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
Addison et al. v. Holly Hill Fruit Products, Inc.
320 U.S. 725·Supreme Court of the United States·1943
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. 217.
Addison et al. v. Holly Hill Fruit Products, Inc.
October 11, 1943.
Mr. George Palmer Garrett for petitioners. Messrs. C. O. Andrews and G. L. Reeves for respondent. Solicitor General Fahy and Mr. Douglas B. Maggs filed a memorandum on behalf of the Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division, U. S. Dept, of Labor, as amicus curiae, in support of the petition.
[MAJORITY]
Petition for writ of certio-rari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted.