# Munn v. Illinois

> Supreme Court of the United States · March 18, 1877 · 94 U.S. 113

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9417075

## Case

- **Full name:** Munn v. Illinois
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** March 18, 1877
- **Citations:** 94 U.S. 113; 24 L. Ed. 77; 1876 U.S. LEXIS 1842
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Strong
- **Judges:** Chubb, Waite, Field, Strong
- **Cited by:** 1,290 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9417075

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that a state law regulating rates charged by grain elevators did not violate the elevator operators' substantive-due-process rights because the statute was `affected with the public interest' and, thus, within the police power of the state
- noting that the government’s power to regulate private property arises when the private property “is ‘affected with a public interest’ ”; adding that this principle is the source of “the power to regulate the charges of common carriers”—“[c]ommon carriers exercise a sort of pu…
- explaining that state regulation of property that is used in a way that is of public consequence is a valid exercise of the state’s powers
- noting that warehousemen, “[l]ike common carriers, * * * are required by law to receive grain from all persons, and store the same upon equal terms and condi- tions”

## Opinion text

Mr. Justice Strong.
When the judgment in this case was announced by direction of a majority of the court, it was well known by all my brethren that I did not concur in it. It had been my purpose to prepare a dissenting opinion, but I found no time for the preparation, and I was reluctant to dissent in such a case without stating my reasons. Mr. Justice Field has now stated them as fully as I can, and I concur in what he has said.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9417075. Public record. Not legal advice.