Summary
In Dillard v. Webb, 55 Ala. 474, it is stated that agriculture is the act or science of cultivating the ground, especially in large quantities, including the preservation of the soil, the planting of seed, the raising and harvesting of crops.
Summary of this case from Mattison v. DunlapOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:87cv1311-MHT (WO).
April 5, 2007
Plaintiff John Dillard represented by Edward Still, Edward Still Law Firm Mediation Center, Birmingham, AL, James U. Blacksher, Birmingham, AL, Norman J. Chachkin, NAACP Legal Defense Educ'l Fund, Inc., New York, NY.
Plaintiff Damascus Crittenden, Jr. represented by Edward Still, James U. Blacksher, Norman J. Chachkin.
Plaintiff Earwen Ferrell represented by Edward Still, James U. Blacksher, Norman J. Chachkin.
Plaintiff Clarence J. Jarrells represented by Edward Still, James U. Blacksher, Norman J. Chachkin.
Plaintiff Ullysses McBride represented by Edward Still, James U. Blacksher, Norman J. Chachkin.
Plaintiff Louis Hall, Jr. represented by Edward Still, James U. Blacksher, Norman J. Chachkin.
Defendant Town of Webb, Alabama represented by David R. Boyd, Balch Bingham, Montgomery, AL, John J. Park, Jr., Office of the Attorney General, Montgomery, AL, William M. Jackson, Jackson Rhodes Sherrer Terry PC, Dothan, AL.
FINAL JUDGMENT
Pursuant to the joint motion to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed (Doc. No. 2), an order was entered on February 2, 2007 (Doc. No. 4), directing defendant Town of Webb to show cause, if any there be, in writing by April 3, 2007, as to why said motion should not be granted. No response has been filed by defendant.
There being no objection to the show-cause order and the final dismissal of this action, and Alabama Act No. 2006-252 having received preclearance, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court as follows:
(1) The motion to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed (Doc. No. 2) is granted.
(2) It is DECLARED as the judgment of this court that Alabama Act No. 2006-252 provides state legislative authority for the method of election and number of seats prescribed by the consent decree and order of the court entered April 1, 1988, providing that the Town Council of the Town of Webb "shall consist of 5 members elected at-large, without designated or numbered places and with the 5 candidates receiving the most votes being elected and each voter casting only one vote."
(3) The injunction contained in the prior judgment of the court to the extent it pertains to defendant Town of Webb is dissolved.
(4) All claims against defendant Town of Webb in this action are dismissed.
The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.