General
BATTAGLIA et al., dba PRODUCE TRANSPORT DISPATCH v. UNITED STATES et al.
385 U.S. 115·Supreme Court of the United States·1966
Mr. Justice Harlan is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for oral argument.
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
BATTAGLIA et al., dba PRODUCE TRANSPORT DISPATCH v. UNITED STATES et al.
No. 564.
Decided November 21, 1966.
Earle V. White for appellants.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro, Robert Ginnane and Betty Jo Christian for the United States et al. Randall B. Kester, John F. Weisser, Jr., James W. Nisbet, J. D. Feeney and Ed White for railroad appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.
Mr. Justice Harlan is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for oral argument.