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.
New York v. New Jersey et al., 1959 — 358 U.S. 924 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
New York v. New Jersey et al.
358 U.S. 924·Supreme Court of the United States·1959
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
January 12, 1959.
No. 13,
Original.
New York v. New Jersey et al.
Louis J. Lejkowitz, Attorney General, Paxton Blair, Solicitor General, and Ruth Kessler Toch, Assistant Solicitor General, for the State of New York, plaintiff. David D. Furman, Attorney General, and Charles J. Kehoe, Deputy Attorney General, for the State of New Jersey, and William S. Gaud for the American Express Co., defendants.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER took no part in the consideration or decision of cases in which orders were filed with the Clerk on this day and were not announced.
[MAJORITY]
The motion for leave to file bill of complaint is denied.