Dillard v. Coffee County Board of Education Consent Decree; Joint Motion for Approval Settlement
Public Court Documents
April 4, 1994
5 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Dillard v. Crenshaw County Hardbacks. Dillard v. Coffee County Board of Education Consent Decree; Joint Motion for Approval Settlement, 1994. 869251d9-b7d8-ef11-a730-7c1e527e6da9. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/cc13dfd7-ddbf-4256-b386-4d0ba7bd3886/dillard-v-coffee-county-board-of-education-consent-decree-joint-motion-for-approval-settlement. Accessed November 02, 2025.
Copied!
JAMES H. WEATHERFORD, JR.
ATTORNEY AT LAW
205 East Lee Street
Enterprise, Alabama 36331
James H. Weatherford, Jr. Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 1291 or
P.O." Box 1254
Telephone 347-1314
Area Code 205
Fax #205-347-8770
April 4, 1994
Thomas C. Caver, Clerk
U.S. Courthouse
P.O. Box 711
Montgomery, Alabama 36101
RE: Dillard vs. Coffee County Board of Education
CV 87-1-1183-N
Dear Mr. Caver:
Please find enclosed "Consent Decree” and "Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement”
which | wish to file with your office.
| am in the process of obtaining copies of the legal description of the districts and a map
which will be forwarded as soon as possible.
If you have any questions or if further information is needed, please contact my office.
Sincerely, /
“Jie Tulfo ot -
/
Jarples/H. Weatherfc
Attorney at Law
JHW/vhf
CC: Edward Still
714 South 29th. Street
Birmingham, Alabama 35233-2845
James U. Blacksher
Title Bldg., STE 710
300 21st. Street North
Birmingham, Alabama 35203
Sherrilyn Ifill : :
NAACP Legal Defense Fund Al Voom —
99 Hudson Street
New York, New York 10013 Dill wd Cound
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
JOHN DILLARD, et al., C.A. 85-T-1332-N
Plaintiffs,
VS.
COFFEE County Board of Education, Defendant.
CONSENT DECREE
Plaintiffs and the Coffee County Board of Education, hereinafter the defendant,
having submitted the following terms of settlement and for good cause shown, it is
HEREBY ORDERED that defendant, its agents, attorneys, employees and those acting
in concert with them or at their direction, are ENJOINED as follows:
1. The redistricting plan proposed by the plaintiffs and agreed to by the
defendant, which modifies the single-member district plan for the Coffee County Board
of Education previously approved by the Court, is PRELIMINARILY APPROVED.
2. The members of the Board of Education shall continued to be elected for 6-
year staggered terms. The incumbent members shall serve out the remainder of their
respective terms without regard to residence within any particular district. Elections
shall be held as follows:
1994: Districts 2, 3, and 5
1996: Districts 1 and 6
1998: Districts 4 and 7.
The districts shall be as described on the attached description. A map embodying the
description is on file with the Clerk of the Court. In case of any conflict between the map
and the verbal description, the verbal description shall take precedence.
3. The chair of the Board of Education shall forthwith inform the county
commission and the probate judge of the plan approved by this Order. The time
limitations of Ala Code § 17-5A-4 notwithstanding, the county commission shall forthwith
make such changes in the precincts and election districts as may be necessary and shall
provide at least one pelling place in each of the single-member districts which has a
majority of black voters. The location of the new polling places shall be determined after
consultation with members of the black community.
4, The defendant shall ensure that a plan to assign voters to the single-
member districts provided for in this decree is adopted and implemented as quickly as
possible.
5. The Court cannot enter a final order at this time because of the lack of
proof that the Justice Department has not interposed an objection under Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act.
6. The defendant shall submit this plan promptly to the Justice Department
for preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
7. Even though this plan should not be approved as a final plan until the
Department of Justice has precleared the plan and the fairness of the plan has been
determined, the Court now determines that the plan should be implemented as the
Court’s own interim plan for the conduct of the special 1994 primaries and election.
Upham v Seamon, 456 US 37 (1982); Burton v Hobbie, 543 FSupp 235 (MD Ala 1982),
aff'd 459 US 961 (1986).
8. It is further ORDERED that this order may be modified at a later time if
the jurisdiction does not receive final approval of the plan preliminarily approved herein.
9. The plaintiffs are prevailing parties for the purpose of the award of
attorneys’ fees and expenses. The Court hereby assesses an award of two thousand five
hundred ($2,500.00) against the defendant and ORDERS the defendant to pay said sum
forthwith to the plaintiffs’ attorneys by check made payable to Edward Still Trust
Account.
DONE this day of 1908,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Approved by:
Edward Still ib James H. Weatherford 2
714 South 29th Street PO Box 1291
Birmingham AL 35233-2845 Enterprise AL 36331-1291
James U. Blacksher
Title Bldg., STE 710
300 21st Street North
Birmingham AL 35203
Sherrilyn Ifill
NAACP Legal Defense Fund
99 Hudson Street
New York, NY 10013
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
JOHN DILLARD, et al., C.A. 85-T-1332-N
Plaintiffs,
Vs.
COFFEE County Board of Education,
Defendant.
Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement
Come now the parties and move the Court to approve the settlement filed
herewith. The parties show unto the Court that this settlement is fair to all parties and
go Yibuliy
Edward Still ames H. SN eaihor ford
714 South 29th Street PO Box 1291
Birmingham AL 35233-2845 Enterprise AL 36331-1291
to the public.
Submitted by:
James U. Blacksher
Title Bldg., STE 710
300 21st Street North
Birmingham AL 35203
Sherrilyn Ifill
NAACP Legal Defense Fund
99 Hudson Street
New York, NY 10013