Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Robert L. Wright, Washington, D.C. (Arthur M. Wisehart, and Wisehart, Friou Koch, New York City, of counsel), for petitioner. Edwin M. Zimmerman, Washington, D.C. (S. William Livingston, Jr., and Covington Burling, Washington, D.C., and Frank H. Gordon, and Rogers, Hoge Hills, New York City, of counsel), for intervenors. Peter M. Shannon, Jr., Washington, D.C. (Arthur J. Cerra, Gen. Counsel, and Peter A. Fitzpatrick, Acting Associate Gen. Counsel, Interstate Commerce Commission, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for respondent Interstate Commerce Commission. Thomas E. Kauper, Asst. Atty. Gen., Carl D. Lawson, and Catherine G. O'Sullivan, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for United States of America (on the brief).
Judges
  • Henry Jacob Friendly
  • Percy Whitman Knapp
  • Thomas Poole Griesa
Acts
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Robert L. Wright, Washington, D.C. (Arthur M. Wisehart, and Wisehart, Friou Koch, New York City, of counsel), for petitioner. Edwin M. Zimmerman, Washington, D.C. (S. William Livingston, Jr., and Covington Burling, Washington, D.C., and Frank H. Gordon, and Rogers, Hoge Hills, New York City, of counsel), for intervenors. Peter M. Shannon, Jr., Washington, D.C. (Arthur J. Cerra, Gen. Counsel, and Peter A. Fitzpatrick, Acting Associate Gen. Counsel, Interstate Commerce Commission, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for respondent Interstate Commerce Commission. Thomas E. Kauper, Asst. Atty. Gen., Carl D. Lawson, and Catherine G. O'Sullivan, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for United States of America (on the brief).
Judges
  • Henry Jacob Friendly
  • Percy Whitman Knapp
  • Thomas Poole Griesa
Acts
See more information ...
Smart Summary

REA EXPRESS, INC., PETITIONER, v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION AND UNITED STATES, RESPONDENTS, ALABAMA GREAT SOUTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL., INTERVENORS.

PER CURIAM:

This petition to review concerns an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission in F.D. 20812 made on September 25, 1959, which would have been reviewable by a three-judge district court, and a report on further consideration, served August 29, 1975, which, if an "order," might be reviewable in this court. We find it unnecessary to determine where review lies since for the reasons stated in Judge Friendly's opinion in REA Express, Inc. v. Alabama Great Southern Railroad, 427 F.Supp. 1157 (S.D. N.Y., filed November 18, 1976), by a three-judge district court composed of the members of this panel, the petition must be denied on the merits.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

REA EXPRESS v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMM
(Nov 18, 1976)