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.
Jack Lincoln Shops, Inc. v. State Dry Cleaners' Board et al., 1943 — 320 U.S. 208 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Jack Lincoln Shops, Inc. v. State Dry Cleaners' Board et al.
320 U.S. 208·Supreme Court of the United States·1943
Mr. Justice Roberts took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
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. 1056.
Jack Lincoln Shops, Inc. v. State Dry Cleaners' Board et al.
June 21, 1943.
Messrs. John B. Dudley and Duke Duvall for appellant.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The appeal is
dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Nebbia v. New York, 291 U. S. 502; West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 U. S. 379; Olsen v. Nebraska, 313 U. S. 236; and Dunn v. Ohio, 318 U. S. 739.
Mr. Justice Roberts took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.