CENTRAL BANK & TRUST CO. v. UNITED STATES, 391 U.S. 469 (1968)

U.S. Supreme Court

CENTRAL BANK & TRUST CO. v. UNITED STATES, 391 U.S. 469 (1968)

391 U.S. 469

CENTRAL BANK & TRUST CO. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN
DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY. No. 1269.
Decided May 27, 1968.*

280 F. Supp. 260, affirmed.

[Footnote *] Together with No. 1270, Boyle v. United States et al., also on appeal from the same court.

Earl S. Wilson, Earl W. Kintner, Sidney Harris, and George R. Kucik for appellant in No. 1269, and Mr. Wilson and Frank S. Ginocchio for appellant in No. 1270.

Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Turner, and Howard E. Shapiro for the United States, and Paul A. Porter and Victor H. Kramer for First National Bank & Trust Co. et al., appellees in both cases.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE BLACK and MR. JUSTICE WHITE would note probable jurisdiction and set these cases for oral argument.

MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.

Page 391 U.S. 469, 470




U.S. Supreme Court

CENTRAL BANK & TRUST CO. v. UNITED STATES, 391 U.S. 469 (1968)

391 U.S. 469

CENTRAL BANK & TRUST CO. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN
DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY. No. 1269.
Decided May 27, 1968.*

280 F. Supp. 260, affirmed.

[Footnote *] Together with No. 1270, Boyle v. United States et al., also on appeal from the same court.

Earl S. Wilson, Earl W. Kintner, Sidney Harris, and George R. Kucik for appellant in No. 1269, and Mr. Wilson and Frank S. Ginocchio for appellant in No. 1270.

Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Turner, and Howard E. Shapiro for the United States, and Paul A. Porter and Victor H. Kramer for First National Bank & Trust Co. et al., appellees in both cases.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE BLACK and MR. JUSTICE WHITE would note probable jurisdiction and set these cases for oral argument.

MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.

Page 391 U.S. 469, 470

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.