Lassiter v. Department of Social Services
Significance, Further Readings
Abby Gail Lassiter
Department of Social Services of Durham County, North Carolina
Because she was indigent, the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause dictated that the state provide her with counsel.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Thomas Russell Odom
Justices for the Court
Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, Potter Stewart (writing for the Court), Byron R. White
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
1 June 1981
Refusing to appoint counsel for an indigent parent in proceedings terminating parental status was found not to violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad Company v. Chicago, 166 U.S. 226 (1897).
- Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455 (1942).
- Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963).
- Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972).
- Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975).
- Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979).
- AFL-CIO C.L.C.v. City of Cleveland Local Number International Association of Firefighters (93,) - Significance, Further Readings
- Kolender v. Lawson - Significance, Impact
- Lassiter v. Department of Social Services - Significance
- Lassiter v. Department of Social Services - Further Readings
- Other Free Encyclopedias