TELEPHONE NEWS SYSTEM, INC. v. ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE, 376 U.S. 782 (1964)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
TELEPHONE NEWS SYSTEM, INC. v. ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE, 376 U.S. 782 (1964) 376 U.S. 782TELEPHONE NEWS SYSTEM, INC., v.
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO. ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN
DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS. No. 772.
Decided April 6, 1964.
220 F. Supp. 621, affirmed.
Thomas D. Nash, Jr. for appellant.
Solicitor General Cox for the United States, and Walter J. Cummings, Jr. for Illinois Bell Telephone Co., appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Opinions
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS. No. 772.
Decided April 6, 1964.
220 F. Supp. 621, affirmed. Thomas D. Nash, Jr. for appellant. Solicitor General Cox for the United States, and Walter J. Cummings, Jr. for Illinois Bell Telephone Co., appellees. PER CURIAM. The judgment is affirmed. MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted. Page 376 U.S. 782, 783
U.S. Supreme Court
TELEPHONE NEWS SYSTEM, INC. v. ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE, 376 U.S. 782 (1964) 376 U.S. 782 TELEPHONE NEWS SYSTEM, INC., v. ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO. ET AL.APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS. No. 772.
Decided April 6, 1964.
220 F. Supp. 621, affirmed. Thomas D. Nash, Jr. for appellant. Solicitor General Cox for the United States, and Walter J. Cummings, Jr. for Illinois Bell Telephone Co., appellees. PER CURIAM. The judgment is affirmed. MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted. Page 376 U.S. 782, 783
Search This Case
