U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1952

Civil Aeronautics Board v. American Air Transport, Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided November 20, 1952 · Edgerton, Miller, Prettyman

201 F.2d 189; 91 U.S. App. D.C. 318 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

John H. Wanner, Associate Gen. Counsel, Civil Aeronautics Board, Washington, D. C., with whom Asst. Atty. Gen. H. G. Morison, and George Morris Fay, U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., at the time the brief was filed, Emory T. Nunneley, Jr., Gen. Counsel, Civil Aeronautics Board, Ross O’Donoghue, Asst. U. S. Atty., and O. D. Ozment, Atty., Civil Aeronautics Board, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellants. Charles M. Irelan, U. S. Atty. at the time of argument, Charles H. Weston, Chief, Appellate Section of the Antitrust Division, Department of Justice, and Joseph M. Howard, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., also entered appearances on behalf of appellants., Albert F. Beitel, Washington, D. C., with whom George M. Morris, Washington, D. C.,,was on the brief, for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision. The 6 that cite it most often are listed here.

Civil Aeronautics Board v. American Air Transport, Inc. (D.C. Cir. 1952)
Deutsche Lufthansa Aktienge-Sellschaft v. Civil Aeronautics Board (D.C. Cir. 1973)
American Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board (D.C. Cir. 1966)
Great Lakes Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board of the United States (9th Cir. 1961)
Capitol Airways, Inc., and World Airways, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Seaboard & Western Airlines, Inc., Intervenor (D.C. Cir. 1961)
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Summerfield (D.C. Cir. 1955)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We certified this case to the Supreme Court. On October 20, 1952, the Supreme Court dismissed the certificate. 344 U.S. 4, 73 S.Ct. 2. The circuit judge who formerly voted for affirmance and the circuit judge who formerly voted for reversal now concur with the circuit judge who formerly voted for .remand. The case is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion of that judge, 201 F.2d 189, 193, 194, as set forth in our certificate filed June 12,1952.

Remanded.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.