CHEYNEY STATE COLLEGE FACULTY v. HUFSTEDLER

No. 82-1282.

703 F.2d 732 (1983)

CHEYNEY STATE COLLEGE FACULTY and E. Sonny Harris and Arthur M. Bagley and Ernest Berry Plaintiffs I, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated and Will Tate and Diana Tracey and Eugene Jones and Stacey Shields and Sylvia White and Vernon Montague, Plaintiffs V, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated and Lisa Fordham, and Dennis Rucker, Plaintiff VI, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated and Christopher Hammon and Nathan L. Gadson, Plaintiffs VII, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated and Jacqueline Sheppard, Plaintiffs II, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated and Henry C. Dailey and Dorian G. Jackson and Leatrice J. Bennet and William Rosenthal, Plaintiffs III, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated and Jeffrey K. Hart, individually and as President of the Student Government Cooperative Association, Inc. on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff IV and Charles Gamble, Elisha B. Morris and Carla Robertson, Plaintiffs VIII, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated and Edward Smith, Plaintiff IX, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated and Denise Scruggs, Plaintiff X, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Appellants, v. Shirley HUFSTEDLER, Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, Dewey Dodds, Director, Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education, Defendant I, Robert G. Scanlon, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Educ., Clayton L. Sommers, Commissioner of Higher Education, Defendant II, Board of State Colleges and University Directors, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Defendant III, Board of Trustees of Cheyney State College, Defendant IV, Wade Wilson, President, Cheyney State College, Defendant V, Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Decided March 30, 1983.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Atty. Gen., Louis J. Rovelli, (argued), Deputy Atty. Gen., Harrisburg, Pa., for appellees.

Roland J. Atkins (argued), O'Brien & O'Brien, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellants.

Before WEIS, SLOVITER and BECKER, Circuit Judges.


OPINION OF THE COURT

WEIS, Circuit Judge.

The record in this case leads us to conclude that a stay order issued by the district court did not effectively terminate the litigation and hence is not appealable. Treating the matter as a petition for mandamus, we hold that the district court did not clearly abuse its discretion in delaying the suit pending the potential resolution of some important issues in ongoing administrative proceedings. Although the court...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases