Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

George B. Bissell, David T. Robinson, And Calvin Day, Plaintiffs In Error, v. The City Of Jeffersonville

1860 • 65 U.S. 287 • Taney Court
This case involved a dispute between the plaintiffs in error, George B. Bissell, David T. Robinson and Calvin Day, and the City of Jeffersonville over an ordinance passed by the city council that imposed a tax on all persons who owned or occupied real estate within its limits. The plaintiffs argued that this ordinance was unconstitutional because it violated their rights under both state and federal law to be taxed only according to their representation in government bodies such as Congress or...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Taney Court
Term: 1860
65 U.S. 287
16 L. Ed. 664
1860 U.S. LEXIS 401
Argued: Jan 31, 1861

George B. Bissell, David T. Robinson, And Calvin Day, Plaintiffs In Error, v. The City Of Jeffersonville

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

This case involved a dispute between the plaintiffs in error, George B. Bissell, David T. Robinson and Calvin Day, and the City of Jeffersonville over an ordinance passed by the city council that imposed a tax on all persons who owned or occupied real estate within its limits. The plaintiffs argued that this ordinance was unconstitutional because it violated their rights under both state and federal law to be taxed only according to their representation in government bodies such as Congress or state legislatures. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled against them, finding that while taxation without representation is indeed prohibited by both state and federal law, this particular ordinance did not violate those laws since it applied equally to all citizens regardless of whether they were represented in government bodies or not. Furthermore, the court found that even if there had been some kind of violation present here then it would have been up to either Congress or the State Legislature – rather than courts – to address any grievances related thereto.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of George B. Bissell, David T. Robinson, and Calvin Day v. The City of Jeffersonville, the dissenting opinion argued that a city ordinance requiring property owners to build sidewalks was unconstitutional because it violated their right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. The majority had held that cities have broad powers in enacting ordinances for public safety and convenience; however, Justice Field argued that this power should not be used as an excuse for taking away private property without just compensation or due process of law. He further stated that if such an ordinance were allowed to stand then any other arbitrary exercise of municipal authority could also be justified on similar grounds - thus allowing cities to take away private rights with impunity and without recourse from citizens who are affected by them.

Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms