NAACP v. Button case brief summary
371 U.S. 415 (1963)
CASE SYNOPSIS:
Certiorari was issued to the Supreme Court of Appeals (VA), which determined that petitioner national association was included within a statutory ban against improper solicitation of any legal or professional business. Petitioner claimed application of the statute violated U.S. Const. amend. I because it prevented petitioner from aiding others in asserting their constitutionally protected rights.
OVERVIEW: The Supreme Court reversed the order of the state court of appeals. Respondent government argued that the statute prohibiting activities of petitioner National Association for the Advancement of Colored People from aiding potential parties to litigation merely restated the law against solicitation, and alleged petitioner also violated canons of professional ethics in their solicitation.
HOLDING:
On review, the court found that petitioner's activities were to assist potential parties in asserting their constitutionally guaranteed rights, and came under the U.S. Const. amend. I protection of vigorous advocacy against government intrusion.
ANALYSIS:
The court noted that a state may not ignore constitutional rights under the guise of prohibiting professional misconduct, and found that the dangers of unfair competition among attorneys were not present since most of petitioner's staff attorneys made financial sacrifices in performing their services.
OUTCOME: The Supreme Court reversed the order of the state court of appeals, which held that the association was prohibited from assisting potential parties, because the association aided potential parties in asserting their constitutionally protected rights and was protected under U.S. Const. amend. I, and the dangers of unfair competition among attorneys were not present.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
371 U.S. 415 (1963)
CASE SYNOPSIS:
Certiorari was issued to the Supreme Court of Appeals (VA), which determined that petitioner national association was included within a statutory ban against improper solicitation of any legal or professional business. Petitioner claimed application of the statute violated U.S. Const. amend. I because it prevented petitioner from aiding others in asserting their constitutionally protected rights.
OVERVIEW: The Supreme Court reversed the order of the state court of appeals. Respondent government argued that the statute prohibiting activities of petitioner National Association for the Advancement of Colored People from aiding potential parties to litigation merely restated the law against solicitation, and alleged petitioner also violated canons of professional ethics in their solicitation.
HOLDING:
On review, the court found that petitioner's activities were to assist potential parties in asserting their constitutionally guaranteed rights, and came under the U.S. Const. amend. I protection of vigorous advocacy against government intrusion.
ANALYSIS:
The court noted that a state may not ignore constitutional rights under the guise of prohibiting professional misconduct, and found that the dangers of unfair competition among attorneys were not present since most of petitioner's staff attorneys made financial sacrifices in performing their services.
OUTCOME: The Supreme Court reversed the order of the state court of appeals, which held that the association was prohibited from assisting potential parties, because the association aided potential parties in asserting their constitutionally protected rights and was protected under U.S. Const. amend. I, and the dangers of unfair competition among attorneys were not present.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
No comments:
Post a Comment