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 April 06, 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