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.
Yates et al. v. United States; Schneiderman v. United States; and Richmond et al. v. United States, 1955 — 350 U.S. 860 · caselaw · US
General
Yates et al. v. United States; Schneiderman v. United States; and Richmond et al. v. United States
350 U.S. 860·Supreme Court of the United States·1955
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. 308.
No. 309.
No. 310.
Yates et al. v. United States; Schneiderman v. United States; and Richmond et al. v. United States.
Norman Leonard, Ben Margolis, Alexander H. Schullman and A. L. Wirin for petitioners in No. 308. Robert W. Kenny for petitioner in No. 309. Augustin Donovan for petitioners in No. 310. Solicitor General Sobeloff, Assistant Attorney General Tompkins, Robert W. Ginnane, Harold D. Koffsky and Lawrence K. Bailey for the United States.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted. The motions for leave to file briefs of American Civil Liberties Union and International Longshoremen’s & Warehousemen’s Union, as amici curiae, are denied.
Reported below: 225 F. 2d 146.