The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California, Southern Pacific Transportation Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California, Trailer Train Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California

Ninth Circuit

The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California, Southern Pacific Transportation Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California, Trailer Train Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California

828 F.2d 9, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 12484

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 21, 1987

Docket85-1554--85-1556

StatusPublished

This text of 828 F.2d 9 (The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California, Southern Pacific Transportation Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California, Trailer Train Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California, Southern Pacific Transportation Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California, Trailer Train Company v. Board of Equalization of the State of California, 828 F.2d 9, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 12484 (9th Cir. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

828 F.2d 9

The ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
TRAILER TRAIN COMPANY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
v.
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.

Nos. 85-1554--85-1556.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued July 8, 1985.
Submitted Aug. 28, 1985.
Decided Sept. 21, 1987.

Crosby, Heafey, Roach & May, Peter W. Davis, Oakland, Cal., Arnold I. Weber, William E. Saul, and Claude E. Kolm, and Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe, Weyman I. Lundquist, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Robertson & Falk, Dirk M. Schenkkan, and Julian O. Standen, Deputy Atty. Gen., San Francisco, Cal., for defendants-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Spencer M. Williams, District Judge, Presiding.

Before FERGUSON, NORRIS and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We deferred submission of the petitions for rehearing in this case pending the Supreme Court's decision in Burlington N.R.R. v. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, ___ U.S. ____, 107 S.Ct. 1855, 95 L.Ed.2d 404 (1987). The petitions for rehearing are now granted, and we vacate our disposition, published at 795 F.2d 1442. We reverse and remand to the district court for proceedings consistent with Burlington Northern.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

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