Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.

GEORGIA RAILROAD & BANKING CO. v. REDWINE, STATE REVENUE COMMISSIONER (1952)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
GEORGIA RAILROAD & BANKING CO. v. REDWINE, STATE REVENUE COMMISSIONER
Term: 1951
Important Dates
Argued: February 13, 1950
Decided: January 28, 1952
Outcome
Reversed and remanded
Vote
9-0
Majority
Hugo BlackHarold BurtonTom ClarkFelix FrankfurterRobert JacksonSherman MintonStanley ReedFrederick Vinson
Concurring
William Douglas

GEORGIA RAILROAD & BANKING CO. v. REDWINE, STATE REVENUE COMMISSIONER is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on January 28, 1952. The case was argued before the court on February 13, 1950.

In a 9-0 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. The case originated from the Georgia Georgia Northern U.S. District Court.

For a full list of cases decided in the 1950s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Vinson Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Judicial Power - comity primarily removal cases, civil procedure (cf. comity, criminal and First Amendment); deference to foreign judicial tribunals
  • Petitioner: Governmental official, or an official of an agency established under an interstate compact
  • Petitioner state: Georgia
  • Respondent type: State or local governmental taxpayer, or executor of the estate of
  • Respondent state: Georgia
  • Citation: 342 U.S. 299
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Appeal
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: Frederick Vinson
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: Frederick Vinson

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes