ILLINOIS
v.
MICHIGAN ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Court granted motions for amicus briefs and to file bills of complaint, and appointed a special master to hear evidence in original jurisdiction cases.
Several parties sought to file amicus briefs and bills of complaint in original jurisdiction cases before the Supreme Court. The Court also needed to …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Bill Of Complaint cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
The motion of Chicago Association of Commerce and Industry for leave to file brief in Nos. 2, Original, 3, Original and 4, Original, as amicus curiae, is granted. The amended application of complainants for a reopening of the decree of April 21,1930, in Nos. 2, Original, 3, Original, and 4, Original [281 U. S-. 696], is granted.
The motion for leave to file a bill of complaint in No. 15, Original, is granted.
It is ordered that Honorable Albert B. Maris, United States Senior Circuit Judge, be, and he is hereby,. appointed special master in each of these causes, with authority to summon witnesses, issue subpoenas, and take such evidence as may be introduced and such as he may deem it necessary to call for. The master is directed to hold hearings with all convenient speed, and to submit such reports as he may deem necessary.
The master shall be allowed his actual expenses. The allowances to him, the compensation paid to his technical, stenographic and clerical assistants, the cost of printing his report, and all other proper expenses, shall bé charged against and be borne by the parties in such proportion as the Court hereafter may direct.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bolling v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue, 357 F.2d 3 (8th Cir. 1966)…736 of 253 F. 2d and p. 455 and footnote 5 on p. 454 of 360 U.S., on p. 1275 of 79 S.Ct. Judge Raum, in his opinion in General Gas Corp., 33 T.C. 303, 304 (1959), observed that this feature was present in United States v. Hine Pontiac, 360 U.S. 715, 79 S.Ct. 1443, 3 L.Ed.2d 1539 (1959). Wood v. United States, 64-2 USTC, par. 9844 (N.D.Ala.1964), would lend support to the taxpayers but that decision has now been reversed. United States v. Wood, 352 F. 2d 522 (5 Cir. 1965). 4. They would distinguish Hansen be…
-
Gen. GAS Corp. v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue, 293 F.2d 35 (5th Cir. 1961)…F. 2d 395; West Pontiac v. Commissioner, 5 Cir., 1958, 257 F. 2d 810; Morgan v. Commissioner, 9 Cir., 1960, 277 F. 2d 152; Wiley v. Commissioner, 6 Cir., 1959, 266 F. 2d 48; United States v. Hine Pontiac, 58-2 USTC Par. 9841, reversed 360 U.S. 715, 79 S.Ct. 1443, 3 L.Ed.2d 1539; Shapiro v. Commissioner, 1959 P-H, T.CMemo. Dec., par. 59,151 (July 24, 1959) (pending on appeal to the 9th Circuit); Cadjew v. Commissioner, 1959 P-H, T.C.Memo. Dec., par. 59,148 (July 20, 1959); Shoemaker-Nash v. Commissioner, 41…
-
United States v. Mitchell, 283 F.2d 935 (5th Cir. 1960)…9 S.Ct. 1270, 3 L.Ed.2d 1360 (affirming Baird v. [*936] Commissioner, 7 Cir., 256 F. 2d 918; and reversing Hansen v. Commissioner, 9 Cir., 258 F. 2d 585 and Glover v. Commissioner, 8 Cir., 253 F. 2d 735); United States v. Hine Pontiac, 360 U.S. 715, 79 S.Ct. 1443, 3 L.Ed.2d 1539 (reversing judgments in three cases entered by the .Fifth Circuit on stipulation (2 A.F.T.R. 2d 5812) ), rehearing denied October 12, 1959; United States v. Colonial Chevrolet Corp., 360 U.S. 716, 79 S.Ct. 1444, 3 L.Ed.2d 1539 (rever…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Wisconsin v. Illinois, 281 U.S. 696 (U.S. 1930)
- Territo v. United States, 359 U.S. 963 (U.S. 1959)