Correspondence from Floyd to Counsel Re: Etowah County District Plan

Correspondence
June 17, 1986

Cite this item
Correspondence from Floyd to Counsel Re: Etowah County District Plan preview

7 pages

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Dillard v. Crenshaw County Hardbacks. Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the Coffee County Defendants, 1986. b20389f2-b8d8-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/567f3993-84aa-438f-b2f0-33bed8fbcc94/proposed-findings-of-fact-and-conclusions-of-law-for-the-coffee-county-defendants. Accessed April 06, 2025.

    Copied!

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

JOHN DILLARD, et al., 

Rlaintiffs, 

vs. 
C.A. No. 85-T-1332-N 

CRENSHAW COUNTY, ALABAMA, et al., 

Defendants. 

PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR THE 

COFFEE COUNTY DEFENDANTS 

The Coffee County Defendants having presented their defense of Res Judicata 

based on the Coffee County case of Sims, et. al. vs. Baxley, et. al. which was 

formerly adjudicated in the United States District Court for the Middle District 

of Alabama, Southern Division. That all of the issues involved in said litigation and 

in this instant case are the same. 

That a judgment on the merits of the issues and parties in this case has been 

previously rendered involving the same claims and demands and is therefore 

an absolute bar to this present action. That the said prior action, of 

Sims constitutes a valid final judgment conclusive on the parties, and those 

in privity with them, as to all matters of fact and law that were or should have 

been adjudicated in said proceeding. 

IT 1S, THEREFORE, OREDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED BY THE COURT that the for- 

mer case of Sims v. Baxley, et.al., Civil Action No. 1170-S, is a judgment on 

the merits and is a valid final judgment conclusive on the parties herein, and 

those in privity with them, as to all matters of fact and law that were or should 

have been adjudicated in said proceeding. 

That said previous litigation is a bar to this action against the said Coffee 

County Defendants.  



  

That this said action against the said Coffee County Defendants be and it 

is dismissed as to said Defendants. 

DONE THIS DRY OF oe . 1u06, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have this date served on the attorneys of record in 

the above styled matter by placing in the United States Mail, postage prepaid the 

foregoing PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW this the 

28th day of February, 1986. 

Warren Rowe, Attbrney for Coffee County

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top