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

Water, Light And Gas Company Of Hutchinson v. The City Of Hutchinson, Kansas

• 1907 • 207 U.S. 385 • Fuller Court
In the case of Water, Light and Gas Company of Hutchinson v. The City of Hutchinson, Kansas (1907), the Supreme Court was asked to decide on a dispute between a utility company and a city over their contractual agreement. The Water, Light and Gas Company had entered into an agreement with the city to provide water services for 30 years. However, after only ten years, the city decided to construct its own water plant in violation of this contract. In response, the utility company sued for...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 Fuller Court
Term: 1907
Docket: 53
207 U.S. 385
28 S. Ct. 135
52 L. Ed. 257
1907 U.S. LEXIS 1233
Argued: Nov 13, 1907

Water, Light And Gas Company Of Hutchinson v. The City Of Hutchinson, Kansas

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Water, Light and Gas Company of Hutchinson v. The City of Hutchinson, Kansas (1907), the Supreme Court was asked to decide on a dispute between a utility company and a city over their contractual agreement. The Water, Light and Gas Company had entered into an agreement with the city to provide water services for 30 years. However, after only ten years, the city decided to construct its own water plant in violation of this contract. In response, the utility company sued for damages claiming breach of contract by constructing its own competing facility before their agreed upon term expired. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the utility company stating that while municipalities have broad powers to act in public interest including providing utilities; they cannot violate contracts without due process or just compensation under Fifth Amendment protections against taking private property for public use without fair compensation.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Water, Light and Gas Company of Hutchinson v. The City of Hutchinson, Kansas, it was argued that the city's decision to construct its own waterworks system infringed upon the exclusive rights granted to the plaintiff by a previous contract with the city. This action was seen as an impairment of contractual obligations which is prohibited under Article I, Section 10 of U.S Constitution. It was also contended that while municipalities have inherent power to provide necessary services like water supply for their citizens' welfare and public health purposes; they should not be allowed to do so in a manner that infringes on existing contracts or vested rights without due process or just compensation. Furthermore, it was suggested that if such actions were permitted then no private corporation would dare enter into any agreement with a municipality out of fear that their contractual rights could be arbitrarily violated at any time.

Opinion written by Justice JMcKenna
Decided: Dec 23, 1907
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