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.
California v. Washington, 1958 — 356 U.S. 955 · caselaw · US
General
California v. Washington
356 U.S. 955·Supreme Court of the United States·1958
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
May 19, 1958.
No. 13,
Original.
California v. Washington.
Edmund G. Brown, Attorney General, Wallace Howland, Assistant Attorney General, and Leonard M. Sperry, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, for the State of California, plaintiff.
John J. O’Connell, Attorney General, and Franklin K. Thorp, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Washington, defendant.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General, and Paxton Blair, Solicitor General, filed a brief for the State of New York, as amicus curiae, supporting the plaintiff.
[MAJORITY]
This case is set for argument on the motion for leave to file bill of complaint and answer. Two hours allowed for oral argument.