Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Close v. Glenwood Cemetery

• 1882 • 107 U.S. 466 • Waite Court
Close v. Glenwood Cemetery is a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1883. The case involved a dispute between the plaintiff, Close, and the defendant, Glenwood Cemetery, over the ownership of a cemetery lot. Close had purchased the lot from the cemetery in 1876, but the cemetery refused to transfer the deed to Close, claiming that the lot had been sold to another party in 1877. Close argued that the cemetery had no right to sell the lot to another party, as he had already...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1882
Docket: 108
107 U.S. 466
2 S. Ct. 267
27 L. Ed. 408
1882 U.S. LEXIS 1239
Argued: Nov 27, 1882

Close v. Glenwood Cemetery

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Close v. Glenwood Cemetery is a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1883. The case involved a dispute between the plaintiff, Close, and the defendant, Glenwood Cemetery, over the ownership of a cemetery lot. Close had purchased the lot from the cemetery in 1876, but the cemetery refused to transfer the deed to Close, claiming that the lot had been sold to another party in 1877. Close argued that the cemetery had no right to sell the lot to another party, as he had already purchased it. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Close, finding that the cemetery had no right to sell the lot to another party after it had already been sold to Close. The Court held that the cemetery was bound by its contract with Close and could not transfer the deed to another party without Close's consent. The Court also held that the cemetery was liable for damages for breach of contract. This case established the principle that a party cannot transfer a deed to another party without the consent of the original purchaser.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Close v. Glenwood Cemetery, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a cemetery corporation had the right to refuse burial services based on race. The majority opinion held that such discrimination was permissible under state law and did not violate any federal laws or constitutional rights of African Americans. Justice Harlan dissented from this decision, arguing that it violated both the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and its Privileges or Immunities Clause. He argued that while states may have certain powers over their own citizens, they cannot deny fundamental rights protected by the Constitution; in this case, he believed that denying access to public cemeteries based solely on race constituted an unconstitutional deprivation of liberty without due process of law. Furthermore, he argued that allowing such racial discrimination would set a dangerous precedent for other forms of discrimination against African Americans in other areas as well.

Opinion written by Justice HGray
Decided: Mar 05, 1883
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms