Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Tully
466 U.S. 388 · Decided April 24, 1984 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Tully was decided on April 24, 1984 unanimously (9–0). The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice Harry A. Blackmun wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “State or local government tax” in the Economic Activity area. SCDB records that the Court declared a state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 466 U.S. 388 · 104 S. Ct. 1856 · 80 L. Ed. 2d 388 · 1984 U.S. LEXIS 67
- Docket number
- 81-2394
- Decided
- April 24, 1984
- Argued
- November 1, 1983
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Harry A. Blackmun
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- State or local government tax
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3 (interstate commerce clause)
- Type of law
- Constitution
- Held unconstitutional
- A state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority |
Full case caption
Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Tully et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1983-079, docket 1983-079-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “State or local government tax”
- Limbach v. Hooven & Allison Co.Altered precedent
- Armco Inc. v. HardestyLaw held unconstitutional
- Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. DiasLaw held unconstitutional
- American Bank & Trust Co. v. Dallas County
- Container Corporation of America v. Franchise Tax Board
- Exxon Corp. v. Eagerton
Cases on the same legal provision: Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3 (interstate commerce clause)
- South-Central Timber Development, Inc. v. Wunnicke
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Wyoming
- White v. Massachusetts Council of Construction Employers, Inc.
- Sporhase v. Nebraska ex Rel. DouglasAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Edgar v. Mite Corp.Law held unconstitutional
- Brown-Forman Distillers Corp. v. New York State Liquor AuthorityLaw held unconstitutional
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Company of Virginia
- Secretary of the Interior v. California
- Sony Corporation of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.
- Daily Income Fund, Inc. v. Fox
- Southland Corp. v. Keating
- Dixson v. United States
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