Collard v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.
246 U.S. 653, 38 S. Ct. 336, 62 L. Ed. 922, 1918 U.S. LEXIS 1601
Opinion
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) § 237, Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of Congress of September 6, 1916, c. 448, § 6, 39 Stat. 726; (2) Schlosser v. Hemphill, 198 U. S. 173; Missouri & Kansas Interurban Ry. Co. v. Olathe, 222 U. S., 185; Louisiana Navigation Co. v. Oyster Commission of Louisiana, 226 U. S. 99.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Collard v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co., 246 U.S. 653, 38 S. Ct. 336, 62 L. Ed. 922, 1918 U.S. LEXIS 1601 (1918).
246 U.S. 653 (Collard v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad
179 F. Supp. 33 (N.D. Iowa, 1959)
Damiano v. Pennsylvania R. Co.
161 F.2d 534 (Third Circuit, 1947)
Brady v. Terminal Railroad Assn.
102 S.W.2d 903 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1937)
Keith v. Texas & P. Ry. Co.
132 So. 223 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1930)
Newberry v. Central of Georgia Ry. Co.
276 F. 337 (Fifth Circuit, 1921)
Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Echols
84 So. 827 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1919)
Joslin Manufacturing Co. v. City of Providence
251 U.S. 535 (Supreme Court, 1919)