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.
Brunner v. United States, 1952 — 343 U.S. 918 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Brunner v. United States
343 U.S. 918·Supreme Court of the United States·1952
Mr. Justice Reed and Mr. Justice Douglas dissent. Mr. Justice Frankfurter took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
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. 442.
Brunner v. United States.
Argued April 2, 1952.
Decided April 7, 1952.
William B. Esterman and A. L. Wirin argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner. J. F. Bishop argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Perlman, Assistant Attorney General Mclnerney, Robert W._ Ginnane and Robert S. Erdahl.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
Judgment reversed. Blau v. United States, 340 U. S. 159.
Mr. Justice Reed and Mr. Justice Douglas dissent. Mr. Justice Frankfurter took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.