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.
NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES et al., 1967 — 388 U.S. 445 · caselaw · US
General
NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES et al.
388 U.S. 445·Supreme Court of the United States·1967
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
NEW YORK CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. UNITED STATES et al.
No. 58.
Decided June 12, 1967.
John A. Daily for appellant.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert B. Hummel, Robert W. Girmane and Robert S. Burk for the United States et al., and Peter T. Beardsley, Harry J. Jordan, William R. Rubbert, R. Edwin Brady, Bryce Rea, Jr., James E. Wilson, Guy H. Postell, Ferdinand Born, LeGrand A. Carlston, F. H. Lynch, Jr., Roland Rice, Homer S. Carpenter, John S. Fessenden and Richard R. Sigmon for the American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al., appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion of American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al., to be added as parties appellee is granted.
The motion to affirm is granted and those portions of the judgment of the District Court from which appellant is appealing are affirmed.