Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Staub v. City of Baxley

United States Supreme Court
355 U.S. 313 (1958)


Facts

The City of Baxley, Georgia (the city) (plaintiff) had an ordinance prohibiting the solicitation of members for an organization without a permit and license. Violation of the ordinance was subject to punishment at the discretion of the city. Rose Staub (defendant), an employee of a ladies’ garment-workers union, was soliciting new members in the city without a permit. Staub was charged with violating the ordinance. Prior to trial, Staub challenged the constitutionality of the law, alleging it violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution by restricting free speech and the freedom of lawful assembly. The city court found Staub guilty and sentenced her to 30 days in jail and a $300 fine. The county superior court affirmed, as did the Court of Appeals of Georgia. The court of appeals declined to rule on the merits, because Staub failed to follow a state procedural rule requiring that specific sections of ordinances be challenged instead of the whole ordinance. The Georgia Supreme Court denied certiorari, and Staub appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

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 (Whittaker, 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.

Dissent (Frankfurter, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

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 218,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.