Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. Chicago 166 U.S. 226 (1897)
CHICAGO, BURLINGTON & QUINCY RAILROAD CO. v. CHICAGO 166 U.S. 226 (1897)
A 7–1 Supreme Court here sustained a $1 award as just compensation for a taking of property, holding that the seventh amendment precluded it from reexamining facts, decided by a jury, which dictated that amount. Although due process required compensation, a nominal sum did not deprive the railroad of either due process or equal protection. The Court required a "fair and full equivalent for the thing taken by the public" and stressed the necessity for understanding the spirit of due process. "In determining what is dueprocessoflaw, regard must be had to substance, not to form."
David Gordon
(1986)
More From encyclopedia.com
Barron V. Baltimore , Barron v. Baltimore
In Barron v. City of Baltimore, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 243, 8 L.Ed. 672 (U.S. 1833), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the fifth amendm… Lochner V. New York , In Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45, 25 S. Ct. 539, 49 L. Ed. 937 (1905), the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a state law restricting the hours employ… Incorporation , According to the incorporation doctrine the fourteenth amendment incorporates or absorbs the bill of rights, making its guarantees applicable to the… Hurtado V. California , Hurtado v. California
An 1884 decision of the Supreme Court, Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516, 4 S. Ct. 111, 28 L. Ed. 232, held that states are n… Due , due / d(y)oō/ • adj. 1. expected at or planned for at a certain time: the baby's due in August | he is due back soon | talks are due to adjourn tomor… John Paul Stevens , Stevens, John Paul
STEVENS, JOHN PAUL
A member of the U.S. Supreme Court since 1975, John Paul Stevens has developed a reputation as a judicial centr…
About this article
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. Chicago 166 U.S. 226 (1897)
You Might Also Like
NEARBY TERMS
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. Chicago 166 U.S. 226 (1897)