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.
Monroe et al. v. Pape et al., 1961 — 365 U.S. 806 · caselaw · US
General
Monroe et al. v. Pape et al.
365 U.S. 806·Supreme Court of the United States·1961
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. 39.
Monroe et al. v. Pape et al.
Morris L. Ernst, Donald Page Moore, Ernst Liebman, Charles Liebman and John W. Rogers for movants.
[MAJORITY]
Certiorari, 362 U. S. 926, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. (Decided this date and opinion reported, ante, p. 167.) Motion of petitioners for leave to file supplemental brief after argument granted.