Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 24, 1943No. 29531Published

1DissentBell, J.

The conclusions reached by the majority in this case, in my opinion, are not warranted by the facts or the law.

Clause 2, Section 10, Article I of the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:

“No state shall, without the consent of the Congress, lay any imposts or duties on imports or exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection laws: * *

That provision as it relates to this case is a prohibition against the state laying imposts on imports.

The fact that all of the goods here in question (with the possible exception of those coming from the Philippine…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Brown v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
  2. Thurlow v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1847
  3. Woodruff v. ParhamSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
  4. Dows v. National Exchange Bank of MilwaukeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
  5. Cincinnati Soap Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1937

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API