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.
MORICO v. UNITED STATES, 1970 — 399 U.S. 526 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
MORICO v. UNITED STATES
399 U.S. 526·Supreme Court of the United States·1970
The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Stewart, Mr. Justice White, and Mr. Justice Blackmun are of the opinion that certiorari should be denied.
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
MORICO v. UNITED STATES
No. 672.
Decided June 29, 1970
Together with No. 35, Misc., Vaughn v. United States, on petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit; No. 88, Misc., McQueary v. United States, and No. 738, Misc., Callison v. United States, on petitions for writs of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in Misc. Nos. 35, 88, and 738, granted. The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted, the judgments are vacated, and the cases are remanded for further consideration in light of Welsh v. United States, 398 U. S. 333.
The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Stewart, Mr. Justice White, and Mr. Justice Blackmun are of the opinion that certiorari should be denied.