Joseph v. Carter & Weeks Stevedoring Co. - 330 U.S. 422 (1947)


U.S. Supreme Court

Joseph v. Carter & Weeks Stevedoring Co., 330 U.S. 422 (1947)

Joseph v. Carter & Weeks Stevedoring Co.

No. 29

Argued March 1, 1946

Reargued November 12, 1946

Decided March 10, 1947*

330 U.S. 422

Syllabus

1. New York City levied an excise tax on the gross receipts of a stevedoring corporation engaged wholly within the territorial limits of the City in loading and unloading vessels moving in interstate and foreign commerce.

Held: such a tax is invalid, since it would burden interstate and foreign commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Pp. 330 U. S. 427, 330 U. S. 433-434.

2. Loading and unloading are essential parts of transportation itself. Therefore, stevedoring is essentially a part of interstate and foreign commerce, and cannot be separated therefrom for purposes of local taxation. Pp. 330 U. S. 427, 330 U. S. 433.

3. Puget Sound Stevedoring Co. v. State Tax Comm'n, 302 U. S. 90, reaffirmed. P. 330 U. S. 433.

Page 330 U. S. 423

4. Western Live Stock v. Bureau of Revenue, 303 U. S. 250; Southern Pacific Co. v. Gallagher, 306 U. S. 167; McGoldrick v. Berwind-White Coal Mining Co., 309 U. S. 33; Department of Treasury v. Wood Preserving Corp., 313 U. S. 62, distinguished. Pp. 330 U. S. 430-433.

294 N.Y. 906, 908, 63 N.E.2d 112, affirmed.

The Comptroller of the City of New York determined that certain stevedoring companies were liable for taxes on their gross receipts under the general business tax laws of New York City. On review, the Comptroller's determinations were annulled by the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division. 269 App.Div. 685, 54 N.Y.S.2d 380, 383. The New York Court of Appeals affirmed. 294 N.Y. 906, 908, 63 N.E.2d 112. This Court granted certiorari. 326 U.S. 713. Affirmed, p. 330 U. S. 434.



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.