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.
UNITED STATES v. ALUMINUM CO. OF AMERICA et al., 1967 — 389 U.S. 49 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
UNITED STATES v. ALUMINUM CO. OF AMERICA et al.
389 U.S. 49·Supreme Court of the United States·1967
Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
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
UNITED STATES v. ALUMINUM CO. OF AMERICA et al.
No. 271.
Decided October 23, 1967.
Solicitor General Marshall, Ralph S. Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert A. Hammond III and Howard E. Shapiro for the United States.
Herbert A. Bergson, Howard Adler, Jr., Donald L. Hardison and William K. Unverzagt for appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Upon consideration of the joint suggestion of mootness and motion to vacate, the judgment of the District Court of January 20, 1967, is vacated as moot and the case is remanded for further proceedings.
Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.