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.
ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES et al., 1970 — 400 U.S. 73 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES et al.
400 U.S. 7327 L. Ed. 2d 212·Supreme Court of the United States·1970
Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.
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
ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES et al.
No. 78.
Argued November 12, 1970
Decided December 8, 1970
James O’Malley, Jr., argued the cause for appellants in No. 78. With him on the briefs were Louis J. Lefko-witz, Attorney General of New York, Walter J. Myskow-ski, 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. Shul-man, William A. Iinhof, 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.
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.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
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.