General
Wisconsin et al. v. Illinois et al.; Michigan v. Illinois et al.; and New York v. Illinois et al.
352 U.S. 947·Supreme Court of the United States·1956
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. 2,
No. 3,
No. 4,
Original.
Original.
Original.
Wisconsin et al. v. Illinois et al.; Michigan v. Illinois et al.; and New York v. Illinois et al.
Russell W. Root and Lawrence J. Fenlon for movant. John M. Dalton, Attorney General, and John W. Inglish, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Missouri, supported the motion. The States of Michigan, by Thomas M. Kavanagh, Attorney General, and Edmund E. Shepherd, Solicitor General; New York, by Jacob K. Javits, Attorney General, and James 0. Moore, Jr., Solici-to!’ General; and Wisconsin, by Vernon W. Thomson, Attorney General, and Boy G. Tulane, Assistant Attorney General, urged dismissal of the motion.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The motion of the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago for clarification of the decree [281 U. S. 696] is hereby denied.