Court Opinion

ID: 4898144
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-09-03 00:11:56.412794+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:58:08.182777
License: Public Domain

Three actions were brought by pipeline companies against the Comptroller of Public Accounts, the Attorney General, and the State Treasurer to recover taxes paid under protest pursuant to Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 7057f, which levies an occupation tax on the business of gathering gas. The actions were consolidated. The companies contended that Article 7057f violates the commerce clause of the Constitution of the United States.
The 126th District Court, Travis County, Jack Roberts, J., entered judgments in favor of the companies, and the Comptroller of Public Accounts, the Attorney General, and the State Treasurer appealed.
The Court of Civil Appeals, Hughes, J., 255 S.W.2d 535, reversed the judgments, rendered judgments for the Comptroller of Public Accounts, the Attorney General, and the State Treasurer, and held that Article 7057f was not unconstitutional on ground that it violated the commerce clause.
The three companies, by three separate applications for writs of error, appealed to the Supreme Court of Texas. The Supreme Court of Texas refused all three applications, and all three companies filed motion for rehearing. The motions of two of the companies were overruled by the Supreme Court of Texas, and those two companies appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
The United States Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Clark, Michigan-Wisconsin Pipe Line Co. v. Calvert, 347 U.S. 157, 74 S.Ct. 396, 98 L.Ed. 583, reversed the judgments and held that the commerce clause was infringed by Texas tax on occupation of gathering gas measured by entire volume of gas taken, as applied to interstate natural gas pipeline companies, where taxable incident was the taking of gas from the outlet of an independent gasoline plant within the state, after production, gathering, and processing, for purpose of immediate interstate transmission.
Thereafter the Texas Supreme Court, with respect to the Amarillo Oil Co. case, which had not been appealed to the United States Supreme Court, entered the following order:
By agreement of all parties the order refusing the application of Amarillo Oil Company for a writ of error is set aside. Application granted on motion for rehearing. Judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals reversed, and judgment of the trial court affirmed.