City of Fort Smith v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.

Supreme Court

City of Fort Smith v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.

270 U.S. 627, 46 S. Ct. 206

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided January 25, 1926·No. No. 151·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Affirmed with costs, upon the authority of Newton v. Consolidated Gas Co., 258 U. S. 165, 175; Galveston Electric Co. v. City of Galveston, 258 U. S. 388, 395; State of Missouri ex rel. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Public Service Commission of Missouri, 262 U. S. 276, 287; Georgia Ry. & Power Co. v. Railroad Commission of Georgia, 262 U. S. 625, 631; Bluefield Water Works & Improvement Co. v. Public Service Commission of West Virginia, 263 U. S. 679, 690.

Clausen, with whom Messrs. J. W. Jamison and C. M. Bracelen were on the brief, for appellee.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

Affirmed with costs, upon the authority of Newton v. Consolidated Gas Co., 258 U. S. 165, 175; Galveston Electric Co. v. City of Galveston, 258 U. S. 388, 395; State of Missouri ex rel. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Public Service Commission of Missouri, 262 U. S. 276, 287; Georgia Ry. & Power Co. v. Railroad Commission of Georgia, 262 U. S. 625, 631; Bluefield Water Works & Improvement Co. v. Public Service Commission of West Virginia, 263 U. S. 679, 690.

Clausen, with whom Messrs. J. W. Jamison and C. M. Bracelen were on the brief, for appellee.

City of Fort Smith v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 270 U.S. 627, 46 S. Ct. 206 (1926).

Pincite

270 U.S. 627 (City of Fort Smith v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related