De La Cruz v. Tormey
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
582 F.2d 45 (1978)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
A group of young, low-income mothers (mothers) (plaintiffs), along with other students and community groups, brought to the attention of the San Mateo Community College District (district) (defendant) the need for facilities for the care of children while their parents attended class. The mothers requested that the district establish a childcare facility, but the district did not act on the request. The mothers then requested support from the district for an off-campus cooperative childcare facility established by the mothers, but the district refused to provide support. The mothers applied for and were given preliminary approval for a grant and for state funds to establish a childcare program. The district refused both the grant and the state funds even though neither required the district to provide financing or facilities for the childcare program. After repeated refusals of assistance from the district, the mothers filed suit in federal district court, alleging that the district’s inaction discriminated against the mothers because of their gender in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The district moved to dismiss, and the district court granted the motion. The mothers appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Palmieri, J.)
Dissent (Wallace, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.