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.
Hilbrich v. United States; Uselding v. United States, 1966 — 384 U.S. 1028 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Hilbrich v. United States; Uselding v. United States
384 U.S. 1028·Supreme Court of the United States·1966
Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions.
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. 1055,
No. 1159,
Misc., October Term, 1964.
Misc., October Term, 1964.
Hilbrich v. United States, Uselding v. United States,
[MAJORITY]
381 U. S. 941, 382 U. S. 874; and
381 U. S. 941, 382 U. S. 874. Motions for leave to file second petitions for rehearing denied.
Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions.