Smith v. Concordia Parish School Board

445 F.2d 285, 10 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1348, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9574, 3 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 8266
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJune 15, 1971
DocketNo. 30556
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 445 F.2d 285 (Smith v. Concordia Parish School Board) 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
Smith v. Concordia Parish School Board, 445 F.2d 285, 10 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1348, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9574, 3 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 8266 (5th Cir. 1971).

Opinion

BY THE COURT:

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 dis[286]*286cretion 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, swpra. 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 criteria that the District Court prescribes so as to effectively comply with the provisions of Singleton, supra. Once proper criteria have been established the merit qualifications of Carter v. West Feliciana Parish School Board, 5 Cir. 1970, 432 F.2d 875, will be applicable. See Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 1971, 402 U.S. 1, 91 S.Ct. 1267, 28 L.Ed.2d 554.

The District Court shall require the school board to file during the school year a semi-annual report similar to those required in United States v. Hinds County School Board, 5 Cir. 1970, 433 F.2d 611, 618-619.

Affirmed and remanded with directions.

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

Related

Pitts ex rel. Pitts v. Freeman
887 F.2d 1438 (Eleventh Circuit, 1989)
United States v. Gadsden County School District
539 F.2d 1369 (Fifth Circuit, 1976)
Smith v. Concordia Parish School Board
387 F. Supp. 887 (W.D. Louisiana, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
445 F.2d 285, 10 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1348, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9574, 3 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 8266, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-concordia-parish-school-board-ca5-1971.