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.
Wisconsin et al. v. Illinois et al.; Michigan v. Illinois et al.; and New York v. Illinois et al., 1959 — 359 U.S. 932 · caselaw · US
General
Wisconsin et al. v. Illinois et al.; Michigan v. Illinois et al.; and New York v. Illinois et al.
359 U.S. 932·Supreme Court of the United States·1959
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
March 9, 1959.
No. 2,
No. 3,
No. 4,
Original.
Original.
Original.
Wisconsin et al. v. Illinois et al.; Michigan v. Illinois et al.; and New York v. Illinois et al.
Solicitor General Rankin on the motion.'
[MAJORITY]
.The motion of the Solicitor General for an extension of time to file & brief - in these cases is granted and. the time is extended to and including April 15, 1959.' The plaintiffs are allowed to and including April 30,' 1959, to file their reply brief, to the answer of the defendants and to reply to the brief of the Solicitor' General, if so advised. Defendants are allowed to and including April 30, 1959, to reply to the brief of the Solicitor General, if so advised.