Evans v. Newton
1964 Ga. LEXIS 524, 138 S.E.2d 573, 220 Ga. 280 (1964)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A court's action of accepting the resignation of a municipal trustee for a racially discriminatory charitable trust and appointing private successor trustees to carry out the testator's original intent does not, by itself, constitute state action enforcing discrimination in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
Facts:
- Senator A. O. Bacon's will established a charitable trust creating a park, known as Baconsfield, in Macon, Georgia.
- The will stipulated that the park was to be for the exclusive use of white people.
- The will designated the Mayor and Council of the City of Macon as the trustee to manage the park.
- As a government entity, the City of Macon determined it could not constitutionally operate a racially segregated park.
- The City of Macon subsequently decided to resign from its role as trustee.
Procedural Posture:
- The City of Macon petitioned the Superior Court to accept its resignation as trustee of Baconsfield.
- A group of African American citizens intervened in the proceeding to oppose the continuation of the trust's discriminatory purpose.
- The Superior Court issued a decree accepting the City of Macon's resignation and appointing new, private individuals as successor trustees.
- The intervenors, as plaintiffs in error, appealed the Superior Court's decree to the Supreme Court of Georgia.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a state court's acceptance of a city's resignation as trustee of a racially segregated park and its subsequent appointment of private individuals as successor trustees constitute state action that unconstitutionally enforces racial discrimination under the Fourteenth Amendment?
Opinions:
Majority - Almand, Justice
No. The court's decree accepting the city's resignation and appointing private trustees does not constitute state enforcement of racial discrimination in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Under Georgia law, a charitable trust cannot fail for want of a trustee, and the court was exercising its duty to appoint a successor when the City of Macon resigned. This action is a procedural function to preserve the trust, not an enforcement of its discriminatory terms. The testator had the right to limit his gift to a specific class, and the court's action is consistent with the outcome in the Girard College case, where a state agency was replaced by private trustees to administer a racially restrictive trust.
Analysis:
This decision illustrates a state court's attempt to reconcile private trust law with constitutional anti-discrimination principles. By framing the appointment of new trustees as a neutral, ministerial act required by state law, the court aimed to avoid a finding of 'state action' that would trigger Fourteenth Amendment scrutiny. This case highlights a legal strategy of substituting private actors for public ones to maintain privately-created segregation. This specific holding was later reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court, which found that the park's public character and the court's involvement were sufficient to constitute state action.
