Arthur v. Nyquist

473 F. Supp. 830, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11907
CourtDistrict Court, W.D. New York
DecidedJune 6, 1979
DocketCiv-1972-325
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 473 F. Supp. 830 (Arthur v. Nyquist) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arthur v. Nyquist, 473 F. Supp. 830, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11907 (W.D.N.Y. 1979).

Opinion

CURTIN, Chief Judge.

I. DAYTON MOTION

On June 29,1978,1 directed the parties to submit proposed findings to the court pursuant to Dayton Board of Education v. Brinkman, 433 U.S. 406, 97 S.Ct. 2766, 53 L.Ed.2d 851 (1977), setting forth “the extent of the incremental effects resulting from the acts found in this court’s April 30, 1976 decision to have been constitutional violations.” Since the Board’s submission in response to this order was inadequate, on September 5, 1978, I directed the Board to prepare a supplementary response. All papers have been submitted, and oral argument on the question was held on November 17, 1978. I am now prepared to rule on the question.

In determining whether the constitutional violations had a systemwide impact, I am not reconsidering questions of liability; these questions were determined in the April 30, 1976 liability decision, Arthur v. Nyquist, 415 F.Supp. 904 (W.D.N.Y.1976), reconsidered in the decision of March 1, 1977, Arthur v. Nyquist, 429 F.Supp. 206 (W.D.N.Y.1977), and affirmed by the Second Circuit on March 8, 1978, Arthur v. Nyquist, 573 F.2d 134 (2d Cir. 1978). Certiorari was denied by the Supreme Court on October 3, 1978, Manch v. Arthur, 439 U.S. 860, 99 S.Ct. 179, 58 L.Ed.2d 169 (1978).' Nor am I addressing whether actions of the defendants taking place after the initial finding of liability constitute additional constitutional violations. Dayton only requires the court to decide whether the segregative acts, as already found by the court, had a sufficiently widespread impact on the school system to justify the imposition of a systemwide remedy.

Dayton does not require a finding that each and every school or student in the system was directly affected by the defendants’ actions as a prerequisite to ordering a systemwide remedy. 1 The test is whether there has been a “systemwide impact.” Thus, in Reed v. Rhodes, 455 F.Supp. 546 (N.D.Ohio 1978), the court found that over 200 separate instances of segregative acts affecting at least 60% of the schools and all of the staff in the Cleveland system had a systemwide impact under Dayton.

Dayton reaffirmed the well-established equitable principle requiring court-imposed remedies to be tailored to the scope of the violation. If the defendants’ acts have had only isolated effects on discrete portions of the school system, then the remedy must be designed to correct the isolated effects only. By the same token, if the incremental segregative effect of the violations is system-wide, the court must fashion a systemwide remedy. In either case, the remedy must be “designed as nearly as possible ‘to restore the victims of discriminatory conduct to the position they would have occupied in the absence of such conduct.’ ” Milliken v. Bradley, 433 U.S. 267, 280, 97 S.Ct. 2749, 2757, 53 L.Ed.2d 745 (1977) (Milliken II), quoting Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717, 746, 94 S.Ct. 3112, 41 L.Ed.2d 1069 (1974) (Milliken I).

The Buffalo public schools currently have in place a partial remedy, consisting of two components: QIE and magnet schools. *833 Apart from deficiencies in these programs (see the court’s order of June 29, 1978 and the discussion, infra), the present remedy leaves untouched many all-minority schools. In the context of this case, resolution of the Dayton question determines whether additional desegregation is required in order to complete the remedy begun in 1976.

I have reviewed the record in this case, including the stipulation of facts, the liability decision, the Second Circuit’s decision, and the legal briefs submitted on this question to the court. For the reasons stated below, I find that the impact of the constitutional violations was systemwide under the standards announced in Dayton.

The liability decision of April 30,1976 and the reconsideration decision of March 1, 1977 recite in great detail the evidence of deliberate segregation relied upon by the court in finding constitutional violations, and it would serve no useful purpose to reiterate those findings here. As the Second Circuit stated in affirming these findings, “[w]e are unable to imagine a set of facts, short of a public admission of wrongdoing, which would be more suggestive of intentional discrimination.” 573 F.2d at 145.

Unlike the circumstances in Dayton, this is not a case which involved only a few isolated acts of discrimination or only a few schools or areas in the City. The majority of schools in the Buffalo system were directly affected by the defendants’ acts and policies. Even those schools which were not specifically discussed in the liability decision were indirectly affected by the broadranging and longstanding discriminatory policies of the defendants, because these policies contributed to the public’s tendency to identify certain schools and certain neighborhoods as minority and other schools and neighborhoods as non-minority. In addition, many of the discriminatory policies, such as staff recruiting and assignment, were necessarily applied on a systemwide basis. Even those which were confined to a limited number of schools had indirect effects on other schools because changes in the composition in part of the system necessarily affected the rest of the system.

In light of the Second Circuit’s decision, the court’s extensive findings in prior decisions, and the position taken by the Board at oral argument, the court need not set forth in detail the reasons for the court’s findings of systemwide impact. For purposes of completeness, however, a brief summary follows.

The first constitutional violation discussed in the April 30,1976 liability decision involved East High School. By redistricting the attendance zone on a number of occasions beginning as early as 1954, the defendants increased and maintained racial segregation at East. 415 F.Supp. at 922-24. In addition, by permitting large numbers of white students to transfer out of the East district to take foreign languages only offered at other high schools, the defendants encouraged concentrations of minorities in one out of seven academic high schools. Id. at 926-30. This manipulation of the racial composition at East had an impact on the predominately majority high schools by preserving and in some cases increasing their majority enrollments.

A second major violation involved transfer policies. Over a period of years, the Board permitted numerous transfers of white students out of predominately black schools for specious or blatantly discriminatory reasons. In addition, certain principals unofficially allowed white students to transfer out of black school districts.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Arthur v. Nyquist
566 F. Supp. 511 (W.D. New York, 1983)
Tasby v. Wright
520 F. Supp. 683 (N.D. Texas, 1981)
United States v. State of Tex.
498 F. Supp. 1356 (E.D. Texas, 1980)
United States v. Texas
498 F. Supp. 1356 (E.D. Texas, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
473 F. Supp. 830, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arthur-v-nyquist-nywd-1979.