United States Supreme Court
545 U.S. 748 (2005)
Jessica Gonzales (plaintiff) obtained a temporary restraining order against her estranged husband from the State of Colorado. The restraining order prohibited the husband from disturbing the peace of Gonzales and their three children and from being within 100 yards of Gonzales’s house. A notice to law enforcement on the back of the restraining order mirrored a Colorado statute stating that police “shall use every reasonable means to enforce a restraining order” and “shall enforce a valid restraining order.” The husband took the three children while they were playing in front of Gonzales’s house. The husband had not arranged any visitation with Gonzales. Gonzales called the Castle Rock Police Department (CRPD) to report the incident and requested that the retraining order be enforced. The responding officers told Gonzales to wait until later that night to see if the children returned. Gonzales called the CRPD several more times with the same result. At 3:20 a.m. the following morning, the husband drove to the police station and began shooting at CRPD officers. The CRPD killed the husband. The CRPD then found the bodies of the children, whom the husband had already murdered, in the husband’s truck. Gonzales brought suit against the CRPD, alleging that the CRPD had violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to respond properly to Gonzales’s complaint that the restraining order had been violated. The district court dismissed the action. The court of appeals reversed, finding that Gonzales had a property interest in having the police enforce her restraining order and thus had stated a cognizable claim based on procedural due process. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Scalia, J.)
Concurrence (Souter, J.)
Dissent (Stevens, J.)
What to do next…
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.
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 218,000 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.