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.
General
United States v. Interstate Commerce Commission et al.
350 U.S. 930·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. 491.
United States v. Interstate Commerce Commission et al.
Solicitor General Sobeloff, Assistant Attorney General Barnes and Daniel M. Friedman for the United States. Robert W. Ginnane and Samuel R. Howell for the Interstate Commerce Commission, Charles P. Reynolds and James B. McDonough, Jr. for the Seaboard Air Line Railroad Co., Richard B. Gwathmey for the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., A. J. Dixon and William B. Jones for the Southern Railway Co., John P. Fishwick for the Norfolk & Western Railway Co., Martin A. Meyer, Jr. for the Virginian Railway Co., and Hugh B. Cox and Windsor F. Cousins for the Pennsylvania Railroad Co., appellees.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Probable jurisdiction noted.