On appellees' motion to strike the new issue raised for the first time in appellant's reply brief claiming facial discrimination against interstate commerce, it is ordered by the court that the motion is denied. Appellant's first merit brief substantially states the basis for the argument, and "there is no clear line between" a claim of facial discrimination against, and a claim of undue burden upon, interstate commerce....
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
