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.
United States v. Procter & Gamble Co. et al., 1957 — 352 U.S. 997 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
United States v. Procter & Gamble Co. et al.
352 U.S. 997·Supreme Court of the United States·1957
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. 609.
United States v. Procter & Gamble Co. et al.
Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Hansen and Daniel M. Friedman for the United States. Kenneth C. Royall, Charles Sawyer, Frederick W. R. Pride and Richard W. Barrett for the Procter & Gamble Co., Mathias F. Correa and Jerrold G. Van Cise for the Colgate-Palmolive Co., Abe Fortas for Lever Brothers Co., and Adrien F. Busick and Shelby Fitze for the Association of American Soap & Glycerine Producers, Inc., appellees.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Further consideration of the question of jurisdiction is postponed'to the hearing of the case on the merits.