Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
[ Footnote * ] Together with No. 752, Interstate Commerce Commission v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. et al., also on appeal from the same court.
242 F. Supp. 414, affirmed.
Jordan Jay Hillman, Bryce L. Hamilton and John C. Danielson for appellants in No. 751. Robert W. Ginnane and Leonard S. Goodman for appellant in No. 752.
Eldon Martin, Robert J. Cooney, Frank S. Farrell, Robert G. Gehrz, William P. Higgins, Curtis H. Berg, John H. Bishop, Louis E. Torinus, Jr., and Paul M. Sand for appellees in both cases.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases. [382 U.S. 422, 423]
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Citation: 382 U.S. 422
No. 751
Decided: January 24, 1966
Court: United States Supreme Court
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)