4th Circuit Opinion and Application for Extension of Time
Public Court Documents
June 12, 1967
12 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Green v. New Kent County School Board Working files. 4th Circuit Opinion and Application for Extension of Time, 1967. af50a3a0-6d31-f011-8c4e-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/e2209026-6876-4e98-bc53-a7fcbc68bfe3/4th-circuit-opinion-and-application-for-extension-of-time. Accessed November 02, 2025.
Copied!
p., Richmond, Va. 23208
HEN TAT LS OURT 0 Ee APPE AY Q
ED STAT Eo COl Ki Uk APPEALS
No. 10,792.
- Charles C. Green, Carroll A. Green and Robert C. Green,
infants, by Calvin C. Green and Mary O. Green,
their father and mother and next friends,
and all others of the plaintiffs,
Appellants,
versus
County School Loard of New Kent County, Virginia, et al,
Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DisTrRicT COURT FOR
THE EASTERN DistricT OF VIRGINIA, AT RICHMOND.
Journ D. BuTzNER, JR., DISTRICT JUDGE.
(Argued January 9, 1967. Decided June 12, 1967.)
Before HaynsworTH, Chief Judge, and SoBELoFF, BORE-
MAN, Bryan, J. Spencer BeLL,¥ WINTER and CRAVEN,
Circuit Judges, sitting en banc. :
S. W. Tucker (Henry L. Marsh, III, Willard H. Douglas,
Jr., Jack Greenberg and James M. Nabrit, III, on brief)
for Appellants, and Frederick T. Gray (Williams, Mullen
& Christian on brief) for Appellees.
* Judge Bell sat as a member of the Court when the case was heard but died
before it was decided.
PER CURIAM
The questions presented in this case are substantially the
same as those we have considered and decided today in
Bowman v. County School Bd. of Charles City County.’
For the reasons stated there, the rulings of the District
Court merit our substantial approval, but the case is neces-
sarily remanded for further proceedings in accordance with
the District Court’s order and our opinion in Bowman.
Remanded.
2a Or, ooo F.2d (Decided this day). The special concurring opinion of Judge Sobeloff, in which Judge Winter joins, in Bowman is applicable to this
case also.
&u
s
~
§
¢
| 4
& fa
"3
Vs
§
» “
4
., Richmond, Va. 23208
ha & fa
i A TES CO UR wr OF AF p PEAL ¥
WV; i A ES 1 1 RT i 31
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT LR. RAN
No 10,792.
Charles C. Green, Carrolb A. Green and Robert C. Green,
infants, by Calvin C. Green and Mary O. Green,
their father and mother and next friends,
and all others of the plaintiffs,
Appellants,
versus
County School Eoard of New Kent County, Virginia, et al.,
Appellees.
ArPEAL FROM THE UNItep StATES District COURT FOR
THE EASTERN DisTrICT OF VIRGINIA, AT RICHMOND.
JouN D. BUuTzZNER, JR., DISTRICT JUDGE
(Argued January 9, 1967. Decided June 12, 1967.)
Before HaynsworTH, Chief Judge, and SoBeLoFF, BORE-
MAN, BryaN, J. SPENceErR BeLrL,* WINTER “and CRAVEN,
Circuit Judges, sitting en banc. |
S. W. Tucker (Henry L. Marsh, III, Willard H. Douglas,
Jr., Jack Greenberg and James M. Nabrit, I1I, on brief)
for Appellants, and Frederick T. Gray (Williams, Mullen
& Christian on brief) for Appellees.
* Judge Bell sat as a member of the Court when the case was heard but died
before it was decided.
fa
-
PER CURIAM :
The questions presented in this case are substantially the
same as those we have considered and decided today in
Bowman v. County School Bd. of Charles City County.’
For the reasons stated there, the rulings of the District
Court merit our substantial approval, but the case is neces-
sarily remanded for further proceedings in accordance with
the District Court’s order and our opinion in Bowman.
Remanded.
14. Cir, (Decided this day). The special concurring opinion of
hich Judge Winter joins, in Bowman is applicable to this
case also.
.» Richmond, Va. 23208
NIT TATES COIIRT OF APPEAYC UNITED § Si TES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10,792.
Charles C. Green, Carroll A. Green 2 id Robert C. Green,
infants, by Calvin C. ir and Mary O. Green,
their father and mother and next friends,
and all others of the plaintiffs,
Appellants,
VETSUS
County School Loard of New Kent County, Virginia, et al,,
Appellees.
AprPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DisTrRiIcT COURT FOR
THE EASTERN DisTricT oF VIRGINIA, AT RICHMOND.
JouN D. BUTZNER, JRr., DISTRICT JUDGE.
(Argued January 9, 1967. Decided June 12, 1967.)
Before HaynswortH, Chief Judge, and SOBELOFF¥, BORE-
MAN, Bryan, J. SpExcer BeLr,* WINTER and CRAVEN,
Circuit Judges, sitting en banc. :
S. W. Tucker (Henry L. Marsh, III, Willard H. Douglas,
Jr., Jack Greenberg and James M. Nabrit, 111, on brief)
for Appellants, and Frederick T. Gray (Williams, Mullen
& Christian on brief) for Appellees.
* Tudee Bell sat as 2a member of the Court when the case was heard but died
oo
before it was decided.
&
or
PER CURIAM :
The questions presented in this case are substantially the
same as those we have considered and decided today in
Bowman v. County School Bd. of Charles City County.’
For the reasons stated there, the rulings of the District
Court merit our substantial approval, but the case is neces-
sarily remanded for further proceedings in accordance with
the District Court’s order and our opinion in Bowman.
Remanded.
24 Cir. Fad... (Decided this day). The special concurring opinion of Judge Sobeloff, in which Judge Winter joins, in Bowman is applicable to this
case also.
EL
i
Ba
il
ie
i
m
t
—
—
—
—
—
—
r
i
t
e
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
e
s
ee
e————
A —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
r
n
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
s
e
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
a
m
e
n
—
—
;
ae
3
5
=
:
a
£
i
:
-
pe
a
pe
f
T
i
A
hy
wed
*
ke
i
%
8
4
grt
/
4
a“
ay
h
¥
x
2
W
3
8
d
3
:
pe
&
¢
¥
%
i
w x
&
{
;
»
’
»
@
k
F
e
.
4
i
t
"
4
pe
ow
4
”
.
.
.
bof
§
4
#
5
5
3
Ey
n
fond
i
i
|
3
ho
3
&
]
y
"
t
&
2
Y
4
:
*
»
H
¥
:
&
i
{
-
hs
¥
-
¥
}
2
n
»
3
i
=
)
%
|
pi
§
3
¥
EE
»
3
:
4
3
g
bi
®
$
¥
7
£
y
a
l
he
1
i
&
i
i
v
A
8
»
i
ity.
3
iy
EN
{
:
Hd
#
.
i
'
i
lg
\
;
:
!
]
L
£
Ee
ib E
i
-
i
3
¥
wd
x
5
;
]
3
Hl
’
3
3
¥
i
§
;
i
:
H
oy
3
gos
x
#
:
C
i
"
y
fo
3
fi
;
We
LG
.
F
'
bl
Es
r
o
a
d
5
¢
py
yb
4
pe
:
: |
he
a
&
"
%
—
E
»
o
F
%
#
:
"
v
wv
at’)
3
G
wr
.
g 5
*
ov
er
—
—
a
=
—
—
—
_
——
a
A
AE
R
A
E
T
ul
rh
-
—
—
x
t
s
pe
—
»
i —
—
—
—
L
S
A
a
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
P
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
-
—
—
—
—
—
—
r
—
—
-
—
—
-
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
¥
#
:
3
i
4
4
§
an
a
:
¥
4
v
Ei
A
ol
"
bia
fi
&
{ik
#
“
;
§
y
4
“
y
ov
V
‘
«
fy
™
Th
ol
-
3
i
—
pd
»
bf
l
oq
i
.
3
pe
b
i
3
4
;
;
S.3
Sd
_
:
;
wi
i
s
§
we
»
RH
"
”
@
&
i
»
#
i
oe
;
‘
’
n
»
4
¥
del
¥
J
2.
&
Sa
7
?
¥
E
;
od
.
i
i
5%
y
#
%
£
4
>
4
P
“
5
i
3
l
A
=
&
Re
-
a
#
J
3
a
“
4
W
:
oo
#
4
Y
wd
¥
:
-
y
di
i»
p
a
3
3
3
4
3
3
bir
.
h
;
:
:
;
us
)
’
Fuh
i
ind
hc
4
%
y
8
§
;
5
oN
2
prog!
i
”
3
andl
Mh
|
fo
»
&
a
aula
8
3
4
$
pr
4
%
;
‘
i
all
:
f
p
.
i
cu
en
y
4
3
-
;
t
X
o
P
3
Gs
4
4
:
:
:
-
;
1
%
ry
wo
1
4
—
po
:!
ly
%
1’
J
et
i
a
d
¥
N
b
#
i
i
i
#
ia
)
:
A
3
4
)
:
"
»
:
©
%
ha
n
RO
§
:
3
ye
a”
8
$
oh
:
:
7
kX
:
¥
i
>
&
4
df
A
¢
oll
ig
2
BF
i
2
i
i
2
i
:
é.
#
§
¢
»,
%
.
1
i
i
a
Vo»
’
v
d
on,
i
4
}
§
#
ii
i
§
’
hic
i
¢
wl
Ri
®
i
%
3
{
r
s
y
il
h
k
i
a
i
w
d
%
o
i
%
i
h
.
m
y
Ki
Toy
1
;
y
£
£2
«
ra
5
k
a
]
god
Fr
=F
Rr
ia
w
id
k
.
&
#%,
A
y
0%
'
]
-~
£
FE
y
.
=
a
¢
R
i
C
.
is
#
3
;
p
£3
iJ
ow
)
WV
*
wo
po
<3
%d
-
ad
}
Fh
wed
.
i
Bs
Ry
oi
oS
.
¢
-
)
:
Foi
5
"
%
‘
#
&
&
g
{
3
id
Fed
"
4
-
at
.
P
4
”
&
3
%
{
£
:
:
3
ahi
3
i:
#1
y
y
3
#
*
»
é
¥
7d
4
4
3
i
3
4
.
3
¥
~
i
¥
’
{
£3
5
y
nl
’
.
.
$
¥
Ly
.
t
i;
we
:
fs
y
.
bad
-
Sp
Wi
4
p
§
a
¥
w
hy
.
5
A
%
x
{
PR
i
wa
L
A
R
hr AE
R
A
Se,
S
R
3
et
B
E
e
t
i
a
m
h
a
a
-
>
e
e
e
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.
-
-
h
e
:
.
.
oe
ce
t
n
se
-
r
e
t
i
n
p
s
s
—
i
————
—
e
T
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
~-
E
—
—
—
—
E
E
E
—
-
&
EN
3
3
h
’
5
-
h
ind
.
3
i
&
sid
#
a
id
d
Yi
#
“
!
}
4
t
of
;
%
P
7
:
:
-
a]
¥
\
%
.
k
i
4
i
§
ull
dae
o
£
2
p
:
y
z
a3
Fh
£
f
x
h
l
b
hate
#
3
v
#
g
]
1
’
1
.
i
‘
“th
%
;
;
%
id
w
k
.
4
.
3
.
”
b
5
Pi
5
-
%
id
hg
y
X
4
&
i,
£5
%
ig
.
PS
E
—
.
#
h,
d
e
r
Wr
3
!
-
wd
4
3
,
4
¥
:
fy
oh
S
b
§
:
:
*
i
3
.
wn
Rik
‘
#
g
1
Sil
i
i
%
a
§
»
a
Yo
§
y
J
:
,
;
1
o
|
i
hy
3
oh
;
“
DO
we
3
rT
f
a
g
"
he
h,
:
§
‘
ud
!
3
4
4
"
9
w
¥
Y
i
i
i
3
iow
:
oR
3
uk
d
§
4
i
i
:
jos
:
»
4
¥
¥
1
#
1
wl
i
»
i
-
s
ba
E
;
¥
ad
¥
¢
Ko
3
z
A
&
2
ful
FevE
]
y
Ne
i
Li
P
FS:
¢
4
3
fv
od
»
ard
ual
¥
2
a
p
.
5
y
3
oe
u
p
i
#
"
»
3
%
i
3
F
$i
%
Vw
n
i
e
.
»
Q
%
*
pe
¥
;
§
3
/
:
®
j
wr
%
|
og
k
d
e
d
¥
k
fd
w
WE
as
i
S
i
2
po
%
y
ga
i
%
par;
J
i
:
i
¥
i
In
bak
gr
4
¥
2
o
;
om
¢
-
Ey
od
¥
"
P
a
bj
.
aot
wd
:
4
fia
i
L$
3
:
Wo
3
-
n
e
We
i
x
5
N
t
kd
.
*
g
o
’
m
1
hd
.
oh
&
&
"
¥
nd
"
Bird
wi,
#5
1
i
ps
"
a”
wh
¢
[3
;
i
&
w¥
P
i
4
#4
"
.
{
a
§
iW
wi
"
:
3
¥
3
wi
#
:
*
»
a
&
id
J
ag
1
=
k
e
]
4
H
9
»
ow
%
d
#
[3
§
#7
: J
7%
a
]
Td
3
*
A
ih
:
:
ol
£
i
2)
¥
:
i
;
#
#
Ted
l
ns
pe
and
bs,
ke
if
i
Bes
"
a
#
§
ge
]
8
»
v
¥
’
:
;
w
o
e
r
e
r
—
—
—
—
| £3 ?
:
3
i
~
4
u
*
3
a
idl
ud
i
wi
3
«
Ww
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
-
=
—
—
-
er
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.
—
E
S
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
r