MORTON SALT CO. v. UNITED STATES, 382 U.S. 44 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court
MORTON SALT CO. v. UNITED STATES, 382 U.S. 44 (1965)
382 U.S. 44 MORTON SALT CO. v. UNITED STATES.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA.
No. 275.
Decided October 25, 1965.*
[Footnote *] Together with No. 276, Diamond Crystal Salt Co. v. United States, also on appeal from the same court.
Affirmed.
L. M. McBride and John P. Ryan, Jr., for appellant in No. 275. R. William Rogers for appellant in No. 276.
Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Turner and Robert B. Hummel for the United States.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. United States v. National Association of Real Estate Boards, 339 U.S. 485, 493, 494; Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. United States, 306 U.S. 208, 221-227; American Tobacco Co. v. United States, 328 U.S. 781, 809-810; Theatre Enterprises v. Paramount Film Distributing Corp., 346 U.S. 537, 540-542.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
U.S. Supreme Court
MORTON SALT CO. v. UNITED STATES, 382 U.S. 44 (1965)
382 U.S. 44 MORTON SALT CO. v. UNITED STATES.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA.
No. 275.
Decided October 25, 1965.*
[Footnote *] Together with No. 276, Diamond Crystal Salt Co. v. United States, also on appeal from the same court.
Affirmed.
L. M. McBride and John P. Ryan, Jr., for appellant in No. 275. R. William Rogers for appellant in No. 276.
Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Turner and Robert B. Hummel for the United States.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. United States v. National Association of Real Estate Boards, 339 U.S. 485, 493, 494; Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. United States, 306 U.S. 208, 221-227; American Tobacco Co. v. United States, 328 U.S. 781, 809-810; Theatre Enterprises v. Paramount Film Distributing Corp., 346 U.S. 537, 540-542.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Page 382 U.S. 44, 45
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.
