Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
Illinois et al. v. United States et al.; and Chicago v. United States et al.
342 U.S. 930·Supreme Court of the United States·1952
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
February 4, 1952.
No. 497.
No. 498.
Illinois et al. v. United States et al.; and Chicago v. United States et al.
Ivan A. Elliott, Attorney General, William R. Ming, Jr., Special Assistant Attorney General, and Milton Mallin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Illinois et al. ; and Walter E. Wiles for the Village °f Flossmoor et al., appellants in No. 497.
Joseph F. Grossman for appellant in No. 498. He also filed a brief for the City of Chicago, as amicus curiae, supporting appellants in No. 497. Daniel W. Knowlton and J. Stanley Payne for the Interstate Commerce Commission; and Erie J. Zoll, Jr., Charles A. Helsell, John W. Freels and Herbert J. Deany for the Illinois Central Railroad Co., appellees in No. 497.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The motions to affirm, in No. 497, are granted and the judgment is affirmed.