-
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _____________________ No. 00-11404 _____________________ HOLLISTER GARDNER Plaintiff - Appellee - Cross - Appellant v. TULIA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; JEANETT HERRING, In her official capacity and in her individual capacity as Trustee; SAM SADLER, in his official capcity and in his individual capacity as Trustee; SCOTT BURROW, in his official capacity and in his individual capacity as Trustee; ANNA GRANADO, in her official capacity and in her individual capacity as Trustee; BOYD MILNER, in his official capacity and in his individual capacity as Trustee; BEN HOWARD, in his official capacity and in his individual capacity as Trustee; GARY GARDNER, in his official capacity as Trustee Defendants - Appellants - Cross - Appellees ____________________________________________________________ DAN GARDNER, Guardian Ad Litem for Molly Gardner; JO BETH GARDNER, Guardian Ad Litem for Molly Gardner Plaintiffs - Appellees v. TULIA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; JEANETT HERRING, In her official capacity and in her individual capacity as Trustee; SAM SADLER, in his official capacity and in his individual capacity as Trustee; SCOTT BURROW, in his official capacity and in his individual capacity as Trustee; ANNA GRANADO, in her official capacity and in her individual capacity as Trustee; BOYD MILNER, in his official capacity and in his individual capacity as Trustee; BEN HOWARD, in his official capacity and in his individual capacity as Trustee; GARY GARDNER, in his official capacity as Trustee Defendants - Appellants --------------------- Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo 97-CV-20 --------------------- September 6, 2002 Before KING, Chief Judge, DAVIS, Circuit Judge, and VANCE1, District Judge. PER CURIAM:2 The Supreme Court recently decided Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls,
122 S. Ct. 2559(2002), which is factually analogous to this case. Because of the effect the Earls decision may have on this case, we vacate the district court judgment and remand this case to the district court for further consideration in light of Earls. We leave it to the discretion of the district court to conduct additional hearings if it considers it advisable to do so. VACATED AND REMANDED. 1 District Judge of the Eastern District of Louisiana, sitting by designation. 2 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Document Info
Docket Number: 00-11404
Filed Date: 9/9/2002
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021