Skip to content
The Citation Code
Sign inRead the free sample

Constitutional LawReconstruction and incorporation

Barron v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided January 1833

Full citation

Barron v. Mayor of Balt., 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 243 (1833).

VerifiedQuotes, pinpoints and citation checked word for word against the opinion; facts checked against the opinion before publication. October 20, 2026.

John Barron, survivor of John Craig, for the use of Luke Tiernan, Executor of John Craig

claimant seeking compensationplaintiff in error

The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore

city governmentdefendants at the trial

The parties: John Barron, survivor of John Craig, for the use of Luke Tiernan, Executor of John Craig v. The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore.

Brief

Facts

John Barron, who survived John Craig, sued the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, a city government, in a Maryland court. The caption shows he sued for the use of Luke Tiernan, executor of John Craig. The opinion does not describe the underlying dispute. It says only that the defendants gave several acts of the general assembly of Maryland in evidence at the trial. The case then went to the court of appeals for the western shore of Maryland, and from there to the Supreme Court on a writ of error, which is a request that a higher court review a lower court's judgment. Barron, the plaintiff in error, argued that the judgment fell within the fifth amendment's ban on taking private property for public use without just compensation. He argued that because the amendment favors the liberty of the citizen, it should be read as a limit on state legislative power as well as on the power of the United States. The Court's power to hear the case depended on that argument being correct.

Issue

Does the fifth amendment's ban on taking private property for public use without just compensation limit the legislative power of a state, so that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review the Maryland judgment?

Holding

The fifth amendment's just compensation provision does not restrain the Maryland legislature. The Maryland acts therefore did not conflict with the Constitution of the United States, and the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction over the cause, so it dismissed the writ of error.

The rest of this brief is for subscribers

Every plan includes the procedural history, the rule and the reasoning, the IRAC and CREAC versions, every key quote with its pinpoint, the citation box with parallel citations and short forms and the exam angle.

See plansSign in

Learn the citation form

Short video lessons on the rules behind this brief’s citations, each with two pause-and-practice exercises.

The Citation Code · citationcode.com/cases/barron-v-mayor-of-baltimore