Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company Of Texas v. Cade

• 1913 • 233 U.S. 642 • White Court
In the 1913 case of Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Cade, the U.S. Supreme Court examined a dispute over land ownership in Texas. The railway company claimed that it had acquired title to certain lands under an Act of Congress from 1875 which granted them to any railroad company that would build through them. However, Cade argued he owned these lands due to his purchase from a man named George Clark who had received patent for this land from the State of Texas before the...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief White Court
Term: 1913
Docket: 522
233 U.S. 642
34 S. Ct. 678
58 L. Ed. 1135
1914 U.S. LEXIS 1208

Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company Of Texas v. Cade

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1913 case of Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Cade, the U.S. Supreme Court examined a dispute over land ownership in Texas. The railway company claimed that it had acquired title to certain lands under an Act of Congress from 1875 which granted them to any railroad company that would build through them. However, Cade argued he owned these lands due to his purchase from a man named George Clark who had received patent for this land from the State of Texas before the act was passed by Congress. The court ruled in favor of Cade stating that when Clark obtained his patent, there were no conditions attached and thus he became absolute owner with power to convey full title free and clear from any claim on part of state or federal government based on subsequent legislation like Railroad Grant Act.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Cade, it was argued that the majority's decision to hold a railway company liable for damages caused by sparks from its locomotive was unjustified. The dissenting justices believed that there wasn't sufficient evidence to prove negligence on part of the railway company and thus, they should not be held responsible for any damage caused by such sparks. They asserted that railroads are not insurers against all accidents but only those which occur due to their negligence or fault. Furthermore, they contended that in this case, where no specific act of negligence could be pointed out other than operation itself - an inevitable aspect of running a railroad - holding them accountable would set an unfair precedent.

Opinion written by Justice MPitney
Decided: May 11, 1914
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms