General
Cheltenham & Abington Sewerage Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission; Newton Oil Co. v. Bockhold et al.
331 U.S. 784·Supreme Court of the United States·1947
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. 1223.
No. 1230.
Cheltenham & Abington Sewerage Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission. Newton Oil Co. v. Bockhold et al.
April 28, 1947.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeals are dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeals were allowed as petitions for writs of certiorari as required by § 237 (c) of the Judicial Code, as amended, 28 U. S. C. § 344 (c), certiorari is denied. George Henry Hujt for appellant in No. 1223. Max P. Zall for appellant in No. 1230. Charles E. Thomas, Samuel Graff Miller and William McKelvy Rutter for appellee in No. 1223. Henry E. Lutz for appellees in No. 1230. Reported below: No. 1223, 355 Pa. 377, 49 A. 2d 707; No. 1230, 115 Colo. 510, 176 P. 2d 904.