General
Wisconsin et al. v. Illinois et al.; Michigan v. Illinois et al.; and New York v. Illinois et al.
359 U.S. 902·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
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.
John W. Reynolds, Attorney General, and Roy Tulané, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Wisconsin; Miles Lord, Attorney General, and Raymond A. Haik, Special Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Minnesota; Mark McElroy, Attorney General; Robert E. Boyd, Assistant Attorney' General, and Herbert H. Naujoks, Special Assistant to the Attorneys General,-for the State of Ohio;' Anne 'X. Alpern, Attorney General, and Lois G. Forer, Deputy Attorney General, for the State of Pennsylvania; Paul L. Adams, Attorney General, Samuel J. .Torina, Solicitor General, and Nicholas V. Olds, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Michigan; and Louis J. Lefkowits, Attorney General; and Richard H. Shepp and D-unton F, Tynan, Assistant Attorneys General, for the State of New York, complainants. Latham Castle, Attorney ■ General of II-. linois, William C. Wines, Assistant Attorney General, George A. Lane, Lawrence J. Fenlon, Joseph B. Fleming, Joseph H. Pleck and Thomas M. Thomas for the defendants.
[MAJORITY]
The motion to allow and fix time .for filing plaintiffs’ reply brief is granted and the time is extended to and including March 31, 1959. The defendants are allowed to and including March 31, 1959, to reply to the brief of the Solicitor General, if so advised.