Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. United States

Supreme Court

Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. United States

364 U.S. 280, 80 S. Ct. 1611, 4 L. Ed. 2d 1719, 1960 U.S. LEXIS 1990, 1960 Trade Cas. (CCH) 69,747

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJune 27, 1960

Docket848

StatusPublished

Cited by25 cases

This text of 364 U.S. 280 (Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. United States, 364 U.S. 280, 80 S. Ct. 1611, 4 L. Ed. 2d 1719, 1960 U.S. LEXIS 1990, 1960 Trade Cas. (CCH) 69,747 (1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, so far as it relates to the suspension of rates phase of the dispute, is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court with instructions to dismiss the cause as moot. United States v. Amarillo-Borger Express, 352 U. S. 1028; Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. Dixie Carriers, 355 U. S. 179. With respect to the antitrust phase of the dispute, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Douglas dissent on the holding of Georgia v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 324 U. S. 439.

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

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, so far as it relates to the suspension of rates phase of the dispute, is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court with instructions to dismiss the cause as moot. United States v. Amarillo-Borger Express, 352 U. S. 1028; Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. Dixie Carriers, 355 U. S. 179. With respect to the antitrust phase of the dispute, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Douglas dissent on the holding of Georgia v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 324 U. S. 439.

Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America, Eastern and Western Railroads, Southern Railroads, Intervenors. The Aluminum Association, Inc. v. United States of America and Interstate Commerce Commission, Eastern, Southern and Western Railroads, Intervenors. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation v. United States of America and Interstate Commerce Commission, Eastern, Southern and Western Railroads, Intervenors

675 F.2d 303 (D.C. Circuit, 1982)

567 F.2d 994 (D.C. Circuit, 1978)

Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Ass'n v. Interstate Commerce Commission

567 F.2d 994 (D.C. Circuit, 1977)

United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP)

412 U.S. 669 (Supreme Court, 1973)

Port of New York Authority v. United States

451 F.2d 783 (Second Circuit, 1971)

The Port of New York Authority v. United States of America and Interstate Commerce Commission, the City of New York v. United States of America and Interstate Commerce Commission, Penn Central Transportation Company (Baker, Bond, Langdon and Wirtz, Trustees), Intervenor in Support of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and State of New York, Applicant for Intervention

451 F.2d 783 (Second Circuit, 1971)

Municipal Light Boards of Reading and Wakefield Massachusetts v. Federal Power Commission, Boston Edison Company, Intervenor

450 F.2d 1341 (D.C. Circuit, 1971)

The Associated Press v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, the Western Union Telegraph Co., American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Intervenors. Aerospace Industries Association of America, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, the Western Union Telegraph Co., American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Intervenors. Air Transport Association of America v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, the Western Union Telegraph Co., Bethlehem Steel Corporation, American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Intervenors. American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, the Western Union Telegraph Co., American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Intervenors. Aeronautical Radio, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, the Western Union Telegraph Co., American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Intervenors. National Association of Motor Bus Owners v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, the Western Union Telegraph Co., American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Intervenors. United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

448 F.2d 1095 (D.C. Circuit, 1971)

Associated Press v. Federal Communications Commission

448 F.2d 1095 (D.C. Circuit, 1971)

Interstate Investors, Inc. v. United States

287 F. Supp. 374 (S.D. New York, 1968)

State of New Hampshire v. Boston and Maine Corporation

251 F. Supp. 421 (D. New Hampshire, 1965)

State v. New York Movers Tariff Bureau, Inc.

48 Misc. 2d 225 (New York Supreme Court, 1965)

Seatrain Lines, Inc. v. United States

233 F. Supp. 40 (D. New Jersey, 1964)

Arrow Transportation Co. v. Southern Railway Co.

372 U.S. 658 (Supreme Court, 1963)

Roadway Express, Inc. v. United States

213 F. Supp. 868 (D. Delaware, 1963)

United States v. Wiley's Cove Ranch

295 F.2d 436 (Eighth Circuit, 1961)

Long Island Rail Road Company v. United States

193 F. Supp. 795 (E.D. New York, 1961)

Consolidated Truck Service, Inc. v. United States

193 F. Supp. 773 (D. New Jersey, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

364 U.S. 280, 80 S. Ct. 1611, 4 L. Ed. 2d 1719, 1960 U.S. LEXIS 1990, 1960 Trade Cas. (CCH) 69,747, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/luckenbach-steamship-co-v-united-states-scotus-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack