Legal Document

381 U.S. 414 85 Supreme Court Reporter 1575 14 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 692 KENNECOTT COPPER CORP.v.UNITED STATES. Number 995. of the June 1, 1965 Arthur or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Dean and Howard T. Milman, for appellant. Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney Orrick, Lionel Kestenbaum, Jerome S. Wagshal Donald L. Hardison, States. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion to affirm is granted judgment affirmed. Brown Shoe company versus States, 370 294, 82 1502, 8 510 Aluminum America, 377 271, 84 1283, 12 314. 2 Mr. Justice HARLAN GOLDBERG, dissenting. 3 We would note probable jurisdiction set case argument. In so voting, we indicate no opinion on merits. Under Expediting Act, 32 Statutes-at-Large 823, as amended, 15 Code KF62 § 29 (1964 ed.), this appellant's first only appeal. So long statute remains books Congress provides intermediate review, see Singer Mfg. Co., 374 174, 175, 83 1773, 1774, 10 it our view that policy Act is, in general, best served by plenary rather than summary dispositions such appeals. Ibid. Of course, if question presented an appeal plainly insubstantial directly governed a controlling decision Court, disposition still be appropriate. Since do not believe can said case, give consideration

Classification Label: 7