Citation network
Union Tank Line Co. Vs. Wright
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 24, 1919
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
- Distinguished
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 275 (1919) U.S. Supreme Court Union Tank Line Co. v. WrightSearch
-
U.S. 275 (1919) Union Tank Line Co. v. WrightSearch
-
average amount of property habitually brought in and carried out by a car company. Id., Western Union Telegraph Co. v. MassachusettsSearch
-
relation to the real value in Georgia, and that the tax was void. P. 249 U. S. 283 . Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. MassachusettsSearch
-
And this principle of average has been approved in regard to refrigerator cars. American Refrigerator Transit Co. v. HallSearch
-
States, as above mentioned, and that there are no such circumstances as to bring it within the ruling made in Fargo v. HartSearch
-
(Western Union Telegraph Co. v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
average amount of property habitually brought in and carried out by a car company ( American Refrigerator Transit Co. v. HallSearch
-
because of conflict with the commerce clause or the Fourteenth Amendment, or both. Western Union Telegraph Co. v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Marye v. BaltimoreSearch
-
Adams Express Co. v. OhioSearch
-
American Refrigerator Page 249 U. S. 283 Transit Co. v. HallSearch
-
deprive it of property without due process of law and also unduly burden interstate commerce. Pullman's Car Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
in question, and what was said of it cannot control here, where the very point is presented for decision. Cohens v. VirginiaSearch
-
McCormick Machine Co. v. AultmanSearch
-
U. S. 606 , 169 U. S. 611 . See also Adams Express Co. v. OhioSearch
-
inflated valuations. Taxes must follow realities, not mere deductions from inadequate or irrelevant data. In Fargo v. HartSearch
-
decisions of this Court which have remained unchallenged for more than a quarter of a century. Western Union Tel. Co. v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Ry. Co. v. BackusSearch
-
Western Union Tel. Co. v. TaggartSearch
-
that a state may lay hold of the average habitual use of movable railroad equipment as a basis of taxation ( Marye v. BaltimoreSearch
-
does business in several states. This method was very clearly sustained by this Court in Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
injustice in a particular case is not sufficient to condemn it. The decision referred to, Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
was cited in support of the mileage basis of apportionment for the taxation of a railroad in Pittsburgh, etc., Ry. Co. v. BackusSearch
-
U. S. 421 , 154 U. S. 431 , and, in Adams Express Co. v. OhioSearch
-
with respect to interstate express companies notwithstanding the absence of physical unity. Adams Exp. Co. v. OhioSearch
-
U. S. 185 . It was quoted from extensively in American Refrigerator Transit Co. v. HallSearch
-
very part of the opinion now held to be dictum being included in the quotation. See also Western Union Telegraph Co. v. TaggartSearch
-
Union Transit Co. v. KentuckySearch
-
Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Ry. Co. v. TexasSearch
-
Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. GreeneSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Union Tank Line Co. v. WrightSearch
-
Id., Western Union Telegraph Co. v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Transit Co. v. HallSearch
-
Pullman's Car Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Cohens v. VirginiaSearch
-
In Fargo v. HartSearch
-
Western Union Tel. Co. v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Ry. Co. v. BackusSearch
-
Adams Exp. Co. v. OhioSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial