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.
Contracts · MBE-tested
STAATS, COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, et al. v. BRISTOL LABORATORIES DIVISION OF BRISTOL-MYERS CO.
451 U.S. 40068 L. Ed. 2d 184·Supreme Court of the United States·1981
Justice Stewart took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
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
STAATS, COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, et al. v. BRISTOL LABORATORIES DIVISION OF BRISTOL-MYERS CO.
No. 80-264.
Argued March 24, 1981
Decided April 29, 1981
Mark I. Levy argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were Solicitor General McCree, Acting Assistant Attorney General Martin, Deputy Solicitor General Getter, Michael Kimmel, Robert Kaplan, and Milton J. Socolar.
Gilbert H. Weil argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Robert L. Sherman.
Philip Lacovara, Ronald A. Stern, Stanley L. Temko, Charles Lister, and Clare Dalton filed a brief for Merck & Co., Inc., et al. as amici curiae urging affirmance.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Justice Stewart took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.