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.
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum, Soft Tile, & Resilient Floor Covering Layers, Local Union No. 419, AFL-CIO, et al., 1970 — 399 U.S. 917 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum, Soft Tile, & Resilient Floor Covering Layers, Local Union No. 419, AFL-CIO, et al.
399 U.S. 917·Supreme Court of the United States·1970
Mr. Justice Black-mun took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions and 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. 476.
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum, Soft Tile, & Resilient Floor Covering Layers, Local Union No. 419, AFL-CIO, et al.,
[MAJORITY]
397 U. S. 655. Motion for leave to supplement petition for rehearing granted. Motion to defer consideration of petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing denied.
Mr. Justice Black-mun took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions and petition.-