Ayers v. Chicago was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a city could be held liable for damages caused by a defective street. The plaintiff, Ayers, was injured when his horse and wagon fell into a hole in the street. He sued the city of Chicago for damages, claiming that the city was negligent in maintaining the street. The Supreme Court held that the city could be held liable for damages caused by a defective street. The Court reasoned that the city had a duty to maintain the streets in a safe condition, and that it had breached this duty by failing to repair the hole in the street. The Court also held that the city was liable for the damages caused by the defective street, even though the city had not been negligent in creating the defect. The Court's decision in Ayers v. Chicago established that cities can be held liable for damages caused by defective streets, even if the city was not negligent in creating the defect. This decision has been cited in numerous cases since then, and has been used to establish the principle that cities have a duty to maintain their streets in a safe condition.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Ayers v. Chicago, arguing that the city of Chicago had not violated any constitutional rights when it refused to issue a permit for a bridge over its river. He argued that while Congress has authority to regulate interstate commerce, this power does not extend so far as to give private individuals or companies the right to build bridges over navigable waters without permission from local authorities. Furthermore, he noted that if such an expansive interpretation of congressional power were accepted, then state and local governments would be stripped of their ability to protect public safety and health by regulating activities within their own borders. In conclusion, Justice Field held that since there was no evidence of bad faith on behalf of the city in denying Ayers' request for a bridge permit, his claim should have been dismissed by the lower court and upheld by the Supreme Court.