SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Administrative Law Keyed to Asimow
Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill
Citation:
470 U.S. 532, 105 S.Ct. 1487, 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985)Facts
James Loudermill was hired as a security guard by the Cleveland Board of Education in 1979. On his job application, he stated he had never been convicted of a felony. Eleven months later, during a routine records check, the Board discovered he had a felony conviction for grand larceny in 1968. The Board terminated Loudermill for dishonesty without giving him an opportunity to explain or challenge the dismissal. Loudermill claimed he thought his conviction was a misdemeanor, not a felony. Similarly, Richard Donnelly, a bus mechanic for the Parma Board of Education, was fired for failing an eye examination without being given a chance to respond. Both employees were classified civil servants under Ohio law who could only be terminated for cause. They filed separate federal lawsuits alleging that Ohio’s civil service statute was unconstitutional because it did not provide employees an opportunity to respond to charges before termination. The Civil Service Commission eventually reinstated Donnelly (without backpay) and upheld Loudermill’s termination after post-termination hearings.
#Issue:
What pre-termination process must be provided to a public employee who possesses a property interest in continued employment before they can be discharged for cause?
#Holding:
Yes, the Due Process Clause requires that public employees with property interests in continued employment must be given notice and an opportunity to respond before termination, even when more elaborate statutory post-termination procedures are available.
#Concurring Opinions:
Justice Marshall concurred in part and concurred in the judgment, arguing that due process requires more extensive pre-termination procedures when there are substantial disputes in testimonial evidence, including the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses.
#Dissenting Opinions:
Justice Rehnquist dissented, arguing that the property right in employment should be defined by and limited to the procedures specified in the statute that created it, following his “bitter with the sweet” approach from Arnett v. Kennedy.
#Reasoning and Analysis (Justice White):
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.