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.
Nathanson v. United States, 1944 — 321 U.S. 744 · caselaw · US
General
Nathanson v. United States
321 U.S. 744·Supreme Court of the United States·1944
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. 560.
Nathanson v. United States.
January 31, 1944.
Messrs. J. Francis O’Sullivcm and Maurice J. O’Sullivan for petitioner. Solicitor General Fahy and Assistant Attorney General Shea for the United States.
See post, p. 746.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Per Curiam:
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals is vacated and the cause is remanded to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Missouri with directions to proceed in conformity with the Act of December 23, 1943, c. 377, 57 Stat. 608.