610. Public elementary and high schools
||Brown v. Bd. of Education.
(DC Kan.) *
||Davis v. County School Bd.
(Prince Edward Cty., Va.) *
||Briggs v. Elliott.
(Clarendon Cty., S. C.) *
||Clemons, et al. v. Bd. of Ed. of Hillsboro, Ohio.
(CA 6, #12494.) For facts, see I DOCKET 26. Jan. 5: CA 6 reversed Dist. Ct. ruling, directed Dist. Ct. to issue permanent injunction to end all racial segregation in Def. schools on or before opening of Sept., 1956 school term, and to admit Pl.-children immediately. Def. filed motion for rehearing, claiming immediate admission of Pls. impossible.
||Burleigh, et al. v. Weakley, et al.
(CA 9.) *
||Hall, et al. v. St. Helena Parish School Bd., et al.
(ED La., Bat. Rge. Div., CA #1068.) *
||Bush, Jr., et al. v. Orleans Parish School Bd., et al.
(ED La., CA #3630.) *
||Matthews v. Launius, Pres., Bearden School Dist., et al.
(WD Ark., El Dorado Div., #570.) *
||Steiner v. Simmons.
(Dela. S. Ct.) *
||Covington, et al. v. Edwards, Supt. of Schools of Montgomery Co., et al.
(MD N. Caro., Rockingham Div., CA #323.) For facts, see I DOCKET 27, 46. Dec. 16: Fedl. Judge Hayes permitted Pls. to amend suit to add allegation that County school sup't and school bd. are officers of State of N. Caro. Pls. seek injunction to prevent segregation in county schools and ruling that N. Caro. school segregation law is unconstitutional.
||Dobbins v. Virginia.
(Va. Ct. of App.) *
||Borrough, et al. v. Jenkins, et al.
(ED Okla., #4006-Civil.) For facts, see I DOCKET 46. Dec. 16, 1955: 3-judge panel dismissed suit by Pl.-Negro students against Def.-Negro Sup't to force him to cancel their transfers from all-Negro school to newly-integrated school in their district. Ct. held: "Because of the def. school districts' good faith strides towards complete integration, this ct. would have no disposition to use its equitable authority to compel Red Bird to renounce all financial right flowing from the transfers in question for the present school term, in order to force complete and immediate integration. Under the conditions existing in the def. districts, such districts are entitled to this added time to complete, in orderly fashion, their desegregation program."
||Bell, et al. v. Rippey, et al.
(CA 5.) *
||Kelly, et al. v. Bd. of Education.
(MD Tenn., Nash. Div., CA #2094.) For facts, see I DOCKET 46-7. White Fisk U. Prof. Rempfer filed petition to amend suit to seek Ct. order compelling Def. to admit his 2 children to nearby Negro elementary schools rather than to white schools over a mile from his home. Case at issue. Date of argument to be set in March.
||McSwain, et al. v. County School Bd. of Anderson County, Tenn., et al.
(ED Tenn., CA #1555.) For facts, see I DOCKET 47. Jan 4: Fedl. Judge Taylor denied Defs.' motion for summary judgment, granted motion for final decree providing segregation of Anderson Co. high school students be discontinued by reasonable date, i.e., not later than beginning of fall term, 1956.
- 63 -
||Jean, et al. v. Atlanta Bd. of Education.
(ND Ga., CA #3923.) *
||Corbin, et al. v. County School Bd. of Pulaski County, Va., et al.
(DC Va.) For facts, see I DOCKET 47. Dec. 15: mandate of CA 4 issued; case sent back to DC for trial.
Hill, Martin and Robinson, Esqs., 623 N. 3d, Richmond, Va.
||Banks, et al. v. Izard, Bd. of Educ. Pres., Van Buren, et al.
(DC Ark., Ft. Smith.) *
D. L. Grace, Esq., 615 Rogers Ave., Ft. Smith, Ark.; U. S. Tate, Esq., 2600 Flora St., Dallas, Texas.
||Dunn, et al. v. Bd. of Educ. of Greenbrier County, et al.
(SD W. Va., CA #1693.) For facts, see I DOCKET 47. Jan. 3: Ct. made findings and suggestions for desegregation of Defs.' schools and continued case until recommendations fully complied with.
||Taylor v. Bd. of Educ. of Raleigh Co.
(DC W. Va.) In answer to suit by Negro-Pl. for integration, Def.-Bd. said it will integrate. Dec. 21, 1955: Fedl. Judge Moore ordered integration by Feb., 1956.
||Jackson v. Rawden.
(ND Tex., Dal. Div.) Suit by Negro students for injunction against continued segregation in schools. Nov. 7, 1955: hearing on temporary injunction.
U. Simpson Tate, Esq., 2600 Flora St., Dallas, Texas.
||Avery, et al. v. Randel, et al.
(ND Tex., Wichita Falls Div.) Suit filed Dec., 1955 by parents of 20 Negro pupils for admission to white elementary school near city's Negro residential district. Pls. request 3-judge Ct. to hear case. Def. alleges that school involved will become Negro school when new one is opened for white children.
U. Simpson Tate, Esq., 2600 Flora St., Dallas, Texas.
||Moore v. Harry, et al.
(DC Md., #8615.) Pls.-Negro elementary school students, many of whom live in integrated Gov't-sponsored housing project near Army Center, are within walking distance of existing white school but must be transported as far as 15 miles to a Negro school. Suit for desegregation filed Dec. 10.
Tucker R. Dearing, Esq., 716 N. Gay, Linwood Koger, Jr., Esq., 1607 W. North Ave., both of Baltimore, Md.; Jack Greenberg, Esq., N.A.A.C.P., 107 W. 43rd, NYC.
||Willis, et al. v. Walker, et al.
(WD Ky.) Petition filed Jy. 1955 with Def.-Bd. of Educ. of Adair Co. to abolish segregation in elementary and high schools. Aug. 30: After registering Pls. and other Negro children in white schools, Def.-Bd. ordered them ejected. After suit brought, 3-judge Ct. convened but determined it was without jurisdiction; case then submitted to Fedl. Judge Swinford, who ruled, Jan. 1955: for Pls., ordered immediate integration of Negro high school students. Because of greater number of Negro elementary school students and other more difficult problems, he ordered integration of elementary schools by Sept., 1956. Citing U.S.S.C. decision in Brown (610.1), Ct. said: "The defs., by their answers, plead the overcrowding of existing school buildings and the inadequacy of transportation facilities. I think that these conditions are to be taken into consideration by the ct. in fixing the date of integration, but I do not think either of them is a defense for unlimited delay. * * * The ct. does not question the good faith of the defs., but good faith is not the test. There must be `compliance at the earliest practicable date'." Suit concluded by Defs.' compliance with orders.
James Crumlin, Esq., Louisville, Ky.
||Carson, et al. v. Bd. of Educ. of McDowell Co.
(CA 4. #7096.) Pls.-Negro students brought suit for admission to white schools in McDowell Co., N. Caro., asked hearing before 3-judge Fedl. Ct. Dec., 1955: 3-judge Ct. held Pls. had not exhausted remedies in state courts under 1955 state law providing local school bds. with complete authority over assignment and enrollment of pupils, and that pupils can appeal from such bds.' decisions directly in state Superior Ct. Ct. also treated case as one involving individual Pls., and not as class action.
Herman L. Taylor and Samuel S. Mitchell, Esqs., 125 E. Hargett St., Raleigh, N. Caro.
||County School Bd. of Hanover Co. v. Shelton.
(Va. S. Ct. of App., #4545.) For facts, see I DOCKET 27. Nov. 30. 1955: Appeal granted. Jan.: record being printed. Argument: April or June session.
||Doby, et ano. v. Brown, et al
(MD N. Caro., CA #337.).*
||Hoxie School Dist. #46, et al. v. Brewer; Guthridge; White America, Inc., a corp.; Citizens Comm. Representing Segregation in the Hoxie Schools, unincorp. assn.; Johnson, Copeland; and White Citizens Council of Arkansas, unincorp. assn.
(ED Ark., #J-918.) For facts, see I DOCKET 47. In 2-day trial Dec. 8-9, Pls. called 5 Negro parents as witnesses who testified they had been visited by delegations of white men, incl. named Defs., who urged them to keep their children out of newly-integrated public schools, and in some cases threatened them. Briefs filed by both parties early Jan. Decision awaited.
||Brewer, et al. v. Howell, Bd. of Educ. Pres., Hoxie.
(Ark. Chancery.) *
||Adams, et al. v. LeBlanc, La. Atty. Genl., et al.
(ED La.) For facts, see I DOCKET 47. Dec. 1955: Fedl. Judge Lindsay upheld Defs.' motion to dismiss, holding that, in spending funds to support state laws which have not yet been invalidated, Def.-Atty. Genl. was doing his "sworn duty". Pls. were "expressing a legal conclusion, unsupported by any judicial decree" when they "alleged the unconstitutionality" of La. segregation laws.
||Riddle v. Bd. of Co. Commrs. of Wagoner Co.
(ED Okla.) Pls.-Negroes seek injunction against use of public funds for improvement of segregated school. After suit filed in Nov., 1955, Defs. went to Okla. S. Ct. for writ of prohibition against US DC hearing suit.
U. Simpson Tate, Esq., 2600 Flora St., Dallas, Texas and Ada Lois Fisher, Esq., 1734 NE 7th St., Oklahoma City, Okla.
- 64 -
||Cook, Atty. Genl. v. Valdosta Board of Education.
(Lowndes Co. Sup. Ct.) As a result of N.A.A.C.P. petition for desegregation of public schools, Def.-School Bd. announced it would "think about" integration. State Atty. Genl. sued to enjoin Bd. from even thinking about desegregation, and to test validity of Ga. law prohibiting use of public funds to operate integrated schools. N.A.A.C.P. filed motion to intervene.
Donald Hollowell, Esq., Atlanta, Ga., for N.A.A.C.P.-intervenor.
||Jordan v. Bd. of Elections.
(Cir. Ct., Richmond.) Dec., 1955: Pl.-Negro atty. sought injunction to prevent Va. state referendum on whether to amend Va. Const. to permit use of public funds to educate children in private schools, claiming the purpose of proposed constitutional change was illegal as a plan to maintain segregated schools in definance of U.S.S.C. decision in Brown (610.1). Judge Snead refused to grant injunction because ct. could not question motive of legislature.