Skip to main content
· 1/25/1916

City of Cincinnati v. Cincinnati & Hamilton Traction Co.

Citations

  • 245 U.S. 446
  • 38 S. Ct. 153
  • 62 L. Ed. 389
  • 1918 U.S. LEXIS 2148

Syllabus

<p>Corporations of Ohio claimed the right to operate a street railway in Cincinnati according to the terms of various grants, etc., under which it had been built in sections or links. A revocable ordinance .of the city council, after reciting that as to portions of the streets so occupied, “alleged grants” had expired, and on others there never had been any grants and the companies had no longer any right to occupy the same, provided that the companies might continue to operate, but only from day to day, and subject to new and material conditions, as to fares., transfers, etc.; that should it be adjudged that they were without continuing right in respect to portions only of the streets occupied, the ordinance should be construed to forbid further operation on such portions except on compliance with all of its terms and conditions; that continued operation “on said streets” should be deemed an acceptance by the companies of the ordinance and all its terms; that in case they refused or failed to comply with it on its effective date, the city solicitor should “take such legal proceedings as may be proper and necessary” to enforce its provisions, or to require them “to abandon the streets covered by this ordinance, and to remove their tracks from said streets.” Averring that the ordinance impaired and attempted to impair the obligations of the several grants etc., that its enforcement would deprive them of their property without due process or compensation, and that, under it, the city threatened to, and unless restrained would, interfere with and prevent the maintenance and operation of the railway over the routes described in the grants aforesaid and under authority and in accordance with the terms thereof, thus causing irreparable injury, the companies, by their bill, filed in the District Court before the ordinance became effective, prayed that it be decreed void and that the city be perpetually enjoined from such interference, in any way, as to the whole and any pa

Judges: McReynolds, Clarke, Brandéis

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.