Davis v. Mobile County Board of School Commissioners Supplemental Brief for Petitioners

    ( t o r t  of %  Ittttrft I t o p n
O ctober T erm , 1970

No. 436

I n  th e

B irdie M ae D avis, et al.,
Petitioners,

v.

B oard of S chool C ommissioners op 
M obile C o u nty , et al.

ON W R IT  OP CERTIORARI TO T H E  U N IT E D  STATES 
COURT OP APPEALS FOR T H E  F IF T H  CIRCU IT

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FOR PETITIONERS

J ack  Greenberg 
J ames M. N abrit, III 
M ichael  D avidson 
N orman J. C h a c h k in  

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019

V ernon Z. Crawford 
A lgernon J. Cooper 

1407 Davis Avenue 
Mobile, Alabama 36603

A n th o n y  G. A msterdam
Stanford University Law School 
Stanford, California 94305

Attorneys for Petitioners



I n  the

in t e r n e  GJmtrl nt tin' States
O ctober, T eem , 1970

No. 436

B irdie M ae D avis, et al.,
Petitioners,

v.

B oard oe S chool Commissioners op 
M obile Co u nty , et al.

ON W R IT  OP CERTIORARI TO T H E  U N ITED  STATES 
COURT OP APPEALS POR T H E  F IF T H  C IR C U IT

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FOR PETITIONERS

Petitioners file this Supplemental Brief pursuant to Rule 
41(5) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the United 
States to bring to the attention of this Court the actual 
enrollment in the public schools of respondent school dis­
trict under the orders of the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Fifth Circuit here reviewed. This information is 
contained in a Report filed with the district court October 2, 
1970 which was not available to Petitioners in time for 
inclusion in their Brief in chief.

The transmittal letter of the district court clerk and 
the actual enrollment figures in the Mobile County public 
school on September 21, 1970 as shown in the Report are 
reprinted in their entirety as an Appendix to this Sup­
plemental Brief.



2

Petitioners’ analysis of the enrollment figures for 
September 21, 1970 reveals the following results of im­
plementation of the Fifth Circuit plan:

1. Nine (9) elementary schools are definable as “ all­
black” under the Fifth Circuit’s standard, which de­
fines “all-black” schools as having 10% or fewer white 
students:

Schools Black White

Brazier 1039 0
Caldwell 408 7
Council 363 14
Fonvielle 919 2
Grant 1087 4
Owens 1476 0
Palmer 646 61
Robbins 694 8
Stanton Road 1019 3

Total 7651

The report further shows that there are 11,894 black 
elementary school students in Metropolitan Mobile. The 
percentage of these assigned to “all-black” schools is 
64%. The number of black students actually assigned 
to “ all-black” schools is 1576 more than the Court of 
Appeals thought were being assigned (compare these 
statistics with those at page 707a of the Appendix).

2. Additionally, 402 black students are assigned to 
a school which is only slightly more than 10% white:

Schools

Whitley

Black

402

White

46



3

I f  this school is treated as being1 “all-black” the total 
number of black students assigned to all-black schools 
is 8053, or 67 % of all black elementary school students 
in Metropolitan Mobile.

3. The Report also indicates a clear problem in 
several junior high schools and high schools:

Schools Black White

Blount 2033 41
Central 1508 17
Dunbar 816 18
Mobile County Training 712 20
Trinity Gardens 868 61
Washington 809 59

Total 6746

Thus, contrary to the Fifth Circuit’s expectations, 6746 
junior and senior high school students are attending 
“ all-black” schools. Significant numbers of the students 
attending “ all-black” elementary schools will attend 
these “all-black” junior and senior high schools. The 
Fifth Circuit’s assumption that every black student 
will attend an integrated school at some point in his 
education in unwarranted.

This miscalculation on the Fifth Circuit’s part further 
demonstrates the need for thorough evidentiary hearings 
under standards declared by this Court. Petitioners sub­
mit that Mobile’s experience under the Fifth Circuit plan 
underscores the necessity for the declaration of a Con­
stitutional standard that in a unitary school system, no 
black student may be assigned to a racially identifiable 
black school, at any grade level.



4

As we suggested in our Brief, Plan B -l Alternative pro­
posed by the Department of H.E.W. on December 1, 1969 
meets that standard in an educationally sound and ad­
ministratively feasible manner. We suggest, therefore, that 
not only should future hearings in the district court pro­
ceed under the Constitutional standard above, but that they 
must be expedited in accordance with a schedule consistent 
with Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 TJ.S. 19 
(1969) and Carter v. West Feliciana Parish School Bd., 396 
U.S. 290 (1970), and the respondents should bear the bur­
den at such hearings “of demonstrating beyond question . .  . 
the unworkability of” Plan B -l Alternative and “ devisfing 
other] measures to provide the required relief.” Carter v. 
West Feliciana Parish School Bd., 396 U.S. at 292 (Mr. 
Justice Harlan, concurring).

Respectfully submitted,

J ack  Greenberg 
J ames M. N abrit, III 
M ichael  D avidson 
N orman J. Ch a c h k in  

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019

V ernon  Z. Crawford 
A lgernon J. C ooper 

1407 Davis Avenue 
Mobile, Alabama 36603

A n th o n y  G. A msterdam
Stanford University Law School 
Stanford, California 94305

Attorneys for Petitioners



APPENDIX



W IL L IA M  J , O ’C O N N O R  
C l e r k

United  S t a t e s  D ist r ic t  C o u r t
S o u t h e r n  D is t r ic t  o f  A l a b a m a

2 1 3  U .S . C o u r t  H o u s e  & C u s t o m  Ho u s e  

M OBILE, A LA B A M A  3 6 6 0 2
OCTOBER 1, 1970

Mr. Michael Davidson,
Attorney at Law,
Suite 2030 -  10 Columbus C irc le , 
New York, N. Y. 10019

In Re: C iv il Action No. 3003-63 -  B irdie
Mae Davis, et a l  v. Board o f School 

Commissioners o f  Mobile County

Dear S ir :

Pursuant to your telephone request o f  yesterday, I hand you 
herewith the fo llow in g :

1. Report f i le d  October 2, 1970, by the Board o f School Com­
missioners showing the number o f non-conformers by school and 
race fo r  Monday, September 28, 1970. This Id In the form o f a 
Memo dated September 28, 1970, from Mr. J. A. McPherson to  Mr. 
Abram L. P h ilip s .

2. Report f i le d  October 2, 1970, by the Board o f School Com­
missioners showing the enrollment fo r  Monday, September 21, 1970. 
On Page 2 o f th is report you w il l  find that the to ta l  enrollment 
is  69,697.

3. Report f i le d  October 2, 1970, by the Board o f School Com­
missioners showing the number o f non-conformers fo r  Thursday, 
September 17, 1970, and Friday, September 18, 1970.

4. Report f i le d  October 2, 1970, by the Board o f School Com­
missioners showing the enrollment figures fo r  Monday, September 
14, 1970.

5. Report f i le d  October 2, 1970, by the Board o f School Com­
missioners showing the cumulative enroliment figures fo r  the second 
day, Thursday, September 10, 1970.

6. Report f i le d  October 2, 1970, by the Board o f School Com­
missioners showing the enrollm ent' report fo r  the f i r s t  day o f 
school, Wednesday, September 9, 1970.

I do not send to you the Report to  the Court that was f i le d  on 
September 25, 1970, se ttin g  out the adm inistrative action  taken by 
the Pupil Personae! O ffice  with regard to  each tran sfer app lication  
received and acted updn in the period bettween September 18 and Sep­
tember 24, 1970.



Mr. Michael Davidson 
Page No. 2 
October 7, 1970

I do not send to you the Report to  the Court that was f i le d  
on September 18, 1970, settin g  out a ction  on student transfers 
with regard to  each tran sfer app lica tion  received and acted 
upon fo r  the f i l in g  o f transfer applications that closed  on 
Friday, September 11, 1970.

The reason I do not send to  you the two foregoing reports 
is that they are lnany, many pages and I do not think you would 
want to  spend your money fo r  th is Information. I f  I am in 
error, advise me.

You may send to  me a check fo r  $5.00 fo r  the enclosures.

Very tru ly  yours

Clerk.



ADAMS

A LB A

trzxzzisssa 

A U S T IN  

A ZA L E A  ROAD 

BAKER 

BELSAW

< ?
t  ■ j r t

^  /  a *

< 5 7 3  9 9 0  /O 0 3

f W .

t

D A V IS

D IC K SO N

D IX O N

DODGE

DUNBAR

EANES

E IG H T  M IL E

o /
* *

y  f t « c c » o c A f

<$» j ,  

#  /

/ 9 0  6 0 /

t  f  s P e c

V
A ®

0 9 /

/Ol2 /<y/s l b / 3

/O S1 s v a 3 5 0

■ ■ ■ £ ;,. -S O  5 1/5 / /9.S rO0‘5 O Q 'O

3 ^ /OUb /M V ■ GO o /o 6 » '7 9

9 5 " SOW -.

0 5

S H 3

o u o

<s/b >0 S5U

<33-3 0 3 £>90 /bOO

/ O J /(/

BLOUNT 9  053 l>/ solov

'  '  V Y ,3 .

B R A Z IE R /O30 /o3~i EVANS /3 Q 9 3 0 0 3

BROOKLEY 9 t> 0 9 5 Sb>5 F0N D E 0 0 0 0 3 0

BURROUGHS -Ob! J $ L - 0 / 0 F O N V IE L L E  ^ 2 l ± . CO 9 0 !

C A LCED EAVER /o q /OQ F O R E S T  H IL L a 5 / 3 S i  ?

CALDW ELL (S0<2 o O /o GLENDALE i (o/O A ?  6 ,C-/5~

G3EESS23

GRAND BAY / < / / VO 3

CEN TRAL /Dt.W /O / 50 b GRANT IP 2 '1 U / c 9 /

CH ICKASAW 6 3 (suq
\

5 7 .0 - G R IG G S o 0 3 M S 0 9 5

C K s m a E H g s a g c a H ALL 3 5 0 /0 3 b

C IT R O N E L L E <63 6 S Sb o //os HAM ILTON /Ol zoo. 3 0  O 5QZL

C LA R K _ £ i1 S<o35 5 3 6 / s o / H IL L S D A L E O b i (SC-,0 o o y 1

C O U N C IL - 3 6 . 3 . / a Z O O H O L L . IS L A N D 0 3 9  2 d/d'LD

CRA IG H E A D 9 0 0 W d o c s s s a

C R IC H TO N / W 3 2 2 - . 5 5 0 IN D IA N  S P R IN G S /(S S O S

D AU PH IN  IS L A N D 0 0 o o L E E /OS~ 6 3 6 , OS/

D A V ID SO N / t f <en 0951-, 0 0 0 3 L E IN K A U F (Si) CO

OFFICE

2,

c-i i<?70- eMEoLLm£70f1ZĵMj.OY,„
0 CONNOR



> '  H K r ^ ( M i  f  & P£f.
♦ SPtZ.

L O T T

/
i

GOl

&

/
GOG

£
! ?

5b ?  THEODORE

Q.°

3>lo
/

IS3G j!2L(a

M ARYVALE 111 391 GUp THOMAS 9 9 103 131

M ERTZ S 3 3 0  0 3G0 T O U L M IN V IL L E 5 3 0 S I JZK1

M O B IL E  C O . H IG H £0!? 5  9 S' 933 T R I N I T Y  GDNS s 9S? (j>! 909

M O B IL E  C O . T R N G . mcL GO 1103 V IG O R S I /UlM / uu? p sn -

MONTGOMERY 3 1 3 U 91 In 9 9 to W ASHINGTON J M - 5 9 5GV

M O R N IN G SID E 1 1 GO!? GO? WESTLAWN 10 3 5 V 39>P

M T . VERNON 3>9 5 9 l i p  W H IS T L E R n?P n s 3 0 !

MURPHY /GO! it69 PUSQ W H ITL E Y //OS UL, OOp

OLD  S H E L L  ROAD 3 300 i P OOO W IL L 103 Goo 103

ORCHARD n o noO 93U W IL L IA M S 5 3 ISSl . 6 5 3

OWENS / o ig /U1G W IL L IA M S O N 2 S 2 _ 9sn

PALMER GOO 6 / lU l  W ILM ER 5 L 330 UbY

P H IL L IP S ML 95 0 350 1013 WOODCOCK / 6 3 'Gp._ 3 3 /

PR IC H A R D 590 lOQ a i / 3 //3U w est?

R A IN a Up 1331. /0 5 s

R O B B IN S G W loon

S T .  ELMO 5 V UDCJ- Clip

SA R A LA N D ion (o il 1 5 S

SATSUM A 0 0 3 910* / U S '

SCARBOROUGH cT J<4 9oO 93U

SEMMES \ 0-9 1031 /OL'G

SHAW a0O3  . 135  3 / G D ( ,

SH EPARD Q? 030 (JGOb

STANTON ROAD /OH 3 /O il COURT

TAN NER W IL L IA M S a 35<? 3005
INQpJ- On

' 3  1370



ME11EN PRESS INC. —  N. Y. C.