SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. v. UNITED STATES, 355 U.S. 370 (1958)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. v. UNITED STATES, 355 U.S. 370 (1958)

355 U.S. 370

SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
VIRGINIA. No. 579.
Decided January 13, 1958.

154 F. Supp. 562, affirmed.

Henry L. Walker, Arthur J. Dixon, James A. Bistline and R. Granville Curry for appellants.

John W. Adams, Jr., Charles P. Reynolds, R. B. Claytor, Martin A. Meyer, Jr. and Walter C. Scott, Jr. for the Atlanta & St. Andrews Bay Railway Co. et al., and John S. Burchmore and Robert N. Burchmore for Cramet Inc., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 355 U.S. 370, 371

 


U.S. Supreme Court

SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. v. UNITED STATES, 355 U.S. 370 (1958)

355 U.S. 370

SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
VIRGINIA. No. 579.
Decided January 13, 1958.

154 F. Supp. 562, affirmed.

Henry L. Walker, Arthur J. Dixon, James A. Bistline and R. Granville Curry for appellants.

John W. Adams, Jr., Charles P. Reynolds, R. B. Claytor, Martin A. Meyer, Jr. and Walter C. Scott, Jr. for the Atlanta & St. Andrews Bay Railway Co. et al., and John S. Burchmore and Robert N. Burchmore for Cramet Inc., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 355 U.S. 370, 371

Disclaimer: 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.

Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.