Webster v. Fargo

Supreme Court

Webster v. Fargo

181 U.S. 394, 21 S. Ct. 623, 45 L. Ed. 912, 1901 U.S. LEXIS 1371

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedApril 29, 1901

Docket378

StatusPublished

Cited by68 cases

This text of 181 U.S. 394 (Webster v. Fargo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Webster v. Fargo, 181 U.S. 394, 21 S. Ct. 623, 45 L. Ed. 912, 1901 U.S. LEXIS 1371 (1901).

Pincite

Opinions

Me. Justice Shieas

delivered the opinion of the court.

It is conceded, in this record, that thé plaintiff in error has no ground to complain of any discrimination attempted against him, either in the statutes of the State or in the proceedings thereunder, whereby the tax in question was assessed against his property. The sole contention on his behalf is that, under the decision of this court in the case of Norwood v. Baker, 172 U. S. 269, all special assessments upon the basis of frontage are in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, in that they may reihlt in the taking of property without due process of law.

But we agree with the. Supreme Court of North Dakota in holding that it is within the power of the legislature of the State to create special taxing districts, and to charge the cost of a local improvement, in whole or in part, upon the property in. said districts, either according to valuation, or superficial area, or frontage, and that it was not the intention of this court, in Norwood v. Baker, to hold otherwise.

It is unnecessary to enter upon an examination of the author- - ities, as that has recently been done in the case of French v. Barber Asphalt Company, ante, 324; and, upon the authority of that case, the judgment of the Supreme Court of North Dakota is

Affirmed.,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Me. Justice Shieas

delivered the opinion of the court.

It is conceded, in this record, that thé plaintiff in error has no ground to complain of any discrimination attempted against him, either in the statutes of the State or in the proceedings thereunder, whereby the tax in question was assessed against his property. The sole contention on his behalf is that, under the decision of this court in the case of Norwood v. Baker, 172 U. S. 269, all special assessments upon the basis of frontage are in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, in that they may reihlt in the taking of property without due process of law.

But we agree with the. Supreme Court of North Dakota in holding that it is within the power of the legislature of the State to create special taxing districts, and to charge the cost of a local improvement, in whole or in part, upon the property in. said districts, either according to valuation, or superficial area, or frontage, and that it was not the intention of this court, in Norwood v. Baker, to hold otherwise.

It is unnecessary to enter upon an examination of the author- - ities, as that has recently been done in the case of French v. Barber Asphalt Company, ante, 324; and, upon the authority of that case, the judgment of the Supreme Court of North Dakota is

Affirmed.,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 U.S. 394, 21 S. Ct. 623, 45 L. Ed. 912, 1901 U.S. LEXIS 1371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/webster-v-fargo-scotus-1901.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack