Legal Opinion

A. Magnano Co. v. Hamilton

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April 2, 1934No. 589PublishedCited by 288 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sutherland

Appellant assails as invalid a statute of the State of Washington which levies an excise tax of fifteen cents per pound on all butter substitutes sold within the state. Every distributor of such butter substitutes is required to file a duly acknowledged certificate with the Director of Agriculture, containing the name under which the distributor is transacting business within the state and other specified information. Sale of any butter substitute is forbidden until such certificate is furnished. The distributor must render to the Director of Agriculture, on the fifteenth day of each month, a…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
  2. Massachusetts v. MellonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  3. Brushaber v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  4. Nichols v. CoolidgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  5. Heiner v. DonnanSupreme Court of the United States · 1932

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

3Cited by288 opinions

  1. Murdock v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  2. Department of Revenue of Mont. v. Kurth RanchSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  3. Grosjean v. American Press Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  4. Carmichael v. Southern Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
  5. Lehnhausen v. Lake Shore Auto Parts Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973

283 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