U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1992

Ayers v. Fordice

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided August 18, 1992 · Barksdale, Davis, Demoss, Duhé, Garwood, Garza, Goldberg, Higginbotham, Johnson, Jolly, Jones, King, Politz, Smith, Wiener

970 F.2d 1378; 1992 WL 198462 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Robert Pressman, Center for Law & Educ., Cambridge, Mass., Alvin 0. Cham-bliss, Oxford, Miss., for Ayers, et al., Linda F. Thome, Jessica Dunsay Silver, Attys., Appellate Sect., Civ. Rights Div., Dept, of Justice, Nathaniel Douglas, John R. Moore, Levern M. Younger, Franz R. Marshall, Zita Johnson-Betts, Attys., U.S. Dept, of Justice, Civ. Rts. Div., Educ. Opportunities Litigation Sec., Roger Clegg, Deputy Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., for U.S., Mike Moore, Atty. Gen., William F. Goodman, Jr., Paul Stephenson, Ed Davis Noble, Jr., Jackson, Miss., for defendants-appel-lees.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Ayers v. Fordice (5th Cir. 1992)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, GOLDBERG, KING, JOHNSON, GARWOOD, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, DUHÉ, WIENER, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

This Court, sitting en banc,1 affirmed the judgment of the district court in Ayers v. Allain, 674 F.Supp. 1523 (N.D.Miss. 1987). On appeal the United States Supreme Court found2 that we and the district court had applied the incorrect legal standard, vacated our decision and remanded the matter to this Court. Accordingly,' we vacate the decision of the district court and remand this matter to it for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court.

VACATED and REMANDED.

. Ayers v. Allain, 914 F.2d 676 (5th Cir. 1990).

. United States v. Fordice, 112 S.Ct. 2727 (1992).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.