Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA et al. v. BALTIMORE SHIPPERS & RECEIVERS ASSOCIATION, INC., et al., 1968 — 389 U.S. 583 · caselaw · US
General
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA et al. v. BALTIMORE SHIPPERS & RECEIVERS ASSOCIATION, INC., et al.
389 U.S. 583·Supreme Court of the United States·1968
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA et al. v. BALTIMORE SHIPPERS & RECEIVERS ASSOCIATION, INC., et al.
No. 846.
Decided January 15, 1968.
Mary Moran Pajalich and Bernard A. Peeters for appellants.
Ronald N. Cobert and Philip R. Ehrenkranz for Baltimore Shippers & Receivers Association, Inc., et al., and Stanley E. Tobin and Carl M. Gould for Charles J. Worth Drayage Co. et al., appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.