Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

contractplaintiffappealwilldiscriminationdue process
contractplaintiffappealwilldue process

Related Cases

Regions Financial Corp., Regions Bank v. Parish Partners Co., L.L.C., 451 Fed.Appx. 354
View Case »
Columbus-America Discovery Group v. Atlantic Mut. Ins. Co., 974 F.2d 450, 1992 A.M.C. 2705, 24 Fed.R.Serv.3d 14
View Case »
Bright v. Boyd, 1 Story 478, 4 F.Cas. 127, No. 1875
View Case »
Duffy v. Milder, 896 A.2d 27
View Case »
Kaye v. Buehrle, 8 Ohio App.3d 381, 457 N.E.2d 373, 8 O.B.R. 495
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Buchanan v. Warley, 245 U.S. 60, 38 S.Ct. 16, 62 L.Ed. 149, L.R.A. 1918C,210, Am.Ann.Cas. 1918A,1201

Facts

Charles H. Buchanan, the plaintiff, entered into a contract to sell a piece of real estate in Louisville to William Warley, a colored man. The contract included a condition that Warley would not be required to accept the deed unless he had the legal right to occupy the property as a residence. The city of Louisville had an ordinance that prohibited colored persons from occupying residences in blocks where the majority of residences were occupied by white persons. Buchanan argued that the ordinance was unconstitutional, violating the Fourteenth Amendment.

Charles H. Buchanan, the plaintiff, entered into a contract to sell a piece of real estate in Louisville to William Warley, a colored man.

Issue

Does a city ordinance that prohibits colored persons from occupying residences in predominantly white blocks violate the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantees of equal protection and due process?

Does a city ordinance that prohibits colored persons from occupying residences in predominantly white blocks violate the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantees of equal protection and due process?

Rule

The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from denying any person the equal protection of the laws and from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from denying any person the equal protection of the laws and from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

Analysis

The Supreme Court analyzed the ordinance and determined that it effectively barred the sale of property to colored persons solely based on their race. The Court emphasized that the right to sell property is a fundamental right protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, and that the ordinance's racial discrimination was not a legitimate exercise of the state's police power.

The Supreme Court analyzed the ordinance and determined that it effectively barred the sale of property to colored persons solely based on their race.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Kentucky Court of Appeals, ruling that the ordinance was unconstitutional and violated the plaintiff's rights to sell his property to a colored person.

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Kentucky Court of Appeals, ruling that the ordinance was unconstitutional and violated the plaintiff's rights to sell his property to a colored person.

Who won?

Charles H. Buchanan prevailed in the case because the Supreme Court found that the ordinance violated the Fourteenth Amendment, thus allowing him to enforce the contract to sell his property.

Charles H. Buchanan prevailed in the case because the Supreme Court found that the ordinance violated the Fourteenth Amendment, thus allowing him to enforce the contract to sell his property.

You must be