In the 1904 case of Savannah, Thunderbolt and Isle of Hope Railway v. Savannah, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the city of Savannah, Georgia. The dispute arose when a railway company was denied permission by the city to lay tracks on certain streets. The railway company argued that this denial infringed upon their charter rights granted by an act from state legislature which allowed them to construct and operate railways along any public road or street with consent from local authorities. However, they claimed that such consent could not be unreasonably withheld. The court held that while it is true that cities cannot arbitrarily withhold consent for projects benefiting public interest; however, they do have discretion over how their streets are used so as not to interfere with public convenience or safety. In this case, there was no evidence presented proving unreasonable withholding of approval by the city council hence ruling in favor of City Of Savannah.

In the dissenting opinion for Savannah, Thunderbolt and Isle of Hope Railway v. Savannah, it was argued that the city's decision to remove a portion of railway track without providing compensation violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause. The justice contended that this action constituted an unlawful taking of private property by government authorities. He disagreed with the majority's view that such removal was within municipal powers related to street regulation and maintenance, asserting instead that it amounted to an arbitrary exercise of power infringing upon constitutional rights. Furthermore, he expressed concern over potential implications for other businesses if governments could interfere with their operations without offering just compensation or following proper legal procedures.