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.
Wolfson et al. v. United States, 1969 — 394 U.S. 946 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Wolfson et al. v. United States
394 U.S. 946·Supreme Court of the United States·1969
Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
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. 1057.
Wolfson et al. v. United States.
William O. Bittman and E. Barrett Prettyman, Jr., for Wolfson, and Milton V. Freeman and Edgar H. Brenner for Gerbert, petitioners.
Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Wilson, Beatrice Rosenberg, and Roger A. Pauley for the United States.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.