O'Hare Truck Service, Inc. v. City of Northlake

518 U.S. 712, 116 S. Ct. 2353, 135 L. Ed. 2d 874 (1996)

From our private database of 47,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

O'Hare Truck Service, Inc. v. City of Northlake

United States Supreme Court
518 U.S. 712, 116 S. Ct. 2353, 135 L. Ed. 2d 874 (1996)

Facts

Since 1965, O’Hare Truck Service, Inc. (O’Hare) (plaintiff) had been an authorized towing-service provider for the City of Northlake, Illinois (the city) (defendant). The city coordinated towing services through the police department and kept a rotation list of towing companies that could provide services. The city’s former mayor and O’Hare had an understanding that O’Hare would remain on the city’s rotation list as long as O’Hare continued to provide good service. When the city’s new mayor, Reid Paxson (defendant), was elected in 1989, Paxson told O’Hare’s owner, John Gratzianna (plaintiff), that Paxson was pleased with O’Hare and would keep O’Hare on the rotation list. In 1993, when Paxson was running for reelection, Paxson’s campaign asked Gratzianna to make a campaign contribution. Gratzianna refused and instead displayed Paxson’s opponent’s campaign poster at O’Hare. A short time later, the city removed O’Hare from the rotation list of towing-service providers. O’Hare and Gratzianna sued the city and Paxson in federal district court in Illinois, asserting violations of the First Amendment. O’Hare and Gratzianna contended that O’Hare had been removed from the rotation list in retaliation for Gratzianna’s support of Paxson’s political opponent. The district court dismissed the complaint, finding that although the United States Supreme Court had previously held that government officials generally may not discharge public employees for refusing to support a political party or candidate, the same protections did not extend to independent contractors like O’Hare. The appellate court affirmed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)

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 899,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 899,000 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
  • 47,000 briefs - keyed to 994 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

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership