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

Standard Oil Company Et Al. v. City Of Marysville Et Al.

• 1928 • 279 U.S. 582 • Taft Court
In the case of Standard Oil Company et al. v. City of Marysville et al., 1928, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Standard Oil and against the city's ordinance that required all gasoline to be stored at least 500 feet from any building used for public or private gatherings. The court found this rule to be arbitrary and unreasonable because it did not take into account safety measures implemented by modern technology, such as fireproof tanks and automatic shut-off valves which could prevent...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 Taft Court
Term: 1928
Docket: 545
279 U.S. 582
49 S. Ct. 430
73 L. Ed. 856
1929 U.S. LEXIS 801
Argued: Apr 19, 1929

Standard Oil Company Et Al. v. City Of Marysville Et Al.

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Standard Oil Company et al. v. City of Marysville et al., 1928, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Standard Oil and against the city's ordinance that required all gasoline to be stored at least 500 feet from any building used for public or private gatherings. The court found this rule to be arbitrary and unreasonable because it did not take into account safety measures implemented by modern technology, such as fireproof tanks and automatic shut-off valves which could prevent explosions or fires even if a tank was located within 500 feet of a building. Therefore, they concluded that this law violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause since it deprived businesses like Standard Oil their property rights without sufficient justification.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

The dissenting opinion in the Standard Oil Company v. City of Marysville case argued that the city's ordinance, which prohibited the construction and operation of gasoline stations within a certain distance from schools or churches, was not a valid exercise of police power. The justice believed that such an ordinance was arbitrary and unreasonable as it did not have any substantial relation to public health, safety or welfare. They contended that there were no facts presented showing gasoline stations posed any danger to these institutions; hence this restriction seemed more like an attempt at zoning rather than genuine concern for public safety. Furthermore, they pointed out inconsistencies in allowing other potentially hazardous businesses within said areas while singling out gas stations for prohibition. Therefore, they concluded that this law violated due process rights by depriving property owners their right to use their land as they see fit without sufficient justification.

Opinion written by Justice HFStone
Decided: May 20, 1929
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