Laing v. United States
423 U.S. 161 · Decided January 13, 1976 · 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
Laing v. United States was decided on January 13, 1976 by a vote of 5–3. The Court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, hearing or notice” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 423 U.S. 161 · 96 S. Ct. 473 · 46 L. Ed. 2d 416 · 1976 U.S. LEXIS 144
- Docket number
- 73-1808
- Decided
- January 13, 1976
- Argued
- January 21, 1975
- Reargued
- October 15, 1975
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–3
- Majority opinion
- Thurgood Marshall
- Opinion assigned by
- William J. Brennan Jr.
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, hearing or notice
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Internal Revenue Code
- Type of law
- Federal statute
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Dissent | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Dissent |
Did not participate: John Paul Stevens.
Full case caption
Laing v. United States et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1975-020, docket 1975-020-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, hearing or notice”
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Shapiro et Ux.
- Goss v. LopezLaw held unconstitutional
- Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.
- Dixon v. Love
- Smith v. Organization of Foster Families for Equality & Reform
- Dillard v. Industrial Commission of Virginia
Cases on the same legal provision: Internal Revenue Code
- Ivan Allen Co. v. United States
- Phelps v. United States
- United States v. Pomponio
- United States v. Foster Lumber Co., Inc.
- United States v. Bisceglia
- Don E. Williams Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Rose v. Locke
- United States v. Powell
- Alamo Land & Cattle Co., Inc. v. Arizona Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Shapiro et Ux.
- Baxter v. Palmigiano
- Tennessee v. Dunlap
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