Supreme Court of the United States, 1968

Arkansas v. Tennessee

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided January 15, 1968 · No. 33

389 U.S. 1026; 88 S. Ct. 757; 19 L. Ed. 2d 815; 1968 U.S. LEXIS 2736 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Joe Purcell, Attorney General of Arkansas, and Don Langston, Assistant Attorney General, on the motion., George F. McCanless, Attorney General of Tennessee, C. Hayes Cooney, Assistant Attorney General, and Harry W. Laughlin, James L. Garthright, Jr., and J. Martin Regan, Special Counsel, for defendant.

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

Resolution Trust Corp. v. Grant (Okla. 1995)
Nesglo, Inc. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. (District Court, D. Puerto Rico 1980)
Sciolino v. Marine Midland Bank-Western (District Court, W.D. New York 1979)
Stirling v. Chemical Bank (District Court, S.D. New York 1974)
International Railways of Central America v. United Brands Co. (District Court, S.D. New York 1973)
Common Cause v. Democratic National Committee (District Court, District of Columbia 1971)
Arkansas v. Tennessee (Supreme Court of the United States 1970)

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

Motion for leave to file bill of complaint granted and the State of Tennessee allowed sixty days to answer.

It Is Ordered that the Honorable Gunnar H. Nordbye, Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, be, and he is hereby, appointed Special Master in this case with authority to fix the time and conditions for the filing of additional pleadings and to direct subsequent proceedings, and with authority to summon witnesses, issue subpoenas, and take such evidence as may be introduced and such as he may deem it necessary to call for. The Master is directed to submit such reports as he may deem appropriate.

The Master shall be allowed his actual expenses. The allowances to him, the compensation paid to his technical, stenographic, and clerical assistants, the cost of printing his report, and all other proper expenses shall be charged against and be borne by the parties in such proportion as the Court hereafter may direct.

It Is Further Ordered that if the position of Special Master in this case becomes vacant during a recess of the Court, The Chief Justice shall have authority to make a new designation which shall have the same effect as if originally made by the Court herein.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.