Bowe v. Scott

Background

Shafer once owned a tract of land in Richmond and formally gave a twenty-foot alley to the public, which the city accepted. Most of the plaintiffs owned lots on Franklin Street that backed onto that alley; one owner, Bolton, sat at the alley’s corner on Harrison Street. The city passed an ordinance letting two neighboring owners, Scott and Myers, close the alley along their property line for thirty years under conditions that they not build on it and that the city could reopen it. The plaintiffs sued to stop enforcement, saying the alley had been dedicated and accepted for public use and arguing various state and federal legal claims. The trial court dismissed the bill for failing to show a special, peculiar injury, and the Court of Appeals affirmed that dismissal.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court considered whether it had authority to decide federal questions raised by the plaintiffs. It concluded the record did not present substantial federal claims. A paragraph claiming a contract with Shafer did not show the plaintiffs themselves held contractual rights, and the due-process allegation appeared tied to the state constitution. A late petition for rehearing did not properly present federal grounds. Because the federal issues were insubstantial or improperly raised, the Court found no basis for its review and dismissed the writ of error for lack of jurisdiction.

Real world impact

The dismissal leaves the lower-court ruling in place and provides no national ruling on the ordinance’s validity. The plaintiffs receive no relief from this Court; they must pursue state remedies or present a clearly supported federal claim in the proper forum.