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.
UNITED STATES v. BLISS & LAUGHLIN, INC., 1962 — 371 U.S. 70 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
UNITED STATES v. BLISS & LAUGHLIN, INC.
371 U.S. 70·Supreme Court of the United States·1962
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
UNITED STATES v. BLISS & LAUGHLIN, INC.
No. 367.
Decided November 5, 1962.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Loevinger and Lionel Kestenbaum for the United States.
W. Donald McSweeney and Maurice Jones, Jr. for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for reconsideration in light of Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U. S. 294.