ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. R. CO.
v.
TYNER, ADMINISTRATOR

U.S. | 1928-10-29
No. 62
278 U.S. 565 Supreme Court of the United States (1928) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam:

Per Curiam:

Reversed and remanded for a new trial on the authority of (1) Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. v. Coogan, 271 U. S. 472; (2) Southern Pacific Co. v. Berkshire, 254 U. S. 415; Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. v. Leitch, 276 U. S. 429; (3) Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. v. Moser, 275 U. S. 133.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Ferguson v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc., 352 U.S. 521 (U.S. 1957)
    …. [*554] 1928 Term. Unadilla Valley R. Co. v. Caldine, 278 U. S. 139; affirmance of judgment for plaintiff reversed. Western & A. R. Co. v. Hughes, 278 U. S. 496; affirmance of judgment for plaintiff affirmed. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Tyner, 278 U. S. 565;* affirmance of judgment for plaintiff reversed. Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. v. Koske, 279 U. S. 7; affirmance of judgment for plaintiff reversed. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Davis, 279 U. S. 34; affirmance of judgment for plaintiff reversed. Atla…
  • Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Powe, 283 U.S. 401 (U.S. 1931)
    …elivered the opinion of the Court. This is. an action under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act for causing the death of Marshall, the respondent’s deceased. It has been before the Court after an earlier trial, Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Tyner, 278 U. S. 565, and now is brought here again to review a judgment of the Supreme Court of South Carolina affirming a judgment for the plaintiff. 159 S. E. 473. The petitioner contends that it was entitled to have a verdict directed in its favor on the grounds tha…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw