Scripto, Inc. v. Carson
362 U.S. 207 · Decided March 21, 1960 · 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
Scripto, Inc. v. Carson was decided on March 21, 1960 by a vote of 8–1. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Tom C. Clark wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “State or local government tax” in the Economic Activity area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 362 U.S. 207 · 80 S. Ct. 619 · 4 L. Ed. 2d 660 · 1960 U.S. LEXIS 1449
- Docket number
- 80
- Decided
- March 21, 1960
- Argued
- February 24, 1960
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 8–1
- Majority opinion
- Tom C. Clark
- Opinion assigned by
- Earl Warren
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- State or local government tax
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3 (interstate commerce clause)
- Type of law
- Constitution
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | |
| Justice Felix Frankfurter | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Majority | |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Majority | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Majority | |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Charles E. Whittaker | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority |
Full case caption
Scripto, Inc., v. Carson, Sheriff, et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1959-049, docket 1959-049-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “State or local government tax”
- Thomas v. Virginia
- Laurens Federal Savings & Loan Assn. v. South Carolina Tax Commission
- E T & W N C Transportation Co. v. Currie
- Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. v. Minnesota
- Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. Virginia
- Allied Stores of Ohio, Inc. v. Bowers
Cases on the same legal provision: Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3 (interstate commerce clause)
- Huron Portland Cement Co. v. City of Detroit
- Bibb v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc.Law held unconstitutional
- Eli Lilly & Co. v. Sav-On-Drugs, Inc.
- Colorado Anti-Discrimination Commission v. Continental Air Lines, Inc.
- Head v. New Mexico Board of Examiners in Optometry
- Polar Ice Cream & Creamery Co. v. AndrewsLaw held unconstitutional
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Harris v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.
- Conner v. Butler
- United States v. Seaboard Air Line Railroad Co.
- Sentilles v. Inter-Caribbean Shipping Corp.
- West v. United States
- Braen v. Pfeifer Oil Transportation Co., Inc.
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