SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. v. UNITED STATES, 390 U.S. 744 (1968)

U.S. Supreme Court

SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. v. UNITED STATES, 390 U.S. 744 (1968) 390 U.S. 744

SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA.
No. 1159.
Decided April 29, 1968.

 277 F. Supp. 671, affirmed.

Alan C. Furth, Robert L. Pierce, William P. Higgins and G. Clark Cummings for appellants.

Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert W. Ginnane and Betty Jo Christian for the United States et al.; Ernest Porter, Dennis McCarthy, E. L. Van Dellen, Walter G. Treanor and E. Barrett Prettyman, Jr., for Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Co. et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

HOSACK v. SMILEY, <a href="/cases/federal/us/390/744/">390 U.S. 744</a> (1968) 390 U.S. 744 (1968) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

HOSACK v. SMILEY, 390 U.S. 744 (1968) 390 U.S. 744

HOSACK ET AL. v. SMILEY ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO.
No. 1196.
Decided April 29, 1968.

 276 F. Supp. 876, affirmed.

Melvin L. Wulf for appellants.

Duke W. Dunbar, Attorney General of Colorado, and John P. Holloway, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

Page 390 U.S. 744, 745

 


U.S. Supreme Court

SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. v. UNITED STATES, 390 U.S. 744 (1968) 390 U.S. 744

SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA.
No. 1159.
Decided April 29, 1968.

 277 F. Supp. 671, affirmed.

Alan C. Furth, Robert L. Pierce, William P. Higgins and G. Clark Cummings for appellants.

Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert W. Ginnane and Betty Jo Christian for the United States et al.; Ernest Porter, Dennis McCarthy, E. L. Van Dellen, Walter G. Treanor and E. Barrett Prettyman, Jr., for Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Co. et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

HOSACK v. SMILEY, <a href="/cases/federal/us/390/744/"><a class="related-case" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/390/744/"><a class="related-case" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/390/744/">390 U.S. 744</a></a></a> (1968) 390 U.S. 744 (1968) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

HOSACK v. SMILEY, 390 U.S. 744 (1968) 390 U.S. 744

HOSACK ET AL. v. SMILEY ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO.
No. 1196.
Decided April 29, 1968.

 276 F. Supp. 876, affirmed.

Melvin L. Wulf for appellants.

Duke W. Dunbar, Attorney General of Colorado, and John P. Holloway, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

Page 390 U.S. 744, 745

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.