GREAT LAKES STEEL CORP.
v.
UNITED STATES ET AL.

U.S. | 1949-06-27
No. 749
Mr. Justice Frankfurter, Mr. Justice Jackson, and Mr. Justice Burton dissent for reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in United States v. Interstate Commerce Comm’n, 337 U. S. 426, 444.
337 U.S. 952 Supreme Court of the United States (1949) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Per_curiam
Per Curiam:

Per Curiam:

Judgment reversed. United States v. Interstate Commerce Comm’n, 337 U. S. 426.

Mr. Justice Frankfurter, Mr. Justice Jackson, and Mr. Justice Burton dissent for reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in United States v. Interstate Commerce Comm’n, 337 U. S. 426, 444.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Gen. Motors Corp. v. United States, 299 F.2d 233 (6th Cir. 1962)
    …not impair the right of shippers to obtain judicial review of adverse Commission orders under § 41(28) merely because the order is sought as a basis for reparations.” Id. p. 440, 69 S.Ct. p. 1418. See also: Great Lakes Steel Corp. v. United States, 337 U.S. 952, 69 S.Ct. 1530, 93 L.Ed. 1753; Union Pacific Railroad Co. v. Price, 360 U.S. 601, 615, 618, 79 S.Ct. 1351, 3 L.Ed.2d 1460. In our judgment, the District Court erred in holding that it had no jurisdiction. This brings us to a consideration of the m…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw