Connection lost
Server error
ORR v. ORR 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 Alabama’s alimony statutes, which imposed alimony obligations only on husbands and not wives, unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause for impermissibly discriminating based on gender.
Legal Significance: This case established that gender-based classifications, even those purportedly benefiting women, must satisfy intermediate scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause and cannot rely on archaic stereotypes about gender roles.
ORR v. ORR 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
William Orr was ordered to pay alimony to Lillian Orr pursuant to an Alabama statutory scheme that provided husbands, but not wives, could be required to pay alimony upon divorce. When Mr. Orr fell into arrears, Mrs. Orr initiated contempt proceedings. Mr. Orr challenged the constitutionality of the Alabama alimony statutes, arguing they violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by discriminating on the basis of sex. The Alabama courts upheld the statutes. Mr. Orr appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court first addressed preliminary jurisdictional questions, including Mr. Orr’s standing. It found he had standing because he bore a burden (the alimony obligation) he would not bear if he were female, regardless of whether the state, upon reversal, would extend alimony to husbands or abolish it entirely. The Court also found the constitutional challenge timely and not barred by an independent and adequate state ground, as the state courts had decided the federal constitutional issue on its merits without relying on Mr. Orr’s potential contractual obligation arising from a stipulation.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Do Alabama statutes authorizing courts to impose alimony obligations on husbands but not on wives violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Yes. The Alabama alimony statutes are unconstitutional because they establish a gender-based 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 nostru
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
Do Alabama statutes authorizing courts to impose alimony obligations on husbands but not on wives violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Conclusion
Orr v. Orr solidified the application of intermediate scrutiny to gender classifications 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 n
Legal Rule
To withstand scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause, classifications by gender must 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 al
Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court applied intermediate scrutiny to Alabama's gender-based alimony statutes. 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 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 d
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Holding: Alabama’s alimony statutes, which imposed obligations on husbands but not