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.
Illinois et al. v. United States Civil Service Commission, 1962 — 369 U.S. 849 · caselaw · US
General
Illinois et al. v. United States Civil Service Commission
369 U.S. 849·Supreme Court of the United States·1962
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. 714.
Illinois et al. v. United States Civil Service Commission.
William G. Clark, Attorney General of Illinois, William C. Wines, Raymond S. Sarnow, A. Zola Groves and Aubrey Kaplan, Assistant Attorneys General, for petitioners.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, Morton Hollander and Sherman L. Cohn for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.