Village of Willowbrook v. Olech

Media Items
Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Opinion Announcement
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
James L. DeAno (Argued the cause for the petitioners)
Irving L. Gornstein (Department of Justice, argued the cause for the United States, as amicus curiae, by special leave of court)
John R. Wimmer (Argued the cause for the respondent)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
98-1288
Petitioner: 
Village of Willowbrook
Respondent: 
Olech
Opinion: 
528 U.S. 562 (2000)

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, Village of Willowbrook v. Olech , 528 U.S. 562 (2000)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1999/1999_98_1288)
Facts of the Case: 

Grace Olech asked the Village of Willowbrook to connect her property to the municipal water supply. The Village conditioned the connection on Olech's granting of a 33-foot easement. Olech refused, claiming that the Village only required a 15-foot easement from other property owners seeking access to the water supply. Olech sued the Village claiming that the Village's demand of an additional 18-foot easement violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The District Court dismissed the case for failure to state a cognizable claim under the Equal Protection Clause. In reversing, the Court of Appeals held that a plaintiff can allege an equal protection violation by asserting that state action was motivated solely by a "spiteful effort to 'get' him for reasons wholly unrelated to any legitimate state objective."

Question: 

Does the Equal Protection Clause give rise to a cause of action on behalf of a "class of one" where the plaintiff did not allege membership in a class or group?

Conclusion: 

Yes. In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that Olech's allegations were sufficient to state a claim for relief under traditional equal protection analysis. "Our cases have recognized successful equal protection claims brought by a 'class of one,' where the plaintiff alleges that she has been intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated and that there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment," stated the unanimous, unsigned opinion. Justice Stephen G. Breyer concurred.

Decisions

Decision: 9 votes for Olech, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Equal Protection

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Wrote a special concurrence
Breyer

Per Curiam with Argument