General
AKRON, CANTON & YOUNGSTOWN RAILROAD CO. et al. v. FROZEN FOOD EXPRESS et al.
355 U.S. 6·Supreme Court of the United States·1957
Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Harlan are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
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
AKRON, CANTON & YOUNGSTOWN RAILROAD CO. et al. v. FROZEN FOOD EXPRESS et al.
No. 258.
Decided October 14, 1957
Carl Helmetag, Jr. and Charles P. Reynolds for appellants in No. 258.
Rollo E. Kidwell and Peter T. Beardsley for appellant in No. 263.
Robert W. Cinnane and Charlie H. Johns, Jr. for appellant in No. 270.
Carl L. Phinney for the Frozen Food Express, appellee.
Together with No. 263, American Trucking Associations, Inc., v. Frozen Food Express, and No. 270, Interstate Commerce Commission v. Frozen Food Express et al., also on appeals from the same court.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Harlan are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.