NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES, 388 U.S. 445 (1967)
U.S. Supreme Court
NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES, 388 U.S. 445 (1967)
388 U.S. 445 NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS. No. 58.
Decided June 12, 1967.
244 F. Supp. 955, affirmed.
John A. Daily for appellant.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert B. Hummel, Robert W. Ginnane and Robert S. Burk for the United States et al., and Peter T. Beardsley, Harry J. Jordan, William R. Rubbert, R. Edwin Brady, Bryce Rea, Jr., James E. Wilson, Guy H. Postell, Ferdinand Born, LeGrand A. Carlston, F. H. Lynch, Jr., Roland Rice, Homer S. Carpenter, John S. Fessenden and Richard R. Sigmon for the American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al., appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion of American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al., to be added as parties appellee is granted.
The motion to affirm is granted and those portions of the judgment of the District Court from which appellant is appealing are affirmed.
U.S. Supreme Court
NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES, 388 U.S. 445 (1967)
388 U.S. 445 NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS. No. 58.
Decided June 12, 1967.
244 F. Supp. 955, affirmed.
John A. Daily for appellant.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert B. Hummel, Robert W. Ginnane and Robert S. Burk for the United States et al., and Peter T. Beardsley, Harry J. Jordan, William R. Rubbert, R. Edwin Brady, Bryce Rea, Jr., James E. Wilson, Guy H. Postell, Ferdinand Born, LeGrand A. Carlston, F. H. Lynch, Jr., Roland Rice, Homer S. Carpenter, John S. Fessenden and Richard R. Sigmon for the American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al., appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion of American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al., to be added as parties appellee is granted.
The motion to affirm is granted and those portions of the judgment of the District Court from which appellant is appealing are affirmed.
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.
