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.
Wright v. Union Central Life Ins. Co., 1938 — 303 U.S. 630 · caselaw · US
General
Wright v. Union Central Life Ins. Co.
303 U.S. 630·Supreme Court of the United States·1938
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
Nos. 715 and 716.
Wright v. Union Central Life Ins. Co.
February 28, 1938.
Messrs. Samuel E. Cook, Wm. Lemke, Elmer McClain and Ray M. Foreman for petitioner. Messrs. Arthur S. Lytton, Louis M. Mantynband, Stanley K. Henshaw, and Virgil D. Parish for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Petition for writs of certio-rari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit granted.