Miller v. Schoene case brief summary
276 U.S. 272
CASE SYNOPSIS:
Plaintiff tree owners challenged the judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, which affirmed a judgment affirming on appeal an order of defendant state entomologist requiring plaintiffs to cut down a large number of ornamental red cedar trees growing on their property to prevent the spread of cedar rust to nearby apple orchards.
CASE FACTS: Acting under the Cedar Rust Act of Virginia, Va. Code Ann. §§ 885 to 893 (1924), defendant state entomologist ordered plaintiff tree owners to cut down a large number of ornamental red cedar trees growing on their property as a means of preventing the communication of a rust or plant disease with which they were infected to the apple orchards in the vicinity. Plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of the statute under the due process clause of U.S. Constitutional amendment XIV.
HOLDING:
United States Supreme Court affirmed the state supreme court's judgment affirming the order directing plaintiffs to cut down the trees.
ANALYSIS:
The Court held that when forced to make the choice, the state did not exceed its constitutional powers by deciding upon the destruction of the cedar trees in order to save the apple orchards, which in the judgment of the legislature was of greater value to the public.
OUTCOME: The Court affirmed the state supreme court's judgment affirming the order directing plaintiff tree owners to cut down their cedar trees to prevent the spread of cedar rust to nearby apple orchards because the state did not exceed its constitutional powers by deciding upon the destruction of the cedar trees in order to save the apple orchards, which in the judgment of the legislature was of greater value to the public.
NOTES:
Under the authority of a Virginia statute, a state official ordered the P to cut down certain infected cedar trees.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
276 U.S. 272
CASE SYNOPSIS:
Plaintiff tree owners challenged the judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, which affirmed a judgment affirming on appeal an order of defendant state entomologist requiring plaintiffs to cut down a large number of ornamental red cedar trees growing on their property to prevent the spread of cedar rust to nearby apple orchards.
CASE FACTS: Acting under the Cedar Rust Act of Virginia, Va. Code Ann. §§ 885 to 893 (1924), defendant state entomologist ordered plaintiff tree owners to cut down a large number of ornamental red cedar trees growing on their property as a means of preventing the communication of a rust or plant disease with which they were infected to the apple orchards in the vicinity. Plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of the statute under the due process clause of U.S. Constitutional amendment XIV.
HOLDING:
United States Supreme Court affirmed the state supreme court's judgment affirming the order directing plaintiffs to cut down the trees.
ANALYSIS:
The Court held that when forced to make the choice, the state did not exceed its constitutional powers by deciding upon the destruction of the cedar trees in order to save the apple orchards, which in the judgment of the legislature was of greater value to the public.
OUTCOME: The Court affirmed the state supreme court's judgment affirming the order directing plaintiff tree owners to cut down their cedar trees to prevent the spread of cedar rust to nearby apple orchards because the state did not exceed its constitutional powers by deciding upon the destruction of the cedar trees in order to save the apple orchards, which in the judgment of the legislature was of greater value to the public.
NOTES:
Under the authority of a Virginia statute, a state official ordered the P to cut down certain infected cedar trees.
- Rule: The state does not exceed its constit. powers by deciding upon the destruction of one class of property in order to save another which, in the judgment of the leg. , is of greater value to the public.
- One of the dist. features of the police power as it affects private property is the preference of the public interest over the private property interests of the individual.
- police powers The power of a state or local govt. to reg. private conduct for the health, safety, and general public welfare.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
No comments:
Post a Comment