DeFunis v. Odegaard
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
DeFunis v. Odegaard | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States |
||||||||||||
Argued February 26, 1974 Decided April 23, 1974 |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Holding | ||||||||||||
The Court held that the case was moot. | ||||||||||||
Court membership | ||||||||||||
Chief Justice: Warren E. Burger Associate Justices: William O. Douglas, William J. Brennan, Potter Stewart, Byron White, Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, Lewis Franklin Powell, Jr., William Rehnquist |
||||||||||||
Case opinions | ||||||||||||
Per curiam. Dissent by: Douglas Dissent by: Brennan Joined by: Douglas, White, Marshall |
||||||||||||
Laws applied | ||||||||||||
U.S. Const. |
DeFunis v. Odegaard, 416 U.S. 312 (1974) , was a United States Supreme Court case that was determined to be moot, and therefore could not go forward. A student who had been denied admission to the University of Washington School of Law, and had then been provisionally admitted during the pendancy of the case, was slated to graduate within a few months at the time the decision was rendered.
The Court rejected the assertion that the case fell into either of two exceptions to the mootness doctrine that were raised by the plaintiff. The case did not constitute "voluntary cessation" on the part of the defendant law school, because the plaintiff was now in his final semester, and the law school could take no action to deny him the ability to graduate. Nor was this a question that was "capable of repetition, yet evading review" because the plaintiff would never again face this situation, and others who might raise the same complaint in the future might be able to receive full review in the courts.