General
Mitsubishi International Corp. et al. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. et al.; China Union Lines, Ltd. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. et al.; and Lan Jing-Chau et al. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. et al.
386 U.S. 933·Supreme Court of the United States·1967
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. 927.
No. 933.
No. 934.
Mitsubishi International Corp. et al. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. et al.; China Union Lines, Ltd. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. et al.; and Lan Jing-Chau et al. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. et al.
Sweeney J. Doehnng for Mitsubishi International Corp. et al., petitioners in No. 927 and respondents in No. 933. Robert Eikel for petitioner in No. 933. Newton B. Schwartz for petitioners in No. 934. Bryan F. Williams, Jr., and Carl O. Bue, Jr., for respondent A. 0. Andersen & Co. in all three cases. Leonard J. Matteson for respondent American Cyanamid Co. in Nos. 933 and 934. John V. Wheat for respondent Duncan in No. 933.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.