0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views3 pages

Maryland v. Louisiana, 452 U.S. 456 (1981)

Filed: 1981-06-15 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 452 U.S. 456, 101 S. Ct. 3075, 69 L. Ed. 2d 156, 1981 U.S. LEXIS 35 Docket: 83 ORIG Supreme Court Database id: 1980-120
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as COURT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views3 pages

Maryland v. Louisiana, 452 U.S. 456 (1981)

Filed: 1981-06-15 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 452 U.S. 456, 101 S. Ct. 3075, 69 L. Ed. 2d 156, 1981 U.S. LEXIS 35 Docket: 83 ORIG Supreme Court Database id: 1980-120
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as COURT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

452 U.S.

456
101 S.Ct. 3075
69 L.Ed.2d 156

State of MARYLAND, et al.


v.
State of LOUISIANA
No. 83

Supreme Court of the United States


June 15, 1981
1

June 15, 1981.

On bill of complaint.

DECREE
3

This cause having come on to be heard on the exceptions to the Reports of the
Special Master dated May 14, 1980, and September 15, 1980, and having been
argued by counsel and this Court having stated its conclusions in its opinion
announced May 26, 1981, 451 U.S. 725, 101 S.Ct. 2114, 68 L.Ed.2d 576
(1981), and having considered the positions of the respective parties as to the
terms of this decree, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED AS
FOLLOWS:

1. The exceptions of the defendant State of Louisiana to the Report of the


Special Master dated May 14, 1980, are overruled and accordingly:

(a) the motions of the State of New Jersey, the United States and the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, and Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation
et al., for leave to intervene as party plaintiffs are granted; and

(b) the motion of Associated Gas Distributors for leave to file a brief as amicus
curiae is granted.

2. The exceptions of the defendant State of Louisiana to the Report of the

Special Master dated September 15, 1980, are overruled, the plaintiff's
exceptions are sustained to the extent indicated in this Court's opinion, and
accordingly:
8

(a) the motion of the defendant State of Louisiana to dismiss the bill of
complaint is denied; and

(b) the motion of the plaintiff States for judgment on the pleadings is granted in
part.

10

3. The motion of the plaintiff States for entry of decree and the motion of the
Solicitor General for entry of decreeare granted. The motion of the defendant
State of Louisiana for entry of decree is denied.

11

4. Section 1 of the Louisiana First Use Tax Act, La.Rev.Stat.Ann. 47:1303 C


(West Supp.1981), violates the Supremacy Clause and the Louisiana First Use
Tax Act, La.Rev.Stat.Ann. SS 47:1301-47:1307 (West Supp.1981), is
unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause.

12

5. Effective with the date of entry of this decree, the defendant State of
Louisiana, its officers, agents, and employees are permanently enjoined and
prohibited from collecting the Louisiana First Use Tax.

13

6. Within thirty (30) days after the entry of this decree, the defendant State of
Louisiana shall:

14

(a) render to the plaintiffs and file with the Court a true, full, accurate, and
appropriate account of any and all revenues collected pursuant to the First Use
Tax Act and of the interest earned by the defendant as a result of its investment
of these revenues and the interest earned thereon; and

15

(b) refund to the taxpayers any and all revenues collected pursuant to the First
Use Tax together with any and all interest earned as a result of its investment of
these revenues and the interest earned thereon, but to the extent that the First
Use Tax revenues and the interest earned thereon have been invested by the
defendant State of Louisiana in interest-bearing securities, the defendant State
of Louisiana shall transfer to the taxpayers the proceeds of principal and
interest from such securities as each of such securities matures.

16

7. The Court retains jurisdiction to entertain such further proceedings, enter

such orders, and issue such writs as may from time to time be deemed necessary
or advisable to give proper force and effect to this decree or to effectuate the
rights of the parties in the premises.
17

Justice POWELL took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions


or this decree.

You might also like