Legal Opinion
Langsdon v. Darnell
District Court, W.D. Tennessee
Decided July 9, 1998No. 92-2415-TUV, 92-2407-TUVPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
TURNER, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in this consolidated civil rights action assert a claim of vote dilution pursuant to § 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973. 1 Specifically, the Rural West Tennessee African American Affairs Council and certain registered voters in Tennessee (the “Rural West plaintiffs”), along with Phillip R. Langsdon and other registered voters in Tennessee (the “Langsdon plaintiffs”) charge that Tennessee’s 1994 reapportionment of its ninety-nine state House districts unlawfully dilutes African-American voting strength in…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,768 Phil A. Street and Clyde H. Street v. J.C. Bradford & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Thornburg v. GinglesSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Johnson v. De GrandySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Mingus Constructors, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rural West Tennessee African American Affairs Council, Inc. v. SundquistDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1998
- Hasia-Welch v. Disability Rights CaliforniaDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2025