Texaco, Inc. v. Short
454 U.S. 516 · Decided January 12, 1982 · 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
Texaco, Inc. v. Short was decided on January 12, 1982 by a vote of 5–4. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, takings clause” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 454 U.S. 516 · 102 S. Ct. 781 · 70 L. Ed. 2d 738 · 1982 U.S. LEXIS 23
- Docket number
- 80-965
- Decided
- January 12, 1982
- Argued
- October 6, 1981
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority opinion
- John Paul Stevens
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, takings clause
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fifth Amendment (takings clause)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Byron R. White | Dissent | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Dissent | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority |
Full case caption
Texaco, Inc., et al. v. Short et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1981-027, docket 1981-027-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, takings clause”
- Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan Catv Corp.Law held unconstitutional
- Dames & Moore v. Regan
- San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. City of San Diego
- Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. BeckwithLaw held unconstitutional
- Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins
- Kaiser Aetna v. United States
Cases on the same legal provision: Fifth Amendment (takings clause)
- Agins et Ux. v. City of Tiburon
- Gurley v. Rhoden
- City of Pittsburgh v. Alco Parking Corp.
- United States v. Fuller et Ux.
- United States v. Grand River Dam Authority
- General Box Co. v. United States
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Jago v. Van Curen
- Smith v. Phillips
- City of Mesquite v. Aladdin's Castle, Inc.
- Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.
- Schweiker v. McClure
- Greene v. LindseyLaw held unconstitutional
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