Williams v. New York
337 U.S. 241 · Decided June 6, 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
Williams v. New York was decided on June 6, 1949 by a vote of 7–2. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Hugo L. Black 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
- 337 U.S. 241 · 69 S. Ct. 1079 · 93 L. Ed. 2d 1337 · 1949 U.S. LEXIS 2308
- Docket number
- 671
- Decided
- June 6, 1949
- Argued
- April 21, 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
- 7–2
- Majority opinion
- Hugo L. Black
- Opinion assigned by
- Fred M. Vinson
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, hearing or notice
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Stanley F. Reed | Majority | |
| Justice Felix Frankfurter | Majority | |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Majority | |
| Justice Frank Murphy | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Robert H. Jackson | Majority | |
| Justice Wiley B. Rutledge | Dissent | |
| Justice Harold H. Burton | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson | Majority |
Full case caption
Williams v. New York
SCDB identifiers: case 1948-087, docket 1948-087-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, hearing or notice”
- Federal Communications Commission v. WJR
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Law held unconstitutional
- Taylor v. Alabama
- Ewing v. Mytinger & Casselberry, Inc.
- Paterno v. Lyons
- Whelchel v. McDonald
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Watts v. Indiana
- Turner v. Pennsylvania
- Harris v. South Carolina
- Fisher v. Pace
- Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York
- Treichler v. WisconsinLaw held unconstitutional
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- National Labor Relations Board v. Stowe Spinning Co.
- Federal Communications Commission v. WJR
- United States v. Cors
- Propper v. Clark
- Kimball Laundry Co. 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