Wright v. Cork Club
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
315 F. Supp. 1143 (1970)
- Written by Miller Jozwiak, JD
Facts
Noah Wright (plaintiff), who was a Black woman, called the Cork Club (defendant) to host a social event. The Cork Club was a nonprofit organization that held a private-club registration permit under Texas law. During that phone call, a Cork Club representative agreed to allow Wright to host the event. The representative also inquired as to whether the event participants were club members. The Cork Club did not have strenuous admission requirements and often allowed nonmembers to attend as guests. At the time, Wright’s event participants were not members. The representative sent Wright applications for the Cork Club. Wright completed the application, became a member, and went to the Cork Club several times. Shortly thereafter, Wright received a letter stating that the so-called matter of integration had not come up for the Cork Club before. The letter then stated that Wright’s event was canceled and that Wright’s membership in the club would not be active until the club voted on integration. The Cork Club later voted against integration. In response, Wright sued the Cork Club for violating the public-accommodations provisions under Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title II). The Cork Club responded that it was not subject to Title II under Title II’s exclusion of private clubs that were not, in fact, open to the public.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Singleton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 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.
