PUBLIC UTILITY DIST. v. CITY OF SEATTLE, 396 U.S. 803 (1969)
U.S. Supreme Court
PUBLIC UTILITY DIST. v. CITY OF SEATTLE , 396 U.S. 803 (1969)
396 U.S. 803
PUBLIC UTILITY DIST. NO. 1 OF PEND OREILLE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
v.
CITY OF SEATTLE.
No. 2.
CITY OF SEATTLE
v.
PUBLIC UTILITY DIST. NO. 1 OF PEND OREILLE COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
No. 3.
Supreme Court of the United States
October Term, 1969.
October Term, 1969.
October 13, 1969
Clarence C. Dill, William G. Ennis, and Bennett Boskey, for Public Utility Dist. No. 1 of Pend Oreille County.
A. L. Newbould and Richard S. White, for City of Seattle.
Solicitor General Griswold, for the United States, amicus curiae.
The petitions for writs of certiorari dismissed under Rule 60.[ Public Utility Dist. v. City of Seattle 396 U.S. 803 (1969) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
PUBLIC UTILITY DIST. v. CITY OF SEATTLE , 396 U.S. 803 (1969)
PUBLIC UTILITY DIST. NO. 1 OF PEND OREILLE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
v.
CITY OF SEATTLE.
No. 2.
CITY OF SEATTLE
v.
PUBLIC UTILITY DIST. NO. 1 OF PEND OREILLE COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
No. 3.
Supreme Court of the United States
October Term, 1969.
October Term, 1969.
October 13, 1969
Clarence C. Dill, William G. Ennis, and Bennett Boskey, for Public Utility Dist. No. 1 of Pend Oreille County.
A. L. Newbould and Richard S. White, for City of Seattle.
Solicitor General Griswold, for the United States, amicus curiae.
The petitions for writs of certiorari dismissed under Rule 60.[ Public Utility Dist. v. City of Seattle 396 U.S. 803 (1969) ]
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.
