green
Positive treatment
2.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1952 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1952
1989
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Roach v. Comptroller of the Treasury
See Reiling v. Lacy, 93 F.Supp. 462, 470-471 (D.Md.1950), appeal dismissed, 341 U.S. 901 , 71 S.Ct. 614 , 95 L.Ed. 1341 (1951).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board
See, e. g., Eastern Air Lines v. C.A.B., 87 U.S.App.D.C. 331 , 185 F.2d 426 (1950), vacated as moot, 341 U.S. 901 , 71 S.Ct. 613 , 95 L.Ed. 1341 (1951); American Airlines, Inc. v. C.A.B., 97 U.S.App.D.C. 324 , 231 F.2d 483 (1956).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Wien Air Alaska, Inc., Alaska Airlines Master Executive Council, Intervenor. Bp Alaska, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Wien Air Alaska, Inc., Alaska Airlines Master Executive Council, Intervenor
See, e. g., Eastern Air Lines v. C.A.B., 87 U.S.App.D.C. 331 , 185 F.2d 426 (1950), vacated as moot, 341 U.S. 901 , 71 S.Ct. 613 , 95 L.Ed. 1341 (1951); American Airlines, Inc. v. C.A.B., 97 U.S.App.D.C. 324 , 231 F.2d 483 (1956). 38 Intervenor Wien contends that the CAB performed only an interpretive function and that all statutory provisions dealing with certificate amendments and enforcement proceedings are irrelevant.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Clarence Eisen v. Oliver C. Eastman
See, e. g., Reiling v. Lacey, 93 F.Supp. 462 (D.Md. 1950), appeal dismissed, 341 U.S. 901 , 71 S.Ct. 614 , 95 L.Ed. 1341 (1951); Abernathy v. Carpenter, 208 F.Supp. 793 (W.D.Mo.1962) [alternative ground], aff’d, 373 U.S. 241 , 83 S.Ct. 1295 , 10 L.Ed.2d 409 (1963); Gray v. Morgan, 371 F.2d 172 (7 Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 1033 , 87 S.Ct. 1484 , 18 L.Ed.2d 596 (1967); Bussie v. Long, 383 F.2d 766 (5 Cir. 1967); Hornbeak v. Hamm, 283 F.Supp. 549 (M.D.Ala.), aff’d, 393 U.S. 9 , 89 S.Ct. 47 , 21 L.Ed.2d 14 (1968).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Nebraska Department of Aeronautics v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Frontier Airlines, Inc., Intervenor
Compare Eastern Airlines v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 1950, 87 U.S.App.D.C. 331 , 185 F.2d 426, 428 , vacated with directions to dismiss as moot, 341 U.S. 901 , 71 S.Ct. 613 , 95 L.Ed. 1341 and American Airlines v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 1956, 97 U.S.App.D.C. 324 , 231 F.2d 483 , 487-8. 16 A review of the legislative history of the Act and of its predecessor, the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938, 52 Stat. 977 , as amended, with particular emphasis upon the 1938 Act’s §§ 401 (k) and 401(h), former 49 U.S.C.A. § 481 (k) and (h), substantially identical with § 401 (j) and § 401(g) of the pre…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Eastern Air Lines, Inc.
v.
Civil Aeronautics Board
v.
Civil Aeronautics Board
No. 567.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 9, 1951.
E. Smythe Gambrell and W. Glen Harlan for petitioner. Solicitor General Perlman, Assistant Attorney General Morison, Emory T. Nunneley, Jr. and Warren L. Sharfman for the Civil Aeronautics Board, and Charles H. Murchison for Capital Airlines, Inc., respondents.
Cited by 4 opinions | Published
On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Per Curiam: The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded to that Court with directions to dismiss the proceeding upon the ground
that the cause is moot.