Connection lost
Server error
LASSITER v. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES Case Brief
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
tl;dr: The Supreme Court held that the Constitution does not automatically require states to provide counsel to indigent parents in termination proceedings. Instead, courts must decide on a case-by-case basis whether fundamental fairness, under a due process balancing test, necessitates appointing a lawyer.
Legal Significance: This case establishes that there is no absolute right to appointed counsel in civil cases under the Due Process Clause. It created a rebuttable presumption that counsel is required only when physical liberty is at stake, applying a case-by-case analysis for parental termination proceedings.
LASSITER v. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 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
The State of North Carolina placed petitioner Abby Lassiter’s infant son in the custody of the Department of Social Services (DSS) after adjudicating him a neglected child. Subsequently, Lassiter was convicted of second-degree murder and imprisoned. Two years later, DSS petitioned to terminate her parental rights, alleging she had willfully failed to maintain contact with the child or plan for his future. Lassiter was brought from prison to attend the termination hearing. The trial court determined that she had ample opportunity to retain an attorney but had failed to do so, and it did not appoint counsel for her. At the adversarial hearing, a DSS social worker testified against Lassiter. Representing herself, Lassiter attempted to cross-examine the witness and present her own testimony but struggled with the legal procedures. The court, finding clear, cogent, and convincing evidence of neglect and lack of concern, terminated her parental rights. Lassiter appealed, arguing that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment entitled her, as an indigent parent, to state-appointed counsel in the termination proceeding.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to appoint counsel for an indigent parent in every proceeding to terminate parental rights?
No. The Court held that the decision to appoint counsel for indigent 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 e
IRAC Legal Analysis
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 Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to appoint counsel for an indigent parent in every proceeding to terminate parental rights?
Conclusion
This decision establishes the constitutional floor for the right to counsel in 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. Excepteu
Legal Rule
The Due Process Clause does not create a per se right to 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
Legal Analysis
The Court, in an opinion by Justice Stewart, began by establishing a 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 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 nul
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The Due Process Clause does not create an absolute right to
