Citation network
Central Greyhound Lines, Inc. Vs. Mealey
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 14, 1948
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
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 653 (1948) U.S. Supreme Court Central Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. MealeySearch
-
U.S. 653 (1948) Central Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. MealeySearch
-
simply because the points from and to are in the same State. Hanley v. KansasSearch
-
Western Union Tel. Co. v. SpeightSearch
-
Cornell Steamboat Co. v. SohmerSearch
-
made simply out of deference to conclusions drawn from Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
U.S. 201. Such a proportioned tax has been sustained in the case of commerce admitted to be interstate. Hanley v. KansasSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
This limited scope of the Lehigh Valley case was the basis of decision in United States Express Company v. MinnesotaSearch
-
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed on the trial court's opinion. Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. CommonwealthSearch
-
Hanley v. KansasSearch
-
the Hanley case invoked Maine v. GrandSearch
-
Galveston, Harrisburg and San Antonio R. Co. v. TexasSearch
-
in other relations, see, e.g., Covington & Cincinnati Bridge Co. v. KentuckySearch
-
the interstate routes were utilized as a means of avoiding, even in part, New York's taxation. Compare, e.g., Eichholz v. PublicSearch
-
Service Commission of Missouri, 306 U. S. 268 , and Ryan v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
State for that aspect of the interstate commerce to which the State bears a special relation. See Union Brokerage Co. v. JensenSearch
-
U. S. 202 , and Bob-Lo Excursion Co. v. MichiganSearch
-
commerce in the constitutional sense, rather than on the ground that it was not interstate commerce. Compare Ewing v. LeavenworthSearch
-
Kirmeyer v. KansasSearch
-
Cornell Steamboat Co. v. SohmerSearch
-
supra, at 235 U. S. 560 , with Cornell Steamboat Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
from this transportation, such abstention would not justify the taxing by New York of the entire revenue. Freeman v. HewitSearch
-
Adams Manufacturing Co. v. StorenSearch
-
Freeman v. HewitSearch
-
Joseph v. CarterSearch
-
Western Livestock v. BureauSearch
-
be sustained on the receipts from the transportation apportioned as to the mileage within the State. See Ratterman v. WesternSearch
-
U. S. 427 -428. There is no question as to the fairness of the suggested method of apportionment. Compare Maine v. GrandSearch
-
New Jersey Bell Telephone Co. v. StateSearch
-
Wallace v. HinesSearch
-
Page 334 U. S. 667 to say that both interstate and intrastate features are present. Cf. Bob-Lo Excursion Co. v. MichiganSearch
-
admonition that commerce among the states is a practical, rather than a technical legal, conception, Swift & Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Court has emphasized the interstate aspect of the transportation in making the federal power supreme. Thus, in Hanley v. KansasSearch
-
of the freight across and beyond the Arkansas border. Page 334 U. S. 668 See also Missouri Pacific R. Co. v. StroudSearch
-
Wilmington Transportation Co. v. RailroadSearch
-
taxes and city license taxes levied on those engaged in the type of transportation here involved. Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
supra, at 145 U. S. 202 . As stated in Cornell Steamboat Co. v. SohmerSearch
-
and state interests in regulating and taxing those engaged in this unique transportation. See Cornell Steamboat Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
supra, and United States Express Co. v. MinnesotaSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Central Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. MealeySearch
-
State. Hanley v. KansasSearch
-
United States Express Company v. MinnesotaSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial