Legal Opinion
Mahaley v. Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority
District Court, N.D. Ohio
Decided February 22, 1973No. Civ. A. C 71-251, C 72-67PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BATTISTI, Chief Judge:
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The remainder of these consolidated actions have been remanded for my further consideration. The findings of fact set forth in the opinion of the panel 355 F.Supp. 1245 are incorporated herein. The question remaining before the court is whether the defendants have used the 'consent requirement as a tool to perpetuate segregation in violation of 42 U.S. C. § 1983.
Cuyahoga County is a racially segregated county. The population of Cuyahoga County in 1970 was 1,721,300; 328,419 (19.1%) of whom were Negro. 87% of these 328,419 Negroes reside in…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Brown v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Shapiro v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Bolling v. SharpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Shelley v. KraemerSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Burton v. Wilmington Parking AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1961
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- United States of America, Appellant-Appellee v. City of Black Jack, Missouri, Appellee-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
- United Farmworkers of Florida Housing Project, Inc. v. The City of Delray Beach, Florida, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
- So. Burl. Cty. NAACP v. Tp. of Mt. LaurelSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1975
- United States v. City of Parma, OhioDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1980
- Artie Mahaley v. Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority, and Cityof EuclidCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1974
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.