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., 1960 — 362 U.S. 957 · caselaw · US
General
Wisconsin et al. v. Illinois et al.; Michigan v. Illinois et al.; and New York v. Illinois et al.
362 U.S. 957·Supreme Court of the United States·1960
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
April 25, 1960.
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, Assistant Attorney General Morton, David R. Warner and Walter Kiechel, Jr. for the United States.
Grenville Beardsley, Attorney General of Illinois, William C. Wines, Assistant Attorney General, Lawrence J. Fenlon, Peter G. Kuh, George A. Lane, Joseph B. Fleming, Joseph H. Pleck and Thomas M. Thomas for the State of Illinois and the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago.
[MAJORITY]
The petition of intervention of the United States and the answer of the State of Illinois and the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago are referred to the Special Master.