Boston Firefighters Union, Local 718 v. Boston Chapter, Naacp Boston Police Patrolmen Association, Inc v. Castro Beecher v. Boston Chapter, Naacp, 82-185
| Decision Date | 06 July 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-246,No. 82-185,No. 82-259,82-185,82-246,82-259 |
| Parties | BOSTON FIREFIGHTERS UNION, LOCAL 718 v. BOSTON CHAPTER, NAACP, et al BOSTON POLICE PATROLMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC. v. Pedro CASTRO et al Nancy B. BEECHER et al. v. BOSTON CHAPTER, NAACP, et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
On writs of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
The motion of respondents to retax costs is denied.
In 1981, the city of Boston decided to lay off hundreds of firefighters and police officers. By statute, Massachusetts requires that civil service layoffs occur in the order of reverse seniority. Mass.Gen.Laws Ann. ch. 31, § 39 (West). Many minority members of Boston's police and fire departments had been hired only recently pursuant to consent decrees by which Boston agreed to increase the proportion of minorities in the departments in order to remedy its past discriminatory hiring practices. As a result, layoffs under the statutory last-hired, first-fired policy would have reduced significantly the minority representation in the two departments.
Justice MARSHALL took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
Respondents obtained an order from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts enjoining Boston from laying off personnel pursuant to the statutory policy to the extent that such layoffs would reduce the percentage of minority police officers and firefighters below the level obtained before the layoffs began. The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed. 679 F.2d 965 (1982). After the Court of Appeals' decision, Massachusetts enacted legislation providing Boston with new revenues, requiring it to reinstate all police officers and firefighters laid off during the city's fiscal crisis, and securing those persons against future layoffs for fiscal reasons. 1982 Mass.Acts, ch. 190, § 25.
This Court granted certiorari to consider this important affirmative action issue. 459 U.S. ----, 103 S.Ct. 293, 74 L.Ed.2d 277 (1982). After hearing oral argument, however, the Court vacated the judgment and remanded for consideration of mootness in light of the new Massachusetts legislation. --- U.S. ----, 103 S.Ct. 2076, 76 L.Ed.2d ---- (1983). Costs were assessed against respondents under this Court's Rule 50.2, which provides: "In a case of reversal or vacating of any judgment or decree by this Court, costs shall be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Solem v. Stumes
...fact-finding, and whether Edwards should be applied retroactively. We granted certiorari only as to the third. --- U.S. ----, 103 S.Ct. 3568, 77 L.Ed.2d 1409 (1983). We therefore assume for present purposes that the conduct at issue here violated Edwards. We need not decide whether the poli......
-
Abrams v. Interco Inc.
...for rehearing), cert. granted, 457 U.S. 1131, 102 S.Ct. 2956, 73 L.Ed.2d 1348, restored to calendar for reargument, --- U.S. ----, 103 S.Ct. 3568, 77 L.Ed.2d 1409 (1983). Two other Courts of Appeals have also followed the reasoning in White by holding that judgments on the merits are appeal......
-
Rose v. Engle
... ... of the Roses called the Franklin, Ohio police department and reported a shooting incident at ... ...
-
U.S. v. Bentley
...(1983). The Supreme Court has this issue before it. See Stumes v. Solem, 671 F.2d 1150 (8th Cir.1982), cert. granted, --- U.S. ----, 103 S.Ct. 3568, 77 L.Ed.2d 1409 (1983). We do not wait for direction from these cases because (1) we find the Edwards rule is otherwise not applicable to this......