Marcy v. Township of Oswego was a United States Supreme Court case that addressed the issue of whether a municipality could be held liable for damages caused by a defective bridge. The plaintiff, Marcy, was injured when his horse and wagon fell through a bridge that had been built by the Township of Oswego. Marcy sued the Township for damages, arguing that the Township was liable for the defective bridge. The Supreme Court held that the Township was liable for the damages caused by the defective bridge. The Court reasoned that the Township had a duty to maintain the bridge in a safe condition, and that it had failed to do so. The Court also noted that the Township had received money from the state to build the bridge, and that it had a duty to use that money to build a safe bridge. The Court's decision established that municipalities can be held liable for damages caused by defective bridges. This decision has been cited in numerous cases since then, and has been used to establish that municipalities have a duty to maintain public infrastructure in a safe condition.

In Marcy v. Township of Oswego, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a township had the right to take private property for public use without just compensation. The majority held that it did not have this power and that taking such property would be unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause. Justice Field dissented from this opinion, arguing that while he agreed with the majority in principle, he felt there were certain circumstances where a municipality could exercise its police powers and take private land for public use without paying just compensation. He argued that municipalities should be allowed some discretion in determining when such takings are necessary and appropriate given local conditions or needs. In his view, if a municipality can demonstrate an overriding need or benefit to society as a whole then it should be able to do so without having to pay out large sums of money in damages or other forms of compensation every time they wish to make improvements on their own lands which may incidentally affect neighboring properties owned by individuals who disagree with them politically or otherwise oppose their plans