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.
BURNETTE et al. v. DAVIS et al., 1965 — 382 U.S. 42 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
BURNETTE et al. v. DAVIS et al.
382 U.S. 42·Supreme Court of the United States·1965
Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.
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
BURNETTE et al. v. DAVIS et al.
No. 241.
Decided October 25, 1965
Aubrey R. Boivles, Jr., and Aubrey R. Bowles III for appellants in No. 241. Samuel W. Tucker and Henry L. Marsh III for appellants in No. 424.
Robert Y. Button, Attorney General of Virginia, R. D. Mcllwaine III, Assistant Attorney General, David J. Mays and Henry T. Wickham for appellees.
Together with No. 424, Thornton et al. v. Davis et al., also on appeal from the same court.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.
Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.