Bi-Metallic Investment Co. v. State Board of Equalization

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Bi-Metallic Investment Co. v. State Board of Equalization" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (December 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Bi-Metallic Investment Co. v. State Board of Equalization
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued December 7–8, 1915 Decided December 20, 1915
Full case name	Bi-Metallic Investment Co. v. State Board of Equalization
Citations	239 U.S. 441 (more) 36 S. Ct. 141; 60 L. Ed. 372
Holding
Due process protections attach only to administrative activities in which a small number of people are concerned, who are exceptionally affected by the act, in each case upon individual grounds.
Court membership
Chief Justice Edward D. White Associate Justices Joseph McKenna · Oliver W. Holmes Jr. William R. Day · Charles E. Hughes Willis Van Devanter · Joseph R. Lamar Mahlon Pitney · James C. McReynolds
Case opinion
Majority	Holmes

Bi-Metallic Investment Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 239 U.S. 441 (1915), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that due process protections attach only to administrative activities in which a small number of people are concerned, who are exceptionally affected by the act, in each case upon individual grounds. By contrast, rule-making or quasi-legislative activities that affect a large number of people without regard to the facts of individual cases do not implicate due process protections. It is an important case in United States administrative law.