SHOOK, ADMINISTRATOR,

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (20 total)

• Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 354 F.2d 608 (2d Cir. 1965)
  …(1946) (“instead of the piecemeal, restrictive, negative approach of the River and Harbor Acts and other federal laws previously enacted”); National Hells Canyon Ass’n v. Federal Power Comm., 99 U.S.App.D.C. 149, 237 F. 2d 777 (1956), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 924, 77 S.Ct. 681, 1 L.Ed.2d 720, rehearing denied, 353 U.S. 978, 77 S.Ct. 1054, 1 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1957). Section 10(a) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. § 803(a), reads: “§ 803. Conditions of license generally. All licenses issued under sections 792…
• Boynton v. Virginia, 364 U.S. 454 (U.S. 1960)
  …n the performance of these services [*461] under such conditions the terminal and restaurant stand in the place of the bus company in the performance of its transportation obligations. Cf. Derrington v. Plummer, 240 P. 2d 922, 925-926, cert. denied, 353 U. S. 924. Although the courts below made no findings of fact, we think the evidence in this case shows such a relationship and situation here. The manager of the restaurant testified that it was not affiliated in any way with the Trailways Bus Company and t…
• Fernandes v. Limmer, 663 F.2d 619 (5th Cir. 1981)
  …ove from the realm of state action restrictions on the exercise of civil rights at the site. Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority, 365 U.S. 715, 81 S.Ct. 856, 6 L.Ed.2d 45 (1961); Derrington v. Plummer, 240 F. 2d 922 (5th Cir. 1956), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 924, 77 S.Ct. 680, 1 L.Ed.2d 719 (1957). Of course, we do not imply that governmental ownership of a facility guarantees the public absolute and unrestricted access for the purpose of exercising First Amendment liberties. See Greer v. Spock, 424 U.S. 8…