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.
Consolidated Rock Products Co. et al. v. du Bois; and Badgley et al. v. Same, 1940 — 311 U.S. 636 · caselaw · US
General
Consolidated Rock Products Co. et al. v. du Bois; and Badgley et al. v. Same
311 U.S. 636·Supreme Court of the United States·1940
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. 400.
No. 444.
Consolidated Rock Products Co. et al. v. du Bois; and Badgley et al. v. Same.
October 28, 1940.
Messrs. Paul R. Watkins and Dana Latham for petitioners in No. 400. Messrs. Homer I. Mitchell and John C. Macfarlánd for petitioners in No. 444. Mr. Kenneth E. Grant for respondent. By leave of Court, Solicitor General Biddle and Messrs. Richard H. Demuth, David W. Knowlton, Chester T. Lane, Martin Riger, George. Rosier, Homer Kripke, and Irving S. Rogers filed briefs on behalf of the Interstate Commerce Commission et al., as amici curiae, in support of petitioners.
[MAJORITY]
Petitions for writs of certiorari to.the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted.
Reported below: 114 F. 2d 102.