945.


124
Later, the district court noted that when asked whether he thought genetic inferiority could possibly explain the disproportionate placement, Riles responded, "The whole concept is reprehensive.  No, I do not agree."   Id. at 955.


125
Despite his statements, the district court concluded that Dr. Riles intentionally discriminated against appellees.  The record does not support the conclusion that Dr. Riles selected and retained the use of IQ tests because of their adverse effects on minority students.



*
 The Honorable William B. Enright, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation


1
 We commend Judge Peckham for a detailed and comprehensive opinion and for his detailed summarizing and analyzing of the issues of a very complex and protracted trial


2
 Diana made essentially the same claimsto the Company shall be determined upon the average net return per one hundred (100) pounds of sugar received by the Company from sugar manufactured by the Company at, or purchased for distribution from, its factories in the state of Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming which is sold by the Company during the period commencing October 1, 1974, and ending September 30, 1975 (both dates inclusive), and also upon the average percent sugar in all beets of the 1974 crop grown and delivered by the Grower to the Company under this contract, in accordance with the following schedule:"
[The contract then sets out a schedule for per ton payments dependent upon the sugar content of the beets and the "Average Net Return per 100 Pounds of Sugar."]
Then, after