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.
Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Federal Power Commission et al., 1961 — 365 U.S. 827 · caselaw · US
General
Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Federal Power Commission et al.
365 U.S. 827·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. 586.
Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Federal Power Commission et al.
Richmond C. Coburn, Alan C. Kohn and Melvin Richter for petitioner.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, John G. Laughlin, Jr., Howard E.. Shapiro and John C. Mason for the Federal Power Commission, and James M. Douglas, Richard D. Shew-maker, Harry A. Roth, Jr. and Richard M. Merriman for other respondents.
[MAJORITY]
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari denied.