CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY CO. v. CHICAGO, 382 U.S. 422 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court
CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY CO. v. CHICAGO, 382 U.S. 422 (1966)
382 U.S. 422CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY CO. ET AL. v. CHICAGO, BURLINGTON & QUINCY
RAILROAD CO. ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS.
No. 751.Decided January 24, 1966.*
[Footnote *] Together with No. 752, Interstate Commerce Commission v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. et al., also on appeal from the same court.
242 F. Supp. 414, affirmed.
Jordan Jay Hillman, Bryce L. Hamilton and John C. Danielson for appellants in No. 751. Robert W. Ginnane and Leonard S. Goodman for appellant in No. 752.
Eldon Martin, Robert J. Cooney, Frank S. Farrell, Robert G. Gehrz, William P. Higgins, Curtis H. Berg, John H. Bishop, Louis E. Torinus, Jr., and Paul M. Sand for appellees in both cases.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.
U.S. Supreme Court
CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY CO. v. CHICAGO, 382 U.S. 422 (1966)
382 U.S. 422CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY CO. ET AL. v. CHICAGO, BURLINGTON & QUINCY
RAILROAD CO. ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS.
No. 751.Decided January 24, 1966.*
[Footnote *] Together with No. 752, Interstate Commerce Commission v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. et al., also on appeal from the same court.
242 F. Supp. 414, affirmed.
Jordan Jay Hillman, Bryce L. Hamilton and John C. Danielson for appellants in No. 751. Robert W. Ginnane and Leonard S. Goodman for appellant in No. 752.
Eldon Martin, Robert J. Cooney, Frank S. Farrell, Robert G. Gehrz, William P. Higgins, Curtis H. Berg, John H. Bishop, Louis E. Torinus, Jr., and Paul M. Sand for appellees in both cases.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.
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.
