Citation network
Richfield Oil Corp. Vs. State Bd. of Equalization
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 25, 1946
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
- Relied / Followed
-
Richfield Oil Corp. v. StateSearch
-
Bd. of Equalization - 329 U.S. 69 (1946) U.S. Supreme Court Richfield Oil Corp. v. StateSearch
-
Bd. of Equalization, 329 U.S. 69 (1946) Richfield Oil Corp. v. StateSearch
-
produce other evidence, and that, if a new trial were had, new or different findings of fact might be made. See Erlin v. NationalSearch
-
P.2d 756. The designation given the judgment by state practice is not controlling. Department of Banking, Nebraska v. PinkSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Market Street R. Co. v. RailroadSearch
-
Radio Station W.O.W. v. JohnsonSearch
-
U. S. 123 -124. That question will be resolved not only by an examination of the entire record ( Clark v. WilliardSearch
-
by resort to the local law to determine what effect the judgment has under the state rules of practice. Brady v. PageSearch
-
Brady v. SouthernSearch
-
Bank of America v. SuperiorSearch
-
to be Page 329 U. S. 74 decided. The jurisdictional objection is thus without merit. See Gulf Refining Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
the conclusion that the tax was constitutional, rested in part on our recent decisions (particularly McGoldrick v. Berwind-WhiteSearch
-
Department of Treasury v. WoodSearch
-
International Harvester Co. v. DepartmentSearch
-
tax has at times been held unconstitutional both under the Import-Export Clause and under the Commerce Clause. Brown v. MarylandSearch
-
of the other turns nowise on whether the article was, or had ever been, an import or export. See Hooven & Allison Co. v. EvattSearch
-
Clause is a limitation upon the power of the States, even in absence of action by Congress. Southern Pacific Co. v. ArizonaSearch
-
Morgan v. VirginiaSearch
-
state interference and, at the same time, to make interstate commerce pay its way. As recently stated in McGoldrick v. Berwind-WhiteSearch
-
McGoldrick v. Berwind-WhiteSearch
-
commerce, which impose a levy for the privilege of doing it, which place an undue burden on it. Adams Mfg. Co. v. StorenSearch
-
Gwin, White & Prince, Inc. v. HennefordSearch
-
Best & Co. v. MaxwellSearch
-
does not comport with the standards for expounding the Constitution. As stated by Chief Justice Marshall in Sturges v. CrowninshieldSearch
-
For, as Chief Justice Taney said in Holmes v. JennisonSearch
-
whether this tax was a prohibited impost upon it. The requirement that foreign commerce be involved ( Woodruff v. ParhamSearch
-
There are few decisions of the Court under Article I, Section 10, Clause 2, which illuminate the problem. In Brown v. HoustonSearch
-
In Coe v. ErrolSearch
-
In Turpin v. BurgessSearch
-
The same result was reached in Cornell v. CoyneSearch
-
a tax on exports, since it is the equivalent of a direct tax on the articles included in the bill of lading. Fairbank v. UnitedSearch
-
federal stamp taxes on charter parties made exclusively for the carriage of cargo in foreign commerce, United States v. HvoslefSearch
-
true of federal stamp taxes on policies insuring exports against maritime risks. Thames & Mersey Marine Ins. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Closer in point is Spalding & Bros. v. EdwardsSearch
-
P. 262 U. S. 70 . This line of cases was summarized in Willcuts v. BunnSearch
-
The fact that delivery to a common carrier for export gave the sale immunity in Spalding & Bros. v. EdwardsSearch
-
that the process of exportation has not started until such delivery has been made. And cases like Superior Oil Co. v. MississippiSearch
-
is the same under that Clause and the Import-Export Clause ( see Brown v. MarylandSearch
-
characterization which the state has given the tax, but on its operation and effect. See St. Louis Southwestern R. Co. v. ArkansasSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial