Case Citation: Nectow v. City of Cambridge, 277 U.S. 183, 48 S.Ct. 447, 72 L.Ed. 842 (1928)
Parties: Nectow, Plaintiff/ Appellant City of Cambridge/Appellee
Facts: The Plaintiff sued for a mandatory injunction, alleging that the zoning ordinance was unconstitutional and that the Plaintiff was deprived of property without due process of law, “directing the city to pass an application of the Plaintiff for a permit to erect any lawful buildings upon a tract of land without regard to the inclusion of the tract of land in a zoning ordinance.” The city zoned the Plaintiffs property land residential. The Plaintiffs land was surrounded by land owned by Ford Motor Company and the Boston & Albany Railroad and some residential homes on the other side of the train tracks. Before the zoning of the ordinance, the Plaintiff had a buyer for the property in question, but because of the residential zoning restriction the buyer back out of the deal to buy the property. “The master appointed to the case found that no practical use can be made of the Plaintiff’s property under the ordinance and that the zoning of the Plaintiffs property in a residential district would not promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. The master’s findings were not followed by the full court below, which found that the zoning ordinance was constitutional as applied to the Plaintiff.”
Procedural History: The Plaintiff sued the City of Cambridge for a mandatory injunction on the bases that the Plaintiffs properties zoning ordinance was unconstitutional. The Plaintiff appealed the original decision and it was later held that the decision was reversed.
Issues:
Issue 1: Was the
