Business Finance
Case Brief

Temple University

Question Description

We have to create a case brief on United States v. Carroll Towing Co., 160 F.2d 482 (2d Cir. N.Y. Mar. 17, 1947. I have attached my last assignment I did and I received a 23/24. My Dissent was not clear enough on my final paper.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Case Brief #2 Case Name and Citation United States v. Carroll Towing Co., 160 F.2d 482 (2d Cir. N.Y. Mar. 17, 1947) Stephen Stillwell Class: Legal Issues Teacher: Professor Rhodes Date: 09/11/2017 Case Brief Brown vs. Board of Education Case Name and Citation: Brown vs. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) Issue: - Whether the Fourteenth Amendment permitted the “separate but equal” doctrine, and whether the educational environments of the plaintiffs, were equal to their white counterparts. Facts: -Oliver Brown and other plaintiffs were denied admission into a public school attended by white children. This was permitted under laws which allowed segregation based on race. Brown claimed that the segregation deprived minority children of equal protection under the 14th Amendment. Brown filed a class action, consolidating cases from Virginia, South Carolina, Delaware and Kansas against the Board of Education in a federal district court in Kansas. - Black children had been denied admission to their community public schools which were only attended by white children under the segregation laws in several places, including Topeka, Kansas where Brown resided. The tangible factors that schools rely upon to function were equalized or are being equalized, although the plaintiffs argued they would never receive the same public education in the black schools. This was acknowledged through a lack in motivation and educational and mental development because of the constant inferiority imposed by segregation. The black students sought admission to the white schools. Court Decision: - The doctrine of “separate but equal” was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause and the students were ordered to gain admission to white public schools in which they had applied for and been denied admission. Court Rationale: - The courts found that the doctrines of separate but equal educational facilities “are inherently unequal.” Thus, no matter of equalized segregation could ever reach the demand imposed by the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment Education had changed so substantially in the time since the fourteenth amendment was passed that it’s prior interpretation in Plessy v. Ferguson is no longer valid. Further, Segregation has inherent inequalities for children, and these inherent inequalities have detrimental effects of the black children of segregated schools limiting the long-term abilities as citizens. This is what the 14th Amendment sought to prohibit, and does in the case, therefore the plaintiffs and all other children should not be denied admission to a public school simply based on race Dissenting Opinion: - Minority groups and members of the civil rights movement were buoyed by the Brown decision even without specific directions for implementation. Proponents of judicial activism believed the Supreme Court had appropriately used its position to adapt the basis of the Constitution to address new problems in new times. The Warren Court stayed this course for the next 15 years, deciding cases that significantly affected not only race relations, but also the administration of criminal justice, the operation of the political process, and the separation of church and state. Personal Opinion: - - My personal opinion of the Brown v. Board of Education case can be relatively long. I believe there is still a lot of work to be done on the equality of our education system and all other matters of any equality. These two cases are just two of the biggest cases that we have heard of, that changed our society and minor changes in desegregation among citizens of America. There is still a lot of work that needs to be done. I believe our government and social media communications is very corrupt. The people of the United States need to stand up for substantial changes to come. ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Final Answer


Stephen Stillwell
Class: Legal Issues
Teacher: Professor Rhodes
Case Brief
United States v. Carroll Towing Co
Case Name and Citation: United States v. Carroll Towing Co., 160 F.2d 482 (2d Cir. N.Y. Mar.
17, 1947).

As to whether the Petitioners should be held partly to account for the destruction to the
barge together with for the misplaced consignment by not getting an attendant aboard the
barge when it broke free from the pier.


The Appellant possessed a barge, which had been chartered by a railway company. The
barge, with a freight of flour owned by the United States, was attached to the end of the
dock. Appellant chartered a pull...

Willygenius (659)
Purdue University

Solid work, thanks.

The tutor was great. I’m satisfied with the service.

Goes above and beyond expectations !


Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors