Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Shaffer

Supreme Court

Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Shaffer

263 U.S. 687, 44 S. Ct. 228, 68 L. Ed. 507, 1924 U.S. LEXIS 2841

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 14, 1924

DocketNo. 558

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 263 U.S. 687 (Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Shaffer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Shaffer, 263 U.S. 687, 44 S. Ct. 228, 68 L. Ed. 507, 1924 U.S. LEXIS 2841 (1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Affirmed upon the authority of Minneapolis & St. Louis Ry. Co. v. Beckwith, 129 U. S. 26; Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry. Co. v. May, 194 U. S. 267; Louisville & Nashville R. R. Co. v. Melton, 218 U. S. 36, 52-53; Jeffrey Mfg. Co. v. Blagg, 235 U. S. 571, 576-577; Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co., 240 U. S. 342, 357-358; New York Central [688]*688R. R. Co. v. White, 243 U. S. 188, 208.

Mr. Platt Hub-bell, for defendant in error, in support of the motion. Mr. John E. Dolman, Mr. M. L. Bell, Mr. W. F. Dickinson, Mr. Bruce Scott, Mr. H. J. Nelson and Mr. J. G. Trimble, for plaintiffs in error, in opposition to the. motion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

Affirmed upon the authority of Minneapolis & St. Louis Ry. Co. v. Beckwith, 129 U. S. 26; Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry. Co. v. May, 194 U. S. 267; Louisville & Nashville R. R. Co. v. Melton, 218 U. S. 36, 52-53; Jeffrey Mfg. Co. v. Blagg, 235 U. S. 571, 576-577; Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co., 240 U. S. 342, 357-358; New York Central [688]*688R. R. Co. v. White, 243 U. S. 188, 208.

Mr. Platt Hub-bell, for defendant in error, in support of the motion. Mr. John E. Dolman, Mr. M. L. Bell, Mr. W. F. Dickinson, Mr. Bruce Scott, Mr. H. J. Nelson and Mr. J. G. Trimble, for plaintiffs in error, in opposition to the. motion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 U.S. 687, 44 S. Ct. 228, 68 L. Ed. 507, 1924 U.S. LEXIS 2841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chicago-rock-island-pacific-railway-co-v-shaffer-scotus-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack