31:
410:
authored a short dissenting opinion, emphasizing what he perceived as the Court's "attitude of callous indifference to the realities of life for the poor." Marshall observed that, according to the record before the Court, Brooks' takehome pay was $ 87 per week, and thus she would be unable to pay
395:
To Brooks' contention that the state had directly authorized the re-sale of her possessions under the UCC, Rehnquist responded that the UCC merely embodied the state's decision not to involve itself in the debtor-lendor dispute. If the state had failed to pass any law related to the re-sale, there
310:
defendant/appellant corporation Flagg Bros., Inc. After several disputes between the parties regarding the price that Brooks was to pay for the moving and storage of her belongings, Flagg Bros. presented Brooks with notice that she needed to pay the amount owed within 10 days "or be sold."
451:
Stevens accused the Court of adopting an overly narrow definition of state action – arguing that under the Court's reasoning, a State could pass a law stating that it would authorize, for example, "any person of sufficient physical power" to seize and retain his neighbor's property.
391:
carried out by state governments. In
American history, the settlement of disputes between debtors and creditors was not, in Rehnquist's view, a function performed exclusively by the state, as the parties typically retained other avenues of remedy.
383:
of Brooks' property could only rise to the level of a federal constitutional violation if Flagg Bros. was a state actor, that is, performing a duty traditionally and exclusively performed by the state, and therefore attributable to the state.
455:
Stevens noted the role of the state in defining and controlling the debtor-creditor relationship, seeing the state power in this case as the power to allow for a binding remedy against the wishes of one of the parties to the dispute.
105:
374:
However, Rehnquist wrote, Brooks carried an additional burden because she was accusing Flagg Bros. of depriving her of property under the
Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment reads, in part, that "
590:
396:
could be no contention that the state had acted in any way. Codification of the state's intent to not involve its courts in the re-sale of repossessed goods still equated to a refusal to act.
318:, seeking monetary damages, an injunction against the proposed sale, and a declaration by the judiciary that such a sale under New York Uniform Commercial Code § 7-210 would violate
364:
283:
253:
135:
529:
113:
72:
379:
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." (emphasis added) Thus, according to the Court's
Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence, Flagg Bros.
415:
necessary, let alone the bill that she owed to the defendant. In
Marshall's view, this meant that Brooks had no realistic remedy at state law. Further, Marshall argued that
287:
127:
600:
585:
387:
Pointing out that Brooks had failed to name any governmental entity as a defendant, Rehnquist went on to argue that "very few" functions have been
595:
419:
state traditions led to the conclusion that the execution of liens was a state function, typically performed by the sheriff. Marshall also joined
126:
Sale of plaintiff's possessions by defendant garage, as authorized by New York's version of the
Uniform Commercial Code, did not constitute
380:
342:
268:
35:
282:
provision, which allows a warehouse to enforce a lien upon repossessed goods by selling said goods, was challenged under the
279:
371:. Second, they must show that Flagg Bros. denied them of that right while acting under the color of New York state law.
447:
368:
367:
claim. First, Rehnquist wrote, the plaintiffs must show that they have been deprived of a right guaranteed by the
360:
445:, authored a dissent, arguing that the Court's decision was foreclosed by inconsistent prior caselaw including
558:
303:
161:
533:
64:
540:
315:
272:
193:
363:. Rehnquist began by outlining the dual burden that rested on the plaintiffs in making a viable
314:
When letters from Brooks to the defendant did not produce any results, Brooks brought suit under
101:
438:
431:
420:
407:
404:
349:
338:
335:
205:
197:
181:
416:
276:
153:
109:
434:
549:
356:
352:
185:
169:
579:
345:
307:
67:
465:
442:
319:
291:
173:
131:
286:. The Court held that the state-allowed re-sale provision did not constitute
83:
79:
302:
After the city evicted plaintiff/appellee
Shirley Brooks from her home in
567:
412:
243:
Brennan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
30:
306:
in 1973, her possessions were stored in a warehouse owned by
290:, and thus, the plaintiff did not possess a colorable federal
341:
authored the majority opinion for the Court, joined by
222:
Rehnquist, joined by Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, Powell
591:
United States
Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court
247:
234:
226:
218:
213:
142:
120:
96:
91:
59:
49:
42:
23:
267:, 436 U.S. 149 (1978), was a case decided by the
116:1977); certiorari granted 434 U.S. 817 (1977)
8:
100:Defendants' motion to dismiss granted, 404
54:Flagg Bros., Inc., et al. v. Brooks, et al.
256:; New York Uniform Commercial Code § 7-210
20:
86:90; 23 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (Callaghan) 1105
477:
18:1978 United States Supreme Court case
7:
130:, and thus did not create a federal
601:United States due process case law
269:Supreme Court of the United States
238:Stevens, joined by White, Marshall
36:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
586:United States Supreme Court cases
536:149 (1978) is available from:
448:Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp.
330:
29:
596:1978 in United States case law
1:
331:Rehnquist's majority opinion
526:Flagg Bros., Inc. v. Brooks
264:Flagg Bros., Inc. v. Brooks
24:Flagg Bros., Inc. v. Brooks
617:
568:Oyez (oral argument audio)
252:
242:
147:
125:
28:
399:
280:Uniform Commercial Code
43:Argued January 18, 1978
426:
254:U.S. Const. amend. XIV
162:William J. Brennan Jr.
108:1975); reversed, 553
423:dissenting opinion.
365:Fourteenth Amendment
326:Opinion of the Court
284:Fourteenth Amendment
136:Fourteenth Amendment
45:Decided May 15, 1978
559:Library of Congress
194:Lewis F. Powell Jr.
78:98 S. Ct. 1729; 56
439:Associate Justices
400:Marshall's dissent
350:Associate Justices
304:Mount Vernon, N.Y.
158:Associate Justices
435:John Paul Stevens
432:Associate Justice
408:Thurgood Marshall
405:Associate Justice
339:William Rehnquist
336:Associate Justice
273:constitutionality
260:
259:
198:William Rehnquist
182:Thurgood Marshall
608:
572:
566:
563:
557:
554:
548:
545:
539:
512:
511:436 U.S. at 170.
509:
503:
502:436 U.S. at 166.
500:
494:
493:436 U.S. at 158.
491:
485:
482:
427:Stevens' dissent
421:Justice Stevens'
316:42 U.S.C. § 1983
154:Warren E. Burger
143:Court membership
134:claim under the
33:
32:
21:
616:
615:
611:
610:
609:
607:
606:
605:
576:
575:
570:
564:
561:
555:
552:
546:
543:
537:
521:
516:
515:
510:
506:
501:
497:
492:
488:
484:436 U.S. at 153
483:
479:
474:
462:
429:
402:
333:
328:
300:
206:John P. Stevens
196:
184:
172:
87:
44:
38:
19:
12:
11:
5:
614:
612:
604:
603:
598:
593:
588:
578:
577:
574:
573:
541:Google Scholar
520:
519:External links
517:
514:
513:
504:
495:
486:
476:
475:
473:
470:
469:
468:
461:
458:
441:Marshall and
428:
425:
401:
398:
357:Harry Blackmun
353:Potter Stewart
332:
329:
327:
324:
299:
296:
258:
257:
250:
249:
245:
244:
240:
239:
236:
232:
231:
228:
224:
223:
220:
216:
215:
211:
210:
209:
208:
186:Harry Blackmun
170:Potter Stewart
159:
156:
151:
145:
144:
140:
139:
123:
122:
118:
117:
98:
94:
93:
89:
88:
77:
61:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
34:
26:
25:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
613:
602:
599:
597:
594:
592:
589:
587:
584:
583:
581:
569:
560:
551:
542:
535:
531:
527:
523:
522:
518:
508:
505:
499:
496:
490:
487:
481:
478:
471:
467:
464:
463:
459:
457:
453:
450:
449:
444:
440:
436:
433:
424:
422:
418:
414:
409:
406:
397:
393:
390:
385:
382:
378:
372:
370:
366:
362:
358:
354:
351:
347:
346:Warren Burger
344:
343:Chief Justice
340:
337:
325:
323:
321:
317:
312:
309:
305:
297:
295:
293:
289:
285:
281:
278:
274:
270:
266:
265:
255:
251:
246:
241:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
217:
214:Case opinions
212:
207:
203:
199:
195:
191:
187:
183:
179:
175:
171:
167:
163:
160:
157:
155:
152:
150:Chief Justice
149:
148:
146:
141:
137:
133:
129:
124:
119:
115:
111:
107:
103:
99:
95:
90:
85:
81:
75:
74:
69:
66:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
27:
22:
16:
525:
507:
498:
489:
480:
454:
446:
437:, joined by
430:
403:
394:
388:
386:
376:
373:
369:Constitution
361:Lewis Powell
334:
313:
301:
288:state action
271:wherein the
263:
262:
261:
248:Laws applied
201:
189:
177:
165:
128:state action
92:Case history
71:
53:
15:
466:State actor
443:Byron White
389:exclusively
320:due process
292:due process
174:Byron White
132:due process
580:Categories
417:New York's
298:Background
277:New York's
84:U.S. LEXIS
82:185; 1978
80:L. Ed. 2d
60:Citations
524:Text of
460:See also
411:for the
308:American
230:Marshall
219:Majority
106:S.D.N.Y.
102:F. Supp.
294:claim.
235:Dissent
227:Dissent
121:Holding
114:2d Cir.
571:
565:
562:
556:
553:
550:Justia
547:
544:
538:
413:surety
381:taking
359:, and
204:
202:·
200:
192:
190:·
188:
180:
178:·
176:
168:
166:·
164:
104:1059 (
532:
472:Notes
377:State
112:764 (
110:F. 2d
97:Prior
534:U.S.
348:and
73:more
65:U.S.
63:436
530:436
275:of
68:149
582::
528:,
355:,
322:.
138:.
76:)
70:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.