This case was a class action brought by Black residents of Taliaferro County, Georgia, challenging the constitutionality of state laws allowing grand juries to select county school board members and related jury commissioner processes. Plaintiffs alleged that the all-white school board and systematic exclusion of Black citizens from grand juries violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as the Thirteenth Amendment, both facially and as applied. A three-judge district court found that Black citizens were systematically excluded from grand jury lists despite roughly equal numbers of Black and white registered voters, resulting in no Black school board members. The court enjoined the jury commissioners from further systematic exclusion of Black citizens from the grand jury system, retained jurisdiction over related single-judge issues, and denied claims for damages, attorneys' fees, and other relief. The decision rested on evidence of token inclusion of Black citizens on jury lists and the resulting lack of representation in school board selection.
In this case, a female employee sued her employer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 after being denied a switchman position solely because of her sex. The employer admitted the refusal but defended it on the ground that sex was a bona fide occupational qualification due to the job's physical requirements. The court found that the switchman role routinely involved lifting equipment over thirty pounds, overhead lifting, pushing heavy items, and 24-hour on-call duties, including late-night work. Georgia state regulations limited women to lifting no more than thirty pounds, which the court deemed reasonable and consistent with Title VII's BFOQ exception as recognized by EEOC guidelines. The court therefore ruled for the defendant, holding that sex was a bona fide occupational qualification for the position.
The case Turner v. Goolsby involved African American plaintiffs in Taliaferro County, Georgia, who challenged the constitutionality of a state statute prohibiting disturbance of religious worship and alleged a conspiracy to deny their civil rights, while also seeking desegregation of the local public schools. The three-judge district court found that the statute had been unconstitutionally applied to the plaintiffs' peaceful assembly and prayer on the courthouse lawn, leading to indictments, and addressed ongoing school desegregation efforts by discharging a court-appointed receiver after the local board submitted a desegregation plan to federal authorities. The court reasoned that the facts showed no substantial disturbance of worship justifying enforcement and that school operations should return to local control with the dual system abolished for the upcoming year, while retaining jurisdiction for further orders.
This case, filed in 1962 by Black schoolchildren against the Savannah-Chatham County Board of Education, challenged the maintenance of racially segregated public schools and sought a court-ordered desegregation plan. After earlier plans were rejected and objections were raised by the U.S. Attorney General regarding incomplete elimination of racial assignments, faculty discrimination, and timelines, the district court approved a revised plan requiring full desegregation of all grades by September 1966, assignment of students without regard to race, and non-discriminatory hiring, pay, and retention of teachers based on merit rather than race. The court enjoined any distinctions based on race or color in school operations while permitting distinctions based on age, qualifications, and other factors, retained jurisdiction for further modifications, and directed publication of the plan. The decision rested on the need to remedy past racial assignments and ensure compliance with constitutional desegregation requirements through a uniformly administered, race-neutral system.
This case involved a claim for compensation under the federal Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act for the death of a longshoreman who was fatally injured while loading cargo from a dock into a ship on the Savannah River. The court considered whether the accident occurred on navigable waters, making it compensable under the federal act, or on land, falling under the state workers' compensation law. The court decided that the deputy commissioner lacked jurisdiction under the federal act because the dock was part of the land, the injury occurred there, and neither the Admiralty Extension Act nor presumptions of coverage applied to extend federal jurisdiction. It therefore granted an injunction against enforcing the federal award, holding that the state act provided the appropriate remedy.
This case was a class action brought by Black students in Savannah-Chatham County public schools seeking an injunction to end the operation of a dual, racially segregated school system and to require a plan for integrating white schools. The defendants conceded the existence of separate schools for white and Black students, while white student intervenors presented evidence from achievement tests, IQ measures, and psychological studies purporting to show average differences in educational capacity, behavior, and learning rates between racial groups. The court allowed the intervention, admitted the evidence over plaintiffs' objections based on Brown v. Board of Education, and found that the data demonstrated integration would impair educational opportunities for both groups due to these differences. It therefore denied the requested relief and upheld the maintenance of the separate school systems.