Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Canady et al. v. Lumberton City Board of Education et al., 1981 — 454 U.S. 957 · caselaw · US
General
Canady et al. v. Lumberton City Board of Education et al.
454 U.S. 957·Supreme Court of the United States·1981
The Chief Justice, Justice Powell, and Justice Rehnquist dissent.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
October 30, 1981
No. A-337.
Canady et al. v. Lumberton City Board of Education et al.
[MAJORITY]
Application for an injunction, presented to The Chief Justice, and by him referred to the Court, preventing the Board of Education and the Board of Elections from permitting residents of the three annexed areas involved in this case to vote in the school board election is granted, pending the timely filing and disposition of a jurisdictional statement, or until appellees demonstrate compliance with Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
The Chief Justice, Justice Powell, and Justice Rehnquist dissent.