Kincaid v. Gibson
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
236 F.3d 342 (2001)
- Written by Jennifer Flinn, JD
Facts
Charles Kincaid and Capri Coffer (plaintiffs) were students at Kentucky State University (defendant). Betty Gibson (defendant) was the university’s vice president for student affairs. Coffer was the editor of the school-funded yearbook. To increase student interest in the yearbook, Coffer designed a yearbook that was different from those produced in years past. Coffer chose a purple cover made from a “rain shower foil stamp” material, gave the yearbook the theme “destination unknown,” and included photos depicting current and political events affecting the university, the surrounding community, and the nation. Gibson objected to the yearbook’s colors, themes, and photos of events unrelated to the university. Gibson found the yearbook to be “of poor quality” and “inappropriate” and refused to allow distribution of the yearbooks. Kincaid and Coffer filed a lawsuit against Gibson and the university, arguing that refusing to distribute the yearbooks violated their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Gibson and the university, and Kincaid and Coffer appealed. [Editor’s Note: The facts of the case were not provided in the casebook excerpt but were sourced from the full-text opinion to provide background essential to the case.]
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cole, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.