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.
John T. Clark & Son v. Cunard SteamShip Co., Ltd., et al.; and David Crystal, Inc. v. Cunard SteamShip Co., Ltd., et al., 1965 — 380 U.S. 976 · caselaw · US
General
John T. Clark & Son v. Cunard SteamShip Co., Ltd., et al.; and David Crystal, Inc. v. Cunard SteamShip Co., Ltd., et al.
380 U.S. 976·Supreme Court of the United States·1965
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. 965.
No. 970.
John T. Clark & Son v. Cunard SteamShip Co., Ltd., et al.; and David Crystal, Inc. v. Cunard SteamShip Co., Ltd., et al.
Horace T. Atkins for petitioner in No. 965. John L. Quinlan for David Crystal, Inc., petitioner in No. 970 and respondent in No. 965. William J. Tillinghast, Jr., for Penson & Co., respondent in No. 965.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.