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.
INLAND EMPIRE BUILDERS, INC., et al. v. WASHINGTON et al., 1964 — 378 U.S. 580 · caselaw · US
General
INLAND EMPIRE BUILDERS, INC., et al. v. WASHINGTON et al.
378 U.S. 580·Supreme Court of the United States·1964
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
INLAND EMPIRE BUILDERS, INC., et al. v. WASHINGTON et al.
No. 849.
Decided June 22, 1964.
Seth W. Morrison for appellants in No. 849.
T. M. Royce for appellants in No. 850.
Edward G. Dobrin for appellants in No. 851.
John J. O’Connell, Attorney General of Washington, John W. Riley and Timothy R. Malone, Special Assistant Attorneys General, and James A. Furber, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Ober-dorfer and I. Henry Kutz filed a memorandum for the United States.
Together with No. 850, Hebb & Narodick Construction Co., Inc., et al. v. Washington et al., and No. 851, Murray et al. v. Washington et al., both also on appeal from the same court.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeals are dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.