Berman v. Parker
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued October 19, 1954 Decided November 22, 1954
Full case name: Berman et al., Executors, v. Parker et al. Citations: 348 U.S. 26; 75 S. Ct. 98; 99 L. Ed. 27; 1954 U.S. LEXIS 1463 Prior history: Kohl et al. v. United States Subsequent history: Kelo v. City of New London
Holding
The court ruled that private property could be taken for a public purpose with just compensation.
Court membership
Chief Justice: Earl Warren Associate Justices: Hugo Black, Stanley Forman Reed, Felix Frankfurter, William O. Douglas, Robert H. Jackson, Harold Hitz Burton, Tom C. Clark, Sherman Minton
Case opinions
Majority by: Douglas Joined by: unanimous
Laws applied
District of Columbia Redevelopment Act of 1945

Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26 (1954) is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that refined the clause "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation" in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The court ruled that private property could be taken for a public purpose with just compensation. This case opened the door for later cases ruling that condemnation of property needing economic improvement is a public purpose and therefore constitutional. Critics of recent occurrences of eminent domain uses trace what they view as property rights violations to this case. Image File history File links No higher resolution available. ... The Supreme Court of the United States (sometimes colloquially referred to by the acronym SCOTUS[1]) is the highest judicial body in the United States and leads the federal judiciary. ... Holding The governmental taking of property from one private owner to give to another in furtherance of economic development constitutes a permissible public use under the Fifth Amendment. ... For the swing saxophonist and occasional singer, see Earle Warren Earl Warren (March 19, 1891 – July 9, 1974) was a California district attorney of Alameda County, the 20th Attorney General of California, the 30th Governor of California, and the 14th Chief Justice of the United States (from 1953 to 1969). ... Hugo Black Hugo LaFayette Black (February 27, 1886 – September 25, 1971) was a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (1937 - 1971). ... Stanley Forman Reed ( December 31, 1884 – April 2, 1980) was an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court from 1938 to 1957. ... Felix Frankfurter (November 15, 1882 – February 22, 1965) was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. ... William Orville Douglas (October 16, 1898 – January 19, 1980) was a United States Supreme Court Associate Justice. ... Robert Houghwout Jackson (February 13, 1892–October 9, 1954) was United States Attorney General (1940–1941) and an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court (1941–1954). ... Harold Hitz Burton (June 22, 1888 - October 28, 1964) was an American Senator and Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. ... Thomas Campbell Clark (September 23, 1899 – June 13, 1977) was United States Attorney General from 1945 to 1949 and an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (1949-1967). ... Sherman Minton, (October 20, 1890–April 9, 1965) was a Democratic United States Senator from Indiana and an associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. ... ... Year 1954 (MCMLIV) was a common year starting on Friday (link will display full 1954 Gregorian calendar). ... A landmark decision is the outcome of a legal case (often thus referred to as a landmark case) that establishes a precedent that either substantially changes the interpretation of the law or that simply establishes new case law on a particular issue. ... The Supreme Court Building, Washington, D.C. The Supreme Court Building, Washington, D.C., (large image) The Supreme Court of the United States, located in Washington, D.C., is the highest court (see supreme court) in the United States; that is, it has ultimate judicial authority within the United States... The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, guarantees several protections related to legal procedure. ... Wikisource has original text related to this article: The United States Constitution The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. ... Just Compensation is typically a term used to mean the fair market value of a property, generally in relation to a taking under Eminent Domain. ... Eminent domain (United States), compulsory purchase (United Kingdom, New Zealand, Republic of Ireland), resumption/compulsory acquisition (Australia) or expropriation (Canada, South Africa) in common law legal systems is the inherent power of the state to seize a citizens private property, expropriate property, or rights in property, without the owner...

Public use

Berman was reexamined in the 2005 Supreme Court decision Kelo v. City of New London, in which the court merely reaffirmed existing precedent about the definition of public use for local governments to take private property by eminent domain. In 1984, the Court had already held in Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984) redistribution of land from some private parties to other private parties could pass constitutional muster. However in Midkiff, the distribution of land holdings in Hawaii were extremely unequal due to that state's unique history. O'Connor tried to craft an opinion which allowing for the state's actions, tried to limit incentives for expansive views of public purpose. Year 2005 (MMV) was a common year starting on Saturday (link displays full calendar) of the Gregorian calendar. ... Holding The governmental taking of property from one private owner to give to another in furtherance of economic development constitutes a permissible public use under the Fifth Amendment. ... Eminent domain (United States), compulsory purchase (United Kingdom, New Zealand, Republic of Ireland), resumption/compulsory acquisition (Australia) or expropriation (Canada, South Africa) in common law legal systems is the inherent power of the state to seize a citizens private property, expropriate property, or rights in property, without the owner... Hawaii Housing Authority v. ... // The United States Reports, the official reporter of the Supreme Court of the United States Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a neutral form which will... This article is about the year. ... This article is about the U.S. State. ...

Background

In 1945, the United States Congress passed the District of Columbia Redevelopment Act of 1945 to address the vast blighted area found in the District of Columbia. The Act created a commission of five members called the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency and granted it the power to redevelop blighted areas and eliminate any "blighting factors or causes of blight." The act granted the Agency the power of eminent domain if necessary. After five years of planning, the Planning Commission published its results and determined that in one blighted area, "64.3% of the dwellings were beyond repair, 18.4% needed major repairs, only 17.3% were satisfactory; 57.8% of the dwellings had outside toilets, 60.3% had no baths, 29.6% lacked electricity, 82.2% had no wash basins or laundry tubs, 83.8% lacked central heating." The Commission's plans made "detailed provisions for the types of dwelling units and provides that at least one-third of them are to be low-rent housing with a maximum rental of $17 per room per month." The Commission then held a public hearing, after which the plan was approved. Year 1945 (MCMXLV) was a common year starting on Monday (link will display the full calendar). ... Type Bicameral Houses Senate House of Representatives President of the Senate President pro tempore Dick Cheney, (R) since January 20, 2001 Robert C. Byrd, (D) since January 4, 2007 Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, (D) since January 4, 2007 Members 535 plus 4 Delegates and 1 Resident Commissioner Political... Symptoms of urban blight: graffiti-covered abandoned and deteriorating buildings and garbage-strewn vacant lots. ...

Case

After approval of the plan, owners of a department store in the area designated to be redeveloped brought suit to the court. The landowners claimed that because the department store itself was not blighted, its redevelopment was not necessary and would not constitute a public use. The owners further argued that taking the land under eminent domain and giving it to redevelopers amounted to "a taking from one businessman for the benefit of another businessman." The interior of a typical Macys department store. ...

Decision

The Supreme Court unanimously decided in favor of the Planning Commission by arguing that the problem of large-scale blight needed to be addressed with a large-scale integrated redevelopment plan. Justice Douglas wrote in his opinion, "If owner after owner were permitted to resist these redevelopment programs on the ground that his particular property was not being used against the public interest, integrated plans for redevelopment would suffer greatly." As the Planning Commission had made detailed plans and taken extensive surveys of the area in question, the Supreme Court argued for judicial restraint. Douglas wrote, "In the present case, the Congress and its authorized agencies have made determinations that take into account a wide variety of values. It is not for us to reappraise them." Douglas addressed the issue presented by the landowners of "a taking from one businessman for the benefit of another businessman" by saying that a legitimate public purpose had been established by the Congress in creating the entire redevelopment plan. The Supreme Court found that though specific parcels of land may fall outside of a public use, they are necessary for the functioning of the redevelopment plan as a whole and so qualify as having public purpose. In this ruling, Justice Douglas expanded the definition of "public use" to include physical, aesthetic, and monetary benefits. The neutrality of this article is disputed. ...

See also

• List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 348

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 348 of the United States Reports: In re Isserman, 348 U.S. 1 (1954) , 348 U.S. 3 (1954) , 348 U.S. 11 (1954) , 348 U.S. 19 (1954) Berman v. ...

External links

• "Berman v. Parker" on Wikisource.
• Full text of decision from Cornell University Law Library