BLAAUW ET AL.
v.
GRAND TRUNK WESTERN RAILROAD CO.

U.S. | 1965-03-01
No. 740
380 U.S. 127 Supreme Court of the United States (1965) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit for reconsideration in light of the opinion of the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, in American National Bank & Trust Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 52 Ill. App. 2d 406, 202 N. E. 2d 79.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Linkletter v. Walker, 381 U.S. 618 (U.S. 1965)
    …a diversity case must therefore apply the most recent state court decision, even if it came after the operative events or the entry of judgment by a lower court.” Note, 71 Yale L. J. 907, 915 (1962). See, e. g., Blaauw v. Grand Trunk Western R. Co., 380 U. S. 127 (1965). Accord, Carpenter v. Wabash R. Co., 309 U. S. 23 (1940) (intervening statutory change); Vandenbark v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co., 311 U. S. 538 and cases cited at 541-542 (1941); Dinsmore v. Southern Express Co., 183 U. S. 115, 120 (1901) (in…
  • Smith v. Hampton Training Sch. FOR Nurses, 360 F.2d 577 (4th Cir. 1966)
    …e, 304 F. 2d 320, 323 (5th Cir. 1962). However, since the present ease arises on direct appeal, it is not necessary to wrestle with the elusive question of what is or is not a “change in the law.” . See, e. g., Blaauw v. Grand Trunk Western R. Co., 380 U.S. 127, 85 S.Ct. 806, 13 L.Ed.2d 792 (1965), vacating and remanding, 333 F. 2d 540 (7th Cir. 1964); Vandenbark v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co., 311 U.S. 538, 61 S.Ct. 347, 85 L.Ed. 327 (1941) (change in state decisional law [*581] pending federal controls resu…
  • Sandoval v. L.N. Hagan, 197 F.3d 484 (11th Cir. 1999)
    …a result, “Respondent school district contractually agreed to ‘comply with title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ... and all requirements imposed by or pursuant to the Regulation of HEW’ ”) (quoting Oklahoma v. United States Civil Service Comm’n, 380 U.S. 127, 142-43, 67 S.Ct. 544, 91 L.Ed. 794 (1947)). Rejecting the claim that the school lacked proper notice of its Title VI obligations, the Supreme Court concluded that “whatever may be the limits of [the Spending Clause] power, they have not been reac…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw