Sterling v. Cupp
Oregon Supreme Court
625 P.2d 123 (1981)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
David Sterling, Thomas Capps, and Wilbur Hixson (inmates) (plaintiffs) were inmates at the Oregon State Penitentiary (prison). They filed suit against prison superintendent Hoyt Cupp and other prison officials (officials) (defendants), seeking an injunction preventing the assignment of female guards to frisk male prisoners or observe them in showers or toilets. The inmates argued that such assignments constituted treatment with unnecessary rigor in violation of Oregon Constitution Article I, Section 13. The trial court held in the prisoners’ favor, issuing an injunction that prohibited the officials from assigning female officers to any position for which the job description or actual duties included frisking or patting down male prisoners in nonemergency situations. The state appellate court affirmed the injunction, and the officials appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Linde, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 912,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,200 briefs, keyed to 998 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.
