ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES, 385 U.S. 457 (1967)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 385 U.S. 457
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/385/457/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/385/457/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES, 385 U.S. 457 (1967)
385 U.S. 457 ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT
OF ILLINOIS. No. 687.
Decided January 9, 1967.*
[Footnote *] Together with No. 688, St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. United States et al., and No. 689, Monon Railroad v. United States et al., also on appeal from the same court.
263 F. Supp. 421, affirmed.
Hugh B. Cox, William H. Allen, Robert Mitten and William J. O'Brien, Jr., for appellant in No. 687. Nuel D. Belnap, Richard M. Freeman and Daniel J. Sweeney for appellant in No. 688. John B. Goodrich for appellant in No. 689.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro, Robert W. Ginnane and Fritz R. Kahn for the United States et al.; James W. Hoeland, W. L. Grubbs and Joseph L. Lenihan for Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co.; W. McNeil Kennedy for Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad Co.; Albert E. Jenner, Jr., Samuel W. Block, Thomas P. Sullivan and John C. Tucker for Missouri Pacific Railroad Co., and Leon Leighton, pro se, appellees in all cases.
PER CURIAM.
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.