Private rights under French law unconnected to a person's civil status. Foreigners may enforce these rights when reciprocity exists with their home country.
See Our Sources
How its tested
Common Examples
6
Pro Bono Services for Reciprocal Rights
Diana Delgado, a French national living in the United States, sought to enforce inheritance rights against a relative's estate in France. Her American counsel provided services at no fee because standard rates would have depleted the limited resources of the advocacy group assisting her. The representation secured enforcement of her private rights under French law once reciprocity was confirmed.
Advocacy Letter on Private Rights
Deanna Davenport contacted a nonprofit after learning her property claim in France had been blocked. The group sent her a letter explaining how to assert her droits civils and offered free representation. Because the letter advanced protected expressive activity tied to reciprocal enforcement, it could not be banned outright.
Darius Dixon, arrested in France on a minor charge, was questioned about his private property interests without warnings. Counsel later argued that the statements could not be used because they touched on enforcement of his droits civils. The court suppressed the statements to protect the underlying reciprocal rights.
Miranda v. Arizona384 U.S. 436 (1966)
In March 1963 Ernesto Miranda was arrested at his home in Phoenix and taken to the police station where he was identified by the complaining witness. He was then questioned by two officers in Interrogation Room No. 2 for two hours. The officers did not advise him of any right to counsel. Miranda signed a typed confession that was introduced at his trial for kidnapping and rape.
On October 14 1960 Michael Vignera was arrested in connection with a Brooklyn robbery. He was taken first to the 17th Detective Squad headquarters in Manhattan and later to the 66th Detective Squad. A detective questioned him for several hours without any advice concerning counsel. Vignera made an oral admission. He was then questioned by an assistant district attorney whose transcribed statement was also introduced at his trial for first-degree robbery.
On March 20 1963 Carl Calvin Westover was arrested by Kansas City police as a suspect in two local robberies. Kansas City police interrogated Westover on the night of his arrest. The next day local officers interrogated him again throughout the morning. Westover was then turned over to FBI agents who questioned him for two to two-and-a-half hours about California robberies and obtained signed confessions. At the time the FBI agents began questioning Westover he had been in custody for over fourteen hours.
On January 31 1963 Roy Allen Stewart was arrested at his home in connection with a series of purse-snatch robberies. During the next five days police interrogated Stewart on nine different occasions without any advice of rights. On the ninth session Stewart confessed. Transcripts of the interrogations were introduced at his trial for kidnapping rape and murder.
The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed Miranda's conviction. The New York courts affirmed Vignera's conviction. The Ninth Circuit affirmed Westover's conviction. The California Supreme Court reversed Stewart's conviction. The Supreme Court granted certiorari in the four cases and consolidated them for argument.
Denise Donovan and her French spouse sought state recognition of their marriage to protect inheritance rights under French law. The couple argued that denying recognition would impair enforcement of droits civils that France would honor for American citizens. The court upheld the marriage on reciprocity grounds.
Obergefell v. Hodges576 U.S. 644 (2015)
The petitioners were fourteen same-sex couples and two men whose same-sex partners were deceased. They lived in Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee. Those states defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman under their constitutions and statutes.
The petitioners filed suits in federal district courts in their home states. They sought marriage licenses or recognition of marriages lawfully performed elsewhere. James Obergefell and John Arthur traveled from Ohio to Maryland to marry aboard a medical transport plane because Arthur suffered from ALS; Obergefell later sought to be listed as surviving spouse on Arthur's death certificate. April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, Michigan nurses, adopted three children but could not both serve as legal parents under state adoption rules. Army Reserve Sergeant Ijpe DeKoe and Thomas Kostura married in New York before DeKoe's deployment to Afghanistan and later settled in Tennessee.
Each district court ruled in the petitioners' favor. The respondents appealed. The Sixth Circuit consolidated the cases and reversed the district court judgments. The petitioners sought certiorari, which the Supreme Court granted.
Same-sex couples had begun establishing families after substantial cultural and political developments in the late twentieth century. Earlier litigation had addressed the legal status of gays and lesbians, including challenges that reached the Supreme Court in Bowers v. Hardwick and Lawrence v. Texas.
Dylan Duffy challenged a state restriction that prevented him from asserting a private claim in France. He contended that the restriction burdened his ability to enforce droits civils recognized under reciprocal arrangements. The court struck down the restriction as an unconstitutional barrier.
Griswold v. Connecticut381 U.S. 479 (1965)
Estelle Griswold served as Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut. Dr. C. Lee Buxton served as the League's Medical Director and was a professor at Yale Medical School. Together they opened and operated a center in New Haven that was open from November 1 to November 10, 1961.
At the center they gave information, instruction, and medical advice to married persons as to the means of preventing conception. They examined the wife and prescribed the best contraceptive device or material for her use. Fees were usually charged, although some couples were serviced free.
The statutes involved were sections 53-32 and 54-196 of the General Statutes of Connecticut (1958 rev.). Section 53-32 made it a crime to use any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception. Section 54-196 punished accessories as principals. The appellants were found guilty as accessories and fined $100 each.
The Appellate Division of the Circuit Court affirmed the convictions. The Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut affirmed that judgment in State v. Griswold, 151 Conn. 544, 200 A. 2d 479. The United States Supreme Court noted probable jurisdiction.
The appellants asserted standing to raise the constitutional rights of the married persons with whom they had a professional relationship. A criminal conviction for serving married couples removes doubts about case or controversy. The rights of husband and wife would be diluted unless considered in a suit involving those who have this kind of confidential relation to them.
Dolores Diaz performed a public demonstration of her French property rights that was televised without consent. She sued for damages, claiming the broadcast interfered with enforcement of her droits civils. The court allowed the claim to proceed because the performance itself constituted a protectible private right.
Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co.433 U.S. 562 (1977)
Hugo Zacchini performs a "human cannonball" act in which he is shot from a cannon into a net some 200 feet away, with each performance occupying some 15 seconds. In August and September 1972, Zacchini was engaged to perform his act on a regular basis at the Geauga County Fair in Burton, Ohio. He performed in a fenced area, surrounded by grandstands, at the fair grounds, and members of the public attending the fair were not charged a separate admission fee to observe his act.
On August 30, a freelance reporter for Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., the operator of a television broadcasting station, attended the fair carrying a small movie camera. Zacchini noticed the reporter and asked him not to film the performance, and the reporter did not do so on that day. On the instructions of the producer of the station's daily newscast, the reporter returned the following day and videotaped the entire act. This film clip, approximately 15 seconds in length, was shown on the 11 o'clock news program that night, together with favorable commentary.
Zacchini then brought this action for damages against Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. He alleged that the station showed and commercialized the film of his act without his consent. Such conduct was an unlawful appropriation of his professional property. The trial court granted summary judgment for the broadcaster. The Court of Appeals of Ohio reversed. The Supreme Court of Ohio gave judgment for the broadcaster.
The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
What distinguishes droits civils from other categories of rights in French law?
Droits civils are private rights separate from a person's civil status. They become enforceable by foreigners only when the foreigner's home country extends reciprocal treatment.
Can a lawyer count time spent on droits civils matters toward pro bono obligations?
Yes. Model Rule 6.1(b)(1) expressly includes delivery of free or reduced-fee services to secure or protect civil rights, which encompasses droits civils when reciprocity supports enforcement.
Does the First Amendment protect letters informing individuals about droits civils?
Yes. Nonprofit advocacy organizations that inform people of rights and offer representation to advance civil rights objectives engage in protected expressive activity that generally cannot be banned outright.
384 U.S. 436 (1966)
…whipping—and to sustained and protracted questioning incommunicado in order to extort confessions. The Commission on Civil Rights in 1961 found much evidence to indicate that "some policemen still resort to physical force to obtain confessions," 1961 Comm'n on Civil Rights Rep., Justice, pt. 5, 17. The use of physical…
Professional ResponsibilityRegulation of the legal profession · Responsibilities of partners, managers, supervisory and subordinate lawyersMPREIntermediate