Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge (1837, Taney).
8
Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge (1837, Taney).
What Happened?
During 1785, a company by the name Charles River Bridge Company created a bridge that had a toll to pass through the area, but later on in 1828, a new company by the name of Warren Bridge were made by legislators to create another bridge close by that had no tolls or fees to cross. Charles then sued Warren Bridge for what they did and went to the Supreme Court.
Basic Summary
The Argument
Arguments from Both Sides
The Plaintiff
Ever since 1785, there was a charter made for Charles River Bridge to construct a bridge that over Cambridge and Boston. The company had a fee for people who crossed their bridge, but since there was a new bridge constructed next to it, people stopped going to their bridge, thus not making any money. The company argues that the legislature had broken their initial contract (Article 1 Section 10) with the second charter they created with Warren Bridge.
The Defendant
What the charter granted for Charles River Bridge was to construct and fee their bridge, but it did not say that it had the right to monopolies the fees next to another bridge that is free of charge.
The Lower Courts Ruling
In Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, the judges on the case were deadlocked and couldn't come to a conclusion until reaching the U.S. Supreme Court.
Supreme
Court
Decision
Supreme Court Ruling
In a 5-2 vote of this case, it was ruled that the second charter created was not violating any parts in Article 1 Section 10.
Their reasoning was that the first charter did not grant the right to hold exclusive powers in that area to charge people for their bridge fees.
Dissenting Opinion
Chief justice Joseph Story had disagreed with Taney's ruling because of the fact Charles River Bridge is a company that is trying to make a profit, and by adding a free bridge next to them would ruin that.
Though not explixicty stated in the charter granted by the legislature, by common law in Story's eyes, it should be clear that the new bridge is destroying their business.
Story was also worried for the future precedents for entrepreneurial prvilege.
The Precedent
Signifigance
This case has made it so future court cases that involve private businesses be more aware about how they earn their profits. Since this court case touched on the topic of monopoly, it was made clear that companies that were monopolizing their property were considered unconstitutional.
Monopolies
Impact
Changes from the Case
From this court case, it has made it so courts can notably alter terms of contracts, as long as those altercations are fair and reasonable while also following the state's police powers.
Police power is "The authority of a government to enforce restrictions on private rights for the sake of public welfare."
Personal Judgement
After researching this court case, it felt extremely petty for Charles River Bridge to sue Warren Bridge since Warren also got the okay from legislature to create their bridge next to theirs.
Opinion
Lesson Learned
What to learn from this case is that monopolies are bad and you shouldn't try to take all the business away from people!
Take Away
Go Taney! Boo Story!!
I 100% agree with the supreme court ruling for the case that Charles River Bridge was in the wrong. The charter that allowed Charles River Bridge to be built only stated that it could be built and make profit...and that's it. It was allowed to make profit, but not to hog competition.
Supreme Court Ruling Opinion
Work Cited
Work Cited
"Proprietors of Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of Warren Bridge." Oyez, www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/36us420. Accessed 17 Apr. 2023.
McBride, A. (2006). The Supreme Court . The first hundred years . landmark cases . Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge (1837): PBS. The Supreme Court . The First Hundred Years . Landmark Cases . Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge (1837) | PBS. Retrieved April 20, 2023, from https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_charles.html
"Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge: Summary & Significance." Study.com, 24 September 2017, study.com/academy/lesson/charles-river-bridge-v-warren-bridge-summary-significance.html
Proprietors of Charles River Bridge v. proprietors of Warren Bridge, 36 U.S. 420 (1837). Justia Law. (n.d.). Retrieved April 20, 2023, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/36/420/
Company, Q. (2016). Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge - Quimbee. Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge. Retrieved April 21, 2023, from https://www.quimbee.com/cases/charles-river-bridge-v-warren-bridge