# Donald Price and Melvin E. Price, Minors v. The Denison Independent School District

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 1, 1983 · 694 F.2d 334

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9469994

## Case

- **Full name:** Donald PRICE and Melvin E. Price, Minors, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. the DENISON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** May 1, 1983
- **Citations:** 694 F.2d 334
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Garwood, Coleman, Politz, Gar-Wood
- **Cited by:** 22 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9469994

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing major purpose behind school desegregation cases is to secure rights of minority groups; literal compliance with Swann may not be required when system is heavily white and all schools are majority white
- discussing need to consider various factors in determining whether constitutionally violative condition of segregation exists

## Opinion text

ON SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
PER CURIAM:
Treating the Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc as a Petition for Panel Rehearing, it is ordered that the Petition for Panel Rehearing is DENIED. No member of the panel nor Judge in regular active service of this Court having requested that the Court be polled- on rehearing en banc (Rule 35, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 16), the Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.
Contrary to the suggestion of the appellees, we did not and do not hold that in a former de jure school system, proof and finding of discriminatory intent on the part of the educational authorities is necessarily required to establish an existing constitutional violation. When a trial court has duly found, after proper consideration of all the relevant factors, that some current condition of racial segregation or inequality exists within a school system, it will then be determined whether the existence of such condition amounts to a constitutional violation. Where the referenced current condition results from the prior de jure segregation in the school system, a present constitutional violation is established without proof or finding that the former de jure segregation was intentional, for it is so as a matter of law, and the fact that the school authorities may more recently have been in good faith and had no segregative or discriminatory intent is not dispositive of whether an existing constitutional violation is present. On the other hand, where the referenced current condition does not result from the prior de jure segregation, proof and finding of subsequent discriminatory or segregative intent on the part of the educational authorities is necessary to establish a present constitutional violation.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9469994. Public record. Not legal advice.