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.
Wales, doing business as Wales Trucking Co., et al. v. United States et al., 1953 — 345 U.S. 954 · caselaw · US
General
Wales, doing business as Wales Trucking Co., et al. v. United States et al.
345 U.S. 954·Supreme Court of the United States·1953
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
May 18, 1953.
No. 723.
Wales, doing business as Wales Trucking Co., et al. v. United States et al.
T. S. Christopher for appellants. Solicitor General Cummings and Edward M. Reidy for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission; R. E. Kidwell for the Newsom Truck Line et al.; Reagan Sayers for Tex-O-Kan Transportation Co.; and Ewell H. Muse, Jr. for E. L. Farmer & Co. et al., appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
Per Curiam:
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed. United States v. Tucker Truck Lines, 344 U. S. 33; United States v. Detroit Navigation Co., 326 U. S. 236, 241.