In the 1927 case of Sprout v. City of South Bend, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the city, upholding its right to enforce a local ordinance that required property owners to connect their properties to public sewer lines at their own expense. The plaintiff, Sprout, argued that this requirement was an unconstitutional taking without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment. However, the court disagreed and held that it was within a municipality's police power to enact such regulations for health and safety reasons. This decision affirmed municipalities' authority over local infrastructure matters and reinforced their ability to impose costs on private property owners for public benefits.

In the dissenting opinion for Sprout v. City of South Bend, it was argued that the city's action to condemn a strip of land owned by Sprout for public use as part of a street improvement project was not justified under eminent domain laws. The justice contended that while cities have the right to take private property for public use with just compensation, this power should be exercised judiciously and only when necessary. In this case, they believed there were other viable alternatives available to improve traffic conditions without infringing on Sprout's property rights. They also questioned whether taking such a small piece of land would significantly benefit the public or merely serve as an aesthetic enhancement benefiting few people at best. Therefore, they disagreed with majority’s ruling in favor of City Of South Bend.