PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
v.
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION
324 U.S. 826
Supreme Court of the United States (1945)
Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 89 L. Ed. 1394 · 65 S. Ct. 855 · 1945 U.S. LEXIS 2336 · SCDB 1944-164
Cited by 5 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam:
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Mr. Herman Phleger, with whom Messrs. 17m. B. Bosley,-Robert H. Oerdes and James S. Moore, Jr. were on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Chester T. Lane, with whom Solicitor General Fahy, Messrs. Roger S. Foster, Milton V. Freeman, David K. Kadane and Arnold R. Ginsburg were on the brief, for respondent.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
N. Am. Co. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 327 U.S. 686 (U.S. 1946)…ities & Exchange Commission, 119 F. 2d 730, cert, denied, 314 U. S. 618; Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Securities & Exchange Commission, 127 F. 2d 378, affirmed on rehearing by equally divided court, 139 F. 2d 298, affirmed by equally divided Court, 324 U. S. 826. See Federal Trade Commission Report, supra, note 3, p. 347. “Sec. 11. (a) . . . “(b) It shall be the duty of the Commission, as soon as practicable after January 1, 1938: “(1) To require by order, after notice and opportunity for hearing, that…
-
In re Commonwealth & S. Corp., 184 F.2d 81 (3d Cir. 1950)…n of appraising conflicting and circumstantial evidence, and the weight and credibility of testimony’. The rules quoted are applicable here.” Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. S.E.C., 9 Cir., 127 F. 2d 378, 384, 139 F. 2d 298, affirmed at 324 U. S. 826, 65 S.Ct. 855, 89 L.Ed. 1394. Appellant insists that the SEC refused to recognize what she calls the “trading value” or “premium value” of the warrants. This value is based, says appellant, on the perpetual call feature of the warrants, warrant holders having th…