Contracts · MBE-tested
Wisconsin v. Minnesota et al.
382 U.S. 935·Supreme Court of the United States·1965
The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Fortas are of the opinion that the motion for leave to file the bill of complaint should be set for oral argument. Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
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. 21,
Original.
Wisconsin v. Minnesota et al.
Bronson C. La Follette, Attorney General of Wisconsin, John H. Bowers, Deputy Attorney General, and A. J. Feijarek and Roy G. Tulane, Assistant Attorneys General, for plaintiff.
Robert W. Mattson, Attorney General of Minnesota, and Perry Voidness, Deputy Attorney General, for defendant State of Minnesota.
Randall J. LeBoeuf, Jr., and Arthur R. Renquist for defendant Northern States Power Co.
[MAJORITY]
Motion for leave to file bill of complaint denied.
The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Fortas are of the opinion that the motion for leave to file the bill of complaint should be set for oral argument. Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.