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.
New York v. Illinois et al., 1960 — 362 U.S. 972 · caselaw · US
General
New York v. Illinois et al.
362 U.S. 972·Supreme Court of the United States·1960
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
May 16, 1960.
No. 4,
Original.
New York v. Illinois et al.
Solicitor General Rankin for the United States.
Grenville Beardsley, Attorney General of Illinois, William C. Wines, Assistant Attorney General, Lawrence J. Fenlon, Peter G. Kuh, George A. Lane, Joseph B. Fleming, Joseph H. Pleck and Thomas M. Thomas for the State of Illinois and the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago, respondents.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Paxton Blair, Solicitor General, Richard H. Shepp, Assistant Attorney General, and Randall J. Le Boeuf, Jr., Special Assistant Attorney General, for complainant.
[MAJORITY]
The response of the United States and the answer of the State of Illinois and the Metropolitan Sanitary District- of Greater Chicago to the supplemental and amended complaint of the State of New York are referred to the Special Master.