Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Ingraham v. Wright Case Brief

Supreme Court of the United States1977Docket #77831
51 L. Ed. 2d 711 97 S. Ct. 1401 430 U.S. 651 1977 U.S. LEXIS 74 Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Torts

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: Public school students sued after being severely paddled. The Supreme Court held that corporal punishment in schools does not violate the Eighth Amendment’s “cruel and unusual punishment” clause and that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause does not require a hearing beforehand.

Legal Significance: The case established that the Eighth Amendment’s protections apply only to the criminal context and that traditional state tort remedies can satisfy procedural due process requirements for disciplinary corporal punishment in public schools, obviating the need for a pre-deprivation hearing.

Ingraham v. Wright Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Petitioners, junior high school students in Dade County, Florida, were subjected to severe corporal punishment. One student, James Ingraham, was struck more than 20 times with a wooden paddle, resulting in a hematoma that required medical attention and kept him out of school for several days. Another student, Roosevelt Andrews, was paddled on his arms, temporarily depriving him of their full use. The punishments were administered for minor disciplinary infractions pursuant to a school policy authorizing corporal punishment. The students filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging the paddlings constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment and a deprivation of liberty without due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment. They sought damages and injunctive relief. The school system’s policy was authorized by Florida statute, which, along with common law, prohibited “unduly severe” punishment and provided for potential civil and criminal liability for excessive force.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment apply to disciplinary corporal punishment in public schools, and if not, does the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause require notice and a hearing prior to its imposition?

The Court affirmed the lower court’s judgment. The Eighth Amendment does not Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment apply to disciplinary corporal punishment in public schools, and if not, does the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause require notice and a hearing prior to its imposition?

Conclusion

This decision significantly limited the scope of the Eighth Amendment to the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamc

Legal Rule

The Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause is inapplicable to disciplinary Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugi

Legal Analysis

The Court's analysis proceeded in two parts. First, addressing the Eighth Amendment Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eius

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • The Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment is limited
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Every accomplishment starts with the decision to try.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+