Source: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/955/1563/448417/
Timestamp: 2013-12-09 09:46:16
Document Index: 224086256

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', '§ 36', '§ 21', '§ 2', '§ 1973', '§ 2']

955 F.2d 1563: Re v. E.k. Hall, Sr.; David Walker; U.S. Donalson; Richardharris; Willie Ates; Re v. Wilson C. Roberson;and Naacp Chapter of Cochran, Bleckleycounty, Plaintiffs-appellants, v. Jackie Holder, Individually and in His Official Capacity Ascounty Commissioner for Bleckley County, Georgia; Robertjohnson, Individually and in His Official Capacity Assuperintendent of Elections for Bleckley County; Charleskillebrew, Individually and in His Official Capacity Asmayor of the City of Cochran; Lonnie Barlow; Ben Jessup;c.c. Crooms; Willie Basby; Billy Ray Godfrey, and T.c.greer, Individually and in Their Official Capacities Asaldermen of the City of Cochran; William J. Lucas,individually and in His Official Capacity As Superintendentof Elections for the City of Cochran; Freddie White; Waynerogers; Wayne Tripp; Sonja Curtis, and J. Larry Williams,individually and in Their Official Capacities As Members Ofthe Bleckley County Board of Education, Defendants-appellees :: US Court of Appeals Cases :: Justia
Justia > US Law > US Case Law > US Federal Case Law > US Courts of Appeals Cases > F.2d > Volume 955 > 955 F.2d 1563 - Re v. E.k. Hall, Sr.; David Walker; U.S. ...	NEW - Receive Justia's FREE Daily Newsletters of Opinion Summaries for the US Supreme Court, all US Federal Appellate Courts & the 50 US State Supreme Courts and Weekly Practice Area Opinion Summaries Newsletters. Subscribe Now
955 F.2d 1563: Re v. E.k. Hall, Sr.; David Walker; U.S. Donalson; Richardharris; Willie Ates; Re v. Wilson C. Roberson;and Naacp Chapter of Cochran, Bleckleycounty, Plaintiffs-appellants, v. Jackie Holder, Individually and in His Official Capacity Ascounty Commissioner for Bleckley County, Georgia; Robertjohnson, Individually and in His Official Capacity Assuperintendent of Elections for Bleckley County; Charleskillebrew, Individually and in His Official Capacity Asmayor of the City of Cochran; Lonnie Barlow; Ben Jessup;c.c. Crooms; Willie Basby; Billy Ray Godfrey, and T.c.greer, Individually and in Their Official Capacities Asaldermen of the City of Cochran; William J. Lucas,individually and in His Official Capacity As Superintendentof Elections for the City of Cochran; Freddie White; Waynerogers; Wayne Tripp; Sonja Curtis, and J. Larry Williams,individually and in Their Official Capacities As Members Ofthe Bleckley County Board of Education, Defendants-appelleesUnited States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. - 955 F.2d 1563
Christopher Coates, Milledgeville, Ga., Laughlin McDonald, ACLU, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiffs-appellants.
R. Napier Murphy, Martin Snow, Grant & Napier, John C. Daniel, Ill., Macon, Ga., William Lonnie Barlow, Arnold & Barlow, Cochran, Ga., for defendants-appellees.
This appeal involves a challenge to the sole commissioner form of county government utilized in Bleckley County, Georgia. Following a four day bench trial, the district court found that the plaintiffs had failed to meet their burden of proof on both their statutory and constitutional claims. For the reasons that follow, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court.
The history of Bleckley County began in 1912 when the Georgia legislature created Bleckley County from land located at the northeastern end of Pulaski County, Georgia. Encompassing about 219 square miles, Bleckley County is a rural county located in the central region of Georgia, approximately forty miles southeast of Macon.
Throughout its existence, Bleckley County has had a population that has ranged from about 9,000 residents to nearly 11,000 residents. According to census figures, the population of Bleckley County numbered 10,767 in 1980.1 That population is approximately 22% black, 77% white, and 1% other.2 The racial composition of Bleckley County's voting age population is 19% black, 80% white, and 1% other. Voter registration levels in Bleckley County are roughly equivalent among blacks and whites, with black and white registration each at about 70% of each group's respective eligible population.
Since its creation, Bleckley County has operated with a sole commissioner form of county government. See 1912 Ga.Laws 38; 1913 Ga.Laws 345. This sole commissioner is the "county governing authority" under Georgia law, O.C.G.A. § 1-3-3(7), and he is vested with all the corresponding powers and duties, see id. § 36-5-22.1.
Bleckley County's sole commissioner is elected in an at-large county-wide election. Although the commissioner race has at times been subjected to a majority vote requirement, throughout most of its history, Bleckley County has elected its sole commissioner by a simple plurality vote. Since 1964, however, the county must elect its commissioner by a majority vote. See O.C.G.A. § 21-2-501.
Today, the election for county commissioner is held at the Jaycee Barn in Cochran. This facility, a building belonging to an all-white civic club, is the sole polling place for the entire 219 square mile area that makes up Bleckley County.3 This sole precinct is also used for the elections of other county officials, including the members of the county's school board.4
On July 17, 1985, the plaintiffs-appellants in this case, black voters residing in Bleckley County, Georgia, together with the NAACP Chapter of Cochran/Bleckley County, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. Among the claims asserted, the plaintiffs presented a challenge to Bleckley County's form of county government under § 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973, and under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.5 The defendants named in this challenge, the appellees herein, are Bleckley County's sole county commissioner and the county's superintendent of elections.
In December of 1989, over four years after this action was commenced, the district court tried this case without a jury. On March 7, 1991, more than a year after that trial, the district court entered an extensive order finding that the plaintiffs had failed to establish either a racially discriminatory intent in the creation or maintenance of Bleckley County's form of government or an impermissible dilution of the electoral power of Bleckley County's black minority. The district court entered a final judgment for the defendants, and the plaintiffs filed a timely appeal.
In reviewing the judgment of the district court, we are bound by the clearly erroneous test set forth in Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the standard upon which an appellate court is to review ultimate factual findings of vote dilution. Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30, 78-79, 106 S.Ct. 2752, 2781, 92 L.Ed.2d 25 (1986); Carrollton Branch of NAACP v. Stallings, 829 F.2d 1547, 1554 (11th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 936, 108 S.Ct. 1111, 99 L.Ed.2d 272 (1988). Nonetheless, this standard does not bar a court from correcting errors of law or findings of fact based on misconceptions of the law. Gingles, 478 U.S. at 79, 106 S.Ct. at 2781; Concerned Citizens v. Hardee County Bd. of Comm'rs, 906 F.2d 524, 526 (11th Cir.1990); Stallings, 829 F.2d at 1554.A. The Voting Rights Act
The statutory claim we address on appeal is unusual in that it challenges a local form of government composed solely of one commissioner.6 It is not a unique challenge, however, and we have already held that § 2 challenges to sole commissioner forms of government are subject to the same analysis employed by the United States Supreme Court in Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30, 106 S.Ct.