In C, B. & Q. R. R. Co. v. Chicago35 the court say in language leaving no room for doubt: "In our opinion, a judgment of a state court, even if it be authorized by statute, whereby private property is taken for the State or under its direction for public use, without compensation made or secured to the owner, is, upon principle and authority, wanting in the due process of law required by the Fourteenth Amendment."

When, however, the complaint is merely that a state court has erroneously decided the facts of a case, all of the proceedings before it being regular and sufiicient, no claim of a denial of due process can be set up. In Central Land Co. v. Laidley36 the court state this doctrine, saying: "When the parties have been fully heard in the regular course of judicial proceedings, an erroneous decision of a state court does not deprive the unsuccessful party of his property without due process of law, within the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States." 37