Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Wilma Joyce Harrington, Franklin Sutton v. Colquitt County Board of Education

449 F.2d 161

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1971-09-20
Topic
general

BY THE COURT: By its Order of May 26, 1971, the district court sought to enjoin violation of its Order by “all persons who are residents of Colquitt County, Georgia”. This was impermissibly broad, although the injunction against the parties is binding as well upon their “officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and upon those persons in active concert or participation with them uiho receive actual notice of the order by personal service or otherwise.” (Emphasis supplied). Rule 65(d), F.R.Civ.P. See Lance v. Plummer, 5 Cir. 1965, 353 F.2d 585, cert. den. 1966, 384 U.S. 929, 86 S.Ct. 1380, 16 L.Ed.2d 532; reh. den. 1966, 384 U.S. 994, 86 S.Ct. 1885, 16 L.Ed.2d 1011.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Wilma Joyce Harrington, Franklin Sutton v. Colquitt County Board of Education. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
5 opinions
HARRINGTON v. COLQUITT COUNTY BOARD OF EDUC.,449 F.2d 161(5th Cir. 1971)
Wilma Joyce HARRINGTON et al., Plaintiffs, Franklin Sutton et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COLQUITT COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 71-2278.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
September 20, 1971.
Reuben H. Yancey, Valdosta, Ga., Frank T. Holt, Thomasville, Ga., for plaintiffs-appellants.

James C. Whelchel, Hoyt H. Whelchel, Jr., Moultrie, Ga., for defendants-appellees.

C.B. King, Elliot H. Holden, Albany, Ga., Jack Greenberg, Norman J. Chachkin, New York City, for other interested parties.
Before WISDOM, COLEMAN and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
By its Order of May 26, 1971, the district court sought to enjoin violation of its Order by "all persons who are residents of Colquitt County, Georgia". This was impermissibly broad, although the injunction against the parties is binding as well upon their "officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and upon those persons inactive concert or participation withthem who receive actual notice of the order by personal serviceor otherwise."(Emphasis supplied). Rule65(d), F.R.Civ.P.SeeLance v. Plummer, 5 Cir. 1965,353 F.2d 585, cert. den. 1966,384 U.S. 929,86 S. Ct. 1380,16 L.Ed.2d 532; reh. den. 1966,384 U.S. 994,86 S.Ct. 1885,16 L. Ed.2d 1011.

The May 26, 1971 Order is directed to be modified by striking the quoted language, and, as so modified, the order is affirmed.
Let our mandate issue immediately.Page 162
Page 163