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.
RICHMOND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT v. BERG, 1977 — 434 U.S. 158 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
RICHMOND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT v. BERG
434 U.S. 15854 L. Ed. 2d 375·Supreme Court of the United States·1977
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
RICHMOND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT v. BERG
No. 75-1069.
Argued October 5, 1977
Decided December 6, 1977
Arthur W. Walenta, Jr., argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs was John B. Clausen.
Mary C. Dunlap argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.
Jerry D. Anker, Robert E. Nagle, and David Rubin filed a brief for the National Education Assn, as amicus curiae urging affirmance.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals, 528 P. 2d 1208, is vacated and the cause remanded for further consideration in light of General Electric Co. v. Gilbert, 429 U. S. 125 (1976), and Nashville Gas Co. v. Satty, ante, p. 136, and for consideration of possible mootness.