Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Viking Theatre Corp. v. Paramount Film Distributing Corp.

378 U.S. 123

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1964-06-15
Topic
bankruptcy

Per Curiam. The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the decision of this case.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Viking Theatre Corp. v. Paramount Film Distributing Corp.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
1 opinion
VIKING THEATREv. PARAMOUNT FILM,378 U.S. 123(1964)
VIKING THEATRE CORP.v. PARAMOUNT FILM DISTRIBUTING CORP. ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT.
No. 481.
Argued April 27, 1964.
Decided June 15, 1964.
Judgment affirmed by an equally divided Court.

Reported below:320 F.2d 285.
Edward Bennett Williamsargued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs wereHarold UngarandHenry W. Sawyer III.Louis NizerandMorris Wolfargued the cause for respondents. WithMr. Nizeron the brief for respondent Paramount Film Distributing Corp. et al. wereW. BradleyWardandLouis J. Goffman. WithMr. Wolfon the brief for respondent Stanley Company of America et al. wasFranklin Poul. Ralph Earle II, Arthur Littleton,Frederick W. R. PrideandCharles F. Youngfiled a brief for Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., et al., andEdwin P. RomeandMorris L. Weisbergfiled a brief for William Goldman Theatres, Inc., respondents.Herman M. Levyfiled a brief for the Theatre Owners of America, Inc., et al., asamici curiae, urging affirmance.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS took no part in the decision of this case.Page 124