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.
Ex parte Fahey et al., 1947 — 331 U.S. 783 · caselaw · US
General
Ex parte Fahey et al.
331 U.S. 783·Supreme Court of the United States·1947
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. 133,
Misc.
Ex parte Fahey et al.
April 14, 1947.
Acting Solicitor General Washington for petitioners.
[MAJORITY]
A rule is ordered to issue, returnable Monday, April 28, next, requiring the respondents to show cause why leave to file the petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition and/or injunction should not be granted. The cause is assigned for argument on the return to the rule immediately following the hearing in Fahey v. Mal-lonee, No. 687. All proceedings tending to effectuate the order of the District Judge granting a motion with respect to costs and expenses of certain appellees in case No. 687 and counsel fees are hereby stayed pending the further order of this Court.