METROPOLITAN R CO v. CHURCH, 174 U.S. 46 (1899)
U.S. Supreme Court
METROPOLITAN R CO v. CHURCH, 174 U.S. 46 (1899)
174 U.S. 46
METROPOLITAN RY. CO.
v.
CHURCH.
BRIGHTWOOD RY. CO.
v.
O'NEAL.
Nos. 114 and 195.
April 11, 1899
D. W. Baker, for Metropolitan Ry. Co. H. P. Blair, for Brightwood Ry. Co. E. L. Schmidt, for Church.
Raymond A. Heiskell and M. J. Colbert, for O'Neal.
Mr. Justice GRAY.
This case, argued at the same time with Traction Co. v. Hof, 19 Sup. Ct. 580, the judgments of the court of appeals of the District of Columbia, quashing writs of certiorari to set aside proceedings of a justice of the peace under similar circumstances, are likewise affirmed.[ Metropolitan R Co v. Church 174 U.S. 46 (1899) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
METROPOLITAN R CO v. CHURCH, 174 U.S. 46 (1899)
METROPOLITAN RY. CO.
v.
CHURCH.
BRIGHTWOOD RY. CO.
v.
O'NEAL.
Nos. 114 and 195.
April 11, 1899
D. W. Baker, for Metropolitan Ry. Co. H. P. Blair, for Brightwood Ry. Co. E. L. Schmidt, for Church.
Raymond A. Heiskell and M. J. Colbert, for O'Neal.
Mr. Justice GRAY.
This case, argued at the same time with Traction Co. v. Hof, 19 Sup. Ct. 580, the judgments of the court of appeals of the District of Columbia, quashing writs of certiorari to set aside proceedings of a justice of the peace under similar circumstances, are likewise affirmed.[ Metropolitan R Co v. Church 174 U.S. 46 (1899) ]
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.