Norfolk & Suburban Turnpike R. Co. v. Virginia

Background

A private turnpike company owned three toll roads in Princess Anne County, Virginia. A state judge appointed three viewers who reported the roads were in poor condition and recommended repairs. The Circuit Court entered an order suspending tolls until repairs were made. The company sought review in Virginia’s highest court, which called the lower order “plainly right” and rejected the company’s petition. A writ of error to the U.S. Supreme Court was later allowed, with the Commonwealth of Virginia appearing through its Attorney General and moving to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

Reasoning

The Court addressed two main questions: whether it had power to review the state-court action, and whether suspending tolls violated constitutional protections. The Court found that the form and surrounding papers showed the state court had effectively affirmed the lower court, so U.S. Supreme Court jurisdiction was proper in this case. It announced a new rule: going forward, when a state high court’s refusal to allow review is ambiguous on the record, the Supreme Court will treat the record against jurisdiction unless the record plainly shows an express affirmance. On the merits, the Court held the statutory suspension of tolls to compel repairs did not amount to an unconstitutional taking; the law made keeping the roads in repair a condition for collecting tolls, and suspending tolls enforces that public duty.

Real world impact

The decision confirms states can suspend toll collection to enforce road maintenance without triggering constitutional takings claims. It also narrows future U.S. Supreme Court review of state-court denials when the state record is ambiguous.