October Term 2002 · Docket 01-1325

Does a state tax on interest from client trust accounts violate the Fifth Amendment?

the sides that brought the case claim a state tax on interest from client trust accounts is an unconstitutional taking. the opposing sides argue the tax is a valid exercise of state power.

Official caption
Washington Legal Foundation v. Legal Foundation of Wash.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Fried argued the interest in IOLTA accounts is private property.

    Mr. Fried argued the state took the property without just compensation.

    Mr. Burman argued the plaintiffs' case has a fundamental flaw.

    Mr. Dellinger argued a taking requires property, a taking, and denial of compensation.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests whether a state tax on interest from client trust accounts is a constitutional taking. the sides that brought the case argue the tax takes private property without just compensation. the opposing sides argue the tax is a valid exercise of state power.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 9, 2002.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want the Court to strike down the state tax on interest from client trust accounts.

the opposing sides want the Court to uphold the state tax on interest from client trust accounts.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue the tax takes private property without just compensation.

the opposing sides argue the tax is a valid exercise of state power.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice O'Connor asked about the flaw in the plaintiffs' case.

Justice Stevens asked the advocates to proceed with their arguments.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

The outcome determines whether states can tax interest from client trust accounts. This affects how states manage public funds and how clients receive compensation.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON