AKRON, CANTON & YOUNGSTOWN RAILROAD CO. ET AL.
v.
FROZEN FOOD EXPRESS ET AL.
AKRON, CANTON & YOUNGSTOWN RAILROAD CO. ET AL.
FROZEN FOOD EXPRESS ET AL.
355 U.S. 6
Supreme Court of the United States (1957)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Harlan are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Agric. Transp. Ass'n of Tex. v. King, 349 F.2d 873 (5th Cir. 1965)…and note 3 Drum. . See Frozen Food Express v. United States, S.D.Tex. (3 Judge), 1955, 128 F. Supp. 374, affirmed, 351 U.S. 49, 76 S.Ct. 574, 100 L.Ed. 917; Frozen Food Express v. United States, S.D.Tex. (3 Judge), 1956, 148 F.Supp. 399, affirmed, 355 U.S. 6, 78 S.Ct. 38, 2 L.Ed.2d 22; and ICC Regulations, 49 C.F.R. 210.25, Administrative Ruling 107, legislatively approved as list of exempt commodities by 1958 amendments also establishing grandfather rights; Frozen Food Express v. United States, N.D.Tex…