Engblom v. Carey

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
Engblom v. Karey
Court United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Full case name MARIANNE E. ENGBLOM and CHARLES E. PALMER, Plaintiff-Appellants, against HUGH L. CAREY, Governor of the State of New York, RICHARD D. HONGISTO, Acting Commissioner, New York State Department of Correctional Services, JOSEPH C. SNOW, Superintendent of the Mid-Orange Correctional Facility, MAJOR-GENERAL VITO J. CASTELLANO, Chief of Staff to the Governor of New York, New York National Guard, LIEUTENANT-COLONEL JUSTIN M. QUEALLY, an Officer of the 106th Maintenance Battalion of the New York National Guard, Captain "JOHN" DREW, an Officer of the 101st Signal Battalion of the New York National Guard, and VARIOUS OFFICERS AND ENLISTED MEN, Members of the New York National Guard, Defendants-Appellees
Argued March 1st 1982
Decided May 3 1982
Citation(s) 677 F.2d 957
A state National Guardsman is a "soldier" by definition of the Third Amendment, and due to this, the defendants' Third Amendment rights were violated by housing them in the defendants' residence without their expressed consent. Even though they did not own the property they dwelled in, they were still entitled to the Amendment, because they lived in the building as an "Owner" would. By virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Third is incorporated onto the states. District court affirmed.
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Keinferd (Chief), Mansfield, Kaufman
Case opinions
Majority Mansfield
Concurrence Keinferd
Dissent Kaufman
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amends. III, XIV

Engblom v. Carey, 677 F.2d 957 (2d Cir. 1982), on rem. 572 F. Supp. 44 (S.D.N.Y. 1982), aff'd. per curiam 724 F.2d 28 (2d Cir. 1983), was a court case decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. It is the only significant court decision based on a direct challenge under the Third Amendment to the United States Constitution.[1]


The case was initiated by a 1979 strike by New York State correction officers. While the officers were on strike, some of their duties were performed by National Guardsmen who were activated. At Mid-Orange Correctional Facility (and other facilities) striking employees were evicted from employee housing which was then used to house some of the National Guard. Two of the evicted officers at Mid-Orange C.F., Marianne E. Engblom and Charles E. Palmer, subsequently filed suit against the state of New York and its governor, Hugh L. Carey.


Rendered on May 3, 1982, the decision, written for the court by Judge Walter R. Mansfield, established that the National Guardsmen qualify as soldiers under the Third Amendment, that the amendment applies to state as well as federal authorities, and that the protection of this amendment extends beyond home owners.[1] The majority stated that the officers' occupancy in the rooms was covered under the legal rules of "tenancy" and was protected under the Third Amendment.

The case was remanded to district court where it was decided in the defendants' favor, due to the principle that as agents of the state, the defendants were covered by a qualified immunity unless they knowingly acted illegally. In the absence of previous precedents on this issue, the standard of knowing illegality was not met.

Concurring in part and dissenting in part, Judge Irving R. Kaufman maintained that the officers' occupancy was covered under the lesser protection of employee housing and that the special circumstances of residency in prison grounds superseded Third Amendment protection.


  1. 1.0 1.1 Tom W. Bell, The Third Amendment: Forgotten but Not Gone, 2 William & Mary Bill of Rights J. 117 (1993)

External links