Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Czosek et al. v. O'Mara et al., 1970 — 396 U.S. 998 · caselaw · US
Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
Czosek et al. v. O'Mara et al.
396 U.S. 998·Supreme Court of the United States·1970
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 234.
Czosek et al. v. O’Mara et al.
William B. Mahoney for O’Mara et al., and Thomas G. Rickert, Richard F. Griffin, and Courtland R. LaVallee for Erie Lackawanna Railroad Co. on the motion.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 2d Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of respondents for permission for two attorneys to participate in oral argument granted.