CLIFFORD N. STEELE ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
v.
THE BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the district court erred in sua sponte dismissing the school integration case and should retain jurisdiction for a period.
Plaintiffs appealed the district court's sua sponte dismissal of a school integration case, arguing it should remain on the docket with status reports…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse School Integration cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
The district court, sua sponte, dismissed this school integration case after making a finding that the school system was desegregated and unitary in nature. Plaintiffs-appellants urge on this appeal that the cause should not have been dismissed, but rather should be maintained on the inactive docket for the next three school years, during which time the school district would be required to file status reports on the state of desegregation in the school system. Appellants further ask that the district court be directed to dismiss the suit at the termination of the three year period only after notice and hearing at which appellants would be permitted an opportunity to show why dismissal of the cause should be further delayed.
It is ordered by the Court:
1. The order of the district court dismissing this action is vacated, and the cause is remanded to the district court with directions to reinstate the action, and to retain jurisdiction over the action for a period not less than three school years. During the next three school years the school district shall be required by the court below to file semi-annual reports with the district court similar to those required in United States v. Hinds County School Board, 5 Cir. 1970, 433 F. 2d 611, 618-619.
2. At the conclusion of three school years the district court should again consider whether the cause should be dismissed. In no event, however, shall the district court dismiss the action without notice to the plaintiffs below and a hear ing providing opportunity to plaintiffs-appellants to show cause why dismissal of the cause should be further delayed.
The mandate shall issue forthwith.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Lawrence Cnty. Sch. Dist., 799 F.2d 1031 (5th Cir. 1986)
-
United States v. The State OF Tex., 509 F.2d 192 (5th Cir. 1975)
-
LEE v. MacOn Cnty. Bd. OF Educ., 584 F.2d 78 (5th Cir. 1978)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Hinds Cnty. Sch. Bd., 433 F.2d 611 (5th Cir. 1970)