mckesson
florida
alcohol
tobacco
argued
march
decided
june
bacchus
imports
dias
held
hawaii
liquor
excise
tax
scheme
allowed
tax
preferences
alcoholic
beverages
manufactured
certain
products
grown
state
violated
commerce
clause
purpose
effect
discriminating
interstate
commerce
florida
revised
similar
tax
preference
scheme
provide
special
rate
reductions
specified
products
commonly
grown
state
used
alcoholic
beverages
produced
petitioner
mckesson
corporation
wholesale
liquor
distributor
whose
products
qualify
rate
reductions
paid
applicable
taxes
number
months
mckesson
filed
suit
state
respondent
taxing
authorities
seeking
inter
alia
refund
amount
excess
taxes
paid
result
disfavored
treatment
trial
invalidated
tax
scheme
bacchus
imports
enjoining
future
enforcement
preferential
rate
reductions
declined
order
refund
form
relief
taxes
mckesson
already
paid
order
stayed
pending
appeal
state
continued
collect
taxes
local
preferences
still
effect
florida
ultimately
affirmed
respects
ruling
refusal
order
refund
proper
light
equitable
considerations
held
eleventh
amendment
provides
part
federal
udicial
power
shall
extend
suit
commenced
prosecuted
one
citizens
preclude
exercise
appellate
jurisdiction
cases
brought
arise
state
courts
view
implicit
consistent
practice
uniformly
endorsed
cases
including
cases
involving
state
tax
refund
actions
brought
state
almost
years
see
cohens
virginia
wheat
general
oil
crain
davis
michigan
dept
treasury
pp
state
penalizes
taxpayers
failure
remit
taxes
timely
fashion
thus
requiring
pay
first
obtain
review
tax
validity
later
refund
action
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
requires
state
afford
meaningful
postpayment
relief
taxes
already
paid
pursuant
tax
scheme
ultimately
found
unconstitutional
pp
precedents
demonstrate
traditional
legal
analysis
appropriate
determining
florida
constitutional
duty
provide
retrospective
relief
mckesson
payment
unlawful
tax
atchison
ward
love
county
board
carpenter
shaw
montana
national
bank
billings
yellowstone
county
moines
national
bank
bennett
pp
cases
state
must
provide
procedural
safeguards
unlawful
tax
exaction
exaction
constitutes
deprivation
property
due
process
clause
state
may
either
providing
form
predeprivation
process
authorizing
taxpayers
sue
enjoin
imposition
tax
prior
payment
withhold
payment
interpose
objections
defenses
tax
enforcement
proceeding
providing
retrospective
relief
part
postdeprivation
procedure
since
florida
established
various
financial
sanctions
summary
remedies
encourage
liquor
distributors
tender
tax
payments
resolution
dispute
tax
validity
state
provide
meaningful
opportunity
predeprivation
relief
thus
postdeprivation
refund
action
state
must
provide
distributors
fair
opportunity
challenge
accuracy
legal
validity
tax
obligation
also
clear
certain
remedy
supra
erroneous
unlawful
tax
collection
state
courts
invalidate
florida
liquor
excise
tax
scheme
entirety
declared
unconstitutional
insofar
discriminated
interstate
commerce
state
free
choose
among
several
alternative
courses
providing
meaningful
remedy
may
refund
mckesson
difference
tax
paid
tax
assessed
extended
rate
reductions
competitors
cf
montana
national
bank
supra
bennett
supra
state
may
also
extent
consistent
constitutional
restrictions
assess
collect
back
taxes
mckesson
competitors
benefited
rate
reductions
contested
tax
period
calibrating
retroactive
assessment
create
hindsight
nondiscriminatory
scheme
cf
furthermore
state
may
implement
combination
partial
refund
mckesson
partial
retroactive
assessment
tax
increases
favored
competitors
long
resultant
tax
actually
assessed
contested
period
reflects
nondiscriminatory
scheme
however
state
may
respondents
contend
deny
mckesson
retrospective
relief
theory
highest
tax
rate
imposed
distributors
state
known
tax
scheme
actually
enacted
declared
unconstitutional
mckesson
paid
tax
event
since
approach
fact
treats
mckesson
worse
distributors
favored
local
products
inconsistent
requirement
due
process
place
mckesson
position
equivalent
actually
occupied
competitors
render
valid
tax
actually
assessed
state
choice
relief
mckesson
ends
paying
smaller
tax
paid
state
initially
imposed
highest
rate
everyone
mckesson
enjoy
unpalatable
windfall
merely
protected
competitive
economic
disadvantage
proscribed
commerce
clause
pp
neither
equitable
considerations
cited
state
sufficient
override
constitutional
requirement
retrospective
relief
first
observation
tax
preference
scheme
implemented
good
faith
reliance
presumptively
valid
statute
bespeaks
concern
obligation
provide
refunds
taxes
collected
pursuant
later
turns
unconstitutional
tax
scheme
undermine
state
ability
engage
sound
fiscal
planning
ability
adequately
secured
state
freedom
impose
various
procedural
requirements
designed
allow
predict
greater
accuracy
availability
undisputed
treasury
funds
example
may
specify
statute
refunds
available
taxpayers
paying
protest
providing
timely
notice
complaint
may
refrain
collecting
taxes
pursuant
scheme
declared
invalid
competent
tribunal
pending
review
florida
failure
avail
methods
weakens
equitable
justification
avoiding
constitutional
obligation
moreover
florida
tax
scheme
hardly
said
presumptively
valid
statute
since
reflected
cosmetic
changes
prior
tax
scheme
virtually
identical
one
struck
bacchus
imports
second
state
speculation
refund
result
windfall
mckesson
likely
passed
cost
tax
customers
rejected
context
case
tax
injured
mckesson
left
poorer
absolute
sense
problem
might
rectified
extent
economic
incidence
tax
passed
others
also
increased
price
mckesson
products
compared
preferred
local
products
mckesson
likely
lost
sales
favored
distributors
else
incurred
costs
advertising
effort
maintain
market
share
state
persuasively
claim
equity
entitles
retain
tax
moneys
taken
unlawfully
mckesson
due
tax
furthers
competitive
disadvantage
constituting
commerce
clause
violation
rendered
deprivation
unlawful
first
place
jefferson
electric
mfg
distinguished
pp
state
interests
avoiding
serious
economic
administrative
dislocation
additional
administrative
costs
may
play
role
choosing
form
relief
provided
mckesson
though
florida
interest
financial
stability
justify
refusal
provide
relief
pp
brennan
delivered
opinion
unanimous
david
robertson
reargued
cause
petitioner
briefs
walter
hellerstein
bartow
farr
iii
reargued
cause
respondents
briefs
robert
butterworth
attorney
general
florida
joseph
mellichamp
iii
assistant
attorney
general
daniel
brown
special
assistant
attorney
general
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
crow
tribe
indians
daniel
rosenfelt
american
trucking
associations
et
al
andrew
frey
kenneth
geller
mark
levy
andrew
pincus
peter
kumpe
daniel
barney
robert
digges
laurie
baulig
william
busker
committee
state
taxation
council
state
chambers
commerce
jean
walker
william
peltz
tax
executives
institute
timothy
mccormally
oil
refining
franklin
dinces
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
state
california
et
al
john
van
de
kamp
attorney
general
california
richard
finn
supervising
deputy
attorney
general
eric
coffill
jim
jones
attorney
general
idaho
marc
racicot
attorney
general
montana
nicholas
spaeth
attorney
general
north
dakota
jim
mattox
attorney
general
texas
paul
van
dam
attorney
general
utah
robert
corbin
attorney
general
arizona
warren
price
iii
attorney
general
hawaii
hubert
humphrey
iii
attorney
general
minnesota
herbert
reid
acting
corporation
counsel
district
columbia
state
georgia
et
al
mary
sue
terry
attorney
general
virginia
lane
kneedler
chief
deputy
attorney
general
walter
mcfarlane
deputy
attorney
general
attorneys
general
respective
jurisdictions
follows
michael
bowers
georgia
william
guste
louisiana
joseph
curran
maryland
frank
kelley
michigan
michael
moore
mississippi
robert
spire
nebraska
brian
mckay
nevada
john
arnold
new
hampshire
peter
perretti
new
jersey
lacy
thornburg
north
carolina
robert
henry
oklahoma
dave
frohnmayer
oregon
travis
medlock
south
carolina
roger
tellinghuisen
south
dakota
charles
burson
tennessee
paul
van
dam
utah
jeffrey
amestoy
vermont
godfrey
de
castro
virgin
islands
caterpillar
harnack
national
conference
state
legislatures
et
al
benna
ruth
solomon
charles
rothfeld
justice
brennan
delivered
opinion
petitioner
mckesson
corporation
brought
action
florida
state
alleging
florida
liquor
excise
tax
violated
commerce
clause
constitution
florida
agreed
petitioner
tax
scheme
unconstitutionally
discriminated
interstate
commerce
provided
preferences
distributors
certain
local
products
although
enjoined
state
giving
effect
preferences
future
also
refused
provide
petitioner
refund
form
relief
taxes
already
paid
precedents
establish
state
penalizes
taxpayers
failure
remit
taxes
timely
fashion
thus
requiring
pay
first
obtain
review
tax
validity
later
refund
action
due
process
clause
requires
state
afford
taxpayers
meaningful
opportunity
secure
postpayment
relief
taxes
already
paid
pursuant
tax
scheme
ultimately
found
unconstitutional
therefore
agree
petitioner
state
decision
denying
relief
must
reversed
several
decades
florida
liquor
excise
tax
scheme
imposes
taxes
manufactures
distributors
cases
vendors
alcoholic
beverages
provided
preferential
treatment
beverages
manufactured
certain
citrus
agricultural
crops
bottled
state
see
stat
held
bacchus
imports
dias
similar
preference
scheme
employed
state
hawaii
violated
commerce
clause
purpose
effect
discriminating
favor
local
products
florida
legislature
revised
excise
tax
scheme
enacted
statutory
provisions
issue
litigation
see
stat
hereafter
liquor
tax
legislature
deleted
previous
express
preferences
products
replaced
special
rate
reductions
certain
specified
citrus
grape
sugarcane
products
commonly
grown
florida
used
alcoholic
beverages
produced
petitioner
mckesson
corporation
licensed
wholesale
distributor
alcoholic
beverages
whose
products
qualify
rate
reductions
petitioner
paid
applicable
taxes
every
month
required
revised
liquor
tax
went
effect
june
petitioner
filed
application
florida
office
comptroller
seeking
refund
ground
tax
scheme
unlawful
september
comptroller
denied
application
petitioner
along
distributors
present
brought
suit
florida
state
respondents
division
alcoholic
beverages
tobacco
department
business
regulation
office
comptroller
petitioner
challenged
constitutionality
tax
commerce
clause
well
various
provisions
florida
constitutions
petitioner
sought
declaratory
injunctive
relief
continued
enforcement
discriminatory
tax
scheme
pursuant
florida
repayment
funds
statute
provides
refund
overpayment
tax
license
account
due
ny
payment
made
state
treasury
error
apparent
compliance
statutory
requisites
preserving
claim
thereunder
petitioner
also
sought
refund
amount
excess
taxes
paid
result
disfavored
treatment
petitioner
motion
partial
summary
judgment
florida
trial
invalidated
discriminatory
tax
scheme
commerce
clause
grounds
revised
legislation
failed
surmount
constitutional
violations
addressed
bacchus
imports
supra
app
trial
enjoined
future
enforcement
preferential
rate
reductions
leaving
distributors
subject
liquor
tax
nonpreferred
rates
however
declined
order
refund
form
relief
taxes
previously
paid
timely
challenged
discriminatory
scheme
order
prospective
relief
stayed
pending
respondents
appeal
commerce
clause
ruling
florida
petitioner
mckesson
trial
ruling
arguing
matter
federal
state
law
entitled
least
refund
difference
disfavored
product
tax
rate
favored
product
tax
rate
state
affirmed
trial
ruling
liquor
tax
unconstitutionally
discriminated
interstate
commerce
upheld
trial
order
preferential
rate
reductions
given
future
operative
effect
also
affirmed
trial
refusal
order
tax
refund
declaring
prospective
nature
rulings
proper
light
equitable
considerations
present
case
noted
division
alcoholic
beverages
tobacco
collected
liquor
tax
good
faith
reliance
presumptively
valid
statute
ibid
moreover
suggested
given
refund
petitioner
probability
receive
windfall
since
cost
tax
likely
passed
customers
ibid
petitioner
request
rehearing
denied
petitioner
filed
petition
writ
certiorari
presenting
question
whether
federal
law
entitles
partial
tax
refund
granted
petition
consolidated
case
american
trucking
smith
also
decide
today
post
ii
respondents
first
ask
us
hold
though
florida
courts
accepted
jurisdiction
suit
sought
monetary
relief
various
state
entities
eleventh
amendment
nevertheless
precludes
exercise
appellate
jurisdiction
case
reject
respondents
suggestion
almost
years
ago
chief
justice
marshall
writing
rejected
state
eleventh
amendment
challenge
power
writ
error
review
judgment
state
involving
issue
federal
law
see
cohens
virginia
wheat
although
cohens
involved
proceeding
commenced
first
instance
state
citizen
holding
might
read
limited
circumstance
decision
long
understood
supporting
broader
proposition
long
ago
settled
writ
error
review
final
judgment
state
even
state
formal
party
defendant
successful
inferior
suit
within
meaning
amendment
general
oil
crain
harlan
concurring
see
also
charles
river
bridge
warren
bridge
pet
story
dissenting
consistent
practice
since
cohens
confirms
broader
understanding
repeatedly
without
question
accepted
jurisdiction
review
issues
federal
law
arising
suits
brought
state
indeed
frequently
entertained
cases
analogous
one
taxpayer
brought
refund
action
state
state
asked
us
reverse
adverse
state
judicial
decision
premised
upon
federal
law
respondents
correctly
note
since
cohens
effect
eleventh
amendment
appellate
jurisdiction
cases
arising
state
infrequently
discussed
cases
discussions
uniformly
reveal
understanding
amendment
circumscribe
appellate
review
judgments
moreover
little
occasion
discuss
issue
merely
reflects
extent
though
frequently
interjecting
eleventh
amendment
objections
suits
initiated
federal
understood
practice
appellate
review
judgments
consistent
role
federal
system
plain
framers
constitution
contemplate
cases
within
judicial
cognizance
might
arise
state
courts
exercise
ordinary
jurisdiction
martin
hunter
lessee
wheat
secure
compliance
national
uniformity
federal
law
exercise
jurisdiction
state
courts
cases
encompassing
issues
federal
law
subject
two
conditions
state
courts
must
interpret
enforce
faithfully
law
land
decisions
subject
review
whereas
eleventh
amendment
construed
state
retains
immunity
original
suit
federal
see
atascadero
state
hospital
scanlon
inherent
constitutional
plan
monaco
mississippi
state
takes
cognizance
case
state
assents
appellate
review
federal
issues
raised
case
whoever
may
parties
original
suit
whether
private
persons
state
recognize
long
implicit
consistent
practice
uniformly
endorsed
cases
eleventh
amendment
constrain
appellate
jurisdiction
cases
arising
state
courts
accordingly
turn
merits
petitioner
claim
iii
undisputed
florida
holding
liquor
tax
unconstitutionally
discriminated
interstate
commerce
preferences
liquor
made
crops
florida
adapted
growing
acted
correctly
awarding
petitioner
declaratory
injunctive
relief
continued
enforcement
discriminatory
provisions
question
us
whether
prospective
relief
exhausts
requirements
federal
law
answer
state
places
taxpayer
duress
promptly
pay
tax
due
relegates
postpayment
refund
action
challenge
tax
legality
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
obligates
state
provide
meaningful
relief
rectify
unconstitutional
deprivation
occasion
recent
years
explain
scope
state
obligation
provide
retrospective
relief
part
postdeprivation
procedure
cases
approach
today
however
rooted
firmly
precedent
dating
back
least
early
century
atchison
involved
suit
railroad
company
recover
taxes
paid
protest
alleging
tax
scheme
violated
commerce
clause
franchise
tax
apportioned
business
conducted
wholly
outside
state
agreed
franchise
tax
unconstitutional
concluded
railroad
company
entitled
refund
portion
tax
imposed
activity
justice
holmes
explained
reasonable
man
denies
legality
tax
clear
certain
remedy
rule
established
apart
special
circumstances
interfere
injunction
state
collection
revenues
action
law
recover
back
paid
alternative
left
course
speaking
cases
state
put
action
citizen
refuses
pay
latter
interpose
objections
way
defence
common
state
summary
remedy
distress
party
indicates
protest
yielding
prevent
courts
sometimes
perhaps
little
slow
recognize
implied
duress
payment
made
even
state
driven
action
time
citizen
put
serious
disadvantage
assertion
legal
case
constitutional
rights
defence
suit
justice
may
require
liberty
avoid
disadvantages
paying
promptly
bringing
suit
side
ward
love
county
board
reversed
oklahoma
refusal
award
refund
unlawful
tax
subdivision
state
sought
tax
lands
allotted
congress
members
choctaw
chickasaw
indian
tribes
despite
provision
allotment
treaty
making
lands
allotted
nontaxable
title
remains
original
allottee
exceed
years
date
patent
quoting
act
june
stat
avoid
distress
sale
lands
choctaw
tribe
paid
taxes
protest
brought
suit
state
obtain
refund
observed
certain
lands
nontaxable
state
subdivisions
allotment
treaty
therefore
taxes
assessed
violation
federal
law
finding
tribe
paid
taxes
duress
ordered
refund
explained
state
duty
remit
tax
follows
say
county
collect
unlawful
taxes
coercive
means
incur
obligation
pay
back
nothing
short
saying
take
appropriate
property
indian
allottees
arbitrarily
without
due
process
law
course
contravention
fourteenth
amendment
binds
county
agency
state
montana
national
bank
billings
yellowstone
county
applied
due
process
analysis
tax
unlawful
discriminatory
though
otherwise
within
state
power
impose
montana
officials
imposed
tax
shares
banks
incorporated
federal
law
shares
banks
relying
montana
decision
interpreting
state
law
preclude
taxation
state
bank
shares
montana
national
bank
billings
paid
tax
protest
brought
suit
refund
bank
contended
different
tax
treatment
violated
revised
statutes
federal
statute
requiring
equal
taxation
shares
state
national
banks
appeal
montana
overruled
previous
interpretation
state
law
held
thereafter
shares
state
banks
also
taxed
thus
enabling
state
officials
comply
montana
national
bank
billings
yellowstone
county
mont
declined
however
order
refund
taxes
montana
national
bank
billings
paid
period
state
officials
exempted
state
banks
reliance
earlier
decision
writ
error
acknowledged
montana
decision
overrule
previous
interpretation
state
law
ensured
future
equal
treatment
demanded
federal
law
noted
however
prospective
relief
alone
id
cure
mischief
done
earlier
construction
held
montana
national
bank
billings
ould
deprived
legal
right
recover
amount
tax
unlawfully
exacted
later
montana
decision
repudiating
construction
unlawful
exaction
made
le
ft
monies
thus
exacted
public
treasury
therefore
bank
enjoyed
undoubted
right
recover
moneys
paid
montana
national
bank
recognized
federal
mandate
equal
treatment
satisfied
collecting
back
taxes
state
banks
rather
granting
refund
national
banks
possibility
remarked
unnecessary
say
nowhere
appears
taxing
officers
possess
power
assess
back
taxes
undertaken
exercise
intention
ever
soon
enough
invite
consideration
purely
speculative
suggestion
ever
taxing
officials
shall
put
practical
effect
ibid
applied
analysis
discriminatory
tax
moines
national
bank
bennett
held
unanimously
state
iowa
taxation
shares
state
national
banks
higher
rate
competing
domestic
corporations
violated
equal
protection
clause
respect
banks
claim
refund
excess
taxes
paid
justice
brandeis
explained
banks
rights
violated
causes
action
arose
taxes
lower
rate
collected
competitors
may
assumed
ground
claim
refund
fallen
state
promptly
upon
discovery
discrimination
removed
collecting
additional
taxes
favored
competitors
collection
banks
grievances
redressed
primarily
overassessment
right
invoked
equal
treatment
treatment
attained
either
competitors
taxes
increased
reduced
cases
demonstrate
traditional
legal
analysis
appropriate
determining
florida
constitutional
duty
provide
relief
petitioner
mckesson
payment
unlawful
tax
exaction
tax
constitutes
deprivation
property
state
must
provide
procedural
safeguards
unlawful
exactions
order
satisfy
commands
due
process
clause
state
may
choose
provide
form
predeprivation
process
example
authorizing
taxpayers
bring
suit
enjoin
imposition
tax
prior
payment
allowing
taxpayers
withhold
payment
interpose
objections
defenses
tax
enforcement
proceeding
initiated
state
however
whereas
described
root
requirement
due
process
clause
individual
given
opportunity
hearing
deprived
significant
property
interest
cleveland
bd
education
loudermill
citation
omitted
well
established
state
need
provide
predeprivation
process
exaction
taxes
allowing
taxpayers
litigate
tax
liabilities
prior
payment
might
threaten
government
financial
security
creating
unpredictable
interim
revenue
shortfalls
state
easily
prepare
making
ultimate
collection
validly
imposed
taxes
difficult
protect
government
exceedingly
strong
interest
financial
stability
context
long
held
state
may
employ
various
financial
sanctions
summary
remedies
distress
sales
order
encourage
taxpayers
make
timely
payments
prior
resolution
dispute
validity
tax
assessment
florida
availed
approach
establishing
various
sanctions
summary
remedies
designed
liquor
distributors
tender
tax
payments
objections
entertained
resolved
result
florida
purport
provide
taxpayers
like
petitioner
meaningful
opportunity
withhold
payment
obtain
predeprivation
determination
tax
assessment
validity
rather
florida
requires
taxpayers
raise
objections
tax
postdeprivation
refund
action
satisfy
requirements
due
process
clause
therefore
refund
action
state
must
provide
taxpayers
fair
opportunity
challenge
accuracy
legal
validity
tax
obligation
also
clear
certain
remedy
erroneous
unlawful
tax
collection
ensure
opportunity
contest
tax
meaningful
one
florida
courts
declared
liquor
tax
invalid
either
discriminatory
nature
beyond
state
power
impose
unapportioned
tax
taxpayers
absolutely
immune
tax
indian
tribes
ward
carpenter
corrective
action
state
cure
invalidity
tax
contested
tax
period
state
choice
undo
unlawful
deprivation
refunding
tax
previously
paid
duress
allowing
state
collect
unlawful
taxes
coercive
means
incur
obligation
pay
back
contravention
fourteenth
amendment
ward
see
also
carpenter
however
florida
courts
invalidate
liquor
tax
entirety
rather
declared
tax
scheme
unconstitutional
insofar
operated
manner
discriminated
interstate
commerce
state
may
course
choose
erase
property
deprivation
providing
petitioner
full
refund
tax
payments
montana
national
bank
bennett
illustrate
state
found
imposed
impermissibly
discriminatory
tax
retains
flexibility
responding
determination
florida
may
reformulate
enforce
liquor
tax
contested
tax
period
way
treats
petitioner
competitors
manner
consistent
dictates
commerce
clause
done
state
may
retain
tax
appropriately
levied
upon
petitioner
pursuant
reformulated
scheme
retention
deprive
petitioner
property
pursuant
tax
scheme
valid
commerce
clause
end
state
postdeprivation
procedure
provide
petitioner
process
due
opportunity
contest
validity
tax
clear
certain
remedy
designed
render
opportunity
meaningful
preventing
permanent
unlawful
deprivation
property
specifically
state
may
cure
invalidity
liquor
tax
refunding
petitioner
difference
tax
paid
tax
assessed
extended
rate
reductions
competitors
actually
received
cf
montana
national
bank
bennett
curing
discrimination
refunds
alternatively
extent
consistent
constitutional
restrictions
state
may
assess
collect
back
taxes
petitioner
competitors
benefited
rate
reductions
contested
tax
period
calibrating
retroactive
assessment
create
hindsight
nondiscriminatory
scheme
cf
bennett
suggesting
state
erase
unconstitutional
discrimination
collecting
additional
taxes
favored
competitors
finally
combination
partial
refund
petitioner
partial
retroactive
assessment
tax
increases
favored
competitors
long
resultant
tax
actually
assessed
contested
tax
period
reflects
scheme
discriminate
interstate
commerce
render
petitioner
resultant
deprivation
lawful
therefore
satisfy
due
process
clause
requirement
fully
adequate
postdeprivation
procedure
respondents
suggest
order
redress
fully
petitioner
unconstitutional
deprivation
state
need
actually
impose
constitutional
tax
scheme
retroactively
distributors
contested
tax
period
rather
claim
state
need
place
petitioner
tax
position
petitioner
placed
hypothetical
scheme
specifically
respondents
contend
state
known
liquor
tax
declared
unconstitutional
imposed
higher
flat
tax
rate
distributors
petitioner
paid
tax
hypothetical
scheme
liquor
tax
respondents
claim
petitioner
entitled
retrospective
relief
least
form
refund
relief
confer
windfall
petitioner
leaving
smaller
tax
burden
borne
commerce
clause
violation
first
place
implicitly
rejected
line
reasoning
montana
national
bank
bennett
expressly
today
even
aside
contrived
nature
baseline
respondents
propose
measure
petitioner
deprivation
respondents
approach
inconsistent
nature
state
due
process
obligation
deprivation
worked
liquor
tax
violated
commerce
clause
tax
scheme
purpose
effect
impose
relative
disadvantage
category
distributors
dealing
nonpreferred
products
largely
composed
companies
treatment
category
distributors
diverged
fixed
substantive
norm
hence
salient
feature
position
petitioner
occupied
absent
commerce
clause
violation
equivalence
position
actually
occupied
petitioner
favored
competitors
state
offer
restore
petitioner
absolute
tax
position
enjoyed
taxed
according
hypothetical
nondiscriminatory
scheme
hindsight
avoid
unlawful
deprivation
still
fact
treats
petitioner
worse
distributors
using
favored
local
products
thereby
perpetuating
commerce
clause
violation
contested
tax
period
respondents
therefore
correct
petitioner
claim
refund
thus
asks
much
prompt
injunctive
relief
achieved
narrow
sense
petitioner
absolute
tax
burden
might
lower
refund
tax
preferences
immediately
enjoined
distributors
taxed
higher
rates
however
actual
refund
retroactive
adjustment
tax
burdens
borne
petitioner
favored
competitors
contested
tax
period
bring
nondiscrimination
prompt
injunctive
relief
achieved
state
choice
relief
petitioner
ends
paying
smaller
tax
paid
state
initially
imposed
highest
rate
everyone
petitioner
enjoy
unpalatable
windfall
rather
petitioner
merely
protected
comparative
economic
disadvantage
proscribed
commerce
clause
hence
state
duty
due
process
clause
provide
clear
certain
remedy
requires
ensure
tax
actually
imposed
petitioner
competitors
contested
tax
period
deprive
petitioner
tax
moneys
manner
discriminates
interstate
commerce
florida
cites
two
equitable
considerations
grounds
providing
petitioner
prospective
relief
neither
sufficient
override
constitutional
requirement
florida
provide
retrospective
relief
part
postdeprivation
procedure
florida
first
mentions
tax
preference
scheme
implemented
division
alcoholic
beverages
tobacco
good
faith
reliance
presumptively
valid
statute
observation
bespeaks
concern
state
obligation
provide
refunds
later
turns
unconstitutional
tax
undermine
state
ability
engage
sound
fiscal
planning
however
leaving
aside
fact
state
might
avoid
disruption
choosing
consistent
constitutional
limitations
collect
back
taxes
favored
distributors
rather
offer
refunds
find
concern
weighty
circumstances
state
freedom
impose
various
procedural
requirements
actions
postdeprivation
relief
sufficiently
meets
concern
respect
future
cases
state
might
example
provide
statute
refunds
available
taxpayers
paying
protest
providing
timely
notice
complaint
execute
refunds
reasonable
installment
basis
enforce
relatively
short
statutes
limitations
applicable
actions
refrain
collecting
taxes
pursuant
scheme
declared
invalid
competent
tribunal
pending
review
declaration
appeal
place
challenged
tax
payments
escrow
account
employ
accounting
devices
state
predict
greater
accuracy
availability
undisputed
treasury
funds
state
ability
future
invoke
procedural
protections
suffices
secure
state
interest
stable
fiscal
planning
weighed
constitutional
obligation
provide
relief
unlawful
tax
present
case
florida
failure
avail
certain
methods
weakens
equitable
justification
avoiding
constitutional
obligation
provide
relief
moreover
even
assume
state
reliance
presumptively
valid
statute
relevant
consideration
florida
obligation
provide
relief
unconstitutional
deprivation
property
disagree
florida
characterization
liquor
tax
statute
liquor
tax
reflected
cosmetic
changes
prior
version
tax
scheme
virtually
identical
hawaii
scheme
invalidated
bacchus
imports
dias
see
app
trial
held
revised
legislation
failed
surmount
constitutional
violations
addressed
bacchus
imports
state
hardly
claim
surprise
florida
courts
invalidation
scheme
florida
also
speculated
given
refund
petitioner
probability
receive
windfall
since
cost
tax
likely
passed
customers
premise
seems
state
faced
obligation
cure
discrimination
contested
tax
period
choosing
meet
obligation
refund
legitimately
choose
avoid
generating
windfall
petitioner
refunding
portion
tax
payment
passed
customers
even
suppliers
even
accept
premise
state
refuse
provide
refund
based
sheer
speculation
occurred
repeatedly
recognized
determining
whether
particular
business
cost
fact
passed
customers
suppliers
entails
highly
sophisticated
theoretical
factual
inquiry
certainly
withhold
part
refund
otherwise
required
rectify
unconstitutional
deprivation
without
first
satisfactorily
engaging
inquiry
event
however
reject
respondents
premise
equitable
considerations
justify
state
attempt
avoid
bestowing
windfall
redressing
tax
unconstitutional
discriminatory
jefferson
electric
mfg
enforced
statutorily
created
defense
refund
action
designed
redress
tax
overassessment
comparing
action
one
assumpsit
money
received
affirmed
federal
government
power
equitable
action
withhold
amount
taxpayer
already
passed
others
theory
taxpayer
unjustly
enriched
recovery
government
already
recovered
losses
observed
taxpayer
shifted
economic
burden
tax
purchasers
actual
sufferers
real
parties
interest
receive
windfall
injury
petitioner
challenge
tax
assessment
merely
exceeded
amount
authorized
statute
petitioner
complaint
florida
tax
scheme
unconstitutionally
discriminated
interstate
commerce
tax
injured
petitioner
left
petitioner
poorer
absolute
sense
problem
might
rectified
extent
petitioner
passed
economic
incidence
tax
others
also
placed
petitioner
relative
disadvantage
marketplace
competitors
distributing
preferred
local
products
see
supra
see
also
bacchus
imports
supra
ven
tax
completely
successfully
passed
increase
price
petitioner
products
compared
exempted
beverages
whatever
extent
petitioner
succeeded
passing
economic
incidence
tax
higher
prices
customers
likely
lost
sales
favored
distributors
else
incurred
costs
advertising
effort
maintain
market
share
state
persuasively
claim
equity
entitles
retain
tax
moneys
taken
unlawfully
petitioner
due
tax
furthers
competitive
disadvantage
constituting
commerce
clause
violation
rendered
deprivation
unlawful
first
place
thus
reject
respondents
reliance
defense
context
respondents
assert
requiring
state
rectify
unconstitutional
discrimination
contested
tax
period
plainly
cause
serious
economic
administrative
dislocation
state
brief
respondents
rearg
agree
within
due
process
jurisprudence
state
interests
traditionally
played
may
play
role
shaping
contours
relief
state
must
provide
illegally
erroneously
deprived
taxpayers
interests
play
role
shaping
procedural
safeguards
state
must
provide
order
ensure
accuracy
initial
determination
illegality
error
see
generally
mathews
eldridge
already
noted
legitimate
interest
sound
fiscal
planning
interest
sufficiently
weighty
allow
withhold
predeprivation
relief
allegedly
unlawful
tax
assessments
providing
postdeprivation
relief
see
supra
even
state
chooses
provide
partial
refunds
means
curing
unlawful
discrimination
opposed
increasing
tax
assessment
previously
favored
state
interest
financial
stability
justify
refusal
provide
relief
noted
earlier
see
supra
state
claim
florida
courts
invalidation
liquor
tax
surprise
even
trial
found
commerce
clause
violation
state
failed
take
reasonable
precautions
reduce
ultimate
exposure
unconstitutional
tax
future
may
avail
variety
procedural
protections
disruptive
effects
tax
scheme
invalidation
providing
statute
refunds
available
taxpayers
paying
protest
enforcing
relatively
short
statutes
limitation
applicable
refund
actions
see
supra
procedural
measures
sufficiently
protect
fiscal
security
weighed
obligation
provide
meaningful
relief
unconstitutional
taxation
respondents
also
observe
state
choice
relief
may
entail
various
administrative
costs
apart
cost
refund
cf
mathews
supra
government
interest
conserving
scarce
fiscal
administrative
resources
factor
must
weighed
determining
precise
contours
process
due
state
may
course
consider
costs
choosing
various
avenues
relief
open
florida
recognize
refund
proceeding
state
obligation
due
process
clause
rectify
invalidity
deprivation
petitioner
property
consider
administrative
costs
might
influence
selection
relief
afforded
petitioner
leave
state
remand
iv
state
penalizes
taxpayers
failure
remit
taxes
timely
fashion
thus
requiring
pay
first
obtaining
review
tax
validity
federal
due
process
principles
long
recognized
cases
require
state
postdeprivation
procedure
provide
clear
certain
remedy
deprivation
tax
moneys
unconstitutional
manner
case
florida
may
satisfy
obligation
form
relief
ranging
refund
excess
taxes
paid
petitioner
offsetting
charge
previously
favored
distributors
cure
unconstitutional
discrimination
interstate
commerce
contested
tax
period
state
free
choose
form
relief
provide
long
relief
satisfies
minimum
federal
requirements
outlined
judgment
florida
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
liquor
tax
tax
rate
several
categories
preferred
products
calculated
according
sliding
scale
rate
varies
directly
total
volume
products
sold
distributors
preceding
month
volume
preferred
products
sold
within
category
low
tax
rate
favorable
compared
generally
applicable
rate
nonpreferred
products
conversely
relatively
high
volume
sales
tax
rate
preferred
products
equals
nonpreferred
rate
liquor
tax
also
contains
retaliation
provisions
declare
rate
reductions
applicable
preferred
products
apply
imported
state
imposes
discriminatory
taxes
provides
agricultural
price
supports
export
subsidies
benefiting
locally
produced
alcoholic
beverages
stat
florida
law
divides
traffic
alcoholic
beverages
three
tiers
manufacture
importation
wholesale
distribution
retail
sales
manufacturers
may
sell
directly
retail
dealers
distributors
therefore
serve
necessary
intermediaries
state
places
legal
incidence
excise
taxes
distributors
must
remit
taxes
monthly
distributors
may
choose
sell
beverage
products
receiving
tax
preferences
nonpreferred
products
record
unclear
whether
prior
petitioner
refund
application
comptroller
september
petitioner
protested
tax
payments
otherwise
put
state
notice
position
liquor
tax
unconstitutional
appears
however
florida
law
require
taxpayer
pay
protest
order
preserve
right
challenge
remittance
postpayment
refund
action
long
action
initiated
within
applicable
limitations
period
see
generally
applicable
limitations
period
refund
actions
containing
protest
requirement
miami
florida
retail
federation
app
involuntary
payment
invalid
tax
promulgated
without
authorized
procedure
protest
presents
bar
recovery
taxpayer
paid
without
protest
assume
present
purposes
petitioner
satisfied
whatever
protest
requirements
might
exist
though
explain
infra
upon
remand
state
may
invoke
independent
basis
refusing
provide
refund
petitioner
failure
comply
notice
requirement
effect
time
petitioner
tax
payments
appeal
certified
directly
florida
district
appeal
state
immediate
filing
notice
appeal
automatically
stayed
trial
order
rule
app
proc
petitioner
requested
trial
vacate
stay
arguing
continued
enforcement
unconstitutional
tax
scheme
pending
state
review
continue
expose
florida
treasury
claims
tax
refunds
hearing
trial
denied
motion
pending
state
final
decision
therefore
respondents
continued
collect
taxes
liquor
tax
unconstitutional
preferences
still
effect
hence
case
petitioner
contests
validity
taxes
paid
july
state
final
decision
given
effect
february
contested
tax
period
cases
argued
october
term
reargued
october
term
supplemental
briefing
requested
judicial
power
shall
construed
extend
suit
law
equity
commenced
prosecuted
one
citizens
another
state
citizens
subjects
foreign
state
amdt
see
davis
michigan
dept
treasury
texas
monthly
bullock
tyler
pipe
industries
washington
state
dept
revenue
arkansas
writers
project
ragland
williams
vermont
bacchus
imports
dias
aloha
airlines
director
taxation
hawaii
exxon
eagerton
central
machinery
arizona
tax
white
mountain
apache
tribe
bracker
halliburton
oil
well
cementing
reily
laurens
federal
savings
loan
assn
south
carolina
tax
memphis
steam
laundry
cleaner
stone
best
maxwell
moines
national
bank
bennett
international
paper
massachusetts
state
tonnage
tax
cases
wall
cf
thomas
review
bd
indiana
employment
security
reversing
decision
claimant
suit
state
entity
seeking
payment
unemployment
benefits
bonelli
cattle
arizona
reversing
decision
claimant
suit
state
seeking
quiet
title
several
recent
cases
exercised
appellate
jurisdiction
review
issues
federal
law
arising
suits
brought
state
entities
state
even
noting
eleventh
amendment
precluded
federal
jurisdiction
original
matter
see
michigan
dept
state
police
present
action
brought
federal
district
dismissed
plaintiff
damages
claim
barred
eleventh
amendment
maine
thiboutot
eleventh
amendment
question
present
course
action
brought
state
cf
nevada
hall
exercising
appellate
jurisdiction
action
brought
state
state
noting
eleventh
amendment
places
explicit
limits
powers
federal
courts
entertain
suits
state
see
also
tafflin
levitt
tate
courts
inherent
authority
thus
presumptively
competent
adjudicate
claims
arising
laws
federalist
cooke
ed
hamilton
every
case
state
courts
expressly
excluded
future
acts
national
legislature
course
take
cognizance
causes
acts
may
give
birth
inference
seems
conclusive
state
courts
concurrent
jurisdiction
cases
arising
laws
union
expressly
prohibited
constitution
laws
shall
made
pursuance
thereof
treaties
made
shall
made
authority
shall
law
land
judges
every
state
shall
bound
thereby
thing
constitution
laws
state
contrary
notwithstanding
art
vi
upon
state
courts
equally
courts
union
rests
obligation
guard
enforce
protect
every
right
granted
secured
constitution
laws
made
pursuance
thereof
whenever
rights
involved
suit
proceeding
fail
therein
withhold
deny
rights
privileges
immunities
secured
constitution
laws
party
aggrieved
may
bring
case
highest
state
question
decided
final
conclusive
determination
robb
connolly
see
also
trust
savings
hill
plaintiff
claim
one
arising
federal
constitution
consequently
one
opinion
state
final
martin
hunter
lessee
wheat
plenary
appellate
jurisdiction
motivated
part
importance
even
necessity
uniformity
decisions
throughout
whole
upon
subjects
within
purview
constitution
atascadero
state
hospital
scanlon
responded
dissent
concern
state
courts
might
inadequately
protect
federal
rights
despite
supremacy
clause
adverting
dissent
description
longstanding
though
unarticulated
rule
eleventh
amendment
limit
exercise
otherwise
proper
federal
appellate
jurisdiction
suits
state
courts
course
though
eleventh
amendment
constrain
appellate
jurisdiction
suits
appellate
jurisdiction
may
constrained
reasons
apposite
example
judgment
unreviewable
rest
independent
adequate
ground
see
michigan
long
charles
river
bridge
warren
bridge
pet
story
dissenting
citing
cohens
virginia
wheat
example
smith
reeves
dismissed
suit
brought
federal
aggrieved
taxpayer
seeking
refund
state
illegal
assessment
explained
however
state
decision
consent
suit
state
federal
subject
always
condition
arising
supremacy
constitution
laws
made
pursuance
thereof
final
judgment
highest
state
action
brought
consent
may
reviewed
reexamined
prescribed
act
congress
denies
plaintiff
right
title
privilege
immunity
secured
specially
claimed
constitution
laws
similarly
chandler
dix
dismissed
quiet
title
suit
brought
federal
citizen
respect
lands
taken
state
sold
recoup
compensation
certain
tax
deficiencies
found
state
necessary
party
defendant
eleventh
amendment
barred
initiation
suit
federal
simultaneously
declared
however
course
taxpayer
denied
rights
secured
constitution
laws
specially
set
bring
case
writ
error
highest
courts
state
see
also
rosewell
lasalle
national
bank
state
tax
refund
scheme
taxpayer
may
raise
constitutional
objections
including
based
state
failure
pay
interest
return
unconstitutionally
collected
taxes
state
legal
refund
proceeding
litigants
opportunity
seek
review
shall
state
deprive
person
life
liberty
property
without
due
process
law
amdt
respondents
question
florida
holding
liquor
tax
violated
commerce
clause
clear
approaches
advanced
today
american
trucking
smith
post
florida
holding
governs
validity
respondents
taxation
petitioner
prior
date
decision
justice
approach
see
post
florida
decision
applies
retroactively
rested
established
principles
commerce
clause
jurisprudence
see
infra
justice
stevens
approach
post
florida
decision
like
judicial
decisions
applies
retroactively
see
also
justice
scalia
separate
opinion
post
circumstances
present
case
warranting
view
departure
stare
decisis
present
recent
past
invalidating
state
tax
scheme
commerce
clause
grounds
left
state
courts
initial
duty
upon
remand
crafting
appropriate
relief
accord
federal
state
law
see
american
trucking
scheiner
tyler
pipe
industries
washington
state
dept
revenue
williams
vermont
bacchus
imports
see
mathews
eldridge
consistently
held
form
hearing
required
individual
finally
deprived
property
interest
central
georgia
wright
davidson
new
orleans
see
bob
jones
university
simon
phillips
commissioner
dodge
osborn
see
california
grace
brethren
church
prepayment
litigation
collection
revenue
challenged
law
might
obstructed
consequent
damage
state
budget
perhaps
shift
state
risk
taxpayer
insolvency
quoting
perez
ledesma
brennan
concurring
part
dissenting
part
dows
city
chicago
wall
upon
taxation
several
chiefly
rely
obtain
means
carry
respective
governments
utmost
importance
modes
adopted
enforce
taxes
levied
interfered
little
possible
delay
proceedings
officers
upon
duty
devolved
collecting
taxes
may
derange
operations
government
thereby
cause
serious
detriment
public
distributor
fails
pay
tax
time
division
alcoholic
beverages
tobacco
may
issue
warrant
filed
local
circuit
directs
county
sheriff
levy
upon
sell
delinquent
taxpayer
goods
chattels
recover
amount
unpaid
tax
plus
penalty
along
interest
per
month
costs
executing
warrant
stat
addition
division
may
revoke
decline
renew
distributor
license
failure
abide
florida
law
including
statutory
requirement
liquor
tax
timely
paid
long
held
tax
paid
order
avoid
financial
sanctions
seizure
real
personal
property
tax
paid
duress
sense
state
provided
fair
meaningful
predeprivation
procedure
see
mississippi
tax
economic
sanctions
nonpayment
ward
love
county
board
distress
sale
land
gaar
scott
shannon
justice
holmes
suggested
atchison
taxpayer
pays
duress
proffers
timely
payment
merely
avoid
serious
disadvantage
assertion
legal
rights
withhold
payment
await
state
enforcement
proceeding
challenge
tax
scheme
validity
defence
suit
contrast
state
chooses
secure
payments
duress
instead
offers
meaningful
opportunity
taxpayers
withhold
contested
tax
assessments
challenge
validity
predeprivation
hearing
payments
tendered
may
deemed
voluntary
availability
predeprivation
hearing
constitutes
procedural
safeguard
unlawful
deprivations
sufficient
satisfy
due
process
clause
taxpayers
complain
fail
avail
procedure
see
mississippi
tax
supra
voluntary
payment
tax
knowingly
made
pursuant
illegal
demand
recovery
payment
may
denied
see
supra
see
also
mathews
fundamental
requirement
due
process
opportunity
heard
meaningful
time
meaningful
manner
citation
omitted
adequacy
aspect
florida
postdeprivation
procedure
dispute
previously
held
retroactive
assessment
tax
increase
necessarily
deny
due
process
whose
taxes
increased
though
beyond
temporal
point
retroactive
imposition
significant
tax
burden
may
harsh
oppressive
transgress
constitutional
limitation
depending
nature
tax
circumstances
laid
welch
henry
see
hemme
darusmont
cf
sperry
surely
proper
congress
legislate
retrospectively
ensure
costs
program
borne
entire
class
persons
congress
rationally
believes
bear
usery
turner
elkhorn
mining
egislation
readjusting
rights
burdens
unlawful
solely
upsets
otherwise
settled
expectations
true
even
though
effect
legislation
impose
new
duty
liability
based
past
acts
citations
omitted
know
whether
state
choose
case
assess
collect
back
taxes
previously
favored
distributors
need
decide
whether
choice
violate
due
process
unduly
interfering
settled
expectations
state
choose
remedial
alternative
state
effort
collect
back
taxes
previously
favored
distributors
may
perfectly
successful
distributors
example
may
longer
business
effort
administer
enforce
retroactive
assessment
likely
constitute
adequate
relief
extent
tax
scheme
violate
commerce
clause
merely
tax
collectors
inadvertently
missed
taxpayers
whether
state
taxed
distributors
highest
rate
authorized
liquor
tax
depends
upon
counterfactual
assumptions
regarding
many
complex
variables
affect
legislative
judgment
therefore
respondents
prediction
easily
proved
quite
possible
example
legislature
unable
enact
discriminatory
liquor
tax
legislature
instead
extended
universally
lower
tax
rate
preferred
keep
minimum
absolute
economic
burden
florida
growers
preferred
products
well
mostly
distributors
products
even
though
particular
aspect
tax
scheme
generate
less
total
revenue
florida
noted
undisputed
manufacturers
distributors
beverages
qualify
preferential
treatment
liquor
tax
direct
competition
manufacturers
distributors
alcoholic
beverages
facts
mind
becomes
quite
apparent
florida
alcoholic
beverage
tax
scheme
clearly
raises
relative
cost
business
manufacturer
distributor
alcoholic
beverages
made
base
crops
adapted
growing
florida
brief
respondents
rearg
respondents
also
assert
refund
appropriate
petitioner
likely
pay
amount
tax
even
preferred
sliding
scale
tax
schedules
retroactively
extended
petitioner
explained
earlier
see
supra
tax
rate
preferred
products
liquor
tax
varies
total
volume
products
sold
respondents
suggest
sliding
scale
schedule
applied
petitioner
gallons
alcoholic
beverages
sold
petitioner
distributors
previously
paid
tax
included
calculation
appropriate
tax
rate
brief
respondents
cf
los
angeles
dept
water
power
manhart
suggesting
within
district
equitable
discretion
devising
remedy
title
vii
violation
arising
determination
insurance
premiums
determine
appropriate
relief
based
recalculation
premium
required
actuarially
sound
nondiscriminatory
insurance
plan
total
volume
sales
included
rate
calculation
virtually
certain
maximum
rates
scales
routinely
apply
appears
highly
likely
therefore
petitioner
owe
amount
tax
brief
respondents
agree
respondents
state
might
remedy
invalidity
petitioner
deprivation
extending
petitioner
sliding
scale
schedule
nondiscriminatory
fashion
respondents
proposal
appear
accomplish
result
proposed
state
calculate
tax
rate
applicable
petitioner
based
total
volume
sales
preferred
nonpreferred
goods
leave
untouched
taxes
actually
collected
favored
distributors
based
volume
sales
preferred
goods
resulting
tax
scheme
raise
questions
commerce
clause
due
state
use
different
volume
variable
preferred
nonpreferred
goods
manner
clearly
disadvantages
latter
order
cure
illegality
tax
originally
imposed
state
must
ultimately
collect
tax
contested
tax
period
respect
impermissibly
discriminates
interstate
commerce
see
ward
love
county
board
recognizing
refund
claim
barred
valid
local
limitations
law
force
claim
filed
see
also
stat
generally
applicable
limitations
period
tax
refund
actions
example
even
florida
trial
held
liquor
tax
violated
commerce
clause
enjoined
tax
preferences
local
products
state
join
petitioner
motion
vacate
stay
automatically
imposed
pending
appeal
thus
continuing
unconstitutional
tax
assessment
extra
months
see
supra
state
also
opposed
suggestion
place
separate
escrow
account
discriminatory
portion
taxes
collected
period
time
ground
statutory
mechanism
place
allowing
refunds
app
state
trial
ruling
favorably
upon
petitioner
motions
preliminary
injunction
partial
summary
judgment
based
holding
liquor
tax
violated
commerce
clause
ruled
sua
sponte
judgment
prospective
effect
ruling
upheld
direct
appeal
time
party
opportunity
present
evidence
concerning
extent
petitioner
ability
pass
economic
burden
excise
tax
consumers
suppliers
florida
statement
tax
likely
passed
petitioner
therefore
purely
speculative
expressed
particular
concern
theoretical
factual
practical
difficulties
engaging
satisfactory
analysis
context
antitrust
doctrine
see
illinois
brick
illinois
hanover
shoe
shoe
machinery
see
generally
atkinson
stiglitz
lectures
public
economics
musgrave
musgrave
public
finance
theory
practice
ed
mclure
incidence
analysis
examination
four
cases
term
sup
econ
rev
phares
pays
state
local
taxes
reason
observed
determining
whether
particular
business
cost
passed
often
require
additional
long
complicated
proceedings
involving
massive
evidence
complicated
theories
hanover
shoe
supra
petitioner
relative
market
share
might
stayed
constant
favored
distributors
reacted
raising
prices
extent
petitioner
trying
pass
excess
tax
burden
however
petitioner
still
suffered
comparative
economic
injury
tax
enabled
favored
distributors
alone
derive
increase
total
revenue
discriminatory
tax
petitioner
market
share
total
revenue
also
might
stayed
constant
least
short
run
sales
liquor
retailers
pursuant
contracts
see
hanover
shoe
supra
respondents
claim
petitioner
position
conceivable
particular
distributor
economic
injury
may
quite
severe
example
tax
drives
market
entirely
though
rational
disfavored
distributor
allow
incur
greater
economic
injury
incurred
simply
shouldered
entire
burden
tax
deprivation
however
state
obligation
due
process
clause
provide
refund
choose
avenue
relief
extends
refunding
excess
taxes
collected
liquor
tax
petitioner
sought
action
recover
actual
damages
may
suffered
see
brief
petitioner
rearg
respondents
suggest
defense
may
nevertheless
invoked
matter
state
law
concede
state
waived
sovereign
immunity
suit
stat
authorization
refund
action
contend
waiver
extends
refunds
sought
taxpayer
borne
actual
economic
burden
tax
citing
state
ex
rel
szabo
food
service
dickinson
need
consider
import
contention
however
respondents
misdescribe
state
law
case
florida
characterized
concern
petitioner
receiving
windfall
due
alleged
tax
burden
equitable
consideration
prohibition
relief
moreover
prohibition
recognized
szabo
food
service
supra
florida
refused
entertain
refund
action
brought
distributor
food
products
challenge
sales
tax
alleged
imposed
erroneously
matter
state
law
noted
legal
incidence
sales
tax
placed
distributor
rather
customers
state
law
required
economic
burden
tax
borne
customers
well
held
unique
circumstances
distributor
lacked
standing
seek
refund
explaining
ne
bear
financial
burden
wrongfully
extracted
tax
suffers
loss
injury
accordingly
standing
demand
refund
ibid
szabo
mention
let
alone
rely
immunity
bar
refund
action
reject
respondents
intimation
cost
refund
considered
state
might
justify
decision
withhold
state
may
object
otherwise
available
remedy
providing
return
real
property
unlawfully
taken
criminal
fines
unlawfully
imposed
simply
finds
property
moneys
useful
also
florida
object
refund
ideas
spend
funds
state
free
course
provide
broader
relief
matter
state
law
required
federal
constitution
see
bacchus
imports