green
Positive treatment
5.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bradley v. Milliken
Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, 336 F.2d 988, 998 (10th Cir. 1964): 781 "Appellants also contend that even though the Board may not be pursuing a policy of intentional segregation, there is still segregation in fact in the school system and under the principles of Brown v. Board of Education, supra, the Board has a positive and affirmative duty to eliminate segregation in fact as well as segregation by intention.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bradley v. Milliken
Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, 336 F.2d 988, 998 (10th Cir. 1964): “Appellants also contend that even though the Board may not be pursuing a policy of intentional segregation, there is still segregation in fact in the school system and under the principles of Brown v. Board of Education, supra, the Board has a positive and affirmative duty to eliminate segregation in'fact as well as segregation by intention.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People Ex Rel. Lynch v. San Diego Unified School District
(2×)
(Jackson v. Pasadena City School Dist., supra, 59 Cal.2d 876 ; United States v. Jefferson County Board of Education, 372 F.2d 836, 846, fn. 5 ; Springfield School Committee v. Barksdale, 348 F.2d 261, 262 ; gen. see Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, 336 F.2d 988, 996 (cert. den. 380 U.S. 914 [ 13 L.Ed.2d 800 , 85 S.Ct. 898 ]); cf. Bell v. School City of Gary, Indiana, 324 F.2d 209, 212-213 (cert. den. 377 U.S. 924 [ 12 L.Ed.2d 216 , 84 S.Ct. 1223 ]).) The mandate of Brown I, which is reiterated in Swann , is directed to the elimination of segregation in public schools which is the pr…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Goss v. Board of Education
Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, 336 F.2d 988, 995 (C.A. 10).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dowell v. School Board of Oklahoma City Public Schools
This conclusion makes no new law: (a) In Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, Kansas, 336 F.2d 988, 989, 995 (10 Cir. 1964), the Court found that the neighborhood school system is not objectionable on constitutional grounds “ * * * in the absence of a showing that such school systems are being used to deprive a student of his constitutional rights, * * * ” but reported that: “They have been successfully challenged on constitutional grounds where operated in such a way as to discriminate against students because of their race or color.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Booker v. Board of Education of City of Plainfield
Ed. 2d 216 (1964); Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, Kansas, 336 F. 2d 988, 998 (10 Cir. 1964), cert. denied 380 U. S. 914 , 85 S. Ct. 898 , 13 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Hobson Ex Rel. Hobson v. Hansen
See Downs v. Board of Educ., 10 Cir., 336 F.2d 988 , 997 (1964), cert. denied, 380 U.S. 914 , 85 S.Ct. 898 , 13 L.Ed.2d 800 (1965). 183 .
cited
Cited "see"
Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools v. Dowell
See Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, 10 Cir., 336 F.2d 988 , cert. denied, 380 U.S. 914 , 85 S.Ct. 898 , 13 L.Ed.2d 800 . .
cited
Cited "see"
Offermann v. Nitkowski
See Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, 336 F.2d 988 (10th.
cited
Cited "see"
Yarbrough v. Hulbert-West Memphis School District No. 4
See Bell v. School City of Gary, Indiana, 324 F.2d 209 (7th Cir. 1963), and Downs v. Board of Education of the City of Kansas City, Kansas, 336 F.2d 988 (10th Cir. 1964), Cert.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rebecca E. Henry v. The Clarksdale Municipal Separate School District
(2×)
See also United States v. School District 151 of Cook County, Illinois, 7 Cir. 1968, 404 F.2d 1125 , in which the Seventh Circuit distinguished Bell v. School City of Gary, 7 Cir. 1963, 324 F.2d 209 , followed by Deal v. Cincinnati Board of Education, 6 Cir. 1966, 369 F.2d 55 and Downs v. Board of Education, 10 Cir. 1964, 336 F.2d 988 on the ground that they dealt with “innocently arrived at de facto segregation with ‘no intention or purpose’ to segregate Negro pupils from White”.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bryant v. Board of Education
(2×)
Compare Deal v. Cincinnati Board of Educ., 369 F.2d 55 (6th Cir. 1966), and Gilliam v. School Board, 345 F.2d 325 (4th Cir.), vacated Bradley v. School Board, 382 U.S. 103 , 86 S.Ct. 224 , 15 L.Ed.2d 187 (1965), and Downs v. Board of Educ., 336 F.2d 988 (10th Cir. 1964), cert. den. 380 U.S. 914 , 85 S.Ct. 898 , 13 L.Ed.2d 800 (1965), and Bell v. School City of Gary, 324 F.2d 209 (7th Cir. 1963), cert. den., 377 U.S. 924 , 84 S.Ct. 1223 , 12 L.Ed.2d 216 (1964), with United States v. Jefferson County, 372 F.2d 836 (5th Cir. 1966), reaffirmed en banc, 380 F.2d 385 (5th Cir. 1967), and Barksdale v…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Monroe v. Board of Commissioners, City of Jackson
See also, to the same effect, Downs et al. v. Board of Education of Kansas City, 336 F.2d 988 (10th Cir. 1964), cert. denied 380 U.S. 914 , 85 S.Ct. 898 , 13 L.Ed.2d 800 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rogers v. Paul
Compare Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, 336 F.2d 988 (10 Cir. 1964), cert. denied 85 S.Ct. 898 , where the Court very pertinently stated: 32 'While there seems to be authority to support that contention, 9 the better rule is that although the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits segregation, it does not command integration of the races in the public schools and Negro children have no constitutional right to have white children attend school with them. (citing cases). "* * * 'there is no affirmative U.S. Constitutional duty to change innocently arrived at school attendance districts by th…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rogers v. Paul
Compare Downs v. Board of Education of Kansas City, 336 F.2d 988 (10 Cir. 1964), cert. denied 85 S.Ct. 898 , where the Court very pertinently stated: “While there seems to be authority to support that contention, 9 the better rule is that although the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits segregation, it does not command integration of the races in the public schools and Negro children have no constitutional right to have white children attend school with them, (citing cases). ****** «« * * * “there is no affirmative U.S. Constitutional duty to change innocently arrived at school attendance dis…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bradley v. School Board of the City of Richmond
See also Downs v. Kansas City Board of Education, 10 Cir., 336 F.2d 988 ; Lynch v. Kenston School District Board of Education, N.D.Ohio, 229 F.Supp. 740 ; Webb v. Board of Education of City of Chicago, N.D.Ill., 223 F.Supp. 466 ; Evans v. Buchanan, D.Del., 207 F.Supp. 820 ; Henry v. Godsell, E.D.Mich., 165 F. Supp. 87 ; Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, D.Kan., 139 F.Supp. 468, 470 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Clarence Coil ELROD and Addie Bud Williams, Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
20731.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Nov 23, 1964.
336 F.2d 988
Robert B. Thompson, Gainesville, Ga., for appellants., Gary B. Blasingame, Asst. U. S. Atty., Macon, Ga., Floyd M. Buford, U. S. Atty., Macon, Ga., for appellee.
Tuttle, Bell, Whitehurst.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
PER CURIAM.
Appellants here challenge only the sufficiency of the evidence to justify submission of this liquor law violation case to the jury. Although the proof is circumstantial, we conclude that it was sufficient to permit the jury to find both appellants guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The judgments are affirmed.