Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Harrison Vs. Schaefer

Harrison vs Schaefer

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Feb-28-1966
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101454

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
383 U.S. 269
Subject
Intellectual Property

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Intellectual Property

Key legal issue
Intellectual Property

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Harrison

Respondent

Schaefer

Excerpt

harrison v. schaefer - 383 u.s. 269 (1966) u.s. supreme court harrison v. schaefer, 383 u.s. 269 (1966) 383 u.s. 269 harrison et al. v. schaefer et al. appeal from the united states district court for the district of wyoming. no. 854. decided february 28, 1966. 251 f. supp. 450, affirmed. thomas o. miller for appellants. a. g. mcclintock for appellees. per curiam. the motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. mr. justice fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. page 383 u.s. 269, 270

Full Judgment

HARRISON v. SCHAEFER - 383 U.S. 269 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court HARRISON v. SCHAEFER, 383 U.S. 269 (1966) 383 U.S. 269

HARRISON ET AL. v. SCHAEFER ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING.
No. 854.
Decided February 28, 1966.

251 F. Supp. 450, affirmed.

Thomas O. Miller for appellants.

A. G. McClintock for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Page 383 U.S. 269, 270



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial