ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. v. UNITED STATES, 400 U.S. 73 (1970)

U.S. Supreme Court

ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. v. UNITED STATES, 400 U.S. 73 (1970)

400 U.S. 73

ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
NEW YORK No. 78.
Argued November 12, 1970
Decided December 8, 1970*

No. 78, 306 F. Supp. 338, and No. 106, 316 F. Supp. 337, affirmed by an equally divided Court.

[Footnote *] Together with No. 106, Alabama Power Co. et al. v. United States et al., on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

James O'Malley, Jr., argued the cause for appellants in No. 78. With him on the briefs were Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Walter J. Myskowski, Sheila H. Marshall, and Alfred E. Froh. Charles J. McCarthy argued the cause for appellants in No. 106. With him on the briefs were Arthur L. Winn, Jr., J. Raymond Clark, and Richard J. Hardy.

Deputy Solicitor General Springer argued the cause for the United States et al. in both cases. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General McLaren, Howard E. Shapiro, Edward M. Shulman, William A. Imhof, Robert W. Ginnane, and Arthur J. Cerra. Hugh B. Cox argued the cause for appellees Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad Co. et al. in both cases. With him on the brief were William H. Allen and Michael Boudin.

John F. Donelan and John M. Cleary filed a brief in No. 106 for the National Industrial Traffic League as amicus curiae urging reversal.

PER CURIAM.

The judgments are affirmed by an equally divided Court.

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

Page 400 U.S. 73, 74




U.S. Supreme Court

ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. v. UNITED STATES, 400 U.S. 73 (1970)

400 U.S. 73

ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
NEW YORK No. 78.
Argued November 12, 1970
Decided December 8, 1970*

No. 78, 306 F. Supp. 338, and No. 106, 316 F. Supp. 337, affirmed by an equally divided Court.

[Footnote *] Together with No. 106, Alabama Power Co. et al. v. United States et al., on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

James O'Malley, Jr., argued the cause for appellants in No. 78. With him on the briefs were Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Walter J. Myskowski, Sheila H. Marshall, and Alfred E. Froh. Charles J. McCarthy argued the cause for appellants in No. 106. With him on the briefs were Arthur L. Winn, Jr., J. Raymond Clark, and Richard J. Hardy.

Deputy Solicitor General Springer argued the cause for the United States et al. in both cases. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General McLaren, Howard E. Shapiro, Edward M. Shulman, William A. Imhof, Robert W. Ginnane, and Arthur J. Cerra. Hugh B. Cox argued the cause for appellees Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad Co. et al. in both cases. With him on the brief were William H. Allen and Michael Boudin.

John F. Donelan and John M. Cleary filed a brief in No. 106 for the National Industrial Traffic League as amicus curiae urging reversal.

PER CURIAM.

The judgments are affirmed by an equally divided Court.

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

Page 400 U.S. 73, 74

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.