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.
The United States, Petitioner, v. Rusch & Company; The United States, Petitioner, v. Titus Blatter & Company; and The United States, Petitioner, v. W. B. Quaintance, 1909 — 214 U.S. 525 · caselaw · US
General
The United States, Petitioner, v. Rusch & Company; The United States, Petitioner, v. Titus Blatter & Company; and The United States, Petitioner, v. W. B. Quaintance
214 U.S. 525·Supreme Court of the United States·1909
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. 875.
The United States, Petitioner, v. Rusch & Company; The United States, Petitioner, v. Titus Blatter & Company; and The United States, Petitioner, v. W. B. Quaintance.
No. 876.
No. 877.
May 24, 1909.
The Attorney General and The■ Solicitor General for petitioner.
Mr. Albert H. Washburn for-respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Petitions for writs of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.