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.
Wisconsin v. Tennessee, 1956 — 350 U.S. 955 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Wisconsin v. Tennessee
350 U.S. 955100 L. Ed. 2d 831·Supreme Court of the United States·1956
Mr. Justice Harlan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
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
January 30, 1956.
No. 13,
Original.
Wisconsin v. Tennessee.
Vernon W. Thomson, Attorney General, argued the cause for the State of Wisconsin, plaintiff. With him on the brief were Stewart O. Honeck, Deputy Attorney General, and Roy G. Tulane and George F. Sieker, Assistant Attorneys General. Knox Bigham, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for the State of Tennessee, defendant. With him on the brief were George F. McCanless, Attorney General, Allison B. Humphreys, Jr., Solicitor General, and James M. Glasgow, Assistant Attorney General.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
On motion for leave to file complaint. Argued January 23,1956. Decided January 30, 1956.
Per Curiam:
The motion for leave to file the complaint is denied.
Mr. Justice Harlan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.