UNITED FUEL GAS v. PUBLIC SERV. COMM'N, WEST VIRGINIA, 376 U.S. 784 (1964)

U.S. Supreme Court

UNITED FUEL GAS v. PUBLIC SERV. COMM'N, WEST VIRGINIA, 376 U.S. 784 (1964)

376 U.S. 784

UNITED FUEL GAS CO. v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA.
No. 527.
Decided April 6, 1964.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Albert R. Connelly, Edward S. Pinney, Victor M. Earle III, C. E. Goodwin, John F. Hunt, Jr., Charles C. Wise, Jr. and William C. Hart for appellant.

Robert L. Stewart for appellee.

Solicitor General Cox, Ralph S. Spritzer, Frank I. Goodman, Richard A. Solomon and Howard E. Wahrenbrock for the United States et al., as amici curiae.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 376 U.S. 784, 1




U.S. Supreme Court

UNITED FUEL GAS v. PUBLIC SERV. COMM'N, WEST VIRGINIA, 376 U.S. 784 (1964)

376 U.S. 784

UNITED FUEL GAS CO. v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA.
No. 527.
Decided April 6, 1964.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Albert R. Connelly, Edward S. Pinney, Victor M. Earle III, C. E. Goodwin, John F. Hunt, Jr., Charles C. Wise, Jr. and William C. Hart for appellant.

Robert L. Stewart for appellee.

Solicitor General Cox, Ralph S. Spritzer, Frank I. Goodman, Richard A. Solomon and Howard E. Wahrenbrock for the United States et al., as amici curiae.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 376 U.S. 784, 1

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.