Tucker v. Blease
South Carolina Supreme Court
97 S.C. 303, 81 S.E. 668 (1914)

- Written by Katrina Sumner, JD
Facts
Three mixed-race children attended the Dalcho school (the school), a school for white children in Dillon County, South Carolina. The children—Herbert, Eugene, and Dudley Kirby—were wards of George Tucker (plaintiff), were white in appearance, and attended the school for two sessions before they were dismissed. The board of trustees (the trustees) received complaints about the children attending the school. Most white parents indicated they would not permit their children to attend the school if the Kirby children remained. The trustees delayed in dismissing the Kirby children, but when other mixed-race children sought to attend, the trustees dismissed the Kirby children. The trustees considered the following: the children not having pure Caucasian blood; their relationships with black people; their reputation; and the community’s awareness of the children’s mixed race. The trustees were willing to provide a separate school for mixed-race children in the district. There had previously existed a school for mixed-race children. When that school was discontinued, mixed-race children attended schools in districts that permitted their attendance. The trustees thought it was in the best interest of the school to dismiss the mixed-race children. Tucker filed a suit with the county board of education, which affirmed the trustees, and appealed to the state board of education, which included Cole Blease (defendant). The state board of education also affirmed. The South Carolina Supreme Court considered the case based on a writ of certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gary, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.