SOUTH CAROLINA EDUC. ASS'N v. CAMPBELL

No. 88-3605.

883 F.2d 1251 (1989)

The SOUTH CAROLINA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, et al.; Nelle H. Taylor, Betty Jane Cunningham; Michael T. Hollifield, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. John T. CAMPBELL, In his Official Capacity as Secretary of State of South Carolina; Carroll Campbell, In his Official Capacity as Governor of the State of South Carolina; Earle Morris, In his Official Capacity as Comptroller General of the State of South Carolina, Defendants-Appellants; The South Carolina State Employees Association; South Carolina School Boards Association, Inc.; Richland County School District Number One, Spartanburg County School District Number Three, Orangeburg County School District Number Five, Marlboro County School District and Dr. James M. Brown, Superintendent and Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Oconee County School District, Amici Curiae.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Decided August 28, 1989.

Rehearing and Rehearing Denied October 18, 1989.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Charles P. Roberts, III (Richard B. Kale, Jr., Haynsworth, Baldwin, Miles, Johnson, Greaves & Edwards, on brief), Greenville, S.C., for defendants-appellants.

Leon Friedman (Richard Mark Gergel, Gergel, Burnette, Nickles, Grant & Ouzts, Columbia, S.C., on brief), for plaintiffs-appellees.

Philip J. Mace, Victoria L. Eslinger, Deborah R.J. Shupe, Berry, Dunbar, Daniel, O'Connor, Jordan & Eslinger, Columbia, S.C., on brief, for amicus curiae, South Carolina State Employees Ass'n.

Jane W. Trinkley, Deborah A. Davis, Edwin W. Johnson, II, McNair Law Firm, P.A., Columbia, S.C., on brief), for amicus curiae, South Carolina School Boards Ass'n, Inc.

Before CHAPMAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and KELLAM, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Virginia, sitting by designation.


Rehearing and Rehearing In Banc Denied October 18, 1989.

CHAPMAN, Circuit Judge:

This case involves a challenge by plaintiffs/appellees, the South Carolina Education Association and various members of that organization (hereinafter collectively referred to as "SCEA"), to a statutory arrangement1 they allege was designed specifically to deny the SCEA payroll deduction benefits and thereby impair the effectiveness of the association...

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