Charles River Bridge et al. v. Warren Bridge et al.

E938877

U.S. Supreme Court case United States constitutional law case United States contracts law case

Charles River Bridge et al. v. Warren Bridge et al. is an 1837 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited implied contract rights in corporate charters and affirmed states’ power to promote the public interest over private monopolies.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

Observed surface forms (1)

Surface form	Occurrences
Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge	0

Statements (46)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	U.S. Supreme Court case ⓘ United States constitutional law case ⓘ United States contracts law case ⓘ
areaOfLaw	corporate charters ⓘ public franchises ⓘ state police power ⓘ
aroseInJurisdiction	Commonwealth of Massachusetts NERFINISHED ⓘ
backgroundEvent	1785 charter of the Charles River Bridge Company by Massachusetts ⓘ 1828 charter of the Warren Bridge by Massachusetts ⓘ
citation	36 U.S. (11 Pet.) 420 ⓘ 9 L. Ed. 773 ⓘ
constitutionalProvisionInvolved	Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ Contract Clause of the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ
country	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
decidedBy	Supreme Court of the United States NERFINISHED ⓘ
decisionDate	1837-02-14 ⓘ
dissentingOpinionBy	John Catron NERFINISHED ⓘ Joseph Story NERFINISHED ⓘ
hasAlternativeName	Charles River Bridge et al. v. Warren Bridge et al. NERFINISHED ⓘ
historicalSignificance	limited the reach of the Contract Clause compared to earlier decisions like Dartmouth College v. Woodward ⓘ marked a shift toward Jacksonian-era emphasis on economic opportunity and competition ⓘ
holding	Massachusetts did not violate the Contract Clause by authorizing the Warren Bridge ⓘ a corporate charter does not imply an exclusive monopoly right unless explicitly stated ⓘ states may promote the public interest and economic development even when it affects existing charters, absent explicit contractual exclusivity ⓘ
languageOfOpinion	English ⓘ
legalIssue	application of the Contract Clause to state-granted franchises ⓘ scope of implied contract rights in corporate charters ⓘ whether a state-granted charter creates an implied monopoly ⓘ
locationOfSubjectMatter	Charles River NERFINISHED ⓘ between Boston and Charlestown, Massachusetts ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	Roger B. Taney NERFINISHED ⓘ
majorityOpinionJoinedBy	Henry Baldwin NERFINISHED ⓘ James M. Wayne NERFINISHED ⓘ John McLean NERFINISHED ⓘ Philip P. Barbour NERFINISHED ⓘ
party	Charles River Bridge Company NERFINISHED ⓘ Commonwealth of Massachusetts NERFINISHED ⓘ Warren Bridge Company NERFINISHED ⓘ
principleEstablished	ambiguities in public charters are resolved against implied private monopolies ⓘ public grants are to be construed narrowly in favor of the public ⓘ states retain broad authority to regulate for the public good despite prior grants ⓘ
relatedCase	Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward NERFINISHED ⓘ
relatedDoctrine	no implied monopoly in state charters ⓘ strict construction of public grants ⓘ
term	1836 term of the U.S. Supreme Court ⓘ
timePeriod	Jacksonian era NERFINISHED ⓘ

Referenced by (1)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge → hasFullCaseName → Charles River Bridge et al. v. Warren Bridge et al. ⓘ