13 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1250, 11 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,612, 12 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 11,263 Kenneth W. Adams, United States of Am., Amicus Curiae v. Rankin Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 524 F.2d 928 (5th Cir. 1975). · Go Syfert
Search
13 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1250, 11 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,612, 12 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 11,263 Kenneth W. Adams, United States of Am., Amicus Curiae v. Rankin Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 524 F.2d 928 (5th Cir. 1975). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
28 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 11 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: B.H. Papasan, Superintendent of Education v. United States of America (ca5, 1985-05-21)
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1975 2000 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) B.H. Papasan, Superintendent of Education v. United States of America
5th Cir. · 1985 · confidence medium
Adams v. Rankin County Board of Education, 524 F.2d 928, 929 (5th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 438 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 3121 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1146 (1978). 16 Cf. Jagnandon v. Giles, 538 F.2d 1166, 1174 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 432 U.S. 910 , 97 S.Ct. 2959 , 53 L.Ed.2d 1083 (1977) (Mississippi State University is an arm of state).
cited Cited "see" James D. Stewart v. Baldwin County Board Of Education
11th Cir. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See Adams, 524 F.2d at 929 & n. 4; Travelers Indemnity Co., 666 F.2d at 509 .
cited Cited "see" Stewart v. Baldwin County Board of Education
11th Cir. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See Adams, 524 F.2d at 929 & n. 4; Travelers Indemnity Co., 666 F.2d at 509 .
discussed Cited "see" Edward R. Jagnandan v. William L. Giles, President, Mississippi State University (2×)
5th Cir. · 1976 · signal: see · confidence high
See Adams v. Rankin County Bd. of Educ., 524 F.2d 928 , 929 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. filed, 44 U.S.L.W. 3686 (U.S. June 1, 1976) (No. 75-1710) (county school system in Mississippi). .
cited Cited "see" Davis v. GRIFFIN-SPALDING CTY., GA., BD. OF ED.
N.D. Ga. · 1976 · signal: see · confidence high
See Adams v. Rankin County Board of Education, 524 F.2d 928 (5th Cir. 1975); Harris v. Tooele County School Dist., 471 F.2d 218 (10th Cir. 1973).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Charles G. McDonald v. Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners
5th Cir. · 1987 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Adams v. Rankin County Bd. of Educ., 524 F.2d 928 , 929 (5th Cir.1975).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Farr v. Chesney
M.D. Penn. · 1978 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See also Adams v. Rankin County Board of Education, 524 F.2d 928, 929 (5th Cir. 1975) (per curiam); Hander v. San Jacinto Junior College, 519 F.2d 273 (5th Cir. 1975).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Wade v. Mississippi Cooperative Extension Service
N.D. Miss. · 1976 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., Adams v. Rankin County Board of Education, 524 F.2d 928 (5 Cir. 1975); Hander, supra. Clearly the county board of supervisors is locally controlled and essentially local in character.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Wade v. Mississippi Cooperative Extension Service
5th Cir. · 1976 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Adams v. Rankin County Board of Education, 5 Cir., 1975, 524 F.2d 928 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." 12 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1041, 11 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,770 Charlie F. Wade, United States of America, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees v. Mississippi Cooperative Extension Service
5th Cir. · 1976 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Adams v. Rankin County Board of Education, 5 Cir., 1975, 524 F.2d 928 . 59 Regardless of the court's decision as to the immunity of the various corporate defendants, the court must also consider whether any of the named individuals have the benefit of the qualified immunity given to public officials acting in good faith.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
13 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1250, 11 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,612, 12 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 11,263 Kenneth W. Adams, United States of America, Amicus Curiae
v.
Rankin County Board of Education
75-1991.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Dec 1, 1975.
524 F.2d 928
Published

524 F.2d 928

13 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1250,
11 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,612,
12 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 11,263
Kenneth W. ADAMS et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
United States of America, Amicus Curiae,
v.
RANKIN COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 75-1991.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 1, 1975.

Fred L. Banks, Jr., Jackson, Miss., Jessica Silver, Dept. of Justice, Civil Rights Div., Washington, D. C., Melvyn R. Leventhal, Jack Greenberg, New York City, Brian K. Landsberg, Washington, D. C., for plaintiffs-appellants.

J. Gerald Hebert, U. S. Dept. of Justice, Education Section, Washington, D. C., Robert E. Hauberg, U. S. Atty., Jackson, Miss., amicus curiae.

Billy G. Bridges, Jackson, Miss., William A. Allain, Jackson, Miss., for defendants-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi.

Before BROWN, Chief Judge, MORGAN and GEE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

[*~928]1

In conformance with our opinion in Adams v. Rankin County Board of Education, 5 Cir., 1973, 485 F.2d 324 which ordered the implementation of a unitary school system in Rankin County, Mississippi, the District Court, upon remand, made a detailed report to the Fifth Circuit on July 10, 1974[1] which was supplemented by a report on December 23, 1974.[2] By its order entered February 3, 1975[3] the District Court adopted these reports as its final judgment and this decree resolved all issues except the following: (i) whether the District Court erred in not reinstating three teachers who were dismissed during the time when the unitary system was being implemented, (ii) whether the District Court erred in not reinstating six nonprofessional staff members who were dismissed but later reemployed, and (iii) whether those teachers who were reinstated pursuant to the District Court's order upon remand from this Court were entitled to back pay awards against the local school system.

2

Dealing with these issues seriatim, we find that the District Court had ample basis upon which to conclude that the teachers were properly discharged. There was no showing that the dismissals were the result of racial discrimination, United States v. Jefferson County Board of Education, 5 Cir., 1967, 380 F.2d 385, 394, and on the contrary there was substantial evidence from which the District Judge could conclude that the teachers were incompetent. See District Court's report to the Fifth Circuit at p. 10, App. at 71.

3

Concerning the nonprofessional employees, in light of the District Court's finding that all of these employees had been re-employed we deem this issue to be moot.

4

Finally, relying on our recent decision in Hander v. San Jacinto Junior College, 5 Cir., 1975, 519 F.2d 273, 279-80, we find that under the applicable Mississippi statutes the Rankin County School system is a locally controlled institution which is supported largely by local revenues[4] and accordingly the Eleventh Amendment does not bar the award of back pay to those teachers who were reinstated since the suit is in reality not against the state itself but against what is primarily a local institution. Accordingly, we remand this case to the District Court with the instructions that it calculate and award back pay to those teachers who were reinstated in accordance with the stipulation of the parties concerning this subject which was filed April 12, 1974 and which is set out on pages 40-58 of the appendix on appeal.

[*~929]5

Affirmed and remanded with instructions.

1

This report is set out in the Appendix on appeal at 62-77

2

See App. at 84-86

3

See App. at 112

4

The county school systems in Mississippi are primarily funded by local ad valorem taxes and the funds obtained thereby are only supplemented by the state if insufficient to accomplish the educational needs of the county. See Miss.Code Ann. § 37-19-15 (1972). In addition, the statutes provide for a flexible tax structure which continues to tap local resources when increases in educational expenses are necessary to accomplish local educational goals. See Miss.Code Ann. § 37-57-1 et seq. (1972). Thus, it is apparent that any award of back pay would come primarily from local funds rather than out of the state treasury