Richfield Oil Corp. v. State Board of Equalization (329 U.S. 69)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided November 25, 1946 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 329 U.S. 69 · 67 S. Ct. 156
- Decided
- November 25, 1946
- Term
- October Term 1946
- Vote
- 7–1
- Majority author
- Justice Douglas
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
- Constitutional ruling
- State/territorial law held unconstitutional
Opinion excerpt
Mr. Justice Douglas delivered the opinion of the Court. This case is here on appeal from the Supreme Court of California which sustained a California tax against the claim that it was repugnant to Article I, Section 10, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States. Judicial Code § 237, 28 U. S. C. §§ 344 (a), 861a. Appellant is engaged in producing and selling oil and oil products in California. It entered into a contract with the New Zealand Government for the sale of oil. The price was f. o. b. Los Angeles, payment in London. Delivery was “to the order of the Naval Secretary, Navy Office, Wellington, into N. Z. Naval tank steamer R. F. A. ‘Nucula’ at Los Angeles, California.” The oil was to be consigned to the Naval-Officer-In-Charge, Auckland, New Zealand. Appellant carried the oil by pipe line from its refinery in California to storage tanks at the harbor where the Nucula appeared to receive the oil. When the Nucula had docked and was ready to receive the oil, appellant pumped it from the storage tanks into the vessel. Customary shipping documents were given the master, including a bill of lading which designated appellant as shipper and consigned the oil to the designated naval officer in Auckland. Payment of the price was made in London. The oil was transported to Auckland, no portion of it being used or consumed in the United States. Appellant filed with the…
Excerpt of a 36,568-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.