JAMES H. CORDER AND HARRY W. WESTERN ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
v.
ROBERT H. KIRKSEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PROBATE JUDGE OF PICKENS COUNTY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES

5th Cir. | 1980-08-21
No. 76-3601
625 F.2d 520 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1980) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the district court must reexamine the evidence in light of a new Supreme Court decision regarding voter dilution claims.


Facts & Procedural History

This case involves a challenge to the at-large method of electing county commissioners. The court previously remanded for findings on constitutionalit…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

On November 16, 1978, we remanded this case, instructing the district court, in part, to make findings of fact, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(b), as to the constitutionality of the at-large method of electing the members of the Pickens County, Alabama, Commission. Corder v. Kirksey, 585 F. 2d 708 (5th Cir. 1978). We instructed the district court to “apply the precepts set forth by this court sitting en banc in Zimmer v. McKeithen, 485 F. 2d 1297 (5th Cir. 1973) (en banc), aff’d on other grounds sub nom. East Carroll Parish School Board v. Marshall, 424 U.S. 636, 96 S.Ct. 1083, 47 L.Ed.2d 296 (1976)." Id., at 712. The district court has made its Zimmer findings; meanwhile, the Supreme Court’s decision in City of Mobile, Ala. v. Bolden,- U.S. -, 100 S.Ct. 1490, 64 L.Ed.2d 47 (1980), has cast some doubt on the continued vitality of the Zimmer rationale, as explicated in Nevett v. Sides, 571 F. 2d 209 (5th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, -U.S.-, 100 S.Ct. 2916, 65 L.Ed.2d-(1980) (Nevett II), as the appropriate approach to be taken, in this circuit, in analyzing the evidence in voter-dilution cases to determine whether purposeful discrimination has occurred within the meaning of the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments.

Accordingly, we remand the case once again to enable the district court to reexamine the evidence, and its findings, in the light of City of Mobile, Ala. v. Bolden, supra, and to entertain any application plaintiffs may care to make to present further evidence on their claim that the at-large method of electing the county commissioners is unconstitutional.

The district court shall accomplish the proceedings on remand within 30 days of receipt of the mandate, which shall issue forthwith. We continue to retain jurisdiction over the cause.

REMANDED.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw