NORTHWESTERN PACIFIC R.R. v. INTERSTATE COMM. COMM'N, 379 U.S. 132 (1964)

U.S. Supreme Court

NORTHWESTERN PACIFIC R.R. v. INTERSTATE COMM. COMM'N, 379 U.S. 132 (1964)

379 U.S. 132

NORTHWESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA. No. 381.
Decided November 23, 1964.

228 F. Supp. 690, affirmed.

Randolph Karr for appellant.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, Robert B. Hummel, Arthur J. Murphy, Jr., and Robert W. Ginnane for the Interstate Commerce Commission et al.; J. Thomason Phelps for Public Utilities Commission of California et al.; Boris H. Lakusta for the City of San Rafael et al.; and Frederick G. Pfrommer for Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 379 U.S. 132, 133




U.S. Supreme Court

NORTHWESTERN PACIFIC R.R. v. INTERSTATE COMM. COMM'N, 379 U.S. 132 (1964)

379 U.S. 132

NORTHWESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA. No. 381.
Decided November 23, 1964.

228 F. Supp. 690, affirmed.

Randolph Karr for appellant.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, Robert B. Hummel, Arthur J. Murphy, Jr., and Robert W. Ginnane for the Interstate Commerce Commission et al.; J. Thomason Phelps for Public Utilities Commission of California et al.; Boris H. Lakusta for the City of San Rafael et al.; and Frederick G. Pfrommer for Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 379 U.S. 132, 133

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.