UNION PAC R CO v. CHICAGO, R I & P R CO, 163 U.S. 611 (1896)
U.S. Supreme Court
UNION PAC R CO v. CHICAGO, R I & P R CO, 163 U.S. 611 (1896)
163 U.S. 611
UNION PAC. RY. CO. et al.
v.
CHICAGO, R. I. & P. RY. CO.
UNION PAC. RY. CO.
v.
CHICAGO, M. & ST. P. RY. CO.
Nos. 41, 42.
May 25, 1896
John F. Dillon and John M. Thurston, for appellants.
J. M. Woolworth, for appellee Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.
George R. Peck, for appellee Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE.
These appeals were from the circuit court and the cases have just been disposed of on appeals from the circuit court of appeals. See 2 C. C. A. 174, 51 Fed. 309. Appeals dismissed.[ Union Pac R Co v. Chicago, R I & P R Co 163 U.S. 611 (1896) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
UNION PAC R CO v. CHICAGO, R I & P R CO, 163 U.S. 611 (1896)
UNION PAC. RY. CO. et al.
v.
CHICAGO, R. I. & P. RY. CO.
UNION PAC. RY. CO.
v.
CHICAGO, M. & ST. P. RY. CO.
Nos. 41, 42.
May 25, 1896
John F. Dillon and John M. Thurston, for appellants.
J. M. Woolworth, for appellee Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.
George R. Peck, for appellee Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE.
These appeals were from the circuit court and the cases have just been disposed of on appeals from the circuit court of appeals. See 2 C. C. A. 174, 51 Fed. 309. Appeals dismissed.[ Union Pac R Co v. Chicago, R I & P R Co 163 U.S. 611 (1896) ]
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.