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.
Continental Baking Co. v. Federal Trade Commission; Langendorf United Bakeries, Inc., et al. v. Federal Trade Commission; and Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission, 1967 — 386 U.S. 932 · caselaw · US
Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
Continental Baking Co. v. Federal Trade Commission; Langendorf United Bakeries, Inc., et al. v. Federal Trade Commission; and Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission
386 U.S. 932·Supreme Court of the United States·1967
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. 845.
No. 849.
No. 852.
Continental Baking Co. v. Federal Trade Commission; Langendorf United Bakeries, Inc., et al. v. Federal Trade Commission; and Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission.
John H. Schafer and James V. Siena for petitioner in No. 845; Herbert S. Little for petitioners in No. 849; and Robert W. Graham for petitioner in No. 852. Solicitor General Marshall/ Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro, James Mcl. Henderson and Daniel H. Hans-com for respondent in all three cases.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.