MAXINE MAYS, ETC., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES,
v.
THE BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS

5th Cir. | 1970-06-08
No. 29384
Before BROWN, Chief Judge, MORGAN and INGRAHAM, Circuit Judges.
428 F.2d 809 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1970) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that a school board has a continuing obligation to remedy faculty desegregation, regardless of opposition, to achieve a unitary system.


Facts & Procedural History

The School Board appealed a District Court order approving a desegregation plan, specifically challenging the faculty desegregation requirements. The …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

The ease under consideration was first initiated in 1961. The appellant School Board appeals1 from a Board-recommended plan approved by the District Court on January 29, 1970, Two errors are asserted to the order of the District Court.

The thrust of appellant School Board’s first objection appears to be on the issue of the desegregation of Englewood and Osprey Schools, and this objection appears to be a matter of semantics in that the District Court should have “approved, not ordered” the Board plan into effect. We find no merit in this contention.

The School Board’s second assertion of error is that the District Court erred in ordering the desegregation of faculties at certain Sarasota County Schools as expressed in our decision in Singleton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, 5 Cir., 1970, 419 F. 2d 1211, “the ratio of Negro to white teachers in each school, and the ratio of other staff in each, are substantially the same as each such ratio is to the teachers and other staff, respectively, in the entire system”. The Board seeks exemption from the requirements of Singleton because its efforts to place Negro faculty in all-white faculties have met with opposition. Regardless of opposition and impediments, the Sarasota Board is under a continuing obligation to remedy the faculty situation. Until it does so, the system cannot be regarded under existing law as unitary. See United States v. Greenwood Municipal Separate School District, 5 Cir., 1969, 406 F. 2d 1086.

The order of the District Court is affirmed.

The mandate herein shall issue immediately, and no stay will be granted for filing petition for rehearing or petition for writ of certiorari.

. Under the stringent requirements of Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 1969, 396 U.S. 19, 90 S.Ct. 29, 24 L.Ed.2d 19, which this Court has carried out in United States v. Hinds County School Board, 5 Cir., 1969, 417 F. 2d 852, and of Carter v. West Feliciana Parish School Board, 1970, 396 U.S. 290, 90 S.Ct. 608, 24 L.Ed.2d 477, implemented in Singleton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, 5 Cir., 1970, 419 F. 2d 1211, this Court has judicially determined that the ordinary procedures for appellate review in school desegregation cases have to be suitably adopted to assure that each system whose case is before us, “begin immediately to operate as unitary school systems”. Upon consideration of the parties’ memoranda and so much of the record as is available or determined to be needed by the Court, the Court has proceeded to dispose of this ease as an extraordinary matter. Rule 2, F.R.A.P.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw