Corporations
Carr v. Beverly Hills Corp. et al.
354 U.S. 917·Supreme Court of the United States·1957
Mr. Justice Frankfurter, Mr. Justice Burton, Mr. Justice Harlan, and Mr. Justice Whittaker dissent for the reasons stated in their dissent in Smith v. Sperling, ante, p. 98.
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. 468.
Carr v. Beverly Hills Corp. et al.
Thomas Dodd Healy and George E. Danielson for petitioner. Paul R. Watkins for the Beverly Hills Corporation, and Frederic H. Sturdy for Lordan et al., respondents.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed on the authority of Smith v. Sperling, ante, p. 91, decided June 10, 1957, and Swanson v. Traer, ante, p. 114, decided June 10, 1957, and the cause is remanded to the District Court for proceedings in conformity with this opinion.
Mr. Justice Frankfurter, Mr. Justice Burton, Mr. Justice Harlan, and Mr. Justice Whittaker dissent for the reasons stated in their dissent in Smith v. Sperling, ante, p. 98.