Territo Vs. United States

Territo vs United States

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jan-12-1959

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/99757

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/99757
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: Jan-12-1959
Case Number: 358 U.S. 279
Subject: FERA

Case Summary

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

FERA

Key legal issue: FERA

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Territo

Respondent

United 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 no part in the consideration or decision of this case. page 358 u.s. 279, 280

Full 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

Same Parties Territo vs United States Same Subject FERA