Carr v. Montgomery County Board of Education, Civ. A. No. 2072-N.

• Citation: 232 F. Supp. 705
• Decision Date: 31 July 1964
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 2072-N.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
• Parties: Arlam CARR, Jr., a minor, by Arlam Carr and Johnnie Carr, his parents and next friends, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION et al., Defendants.

232 F. Supp. 705

Arlam CARR, Jr., a minor, by Arlam Carr and Johnnie Carr, his parents and next friends, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION et al., Defendants.

Civ. A. No. 2072-N.

United States District Court M. D. Alabama, N. D.

July 31, 1964.

Fred D. Gray, Montgomery, Ala., Jack Greenberg and Charles H. Jones, Jr., New York City, for plaintiffs Carr and others.

Vaughan Hill Robison, R. S. Hill, Jr., Richard C. Belser and Joseph D. Phelps, (of Hill, Robison & Belser), Montgomery, Ala., for defendants.

Ben Hardeman, U. S. Atty., Montgomery, Ala., and John Doar and Jonathan B. Sutin, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for the United States, amicus curiae.

JOHNSON, District Judge.

This cause is now submitted upon the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. Upon consideration of the evidence, consisting of requests for admissions and responses thereto, interrogatories and answers thereto, the deposition of the Montgomery County Superintendent of Education, Walter McKee, and the several exhibits thereto, and the oral testimony of the various witnesses, together with the several exhibits to that testimony, this Court now makes the appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law, embodying the same in this memorandum opinion.

This is a proceeding authorized by § 1343, Title 28 U.S.C.A., and § 1983, Title 42 U.S.C.A., brought by the several plaintiffs, who are Negro children suing through their parents as next friends, against the Board of Education of Montgomery County, Alabama, its individual members, agents, representatives, employees, and successors in office, and against the Superintendent of Education of Montgomery County, Alabama. Plaintiffs ask this Court to enjoin the defendants and each of them from continuing the policy, practice, custom, and usage of maintaining and operating a compulsory biracial school system in Montgomery County, Alabama, and from assigning students, teachers and other school personnel on the basis of race. Upon the filing of this action on May 11, 1964, by the plaintiffs, for themselves and on behalf of other members of their class, this Court by formal order made and entered in this case on May 18, 1964, designated the United States of America as amicus curiae.

From the evidence in this case, this Court now finds that these plaintiffs are Negro children living and residing in various areas of Montgomery County, Alabama; that plaintiffs are authorized by law to bring and maintain this action, and that these plaintiffs represent a class within the meaning of Rule 23(a) (3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and are, therefore, authorized to sue on behalf of other members of that class since there are common questions of fact arising out of circumstances that are common to these plaintiffs and the other members of their class. Potts v. Flax, 313 F. 2d 284 (5th Cir. 1963); Brunson v. Board of Trustees of School Dist. No. 1, 311 F.2d 107 (4th Cir. 1962), cert. den. 373 U.S. 933, 83 S.Ct. 1538, 10 L.Ed.2d 690 (1963).

This Court further finds that these plaintiffs and the other members of their class who are similarly situated have been and are currently attending the public schools in Montgomery County, Alabama, or expect to commence attendance in said public school system during the 1964-65 school year; that the individual defendants Harold M. Harris, as Chairman, Fred Bear, Dr. H. P. Dawson, George A. Dozier, Dr. W. E. Goodwin, Isabelle B. Thomasson, and Dr. Robert Parker are the members composing the Montgomery County Board of Education, and Walter McKee is the Superintendent of Education of Montgomery County, Alabama; and that these individuals actively manage, control and operate the public school system throughout Montgomery County, Alabama. This school system, as operated, is a unified city-county system with no separate city school districts and no City Board of Education. There is only one school district for Montgomery County, Alabama, with the County Board of Education and the Superintendent of Education of Montgomery County, Alabama, exercising complete control over the entire system. In this school system for the school year 1963-64, there were in attendance approximately 15,000 Negro children and approximately 25,000 white children. In this system the Montgomery County Board of Education owns and operates approximately 77 schools.

From the evidence in this case, this Court further specifically finds that, through policy, custom and practice, the Montgomery County Board of Education, functioning at the present time through the named individual defendants, operates a dual school system based upon race and color; that is to say, that, through this policy, practice and custom, these officials operate one set of schools to be attended exclusively by Negro students and one set of schools to be attended exclusively by white students. The evidence further reflects that the teachers are assigned according to race; Negro teachers are assigned only to schools attended by Negro students and white teachers are assigned only to schools attended by white students.

This Court further finds that the students using the transportation facilities; that is, the school buses, are segregated according to race. Furthermore, transportation is furnished by the defendants for Negroes only to schools attended solely by Negro students and for white students only to schools attended solely by white students.

The several exhibits in this case reflect that, in what has been set up by these defendants as "attendance areas," particularly in the City of Montgomery, Alabama, certain such areas are designated for "colored" and others are designated for "white." From the manner in which these area lines are drawn, there are schools designated for and solely attended by white students that are in closer proximity to the homes of Negro students than are the schools designated for the Negro students. The reverse is true with reference to white students. The assignments of students to public schools (elementary, junior high and high) in Montgomery County, Alabama, have been, and are presently, being made on the basis of race or color. This is being done through the use of these "attendance areas" or "district zones," which areas are, according to the maps introduced into evidence in this case, very obviously drawn on the basis of race and color. Segregation of the races is also being accomplished in this public school system through the assignment of principals, teachers and other professional personnel. The "feeder system" is used in the Montgomery County school system; this is a system by which students are advanced from elementary schools through junior high schools and on to the high schools. This "feeder system" has been set up, is based, and is presently operating on distinctions of race and color. For instance, Negro children who are initially assigned to an elementary school attended solely by other Negro children are thereafter, in each and every instance as reflected by the evidence in this case, assigned to junior high schools and subsequently to senior high schools which are attended solely by Negro children. The reverse is true for white children. Furthermore, strong considerations of race have figured in the disbursement of school funds for maintenance, operation and construction in the Montgomery County school system. Even the substitute teachers' lists and attendance records reflect these distinctions based upon race.

This Court now specifically finds and concludes that, because of the designation of certain schools to be used solely by Negro students and the designation of other schools to be used solely by white students, because of the assignment of teachers and the manner in which the teachers are assigned, because of the transportation facilities that are made available to students and the manner in which said facilities are used, and upon an abundance of other evidence as submitted in this case, some of which has been hereinabove referred to, the operation of the Montgomery County school system by these defendants is on a compulsory biracial basis. The operation of this school system on a...