Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Anderson Vs. Atherton

Anderson vs Atherton

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1937
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/96584

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
302 U.S. 643
Subject
MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue
MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Anderson

Respondent

Atherton

Excerpt

anderson v. atherton - 302 u.s. 643 (1937) u.s. supreme court anderson v. atherton, 302 u.s. 643 (1937) 302 u.s. 643 anderson v. atherton. no. 12. supreme court of the united states october 18, 1937 messrs. e. b. stroud and maurice e. purnell, both of dallas, tex., for petitioner. messrs. newton d. baker and howard f. burns, both of cleveland, ohio, for respondents. per curiam. the court is of the opinion that the circuit court of appeals was in error in ruling that, in the absence of a cross appeal, the question whether common law liability for negligence would support the decree was not before the court for review. united states v. american railway express co., 265 u.s. 425, 435 , 436 s., 44 s.ct. 560; langnes v. green, 282 u.s. 531, 538 , 539 s., 51 s.ct. 243; public service commission v. havemeyer, 296 u.s. 506, 509 , 56 s.ct. 360; united states v. curtiss-wright corporation, 299 u.s. 304, 330 , 57 s.ct. 216; morley construction co. v. maryland casualty co., 300 u.s. 185, 191 , 57 s.ct. 325. the decree of the circuit court of appeals is reversed and the cause is remanded to that court for the determination of that question.

Full Judgment

ANDERSON v. ATHERTON - 302 U.S. 643 (1937)
U.S. Supreme Court ANDERSON v. ATHERTON, 302 U.S. 643 (1937)

302 U.S. 643

ANDERSON
v.
ATHERTON.
No. 12.

Supreme Court of the United States

October 18, 1937

Messrs. E. B. Stroud and Maurice E. Purnell, both of Dallas, Tex., for petitioner.

Messrs. Newton D. Baker and Howard F. Burns, both of Cleveland, Ohio, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The Court is of the opinion that the Circuit Court of Appeals was in error in ruling that, in the absence of a cross appeal, the question whether common law liability for negligence would support the decree was not before the court for review. United States v. American Railway Express Co., 265 U.S. 425, 435 , 436 S., 44 S.Ct. 560; Langnes v. Green, 282 U.S. 531, 538 , 539 S., 51 S.Ct. 243; Public Service Commission v. Havemeyer, 296 U.S. 506, 509 , 56 S.Ct. 360; United States v. Curtiss-Wright Corporation, 299 U.S. 304, 330 , 57 S.Ct. 216; Morley Construction Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 300 U.S. 185, 191 , 57 S.Ct. 325. The decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals is reversed and the cause is remanded to that court for the determination of that question.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial