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.
Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corporation et al.; and Thompson, Trustee, v. Reconstruction Finance Corporation et al., 1946 — 328 U.S. 867 · caselaw · US
Corporations
Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corporation et al.; and Thompson, Trustee, v. Reconstruction Finance Corporation et al.
328 U.S. 867·Supreme Court of the United States·1946
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
No. 286.
No. 291.
Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corporation et al.; and Thompson, Trustee, v. Reconstruction Finance Corporation et al.
June 10, 1946.
William V. Hodges and Frank C. Nicodemus, Jr. for petitioner in No. 286.
H. H. Larimore for petitioner in No. 291.
Acting Solicitor General Judson, John W. Davis, Edwin S. S. Sunderland, James L. Homire, Thomas O’G. FitzGibbon, Judson C. McLester, Jr., Henry W. Anderson, George D. Gibson, W. A. W. Stewart and Arthur A. Gammell for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Petitions for writs of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.