Skip to content


United States Vs. Bliss and Laughlin, Inc. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number371 U.S. 70
AppellantUnited States
RespondentBliss and Laughlin, Inc.
Excerpt:
united states v. bliss & laughlin, inc. - 371 u.s. 70 (1962) u.s. supreme court united states v. bliss & laughlin, inc., 371 u.s. 70 (1962) 371 u.s. 70 united states v. bliss & laughlin, inc. appeal from the united states district court for the southern district of california. no. 367. decided november 5, 1962. judgment vacated and case remanded for reconsideration in light of brown shoe co. v. united states, 370 u.s. 294 . reported below: 202 f. supp. 334. solicitor general cox, assistant attorney general loevinger and lionel kestenbaum for the united states. w. donald mcsweeney and maurice jones, jr. for appellee. per curiam. the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for reconsideration in light of brown shoe.....
Judgment:
UNITED STATES v. BLISS & LAUGHLIN, INC. - 371 U.S. 70 (1962)
U.S. Supreme Court UNITED STATES v. BLISS & LAUGHLIN, INC., 371 U.S. 70 (1962) 371 U.S. 70

UNITED STATES v. BLISS & LAUGHLIN, INC.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. No. 367.
Decided November 5, 1962.

Judgment vacated and case remanded for reconsideration in light of Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294 .

Reported below: 202 F. Supp. 334.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Loevinger and Lionel Kestenbaum for the United States.

W. Donald McSweeney and Maurice Jones, Jr. for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for reconsideration in light of Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294 .

Page 371 U.S. 70, 71




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //