Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Capitol Greyhound Lines Vs. Brice

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 15, 1950

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

72 entries 9 linked 63 unlinked
Show
  1. Morf Vs. Bingaman US Supreme Court · May 18, 1936
  2. international Harvester Co. Vs. Evatt US Supreme Court · Jan 06, 1947
  3. interstate Transit, Inc. Vs. Lindsey US Supreme Court · Apr 13, 1931
  4. ingels Vs. Morf US Supreme Court · Mar 01, 1937
  5. Continental Baking Co. Vs. Woodring US Supreme Court · May 23, 1932
  6. Maurer Vs. Hamilton US Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1940
  7. Clyde Mallory Lines Vs. Alabama US Supreme Court · Dec 09, 1935
  8. interstate Busses Corp. Vs. Blodgett US Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1928
  9. HicklIn Vs. Coney US Supreme Court · Dec 04, 1933
    Relied / Followed
  10. U.S. 542 (1950) U.S. Supreme Court Capitol Greyhound Lines v. Brice
    Search
  11. U.S. 542 (1950) Capitol Greyhound Lines v. Brice
    Search
  12. The difficulty in gearing taxes to these factors was recognized by this Court as early as Kane v. New
    Search
  13. U. S. 407 , 298 U. S. 412 . See also Aero Mayflower Transit Co. v. Comm'rs
    Search
  14. result may be a tax which, on its face, appears to bear with unequal weight upon different carriers. Aero Transit Co. v. Georgia
    Search
  15. the taxes as applied, and, upon proper proof, obtain a judicial declaration of their invalidity as applied. Ingels v. Morf
    Search
  16. U. S. 290 . Cf. Clark v. Paul
    Search
  17. to the road privileges granted. The burden of proof in this respect is on a carrier who challenges a state law. Clark v. Paul
    Search
  18. there is a complete and utter lack of proof sufficient to invalidate the state law on this ground. See Dixie Ohio Co. v. Commission
    Search
  19. Sprout v. City
    Search
  20. roads by occasional travelers is as broad as where road use by carriers is involved. See Aero Mayflower Transit Co. v. Comm'rs
    Search
  21. U. S. 495 , 332 U. S. 503 . See also the opinions in Edwards v. California
    Search
  22. of the complexities springing from state attempts to weigh numerous factors was the Indiana tax upheld in Eavey Co. v. Department
    Search
  23. b). See Brashear Freight Lines v. Public
    Search
  24. Maurer v. Hamilton
    Search
  25. use of highways constructed and maintained by Maryland or for the cost of traffic regulation. Interstate Transit, Inc. v. Lindsey
    Search
  26. Dixie Ohio Express Co. v. State
    Search
  27. motor traffic to such State power is only a particular application of a general principle. Clyde Mallory Lines v. Alabama
    Search
  28. compensation for the road use which the State affords and for which it may exact a return. Interstate Transit, Inc. v. Lindsey
    Search
  29. is given by the State. Taxes based on miles or ton-miles have encountered no difficulty here. Interstate Busses Corp. v. Blodgett
    Search
  30. fairly be attributed to the privilege of road use, as distinguished from actual use. Compare Interstate Transit, Inc. v. Lindsey
    Search
  31. U. S. 183 (no allocation of proceeds) with Clark v. Poor
    Search
  32. p. 339 U. S. 561 . Thus, mileage may be ignored, and an annual tax may be based on horsepower, Hendrick v. Maryland
    Search
  33. U. S. 610 , and Kane v. New
    Search
  34. on carrying capacity, Clark v. Poor
    Search
  35. U. S. 554 , and Hicklin v. Coney
    Search
  36. U. S. 169 , and on manufacturer's rated capacity, Dixie Ohio Express Co. v. State
    Search
  37. And the Court has upheld flat fees imposed without regard to size or weight factors. Aero Mayflower Transit Co. v. Georgia
    Search
  38. Clark v. Paul
    Search
  39. Aero Mayflower Transit Co. v. Board
    Search
  40. of amount. Such a view collides with the guiding limitation upon State power announced in Interstate Transit, Inc. v. Lindsey
    Search
  41. to deny to States the right to make interstate commerce pay its way. Likewise, today's opinion disregards McCarroll v. Dixie
    Search
  42. Aero Mayflower Transit Co. v. Georgia
    Search
  43. tax. Our decisions reflect that reason. A State naturally may deem factors of size or weight to be relevant. Hicklin v. Coney
    Search
  44. to size, weight and other relevant factors such respect as is fairly within the restraints of decency. Cf. Clark v. Paul
    Search
  45. flat taxes, the Court carefully pointed out that the classification was reasonable on the facts before it. Morf v. Bingaman
    Search
  46. wide choice must be allowed to the States of possible taxes on motor vehicles traveling in interstate commerce. Clark v. Paul
    Search
  47. intimation is afforded regarding the standards by which excessiveness is to be determined. Reference is made to Ingels v. Morf
    Search
  48. the danger of an unfair burden falling upon interstate commerce remains correspondingly small. Cf. Union Brokerage Co. v. Jensen
    Search
  49. gross receipts taxes on interstate transportation beyond a State's power to impose. Cf. Central Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Mealey
    Search
  50. U. S. 653 . These practical considerations prevailed against a State in Sprout v. South
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial