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
WASHINGTON v. UNITED STATES
357 U.S. 348·Supreme Court of the United States·1958
Mr. Justice Burton, Mr. Justice Clark, and Mr. Justice Whittaker dissent.
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
WASHINGTON v. UNITED STATES.
No. 1012.
Decided June 23, 1958.
Daniel D. Olasser for petitioner.
Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Anderson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for the United States.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is reversed because of the insufficiency of the evidence and the case is remanded to that Court.
Mr. Justice Burton, Mr. Justice Clark, and Mr. Justice Whittaker dissent.