Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Pitts ex rel. Pitts v. Freeman

979 F.2d 1472

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1992-12-07
Topic: bankruptcy

*1473ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Before FAY, HATCHETT and DUBINA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This matter is before us as a result of a remand from the Supreme Court. Freeman v. Pitts, 508 U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1430, 118 L.Ed.2d 108 (1992). In accord with the Court’s opinion, we affirm the order of the district court entered on June 30, 1988 and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with that opinion.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Pitts ex rel. Pitts v. Freeman. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 1 opinion

PITTS v. FREEMAN,979 F.2d 1472(11th Cir. 1992)

WILLIE EUGENE PITTS, A MINOR BY HIS MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND, MRS. ANNA MAE

PITTS, VICTOR MARTIN; A MINOR, BY HIS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND ROBERT L.

MARTIN; KELVIN, FELICIA, ALFRED, ORMA, AND ALFREDIA HENDERSON, MINORS, BY

THEIR MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND, REBECCA HENDERSON, PATRICIA JOYCE REEVES, A

MINOR, BY HER MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND, MRS. ROSA LEE REEVES; ANTHONY REED AND

CECILIA SEARCY, MINORS, BY THEIR MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND, MRS. JUANITA

SEARCY; NED AND BECKY STONE, MINORS, BY THEIR FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND, ALFRED

E. STONE, JR.; JOY, BRIDGETT AND SANDRA BECKER, MINORS, BY THEIR FATHER AND

NEXT FRIEND, LOUIS E. BECKER; MONICA ROCKER, A MINOR, BY HER FATHER AND NEXT

FRIEND, ARTHUR "ROCK" ROCKER; JOHN JOHNSON AND DEVETT SMITH, MINORS, BY

THEIR MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND, MS. EUNICE A. SMITH; FRANKIE PRATHER, A MINOR,

BY GUARDIAN AND NEXT FRIEND, CYNTHIA SCOTT, AND HER FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND,

MAJOR SCOTT; PRINCESS MILLS, A MINOR, BY HER FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND, ROGER

MILLS; MARK ANTHONY WHARTON, A MINOR, BY HIS MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND DORIS

PATILLAR; AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,

CROSS-APPELLEES, VALENCIA MILLS, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, ASHLEY AND B'RANDI

ARMSTRONG, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-INTERVENORS, v. ROBERT FREEMAN,

SUPERINTENDENT, LYMAN HOWARD, NORMA TRAVIS, AND PHIL McGREGOR, DeKALB COUNTY

BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES, CROSS-APPELLANTS.

WILLIE EUGENE PITTS, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, CROSS-APPELLEES,

VALENCIA MILLS, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, ASHLEY AND B'RANDI ARMSTRONG, ET AL.,

PLAINTIFFS-INTERVENORS, v. ROBERT R. FREEMAN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS,

CROSS-APPELLANTS.

Nos. 88-8687, 88-8775.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

December 7, 1992.

Kathleen L. Wilde, Marcia W. Borowski, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiffs-appellants, cross-appellees.

Boykin Edwards, Jr., Boykin Edwards, Jr., P.C., Decatur, Ga., Charles S. Johnson, III, Peterson, Dillard, Young, Self Asselin, Atlanta, Ga., for intervenors.

Gary M. Sams, Charles L. Weatherly, J. Stanley Hawkins, Mark D. Welsh, Weekes Candler, Decatur, Ga., for defendants-appellees, cross-appellants.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia; William C. O'Kelley, Chief Judge.Page 1473

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before FAY, HATCHETT and DUBINA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

[1] This matter is before us as a result of a remand from the Supreme Court.Freeman v. Pitts,503 U.S. ___,112 S.Ct. 1430,118 L.Ed.2d 108(1992). In accord with the Court's opinion, we affirm the order of the district court entered on June 30, 1988 and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with that opinion.

[2] The issues to be considered by the district court should include, but not necessarily be limited to, faculty and staff assignments (which may or may not involve a reexamination of student assignments), resource allocation, the quality of education being received by all students and the good faith commitment of the school district.

[3] AFFIRMED and REMANDED for further proceedings.