Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
S

Stanford v. Tennessee Valley Authority

18 F.R.D. 152 (1955)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Stanford v. Tennessee Valley Authority

United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
18 F.R.D. 152 (1955)

Facts

Monsanto Chemical Company (Monsanto) (defendant) and Armour & Company (Armour) (defendant) operated separate manufacturing facilities near property owned by the Stanfords (plaintiffs). The facilities were separately owned and operated and were located at different distances from the property in question; however, both facilities emitted fluorine gas fumes. The Stanfords sued Monsanto and Armour in a single action, alleging injuries caused by the fluorine gas fumes. Monsanto and Armour moved to dismiss the Stanfords’ lawsuit, arguing that they had been improperly joined as defendants. In the alternative, Monsanto and Armour requested that the court sever the claims against them and order separate trials.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Miller, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Advanced Civil Procedure

Key Terms