Minneapolis, St. Paul, & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad Company, in Error v. Louise Alexander, Administratrix, Etc

239 U.S. 635, 36 S. Ct. 283, 60 L. Ed. 479, 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1356

• Court: Supreme Court of the United States
• Decided: January 10, 1916
• Docket: 148
• Status: Published

Opinion

239 U.S. 635

36 S.Ct. 283

60 L.Ed. 479

MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL, & SAULT STE. MARIE RAILROAD COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
LOUISE ALEXANDER, Administratrix, etc.

No. 148.

Supreme Court of the United States

January 10, 1916

Mr. William A. Hayes for plaintiff in error.

Mr. D. W. McNamara and Miss Anna B. Hull for defendant in error.

Per Curiam:

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) Consolidated Turnp. Co. v. Norfolk & O. V. R. Co. 228 U. S. 596, 600, 57 L. ed. 982, 983, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 609; Manhattan L. Ins. Co. v. Cohen, 234 U. S. 123, 137, 58 L. ed. 1245, 1254, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 874; Easterling Lumber Co. v. Pierce, 235 U. S. 380, 59 L. ed. 279, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 133; (2) Missouri P. R. Co. v. Humes, 115 U. S. 512, 29 L. ed. 463, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 110; Minneapolis & St. L. R. Co. v. Beckwith, 129 U. S. 26, 32 L. ed. 585, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 207; Minneapolis & St. L. R. Co. v. Emmons, 149 U. S. 364, 37 L. ed. 769, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 870; (3) Waters-Pierce Pierce Oil Co. v. Texas, 212 U. S. 112, 118, 53 L. ed. 431, 434, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 227; Deming v. Carlisle Packing Co. 226 U. S. 102, 57 L. ed. 140, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 80; Overton v. Oklahoma, 235 U. S. 31, 59 L. ed. 112, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 14.