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

Gulf Oil Corp. Et Al. v. Copp Paving Co., Inc., Et Al.

• 1974 • 419 U.S. 186 • Burger Court
In the case of Gulf Oil Corp. et al. v. Copp Paving Co., Inc., et al., 1974, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Gulf Oil Corporation and other oil companies against Copp Paving Company and others who alleged that they had been charged excessive prices for asphalt due to a conspiracy among oil companies to fix prices, violating antitrust laws. The court held that federal courts should not apply state law retroactively when it interferes with federal interests or policies such as those under the...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 Burger Court
Term: 1974
Docket: 73-1012
419 U.S. 186
95 S. Ct. 392
42 L. Ed. 2d 378
1974 U.S. LEXIS 47
Argued: Oct 21, 1974

Gulf Oil Corp. Et Al. v. Copp Paving Co., Inc., Et Al.

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Gulf Oil Corp. et al. v. Copp Paving Co., Inc., et al., 1974, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Gulf Oil Corporation and other oil companies against Copp Paving Company and others who alleged that they had been charged excessive prices for asphalt due to a conspiracy among oil companies to fix prices, violating antitrust laws. The court held that federal courts should not apply state law retroactively when it interferes with federal interests or policies such as those under the Sherman Act (antitrust legislation). In this case, California's attempt to apply its own antitrust laws was deemed inappropriate because it conflicted with existing federal policy on interstate commerce and competition.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Gulf Oil Corp. v. Copp Paving Co., Inc., Justice Brennan, joined by Justices Douglas and Marshall, argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law restricting interstate commerce was inconsistent with previous Supreme Court rulings on similar issues. They contended that California's requirement for asphalt manufacturers to have an in-state processing plant effectively discriminated against out-of-state companies and placed an undue burden on interstate commerce. The dissenters also disagreed with the majority's assertion that this case was different from others because it involved natural resources; they believed this distinction did not justify upholding a discriminatory law. Furthermore, they criticized the majority for failing to consider whether there were less restrictive alternatives available to achieve California’s goal of conserving its natural resources.

Opinion written by Justice LFPowell
Decided: Dec 16, 1974
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
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