Wilma Joyce Harrington v. Colquitt County Board of Education

Fifth Circuit

Wilma Joyce Harrington v. Colquitt County Board of Education

446 F.2d 1011, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9236

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 29, 1971

Docket30572

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 446 F.2d 1011 (Wilma Joyce Harrington v. Colquitt County Board of Education) 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

Wilma Joyce Harrington v. Colquitt County Board of Education, 446 F.2d 1011, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9236 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

BY THE COURT:

The judgment of the district court is vacated, 1 and the cause is remanded with directions to the district court to order the school board to implement a plan for the 1971-72 school term which will achieve a greater degree of desegregation among the Grey, Vereen, Wright, Cox, and Central elementary schools than now exists under the present elementary attendance zone plan. Such plan shall comply fully with the principles established in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 1971, 402 U.S. 1, 91 S.Ct. 1267, 28 L.Ed.2d 554, and with full exploitation of the broad equitable powers available to the district court to effectuate this order as authorized in Swann, supra.

The district court is ordered promptly to appoint a bi-racial committee to advise with the Board of Education and with the district court with respect to such desegregation plan.

The district court shall require the school board to file semi-annual reports during the school • year similar to those required in United States v. Hinds County School Board, 5 Cir. 1970, 438 F.2d 611, 618-619.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Vacated and remanded with directions.

1

. Under the stringent requirements of Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 396 U.S. 19, 90 S.Ct. 29, 24 L.Ed.2d 19 (1969), which this Court has carried out in United States v. Hinds County School Board, 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 852, and of Carter v. West Feliciana Parish School Board, 396 U.S. 290, 90 S.Ct. 608, 24 L.Ed.2d 477 (1970), implemented in Singleton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, 5 Cir. 1970, 419 F.2d 1211, this Court has judicially determined that the ordinary procedures for appellate review in school desegregation cases have to be suitably adopted to assure that each system whose case is before us “begin immediately to operate as unitary school systems.” Upon consideration of the parties’ memoranda and so much of the record as is available or determined to be needed by the Court, the Court has proceeded to dispose of this case as an extraordinary matter. Rule 2, F.R.A.P.

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

BY THE COURT:

The judgment of the district court is vacated, 1 and the cause is remanded with directions to the district court to order the school board to implement a plan for the 1971-72 school term which will achieve a greater degree of desegregation among the Grey, Vereen, Wright, Cox, and Central elementary schools than now exists under the present elementary attendance zone plan. Such plan shall comply fully with the principles established in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 1971, 402 U.S. 1, 91 S.Ct. 1267, 28 L.Ed.2d 554, and with full exploitation of the broad equitable powers available to the district court to effectuate this order as authorized in Swann, supra.

The district court is ordered promptly to appoint a bi-racial committee to advise with the Board of Education and with the district court with respect to such desegregation plan.

The district court shall require the school board to file semi-annual reports during the school • year similar to those required in United States v. Hinds County School Board, 5 Cir. 1970, 438 F.2d 611, 618-619.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Vacated and remanded with directions.

1

. Under the stringent requirements of Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 396 U.S. 19, 90 S.Ct. 29, 24 L.Ed.2d 19 (1969), which this Court has carried out in United States v. Hinds County School Board, 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 852, and of Carter v. West Feliciana Parish School Board, 396 U.S. 290, 90 S.Ct. 608, 24 L.Ed.2d 477 (1970), implemented in Singleton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, 5 Cir. 1970, 419 F.2d 1211, this Court has judicially determined that the ordinary procedures for appellate review in school desegregation cases have to be suitably adopted to assure that each system whose case is before us “begin immediately to operate as unitary school systems.” Upon consideration of the parties’ memoranda and so much of the record as is available or determined to be needed by the Court, the Court has proceeded to dispose of this case as an extraordinary matter. Rule 2, F.R.A.P.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

446 F.2d 1011, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilma-joyce-harrington-v-colquitt-county-board-of-education-ca5-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack