Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Aldinger v. Howard

United States Supreme Court
427 U.S. 1 (1976)


Facts

Howard (defendant) was the treasurer of Spokane County, Washington. Howard hired Aldinger (plaintiff) as a clerk, dismissible at Howard's will. Two months later and despite an excellent work evaluation, Howard fired Aldinger for living with her boyfriend. Aldinger requested but was denied a pre-dismissal hearing. Citing a civil rights statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Aldinger sued Howard, county officials, and the county (defendants) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. Aldinger alleged violations of several of her constitutional rights. Additionally, Aldinger asserted state law claims, and argued the federal court had pendent jurisdiction over those claims. The district court dismissed Aldinger's complaint against the county, on the grounds that § 1983 allowed suits against individuals but not municipalities. Aldinger appealed the dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The appellate court agreed the county could not be sued under § 1983 and also rejected Aldinger's argument about pendent jurisdiction. Aldinger appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which confined its consideration to the issue of pendent jurisdiction.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Brennan, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.