Southern Pacific Company v. Jensen
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT, OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. The case is stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court 1
244 U.S. 205
37 S.Ct. 524
61 L.Ed. 1086
SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY, Plff. in Err.,
v.
MARIE JENSEN.
No. 280.
Argued February 28, 1916.
Restored to docket for reargument November 13, 1916.
Reargued January 31 and February 1, 1917.
Decided May 21, 1917.
[Syllabus from pages 205-207 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Norman B. Beecher and Ray Rood Allen for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. E. Clarence Aiken, Harold J. Hinman, and Mr. Egburt E. Woodbury, Attorney General of New York, for defendant in error.
Mr. Christopher M. Bradley as amicus curiae.
2Opinion of the Court · McReynoldsJustice McReynolds
1
Upon a claim regularly presented, the Workmen's Compensation…
Also in this document: Dissent · Holmes; Dissent · Pitney.
3Cases cited122 opinions
- M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Gibbons v. OgdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Southern Pacific Company v. JensenSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Adams Express Company v. CroningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Martin v. Hunter's LesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1816
117 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.