LUCKENBACH STEAMSHIP CO., INC. v. UNITED STATES, 364 U.S. 280 (1960)
Subscribe to Cases that cite INC. v. UNITED STATES, 364 U.S. 280
Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/364/280/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/364/280/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
LUCKENBACH STEAMSHIP CO., INC. v. UNITED STATES, 364 U.S. 280 (1960)
364 U.S. 280 LUCKENBACH STEAMSHIP CO., INC., v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE.
No. 848.
Decided June 27, 1960.
Judgment with respect to suspension of rates vacated and case remanded; judgment affirmed with respect to antitrust question.
Reported below: 179 F. Supp. 605.
Mark P. Schlefer, John Cunningham and Israel Convisser for appellant.
Solicitor General Rankin, Acting Assistant Attorney General Bicks, Charles H. Weston, Robert W. Ginnane and H. Neil Garson, for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission, appellees; Jeremiah C. Waterman, Edward M. Reidy and Raymond A. Negus for other appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, so far as it relates to the suspension of rates phase of the dispute, is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court with instructions to dismiss the cause as moot. United States v. Amarillo-Borger Express, 352 U.S. 1028; Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. Dixie Carriers, 355 U.S. 179. With respect to the antitrust phase of the dispute, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK and MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS dissent on the holding of Georgia v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 324 U.S. 439.