Skip to content


Territo Vs. United States - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number358 U.S. 279
AppellantTerrito
RespondentUnited States
Excerpt:
territo v. united states - 358 u.s. 279 (1959) u.s. supreme court territo v. united states, 358 u.s. 279 (1959) 358 u.s. 279 territo et al. v. united states et al. appeal from the united states district court for the district of new jersey. no. 454. decided january 12, 1959. appeal dismissed because notice thereof was not timely filed. reported below: 170 f. supp. 855. francis j. ortman for appellants. solicitor general rankin, assistant attorney general hansen, robert w. ginnane and james a. murray for the united states and the interstate commerce commission, appellees. per curiam. the appeal is dismissed for the reason that the notice thereof was not filed within the time provided by law. mr. justice frankfurter took.....
Judgment:
TERRITO v. UNITED STATES - 358 U.S. 279 (1959)
U.S. Supreme Court TERRITO v. UNITED STATES, 358 U.S. 279 (1959) 358 U.S. 279

TERRITO ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY.
No. 454.
Decided January 12, 1959.

Appeal dismissed because notice thereof was not timely filed.

Reported below: 170 F. Supp. 855.

Francis J. Ortman for appellants.

Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Hansen, Robert W. Ginnane and James A. Murray for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for the reason that the notice thereof was not filed within the time provided by law.

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Page 358 U.S. 279, 280




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