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. Patrick et al., 1962 — 369 U.S. 835 · caselaw · US
General
United States v. Patrick et al.
369 U.S. 835·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
No. 256.
United States v. Patrick et al.
Argued March 28, 1962.
Wayne G. Barnett argued the cause for the United States.
On the briefs were Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Oberdorfer, Richard J. Medalie, Melva M. Graney, Harold C. Wilkenfeld and Arthur I. Gould.
Robert M. Ward argued the cause and filed a brief for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Certiorari, 368 U. S. 817, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
This case is restored to the calendar for reargument.