|
ALFREDA KECK and DEVON KECK, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. GRAHAM HOTEL SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee. |
|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 07-11042—Robert H. Cleland, District Judge.
Argued: April 29, 2009
Decided and Filed: May 21, 2009
Before: MERRITT, COOK, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.
MERRITT, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs, Alfreda and Devon Keck, sued the defendant, Graham Hotel Systems, Inc., alleging race discrimination in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and the Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.2302. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant refused to host their wedding reception at its hotel because they are African American.
The plaintiffs appeal the District Court’s June 30, 2008, opinion and order granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Keck v. Graham Hotel Sys., Inc., 563 F. Supp. 2d 733 (E.D. Mich. 2008). There is no issue in this case regarding the standard of review of a summary judgment. We review the summary judgment de novo but the court’s findings of specific facts for clear error. The District Court is required to interpret facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986). We conclude that the District Court did not so interpret the facts and that a material dispute of fact exists requiring the reversal of summary judgment.
|
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DONYELL D. COX, Defendant-Appellant. |
|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Ohio at Dayton.
No. 05-00150—Thomas M. Rose, District Judge.
Argued: January 23, 2009
Decided and Filed: May 21, 2009
Before: SUHRHEINRICH, GRIFFIN, and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges.
KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. Donyell Cox appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. We affirm his conviction, but vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing.
|
CLAUDE BERNARD ROBINSON and JULIA D. ROBINSON, infant, by Melvin Robinson, their father and next friend, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee/ Cross-Appellant, v. SHELBY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. |
|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Tennessee at Memphis.
No. 63-04916—Bernice B. Donald, District Judge.
Argued: July 25, 2008
Decided and Filed: May 21, 2009
Before: COOK and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges; MARBLEY, District Judge.
GRIFFIN, Circuit Judge. This appeal presents the final chapter in the courtordered desegregation of the Shelby County, Tennessee, public school system, a process which began forty-five years ago. In 1963, plaintiff public school students1 filed this class action against defendant Shelby County Board of Education (“Board”) alleging unconstitutional racial segregation in the Shelby County schools. In the ensuing period, the district court issued numerous orders requiring the elimination of all vestiges of state-imposed public school segregation in accordance with the mandate of Brown v. Bd. of Educ. of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). A court-approved desegregation plan was implemented and in August 2006, after decades of court supervision, the parties moved jointly to dissolve all outstanding orders, declare the school district a unitary school system, and terminate the litigation. The United States, which has participated as an intervenor since 1966, supported the motion.
Despite the parties’ universal agreement that the goals of the desegregation plan have been satisfactorily fulfilled and that educational parity has been attained, the district court disagreed that the constitutional requirements for unitary status have been met in all relevant respects. Consequently, although the court granted the joint motion in regard to facilities, transportation, and staffing, it denied the motion as it pertained to the areas of student assignment, faculty integration, and extracurricular activities. The district court established new “racial ratios” for the racial composition of students and faculty which it expected to be met no later than October 2012. The court anticipated that if its new orders were followed, it would end its school supervision by October 2015.
Defendant Shelby County Schools now appeals the portion of the district court order denying the joint motion for unitary status. The intervenor United States appeals the remedy ordered by the district court for faculty integration.
For the reasons stated below, we hold that the district court abused its discretion by denying the parties’ joint motion for unitary status regarding student assignment, faculty integration, and extracurricular activities. Accordingly, we reverse, in part, the order of the district court and remand with instructions to grant in full the parties’ joint motion for declaration of unitary status, dissolve all outstanding orders and injunctions as to the Board and its members, and dismiss this action as to all parties and claims.