MOTOR FREIGHT EXPRESS ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States ex rel. Willie Seals, Jr. v. Wiman, 304 F.2d 53 (5th Cir. 1962)
  …trict court is reversed, judgment here rendered in accordance with the holdings of this opinion, and the cause remanded for any further proceedings which may be found necessary or proper. Reversed, rendered, and remanded. . Reeves v. Alabama, 1954, 348 U.S. 891, 75 S.Ct. 214, 99 L.Ed. 700; Ashcraft v. Tennessee, 1946, 327 U.S. 274, 66 S.Ct. 544, 90 L.Ed. 667; Vernon v. Alabama, 1940, 313 U.S. 547, 61 S.Ct. 1092, 85 L. Ed. 1513; Canty v. Alabama, 1939, 309 U.S. 629, 60 S.Ct. 612, 84 L.Ed. 988. . The person…
• United States v. S. Ry. Co., 364 F.2d 86 (5th Cir. 1966)
  …ive action and, thus, entitled to challenge the validity of the revised order, nevertheless, the trial in the district court would not be de novo. Motor Freight Express v. United States, 119 F.Supp. 298, 303 (M.D.Pa.1954) (three-judge court), aff’d. 348 U.S. 891, 75 S.Ct. 215, 99 L.Ed. 700 (1954); Lang Transportation Corp. v. United States, 75 F.Supp. 915, 922 (S.D.Cal.1948) (three-judge court). Furthermore, the only questions which could be properly raised would be those affecting the constitutional power,…
• Smyly v. United States, 287 F.2d 760 (5th Cir. 1961)
  …v. State of Arkansas, 1958, 356 U.S. 560, 78 S.Ct. 844, 2 L.Ed.2d 975; Mallory v. United States, 1957, 354 U.S. 449, 77 S.Ct. 1356, 1 L.Ed.2d 1479; Fikes v. State of Alabama, 1957, 352 U.S. 191, 77 S.Ct. 281, 1 L.Ed.2d 246; Reeves v. Alabama, 1954, 348 U.S. 891, 75 S.Ct. 214, 99 L.Ed. 700; Leyra v. Denno, 1954, 347 U.S. 556, 74 S.Ct. 716, 98 L.Ed. 948; United States v. Carignan, 1951, 342 U.S. 36, 72 S.Ct. 97, 96 L.Ed. 48; Johnson v. Com. of Pennsylvania, 1950, 340 U.S. 881, 71 S.Ct. 191, 95 L.Ed. 640; Har…