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.
United States v. Lepowitch et al.; Hopkins, U. S. District Judge, v. United States; and Pearson v. California et al., 1943 — 319 U.S. 783 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
United States v. Lepowitch et al.; Hopkins, U. S. District Judge, v. United States; and Pearson v. California et al.
319 U.S. 783·Supreme Court of the United States·1943
Me. Justice Murphy. took no part in the consideration or decision of these applications.
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. 629.
No. 765.
No. 844.
United States v. Lepowitch et al.; Hopkins, U. S. District Judge, v. United States; and Pearson v. California et al.
May 24, 1943.
[MAJORITY]
Petitions for rehearing denied.
Me. Justice Murphy. took no part in the consideration or decision of these applications.
No. 629, 318 U. S. 702; No. 765, 318 U. S. 786; No. 844, 318 U. S. 745.