Pitney v. Washington
240 U.S. 387 (1916)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Pitney v. Washington, 240 U.S. 387 (1916)

Pitney v. Washington

No. 242

Argued October 29, November 1, 2, 1915

Decided March 6, 1916

240 U.S. 387

Syllabus

On authority of Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co., ante, p. 240 U. S. 342, and Tanner v. Little, ante, p. 240 U. S. 369, held that the trading stamp license statute of Washington is not unconstitutional under the commerce clause of, or the due process or equal protection provision of the Fourteenth Amendment to, the federal Constitution.

79 Wash. 608 affirmed.

The facts, which involve the constitutionality, under the commerce clause of the federal Constitution and the due process and equal protection provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment thereto, of the trading stamp license tax laws of the Washington, are stated in the opinion.

Page 240 U. S. 388

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.