Skip to content


Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co. Vs. United States - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number385 U.S. 37
AppellantJos. Schlitz Brewing Co.
RespondentUnited States
Excerpt:
.....253 f. supp. 129, affirmed. leslie hodson, hammond e. chaffetz, joseph ducoeur and richard j. archer for appellant. solicitor general marshall and assistant attorney general turner for the united states, and burnham enersen and stephen grant for general brewing corp., appellees. godfrey l. munter, jr., for ray et al., as amici curiae, in support of appellant. per curiam. the motion of philip a. ray et al., for leave to file a brief, as amici curiae, is granted. the motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed. mr. justice harlan is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and would set the case for argument. page 385 u.s. 37, 38
Judgment:
JOS. SCHLITZ BREWING CO. v. UNITED STATES - 385 U.S. 37 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court JOS. SCHLITZ BREWING CO. v. UNITED STATES, 385 U.S. 37 (1966) 385 U.S. 37

JOS. SCHLITZ BREWING CO. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT
OF CALIFORNIA. No. 486.
Decided November 7, 1966.

253 F. Supp. 129, affirmed.

Leslie Hodson, Hammond E. Chaffetz, Joseph DuCoeur and Richard J. Archer for appellant.

Solicitor General Marshall and Assistant Attorney General Turner for the United States, and Burnham Enersen and Stephen Grant for General Brewing Corp., appellees.

Godfrey L. Munter, Jr., for Ray et al., as amici curiae, in support of appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The motion of Philip A. Ray et al., for leave to file a brief, as amici curiae, is granted.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and would set the case for argument.

Page 385 U.S. 37, 38




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