Brown v. City of Oneonta

221 F.3d 329 (2000)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Brown v. City of Oneonta

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
221 F.3d 329 (2000)

SC
Play video

Facts

An elderly woman reported to the City of Oneonta Police Department (defendant) that her house had been broken into. The woman could not identify the perpetrator but did note that he was male, young, black, and had cut his hand on a knife. A police dog traced the scent of the perpetrator to nearby State University of New York College at Oneonta (SUCO). The police received a list of all of the black male students at SUCO and interviewed those students. The police also conducted field investigations in the city, stopping and questioning young, nonwhite males about the incident and looking for cuts on hands. Brown and others who were on the SUCO list or who were stopped and questioned on the street (plaintiffs) brought suit, claiming that the investigation tactics constituted racial profiling in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The City of Oneonta filed a motion for summary judgment.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning ()

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 745,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership