Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Atlantic Lumber Co. v. Commissioner Of Corporations And Taxation Of Massachusetts

• 1935 • 298 U.S. 553 • Hughes Court
In the 1935 case of Atlantic Lumber Co. v. Commissioner of Corporations and Taxation of Massachusetts, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state's taxation authority over an out-of-state corporation operating within its borders. The Atlantic Lumber Company, a Maine-based corporation with operations in Massachusetts, challenged a tax assessment by arguing that it was not doing business within Massachusetts but merely had property there for storage purposes. However, evidence showed that...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Hughes Court
Term: 1935
Docket: 715
298 U.S. 553
56 S. Ct. 887
80 L. Ed. 1328
1936 U.S. LEXIS 719
Argued: Apr 02, 1936

Atlantic Lumber Co. v. Commissioner Of Corporations And Taxation Of Massachusetts

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1935 case of Atlantic Lumber Co. v. Commissioner of Corporations and Taxation of Massachusetts, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state's taxation authority over an out-of-state corporation operating within its borders. The Atlantic Lumber Company, a Maine-based corporation with operations in Massachusetts, challenged a tax assessment by arguing that it was not doing business within Massachusetts but merely had property there for storage purposes. However, evidence showed that they were buying lumber from other states and selling to customers both inside and outside Massachusetts while using their property as a base for these transactions. The court held that this constituted "doing business" under state law which made them liable to pay taxes on all income derived from such activities regardless if it came from interstate commerce or not.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Atlantic Lumber Co. v. Commissioner of Corporations and Taxation of Massachusetts, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on foreign corporations doing business in Massachusetts violated both the Due Process Clause and Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The dissent contended that this tax unfairly burdened interstate commerce by imposing an additional cost on out-of-state businesses not faced by their in-state counterparts, thereby creating an unconstitutional barrier to trade between states. Furthermore, they believed that this taxation scheme did not meet due process requirements because it failed to provide sufficient connection or nexus between the state taxing authority and activities being taxed - namely, those conducted outside its borders.

Opinion written by Justice GSutherland
Decided: May 25, 1936
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms