Case Name: In the Matter of the CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY, Debtor, Trustees of the Property of the Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, Appellees, The New York Central Railroad Company, Appellant, Southern Railway Company et al., Intervenors
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1968-04-22
Citations: 392 F.2d 589
Docket Number: No. 17012
Parties: In the Matter of the CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY, Debtor, Trustees of the Property of the Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, Appellees, The New York Central Railroad Company, Appellant, Southern Railway Company et al., Intervenors.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 392
Pages: 589–589

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY, Debtor, Trustees of the Property of the Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, Appellees, The New York Central Railroad Company, Appellant, Southern Railway Company et al., Intervenors.
No. 17012.
United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.
Argued March 22, 1968.
Decided April 22, 1968.
Jerome H. Shapiro, New York City (O’Mara, Schumann, Davis & Hession, Jersey City, N. J., Kenneth H. Lundmark, New York City, on the brief), for appellant.
Donald N. Dirks, Davis, Polk & Ward-well, New York City, for intervenor, Southern Ry. Co. et al.
Charles J. Milton, Milton, Keane & De-Bona, Jersey City, N. J., for appellee Trustee of Central R. Co. of New Jersey.
Charles Danzig, Riker, Danzig, Scherer & Brown, Newark, N. J., for appellee Lehigh Coal and Navigation Co.
Before McLAUGHLIN, FORMAN and FREEDMAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
PER CURIAM:
The arguments of the appellant, The New York Central Railroad Company, and the intervenors, Southern Railway Company, et al., have been considered. They have been amply met by the sound reasoning of Chief Judge Augelli of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in his Memorandum and Order of September 21, 1967, as amended September 26, 1967, 273 F.Supp. 282, which will be affirmed.