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.
Schaffer Transportation Co. et al. v. United States et al., 1956 — 352 U.S. 923 · caselaw · US
General
Schaffer Transportation Co. et al. v. United States et al.
352 U.S. 923·Supreme Court of the United States·1956
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. 419.
Schaffer Transportation Co. et al. v. United States et al.
Peter T. Beardsley for appellants. Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Hansen and Charles H. Weston for the United States, Robert W. Ginnane and H. Neil Gar son for the Interstate Commerce Commission, and Amos M. Mathews for the Akron, Canton & Youngstown Railroad Co. et al., ap-pellees.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota. Probable jurisdiction noted.