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.
Union Carbide Corp. v. Graver Tank & Mfg. Co., Inc., et al.; and Graver Tank & Mfg. Co., Inc., et al. v. Union Carbide Corp., 1961 — 365 U.S. 812 · caselaw · US
General
Union Carbide Corp. v. Graver Tank & Mfg. Co., Inc., et al.; and Graver Tank & Mfg. Co., Inc., et al. v. Union Carbide Corp.
365 U.S. 812·Supreme Court of the United States·1961
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. 576.
No. 604.
Union Carbide Corp. v. Graver Tank & Mfg. Co., Inc., et al.; and Graver Tank & Mfg. Co., Inc., et al. v. Union Carbide Corp.
John T. Cahill, James A. Fowler, Jr., Richard Russell Wolfe and George N. Beamer for petitioner in No. 576 and respondent in No. 604.
Thomas V. Koykka, James R. Stewart, Casper W. Ooms, Dugald S. McDougall and Edward A. Haight for respondents in No. 576 and petitioners in No. 604.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Reported below: 282 F. 2d 653.