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.
Bankruptcy
Boston & Providence Railroad Stockholders Development Group v. Bartlett, Trustee in Bankruptcy, et al.
389 U.S. 974·Supreme Court of the United States·1967
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. 624.
Boston & Providence Railroad Stockholders Development Group v. Bartlett, Trustee in Bankruptcy, et al.
Armistead B. Rood for petitioner.
James Garfield, James Wm. Moore and Robert W. Blanchette for respondents Smith et al., Trustees of the property of New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., Robert W. Meserve for respondent Boston & Providence Railroad Corp. Stockholders Committee, Charles Y. Wadsworth for respondent Boston & Providence Railroad Corp., and Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for respondent United States.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 1st Cir. (See No. 661, Mise., supra, p. 967.) Certiorari denied.