franchise
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 83 U.S. 544 - Mitchell v. Hawley · 1872Most cited · 181 citing opinions
patent
Purchasers of the exclusive privilege of making or vending the patented machine hold the whole or a portion of the franchise which the patent secures, depending upon the nature of the conveyance... But the purchaser of the implement or machine for the purpose of using it in the ordinary pursuits of life stands on different grounds, as he does not acquire any right to construct another machine either for his own use or to be vended to another for any purpose. Complete title to the implement or machine purchased becomes vested in the vendee by the sale and purchase, but he acquires no portion of the franchise, as the machine, when it rightfully passes from the patentee to the purchaser, ceases to be within the limits of the monopoly.
How the Supreme Court has restated “franchise”
Each Supreme Court definition of “franchise,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “franchise”
Court decisions citing the 7 opinions that defined “franchise” — 473 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 8 definitions, chronological · 1858–1936
- ORIGINAL
This special privilege, conferred on the corporation by the sovereign power, of obstructing the navigation, did not belong to the country generally by common right, and is therefore a franchise; and, secondly, the authority of taking tolls from those who crossed the river on the bridge was also a franchise, and freedom to do that which could not be lawfully done by one without public authority; this franchise could only be conferred by the Legislature directly, or indirectly through public agents and tribunals, in pursuance of a statute.
The franchise being an incorporeal hereditament, cannot, upon the settled principles of the common law, be seized under a fieri facias
A franchise is a privilege conferred in the United States by the immediate or antecedent legislation of an act of incorporation, with conditions expressed, or necessarily inferential from its language, as to the manner of its exercise and for its enjoyment.
franchises are special privileges conferred by the government on individuals, and which do not belong to the citizens of the country generally of common right; and that in this country no franchise can be held which is not derived from the law of the State.
the privilege of making a railway or turnpike, or establishing a ferry and taking tolls for the use of the same, is a franchise, as the public have an interest in the same, and the owners of the privilege are liable to answer in damages if they refuse the use of the same, without any reasonable excuse, upon being paid or tendered the usual fare.
the franchise of a private corporation—which in its application to a railroad is the privilege of running it and taking fare and freight—is property, and of the most valuable kind, as it cannot be taken for public use even without compensation
Implied in every grant of franchise is the condition that it may be lost by misuse. Every such special privilege is subject to termination for breach of condition, whether express or implied, upon which the grant depends. It may be canceled or withdrawn by any procedure that is not repugnant to the established principles of justice.
implied condition of forfeiture