Smith v. Concordia Parish School Board, 30556.
| Citation | 445 F.2d 285 |
| Decision Date | 15 June 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 30556.,30556. |
| Parties | Irma J. SMITH et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, and United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee, v. CONCORDIA PARISH SCHOOL BOARD et al., Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
Denis A. Barry, II, New Orleans, La., W. C. Falkenheiner, Dist. Atty., Seventh Judicial Dist., Concordia Parish School Board, Vidalia, La., for appellants.
John D. Powers, Baton Rouge, La., Louisiana Teachers Ass'n, amicus curiae.
George M. Strickler, Jr., Stanley Halpin, Jr., New Orleans, La., Ed Christenbury, Department of Justice, Civil Rights, Washington, D. C., for appellees.
Richard M. Sharp, Washington, D. C., National Education Ass'n, amicus curiae.
Before GEWIN, GOLDBERG and DYER, Circuit Judges.
The Board's attack on the District Court's judgment placing the sixth grade in Vidalia Junior High School is without merit.
The District Court's findings, that the Board had neither developed nor applied objective criteria in connection with the reduction of staff positions, and that the dismissal of black teachers was racially discriminatory, are not clearly erroneous. See Singleton et al. v. Jackson Municipal Separate School System, 5 Cir. 1969, 419 F.2d 1211. Nor did the District Court abuse its discretion in establishing faculty racial ratios that would govern personnel changes until the school board formulated objective and reasonable non-discriminatory criteria governing dismissals, demotions, hiring and promotions. See United States v. Montgomery County Board of Education, 1969, 395 U.S. 225, 89 S.Ct. 1670, 23 L.Ed.2d 263.
The Board having made no objection or suggestion to the District Court that it desired to tender evidence, we will not entertain, for the first time on appeal, an argument that the court's failure to consider evidence was error.
As of May 1, 1971, there were 5240 students in the system: 2355, or 44.94%, were white; and 2885, or 55.1%, were black. The faculty numbered 297: 141, or 47.47%, were white; and 156, or 52.53%, were black. These ratios substantially comply with Singleton, supra. The District Court will require the Board, the plaintiffs, and the Department of Justice to submit, within 15 days, non-discriminatory, non-racial objective criteria to cover both faculty reduction and dismissals for cause. If the parties cannot agree on such criteria, the District Court will, within thirty days thereafter, require the Board to adopt the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Gadsden County School Dist., 75-4294
...course in the past. See, e. g., United States v. Texas Education Agency, 459 F.2d 600, 607 (5th Cir. 1972); Smith v. Concordia Parish School Board, 445 F.2d 285, 286 (5th Cir. 1971).17 The School Board also argues that the district court erred in applying the Singleton rules to this case at......
-
Smith ex rel. Smith v. Sch. Bd. of Concordia Parish
...The Board was previously found to have engaged in unconstitutional racial discrimination. See, e.g. , Smith v. Concordia Par. Sch. Bd. , 445 F.2d 285, 285 (5th Cir. 1971). The Board has not moved for a declaration of unitary status, and the district court retains jurisdiction. Lee v. Macon ......
-
Pitts by Pitts v. Freeman, s. 88-8687
...See Tasby v. Estes, 517 F.2d 92 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 939, 96 S.Ct. 299, 46 L.Ed.2d 271 (1975); Smith v. Concordia Parish School Board, 445 F.2d 285 (5th Cir.1971). The DCSS, however, argues that a 15-percent deviance rule does not constitute error. The DCSS points to a non-bin......
-
Armstead v. Starkville Municipal Separate School Dist., 71-2124.
...the court was attempting to restore the status quo. This was a proper order under the circumstances. See Smith v. Concordia Parish School District, 5 Cir. 1971, 445 F.2d 285. The judgment of the district court is reversed as to the proscription of the use of an AA Teacher's Certificate or a......