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.
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum, Soft Tile & Resilient Floor Covering Layers, Local Union No. 419, AFL-CIO, et al., 1969 — 396 U.S. 926 · caselaw · US
General
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum, Soft Tile & Resilient Floor Covering Layers, Local Union No. 419, AFL-CIO, et al.
396 U.S. 926·Supreme Court of the United States·1969
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. 476.
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum, Soft Tile & Resilient Floor Covering Layers, Local Union No. 419, AFL-CIO, et al.
Gerard C. Smetana and Alan Raywid for petitioner. Solicitor General Griswold, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli, Norton J. Come, and Linda Sher for respondent Waers, NLRB Regional Director. Brice I. Bishop and Phil B. Hammond for American Retail Federation as amicus curiae in support of the petition. Charles C. Kieffer for Terminal Freight Handling Co. et al. as amici curiae in support of the petition.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 10th Cir. Motion of American Retail Federation for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Motion of Terminal Freight Handling Co. et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Certiorari granted.