NORTHERN FREIGHT LINES v. UNITED STATES, 397 U.S. 247 (1970)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

NORTHERN FREIGHT LINES v. UNITED STATES, 397 U.S. 247 (1970)

397 U.S. 247

NORTHERN FREIGHT LINES, INC., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA No. 1100.
Decided March 16, 1970

304 F. Supp. 536, affirmed.

Guy H. Postell, David A. Sutherlund, David Axelrod, Roland Rice, John S. Fessenden, Richard R. Sigmon, Peter T. Beardsley, R. Edwin Brady, Albert B. Rosenbaum, Donald E. Cross, Bryce Rea, Jr., Eugene T. Liipfert, and William O. Turney for appellants.

Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General McLaren, Howard E. Shapiro, Robert W. Ginnane, Fritz R. Kahn, and Raymond M. Zimmet for the United States et al., John E. Robson and Arthur M. Wisehart for Railway Express Agency, Inc., and John J. C. Martin for Drug & Toilet Preparation Traffic Conference et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 397 U.S. 247, 248




U.S. Supreme Court

NORTHERN FREIGHT LINES v. UNITED STATES, 397 U.S. 247 (1970)

397 U.S. 247

NORTHERN FREIGHT LINES, INC., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA No. 1100.
Decided March 16, 1970

304 F. Supp. 536, affirmed.

Guy H. Postell, David A. Sutherlund, David Axelrod, Roland Rice, John S. Fessenden, Richard R. Sigmon, Peter T. Beardsley, R. Edwin Brady, Albert B. Rosenbaum, Donald E. Cross, Bryce Rea, Jr., Eugene T. Liipfert, and William O. Turney for appellants.

Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General McLaren, Howard E. Shapiro, Robert W. Ginnane, Fritz R. Kahn, and Raymond M. Zimmet for the United States et al., John E. Robson and Arthur M. Wisehart for Railway Express Agency, Inc., and John J. C. Martin for Drug & Toilet Preparation Traffic Conference et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 397 U.S. 247, 248

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.