Login

Login

To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library

Add

Search

Login
Register
Register

NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co

Law Dictionary
CASE BRIEFS

Law Dictionary

Featuring Black's Law Dictionary 2nd Ed.
AA
Font size

Constitutional Law Keyed to Cohen

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Citation. 22 Ill.357 U.S. 458 U.S. 886, 102 S. Ct. 3409, 73 L. Ed. 2d 1215 (1982)

Brief Fact Summary. Beginning in 1966, under the direction of the Petitioner, the Mississippi National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) (Petitioner), black citizens began to boycott the businesses of several white merchants, on the basis of racial injustice. The Respondents, Claiborne Hardware Co. and other merchants (Respondents), brought suit asking for damages, alleging that their businesses had suffered due to the boycott.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The freedom to associate includes the freedom to demonstration, provided that a demonstration does not lead to violence.


Facts. Beginning in 1966, under the direction of the Petitioner, black citizens began to boycott the businesses of several white merchants, on the basis of racial injustice. The Respondents brought suit asking for damages, alleging that their businesses had suffered due to the boycott. In 1976, ten years after the beginning of the boycott, the Trial Court held for the Respondents and awarded damages for lost business, in excess of $1.25 million. The Supreme Court of the State of Mississippi upheld the imposition of liability under the theory of malicious interference, and the Petitioner appealed to the United States Supreme Court (Supreme Court).

Issue. This case considers whether demonstrators in a boycott, who are exercising their right to freely associate, can be held liable for damages caused to a business as a result of the boycott.
See More Course Videos

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following