In the case of Schmidinger v. City of Chicago in 1912, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving property rights and taxation. The plaintiff, Mr. Schmidinger, owned a piece of land that was being used as a street by the city without his consent or any compensation provided to him for its use. He argued that this constituted an illegal taking of his property under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause which states that private property cannot be taken for public use without just compensation. The court held in favor of Mr. Schmidinger stating that while cities have broad powers to regulate streets and other public spaces, they do not have unlimited authority to take over privately-owned lands without providing fair payment or obtaining permission from owners first. This ruling affirmed citizens' constitutional protections against uncompensated takings by government entities and clarified limits on municipal power over private properties within their jurisdictions.

In the dissenting opinion for Schmidinger v. City of Chicago, it was argued that the city's ordinance prohibiting street stands did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment rights of a citizen to engage in lawful trade and earn a living. The justice contended that such regulations are within the purview of local authorities who have been entrusted with maintaining order, safety, health and morals in their communities. They believed that these powers should be exercised reasonably without infringing upon individual liberties but also acknowledged that what constitutes as 'reasonable' can vary greatly depending on circumstances and societal changes over time. Therefore, they felt it inappropriate for courts to interfere unless there is clear evidence of abuse or discrimination by local authorities which was not evident in this case.