Last November, the University of Cincinnati Libraries announced the award of an Archives Grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to the Libraries’ Archives and Rare Books Library (ARB). This grant supports the archival processing of records related to the lawsuit Bronson v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Cincinnati maintained by the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and donated to the University of Cincinnati in the 1980s. 

For the continuing blog series on this project, project archivist Julianna Witt provides a timeline of events from the filing of the case in 1974 to its settlement nearly a decade later.

May 29, 1974 

Bronson v. Board of Education of the City of Cincinnati is filed on behalf of Mona Bronson, and other school children by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) to address racial isolation in Cincinnati’s public schools. The lawsuit is filed against the Cincinnati Board of Education, Ohio State Board of Education, State Superintendent, Attorney General, and Governor.  

January 30, 1975 

The affirmative defense opinion by Judge David S. Porter of the District Court is declared. Judge Porter raises the question whether the decision in the earlier Cincinnati desegregation case Deal v. Board of Education is still viable in the 10 years since the decision and if the same matters can be re-litigated. Judge Porter finds that the decision in Deal v. Board is still acceptable, and the doctrine of res judicata is acknowledged. This doctrine prevents the plaintiffs from relitigating arguments prior to the July 1965 Deal v. Board decision.  

April 23, 1975 

The plaintiffs file an appeal that transferred the case to the Sixth Circuit Court. Judge C.J. Lively and Judge Harry Phillips find that res judicata does not apply and instead collateral estoppel, which is the least strict of the two re-litigation doctrines. They introduce the fact that this does not prevent the plaintiffs from bringing forth post-July1965 evidence that occurred after Deal v. Board. Pre-Deal v. Board evidence can also be offered, however, only if the evidence is introduced on behalf of children born or not of school age as of July 1965 as long as it does not contradict earlier arguments. A rehearing of the appeal is denied, and the case is returned to the District Court.   

June 27, 1980 

Judge Porter retires and the case is transferred to Judge Walter H. Rice. Judge Rice issues “Entry Setting Forth This Court’s Interpretation of Sixth Circuit Opinion in Bronson v. Board of Education” which asserts Judge Porter’s affirmative defense opinion.  

October 14, 1980 

The plaintiffs file a response memorandum with the court that introduces the dual school system theory which was argued in two United States Supreme Court cases, Dayton Board of Education v. Brinkman and Columbus Board of Education v. Penick. Both cases ended in 1979 and evidence in both found that in the Cincinnati schools, dual school systems were existent in May 1954, the date of the Brown v. Board decision. Since this was not discussed in Deal v. Board, the plaintiffs maintain that the case does not have to follow collateral estoppel completely.  

February 11, 1982 

Judge Rice decides collateral estoppel is still in effect as there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that Cincinnati schools had a dual school system but enough reasoning to consider if evidence is brought forth. The plaintiffs cannot relitigate the exact arguments that were discussed in Deal v. Board. However, they do not have any restrictions when it comes to pre- or post-July 1965 evidence that was declared in 1975 and 1980. 

December 19, 1983 

Judge Rice accepts the suburban school districts’ motion for summary judgement and dismisses them from the case. In the court pleadings, Judge Rice explains the reason for dismissal as the plaintiffs were unable to produce sufficient evidence to find the suburban school districts guilty of unlawful segregation. Cincinnati Board of Education and the State defendants have not been excused.  

April 6, 1984 

A settlement is reached and agreed by both sides without going to trial. This does not include the suburban school district defendants, as they were dismissed. The matters of the settlement include: 

1. The Cincinnati Board of Education has seven years to reduce the current Taeuber Index of Dissimilarity score by 17 points. This index measures racial composition within a school compared to the district. 

2. The Board can decide how they will reduce racial isolation. However, they must claim responsibility to achieve the target Taeuber Index score. 

3. The State will provide financial assistance for efforts in reducing racial isolation with some restrictions. 

4. A committee will meet yearly to review the district’s progress. 

This project has been made possible in part by grant RH-104772-24 from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC). Any views, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this blog post do not necessarily represent those of the NHPRC.