Editing Ambler Realty Co. v. Village of Euclid, Ohio

{{Infobox Case Brief
|court=United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
|date=January 14, 1924
|subject=Property
|facts=The village of Euclid was a suburb of Cleveland, Ohio in the early 1920s. The village had a potential for population growth and economic boom. The village passed an ordinance to restrict land use.

The village of Euclid created 6 classes of land uses, impose height restrictions on buildings, and created setbacks.

Ambler Realty Company owned 68 acres of un-improved land in Euclid, Ohio. The ordinance forced Ambler Realty to limit its percentage of land for industry and manufacturing to a small percentage.
|arguments=Ambler argued that the Euclid ordinance depressed the market value of its property by several $100,000 in the 1920s.

Euclid argued that the ordinance was a valid exercise of its police power in the state of Ohio for [[zoning in the United States]].
|holding=An ordinance that interferes with an owner's use of private property constitutes a [[Constitution_of_the_United_States#Takings_Clause|taking]] under the [[5th Amendment]].
|reasons=Judge [https://www.fjc.gov/node/1389636 David Westenhaver] reasoned that any ordinance that (1) limits the free use of property or (2) decreases property value interferes with the right to property, and it is, therefore, a taking.
|comments=This case is appealed & decided by SCOTUS 2 years later in ''[[Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.]]'' (1926).
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/ambler-realty-co-v-893733351
|case_text_source=v . lex
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://cite.case.law/f/297/307/
|case_text_source=Harvard Law School
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/ambler-realty-co-v-village-of-euclid-ohio-297-f-307-1924
|source_type=Video summary
|case_text_source=Quimbee
}}
}}