GEORGIA v. UNITED STATES, 356 U.S. 273 (1958)

U.S. Supreme Court

GEORGIA v. UNITED STATES, 356 U.S. 273 (1958)

356 U.S. 273

GEORGIA ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
GEORGIA. No. 774.
Decided April 14, 1958.

 156 F. Supp. 711, affirmed.

Eugene Cook, Attorney General of Georgia, E. Freeman Leverett, Assistant Attorney General, W. H. Swiggart, E. R. Leigh, Joseph L. Lenihan and W. L. Grubbs for appellants.

Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Hansen, Robert W. Ginnane, Samuel R. Howell and Isaac K. Hay for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission, and Henry L. Walker, Arthur J. Dixon and James A. Bistline for the Southern Railway Co. et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 356 U.S. 273, 274

 


U.S. Supreme Court

GEORGIA v. UNITED STATES, 356 U.S. 273 (1958)

356 U.S. 273

GEORGIA ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
GEORGIA. No. 774.
Decided April 14, 1958.

 156 F. Supp. 711, affirmed.

Eugene Cook, Attorney General of Georgia, E. Freeman Leverett, Assistant Attorney General, W. H. Swiggart, E. R. Leigh, Joseph L. Lenihan and W. L. Grubbs for appellants.

Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Hansen, Robert W. Ginnane, Samuel R. Howell and Isaac K. Hay for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission, and Henry L. Walker, Arthur J. Dixon and James A. Bistline for the Southern Railway Co. et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 356 U.S. 273, 274

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.