Search results
View Case. Petitioner. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company. Respondent. Chicago. Docket no. 129. Decided by. Fuller Court. Citation. 166 US 226 (1897) Decided. Mar 1, 1897. Facts of the case. The City of Chicago wanted to connect two disjoint sections of Rockwell Street between 18th and 19th Streets, over private property.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago, 166 U.S. 226 (1897), was a ruling that determined the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment required states to provide just compensation for seizing private property.
In a proceeding in a state court in Illinois to ascertain the compensation due to a railroad company arising from the opening of a street across its tracks -- the land as such not being taken, and the railroad not being prevented from using it for its ordinary railroad purposes, and being interfered with only so far as the right to its ...
The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Illinois Supreme Court's decision and ruled the one-dollar sum did not amount to just compensation under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. [1] HIGHLIGHTS. The case: The city of Chicago condemned land owned by the Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railroad Company to expand a street.
The jury fixed the railroad company’s compensation at one dollar. This caused the railroad company to move for a new trial, alleging an infringement of its due-process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The trial court overruled the motion and entered judgement for the City of Chicago.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Chicago Case Brief Summary: The case involves a railroad company and other parties who are disputing the compensation they received for the condemnation of their property for a public use.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago, 166 U.S. 226 (1897), incorporated the takings clause of the 5th amendment into the due process clause of the 14th amendment by requiring states to provide just compensation for seizing private property.
