Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
On petition for writ of
certiorari to the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Justice WHITE, with whom Justice BRENNAN and Justice O'CONNOR join, dissenting.
In this case, the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine held that an allegation that a State has violated the Commerce Clause is not cognizable in an action under 42 U.S.C. 1983. 503 A.2d 214 (1986). This decision, while supported by the weight of authority, see, e.g., Consolidated Freightways Corp. v. Kassel, 730 F.2d 1139 (CA8), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 834 (1984), conflicts with the holding in Kennecott Corp. v. Smith, 637 F.2d 181, 186, n. 5 (CA3 1980). I would grant certiorari to resolve this conflict.
This case also presents the question whether persons subjected to an unconstitutional tax, the nonpayment of which is a crime, may bring a refund action under the Fourteenth Amendment if no state refund procedure is available. The Supreme Judicial Court recognized that the Fourteenth Amendment may require a refund of unconstitutional taxes paid under compulsion. See Carpenter v. Shaw, 280 U.S. 363, 369 , 123 (1930); Ward v. Board of County Comm'rs, 253 U.S. 17, 24 , 422 (1920). However, the court rejected the " implied duress" theory of Atchison, T. & S.F. R. Co. v. O'Connor, 223 U.S. 280, 286 , 217 (1912), and held that petitioners have no right of recovery under the Fourteenth Amendment [476 U.S. 1129 , 1130] because they failed to present evidence that the State actually threatened them with arrest or seizure of personal property if they failed to pay the tax in question. Because this holding calls into question the continuing vitality of Atchison, I would grant certiorari on this issue as well.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Citation: 476 U.S. 1129
Docket No: No. 85-1423
Decided: May 19, 1986
Court: United States Supreme Court
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)