Emerson v. Tea Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• analyzing a person’s testimony that he “was listening for a locomotive whistle, and that none was sounded,” as well as the statement of another person that “no crossing signal was given,” and concluding that both statements, though “negative in form, [were] positive in substance”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).