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.
Detroit Bank, formerly Detroit Savings Bank, v. United States; and Michigan et al. v. United States, 1942 — 317 U.S. 607 · caselaw · US
General
Detroit Bank, formerly Detroit Savings Bank, v. United States; and Michigan et al. v. United States
317 U.S. 607·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. 156.
Detroit Bank, formerly Detroit Savings Bank, v. United States; and Michigan et al. v. United States.
No. 214.
October 12, 1942.
Messrs. Ferris D. Stone and Cleveland Thurber for petitioner in No. 156. Messrs. Herbert J. Bushton, Attorney General of Michigan, James H. Lee, and Samuel Brezner for petitioners in No. 214. Solicitor General Fahy, Assistant Attorney General Clark, and Messrs. Sewall Key, J. Louis Monarch, Oscar Cox, Archibald Cox, and Morton K. Rothschild for the United States.
[MAJORITY]
Petitions for writs of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit granted.