Berman v. Parker
United States Supreme Court
348 U.S. 26 (1954)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
The District of Columbia enacted an urban-renewal plan in 1945 that allowed seizure of title to about 15 city blocks within slums or blighted areas. Title to the property transferred to private developers provided at least one-third of new housing would be low-rent. Two owners (appellants) of a department and a hardware store seized by the government brought consolidated lawsuits challenging the renewal plan as unconstitutional because (1) it authorized by eminent domain taking title to private property and its sale or lease to other private persons for private (instead of public) uses, and (2) it allowed the taking of property in “blighted areas” without sufficiently defining that term to delegate power. The owners also argued that the plan was unconstitutional in application to their particular properties and should be strictly construed to not apply to either commercial properties or any property where no slum existed. The trial court found the renewal plan constitutional, and the owners appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Douglas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 787,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
