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.
General
Commercial Molasses Corp. v. New York Tank Barge Corp.
313 U.S. 54185 L. Ed. 1510·Supreme Court of the United States·1941
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. 584.
Commercial Molasses Corp. v. New York Tank Barge Corp.
Argued Match 13, 14, 1941.
Decided April 14, 1941.
[MAJORITY — Per Cu- riam:]
Per Cu- riam:
Mr. T. Catesby Jones, with whom Messrs. D. Roger Englar, Leonard J. Matteson, and Ezra G. Benedict Fox were on the brief, for petitioner. Mr: Robert S. Erskine, with whom Messrs. Cletus Keating, L. de Grove Potter, and Richard Sullivan were on the brief, for respondent.
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.