Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

City of Chicago v. United States

394 U.S. 717

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1969-04-21
Topic
general

Per Curiam. The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed City of Chicago v. United States. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
1 opinion
CITY OF CHICAGOv. UNITED STATES,394 U.S. 717(1969)
CITY OF CHICAGO ET AL.v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS.
No. 1047.
Decided April 21, 1969.fn*
291 F. Supp. 858, affirmed.
Raymond F. Simon, Nuel D. Belnap, andHarold E.Spencerfor appellants in No. 1047.John W. Adams,William J. O'Brien, Jr., James H. Durkin, Bryce L.Hamilton, andLouis A. Schwartzfor appellants in No. 1048.Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney GeneralMcLaren, Robert W. Ginnane, Leonard S. Goodman, andRaymond M. Zimmetfor the United States et al. in both cases.

Briefs ofamici curiaewere filed in No. 1047 byWilliamJ. Scott, Attorney General, andRobert F. Scott, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Illinois; byFrank J. Kelley, Attorney General,Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, andNicholas V. Olds, JeromeMaslowski, andCurtis G. Beck, Assistant Attorneys General, for the State of Michigan; byPaul W. Brown, Attorney General, andShelby V. HutchinsandJ. PhilipRedick, Assistant Attorneys General, for the State of Ohio; and byJoseph H. Nathansonfor the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.Page 718
  1. Page 717 Together with No. 1048,Illinois Central Railroad Co. et al. v.City of Chicago et al.,also on appeal from the same court. ↩