WALKER v. UNITED STATES, 372 U.S. 526 (1963)

U.S. Supreme Court

WALKER v. UNITED STATES, 372 U.S. 526 (1963)

372 U.S. 526

WALKER v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
TEXAS. No. 657.
Decided March 18, 1963.

208 F. Supp. 388, affirmed.

Henry W. Moursund, Maynard F. Robinson and R. Dean Moorhead for appellant.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Loevinger, Robert B. Hummel, Irwin A. Seibel and Robert W. Ginnane for the United States et al., and George Nokes, Roland Rice, Carl Wright Johnson and Nat L. Hardy for Central Freight Lines Inc. et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

Page 372 U.S. 526, 527




U.S. Supreme Court

WALKER v. UNITED STATES, 372 U.S. 526 (1963)

372 U.S. 526

WALKER v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
TEXAS. No. 657.
Decided March 18, 1963.

208 F. Supp. 388, affirmed.

Henry W. Moursund, Maynard F. Robinson and R. Dean Moorhead for appellant.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Loevinger, Robert B. Hummel, Irwin A. Seibel and Robert W. Ginnane for the United States et al., and George Nokes, Roland Rice, Carl Wright Johnson and Nat L. Hardy for Central Freight Lines Inc. et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

Page 372 U.S. 526, 527

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.