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.
Adirondack Transit Lines, Inc. v. United States et al., 1945 — 324 U.S. 824 · caselaw · US
General
Adirondack Transit Lines, Inc. v. United States et al.
324 U.S. 824·Supreme Court of the United States·1945
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. 913.
Adirondack Transit Lines, Inc. v. United States et al.
February 26, 1945.
Mr. Martin J. Kelly, Jr. for appellant.
Solicitor General Fahy and Mr. Daniel W. Knowlton for the United States et al.; Messrs. John E. Buck and John F. Finerty for the Hudson & Manhattan R. Co.; and Mr. Henry P. Goldstein for the Manhattan Coach Line, Inc. et al., appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.