Supreme Court of the United States, 1952

Richfield Oil Corp. v. United States

Richfield Oil Corp. v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States · Decided April 21, 1952 · Adhering, Affirming, Burton, Consideration, Douglas, Expressed, Frankfurter, Having, Illness, Jackson, Oil, Owing, Supra, Took
343 U.S. 922; 96 L. Ed. 1334; 72 S. Ct. 665; 1952 U.S. LEXIS 2774; 1952 Trade Cas. (CCH) 67,262 (United States Reports)

Counsel

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.

Richfield Oil Corp. v. United States

Cases that cite this one

41 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.