Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.
Public Welfare Versus Private Ownership, Court Rules For "a Changing World", Further Readings
Village of Euclid, Ohio
Ambler Realty Co.
That a decree of the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Ohio enjoining enforcement of village zoning regulations should be reversed.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
Newton D. Baker
Justices for the Court
Louis D. Brandeis, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Edward Terry Sanford, Harlan Fiske Stone, George Sutherland (writing for the Court), William Howard Taft
Pierce Butler, James Clark McReynolds, Willis Van Devanter
Date of Decision
22 November 1926
The Court upheld the village's right to enact zoning, reversing the Ohio court's decision.
The decision established the right of local governments to control land use through zoning laws.
- Washington ex rel. Seattle Trust Co. v. Roberge, 278 U.S. 116 (1928).
- Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas, 416 U.S. 1 (1974).
- Young v. American Mini Theatres Inc., 427 U.S. 50 (1976).
- Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977).
- City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, 485 U.S. 41 (1986).
- Ex parte Grossman - Significance, Related Cases
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins - Significance, The Court Changes Course, A "radical Change", Impact
- Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. - Public Welfare Versus Private Ownership
- Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. - Further Readings
- Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. - Court Rules For "a Changing World"
- Other Free Encyclopedias