From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

M.M. v. Anker

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Oct 19, 1979
607 F.2d 588 (2d Cir. 1979)

Summary

In M.M. v. Anker, 607 F.2d 588 (2d Cir. 1979) (per curiam), a case decided before T.L.O., we concluded that "when a teacher conducts a highly intrusive invasion such as [a] strip search... it is reasonable to require that probable cause be present."

Summary of this case from Phaneuf v. Fraikin

Opinion

Nos. 170, 171, Dockets 79-7368, 79-7391.

Argued October 15, 1979.

Decided October 19, 1979.

Richard Emery, New York City, New York Civil Liberties Union, for plaintiffs-appellants cross-appellee.

Eugene B. Nathanson, New York City (Allen G. Schwartz, Corp. Counsel, L. Kevin Sheridan, New York City, of counsel), for defendants-appellees cross-appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Before KAUFMAN, Chief Judge, and FEINBERG and SMITH, Circuit Judges.


We affirm on Judge Dooling's opinion, reported at 477 F.Supp. 837, No. 78 C 492 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 6, 1979).

For purposes of clarifying our holding, we note our agreement with Judge Dooling that there are searches in the school enclave that satisfy Fourth Amendment requirements when based on less than probable cause. Judge Dooling was also correct in finding that the initial decision to search M.M. was predicated on no more than mere suspicion that M.M. "might" have stolen some unidentified object. We recognize, however, that teachers have a unique relationship to their students, both in administering discipline as part of their educational function, and in protecting the well-being of all children in their care and custody. Accordingly, these interests justify greater flexibility when applying the Fourth Amendment in a school setting. See, e. g., Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F.Supp. 47, 53 (N.D.N.Y. 1977); People v. Scott D., 34 N.Y.2d 483, 358 N.Y.S.2d 403, 315 N.E.2d 466 (1974) (Breitel, C. J.); cf. Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 97 S.Ct. 1401, 51 L.Ed.2d 711 (1977).

We are also of the view that as the intrusiveness of the search intensifies, the standard of Fourth Amendment "reasonableness" approaches probable cause, even in the school context. Cf. Dunaway v. New York, ___ U.S. ___, ___, 99 S.Ct. 2248, 60 L.Ed.2d 824 (1979). Thus, when a teacher conducts a highly intrusive invasion such as the strip search in this case, it is reasonable to require that probable cause be present. We conclude Judge Dooling correctly held that defendants Heitner and Amicone failed to make this showing.


Summaries of

M.M. v. Anker

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Oct 19, 1979
607 F.2d 588 (2d Cir. 1979)

In M.M. v. Anker, 607 F.2d 588 (2d Cir. 1979) (per curiam), a case decided before T.L.O., we concluded that "when a teacher conducts a highly intrusive invasion such as [a] strip search... it is reasonable to require that probable cause be present."

Summary of this case from Phaneuf v. Fraikin

In M.M. v. Anker, 607 F.2d 588, 589 (2d Cir. 1979), the court observed that "as the intrusiveness of the search intensifies, the standard of Fourth Amendment `reasonableness' approaches probable cause."

Summary of this case from Allen v. Passaic Cty
Case details for

M.M. v. Anker

Case Details

Full title:M.M., A MINOR BY HER MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND, C.M., AND M.F., A MINOR BY…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Oct 19, 1979

Citations

607 F.2d 588 (2d Cir. 1979)

Citing Cases

Phaneuf v. Fraikin

See T.L.O., 469 U.S. at 346, 105 S.Ct. 733. In M.M. v. Anker, 607 F.2d 588 (2d Cir. 1979) (per curiam), a…

N.G. v. Connecticut

In three other cases not discussed by the majority, we have likewise held that at least some individualized…