Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Barron Ex Rel. Tiernan v. Mayor of Baltimore Case Brief

Supreme Court of the United States1833Docket #365750
32 U.S. 243 8 L. Ed. 672 7 Pet. 243 1833 U.S. LEXIS 346

Audio Insights: Learn Cases on The Go

Transform downtime into productive study time with our premium audio insights. Perfect for commutes, workouts, or visual breaks from reading.

Reinforces complex concepts Improves retention Multi-modal learning

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A wharf owner sued Baltimore, alleging city development projects constituted a “taking” of his property under the Fifth Amendment. The Supreme Court held that the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights does not apply to state governments, only to the federal government.

Legal Significance: This landmark case established that the Bill of Rights acts as a restriction only on the federal government, not on state or local governments. This principle of non-application stood until the doctrine of selective incorporation began applying these rights to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment.

Barron Ex Rel. Tiernan v. Mayor of Baltimore Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

John Barron, the plaintiff, was a co-owner of a profitable wharf in the harbor of Baltimore. He brought an action against the city, alleging that extensive municipal public works projects, including the alteration and paving of streets, had diverted the flow of several streams. This diversion caused large deposits of sand and sediment to accumulate in the harbor near his wharf. The buildup of sediment made the water too shallow for most commercial vessels to approach, which effectively destroyed the wharf’s utility and economic value. Barron contended that this constituted a taking of his private property for public use by the city. He sought financial damages, arguing that he was entitled to just compensation under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Maryland state courts found in favor of the city. Barron then sought a writ of error from the U.S. Supreme Court, asserting that the state court’s judgment was erroneous because the city’s actions violated the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause, which he argued should restrain state governments.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition against taking private property for public use without just compensation apply as a limitation on the actions of state governments?

No. The Supreme Court held that the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause is Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consec

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition against taking private property for public use without just compensation apply as a limitation on the actions of state governments?

Conclusion

Barron v. Baltimore established the principle that the Bill of Rights does Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis

Legal Rule

The first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, collectively known as Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea

Legal Analysis

Writing for a unanimous Court, Chief Justice Marshall's analysis focused on the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Summary unavailable

No flash summary is available for this opinion.

Every accomplishment starts with the decision to try.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+