Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Goetz v. Windsor Central School District

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
698 F.2d 606 (2d Cir. 1983)


Facts

Dennis Goetz (plaintiff) was employed as a cleaner for the Windsor Central School District (School District) (defendant). Goetz was classified as an at-will employee. Pursuant to a collective-bargaining agreement, the School District was required to provide Goetz with notice and an explanation prior to terminating his employment. Approximately one year after Goetz was hired, a series of thefts occurred at the School District’s offices. Goetz was arrested and charged with burglary in connection with the thefts. On January 10, 1981, while the charges were pending, the School District suspended Goetz. On January 12, 1981, the School District sent Goetz a letter requesting a written explanation regarding his involvement in the thefts. Goetz never responded. The School District also circulated a memorandum among the staff requesting that recent events at the school be subject to the strictest confidentiality. On January 19, 1981, Goetz sent a letter to the School District, alleging that his suspension without a hearing violated his constitutional rights. The letter requested that the School District provide Goetz with a hearing. On January 22, 1981, the School District terminated Goetz’s employment because he had failed to provide a written explanation pursuant to the January 12 letter. Goetz sued the School District, alleging that his termination had deprived him of property and liberty interests guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The United States District Court for the Northern District of New York granted summary judgment in favor of the School District. Goetz 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 (Cardamone, 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…

  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 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.