Correspondence from Clerk to West Publishing Company

    United States Court of Appeals 
FIFTH CIRCUIT 

TEL 504-589-6514 

CLERK NEW ORLEANS, LA. 70130 

July 2, 1976 

West Publishing Company 
50 W. Kellogg Blvd. 
St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 

Attention Mr. Charles E. Nelson 

Re: No. 75-1998 - Witt Campbell v. Gadsden County 
District School Board, et al, etc. 

(Opinion rendered July 2, 1976 at p. 4359) 
—— ——— CD CG ——— — ———— GI WE GE GE GH GW GG Ww WA ———— —— = ——— — — — — — — 

Gentlemen: 

I am directed by the panel in this case to write the following: 

In light of the Supreme Court's recent decisions in Runyan 
v. McCrary and McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co., 
both decided June 25, 1976 and thus handed down while the 
Court's Campbell opinion was at the printer, the following 
minor changes in the opinion are necessary and should be made: 

l. In footnote 8, slip op. at 4363, the material 
beginning with "See generally Greenfield . . ." to ". . . 
civil rights violations." on the third line of note 8 on 
p. 4364 should be deleted and supplanted by the following: 

See generally Greenfield & Kates, Mexican Americans, 
Racial Discrimination, and the Civil Rights ‘Act of 
1866, 63 Calif. 1. Rev. 662 (1975). The fact that 
racial discrimination is an important component in a 
section 1981 cause of action is also clear from the 
Supreme Court's recent section 1981 decisions banning 
discriminatory admission policies in private schools 
and discrimination against whites in private employ- 
ment. See Runyan v. McCrary, 44 U.S.L.W. ’ 

(U.S. June 25,.1976);: McDonald v. Santa Pe 
Trall Transportation Co., 44 U.S.L.W. ’ 
(U.S. June 25, 1976). Section 1981 thus allows relief 
for a limited range of particularly serious civil 
rights violations in which racial animus is implicated. 
In view of the fact that section 1981 has more restricted 
applicability than section 1983, the differences in 
statutory language that limit liability under section 
1983 to "persons" but fail to similarly confine section 
1981 liability, see notes 4 and 6, supra, do not seem 

unreasonable. 



West Publishing Company 
July 2, 1976 
Page 2 

2. The sentence beginning "We do not interpret ‘ 
in the fourth line of footnote 8, slip op. at 4364, should 

start a new paragraph. 

3. At the top of p. 4364, the following citation should 

be added, so that the first line of text on that page and 
further should read: 

Houses, Inc., 5: Cir. , 1970, 431 P.24:1097; see also 
Runyan v. McCrary, 44 U.S.L.W. ((.S. 
June 25, 1976); McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transporta- 
tion Co. 44 U.S.L.W. y (U.S. June:-25, 

1976) ,9/ we affirm. . + etc. 

4. .In note 10, at 4365, the bracketed "[1976]" at the 
end of several of the case citations is now redundant and 
unnecessary in light of the fact that West has provided the 
correct citation to ¥.24. 

5. Eight lines from the end of note 10, at the bottom 

Of p. 4365, "note 2". should be "note 12". 

6. Two-thirds of the way down the first column on p. 
4367, the word "There" at the beginning of the indented 
passage should not be capitalized. 

7. In note 13, on p. 4369, beginning six lines from the 
top of the second column of the footnote, the phrase "sub- 
stance and in availability" should be deleted and replaced 
by the single word "scope". 

Very truly yours, 

EDWARD ai Cle 

Cg gs Sr Jr. 
/Chief, Judicial Support Division 

REWjr/sbl 
cc Mr. Brian T. Hayes 

Mr. Richard J. Gardner 
Mr. Kent Spriggs 
Messrs. Jack Greenberg i 

James Gray