Bishop v. Aronov

Bishop v. Aronov by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Syllabus

Opinion of the Court→

Bishop v. Aronov, 926 F.2d 1066 (11th Cir. 1991), was a 1991 legal case in which Phillip A. Bishop, an exercise physiology professor at the University of Alabama, sued the college on free speech and academic freedom grounds, when it instructed him not to teach "intelligent design theory" in an extracurricular class and not to lecture on "evidences of God in Human Physiology" in class. The District Court for the Northern District of Alabama found in favor of Bishop but the university appealed and the w:United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit found that the classroom, during instructional time, was not an open forum, and that the university had a right to set the curriculum. — Excerpted from Bishop v. Aronov on Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

926 F.2d 1066 Phillip A. BISHOP, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Aaron M. ARONOV, Winton M. Blount, O.H. Delchamps, Jr., Sandrall Hullett, Guy Hunt, William Henry Mitchell, John T. Oliver, Jr., Thomas E. Rast, Yetta G. Samford, Jr., Martha H. Simms, Wayne Teague, Cleophus Thomas, Jr., George S. Shirley, Cordell Wynn, all in their official capacities as members of the Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama, Defendants-Appellants No. 90-7230 United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. March 15, 1991

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. No. 88-G-1591-S; J. Foy Guin, Jr., Judge.

Reversed.

Kenneth L. Goodwin, Paul E. Skidmore, Stanley J. Murphy, The Univ. of AL System, Office of Counsel, The Univ. of AL Office, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, for Appellants.

Albert L. Jordan, Wallace, Brooke & Byers, Birmingham, Alabama, for Appellee.

Cox and Birch, Circuit Judges, and Floyd R. Gibson, Senior Circuit Judge.

Footnotes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).