Quilloin v. Walcott et Vir
434 U.S. 246 · Decided January 10, 1978 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Quilloin v. Walcott et Vir was decided on January 10, 1978 unanimously (9–0). The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Sex discrimination (excluding employment)” in the Civil Rights area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 434 U.S. 246 · 98 S. Ct. 549 · 54 L. Ed. 2d 511 · 1978 U.S. LEXIS 52
- Docket number
- 76-6372
- Decided
- January 10, 1978
- Argued
- November 9, 1977
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Thurgood Marshall
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- Sex discrimination (excluding employment)
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority |
Full case caption
Quilloin v. Walcott et Vir
SCDB identifiers: case 1977-021, docket 1977-021-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Sex discrimination (excluding employment)”
- Vorchheimer v. School District of Philadelphia
- Califano v. Webster
- Califano v. GoldfarbLaw held unconstitutional
- Stanton v. Stanton
- Duren v. MissouriAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Harlin v. Missouri
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Bordenkircher v. Hayes
- Board of Curators of the University of Missouri v. Horowitz
- Memphis Light v. Craft
- Kulko v. Superior Court of California in and for the City and County of San Francisco (Horn
- Flagg Bros., Inc. v. Brooks
- Taylor v. Kentucky
Same Term, same area (Civil Rights)
- Califano v. Jobst
- Idaho Department of Employment v. Smith
- Nashville Gas Co. v. Satty
- Richmond Unified School District v. Berg
- United Air Lines, Inc. v. McMann
- Zablocki v. RedhailLaw held unconstitutional
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error