Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Beck Vs. Mcleod

Beck vs Mcleod

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jan-31-1966
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101473

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
382 U.S. 454
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Beck

Respondent

Mcleod

Excerpt

beck v. mc leod - 382 u.s. 454 (1966) u.s. supreme court beck v. mc leod, 382 u.s. 454 (1966) 382 u.s. 454 beck v. mc leod, attorney general of south carolina. appeal from the united states district court for the eastern district of south carolina. no. 770. decided january 31, 1966. 240 f. supp. 708, affirmed. samuel c. craven for appellant. daniel r. mcleod, attorney general of south carolina, and everett n. brandon, assistant attorney general, for appellee. per curiam. the judgment is affirmed. page 382 u.s. 454, 455 united states v. wilson & co., inc., 382 u.s. 454 (1966) 382 u.s. 454 (1966) "> u.s. supreme court united states v. wilson & co., inc., 382 u.s. 454 (1966) 382 u.s. 454 united states et al. v. wilson & co., inc., et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit. no. 56. decided january 31, 1966. 335 f.2d 788 , remanded. solicitor general marshall for the united states et al. howard j. trienens for respondents american telephone & telegraph co. et al. per curiam. the joint motion of counsel to remand is granted and the case is remanded to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit in order to permit the entry of a decree of restitution in accordance with the agreement of the parties.

Full Judgment

BECK v. Mc LEOD - 382 U.S. 454 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court BECK v. Mc LEOD, 382 U.S. 454 (1966) 382 U.S. 454

BECK v. Mc LEOD, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
SOUTH CAROLINA. No. 770.
Decided January 31, 1966.

240 F. Supp. 708, affirmed.

Samuel C. Craven for appellant.

Daniel R. McLeod, Attorney General of South Carolina, and Everett N. Brandon, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed.

Page 382 U.S. 454, 455


UNITED STATES v. WILSON & CO., INC., <a href="/101473"> 382 U.S. 454 </a> (1966) 382 U.S. 454 (1966) "> U.S. Supreme Court UNITED STATES v. WILSON & CO., INC., 382 U.S. 454 (1966) 382 U.S. 454

UNITED STATES ET AL. v. WILSON & CO., INC., ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT.
No. 56.
Decided January 31, 1966.

335 F.2d 788 , remanded.

Solicitor General Marshall for the United States et al.

Howard J. Trienens for respondents American Telephone & Telegraph Co. et al.

PER CURIAM.

The joint motion of counsel to remand is granted and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in order to permit the entry of a decree of restitution in accordance with the agreement of the parties.



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial