About: Quill Corp. v. North Dakota

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: Quill Corp. v. North Dakota Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FQuill_Corp._v._North_Dakota

Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court ruling, since overturned, concerning use tax. The decision effectively prevented states from collecting any sales tax from retail purchases made over the Internet or other e-Commerce route unless the seller had a physical presence in the state. The ruling was based on the Dormant Commerce Clause, preventing states from interfering with interstate commerce unless authorized by the United States Congress. The case resulted from an attempt by North Dakota seeking to collect sales tax on licensed computer software offered by the Quill Corporation, an office supply retailer with no North Dakota presence, that allowed users to place orders directly with Quill.

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	Thing case Legal Case unit of work Legal case yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 yago:Happening107283608 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity Supreme Court of the United States case
rdfs:label	Quill Corp. v. North Dakota (en)
rdfs:comment	Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court ruling, since overturned, concerning use tax. The decision effectively prevented states from collecting any sales tax from retail purchases made over the Internet or other e-Commerce route unless the seller had a physical presence in the state. The ruling was based on the Dormant Commerce Clause, preventing states from interfering with interstate commerce unless authorized by the United States Congress. The case resulted from an attempt by North Dakota seeking to collect sales tax on licensed computer software offered by the Quill Corporation, an office supply retailer with no North Dakota presence, that allowed users to place orders directly with Quill. (en)
foaf:name	Quill Corporation, Petitioner v. North Dakota by and through its Tax Commissioner,Heidi Heitkamp (en)
dcterms:subject	United States Dormant Commerce Clause case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Constitution Article One case law United States taxation and revenue case law Taxation in North Dakota United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court 1992 in United States case law E-commerce in the United States Legal history of North Dakota
Wikipage page ID	11587786 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1123780264 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	Quill Corporation United States Dormant Commerce Clause case law United States Congress Dormant Commerce Clause Due process North Dakota Office of State Tax Commissioner North Dakota Supreme Court United States Supreme Court cases Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady Computer software Anthony Kennedy Stare decisis Commerce Clause Use tax United States Constitution Article One case law United States taxation and revenue case law Taxation in North Dakota Amazon.com Floppy disk North Dakota United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court Heidi Heitkamp 1992 in United States case law E-commerce in the United States L. Ed. 2d Legal history of North Dakota Supreme Court of the United States Sales taxes in the United States Direct Marketing Ass'n v. Brohl South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. National Bellas Hess v. Illinois Certiorari Streamlined Sales Tax Project IP address Office supply Retailer U.S. LEXIS
Link from a Wikipage to an external page	https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/504/298/ http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep504/usrep504298/usrep504298.pdf https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/504/298.html https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-0194.ZS.html https://www.oyez.org/cases/1991/91-194
sameAs	Quill Corp. v. North Dakota Quill Corp. v. North Dakota Quill Corp. v. North Dakota Quill Corp. v. North Dakota
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:' dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Reflist dbt:Rp dbt:Ussc dbt:USArticleI
JoinMajority	unanimous court ; Rehnquist, Blackmun, O'Connor, Souter (en)
LawsApplied	Commerce Clause
oyez	https://www.oyez.org/cases/1991/91-194
ParallelCitations	172800.0 (second)
USPage	298 (xsd:integer)
USVol	504 (xsd:integer)
ArgueDate	0001-01-22 (xsd:gMonthDay)
ArgueYear	1992 (xsd:integer)
case	Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, (en)
DecideDate	0001-05-26 (xsd:gMonthDay)
DecideYear	1992 (xsd:integer)
findlaw	https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/504/298.html
fullname	Quill Corporation, Petitioner v. North Dakota by and through its Tax Commissioner, Heidi Heitkamp (en)
Holding	The lack of a physical nexus in a state is sufficient grounds to exempt a corporation from having to pay sales and use taxes to a state. (en)
justia	https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/504/298/
Litigants	Quill Corp. v. North Dakota (en)
majority	Stevens (en)
loc	http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep504/usrep504298/usrep504298.pdf
has abstract	Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court ruling, since overturned, concerning use tax. The decision effectively prevented states from collecting any sales tax from retail purchases made over the Internet or other e-Commerce route unless the seller had a physical presence in the state. The ruling was based on the Dormant Commerce Clause, preventing states from interfering with interstate commerce unless authorized by the United States Congress. The case resulted from an attempt by North Dakota seeking to collect sales tax on licensed computer software offered by the Quill Corporation, an office supply retailer with no North Dakota presence, that allowed users to place orders directly with Quill. Quill modified an earlier court decision, National Bellas Hess, Inc. v. Department of Revenue of Illinois, which dealt with a state imposing the duty of use tax collection on a mail order reseller. The decision in Quill has been a point of contention for states as e-Commerce had grown greatly during the 21st century. Spurred by Justice Anthony Kennedy's concurrence in Direct Marketing Ass'n v. Brohl, which spoke to a review of Quill, several states passed "kill Quill" laws to bring such a review to the Supreme Court. In the first such challenge, South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., heard in the 2018 term, the Court found that the physical presence rule defined by Quill was "unsound and incorrect", and overturned both Quill and the remaining portions of National Bellas Hess. (en)
Concurrence	Scalia (en)

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 67 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software