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.
AUCLAIR TRANSPORTATION, INC., et al. v. UNITED STATES et al., 1964 — 376 U.S. 514 · caselaw · US
Administrative
AUCLAIR TRANSPORTATION, INC., et al. v. UNITED STATES et al.
376 U.S. 514·Supreme Court of the United States·1964
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
AUCLAIR TRANSPORTATION, INC., et al. v. UNITED STATES et al.
No. 724.
Decided March 23, 1964.
Peter T. Beardsley and Richard R. Sigmon for appellants.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Or-rick, Lionel Kestenbaum, Robert W. Ginnane and H. Neil Garson for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission; and William J. Taylor for Railway Express Agency, Inc., appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.