Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. City of Omaha
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. The facts, which involve the constitutionality under the due process provision of the Fourteenth Amendment of an ordinance of the City of Omaha requiring the construction of a viaduct by a railroad company, are stated in the opinion. The city had no power to compel the construction of the viaduct for the benefit of the street railway company.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. The facts, which involve the constitutionality under the due process provision of the Fourteenth Amendment of an ordinance of the City of Omaha requiring the construction of a viaduct by a railroad company, are stated in the opinion. The city had no power to compel the construction of the viaduct for the benefit of the street railway company. The city had no power to require the building of the viaduct across the proposed boulevard. The city had no power to compel the building of the viaduct without closing the grade crossing.…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Day
This suit was originally instituted in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska. Its object was to enjoin the City of Omaha from requiring the Missouri Pacific Railway Company,' by virtue of a certain ordinance of the City, to construct a viaduct over and across its line of railway and along Dodge Street, in said City. The Circuit Court dismissed the bill and the decree was affirmed in the Circuit Court of Appeals, 197 Fed. Rep. 516. The ordinance, passed March 29, 1910, ordered the appellant to erect, construct and complete the viaduct and approaches on Dodge…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Illinois ex rel. Drainage CommissionersSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Dobbins v. Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. City of GoldsboroSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- McLean v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway v. WaltersSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Erie Railroad v. Board of Public Utility CommissionersSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- General Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Department of Public WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Lehigh Valley Railroad v. Board of Public Utility CommissionersSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Opinion of the Justices to the House of RepresentativesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.