Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.
419 U.S. 345 · Decided December 23, 1974 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. was decided on December 23, 1974 by a vote of 6–3. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, hearing or notice” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 419 U.S. 345 · 95 S. Ct. 449 · 42 L. Ed. 2d 477 · 1974 U.S. LEXIS 50
- Docket number
- 73-5845
- Decided
- December 23, 1974
- Argued
- October 15, 1974
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority opinion
- William H. Rehnquist
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, hearing or notice
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William O. Douglas | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.
SCDB identifiers: case 1974-016, docket 1974-016-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, hearing or notice”
- Goss v. LopezLaw held unconstitutional
- Dillard v. Industrial Commission of Virginia
- Laing v. United States
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Shapiro et Ux.
- Dixon v. Love
- Smith v. Organization of Foster Families for Equality & Reform
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Drope v. Missouri
- Withrow v. Larkin
- Mullaney v. WilburLaw held unconstitutional
- Murphy v. Florida
- Taylor v. Hayes
- Wolff v. McDonnell
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Blanchette v. Connecticut General Insurance Corp.
- Goss v. LopezLaw held unconstitutional
- Drope v. Missouri
- Withrow v. Larkin
- Mullaney v. WilburLaw held unconstitutional
- O'Connor v. Donaldson
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error