Schmidt v. Oakland Unified School District

457 U.S. 594, 102 S. Ct. 2612, 73 L. Ed. 2d 245, 1982 U.S. LEXIS 136, 34 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 667, 50 U.S.L.W. 3998
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedJune 21, 1982
Docket81-1444
StatusPublished
Cited by47 cases

This text of 457 U.S. 594 (Schmidt v. Oakland Unified School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Schmidt v. Oakland Unified School District, 457 U.S. 594, 102 S. Ct. 2612, 73 L. Ed. 2d 245, 1982 U.S. LEXIS 136, 34 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 667, 50 U.S.L.W. 3998 (1982).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

California Educ. Code Ann. § 39640 (West Supp. 1982) requires school districts to award any contracts for work involving more than $12,000 to the “lowest responsible bidder.” For projects over $100,000, the Oakland School District requires that to be considered responsible, general contractors must use minority-owned businesses for at least 25 percent of the dollar amount of the total bid. Petitioners submitted the low bid for an advertised project but were disqualified under the School District plan as not being responsible. They brought this action claiming damages and asserting that the affirmative-action plan violated not only the Federal Constitution but also state law. The Court of Appeals affirmed a judgment of the District Court upholding the plan on constitutional grounds. 662 F. 2d 550 (1981). Although the Court of Appeals acknowledged that under one of its prior decisions, the plan at issue might be invalid under state law, it declined to decide the state-law question since it was a sen *595 sitive matter and petitioners could present it to the state courts.

If the affirmative-action plan is invalid under state law, the Court of Appeals need not have reached the federal constitutional issue. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals declined to resolve the pendent state-law claim. Under Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U. S. 528, 546 (1974), and Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U. S. 715 (1966), this was an abuse of discretion in the circumstances of this case.

We accordingly grant the petition for certiorari, vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

So ordered.

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

Related

Vlaming v. West Point School Board
Supreme Court of Virginia, 2023
Ricardo Torres v. Precision Indus., Inc.
938 F.3d 752 (Sixth Circuit, 2019)
Henn v. City of Highland Heights
3 F. App'x 487 (Sixth Circuit, 2001)
Lashawn A. v. Marion S. Barry, Jr.
87 F.3d 1389 (D.C. Circuit, 1996)
Mullis Tree Service, Inc. v. Bibb County, Ga.
822 F. Supp. 738 (M.D. Georgia, 1993)
Triple G Landfills, Inc. v. Board of Commissioners
977 F.2d 287 (Seventh Circuit, 1992)
Wal-Juice Bar, Inc. v. Elliott
899 F.2d 1502 (Sixth Circuit, 1990)
Finley v. United States
490 U.S. 545 (Supreme Court, 1989)
WJW-TV, Inc. v. City of Cleveland
870 F.2d 658 (Sixth Circuit, 1989)
Argento v. Village of Melrose Park
838 F.2d 1483 (Seventh Circuit, 1988)
J.A. Croson Co. v. City of Richmond
822 F.2d 1355 (Fourth Circuit, 1987)
Spann v. Colonial Village, Inc.
662 F. Supp. 541 (District of Columbia, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
457 U.S. 594, 102 S. Ct. 2612, 73 L. Ed. 2d 245, 1982 U.S. LEXIS 136, 34 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 667, 50 U.S.L.W. 3998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schmidt-v-oakland-unified-school-district-scotus-1982.