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.
Moore, doing business as Moore Motor Freight Lines, v. United States et al., 1942 — 316 U.S. 642 · caselaw · US
General
Moore, doing business as Moore Motor Freight Lines, v. United States et al.
316 U.S. 642·Supreme Court of the United States·1942
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. 1074.
Moore, doing business as Moore Motor Freight Lines, v. United States et al.
April 13, 1942.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Appeal from
the District Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota.
Per Curiam:
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. United States v. Maher, 307 U. S. 148, 153-154; United States v. Rosenblum Truck Lines, 315 U. S. 50; Lubetich v. United States, 315 U. S. 57.
Messrs. Ernest A. Michel and Thomas Walsh for appellant. Solicitor General Fahy and Mr. Daniel W. Knowlton for respondents.