Leon W. Bradley, Jr., a Minor, by Leon W. Bradley, Sr., His Father and Next Friend v. Board of Public Instruction of Pinellas County, Florida

431 F.2d 1377, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7967
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJuly 28, 1970
Docket28639_1
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 431 F.2d 1377 (Leon W. Bradley, Jr., a Minor, by Leon W. Bradley, Sr., His Father and Next Friend v. Board of Public Instruction of Pinellas County, Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Leon W. Bradley, Jr., a Minor, by Leon W. Bradley, Sr., His Father and Next Friend v. Board of Public Instruction of Pinellas County, Florida, 431 F.2d 1377, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7967 (5th Cir. 1970).

Opinion

431 F.2d 1377

Leon W. BRADLEY, Jr., a minor, by Leon W. Bradley, Sr., his father and next friend, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 28639.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

July 28, 1970.

James B. Sanderlin, St. Petersburg, Fla., Jack Greenberg, William L. Robinson, Norman J. Chachkin, Drew S. Days, III, New York City, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Edward A. Turville, St. Petersburg, Fla., for defendants-appellees.

William C. Cramer, U. S. House of Rep., Washington, D. C., amicus curiae.

Gerald Mager, Legal Counsel to the Governor, Tallahassee, Fla., for Claude R. Kirk, Jr., amicus curiae.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

Before SIMPSON, MORGAN and INGRAHAM, Circuit Judges.

LEWIS R. MORGAN, Circuit Judge:

In the light of subsequent changes made by the school board in attendance zones and enrollment figures, and in order to incorporate into the Pinellas County school system new schools not shown in the original record, all as set out in the school board's motion for rehearing, the prior opinion and judgment of this court of July 1, 1970, are withdrawn and the following opinion and orders are substituted therefor.

The issue presented in this school desegregation case is whether the Pinellas County, Florida, public school system is unitary. The district court, by its final order of August 4, 1969, held that the desegregation plan submitted by the school board for the year 1969-1970 (hereinafter, the school board's plan) effectively "converted the old dual system to a unitary system in which racial discrimination is eliminated".1 The school board's plan was put into effect for the 1969-70 school year even though plaintiffs appealed. From the district court's order, plaintiffs filed notice of appeal to this court on September 12, 1969. Upon oral argument and this court's request for additional findings of fact, the district court entered its supplemental findings on April 18, 1970.

Tested against the six criteria of Green v. New Kent County School Bd., 391 U.S. 430, 88 S.Ct. 1689, 20 L.Ed.2d 716 (1968) — faculty, transportation, staff, facilities, extracurricular activities, and student body composition — and the end to be achieved as set out in Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 396 U.S. 19, 90 S.Ct. 29, 24 L.Ed.2d 19 (1969) — that the school system no longer operate as a dual system based on race or color but as a "unitary school system within which no person is to be effectively excluded from any school because of race or color" — we find the school board's plan, as approved by the district court, to be deficient in student assignment in certain schools. In keeping with the approach of Ellis v. Board of Public Instruction of Orange County, Florida, 5 Cir., 1970, 423 F.2d 203; Mannings v. Board of Public Instruction of Hillsborough County, Florida, 5 Cir., 1970, 427 F.2d 874; and Davis v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County, 5 Cir., 1970, 430 F.2d 883; we will review all the requisites of Green, supra, to make a final determination as to whether Pinellas County has been effectively converted into a unitary system.

The Pinellas school system covers the whole of Pinellas County with a land area of 265 square miles. The student population of the system is approximately 80,000, of which 12,700, or 16%, are Negro students. Approximately 9,500 of these Negro students live in the City of St. Petersburg, in the southernmost part of the system.

Since 1964, when the original complaint in this case was filed up to the 1969-70 school year, there has been a gradual decrease in the percentage of students in all-Negro schools throughout the entire system. In the 1969-70 school year, there were 102 schools in operation — 72 elementary, 19 junior high, and 11 senior high schools. During the 1969-70 school year, 12 elementary schools, one junior high and one senior high school served all-Negro or virtually all-Negro student bodies. Approximately 8,400, or 66%, of the 12,700 Negro students in the entire system at all levels attended all-Negro or virtually all-Negro schools.

Under the school board's plan, the plan approved by the district court, there were to be 107 schools in operation — 75 elementary, 20 junior high, and 12 senior high schools. At the elementary level, nine would remain all-Negro or virtually all-Negro. There would also remain the one all-Negro junior high and one all-Negro senior high school. Under this plan, 8,200 out of the 12,700 Negro students in the entire system at all grade levels, or 64%, would attend all-Negro or virtually all-Negro schools.

The school board's plan does not change the already-existing majority-to-minority transfer policy, which during the 1969-70 school year has resulted in the transfer of only 62 students.2 The plan also leaves intact two bi-racial committees operating in Pinellas County. We do not disapprove of either of these two features of the school board's plan.

FACULTY AND STAFF

The faculty and staff desegregation standard enunciated in Singleton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, 5 Cir., 1969, 419 F.2d 1211, requires assignment on a basis whereunder the ratio of Negro to white teachers and staff members in each school is substantially the same as each such ratio is to teachers and staff in the entire school system. This standard has been met in the Pinellas County school system. According to the school board's "Instructional Personnel Assignments" submitted to this court and dated July 15, 1970, each school system has a faculty composition which closely approximates the 87.5%-white — 12.5%-Negro ratio in compliance with Singleton. The Board is ordered to implement this faculty and staff assignment for its 1970-71 school year.

TRANSPORTATION, FACILITIES, AND EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

From the record, it appears that the Pinellas County transportation system is operated on a desegregated basis. The district court, through its approval of the school board's Exhibits D-1, D-2, and D-3, found that the transportation is equally available to both Negro and white students in Pinellas County.

The facts indicate that the extracurricular activities and facilities of the Pinellas County schools are also operated on a desegregated basis.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
431 F.2d 1377, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7967, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leon-w-bradley-jr-a-minor-by-leon-w-bradley-sr-his-father-and-next-ca5-1970.