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.
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Mutual Savings Bank Group Committee et al.; Susman et al., Convertible Bond Owners, v. Mutual Savings Bank Group Committee et al.; and Irving Trust Co., Successor Trustee, v. Mutual Savings Bank Group Committee et al., 1943 — 319 U.S. 781 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Mutual Savings Bank Group Committee et al.; Susman et al., Convertible Bond Owners, v. Mutual Savings Bank Group Committee et al.; and Irving Trust Co., Successor Trustee, v. Mutual Savings Bank Group Committee et al.
319 U.S. 781·Supreme Court of the United States·1943
Mr. Justice Rutledge took no part in the consideration or decision of these applications. 318 U. S. 793. .
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
Nos. 34, 35, and 36.
Nos. 37 and 38.
Nos. 62, 63, and 64.
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Mutual Savings Bank Group Committee et al.; Susman et al., Convertible Bond Owners, v. Mutual Savings Bank Group Committee et al.; and Irving Trust Co., Successor Trustee, v. Mutual Savings Bank Group Committee et al.
May 17, 1943.
[MAJORITY]
The petitions for rehearing are denied.
Mr. Justice Rutledge took no part in the consideration or decision of these applications. 318 U. S. 793. .