Case Name: NATIONAL MOTOR FREIGHT TRAFFIC ASSOCIATION, INC., and United Motor Freight, Inc., Petitioners, v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, Respondent, Emery Air Freight Corporation, Intervenor
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1966-12-06
Citations: 374 F.2d 266
Docket Number: No. 19953
Parties: NATIONAL MOTOR FREIGHT TRAFFIC ASSOCIATION, INC., and United Motor Freight, Inc., Petitioners, v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, Respondent, Emery Air Freight Corporation, Intervenor.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 374
Pages: 266–268

Head Matter:
NATIONAL MOTOR FREIGHT TRAFFIC ASSOCIATION, INC., and United Motor Freight, Inc., Petitioners, v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, Respondent, Emery Air Freight Corporation, Intervenor.
No. 19953.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued Oct. 26, 1966.
Decided Dec. 6, 1966.
Certiorari Denied May 15, 1967.
See 87 S.Ct. 1687.
Fahy, Circuit Judge, dissented.
Mr. Bryce Rea, Jr., Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. Thomas M. Knebel and F. G. Freund, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for petitioners.
Mr. Warren L. Sharfman, Associate General Counsel, Civil Aeronautics Board, with whom Asst. Atty. Gen. Donald F. Turner, Messrs. Joseph B. Goldman, General Counsel, O. D. Ozment, Deputy General Counsel, Robert L. Toomey, Attorney, Civil Aeronautics Board, and Howard E. Shapiro, Attorney, Department of Justice, were on the brief, for respondent.
Mr. George C. Neal, Washington, D. C., for intervenor. Mr. Brian C. Elmer, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for intervenor.
Before Fahy, Circuit Judge, Bastían, Senior Circuit Judge, and Tamm, Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
JUDGMENT
PER CURIAM.
This case came on to be heard on the record from the Civil Aeronautics Board, and was argued by counsel.
ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is ordered and adjudged by this court that the order of the Civil Aeronautics Board on review herein is affirmed. See Law Motor Freight v. CAB, Inc., 364 F.2d 139, 1st Cir., July 20, 1966.