Also known as: distinguish · distinguishes · distinguished · distinguishing · distinguishable
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A judicial technique by which a court identifies material factual or legal differences between the present case and a precedent, thereby limiting the precedent's applicability.
After an unlawful arrest, officers obtained a confession from Dominic Drake. Days later, Drake's sister voluntarily led police to a weapon used in the crime. The prosecution offered the weapon at trial. The court admitted the evidence because the sister's independent action created a break from the initial illegality.
Davenport Pharmaceuticals filed articles listing two classes of stock but failed to assign each class a unique designation. In later litigation a court distinguished an earlier precedent requiring identical rights within each class because the present articles supplied materially different terms and preferences for each class.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Dillon Energy, an unregistered foreign limited liability partnership, sought to register its name in a new state. The secretary of state compared the name against existing records. A court later distinguished an earlier precedent that had barred similar names because the present filing presented materially different identifying features.
A local newspaper published a false story about Derek Douglas, a private citizen. Douglas sued for defamation without proving actual malice. The court permitted recovery under a negligence standard because Douglas lacked the public access that would require the higher fault showing.
New York City designated Grand Central Terminal a landmark, barring construction of a tower above it. Penn Central argued the restriction constituted a taking. The Court upheld the regulation after finding the owners retained substantial beneficial use of the existing terminal.
State officials defended bans on same-sex marriage by citing earlier decisions upholding traditional marriage definitions. The Court rejected those precedents after identifying changed legal understandings of liberty and equality that rendered the older cases inapposite.
A lawyer must identify a material factual, procedural, or legal difference between the cited case and the present dispute that renders the precedent inapplicable.
Supporting sources
No. Distinguishing narrows the precedent's reach to the specific facts or legal context identified but leaves the holding intact for future cases that match those features.
Supporting sources
A court may distinguish an earlier precedent interpreting name-availability statutes when the present filing presents materially different identifying features that the prior decision did not address.
A court may distinguish an earlier precedent applying the exclusionary rule when the present facts show material differences in attenuation, temporal proximity, or intervening circumstances that the prior decision did not consider.
…imposing it upon the people of the 50 States. Dissenting — Rehnquist, J. The decision here to break pregnancy into three distinguishable terms and to outline the permissible restrictions the State may impose in each one, partakes more of judicial legislation than it does of a determination of the intent of the drafters of…