U.S. v. ACME PROCESS EQUIPMENT COMPANY., 384 U.S. 917 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. v. ACME PROCESS EQUIPMENT COMPANY. , 384 U.S. 917 (1966)
384 U.S. 917
UNITED STATES, petitioner,
v.
ACME PROCESS EQUIPMENT COMPANY.
No. 1116.
Supreme Court of the United States
April 25, 1966
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Douglas, David L. Rose and Robert V. Zener, for the United States.
Jack Rephan, Raymond R. Dickey and Bernard Gordon, for respondent.
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Claims granted and case placed on the summary calendar.[ U.S. v. ACME Process Equipment Company. 384 U.S. 917 (1966) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. v. ACME PROCESS EQUIPMENT COMPANY. , 384 U.S. 917 (1966)
UNITED STATES, petitioner,
v.
ACME PROCESS EQUIPMENT COMPANY.
No. 1116.
Supreme Court of the United States
April 25, 1966
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Douglas, David L. Rose and Robert V. Zener, for the United States.
Jack Rephan, Raymond R. Dickey and Bernard Gordon, for respondent.
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Claims granted and case placed on the summary calendar.[ U.S. v. ACME Process Equipment Company. 384 U.S. 917 (1966) ]
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.