Skip to content


Walker Vs. United States - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number372 U.S. 526
AppellantWalker
RespondentUnited States
Excerpt:
walker v. united states - 372 u.s. 526 (1963) u.s. supreme court walker v. united states, 372 u.s. 526 (1963) 372 u.s. 526 walker v. united states et al. appeal from the united states district court for the western district of texas. no. 657. decided march 18, 1963. 208 f. supp. 388, affirmed. henry w. moursund, maynard f. robinson and r. dean moorhead for appellant. solicitor general cox, assistant attorney general loevinger, robert b. hummel, irwin a. seibel and robert w. ginnane for the united states et al., and george nokes, roland rice, carl wright johnson and nat l. hardy for central freight lines inc. et al., appellees. per curiam. the motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. mr. justice black is of.....
Judgment:
WALKER v. UNITED STATES - 372 U.S. 526 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court WALKER v. UNITED STATES, 372 U.S. 526 (1963) 372 U.S. 526

WALKER v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
TEXAS. No. 657.
Decided March 18, 1963.

208 F. Supp. 388, affirmed.

Henry W. Moursund, Maynard F. Robinson and R. Dean Moorhead for appellant.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Loevinger, Robert B. Hummel, Irwin A. Seibel and Robert W. Ginnane for the United States et al., and George Nokes, Roland Rice, Carl Wright Johnson and Nat L. Hardy for Central Freight Lines Inc. et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE BLACK is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

Page 372 U.S. 526, 527




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //