Skip to main content

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.

Sears, Roebuck & Co. et al. v. Solien, Regional Director, National Labor Relations Board, et al.; California v. Eller Telecasting Company of Arizona; Inject-O-Meter Manufacturing Co., Inc. v. North Plains Fertilizer & Chemical, Inc.; Groendyke Transport, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board; Ansted v. Froehlke, Secretary of the Army, et al.; Harrison et al. v. Prather; Cole v. Nigro, Judge; Beasley v. United States; Brown v. Kentucky; Quarles v. Texas et al.; Clark v. Craven, Warden; Watson v. Goodwin, U. S. District Judge; Marts et al. v. United States; Clausser v. First National Bank of Arizona, Administrator, et al.; Herrington v. United States; Dixon v. United States; McDonald v. Metropolitan Traffic and Parking Commission et al.; Fanning v. United States; Marmorstein et al. v. United States, 1971 — 404 U.S. 960 · caselaw · US