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
New York Central Railroad Co. v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners of New Jersey et al.
359 U.S. 982·Supreme Court of the United States·1959
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 4, 1959.
No. 41.
New York Central Railroad Co. v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners of New Jersey et al.
Thomas E. Dewey and Gerald E. Dwyer for the New York Central Railroad Co., appellant-movant.
On a stipulation of the parties for dismissal of the case as moot were Thomas E. Dewey for the New York Central Railroad Co., appellant; and David D. Furman for the Board of Public Utility Commissioners, of New Jersey et al., William A. Roberts for Bergen County et al., Solicitor General Rankin for the United States, and Robert W. Ginnane for the Interstate Commerce Commission, appellees.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. (Probable jurisdiction noted, 357 U. S. 917.) The motion to vacate the decree is granted and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey with directions to dismiss the complaint as moot.