Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit
United States Supreme Court
507 U.S. 163 (1993)
Charlene Leatherman (plaintiff) brought suit against Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit (Tarrant County) (defendant), alleging violations of her civil rights during the execution of a search warrant in her home, in violation of § 1983 and the Fourth Amendment. Leatherman alleged that the officers’ conduct, which included shooting and killing Leatherman’s two dogs, was evidence that the officers were improperly trained, thus incurring municipal liability. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas dismissed her complaint, finding that the pleading did not meet the heightened standard required by Fifth Circuit case law. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, C.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 169,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.