Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Civil Rights-Corporate Directors Held Personally Liable For Intentional Racial Discrimination Despite Due Diligence To Know The Law
University of Richmond Law Review
In 1968, the Supreme Court resurrected section 1 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 [now 42 U.S.C. §§ 19812 and 19823 (1970)] and held that section 1982 prohibits private as well as public racial discrimination in the sale or rental of property. The question of whether damages are recoverable for violations of section 1982 was then left undecided but was subsequently answered in the affirmative. A similar cause of action has been recognized under section 1981 to compensate for private racial discrimination in the formulation and enforcement of contracts. The issue presented in Tillman v. Wheaton-Haven Recreation Association was …
Constitutional Law-Civil Rights-Absent State Involvement, Right Of Association Not Protected By 42 Usc § 1985(3)
University of Richmond Law Review
42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) was enacted' to curtail the Ku Klux Klan's terrorist activities in the South by prohibiting conspiracies to deprive any person "of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws. . . ." From its inception, the major controversy has concerned whether the statute requires an element of state action. The first judicial statement construed the statute as reaching only conspiracies carried out under color of state law. Twenty years later, a unanimous Supreme Court found the statute to "fully encompass the conduct of private persons" attempting to deprive an …
School Desegregation In Richmoad: A Case History, Gary C. Leedes, James M. O'Fallon
School Desegregation In Richmoad: A Case History, Gary C. Leedes, James M. O'Fallon
University of Richmond Law Review
The story of judicially administered school desegregation in Richmond is the story of Bradley v. School Board of the City of Richmond. It began modestly with a district court decree which granted the individual claims of ten named plaintiffs but denied injunctive relief to the class. Eleven years later it approached landmark status, with a district court decree directing consolidation of the Richmond schools with those of surrounding Henrico and Chesterfield counties. However, the landmark was not to be. The Fourth Circuit reversed the district court's decree, and an evenly divided Supreme Court affirmed by default. Richmond was left in …