U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1977

Spangler ex rel. Spangler v. Pasadena City Board of Education

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided January 24, 1977 · Chambers, Ely, Wallace

549 F.2d 733 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Lee G. Paul (argued), of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendants-appellants., Brian K. Landsberg (argued), Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., Fred OKrand (argued), ACLU Foundation, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellees.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Spangler v. Pasadena City Board Of Education (9th Cir. 1977)

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

ORDER ON REMAND

Before CHAMBERS, ELY and WALLACE, Circuit Judges.

The court concludes that" all determinations as to modifications required under Pasadena City Board of Education v. Spangler, 427 U.S. 424, 96 S.Ct. 2697, 49 L.Ed.2d 599 (1976) of the district court’s decrees of 1970 and 1974, should initially be made by the district court. In doing so, it will conclude that some superseding judgment or decree is needed to be entered and to be preceded by current findings of fact.

It seems clear that a bald unqualified order that there shall never be any “majority of any minority” in any Pasadena attendance zone cannot stand.

The resolution of such questions as are mentioned in Part III of the majority opinion by the Supreme Court will necessarily depend on the existing record as it will be supplemented by a subsequent hearing or hearings.

Further than as above indicated, we do not go.

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