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.
White Motor Co. v. United States, 1963 — 371 U.S. 945 · caselaw · US
General
White Motor Co. v. United States
371 U.S. 945·Supreme Court of the United States·1963
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. 54.
White Motor Co. v. United States.
Sigmund Timberg on the motion for Serta Associates, Inc., et al.
John Bodner, Jr. on the motion for Sandura Company.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. (Probable jurisdiction noted, 369 U. S. 858). The motions of Serta Associates, Inc., et al. and Sandura Company for leave to file briefs, as amid curiae, are granted.