Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Pennsylvania v. West Virginia 263 U.S. 350

← Cases

Pennsylvania v. West Virginia

263 U.S. 350 Court SCOTUS Decision date 1923-12-03 Docket Nos. 15 and 16 English

Judges The Chief Justice did not participate in the consideration of the cases on the rehearing.; Mr. Justice Holmes, Mr. Justice McReynolds and Mr. Justice Brandéis dissent, for the reasons given in their dissenting opinions at the last term.

Delivered by Van J.

Contents

Majority — Van J.

p. 350
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA. STATE OF OHIO v. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA.

Syllabus

OUT REHEARING.
Nos. 15 and 16,
Orig., October Term, 1922.
Reargued November 20, 1923.
Decided December 3, 1923.
Decree heretofore made in these cases, reaffirmed, after rehearing.
Mr. John W. Davis and Mr. George E. Alter, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, for plaintiffs.
Mr. Philip, P. Steptoe and Mr. George M. Hoffheimer for defendant.

announced the ruling of. the Court.

An opinion expressing the views of the Court in these cases was announced at the ’last term and a decree was entered then. 262 U. S. 553 , 623. - By the Court’s leave, given at that term, a petition for rehearing was filed. The cases had been ■ presented ■ in oral argument three times, but three members of the Court had heard only ■ the last presentation. This, with the importance of the questions involved and the public character of; the litigants, led the Court to grant the rehearing. It was had. two weeks ago.. The cases have been considered again in the light of that presentation, and after this further reflection the Court perceives no ground for disturbing the

p. 351
opinion heretofore announced or the decree entered thereon.

Decree reaffirmed.

The Chief Justice did not participate in the consideration of the cases on the rehearing.

Mr. Justice Holmes, Mr. Justice McReynolds and Mr. Justice Brandéis dissent, for the reasons given in their dissenting opinions at the last term.

Cases cited