CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


THOMAS CUSACK CO. V. CITY OF CHICAGO, 242 U. S. 526 (1917)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 242 U. S. 526 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Thomas Cusack Co. v. City of Chicago, 242 U.S. 526 (1917)

Thomas Cusack Co. v. City of Chicago

No. 126

Argued December 20, 21, 1916

Decided January 15, 1917

242 U.S. 526

Syllabus

The Fifth Amendment relates to national action only.

A city ordinance which has been upheld by the highest court of the state as valid under the state legislation is to be regarded by this Court as a law of the state, and is to be tested accordingly.

Such an ordinance, when dealing with a subject within the police power, must be upheld unless shown to be clearly unreasonable, arbitrary or discriminatory.

A city, exercising the police power, may prohibit the erection of billboards in residence districts in the interest of the safety, morality, health, and decency of the community. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 242 U. S. 527

Such a prohibition is not to be deemed unduly discriminatory because not including fences and other structures found less likely to become a source of public injury.

An ordinance prohibiting billboards is not invalidated by a provision which removes the prohibition as to any billboard the erection of which is first consented to by the owners of a majority of the frontage on both sides of the street in the block in which it is to be erected. Eubank v. Richmond, 226 U. S. 137, distinguished.

He who is not injured by the operation of a law or ordinance cannot be said to be deprived by it of either constitutional right or of property.

267 Ill. 344 affirmed.

The case is stated in the opinion.





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED