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

Economy Light & Power Company v. United States

• 1920 • 256 U.S. 113 • White Court
The Economy Light & Power Company v. United States case in 1920 revolved around the issue of whether a public utility company, specifically the Economy Light & Power Company, was exempt from federal income tax under Section 38 of the Act of Congress approved September 8, 1916. The Supreme Court ruled that it was not exempt because it did not fall within any category specified by law for exemption. The court clarified that exemptions to taxation are subject to strict interpretation and must be...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 White Court
Term: 1920
Docket: 104
256 U.S. 113
41 S. Ct. 409
65 L. Ed. 847
1921 U.S. LEXIS 1697
Argued: Dec 17, 1920

Economy Light & Power Company v. United States

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The Economy Light & Power Company v. United States case in 1920 revolved around the issue of whether a public utility company, specifically the Economy Light & Power Company, was exempt from federal income tax under Section 38 of the Act of Congress approved September 8, 1916. The Supreme Court ruled that it was not exempt because it did not fall within any category specified by law for exemption. The court clarified that exemptions to taxation are subject to strict interpretation and must be clearly expressed in legislation; they cannot be implied or inferred. Therefore, since there were no explicit provisions stating that such companies were exempted from paying taxes under this act, the Economy Light & Power Company had an obligation to pay its due share of federal income tax.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Economy Light & Power Company v. United States, Justice McReynolds argued that the majority's decision was a misinterpretation of the Hepburn Act. He contended that Congress did not intend to regulate private contracts between carriers and shippers under this act, but rather aimed at preventing unjust or unreasonable rates in public tariffs. The justice believed that there was no evidence showing any harm done to the public interest by these private contracts; thus, they should be allowed as long as they do not result in discrimination against other shippers or violate antitrust laws. Furthermore, he pointed out inconsistencies within previous court decisions regarding similar issues and expressed concern over potential negative impacts on business practices due to uncertainty about what constitutes lawful conduct under federal law.

Opinion written by Justice MPitney
Decided: Apr 11, 1921
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