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
United States v. Davis et ux.; and Davis et ux. v. United States
368 U.S. 813·Supreme Court of the United States·1961
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. 190.
No. 268.
United States v. Davis et ux.; and Davis et ux. v. United States.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Oberdorfer and I. Henry Kutz for the United States in No. 190, and Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Oberdorfer, Meyer Rothwacks and Harold C. Wilkenfeld for the United States in No. 268. Converse Murdoch for Davis et ux.
[MAJORITY]
Court of Claims. Certiorari granted.
Reported below: — Ct. Cl. —, 287 F. 2d 168.