State of Alabama, and the Lauderdale County Board of Education v. Bruce Buckingham

437 F.2d 116, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 12350
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 15, 1971
Docket29818_1
StatusPublished

This text of 437 F.2d 116 (State of Alabama, and the Lauderdale County Board of Education v. Bruce Buckingham) 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
State of Alabama, and the Lauderdale County Board of Education v. Bruce Buckingham, 437 F.2d 116, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 12350 (5th Cir. 1971).

Opinion

PER CURIAM;

Buckingham, a Negro teacher, junior high school principal and high school principal, employed by the Lauderdale Board of Education for over twenty-five years, was served with a notice of cancellation of his employment contract based upon fifty specifications, twenty-four of which dealt with his conversion, embezzlement and forgery of school funds. He was also the subject of eight indictments charging him with the felony offenses of embezzlement, forgery, grand larceny, and obtaining property by false pretenses.

Asserting that his civil rights as a Negro teacher had been violated Buckingham, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1443, removed to the District Court the proceedings pending against him under the Alabama Teacher Tenure Act, as well as the criminal proceedings filed against him in the Circuit Court of Lauderdale County, Alabama. The District Court remanded the cancellation of contract proceedings to the Board of Education so that it might proceed with its hearing in accordance with Alabama law, and remanded the criminal prosecution to the state court from which it was removed. We affirm.

Buckingham’s argument that he is entitled to have his hearing before the Board removed to the District Court is frivolous. The proceedings before the Board for" the cancellation of his employment contract is not a civil action, or a criminal prosecution within the purview of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1443, nor is the Board a court within the meaning of the statute.

Buckingham’s petition likewise clearly fails to allege a basis for the removal of the criminal proceedings under *118 Greenwood v. Peacock, 1966, 384 U.S. 808, 86 S.Ct. 1800, 16 L.Ed.2d 944, and Georgia v. Rachel, 1966, 384 U.S. 780, 86 S.Ct. 1783, 16 L.Ed.2d 925.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Georgia v. Rachel
384 U.S. 780 (Supreme Court, 1966)
City of Greenwood v. Peacock
384 U.S. 808 (Supreme Court, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
437 F.2d 116, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 12350, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-alabama-and-the-lauderdale-county-board-of-education-v-bruce-ca5-1971.