Richfield Oil Corp. v. United States, 343 U.S. 922 (1952). · Go Syfert
Search
Richfield Oil Corp. v. United States, 343 U.S. 922 (1952). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
67 citation events across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Gen. Elec. Co., 358 F. Supp. 731 (S.D.N.Y. 1973)
Treatment trajectory · 1955 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1955 1990 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
Other citing cases1 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Richfield Oil Corp.
v.
United States
No. 395.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 21, 1952.
Published opinion
343 U.S. 922
1952 U.S. LEXIS 2774
Robert E. Paradise argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was William J. DeMartini. Assistant Attorney General Morison argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Perlman, James L. Morrisson and J. Roger Wollenberg.
Adhering, Affirming, Burton, Consideration, Douglas, Expressed, Frankfurter, Having, Illness, Jackson, Oil, Owing, Supra, Took.
Cited by 48 opinions  |  Published
Per Curiam:

The Court is of the opinion that the issues raised by this appeal are substantially the same as those decided in Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 337 U. S. 293 (1949). Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Douglas, Mr. Justice Jackson, and Mr. Justice Burton, while adhering to their views expressed in Standard Oil Co. v. United States, supra, join in affirming the judgment of the District Court in this case. Mr. Justice Frankfurter, not having heard the argument, owing to illness, took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Mr. Justice Clark took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.