Franks v. Bowman Transportation Company Certificate Required by Local Rule 13(a)

Public Court Documents
January 1, 1972

Franks v. Bowman Transportation Company Certificate Required by Local Rule 13(a) preview

Date is approximate.

Cite this item

  • Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Franks v. Bowman Transportation Company Certificate Required by Local Rule 13(a), 1972. 0adc2e59-b29a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/22aa1719-736e-4587-bc70-b10270e3073e/franks-v-bowman-transportation-company-certificate-required-by-local-rule-13-a. Accessed October 08, 2025.

    Copied!

    IN THE

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT 

No.  7 2 - 3 2 3 9

HAROLD FRANKS,

P l a i n t i f f - A p p e l l a n t ,

a n d

JOHNNIE LEE,

I n t e r v e n o r - A p p e l l a n t ,

-  v s  -

BOWMAN TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, e t  a l . ,

D e f e n d a n t s - A p p e l l e e s .

CERTIFICATE REQUIRED BY LOCAL RULE 13 (a)

The  u n d e r s i g n e d  c o u n s e l  o f  r e c o r d  f o r  P l a i n t i f f - A p p e l l a n t  

a n d  I n t e r v e n o r - A p p e l l a n t  c e r t i f i e s  t h a t  t h e  f o l l o w i n g  l i s t e d  

p a r t i e s  h a v e  a n  i n t e r e s t  i n  t h e  o u t c o m e  o f  t h i s  c a s e .  T h e s e  

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s  a r e  made i n  o r d e r  t h a t  J u d g e s  o f  t h i s  C o u r t  may  

e v a l u a t e  p o s s i b l e  d i s q u a l i f i c a t i o n  o r  r e c u s a l  p u r s u a n t  t o  

L o c a l  R u l e  13 {a ) .

!*■ E T .



to Intervenor Lee in the net amount lie lost due toback pay 
his discharge.

Respectfully submitted,

jfytcrms 1, Q-clJjIsl--'.
HOWARD MOORE ,<v.JR.
ELIZABETH R. RINDSKOPF

75 Piedmont Avenue, N . E .  
Suite 1154
Atlanta, Georgia 3 0 303

JACK GREENBERG 
WILLIAM L .  ROBINSON 
MORRIS J .  BALLER 
BARRY L .  GOLDSTEIN

10 C o lum bus  C i r c l e  
S u i t e  2030
New Y o r k ,  New Y ork  1 0 0 1 9

Attorneys for Appellants*

* Appellants' attorneys acknowledge with appreciation the 
dedicated and competent assistance of Peter Bienstock, 
a third year student at the Law School of New York 
University, in the preparation of the trial in this case 
and of this brief.



50

CONCLUSION

W herefore, for the foregoing reasons it is respectfully 
submitted that the judgment of the United States Court 
of Appeals should be reversed. The case should be re­
manded to the distiict court with instructions to conduct 
immediately a hearing on whether some other method of 
pupil assignment would, consistently with sound educa­
tional principles, sooner disestablish the dual system. If 
such be the case that court should order that the speedier 
method be employed by defendants.

Respectfully submitted,

J ack Greenberg 
J ames M. Nabrit, JIT 
F ranklin E. W hite 

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019

S. W. T ucker 
Henry L. Marsh, III 

214 East Clay Street 
Richmond, Virginia

Attorneys for Petitioners

Of Counsel:
Michael Meltsner 
Michael J. H enry



C O N C L U S I O N

F o r  t h e  r e a s o n s  s e t  f o r t h  a b o v e ,  t h i s  C o u r t  s h o u l d  

r e v e r s e  t h e  j u d g m e n t  o f  t h e  c o u r t  b e l o w  a n d  r e m a n d  w i t h  i n ­

s t r u c t i o n s  t o  e n t e r  a  d e c r e e  p r o v i d i n g  f u l l  a n d  e f f e c t i v e  

r e l i e f  t o  a p p e l l a n t s  an d  m em bers  o f  t h e  c l a s s  t h e y  r e p r e s e n t .  

S u c h  r e l i e f  s h o u l d  s p e c i f i c a l l y  i n c l u d e :  (1) t h e  u s e  o f  f u l l

c o m p a n y  s e n i o r i t y  b y  c l a s s  m em b ers  who a r e  now e m p l o y e d ,  a n d  

r e t r o a c t i v e  s e n i o r i t y  f o r  c l a s s  m e m b e rs  who a r e  r e j e c t e d  a p p l i ­

c a n t s  a n d  a r e  l a t e r  h i r e d ;  (2) a n  a f f i r m a t i v e  p r o g r a m  f o r  h i r i n g  

B l a c k  r o a d  d r i v e r s  on  a r a t i o  a s  s u g g e s t e d  h e r e i n ,  a n d  f o r  r e ­

c r u i t m e n t  o f  B l a c k  a p p l i c a n t s  f o r  o f f i c e / c l e r i c a l  p o s i t i o n s ;

(3) a  t r a i n i n g  p r o g r a m  t o  a s s i s t  B l a c k s  i n  e n t e r i n g  j o b s  f r o m  

v h i c h  t h e y  h a v e  b e e n  e x c l u d e d ;  (4) p r o v i s i o n  f o r  r e t a i n e d  j u r i s ­

d i c t i o n  an d  r e p o r t i n g  b y  d e f e n d a n t s ;  (5) a n  o r d e r  t h a t  b a c k  p a y  

may b e  g r a n t e d  t o  c l a s s  m e m b e r s ,  a n d  p r o c e e d i n g s  t o  d e t e r m i n e  

t h e  a m o u n t s  a n d  d i s t r i b u t i o n  t h e r e o f ;  (6) a n  a w a r d  o f  b a c k  p a y  

t o  p l a i n t i f f  F r a n k s  i n  t h e  n e t  a m o u n t  h e  l o s t  d u e  t o  t h e  d e n i a l  

o f  p r o m o t i o n  o r  t r a n s f e r  a n d  h i s  d i s c h a r g e ;  (7) a n  a w a r d  o f

66

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.