The term "vested rights" is not used in the federal constitution (Campbell v. Holf) nor generally in state constitutions; but it is frequently employed to describe those rights incident to property or arising out of contract which are deemed to be beyond impairment by subsequent legislation, under the usual clauses as to due process of law and the impairment of the obligations of contract. For instance, the right of a prospective heir to inherit property is subject to legislative control, so that the share which he shall take or the conditions under which the property shall pass to him may be changed by statute passed before the death of the person from whom he is to inherit; but after the right to inherit has thus become fixed by law, no statute can be passed, general or special, which takes away or restricts the interest which he has thus already acquired by inheritance. Likewise the share which a wife is entitled to have out of her husband's property in the event that she survives him may be diminished or increased at any time before the husband's death; but after his death her right to dower, as it is called, is fixed, and any attempt by statute to limit it would be unconstitutional as impairing her property rights.

As stated in the preceding chapter, a judgment is not, strictly speaking, a contract, neither is it property. If it represents an interest in property or a right accruing under contract, it may be exempt from impairment by subsequent legislation; but it is not a property right so far as it represents merely a remedy which might or might not be afforded as the legislature in its discretion should determine. Thus if it is provided by statute that cities shall be liable for the value of property destroyed by city officers to prevent the spread of a fire, such a statute is to be considered as granting a privilege only, and not as recognizing a property right; and if the statute should be repealed, no person whose property was subsequently destroyed in this way would be entitled to any compensation. Therefore, a judgment rendered against a state for damages on account of such destruction does not represent a property right, and the legislature in its discretion may take away all remedy for the enforcement of such a judgment (Louisiana v. Mayor of New Orleans).