Chicago, Burlington And Quincy Railroad Company v. Chicago

166 U.S. 226 (1897)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The constitution of Illinois provides that 'no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.' Art. 2, § 2. It also provides: 'Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation. Such compensation, when not made by the State, shall be ascertained by a jury, as shall be prescribed by law. The fee of land taken for railroad tracks, without consent of the owners thereof, shall remain in such owners, subject to the use for which it is taken.' Art. 2, § 13. City Councils also had the power, by condemnation or otherwise, to extend any street, alley or highway over or across, or to construct any sewer under or through any railroad track, right of way or land of any railroad company (within the corporate limits); but where no compensation is made to such railroad company, the city shall restore such railroad track, right of way or land to its former state, or in a sufficient manner not to have impaired its usefulness.' When private property was taken or damaged for public use, the city or village should file in its name a petition in some court of record of the county praying 'that the just compensation to be made for private property to be taken or damaged' for the improvement or purpose specified in the ordinance be ascertained by a jury. The city council of Chicago (P) ordained that Rockwell Street be opened and widened. To do this it condemned property owned by D. P filed a petition as per the statute for damages to be ascertained by a jury. The jury fixed just compensation at $1. D moved for a new trial. The motion was overruled, and a final judgment was rendered. The judgment was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the State. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. D claims it was deprived of its property without due process of law contrary to the prohibitions of the Fourteenth Amendment. P contends that the question as to the amount of compensation to be awarded to the railroad company was one of local law merely, and as that question was determined in the mode prescribed by the constitution and laws of Illinois, the company appearing and having full opportunity to be heard, the requirement of due process of law was observed.