ILLINOIS v. UNITED STATES, 373 U.S. 378 (1963)

U.S. Supreme Court

ILLINOIS v. UNITED STATES, 373 U.S. 378 (1963)

373 U.S. 378

ILLINOIS ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS. No. 937.
Decided May 20, 1963.

213 F. Supp. 83, affirmed.

William G. Clark, Attorney General of Illinois, Edward V. Hanrahan, Special Assistant Attorney General, Harold A. Cowen, Assistant Attorney General, and S. Ashley Guthrie for appellants.

Robert W. Ginnane and Stanton P. Sender for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission; and James J. Magner, Frederick E. Stout and L. Agnew Myers, Jr. for Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee Railway, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 373 U.S. 378, 379




U.S. Supreme Court

ILLINOIS v. UNITED STATES, 373 U.S. 378 (1963)

373 U.S. 378

ILLINOIS ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS. No. 937.
Decided May 20, 1963.

213 F. Supp. 83, affirmed.

William G. Clark, Attorney General of Illinois, Edward V. Hanrahan, Special Assistant Attorney General, Harold A. Cowen, Assistant Attorney General, and S. Ashley Guthrie for appellants.

Robert W. Ginnane and Stanton P. Sender for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission; and James J. Magner, Frederick E. Stout and L. Agnew Myers, Jr. for Chicago North Shore & Milwaukee Railway, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 373 U.S. 378, 379

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.