This website requires JavaScript. Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings, or use a different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari.

Options

From our private database of 34,000+ case briefs...

Fitzpatrick v. City of Atlanta

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

2 F.3d 1112 (1993)

Facts

The City of Atlanta (city) (defendant) had a rule (the no-beard rule) requiring all firefighters to fully shave their faces. Occupational safety and health experts stated that the respirator masks used by firefighters should not be worn with facial hair. Facial hair prevented the forming of a proper seal between the respirator mask and the wearer’s face, thereby risking exposing the wearer to contaminants. Several Black firefighters (the firefighters) (plaintiffs) employed by the city suffered from pseudofolliculitis barbae (PFB), which caused their faces to become infected if they shaved. PFB disproportionately afflicted Black men. The firefighters brought suit, contending that the no-beard rule had a disparate impact on Blacks in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII). The firefighters proposed an alternative rule that would require shaving only the portion of the face where the respirator mask’s seal would come into contact with the skin. But the firefighters did not cite any evidence indicating that partial shaving would be a safe alternative. Further, partial shaving would pose the same PFB problems as full-face shaving. The district court granted summary judgment for the city. The firefighters appealed.

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 (Anderson, 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.

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 607,000 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 brief 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.
Learn about our approach Read more about Quimbee

Here's why 607,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 34,000 briefs, keyed to 984 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 607,000 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
34,000 briefs - keyed to 984 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