General
RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS et al. v. HUMBLE OIL & REFINING CO.
311 U.S. 57885 L. Ed. 363·Supreme Court of the United States·1941
■■ The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice McReynolds and Mr. Justice Roberts .dissent.
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
RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS et al. v. HUMBLE OIL & REFINING CO.
No. 57.
Argued December 12, 1940.
Decided January 6, 1941.
■Mr. James P. Hart, Assistant Attorney General of Texas, with whom Messrs. Gerald C. Mann, Attorney General, Edgar W-- Cále, Tom D. Rowell, Jr., and E. R. Simmons, Assistant Attorneys General, were oh the brief, for appellants. Mr. Norman L. Meyers was on a brief for G. A.. Sadler, appellant.
' Mr; Rex G. Baker, with whom M.essrs:Robert E. Hard-wicke, E. E. Townes, and R. E. Seagler were on the brief, for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Frankfurter]
Mr. Justice Frankfurter
delivered the opinion of the^ Court.
This case is a companion case to Railroad Commission v. Rowan & Nichols Oil Co., ante, p. 570. There are minor variations in the facts of the two cases, but not of sufficient moment to call for particularization. The decision, in the Rowan & Nichols case is decisive of this.
The decree is vacated and the case is remanded to the district court for dismissal of the complaint.
Vacated.
■■ The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice McReynolds and Mr. Justice Roberts .dissent.