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.
Massachusetts et al. v. Feeney, 1977 — 434 U.S. 884 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Massachusetts et al. v. Feeney
434 U.S. 884·Supreme Court of the United States·1977
Mr. Justice Brennan, Mr. Justice Marshall, and Mr. Justice Powell would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.
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. 76-265.
Massachusetts et al. v. Feeney.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from D. C. Mass. Motion of John R. Buckley, Secretary of Administration and Finance of Massachusetts, for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Judgment vacated and case remanded for further consideration in light of Washington v. Davis, 426 U. S. 229 (1976).
Mr. Justice Brennan, Mr. Justice Marshall, and Mr. Justice Powell would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.