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

City Of New York v. Consolidated Gas Company Of New York Et Al.

• 1919 • 253 U.S. 219 • White Court
In the case of City of New York v. Consolidated Gas Company of New York et al., 1919, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Consolidated Gas Company. The city had sought to regulate gas prices by setting a maximum rate that could be charged for gas sold within its jurisdiction. However, the court held that such regulation was unconstitutional as it violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and amounted to confiscation without compensation. The court reasoned that while cities...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 White Court
Term: 1919
Docket: 566
253 U.S. 219
40 S. Ct. 511
64 L. Ed. 870
1920 U.S. LEXIS 1415
Argued: Apr 22, 1920

City Of New York v. Consolidated Gas Company Of New York Et Al.

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of City of New York v. Consolidated Gas Company of New York et al., 1919, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Consolidated Gas Company. The city had sought to regulate gas prices by setting a maximum rate that could be charged for gas sold within its jurisdiction. However, the court held that such regulation was unconstitutional as it violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and amounted to confiscation without compensation. The court reasoned that while cities have power to regulate utilities, they cannot set rates so low as to prevent companies from earning a reasonable return on their investment or property value used in providing service.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for the case City of New York v. Consolidated Gas Company of New York, Justice McReynolds expressed his disagreement with the majority's decision that upheld a law setting maximum rates for gas companies in New York City. He argued that this law was unconstitutional as it deprived gas companies of their property without due process and denied them equal protection under the laws. According to him, there was no evidence presented during trial showing these rates were reasonable or fair; instead they seemed arbitrary and designed to harm corporations rather than protect consumers' interests. Furthermore, he contended that such regulation should be based on individual company performance rather than an industry-wide standard which could potentially lead to unfair treatment towards certain businesses.

Opinion written by Justice WRDay
Decided: Jun 01, 1920
PDF viewer is not available.
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