Sonneborn Brothers v. Cureton, 262 U.S. 506 (1923)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 262 U.S. 505, click here.

Sonneborn Brothers v. Cureton

No. 20

Argued March 24, 1922
Restored to docket for reargument May 29, 1922
Reargued October 5, 1922
Decided June 11, 1923
262 U.S. 506

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Syllabus

1. A state occupation tax, levied on all wholesale dealers in oil and measured by a percent of the gross amount of their respective sales made within the state, is not invalid as a burden on interstate commerce when applied to local sales in the original packages of oil previously shipped into the state and stored by the dealer as part of his stock in trade. P. 508.

2. As regards immunity from state taxation, the distinction between imports and articles in original packages in interstate commerce is that, in the one case, the immunity attaches to the import itself before sale, while, in the other, it depends on whether the tax regulates or burdens interstate commerce. P. 509.

Woodrufl v. Parham, 8 Wall. 123, followed. Standard Oil Co. v. Graves, 249 U.S. 389; Ascren v. Continental Oil Co., 252 U.S. 444; Bowman v. Continental Oil Co., 256 U.S. 642, and Texas Co. v. Brown, 258 U.S. 466, qualified.

Affirmed.

Appeal from a decree of the district court dismissing, on final hearing, the appellants’ bill, which sought to enjoin the enforcement of penalties for failure to make reports of sales of oil and for failure to pay a state tax in respect of oil sold in the packages in which it had been originally shipped into the state.