Joy Oil Co., Ltd. v. State Tax Commission
337 U.S. 286 · Decided June 13, 1949 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Joy Oil Co., Ltd. v. State Tax Commission was decided on June 13, 1949 by a vote of 6–3. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “State or local government tax” in the Economic Activity area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 337 U.S. 286 · 69 S. Ct. 1075 · 93 L. Ed. 2d 1366 · 1949 U.S. LEXIS 2257
- Docket number
- 223
- Decided
- June 13, 1949
- Argued
- January 6, 1949
- Court era
- Vinson Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority opinion
- Felix Frankfurter
- Opinion assigned by
- Hugo L. Black
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- State or local government tax
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 2 (export-import clause)
- Type of law
- Constitution
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | |
| Justice Stanley F. Reed | Majority | |
| Justice Felix Frankfurter | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Majority | |
| Justice Frank Murphy | Dissent | |
| Justice Robert H. Jackson | Dissent | |
| Justice Wiley B. Rutledge | Majority | |
| Justice Harold H. Burton | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Joy Oil Co., Ltd. v. State Tax Commission
SCDB identifiers: case 1948-090, docket 1948-090-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “State or local government tax”
- Wheeling Steel Corp. v. GlanderLaw held unconstitutional
- Interstate Oil Pipe Line Co. v. Stone
- Empresa Siderurgica, S. A. v. County of Merced
- Ott v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co.Altered precedent
- Treichler v. WisconsinLaw held unconstitutional
- Capitol Greyhound Lines v. Brice
Cases on the same legal provision: Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 2 (export-import clause)
- Department of Revenue v. James B. Beam Distilling Co.Law held unconstitutional
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Mandel Brothers, Inc. v. Wallace
- Ford Motor Co. v. United States
- Eckenrode v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.
- Kordel v. United States
- United States v. Urbuteit
- Grand River Dam Authority v. Grand-Hydro
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error