Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Carnation Co. v. Pacific Westbound Conference et al., 1966 — 383 U.S. 932 · caselaw · US
General
Carnation Co. v. Pacific Westbound Conference et al.
383 U.S. 932·Supreme Court of the United States·1966
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 20.
Carnation Co. v. Pacific Westbound Conference et al.,
[MAJORITY]
ante, p. 213.
It is ordered that the opinion of the Court in this case handed down on February 28, 1966, is amended as follows:
(1) By striking that portion of the last paragraph on page eight of the slip opinion commencing with the words “Even if” and concluding with the words “Court of Appeals’ decision” in the first line of page nine;
(2) By striking the first, third, and fourth sentences of the paragraph commencing on page nine and concluding on page ten, and adding the following “An appeal from the Cdhimission’s decision is now pending.” after the sentence commencing “The Commission completed” in said paragraph;
(3) By striking the words “for a determination of the antitrust issues.” from the last paragraph of the opinion and substituting therefor the words “with instructions to stay the action pending the final outcome of the Shipping Act proceedings and then to proceed in a manner consistent with this opinion.”