FLOYD & BEASLEY TRANSFER CO., INC. v. UNITED STATES
385 U.S. 647 (1967)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

FLOYD & BEASLEY TRANSFER CO., INC. v. UNITED STATES, 385 U.S. 647 (1967)

385 U.S. 647

FLOYD & BEASLEY TRANSFER CO., INC. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ALABAMA. No. 702.
Decided January 23, 1967.

256 F. Supp. 23, affirmed.

John W. Cooper for appellant.

Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro, Robert W. Ginnane and Fritz R. Kahn for the United States et al.; Guy H. Postell for Akers Motor Lines, Inc., et al.; and Harold Hernly, Robert E. Joyner and Ormond Somerville for Alabama Highway Express, Inc., et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.


SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, <a href="/cases/federal/us/385/647/case.html">385 U.S. 647</a> (1967) 385 U.S. 647 (1967) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, 385 U.S. 647 (1967)

385 U.S. 647

SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 797.
Decided January 23, 1967.

242 Cal. App. 2d 38, 51 Cal. Rptr. 197, appeal dismissed.

Randolph Karr and Alan L. Freedman for appellant.

Roger Arnebergh and Bourke Jones for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 385 U.S. 647, 648




Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.