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.
LEVITT & SONS, INC., v. DIVISION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION IN STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION et al., 1960 — 363 U.S. 418 · caselaw · US
General
LEVITT & SONS, INC., v. DIVISION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION IN STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION et al.
363 U.S. 418·Supreme Court of the United States·1960
Mr. Justice Black would note probable jurisdiction.
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
LEVITT & SONS, INC., v. DIVISION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION IN STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION et al.
No. 865.
Decided June 13, 1960.
William P. Reiss for appellant.
David D. Furman, Attorney General of New Jersey, and Lee A. Holley, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee Division Against Discrimination.
Emerson L. Darnell and Sidney Reitman for appellee Willie R. James; Jerome C. Eisenberg and Herbert H. Tate for appellee Franklin D. Todd; and Julius Wildstein of counsel, and Joseph B. Robinson on the brief, for both individual appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Mr. Justice Black would note probable jurisdiction.