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.
SULLIVAN et al. v. LITTLE HUNTING PARK, INC., et al., 1968 — 392 U.S. 657 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
SULLIVAN et al. v. LITTLE HUNTING PARK, INC., et al.
392 U.S. 65720 L. Ed. 2d 1346·Supreme Court of the United States·1968
Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice White dissent for the reasons stated in Mr. Justice Harlan’s dissenting opinion in Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., ante, p. 449.
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
SULLIVAN et al. v. LITTLE HUNTING PARK, INC., et al.
No. 1188.
Decided June 17, 1968.
Allison W. Brown, Jr., Robert M. Alexander, Jack Greenberg, and James M. Nabrit III for petitioners.
John Chas. Harris for respondents.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment is vacated. The case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia for further consideration in light of Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., ante, p. 409.
Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice White dissent for the reasons stated in Mr. Justice Harlan’s dissenting opinion in Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., ante, p. 449.