United States Supreme Court. STANDARD OIL CO. v. UNITED STATES(1950) No. 27 Argued: October 13, 1950 Decided: November 27, 1950. 1. A government war risk insurance policy insuring a ship against "all consequences of hostilities or warlike operations" does not, as a matter of law, cover a loss resulting from a collision occurring during wartime between the insured vessel and a Navy mine sweeper Standard Oil moved for dismissal by arguing that the word “refuse” meant “rejected matter,” which the accidentally discharged gasoline was not. The district court agreed and granted dismissal. The United States appealed directly to the Supreme Court.

United States Supreme Court. STANDARD OIL CO. v. UNITED STATES(1950) No. 27 Argued: October 13, 1950 Decided: November 27, 1950. 1. A government war risk insurance policy insuring a ship against "all consequences of hostilities or warlike operations" does not, as a matter of law, cover a loss resulting from a collision occurring during wartime between the insured vessel and a Navy mine sweeper Standard Oil moved for dismissal by arguing that the word “refuse” meant “rejected matter,” which the accidentally discharged gasoline was not. The district court agreed and granted dismissal. The United States appealed directly to the Supreme Court. United States of America, Appellant, v. Standard Oil Company of California, the Texas Company, Bahrein Petroleum Company, Ltd., California-texas Oil Company, Ltd., Caltex Oceanic, Ltd., and Mid-east Crude Sales Company, Appellees, 270 F.2d 50 (2d Cir. 1959) case opinion from the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit A condition of the sale of the ORRI from the Trust required Texas Standard Oil Company to offer to exchange 30% of its capital stock for all of the units of the Trust. Texas Standard Oil Company registered itself as a publicly traded company in all fifty states in order to make the exchange offer. United States Supreme Court. UNITED STATES v. STANDARD OIL CO.(1966) No. 291 Argued: January 25, 1966 Decided: May 23, 1966. Appellant was indicted for discharging gasoline into navigable waters in violation of the proscription in 13 of the Rivers and Harbors Act against discharge therein of "any refuse matter of any kind or description." Standard Oil Company. Sustainability at Standard Oil. Energy is vital to daily life it keeps our world moving and provides access to essentials like clean water, food and health care. Over the coming decades, populations and living standards for many will rise and so will the need for energy.

21 Apr 2016 In Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. United States, 221 U.S. 1 (1911), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Standard Oil Company was 

A condition of the sale of the ORRI from the Trust required Texas Standard Oil Company to offer to exchange 30% of its capital stock for all of the units of the Trust. Texas Standard Oil Company registered itself as a publicly traded company in all fifty states in order to make the exchange offer. United States Supreme Court. UNITED STATES v. STANDARD OIL CO.(1966) No. 291 Argued: January 25, 1966 Decided: May 23, 1966. Appellant was indicted for discharging gasoline into navigable waters in violation of the proscription in 13 of the Rivers and Harbors Act against discharge therein of "any refuse matter of any kind or description." Standard Oil Company. Sustainability at Standard Oil. Energy is vital to daily life it keeps our world moving and provides access to essentials like clean water, food and health care. Over the coming decades, populations and living standards for many will rise and so will the need for energy. United States v. Standard Oil Co., 384 U.S. 224 (1966) United States v. Standard Oil Co. No. 291. Argued January 25, 1966. Decided May 23, 1966. 384 U.S. 224. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Syllabus UNITED STATES v. STANDARD OIL CO. OF NEW JERSEY. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, hereafter called the Standard Company, which had a capital stock of Texas, Colorado, and California in shipping and transporting the oil through pipe lines owned or controlled by these companies from the various oil-producing districts into and through

Standard Oil Company. Sustainability at Standard Oil. Energy is vital to daily life it keeps our world moving and provides access to essentials like clean water, food and health care. Over the coming decades, populations and living standards for many will rise and so will the need for energy.

9 Jul 2019 Texas v. U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Oral Argument United States et al., a case concerning the constitutionality… read more THAT IS A HIGH STANDARD. SKELLY OIL --THAT IS A CASE ABOUT THE FEDERAL QUESTION OF JURISDICTION. 2020 National Cable Satellite Corporation. 14 Oct 1979 1, 1920, the U.S. Geological Survey—drawing its information, as always, since Texas was the dominant oil state, the price paid for oil in Texas would Corporation) to buy out the American oil partners — Standard Oil of  7 Jun 2018 TEXAS, et al.,. Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 4:18-cv-00167-O. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Williams v. Standard Oil Co. of Louisiana,. 23 Dec 1999 The break-up of Standard Oil into 34 companies, among them those that became Exxon, toothless against America's “robber barons” (Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, By 1900, it controlled over 90% of the refined oil in the United States. It was already being challenged by oil from Texas and Persia. STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF TEXAS and Pasotex Pipe Line Company, Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 18888. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit. Aug. 15, 1962. Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 337 U.S. 293 (1949), more commonly referred to as the Standard Stations case (because that was the brand name of the company whose exclusive dealing contracts were held unlawful in the case. and also because there is a 1911 case with the same caption Standard Oil Co. v. United States), is a 1947 decision of the United States Supreme Court in which requirements contracts for gasoline stations (Standard Stations) were held to violate section 3 of the Clayton Act. Standard Oil Company of Texas, and Pasotex Pipe Line Company. We do not reach the contention that transportation by Pasotex was not in interstate commerce. Standard's activities were even more comprehensive.

United States of America, Appellant, v. Standard Oil Company of California, the Texas Company, Bahrein Petroleum Company, Ltd., California-texas Oil Company, Ltd., Caltex Oceanic, Ltd., and Mid-east Crude Sales Company, Appellees, 270 F.2d 50 (2d Cir. 1959) case opinion from the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

UNITED STATES v. STANDARD OIL CO. OF NEW JERSEY. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, hereafter called the Standard Company, which had a capital stock of Texas, Colorado, and California in shipping and transporting the oil through pipe lines owned or controlled by these companies from the various oil-producing districts into and through

STANDARD OIL COMPANY. The origins of the Standard Oil Company date from 1863 when John D. Rockefeller (1839 – 1937), son of a modest businessman, and two others purchased a refinery in Cleveland, Ohio.Rockefeller foresaw the potential of refining Pennsylvania crude oil, which would revolutionize the way people lighted their homes, fueled their vehicles, and powered their industries.

7 Jun 2018 TEXAS, et al.,. Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 4:18-cv-00167-O. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Williams v. Standard Oil Co. of Louisiana,. 23 Dec 1999 The break-up of Standard Oil into 34 companies, among them those that became Exxon, toothless against America's “robber barons” (Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, By 1900, it controlled over 90% of the refined oil in the United States. It was already being challenged by oil from Texas and Persia. STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF TEXAS and Pasotex Pipe Line Company, Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 18888. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit. Aug. 15, 1962.

Standard Oil moved for dismissal by arguing that the word “refuse” meant “rejected matter,” which the accidentally discharged gasoline was not. The district court agreed and granted dismissal. The United States appealed directly to the Supreme Court. U.S. Supreme Court Standard Oil Company v. United States, 283 U.S. 163 (1931) Standard Oil Company (Indiana) v. Although the parties are the United States and the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, this is nothing more than an ordinary insurance case. It is before us because of a conflict with the views of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in General Insurance Co. of America v. Standard Oil, in full Standard Oil Company and Trust, American company and corporate trust that from 1870 to 1911 was the industrial empire of John D. Rockefeller and associates, controlling almost all oil production, processing, marketing, and transportation in the United States.