PENSICK & GORDON, INC., v. CALIFORNIA MOTOR EXPRESS

ResetAA Font size: Print

United States Supreme Court

LEE v. PEEK, (1962)

No. 426

Argued:     Decided: December 3, 1962

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 240 S. C. 203, 125 S. E. 2d 353.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied. [371 U.S. 184, 185]  


PENSICK & GORDON, INC., v. CALIFORNIA MOTOR EXPRESS, <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/371/184.html">371 U.S. 184 </a> (1962) 371 U.S. 184 (1962) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

PENSICK & GORDON, INC., v. CALIFORNIA MOTOR EXPRESS, 371 U.S. 184 (1962)

371 U.S. 184

PENSICK & GORDON, INC., v. CALIFORNIA MOTOR EXPRESS ET AL.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 222.
Decided December 3, 1962.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Reported below: 302 F.2d 391.

Carl M. Gould for petitioner.

Theodore W. Russell, George L. Catlin and Joseph P. Loeb for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further consideration in light of Hewitt-Robins Inc. v. Eastern Freight-Ways, Inc., ante, p. 84.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, MR. JUSTICE STEWART, and MR. JUSTICE WHITE would affirm the judgment below for the reasons given in the dissenting opinion in Hewitt-Robins.

FindLaw Career Center


      Post a Job  |  View More Jobs

    View More