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.
Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Federal Power Commission et al.; and United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Mississippi River Fuel Corp. et al., 1957 — 355 U.S. 904 · caselaw · US
Corporations
Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Federal Power Commission et al.; and United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Mississippi River Fuel Corp. et al.
355 U.S. 904·Supreme Court of the United States·1957
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. 567.
No. 568.
Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Federal Power Commission et al.; and United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Mississippi River Fuel Corp. et al.
William A. Dougherty, Spencer W. Reeder and James Lawrence White for the Mississippi River Fuel Corporation. Thomas Fletcher, C. Huffman Lewis and Ralph M. Carson for the United Gas Pipe Line Co., petitioner in No. 568 and respondent in No. 567. Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Doub, Paul A. Sweeney, Bernard Cedarbaum, Willard W. Gatchell and Howard E. Wahrenbrock for the Federal Power Commission, respondent.
[MAJORITY]
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari denied.
Reported below: 102 U. S. App. D. C. 238, 252 F. 2d 619.