UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON-LINE

The right of this Court to review the judgment of the highest court of a state is specifically limited by § 709, Rev.Stat., and, in cases such as this, depends on an alleged denial of a federal right which the record shows was specially set up and claimed in, and denied by, the state court or that such was the necessary effect of the judgment.

Assignments of error made for the purpose of bringing the case to this Court cannot originate the right of review here.

An exception in the state court that the judgment deprives plaintiff in error of his property without due process of law in violation of the Constitution of the United States only affords ground for an inquiry whether the proceedings themselves show a want of due process.

The Fourteenth Amendment forbids a state from taking private property for public use without compensation, C., B. & Q. R. Co. v. Chicago, 166 U. S. 226, but where the state provides adequate machinery for ascertaining compensation on notice and hearing which were availed of and there was no ruling by the state court which prevented compensation for property actually taken, there is no lack of due process because of the amount awarded, even if only nominal.

Judgment entered on authority of 189 N.Y. 163 affirmed. clubjuris

Page 221 U. S. 525

The facts, which involve the validity of an award for property taken in condemnation proceedings, are stated in the opinion.