Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute Archives logo
| HOME | HISTORY | PUBLICATIONS | DOCKETS | FINDING AIDS |

CIVIL LIBERTIES DOCKET
Vol. I, No. 5
July, 1956
$5.00 per year

Search in this volume

Case Number: 

Enter a specific case number or use * as wildcard, e.g., 303.15, 303.*

Case Title: 

Enter keywords from the title of a case, e.g., carpenters union

Case Description: 

Enter keywords from the description of a case, e.g., segregation school
   
ABOUT THE CIVIL LIBERTIES DOCKET

The DOCKET is published 5 times each year, October to June, by the National Committee on Constitutional Rights and Liberties, Osmond K. Fraenkel, chairman, Ann Fagan Ginger, editor.

Concluded cases described in Vol. I, Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 will not be mentioned in this or future issues. Pending cases in which there has been no change in status since the description in the last issue are listed here and marked with an*. Where a change has occurred, the facts will not be repeated but will be referred to by page and only new matter will appear in this and subsequent issues.

I. EXERCISE OF FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS

Robert E. Cushman, Civil Liberties in the United States: A Guide to Current Problems and Experience, Cornell Univ. Press, 1956.

Zechariah Chafee, Jr., The Blessings of Liberty, Lippincott Co., NYC, 1956.

Law review articles:

Alpheus Thomas Mason, The core of free government, 1938-1940: Mr. Justice Stone and the "preferred freedoms", 65 Yale L. J. 597-628 (Apr., 1956).

Carl Brent Swisher, The delineation of personal and civil rights, 44 Georgetown L. J. 395-406 (Mar., 1956).

10. Freedom of Speech
Law review articles:

Robert A. Leflar, Legal liability for the exercise of free speech, 10 Arkansas L. R. 155-178 (Spring, 1956; discusses principally the law of Arkansas);

Francis E. Jones, Jr., Free speech: Pickets on the grass, alas! Amidst confusion, a consistent principle, 29 Southern California L. R. 137-181 (Feb., 1956).


10.1. People ex rel. Hearn v. Muste, et al. (formerly entitled New York v. Parrilli, et al.) (NYC Magis. Ct.).*
10.2. Reiss v. People of New York. (U.S.S.C., #779, Oct. Term, 1955.) For facts, see I DOCKET 67. May 7: appeal dismissed, 351 U. S. ......... JJ. Black and Douglas would note probable jurisdiction.
10.3. Rev. Dawkins v. Station KGFJ. (Calif. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Co.).*
10.4. People of New York v. Carcel and Collazo. (N. Y. Ct. of Spec. Sess., App. Part.) For facts, see I DOCKET 67. Defs. convicted; 30 days' suspended sentence. Appeal to be argued Sept. 14.
10.21. U. S. v. UAW-CIO. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 1, 33, 68. April 23: Gov't's petition for certiorari granted. Case to be argued in Fall, 1956.
20. Freedom of Press

20.5. Fla. ex rel. Huie v. Lewis, Sheriff. (Sup. Ct. Fla., #26158.).*
20.6. U. S. v. Solow. (SD NY.).*
20.9. Tirone v. Ramsey Journal and Russo. (N. J. Super. Ct.).*
20.11. Butler v. Michigan. (U.S.S.C., #548, Oct. Term, 1955.).*
20.12. Alberts v. California. (U.S.S.C.) Def. convicted on 2 charges under Calif. Penal Code, Sec. 311: Lewdly keeping for sale obscene and indecent books; advertising them. New trial denied; sentence imposed. Calif. Sup. Ct. affirmed, holding: the words "obscene or indecent" as used in statute are "not unconstitutionally indefinite"; fact that literature was distributed by mail did not render statute inoperative. Appeal to U.S.S.C. based on ground that
- 88 -

Calif. statute is in violation of due process and freedom of press provisions of U. S. Constitution and inapplicable to the mailing of or sale by mail of circulars, a sphere of activity reserved exclusively to Federal Gov't.

Stanley Fleishman, 174 North Ivar Ave., Los Angeles.

20.13. Sunshine Book Co., et ano. v. U. S. Post Office Dept. (CA DC.) May 31: CA (2-1) ordered Dist. Ct. to issue permanent injunction forbidding Def. from refusing to transmit by mail Feb. 1955 issue of two nudist magazines. Ct. held Def. had applied "improper standards" in determining magazines were "obscene, lewd, lascivious and indecent" since order not based on text, but on illustrations.
20.30. Capital Enterprise v. N. Y. Board of Regents. (NY Sup. Ct., App. Div.) For facts, see I DOCKET 68. Cite: 149 NYS 2d 920.
20.31. Times Film Corporation v. Chicago. (DC Ill., 55 C 1006, 1955.).*
20.32. Independent Productions Corp. and I.P.C. Distributors, Inc. v. Loew's, Inc., et al. (SD NY, Civ. #110-304.) Pls.-producers of movie "Salt of the Earth" (re strike of Mine, Mill Union, see 165.1) brought action against 62 producing, distributing, exhibiting and processing companies charging violation of U. S. anti-trust act. Pls. allege Defs. black-listed 3 persons engaged in production of movie and thus made it impossible to obtain adequate distribution of film.

Rosston, Hort and Brussel, Esqs., 141 Broadway, NYC.

And see Faulk (250.4).

20.40. Daily Worker v. Moysey. (SD NY.) Office of newspaper seized on an alleged deficiency tax for year 1951, simultaneously with seizure of Communist Party (180.10). Tax imposed on moneys received as gifts which under the law are non-taxable, because names of donors were not supplied. Tax returns of paper showed substantial annual operating deficits. Action brought to enjoin collection of tax, among other grounds, on claim that levy was deliberate and intentional interference with publication of newspaper in violation of First Amendment. May 23: Dist. Ct. denied injunction pendente lite on ground law does not permit enjoining tax levy. Appeal pending in CA 2.

Harry Sacher, Esq., 342 Madison Ave., NYC.

20.41. U. S. v. Powell, et al. (ND Calif., S. Div., #35065.) Indictment under 50 U.S.C., Sec. 2388, charging Defs. with wartime sedition during Korean conflict, to wit, interfering with operation and success of military forces and to promote the success of its enemies; promoting insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, the obstruction of recruiting and enlistment, reporting on bacteriological warfare, war casualties and American sabotage of Korean peace talks, while publishing China Monthly. Sept. 6: argument on motions to dismiss.

McMurray, Brotsky, Walker, Bancroft & Tepper, Esqs., 785 Market St., San Francisco; Stanley Faulkner, Esq., 9 East 40th St., NYC.

30. Freedom of Religion

30.1. People's Church of San Fernando Valley, Inc. v. County of Los Angeles. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) and
30.2. First Methodist Church of San Leandro v. Horstmann, et al. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) and
30.3. First Unitarian Church of Berkeley v. Horstmann, et al. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 2. June 13: heard and submitted, together with Speiscr (430.1).
30.4. American Unitarian Assn., et al. v. County of Santa Clara, et al. *

Filed amicus brief in First Methodist Church (30.2).

And see cases at 430.

30.5. Ilse Scaccio—Pet. for naturalization. (CA 9.) For facts, see I DOCKET 34. CA 9 reversed denial of naturalization on examination of record and confession of error by Gov't based on memorandum holding Congress did not intend to bar from citizenship conscientious objectors who objected to working in munitions plants.
30.5a. Re Schmitt. (Imm. and Nat. Service.) Hearing Examiner recommended that application for citizenship be denied because Applicant subscribed to views of Mennonite Church against bearing arms. Reversed by Imm. and Nat. Service. Lawrence Speiser, Esq., A.C.L.U. of N. Calif., 503 Market St., San Francisco.
30.6. Hughes v. Priest, U. S. Treasurer. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 52, 68. May 16: dismissed by agreement of counsel.
30.7. Fellowship of Humanity v. Co. of Alameda and City of Oakland. (Super. Ct., Alameda Co., #250074.)*
30.8. Textile Workers v. Lawtex Corp. and Belcraft Corp. (N.L.R.B.)*
30.10. Carden v. Bland. (Tenn. Sup. Ct.) (288 SW 2d 718.)*
40. Freedom of Assembly

40.3. Alabama v. Rev. King, et al. (Ala. Ct. of Appeals.)*

And see Parks (670.5), Browder (670.6), N.A.A.C.P. (180.7).

100. Freedom of Association—Governmental limitations on organizations
110. Federal conspiracy indictments—Smith Act

110.1. Yates, et al. v. U. S. (U.S.S.C., #308.)*

And see Yates (320.4).

110.2. Fujimoto, et al. v. U. S. (CA 9.) For facts, see I DOCKET 3. Argued July 2.

Substitute counsel for Def. Hall: Telford Taylor, Esq., 400 Madison Ave., NYC.

And see Bouslog (560.2, 560.2a), Gladstein (560.1).

110.3. Wellman, et al. v. U. S. (U.S.S.C.)*
110.4. Huff, et al. v. U. S. (CA 9, #14320.) For facts, see I DOCKET 3. Argued July 3.
110.5. U. S. v. Mesarosh, et al. (U.S.S.C.)*
110.6. Sentner, et al. v. U. S. (CA 8.)*
110.7. U. S. v. Kuzma, et al. (CA 3.)*
- 89 -

110.8. U. S. v. Bary, et al. (CA 10.)*
110.9. U. S. v. Brandt, et al. (CA 6.) For facts, see I DOCKET 4, 34, 52, 69. Appeal pending.
110.10. U. S. v. Silverman, et al. (CA 2.) For facts, see I DOCKET 4, 34, 52, 69. April 20: 4 Defs. sentenced to 4 yrs., 1 to 5 yrs.; appeals filed. 1 Def. sentenced to 3 yrs., suspended, probation for 5 yrs.; not appealing.

Counsel on appeal: Frank J. Donner, Esq., 342 Madison Ave., NYC; George F. Lowner, Esq., Stamford, Conn. and Francis A. Smith, Jr., Esq., Bridgeport, Conn., appointed by Ct.

110.12. U. S. v. Charney, et al. (SD NY.) For facts, see I DOCKET 4, 34, 52, 69. June 18: Judge Bicks dismissed charges against Def. Bachrach. Gov't case concluded; defense continuing.
110.13. U. S. v. Mirabal, et al. (U.S.D.C., Puerto Rico.)*
110.14. U. S. v. Russo, et al. (DC Mass.) May 29: 7 persons indicted May 29, charged with conspiracy to advocate. (3 had just been released from indictments under Mass. laws, see Hood, et al., 130.5.) Defs. have not been arraigned to date. They are seeking counsel.

And see Russo, et al. under 570.

120. Federal seditious conspiracy indictments—18 USC 2384

120.2. U. S. v. Valle, et al. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 5, 52. May 21: U.S.S.C. denied cert.
130. State anti-sedition indictments (post World War I statutes)

130.1. Pennsylvania v. Nelson. (U.S.S.C.) (350 U. S. 497.) For facts, see I DOCKET 5, 70. May 4: motion for reargument denied.

Law review note on decision below in 44 Georgetown L. J. 509-515 (Mar., 1956).

130.2. Pennsylvania v. Dolson and Onda. (Pa. Superior Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 5. Despite decision of U.S.S.C. in Nelson (130.1), Dolson appeal set for argument in Oct. Onda sentence still pending, Quarter Sessions Ct., Allegheny Co., Pa.
130.3. Kentucky v. Braden, et al. (Ky. Ct. of App.) For facts, see I DOCKET 5. June 23: Ct. of App. reversed conviction of Braden on the basis of U.S.S.C. decision in Nelson (130.1, I DOCKET 70). Ct. said it would still be possible for Ky. to prosecute for sedition against Ky. alone.

Amicus brief filed by National Lawyers Guild, by Osmond K. Fraenkel, Esq., 120 Broadway, and Victor Rabinowitz, Esq., 25 Broad, both of NYC.

And see S. End Federal Svgs. & Loan v. Roan, Braden and Wade (640.3).

130.4. Massachusetts v. Struik, et al. (Middlesex Sup. Ct., Crim. #40726, 40734, 40735.) For facts, see I DOCKET 5. In companion case, Mass. v. Gilbert (1956 A.S. 495) Sup. Jud. Ct. on May 3 allowed motion to quash indictment on basis of U.S.S.C. decision in Nelson (130.1). May 25: indictments against Struik and Winner quashed.
130.5. Massachusetts v. Hood, et al. (Suffolk Co. Sup. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 5. May 24: Ct. allowed Defs.' motion to quash indictments based on U.S.S.C. decision in Nelson (130.1) and Mass. Sup. Jud. Ct. decision in Gilbert (130.4).

And see Russo, et al. (110.14).

And see cases at 210.

140. Federal registration provisions—Internal Security Act of 1950

140.1. Communist Party of U. S. v. Subversive Activities Control Board. (U.S.S.C. #48.) (76 S. Ct. 663.) For facts, see I DOCKET 5. April 30: U.S.S.C. (6-3) remanded proceeding to S.A.C.B. with directions that it reconsider its determination after either (1) expunging testimony of Gov't witnesses Matusow, Crouch and Johnson or (2) hearing additional evidence which Pet.-C.P. had moved in CA for leave to adduce in order to establish that these witnesses had perjured themselves in other proceedings subsequent to close of S.A.C.B. hearing.

July 1: Pet. filed motion with S.A.C.B. to reopen hearings to permit Communist Party officials to offer supplemental proof that Party is not affiliated with international communist movement through testimony re Party's recent repudiation of acts of Soviet gov't under Stalin.

140.4. Browncll v. Labor Youth League. (CA DC.)*
140.5. Jefferson School v. S.A.C.B. (CA DC.) (formerly entitled Brownell v. Jefferson School.) For facts, see I DOCKET 5. Pet's. motion to set aside summarily S.A.C.B. order against Pet., on ground that U.S.S.C. decision in C. P. v. S.A.C.B. (140.1) destroyed basis for order, is pending.
140.6. Brownell v. Civil Rights Congress. (SACB #106-53.)*
140.7. Natl. Council of American-Soviet Friendship v. S.A.C.B. (CA DC.) (formerly entitled Brownell v. Natl. Council of American-Soviet Friendship.) For facts, see I DOCKET 6, 70. Pet.'s motion to set aside S.A.C.B. order against Pet., on ground that U.S.S.C. decision in C. P. v. S.A.C.B. (140.1) destroyed basis for order, is pending.
140.8. Brownell v. California Labor School in San Francisco. (SACB.)*
140.9. See 160.7.
140.10.. Brownell v. Washington Pension Union. (SACB #114-55.)*
140.11. Brownell v. Am. Comm. for Protection of Foreign Born. (SACB.) For facts, see I DOCKET 6. Case suspended pending Bd.'s determination of action to be taken in C. P. v. S.A.C.B. (140.1).
140.12. Brownell v. American Peace Crusade. (SACB #117-56.)*
150. Federal proceedings under Communist Control Act of 1954
Law review article:

Carl A. Auebach, The Communist Control Act of 1954: A proposed legal-political theory of free speech, 23 Univ. of Chi. L. R. 173-220 (Winter, 1956).


- 90 -

150.1. Brownell v. Intl. Union of Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers. (SACB.) For facts, see I DOCKET 6, 35. Hearing postponed indefinitely as a result of U.S.S.C. decision in C. P. v. S.A.C.B. (140.1).

And see Mine, Mill (165.1).

150.2. United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America v. Brownell. (CA DC.)*
150.3. Brownell v. United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers. (SACB #119-56.)*
160. U. S. Attorney General's "listing" power under Executive Order 10450

160.1. National Lawyers Guild v. Brownell. (U.S.S.C. #496.) For facts, see I DOCKET 6. May 7: cert. denied. June 11: petition for rehearing denied. June 15: motion to modify interrogatories (in light of decision of CA DC Jy. 14, 1955) filed with Atty. Genl., together with cross-interrogatories and answer to Atty. Genl.'s statement of grounds.
160.3. Natl. Council of American-Soviet Friendship v. Brownell. (CA DC.)*
160.4. Assn. of Lithuanian Workers v. Brownell. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 6, 53. After denial of certiorari in Guild (160.1), brief on appeal filed for Pet.
160.5. Brownell v. Natl. Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions, Inc. (Dept. of Justice.) For facts, see I DOCKET 7. Atty. Genl. has referred case to hearing officer.
160.6. Brownell v. Independent Socialist League. (Dept. of Justice.) For facts, see I DOCKET 7. Hearing recessed from 1st day (July, 1955) to May 21, 1956, after U.S.S.C. denied cert. in Guild (160.1). Hearings continuing.
160.7. Brownell v. Californians for the Bill of Rights. (Dept. of Justice.)*
162. Congressional Committee's "listing" power

162.1. Methodist Federation for Social Action v. Eastland, et al. (DC DC, #13,335.) Action to enjoin U. S. public printer and Supt. of Documents from printing pamphlet, "A Handbook for Americans", issued by Senate Internal Security Subcomm., on ground that its distribution is not a proper legislative function and Pl. had been listed in it as "Communist front" organization without hearing. Temporary restraining order signed by Judge Wilkin; case set down before 3-Judge statutory ct. Trial held on stipulated set of facts; Ct. dismissed complaint because publication absolutely privileged under Art. I, Sec. 6 of U. S. Constitution. Judge Wilkin dissented: privilege not absolute, does not cover this publication.

Leonard B. Boudin, Esq., 25 Broad St., NYC; Harry I. Rand, Esq., Wyatt Bldg., Washington, D. C.

165. N.L.R.B. decertification of Unions

165.1. Intl. Union of Minc, Mill & Smelter Workers v. N.L.R.B. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 36, 53. Certiorari granted; to be argued Fall, 1956.
165.2. Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen, AFL-CIO, Successor to Intl. Fur & Leather Workers Union v. N.L.R.B. (formerly entitled N.L.R.B. v. Lannom Mfg. Co.) (U.S.S.C., #723.) For facts, see I DOCKET 36, 71. Certiorari granted; to be argued Fall, 1956.

And see United Mine Workers v. Ark. Oak Flooring Co. (U.S.S.C.) (76 S. Ct. 559.) U.S.S.C. held (8-1): state ct. does not have right to enjoin employees and their union from peacefully picketing employer's plant to secure recognition even though union failed to file T-H non-Communist affidavits and other data required under Taft-Hartley Act.

170. State officials "listing" powers
170.1 See 390.2.
170.2. Kaplan, et al. v. Bowker, et al. (Mass. Sup. Jud. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 7, 54. Cite: 131 N. E. 2d 372.
170.3. Tormey v. Bowker, et al. (Mass. Sup. Jud. Ct., Suffolk Co., Eq. #68546.)*
170.4. Luscomb v. Bowker, et al. (Mass. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Co.)*
180. Other state actions against organizations

180.1. Green v. Javits. (N. Y. Sup. Ct.)*
180.3. New York v. Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee, et al. (N. Y. Sup. Ct., NY Co.)*
180.4. Louisiana ex rel. Le Blanc, Atty. Genl. v. Lewis, et al., and N.A.A.C.P. (19th Jud. Dist., Parish of E. Baton Rouge, La., #55899, Div. D.) For facts, see I DOCKET 71. April: Alabama Sup. Ct. denied N.A.A.C.P. motion for removal to Fedl. Ct. State Dist. Ct. then issued permanent injunction against all N.A.A.C.P. activities in Ala., but dismissed suit as to 10 individual members. Appeal to be filed.
180.5. Lewis, et al. & N.A.A.C.P. v. Le Blanc, Atty. Genl. (D.C. La.)*
180.6. N.A.A.C.P., a Corp. v. Eure, Secy. of State, and Rodman, Jr., Atty. Genl. (Sup. Ct. N. Caro., #449.) For facts, see I DOCKET 71. Appeal to be heard Fall, 1956.

C. O. Pearson and William A. Marsh, Jr., Esqs., Box 125, Durham, N. C.; Thurgood Marshall and Robert Carter, 20 W. 40th St., NYC.

180.7. Alabama ex rel. Atty. Genl. Patterson v. N.A.A.C.P. (Montgomery Co. Cir. Ct.) Pet. accused N.A.A.C.P. of organizing and supporting Montgomery bus boyoctt (see Rev. King, 40.3), providing financial assistance to Pls. Lucy and Hudson (620.7), being an out-of-state corporation engaged in business in Ala. without complying with Ala. laws. June 1: Temporary restraining order issued, ex parte, against N.A.A.C.P. prohibiting it from conducting further business in the state, organizing new chapters, collecting funds. N.A.A.C.P. will contest action.
180.10. Communist Party v. Moysey. (SD NY.) March, 1956; Def.-district director of Internal Revenue in N.Y.C. assessed deficiency income tax against Pl. for year 1951 of $389,000; without prior notice or warning, seized Pl.'s
- 91 -

offices and those of affiliated state organizations, appropriating property and cash money found on premises. Pl. claims it has no taxable income, that no political party has ever been required to file income tax returns or pay income taxes. Def. said: because Pl. did not furnish Def. with names of all donors and sources of moneys received, and of all persons to whom payments made, all moneys received by Pl. were treated as income and so taxed in deficiency tax assessment. Pl. sued to enjoin collection of tax until appeal from assessment tried in Tax Court. May 23: Dist. Ct. denied motion for temporary injunction on ground law provides no such remedy against tax imposition; unique treatment of Pl. as political party immaterial. Appeal pending to CA 2.

John Abt, Esq., 11 Park Pl., NYC.

And see Daily Worker (20.40).

200. Freedom of Association—Governmental limitations on individuals
Law review note:

The heritage of Lovett—A decade of attainder allegations, 28 Rocky Mountain L. R. 250-265 (Feb., 1956).

201. Federal membership indictments—Smith Act

201.2. U. S. v. Lightfoot. (U.S.S.C.)*
201.3. U. S. v. Scales. (U.S.S.C.)*

Law review notes on decision in:

44 Georgetown L. J. 515-518 (Mar., 1956);

27 Mississippi L. J. 236-238 (May, 1956).

201.4. U. S. v. Blumberg. (CA 3.) For facts, see I DOCKET 8, 37, 72. Appeal pending.
201.5. U. S. v. Noto. (CA 2.) For facts, see I DOCKET 8, 72. Appeal pending.
201.6. U. S. v. Weiss. (ND Ill. ED.)*

William Scott Stewart, Esq., 77 W. Washington, Chicago.

201.7. U. S. v. Blum. (ND Ill. ED.) For facts, see I DOCKET 72. Def. released on $5,000. bail.
201.8. U. S. v. Russo. (DC Mass.)*
201.9. U. S. v. Hellman. (DC Mont.)*

W. E. Coyle and Robert Poor, Esqs., Butte, Montana.

210. State anti-communist membership indictments

210.1. Alabama v. Knox. (Ala. Ct. of App.) For facts, see I DOCKET 8. May: Ct. of App. reversed conviction because based on insufficient evidence.
210.3. Albertson v. Millard. (Mich. S. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 8. May 14: Mich. S. Ct. entered declaratory decree that Trucks Act sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 are unconstitutional and Def.-Atty. Genl. enjoined from enforcing same under Nelson decision of U.S.S.C. (I DOCKET 70, 130.1.)
210.4. Massachusetts v. Struik. (Middlesex Super. Ct., Crim. #40725.) For facts, see I DOCKET 8. Indictment quashed on basis of U.S.S.C. decision in Nelson (130.1).
210.5. Massachusetts v. Hood. (Suffolk Co., #11492; Mass. Sup. Jud. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 8. May 3: Ct. allowed motion to quash on basis of U.S.S.C. decision in Nelson (130.1).

And see Russo, et al. (110.14.)

And see cases at 130.

220. "Loyalty-security" dismissals of government employees—UN, US, states, cities
Law review articles:

People, government and security: An analysis of three books and a program; articles by Paul A. Sweeney, Alex Elson, Nathaniel L. Nathanson and Richard A. Pear, 51 Northwestern Univ. L. R. 79-111 (Mar.-Apr., 1956).

Murray Seasongood and Richard L. Strecker, The loyalty review board, 25 Univ. of Cincinnati L. R. 1-42 (Winter, 1956).

Frank F. Mankiewicz, John K. Magnum and Graham B. Moody, Jr., The federal loyalty-security program: A proposed statute, 44 California L. R. 72-93 (Mar., 1956).


220.1. Leff, Duberg and Wilcox v. Evans. (Before Adm. Trib. of ILO.)*
220.3. Service v. Dulles, et al. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 9. June 14: Judgment entered affirming DC judgment of dismissal and Dist. Ct. direction to Civil Service Commission to expunge from its records a finding of now-defunct Loyalty Review Bd. that there was reasonable doubt as to Pl.'s loyalty.
220.5. Kutcher v. Higley. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 9. Apr. 20: CA (2-1) reversed Dist. Ct. decision upholding firing of Pl. because charges against Pl. and findings of Veterans Admr. loyalty bd. "differ substantially." Charges: membership in, employment by, contributing to organization on Atty.-Gen'l's list (Socialist Workers Party). Reasons for discharge: S.W.P. found to advocate overthrow of Gov't by unconstitutional means, Pl. aware of that aim and supported it conscientiously and actively.
220.6. Cole v. Young. (U.S.S.C.) (125 F. Supp. 284.) For facts, see I DOCKET 9. June 11: U.S.S.C. (6-3) reversed dismissal of Pl.-employee in Food & Drug Admr. of Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare. Harlan, J., for the majority:

"*** we conclude (1) that the term `national security' is used in the act in a definite and limited sense and relates only to those activities which are directly concerned with the nation's safety, as distinguished from the general welfare; and (2) that no determination has been made that petitioner's position was affected with the `national security' as that term is used in the act. It follows that his dismissal was not authorized by the 1950 act.***

"*** it is difficult to justify summary suspensions and unreviewable dismissals on loyalty grounds of employees who are not in `sensitive' positions and who are thus not situated where they could bring about any discernible adverse effects on the nation's security. In the absence of an immediate threat of harm to the `national security', the normal dismissal procedures seem fully adequate and the justification for summary powers disappears. Indeed, in view of the stigma attached to persons dismissed on loyalty grounds, the need for procedural safeguards seems even greater than in other cases, and we will not lightly assume that Congress intended to take away those safeguards in the absence of some overriding necessity, such as exists in the case of employes handling defense secrets."

- 92 -

220.7. Berman v. Summerfield. (DC DC, #4475-55.) For facts, see I DOCKET 54. Awaiting administrative action on the basis of U.S.S.C. decision in Cole (220.6).
220.8. Liner v. Summerfield. (DC DC, #4473-55.) For facts, see I DOCKET 54. Awaiting administrative action on the basis of U.S.S.C. decision in Cole (220.6).
220.10. Dupree v. U. S. Coast Guard Commandant. (U.S. Ct. of Claims.) Pl.-shipmaster sued for back pay for 5 yrs. based on refusal of Coast Guard to issue certificate of loyalty. June 5: suit dismissed. Ct. held it could not assume certificate would have been issued if opportunity to cross-examine witnesses had been afforded, and that certificate of loyalty was reasonable requirement to operate a ship.

And see cases at 250.2.

220.20. Nagin v. Zurmuhlen. (N.Y. Sup. Ct., N.Y. Co.)*
220.21. Wilkins v. Carlander, et al. (Super. Ct. Kings Co., #490844.)*
220.22. Hehir v. NYC Transit Authority, NY State Civil Service Commission, et ano. (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Kings Co.) Action under Article 78 to review dismissal of employee of Transit Authority under N.Y. Security Risk Law. Issues: constitutionality of law, application to employee, effect of refusal to answer questions. Motion for reinstatement argued; decision pending.

Leonard B. Boudin, Esq., 25 Broad St., NYC.

220.50. In the Matter of Hamilton, Resp. v. Monahan, NYC Police Comm'r. (NY Ct. of App.)*
222. "Loyalty-security" indictments re application for government employment (18 USCA 1001)

222.1. U. S. v. McDaniel. (ED Wash., S. Div., #C-4519.) For facts, see I DOCKET 37-38. One count of indictment dismissed following CA 9 decision reversing conviction in Fisher (240.5, I DOCKET 73). Trial date: Nov. 1956.

See cases at 160.

222.2. U. S. v. Giarraputo. (ED NY, Crim. #44283.) For facts, see I DOCKET 72. May 9: Def. convicted in trial before Judge Rayfiel without a jury.
225. "Loyalty-security" less - than - honorable discharges from Armed Services

225.3. Lt. Mitchell. (U.S. Air Force, 10th Air Force.)*
225.4. Re Jensen. (U.S. Army.) Administrative proceeding to determine whether to issue less-than-honorable discharge for loyalty-security reasons. Gov't informants did not appear at hearing, nor were their names supplied. Charges based on pre-induction membership in various organizations. Decision awaited.

Wyman Smith, Esq., 311 Produce Bank Bldg., Minneapolis, Minnesota.

225.20. Harmon v. Stevens. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 10, 54. To be argued in Fall, 1956.
225.21. Schustack v. Herren, et al. (CA 2.) For facts, see I DOCKET 10, 73. June 1: CA 2 affirmed Dist. Ct. dismissal of complaint. Motion to stay mandate until U.S.S.C. acts on petition for certiorari pending.
225.22. Bernstein, et al. v. Lt. Gen. Herren. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 38, 55, 73. June 1: CA 2 affirmed Dist. Ct. dismissal of complaint for failure to join Secy. of Defense as indispensable party. Motion to stay mandate until U.S.S.C. acts on petition for certiorari pending.
225.23. Bland v. Hartman, et al. (SD Calif., S. Div., CA #1852-SD.)*
225.25. Abramowitz v. Brucker. (DC DC, #2140-1956.) Pl. received undersirable discharge from Army Reserves; brought action to review validity of Army regulations re discharge of soldiers on basis of pre-induction conduct. Motion for summary judgment pending.

Victor Rabinowitz, Esq., 25 Broad St., N. Y. C.; David Rein, Esq., 711-14th St., NW, Washington, D. C.

And see cases at 450.

227. "Loyalty-security" denials of veterans' disability payments

227.1. Thompson v. Veterans Admin. (Vet. Adm.) For facts, see I DOCKET 38, 73. July 10: public hearing on charges: speeches in opposition to U. S. participation in Korean conflict and Walter-McCarran Act.
227.2. Wellman v. Veterans Administration. (Vet. Adm.)*
230. "Loyalty-security" dismissals v. academic freedom

230.1. Matter of Hughes v. Bd. of Higher Education. (N.Y. Ct. of App.)*

And see cases at 440, 460.

240. Perjury indictments against trade union officials under Taft-Hartley oath

240.3. Jencks v. U. S. (U.S.S.C.) (350 U.S. 980.)*

And see: Matusow (545.2) and Witt (480.2).

240.4. Gold v. U. S. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 11, 55, 73. June 7: petition for certiorari filed.

And see Cammer (560.4).

- 93 -

240.5. U. S. v. Fisher. (CA 9.) For facts, see I DOCKET 11, 73. Cite: 231 F. 2d 99.
240.6. U. S. v. Bryson. (CA 9.) For facts, see I DOCKET 11. May 21: argued and submitted.
240.7. U. S. v. Travis. (CA 10.) For facts, see I DOCKET 11, 38, 55, 73. To be argued in Fall.

And see Mine, Mill (165.1).

240.8. U. S. v. Lohman. (CA 6.)*
240.9. U. S. v. Killian. (DC Ill., #55 Crim. 626.)*

And see cases at 165.

250. "Loyalty-security" dismissals in private employment
Law review article:

The role of employer practices in the Federal Industrial Personnel Security Program—A field study, 8 Stanford L. R. 234-260 (Mar., 1956).


250.1. Black, et al. on behalf of United Office and Professional Workers Union Local v. Cutter Laboratories. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 11. June 4: U.S.S.C. dismissed writ of certiorari (6-3), by Clark, J. Dissenting J. Douglas: "The Court says that the parties to a collective-bargaining agreement may make Communist Party membership `just cause' for discharge of an employee, that discharge for that reason is merely a matter of contract between the union on the one hand and the employer on the other, and that when the contract is enforced no federal right is infringed. I disagree with that doctrine. It is a dangerous innovation to meet the exigencies of the present case. It violates First Amendment guarantees of citizens who are workers in our industrial plants***.

"Cutter Laboratories is an important pharmaceutical factory. It may need special protection. It may need to establish safeguards against sabotage and adulteration. It may need special screening of its employees. But there is not a word in the present record indicating it needs protection against Doris Walker. She has no criminal record. She is guilty of no adulteration, no act of sabotage. The factory in question has not been plagued with any such problem. It is only the fear that Doris Walker might at a future time engage in sabotage that is made the excuse for her discharge. I do not think we can hold consistently with our Bill of Rights that Communists can be proscribed from making a living on the assumption that wherever they work the incidence of sabotage rises or that the danger from Communist employees is too great for critical industry to bear.

"The blunt truth is that Doris Walker is not discharged for misconduct but either because of her legitimate labor union activities or because of her political ideology or belief. Belief cannot be penalized consistently with the First Amendment***. We sanction a flagrant violation of the First Amendment when we allow California, acting through her highest court, to sustain Mrs. Walker's discharge because of her belief." Warren, C. J. and Black, J. concurred in dissent.

250.2. Parker, et al. v. Lester, et al. (ND Cal. SD.) For facts, see I DOCKET 38-39, 73. June 21: Dist. Judge Murphy ruled that Pls.-seamen are entitled to injunction permitting them to return to their jobs under CA 9 decision before a rescreening. Ruling did not bar Coast Guard from bringing charges against Pls. and others as individuals under new screening regulations adopted in May requiring persons charged to be notified of charge, confronted with informants or evidence against them, and permitted to cross-examine informants.

Law review note in 44 Georgetown L. J. 326-329 (Jan., 1956).

250.2a. Kasik v. Richmond. (DC DC.) Action by 7 Pls. seeking review of screening procedures applicable to merchant marine employees. Issues: constitutionality of regulations both substantively and procedurally. Motion for summary judgment pending.

Victor Rabinowitz, Esq., 25 Broad St., NYC; Forer & Rein, Esqs., 711-14th St., N.W., Washington, D. C.

250.2b. Mulzac v. Richmond. (DC DC.) Action by 3 Pls. raising the same issues as in Kasik (250.2b).

William L. Standard, Esq., 38 Park Row, NYC; Forer & Rein, Esqs., 711-14th St., N.W., Washington, D. C.

250.3. Hutchin v. Rohr Aircraft Co. (Calif. Super. Ct., San Diego.)*
250.4. Faulk v. AWARE, Inc., et al. (N.Y. Sup. Ct., NY Co.) Suit for $500,000 damages by Pl.-radio performer charging Def. organization and directors with conspiracy to defame Pl. by circulating false matter about him seeking to link him with "Communist conspiracy"; attempting to blacklist Pl. and other radio and television artists. Pl. alleged he had filed non-Communist affidavit when elected vice-pres., NY local, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists. Pl. also alleged Def. had caused loss of 19 commercial sponsors for his program per week and rendered him unemployable on TV and radio networks other than CBS.

Louis Nizer, Esq., Phillips, Nizer, Benjamin and Krim, 1501 Broadway, NYC.

John Cogley, Editor, Report on Blacklisting, Fund For the Republic, 2 vols., 1956.

And see cases at 470.

255. Denial of Unemployment Compensation

255.1. Re Fitzpatrick. (Unemployment Compensation Bd. of Review.)*
255.2. Re Albert. (Unemployment Compensation Referee.)*
255.4. Baxter v. General Motors. (Mich. Employment Security Adm.)*

And see 475.

257. Denial of Social Security benefits

257.1. Matter of Bittleman, Mindel, Foster, Wagenknecht, Dirba, Amter. (Social Security Bd.) For facts, see I DOCKET 56. May 22: Referee rendered partial decision restoring all claimants to benefits based on wages reported for period prior to 1952, because statute of limitations has run on correcting errors not on face of record. June:
- 94 -

Referce held claimants' work for Communist Party of U.S. did not constitute employment by foreign government and did not involve exception under Social Security Act, sec. 210 (a) (11).
260. Actions against attorneys based on alleged political associations

260.2. In re Schlesinger. (Sub-comm. of Comm. on Offenses of Allegheny Cty., Common Pleas Ct., Pa.)*
260.3. In re Steinberg. (Sub.-comm. of Comm. on Offenses of Allegheny Cty., Common Pleas Ct., Pa.)*
260.4. Schware v. Bd. of Bar Examiners of New Mexico. (N. Mex. Sup. Ct.) (60 N.M. 304, 291 P. 2d 607.) Petition to review denial of application to take bar examination. Def.-Bd. and Sup. Ct. stated they based decision solely on Pet.'s own testimony, tho Bd. had confidential file not available to Pet. Pet. testified he had used aliases to organize unions and to gain employment; was Communist Party member 1934-40 but now anti-Communist; had been arrested: 1) several times in Calif. during 1934 maritime strike, once on charge of criminal syndicalism; never brought to trial. 2) 1940 in Detroit when seeking recruits for Spanish Republican Army; charge under U.S. Neutrality Act of 1816 nolle prossed 3) 1940 in Texas on "suspicion of transporting stolen vehicle"; charge dropped after car ownership check.

Sept. 1955: Ct. affirming denial, held: while membership in legal profession is constitutional property right, denial of permission to take bar exam, when Bd. is not satisfied of applicant's good moral character, is not unreasonable deprivation. Burden of proof re character is on applicant; Pet. failed to sustain burden. Pet.'s use of aliases involved deceptions of employers and police; Pet.'s present attitude toward them and past arrests not satisfactory. Dec. 1955: Ct. denied petition for rehearing, held: 1) question of whether former membership in Communist Party alone established lack of good moral character not before Ct.; 2) one who knowingly gave loyalties to Comm. Party program and belief for 6-7 yrs. of responsible adulthood is person of questionable moral character (citing Jackson, J. in A.C.A. v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382), even though Party was legal during such membership; 3) whether Pet. will be permitted to take exam later will depend on showing them made.

Dissenting judge: decision permanently disqualifies Pet. If after 15 yrs. of unobjectionable conduct, Pet. still said to be of questionable character on ground of past affiliation, when Party was legal, there can be no future hope. Ct. has duty to examine confidential file.

And see 420, 480 and 560.

270. Refusals to issue licenses on "loyalty-security" grounds

270.1. Appeal of Shonick. (Docket #8, D.C. Bd. of Appeals and Review.)*
270.2. In re Application of Dispatch, Inc., Erie, Pa., for Renewal of License of Television Station WICU. (Fedl. Comm. Comm., #11048, File BRCT-42.)
270.3. In re Application of Lafferty for Renewal of Radio Operator's License. (Fedl. Comm. Comm.) Jy. 1954: Lafferty filled out usual application for renewal of license. Thereafter, he was asked to answer further questions (re past or present membership in Communist Party or "Communist organizations") not asked of other applicants. At hearing before FCC, Comm. counsel refused to divulge why questions were asked, but stipulated that nothing exists in FCC files indicating that Lafferty had violated any FCC rule or had been complained about. Hearing officer recommended that renewal be denied because of refusal to answer questions. Appeal to full Comm. pending. Lawrence Speiser, A.C.L.U. of N. Calif., 503 Market St., San Francisco.
280. Denial of passports on "loyalty-security" grounds
Law review note:

The passport puzzle. 23 Univ. of Chicago L. R. 260-289 (Winter, 1956).


280.6. McIntire v. Dulles. (DC DC.)*
280.8. Boudin v. Dulles. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 12, 39, 56. June 28: CA remanded to State Dept. on holding that findings of Def. were not sufficient for denial of passport under Dept. regulations. Decision on validity of regulations postponed pending further findings by Def.-Secy. of State.
280.9. Schachtman v. Dulles. For facts, see I DOCKET 12; for law review references, see I DOCKET 74.

Law review note in 31 N. Y. U. L. R. 603 (Mar., 1956).

280.11. Dayton v. Dulles. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 74. Briefs filed; awaiting argument.
280.12. Stewart v. Dulles. (DC DC, Civ. #1825-56.) Action to compel issuance of passport; issues substantially the same as Boudin (280.8) and Dayton (280.11). Motion for summary judgment argued; decision awaited.

Harry I. Rand, Esq., Wyatt Bldg., Washington, D. C.; Leonard B. Boudin, Esq., 25 Broad Street, NYC.

280.13. Chodorov v. Dulles. (DC DC, #1733-56.) Action to compel issuance of passport; issues substantially the same as Boudin (280.8) and Dayton (280.11). Motion for preliminary injunction pending.

Frank J. Delaney, Esq., 1317 F St., N.W., Washington, D. C.

280.30. Robeson v. Dulles. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 12-13. June 7: CA affirmed denial of Pet.'s motion to compel Def. to issue passport, on ground of failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (Pet. had refused to attend hearing before Def. Passport Office because filing affidavit re political affiliations constituted prerequisite to hearing under agency rules.)
280.32. Kent v. Dulles. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 56, 74. Appeal pending.
280.33. Briehl v. Dulles. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 74. Appeal pending.
- 95 -

290. Actions against the foreign-born based on alleged political associations
Law review article:

Will Maslow, Recasting our deportation law: Proposals for reform, 56 Columbia L. R. 309-366 (Mar., 1956).


290.1. Crain v. Boyd, Dist. Dir. (CA 9, #14633.)*
290.3. U. S. v. De la Cruz. (CA 9.)*
290.4. Rowoldt v. Perfetto. (U.S.S.C.) Pet. arrested for deportation on basis of membership in Communist Party for brief period in 1930s. Appealing from deportation order. Issues: 1) whether Pet. was only "nominal" member within Galvan decision, 2) constitutionality of Walter-McCarran Act. U.S.S.C. granted certiorari on both points. To be argued in Fall.

Forer and Rein, Esqs., 711 14th St. NW, Washington, D. C. And see cases at 540.

300. Refusals to answer questions re political beliefs, affiliations—contempt indictments
301. Before Congressional committees: based on First Amendment/no authority to ask
A. FEDERAL CASES

301.1. U. S. v. Lamont. (CA 2.) For facts, see I DOCKET 13. June 5: argued and submitted.
301.2. U. S. v. Unger. (CA 2.) For facts, see I DOCKET 13. June 5: argued and submitted.
301.3. U. S. v. Shadowitz. (CA 2.) For facts, see I DOCKET 13. June 5: argued and submitted.
301.4. U. S. v. O'Connor. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 13, 40. June 15: argued and submitted.
301.5. U. S. v. C. Davis. (WD Mich.)*
301.6. U. S. v. Watson. (DC DC.)*
301.7. U. S. v. Barenblatt. (CA DC.)*

David Scribner, Esq., 9 E. 40th St., NYC.

301.8. U. S. v. Lorch. (SD Ohio.) For facts, see I DOCKET 14, 40, 57. April 13: Gov't moved to dismiss indictment; motion allowed by Judge Cecil.
301.9. U. S. v. Russell. (DC DC, Crim. #1230.) For facts, see I DOCKET 14, May: during trial Gov't dropped 3 counts. May 31: Def. convicted after jury trial on 3 counts.
301.10. U. S. v. Deutch. (DC DC.)*
301.11. U. S. v. Markison. (DC DC.)*
301.12. U. S. v. Sacher. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 75. App't's brief due mid-July.
301.13. U. S. v. Gojack. (DC DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 57. May 3: case heard with a jury; Def. found guilty. June 15: sentence imposed of 9 mths. and $200 fine. Appeal to CA DC to be filed.
310. Before Congressional committees: based on unwillingness to "inform"/lack of authority

310.2. U. S. v. Furry. (DC Mass., Crim. #54-390WA.) For facts, see I DOCKET 14. As a result of decision in Kamin (310.3, I DOCKET 14, 40, 57), Gov't moved for dismissal of indictment against Furry. June 13: Dist. Ct. granted motion.
310.4. U. S. v. Metcalf. (SD Ohio.)*
310.6. U. S. v. Singer. (DC DC.)*
310.7. Watkins v. U. S. (CA DC #12,797.) For facts, see I DOCKET 14, 57. April 22: CA (6-2) en banc reversed 2-1 decision (I DOCKET 57), affirmed conviction, finding questions asked Def. were pertinent and any exposure of individuals to contempt thereby incidental only.

Law review notes on initial decision of CA DC in: 24 Geo. Washington L. R. 592-596 (Apr., 1956); 10 Arkansas L. R. 210-213 (Spring, 1956).

320. During trial: based on Fifth Amendment privilege/refusal to "inform"

320.1. U. S. v. Phillips. (CA 9.) For facts, see I DOCKET 15. July 3: heard and submitted.
320.4. Yates v. U. S. (U.S.S.C., #547.)*
330. During deportation and denaturalization proceedings: lack of authority/refusal to "inform"

330.5. Brown v. U. S. (CA 6, #12,628.) For facts, see I DOCKET 75. May 18: judgment of Dist. Ct. affirmed. Petition for rehearing pending.
340. Before Congressional committee: based on Fifth Amendment privilege

340.4. U. S. v. Starkovich. (WD Wash. ND.) For facts, see I DOCKET 16, 41, 75. Ct. granted Def.'s motion to dismiss indictment.
340.6. U. S. v. Fagerhaugh. (CA 9.) For facts, see I DOCKET 16, 41. April 24: CA reversed conviction for failure to direct witness to answer after claim of privilege.
340.7. U. S. v. Grossman. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 16, 58. Cite: 229 F. 2d 775.
340.8. U. S. v. Hoag. (DC DC.)*
340.9. McKensie v. U. S. (CA 9.)*
340.10. Wollam v. U. S. (CA 9.)*
340.11. U. S. v. Simpson. (CA 9.) Def. convicted of contempt for refusal to testify before Congressional Committee. Dist. Ct. (Ore.) held he had improperly invoked Fifth Amendment; sentence: 10 months. Appeal pending. Reuben G. Lenske, Esq., 1123 S. W. 5th Ave., Portland 4, Ore.
- 96 -

350. Before Court or grand jury: based on Fifth Amendment privilege
351. Federal Immunity Statute invoked

351.1. U. S. v. Ullmann. (350 U. S. 422.) (SD NY.) For facts, see I DOCKET 76. May 7: U.S.S.C. denied petition for rehearing. Def. testified before grand jury, answering questions under grant of immunity after U.S.S.C. decision upholding constitutionality of Immunity Act of 1954. June 1: SD NY entered order purging Def. of contempt.

Law review note on decision below in 20 Albany L. R. 107-114 (Jan., 1956).

351.2. U. S. v. Fitzgerald. (CA 2.)*
360. Inability/refusal to produce records before Congressional Committees

360.1. Flaxer v. U. S. (CA DC, #12,027.) For facts, see I DOCKET 16. June 21: conviction affirmed (4-3). Ct. held union membership lists pertinent to Congressional Comm. inquiry; direction to answer was given. Petition for certiorari to be filed.
360.2. U. S. v. Baxter. (ED Mich., SD.) Prosecution for contempt of Congress for failure to produce records of Labor Youth League (140.1) subpoenaed by House Committee. May 10: during trial, Judge Lederle sustained Def.'s objection to Gov't's attempt to establish intent in subpoenaing records by testimony of Comm. investigator. Case continued to allow appearance of Congressman member of Comm. to establish this point.

Milton R. Henry, Esq., 41½ S. Saginaw St., Pontiac, Mich.

370. Inability/refusal to produce records before Court/grand jury
380. Indictment for perjury before Congressional committees

380.2. U. S. v. Icardi. (DC DC.) Def. indicted for perjury in testimony before Congressional Committee in 1953, at which time he had denied complicity in a murder behind enemy lines in Italy in 1943. After trial, Ct. directed acquittal on the ground that the testimony did not relate to a material matter and that the purpose of Comm.'s inquiry had not been legislative; intention had been to entrap Def.

Edward Bennett Williams, Esq., 839 17th N.W., Washington, D. C.

390. Before state official—based on First Amendment-equivalent

390.1. New Hampshire, by Wyman, Atty. Genl. v. Sweezey. (U.S.S.C.) (121 A. 2d 783.) For facts, see I DOCKET 17, 76. N. H. Sup. Ct. denied two petitions for rehearing without opinion. April 19: notice of appeal to U.S.S.C. filed.
390.2. New Hampshire v. Uphaus (formerly listed at 170.1). (N. H. Sup. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 7, 36, 53. Appeal pending.
395. Before state body—based on Fifth Amendment privilege-equivalent
396. State Immunity Statute invoked

396.2. Ohio v. Morgan. (U.S.S.C.) (133 NE 2d 104.) For facts, see I DOCKET 17, 76. June 11: notice of appeal to U.S.S.C. filed.
396.3. Ohio v. Jackson and Terrill. *
396.4. Ohio v. Hupman, et al. *
396.5. Ohio v. Raley, et al. (U.S.S.C.) (133 NE 2d 104.) For facts, see I DOCKET 17, 76. June 11: notice of appeal to U.S.S.C. filed.
396.6. Ohio v. Slagle, et al. (Stark Co. Com. Pleas Ct., #15972.)*
396.7. Ohio v. Arnold, Thelma Furry, et al. (Ct. of App., 9th Dist., #4524-4531.)*
396.8. State v. Dominguez. For facts, see I DOCKET 76.

Law review notes in:

16 Louisiana L. R. 434-437 (Feb., 1956);

34 Texas L. R. 639-641 (Apr., 1956).

400. Sanctions against individuals for refusals to answer
A. BASED ON FLAT REFUSALS TO ANSWER
410. Denial of public housing—Gwinn Amendment oath
Law review articles:

Henry N. Williams, Tenant's loyalty oaths, 31 Notre Dame Lawyer 190-222 (Mar., 1956).


410.1. Rudder v. U. S. For facts, see I DOCKET 17; for law review reference, see I DOCKET 77.

Law review notes in:

44 Georgetown L. J. 330-333 (Jan., 1956); 2 Howard L. J. 136-140 (Jan., 1956).

410.2. Lawson v. Housing Authority of City of Milwaukee, et al. (U.S.S.C.) (Cert. denied, 350 U. S. 882.) For facts, see I DOCKET 18, 41.

Law review note in 2 Wayne L. R. 47-50 (Winter, 1955).

410.3. Dailey, et al. v. Housing Auth. of City of Seattle. (Wash. S. Ct.)*
410.5. Weixel v. N. Y. C. Housing Authority. (NY App. Div., 2d Dept.) For facts, see I DOCKET 18, 58. June 13: Ct. granted motion for judgment in favor of Pl.
410.6. Levine v. N. Y. C. Housing Authority. (Sup. Ct., Bronx Co., #7289-1955.)*
410.7. New York City Housing Authority v. Sichel, et al. (1st Dist., Brooklyn.)*
410.8. Dupree v. Baltimore City Housing Authority. *
410.9. Wheatley, et al. v. Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority. *
- 97 -

410.10. Richmond Housing Authority v. Zumwalt. (Superior Ct., Contra Costa Co.) For facts, see I DOCKET 41. Appeal by Housing Auth. dismissed as moot since Def.-tenants moved out of project after favorable decision. Lower ct. decision holding Gwinn Amdt. unconstitutional stands.
410.11. San Francisco Housing Authority v. Thorner. (App. Dept., San Francisco Superior Ct.)*
410.12. Los Angeles Housing Authority v. Cordova. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 58-59, 77. Cite: 350 U. S. 969.
420. Actions against attorneys

420.3. Konigsberg v. State Bar of California and Committee of Bar Examiners. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 41-42. May 21: petition for writ of certiorari granted, with invitation to parties to brief several jurisdictional questions in addition to the merits.
430. Loss of individual tax exemptions (Calif.)

430.1. Speiser v. Randall. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 19, 42. June 13: heard and submitted.
430.2. Prince v. City & County of San Francisco. (Calif. Dist. Ct. of App., Div. 1.)*
430.3. Lehrer v. Hall. (Calif. Superior Ct., Martin County.)*
430.4. Bliss v. Quinn. (Calif. Superior Ct., Los Angeles.)*

And see cases at 30.

440. Attacks against academic loyalty oaths

440.1. Savelle and Nostrand v. U. of Wash., et al. (Thurston Cty. Superior Ct.)*
440.2. Lens, Pickus and Soglin v. Chicago Bd. of Education. (Ill. Sup. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 42, 59, 77. Set for oral argument in Sept. term.
440.3. Adler v. Bd. of Education. (NY State Commissioner of Education.) Proceeding by 4 teachers re right of Bd. of Education to dismiss employees for their refusal to inform on other teachers' political beliefs. Decison awaited.

Victor Rabinowitz, Esq., 25 Broad, NYC.

And see cases at 230, 460.

B. BASED ON CLAIM OF FIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE
Law review articles:

Alfred C. Clapp, Privilege against self-incrimination, in A symposium on the uniform rules of evidence, 10 Rutgers L. R. 541-573 (Spring, 1956);

The issue of Kentucky L. J. for Spring, 1956, has several articles and notes:

Roy Moreland, Historical Background and implications of the privilege against self-incrimination, 44 Kentucky L. J. 267-276;

Charles L. Calk, The privilege against self-incrimination—policy, pro and con, 44 Kentucky L. J. 304-317;

James R. Richardson, The investigating power of Congress—its scope and limitations, 44 Kentucky L. J. 318-332;

Robert G. Trimble, Self-incrimination and Congressional investigations, 44 Kentucky L. J. 323-342;

Criminal procedure—Private documents and the Fifth Amendment, 44 Kentucky L. J. 345-353;

Criminal procedure—Self-incrimination—Scientific tests of body substances as evidence, 44 Kentucky L. J. 353-361.

The issue of Marquette L. R. for Winter, 1955-56, has several articles:

John R. Connery, The right to silence, 39 Marquette L. R. 180-190;

Erwin N. Griswold, The Fifth Amendment today, 39 Marquette L. R. 191-204;

C. Dickerman Williams, The Fifth Amendment in noncriminal proceedings, 39 Marquette L. R. 205-217.

R. Carter Pittman, The Fifth Amendment: Yesterday, today and tomorrow, 42 A.B.A.J. 509 (June, 1956).

450. Refusal of honorable discharge from Armed Services

450.3. St. Helen v. Lt. Gen. Wyman, et al. (ND Calif.) For facts, see I DOCKET 19. April 3: Ct. held Pl. failed to join an indispensable party, Secy. of Army; action dismissed.
450.5. Marshall v. Brucker. (DC DC, #5036-55.)*

And see cases at 225.

455. Dismissal from government employment

455.1. Lerner v. Transit Authority. (#15187-1954 App. Div., 1st Dept., N. Y.) For facts, see I DOCKET 19. June 25: App. Div. (4-1) upheld dismissal for refusal to answer questions re political beliefs. Justice Beldock, dissenting: NY Security Risk Law not applicable to Transit Authority.

And see cases at 220.

460. Dismissal from academic employment

460.1. Opinion of Justices of Mass. Sup. Jud. Ct. For facts, see I DOCKET 20, 77.

Law review note in 34 Chicago-Kent L. R. 144-150 (Mar., 1956).

460.3. Slochower v. Bd. of Education. (U.S.S.C., #466.) (350 U. S. 551.) For facts, see I DOCKET 20, 42, 78. May 28: petition for rehearing denied.
460.5. Steinmetz v. Calif. State Bd. of Ed. (U.S.S.C., #288, Misc.) For facts, see I DOCKET 20. Apr. 23: certiorari denied.
460.6. Mass v. San Francisco Bd. of Education. (Calif. Supreme Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 42. Additional briefs submitted on effect of Slochower decision (460.3).
460.7. Schuyten v. Contra Costa Bd. of Education. (Calif. Dist. Ct. of App.)*
460.9. Board of Education v. Los Angeles Teachers. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 78. Dist. Ct. of Appeals decision final. (136 Cal. App. 2nd 513.)
- 98 -

460.10. St. John v. Orange Coast College. (Calif. Ct. of App., 4th Dist.)*

And see cases at 230, 440.

470. Dismissal from private employment

470.1. United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE), et al. v. General Electric Company. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 20, 78. Petition for certiorari filed Jy. 15.
470.2. Polumbaum v. United Press. (Sup. Ct., NY Co.)*

And see cases at 250.

475. Denial of unemployment compensation

475.3. Kilpatrick v. Bureau of Unemployment Compensation. (Cuyahoga Co. Common Pleas Ct., #669433.)*
475.4. Rose v. American Motors Corp. (Wis. Ind. Comm., #22801.) For facts, see I DOCKET 60. Jan. 31: Ind. Comm. affirmed appeal tribunal's decision granting compensation. Def. did not petition for review; benefits paid to Pl.

And see cases at 255.

480. Disbarment of attorneys

480.1. Sheiner v. Florida. (Dade County Circuit Ct., 11th Jud. Cir., #167991-H.) For facts, see I DOCKET 21, 43, 78. Cir. Judge Giblin, who presided at original hearing, has disqualified himself. July 2: hearing before Judge Pierson.

Law review article and notes:

W. E. Gray, The "Fifth Amendment" attorney, 2 South Texas L. J. 179-186 (Fall, 1955-56);

16 Louisiana L. R. 577-582 (Apr., 1956);

32 North Dakota L. R. 135-139 (Apr., 1956).

And see 260, 420, 560.

II. RIGHT TO FAIR PROCEDURES AND TRIAL—FOURTH, FIFTH, SIXTH, EIGHTH, AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS

510. Use of evidence illegally obtained—Fourth Amendment
511. Wiretapping

511.1. New York v. Broady. (NYC Genl. Sess. Ct.)*
511.3. People v. Cahan. For facts, see I DOCKET 24; for law review references, see I DOCKET 79.

Law review note in 28 Rocky Mountain L. R. 289-292 (Feb., 1956).

511.4. Wirin v. Parker, L. A. Police Chief. (Super. Ct., #590862.)*
511.5. Sugden v. U. S. (U.S.S.C., #555.) For facts, see I DOCKET 60. April 30: U.S.S.C. affirmed (6-3) CA 9 decision reversing dismissal of indictments by Dist. Ct.

Law review notes on decision below in:

24 Geo. Washington L. R. 478-480 (Mar., 1956);

69 Harvard L. R. 1135-1137 (Apr., 1956).

511.6. California v. Tarantino. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) (290 Pac. 2d 505.)*
515. Right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures—Fourth Amendment

515.1. Hinton v. Eastland, et al. (DC DC, Civ. #1167-56.)*
515.3. Levy v. Grant, et al. (SD Calif.)*
520. Right to indictment by grand jury of one's peers—Fifth Amendment
521. Challenge based on presence of Government employees
522. Challenge based mainly on absence of economic cross-section
523. Challenge based mainly on absence of members of minority groups
525. Grand jury procedures
527. Right to jury trial—Fifth Amendment

527.2. U. S. ex. rel. Covert v. Reid. (U.S.S.C., #701 1955 Term.) For facts, see I DOCKET 60. June 11: U.S.S.C. reversed (5-3, Frankfurter, J., indicating reservation), holding civilian accompanying Armed Forces overseas is subject to military trial.
527.3. U. S. ex rel. Krueger v. Kinsella, Warden. (U.S.S.C.) (137 F. Supp. 806.) For facts, see I DOCKET 80. June 11: U.S.S.C. affirmed (5-3, Frankfurter, J. indicating reservation), holding civilian accompanying Armed Forces overseas is subject to military trial.
530. Police violence and coerced confessions—Fifth Amendment

530.3. Admr. of Fields v. NYC & Applebaum. (Sup. Ct., Kings Co., NY, #2679/1952.)
530.6. Bustillos v. Sheriff Biscailuz. (Calif. Super. Ct., Los Angeles.)*
530.7. Rynders v. Hilton, et al. (Calif. Super. Ct., Los Angeles.) For facts, see I DOCKET 80. July 11: trial date.
540. Due process—Fifth Amendment

540.2. Hyun v. Landon. (U.S.S.C., #201.) (350 U.S. 990.) For facts, see I DOCKET 44, 80. May 7: petition for rehearing denied.
- 99 -

540.3. Nukk, et al. v. Shaughnessy. (SD NY.)*
540.5. U. S. v. Keller and Witkovich. (ND Ill., ED #55 CR 608, 607.) For facts, see I DOCKET 45 (at 570.5) and 80. Witkovich: June: Ct. dismissed indictment because questions Def. allegedly failed to answer are not relevant to his availability for deportation. Following analogy of criminal contempt proceedings for failure to answer grand jury or Congressional committee, Ct. ruled that pertinency of questions to subject matter may be determined from indictment itself. June 8: Gov't served notice of appeal to U.S.S.C. on sole issue of relevancy. Keller: trial date Nov. 26.
540.6. Sentner v. Colarclli. (ED Mo.)*
540.8. Re Diaz. (ND Calif., S. Div.) 1934: deportation proceeding commenced on charge of Communist Party membership. 1950: dismissed upon finding of non-membership or affiliation. 1953: case reopened; 1956: deportation order entered. Action to review and enjoin enforcement of order. Issues: (1) denial of due process and right to counsel because hearing held while Pet. confined at McNeil Island over his objection and request for attendance of his counsel; (2) disposition of charge in 1950 was res adjudicata. Pending.

George R. Andersen, Esq., 240 Montgomery St., San Francisco.

540.9. Re Vidolin. (Bd. of Immigration Appeals.) Non-citizen arrested 1953 on charge of former membership in Intl. Workers Order, organization affiliated with Communist Party and advocating violent overthrow of Gov't. May 15, 1956: B.I.A. ordered hearing reopened to permit Gov't to prove I.W.O. was affiliated with Communist Party and that Resp. had notice or knowledge of affiliation and of organization's improper purposes. May 31: Special Inquiry Officer in reopened hearing ordered proceedings terminated because Immigration Service did not have proof of these facts available.

George R. Andersen, Esq., 240 Montgomery St., San Francisco.

540.20. Bockler & Wife v. District Director. (ND Calif. S. Div.) Application for hearing on petitions for naturalization, pending for 5 yrs. before Immigration Service, which had refused to bring petitions before the court. Pets. claim delay by Service constitutes denial of due process in the absence of evidence of any intention by Service to present applications favorably or otherwise to Ct. in near future. Application pending.

Lawrence Speiser, Esq., A.C.L.U. of N. Cal., 503 Market St., San Francisco.

And see cases at 330.

545. Due process—actions against recanting witnesses

545.1. U.S. v. Natvig. (CA DC.) For facts, see I DOCKET 23. June 21: conviction affirmed.
545.2. Matusow v. U. S. (CA 5.) (229 F. 2d 335.)*
545.3. U. S. v. Matusow. (SD NY.) For facts, see I DOCKET 23. July 9: trial date.

And see C. P. v. S.A.C.B. (140.1).

550. Due process—right to acquittal/new trial based on perjured testimony, new facts
See C. P. v. S.A.C.B. (140.1).
550.1. U. S. v. Zuker. (Immigration Service, Cleveland Office.)*

And see Lamb (270.2).

550.3. Salemi v. Denno. (CA 2.) For facts, see I DOCKET 23, 61, 80. June 6: heard and submitted.
550.4. Illinois v. Miller. (Ill. Sup. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 23, 61. After Def. won right to new trial, State nolle prossed the indictment.
550.5. Landeros v. New Jersey. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 80-81. June 4: cert. denied "without prejudice to an application for a writ of habeas corpus in an appropriate U.S. Dist. Ct."
552. Right to speedy and public trial—Sixth Amendment
555. Confrontation of witnesses—Sixth Amendment

555.2. Jay v. Boyd. (U.S.S.C. # 1955 Term.) June 11: U.S.S.C. (5-4) upheld Gov't's use of "confidential information" in denying suspension of deportation to noncitizen charged with Communist Party membership 1935-40. Immigration hearing officer had found Pet. would be eligible for suspension (because Pet. of good moral character, his deportation would work "extreme hardship" on himself and family), but for such confidential information. Reed, J. for majority; Warren, C. J., Black, Frank-furter, Douglas, JJ., dissenting. Black, J.: "The core of our constitutional system is that individual liberty must never be taken away by shortcuts, that fair trials in independent courts must never be dispensed with. That system is in grave danger. This case emphasizes that fact. Prosecution of any sort on anonymous information is still too dangerous, just as it was when Trajan rejected it nearly 2,000 years ago. Those who prize liberty would do well to ponder this."
560. Indirect restrictions on right to counsel—Sixth Amendment

560.1. Re Gladstein. (DC Hawaii.)*
560.2. Re Bouslog. (CA 9, #15,109.) For facts, see I DOCKET 24, 45, 61, 81. May 23: CA 9 granted motion to stay suspension of license pending appeal (2-1). May 28: Sup. Ct. of Terr. of Hawaii returned license pursuant to order.

And see 560.2a.

560.2a. Re Bouslog. (DC Hawaii, Misc. #649.) For facts, see I DOCKET 81. Motion to vacate order of suspension and to
- 100 -

hold matter in abeyance based on stay order of CA 9 in 560.2 and reinstatement as practitioner by Hawaii Sup. Ct. pending.
560.3. Re Braverman. (U.S.S.C.) (121 A. 2d 473.) For facts, see I DOCKET 24, 45, 61, 81. Petition for certiorari filed June 8 raising issues: (1) unconstitutionality of disbarment for political associations; (2) conviction under Smith Act conspiracy section unreviewed by U.S.S.C., which has now agreed to hear similar cases (Yates 110.1, Mesarosh 110.5); (3) denial of due process.

And see 560.3a.

560.3a. Re Braverman. (DC Md.)*
560.4. Cammer v. U. S. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 24, 61-2, 81. Cite: 350 U.S. 399.
560.6. Shibley v. U. S. (U.S.S.C.) Pet.-lawyer in 1952 represented a member of U.S. Marines charged with minor offense, and won reversal of conviction on appeal. During proceedings, Pet. wrote letter to U.S. Marine Corps Commandant making serious accusations against Corps officials, including failure to appoint available military counsel, destruction and falsification of records, procurement of perjured testimony, coercion of witnesses. Pet. subpoenaed as witness before Ct. of Inquiry convened by commanding general to investigate these charges. After testifying for several days, during which time Pet. refused to answer various questions on various grounds, including lawyer-client privilege, Pet. believed he was excused as witness. 3 days later, without notice, Ct. of Inquiry issued warrant of attachment for Pet., had him arrested and forcibly taken to U.S. Air Base, charged him with contempt. Pet. then charged and tried for contempt in U.S. Dist. Ct.; Ct. acquitted on 3 counts; jury acquitted on 3 counts; later dismissed. Pet. then indicted for felonies: conspiracy, burglary, receiving stolen property, theft of seventh carbon copy of transcript of hearings before Ct. of Inquiry (consisting mainly of Pet.'s own testimony.) At trial, Gov't witnesses testified that one Thompson had taken copy of transcript and mailed it to Washington newspaper columnist; Gov't attempted to link Pet. with this action. After trial by jury, Pet. convicted; sentence: 3 yrs. CA 9 affirmed. Petition for certiorari to be filed in U.S.S.C.

Amicus brief filed by Members of Bar, by Myron G. Ehrlich, Esq. (Brig. Gen. USMC, Ret.) 207 Security Bldg., Fresno, Calif.; Myron G. Ehrlich, Esq. (Capt. USNR), 416 Fifth St. NW, Washington.

And see cases at 260, 420, 480.

565. Right to counsel—Sixth amendment

565.1. Henderson v. Michigan. (U.S.S.C. #590 Misc., Oct. Term, 1955.) For facts, see I DOCKET 81. June 4: cert. denied. Petition for habeas corpus to be filed in US Dist. Ct.
567. Equal opportunity for appellate review—Fifth Amendment

567.1. Griffin and Crenshaw v. Illinois. (U.S.S.C., Oct. Term 1955, #95.) After conviction for armed robbery, Pets. applied to court for transcript of record in order to prosecute appeal, alleging they were unable to pay therefor. Motion denied without hearing; Ill. Sup. Ct. affirmed. Under Ill. law, only indigent Defs. sentenced to death are provided with free transcripts. U.S.S.C. vacated judgment. Court held: where right of appeal exists, due process and equal protection clauses of 14th Amendment protect persons against discrimination; destitute Defs. must be provided with equal opportunity for appellate review with those who can afford it, and if such review requires trial transcript, it must be provided.

Charles A. Horsky, Esq., Union Trust Bldg., Washington, D.C.

570. Excessive bail/parole conditions—Eighth Amendment

570.1. Ohio v. Lumer. (Cleve. Muni. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 24. April 17-18: trial on charge of illegal possession of narcotics. After Gov't's chemist-witness himself testified Def.'s pills contained no narcotics, Def. acquitted.
570.2. U. S. v. Stein. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 24, 81. Def. decided to appeal from bail of $75,000, despite CA 9 affirmance of conviction on charge of harboring Communist fugitive. May 28: U.S.S.C. Justice Douglas reduced bail to $10,000 because question in appeal, research and seizure of Def.'s possessions without warrant, is "important" and "substantial".
110.14. U. S. v. Russo, et al. (DC Mass.) For facts, see I DOCKET 89. May 30: Judge Aldrich set bail for each Def. at $10,000. June Aldrich denied Defs'. motion for reduction of bail.
201.5. U. S. v. Noto. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 45, 62. Apr. 23: U.S.S.C., per curiam, reversed judgment on bail question, remanded to Dist. Ct. for order enlarging Def. on $10,000 bail.
201.9. U. S. v. Hellman. (DC Mont.) For facts, see I DOCKET 72. Fedl. Judge Murray originally set bail at $20,000. Apr. 13: bail reduced to $5,000, following precedents set by CA 9. Judge Murray, referring to a statement issued by J. Edgar Hoover of the F.B.I. concerning Def., "condemn[ed] in the strongest terms possible the issuance of statements by police officials or investigating officers with reference to the facts of a case, presenting them to the public in an effort, apparently, to try the case outside of court."
570.3. See 540.3.
570.4. See 540.4.
570.5. See 540.5.
580. Cruel and unusual punishment and treatment—Eighth Amendment

580.2. Wisconsin v. Horowitz, alias Brown. (Milw. Cty. Muni. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 25. Motion to dismiss denied. July 9: trial date.
580.3. DeSilva v. TWA. (SD NY, #99198.)*
- 101 -

585. Extradition resulting in cruel and unusual punishment—Eighth Amendment
Law review article:

Herbert O. Reid, Interstate rendition and illegal return of fugitives, 2 Howard L. J. 76-93 (Jan., 1956).


585.2. In re Willic Reid. (Felony Ct., Manhattan.)*
585.4. People of New York ex rel. Crenshaw v. Ruthazer, Warden. (Sup. Ct. N.Y. City, #4025.)*
585.7. Ohio ex rel. Saunders v. Warden, State of Mississippi. (Ohio Gov. Frank Lausche.) 1954: Negro Air Force Lt. Saunders arrested after minor auto collision which occurred while companion drove his car. Charge: drunken driving; sentence: to be served on chain gang. Miss. Sup. Ct. affirmed conviction. Saunders escaped to Ohio. June 21, 1956: A.C.L.U. petitioned Ohio Gov. to deny Mississippi's request for extradition. Pending.

Stanley U. Robinson, Esq., Columbus, Ohio, for A.C.L.U.

III. EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS—CIVIL RIGHTS—FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

Law review articles:

Special issue on Integration, suffrage and civil rights in XVI Lawyers Guild Rev. (Summer, 1956) contains the following articles and notes:

Mitchell Franklin, The unconstitutionality of interposition, XVI Law. Guild Rev. 45;

Laurent Frantz, The civil rights crisis in the South: Bases for federal action, XVI Law. Guild Rev. 61;

Jessica Davidson and Ann Fagan Ginger, "With all deliberate speed": A note on the progress toward integration, XVI Law. Guild Rev. 67;

Bella S. Abzug, Legislative proposals in the South against integration, XVI Law. Guild Rev. 83.

Ernst Borinski, The emerging case law in the segregation decisions of the Supreme Court of May 17, 1954, and May 31, 1955: Its crystallization and trends, 17 Univ. of Pittsburgh L. R. 416-436 (Spring, 1956).

Eugene Cook and William I. Potter, The school segregation cases: Opposing the opinion of the Supreme Court, 42 A.B.A.J. 313 (April, 1956);

George W. Stumberg, The school segregation cases: Supporting the opinion of the Supreme Court, 42 A.B.A.J. 318 (April, 1956).

Legal articles:

The issue of the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science for March, 1956 (Vol. 304), is devoted to "Racial desegregation and integration". The following articles contain discussions of legal interest:

Rayford W. Logan, The United States Supreme Court and the segregation issue, 304 Annals 10-16;

James M. Nabrit, Jr., Legal inventions and the desegregation process, 304 Annals 35-43;

Elmer A. Carter, Policies and practices of discrimination commissions, 304 Annals 62-77.

A. IN ELECTIONS
Law review note:

Use of literacy tests to restrict the right to vote, 31 Notre Dame Lawyer 251-264 (Mar., 1956).

B. IN EDUCATION
610. Public elementary and high schools
Law review note:

Legal sanctions to enforce desegregation in the public schools: The contempt power and the Civil Rights Act, 65 Yale L. J. 630-659 (Apr., 1956).


610.1. Brown v. Bd. of Education. (DC Kan.)*
610.2. Davis v. County School Bd. (Prince Edward Co., Va.) For facts, see I DOCKET 26. April 23: Pls. moved for ct. order requiring Def.-Bd. to make "prompt and reasonable start" toward racial integration in public schools. Pending.
610.3. Briggs v. Elliott. (Clarendon Co., S. C.)*
610.4. Clemons, et al. v. Bd. of Ed. of Hillsboro, Ohio. (CA 6, #12494.) For facts, see I DOCKET 26, 62, 82. April: Pls. admitted to Def.-schools on non-segregated basis.
610.7. Burleigh, et al v. Weakley, et al. (CA 9.) For facts, see I DOCKET 26. Case settled by stipulation at same time as Romero (610.6) described at I DOCKET 46.
610.8. Hall, et al. v. St. Helena Parish School Bd., et al. (ED La., Bat. Rge. Div., Civ. #1068.)*
610.9. Bush, Jr., et al. v. Orleans Parish School Bd., et al. (CA 5.) For facts, see I DOCKET 27, 46, 82. Appeal pending. May 28: U.S.S.C. denied Def.-Bd.'s motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus testing decision by single Dist. Ct. judge rather than 3-judge statutory ct.
610.10. Matthews v. Launius, Pres., Bearden School Dist., et al. (WD Ark., El Dorado Div., #570.)*

Law review note in 10 Arkansas L. R. 229-234 (Spring, 1956).

610.12. Covington, et al. v. Edwards, Supt. of Schools of Montgomery Co., et al. (MD N. Caro., Rockingham Div., Civ. #323.) For facts, see I DOCKET 27, 46, 62. April: Fedl. Judge Hayes held: 1) N.C. constitutional proviso requiring separate schools unconstitutional; 2) local school bd. members are state officials and their action is state action; 3) not necessary to convene 3-judge ct. to hear case.
- 102 -

610.13. Dobbins v. Virginia. (Va. Ct. of App., #4252.)*
610.15. Brown, et al. v. Rippey, et al. (CA 5.) For facts, see I DOCKET 46. May 25: CA 5 vacated and reversed Dist. Ct. decision dismissing action; case remanded to Dist. Ct. for proceedings re Pet.'s allegation of segregation in Dallas public schools.
610.16. Kelly, et al. v. Bd. of Education. (MD Tenn., Nash. Div., Civ. #2094.)*
610.17. McSwain, et al v. County School Bd. of Anderson County, Tenn., et al. (ED Tenn., Civ. #1555.)*
610.18. Aaron, et al. v. Cook, Atlanta Bd. of Education, et al. (formerly listed as Jean, et al. v. Atlanta Bd. of Education.) ND Ga., Civ. #3923.) For facts, see I DOCKET 47. May 16: case dismissed for lack of prosecution.
610.19. Corbin, et al. v. County School Bd. of Pulaski County. Va., et al. (WD Va.)*
610.20. Banks, et al. v. Izard, Bd. of Educ. Pres., Van Buren, et al. (DC Ark., Ft. Smith, Civ. #1236.) For facts, see I DOCKET 47. March: Fedl. Judge Miller ordered Def.-Bd. to "make prompt and reasonable" start toward integration and report "plans and progress" by Aug. 15.
610.21. Dunn, et al. v. Bd. of Educ. of Greenbrier Co., et al. (SD W. Va., Civ. #1693.)*
610.22. Taylor, et al. v. Bd. of Educ. of Raleigh Co., et al. (SD W. Va., Civ. #159.)*
610.23. Jackson v. Rawden. (CA 5.) For facts, see I DOCKET 63. 83. June 7: heard and submitted; decision awaited.
610.24. Avery, et al. v. Randel, et al. (CA 5.) For facts, see I DOCKET 63. April 3: Ct. dismissed complaint because Def.-Bd. disclosed plans to desegregate completely by Sept. 1956 or Jan. 1957. Appeal pending.
610.25. Moore v. Harry, et al. (DC Md., #8615.)*
610.27. Carson, et al. v. Bd. of Educ. of McDowell Co. (N. C. Sup. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 63, 83. May: N. C. Sup. Ct. affirmed lower ct. decision; upheld constitutionality of 1955 local school assignment law and ruled that Negroes seeking to enter white public schools must act individually and not as a class under the statute. Pls. appealing to US DC.
610.28. Aaron, et al. v. Cooper, Pres., Bd. of Trustees, Little Rock Ind. School Dist. 316, et al. (ED Ark., W. Div., Civ. #3113.) For facts, see I DOCKET 83. Def.-Bd., before being sued, had announced its intentions to desegregate, starting at high school level in 1957 and working down thru grades. Fedl. Judge Miller wrote to Pl.'s attys. that the issue "will be whether the proposed plan is sufficient to meet the requirement of a prompt and reasonable start" toward desegregation. May 5: Def.-attys. took depositions from pres. of local and state N.A.A.C.P. after Judge Miller overruled Pl.'s objections thereto. Presidents said no documents available re N.A.A.C.P. meeting at which vote was taken on bringing suit and declined to state number of N.A.A.C.P. members.
610.29. Anderson, et al. v. Bd. of Educ., Mercer Co., W. Va., et al. (SD W. Va., Bluefield Div., Civ. #437.)*
610.30. Martin, et al. v. Bd. of Educ., McDowell Co., W. Va. (SD W. Va., Bluefield Div., #450.) For facts, see I DOCKET 83. June: No order entered by ct.; case being held as pending until desegregation has been accomplished.
610.31. Atkins, et al. v. School Bd. of Newport News, Va., et al. (ED Va., Newport News Div., Civ. #489.) Suit by Pl.-Negro children for admission on integrated basis to schools operated by Def.-Bd. filed April 26. Pending.

W. Hale Thompson, Esq., 611 25th St. and Philip S. Walker, Esq., 2411 Jefferson Ave., both of Newport News, Va.; Spottswood W. Robinson, III, Esq., 623 North 3rd St. and Oliver W. Hill, Esq., 118 East Leigh St., both of Richmond, Va.

610.32. Davis, Jr., et al. v. E. Baton Rouge Parish School Bd., et al. (ED La., Baton Rouge Div., Civ. #1662.) Suit by Pl.-Negro children for interlocutory injunction requiring Def.-Bd. to admit Pls. to school on integrated basis.

Alex L. Pitcher, Jr., Esq., 1501 E. Boulevard, Baton Rouge; A. P. Tureaud and A. M. Tureaud, Jr., Esqs., 1821 Orleans Ave., New Orleans; U. Simpson Tate, Esq., 2600 Flora St., Dallas, Texas; Thurgood Marshall and Robert L. Carter, Esqs., N.A.A.C.P., 107 W. 43rd St., NYC.

610.33. Robinson, et al. v. Bd. of Educ. of St. Mary's Co., Md., et al. (DC Md., Civ. #8780.) Suit by Pl.-Negro children for admission on integrated bases to schools operated by Def.-Bd. Pending.

Tucker R. Dearing, Esq., 740 N. Gay St., Robert B. Watts, Esq., 1520 E. Monument St., Juanita J. Mitchell, Esq., 1239 Druid Hill Ave., all of Baltimore, Md.; Jack Greenberg, Esq., N.A.A.C.P., 107 W. 43rd St., NYC.

610.34. Jackson, et al. v. Buchanan, Members of Dela. Bd. of Educ., and Bd. of Trustees, Christiana School Dist., et al. (DC Dela., Civ. #1815.) Suit by Pl.-Negro children seeking injunctive relief to restrain enforcement of administrative orders, rules, regulations, customs, practices and usages pursuant to which Pls. are segregated in schooling because of race, color and ancestry and to require admittance on non-discriminatory basis, with all deliberate speed. Pending.

Louis L. Redding, Esq., 923 Market St., Suite 300, Wilmington, Dela.

610.35. Evans, et al. v. Buchanan, Members of Dela. Bd. of Educ., and Bd. of Educ., Milford Special School Dist., et al. (DC Dela., Civ. #1817.) Facts and issues similar to Jackson (610.34). Pending.

Louis L. Redding, Esq., 923 Market St., Suite 300, Wilmington, Dela.

610.36. Coverdale, et al. v. Buchanan, Members of Dela. Bd. of Educ., and Bd. of Educ., Greenwood School Dist., et al. (DC Dela., Civ. #1818.) Facts and issues similar to Jackson (610.34). Pending.

Louis L. Redding, Esq., 923 Market St., Suite 300, Wilmington, Dela.

610.37. Holloman, et al. v. Buchanan, Members of Dela. Bd. of Educ. and Bd. of Educ., Milton School Dist., et al. (DC Dela. Civ. #1819.) Facts and issues similar to Jackson (610.34). Pending.,

Louis L. Redding, Esq., 923 Market St., Suite 300, Wilmington, Dela.

- 103 -

610.38. Crcighton, et al. v. Buchanan, Members of Dela. Bd. of Educ., and Bd. of Educ., Laurel Special School Dist., et al. (DC Dela., Civ. #1820.) Facts and issues similar to Jackson (610.34). Pending.

Louis L. Redding, Esq., 923 Market St., Suite 300, Wilmington, Dela.

610.39. Denson, et al. v. Buchanan, Members of Dela. Bd. of Educ., and Bd. of Educ., Seaford Special School Dist., et al. (DC Dela., Civ. #1821.) Facts and issues similar to Jackson (610.34). Pending.

Louis L. Redding, Esq., 923 Market St., Suite 300, Wilmington, Dela.

610.40. Oliver, Jr., et al. v. Buchanan, Members of Dela. Bd. of Educ., and Bd. of Trustees, John M. Clayton School Dist., et al. (DC Dela., Civ. #1822.) Facts and issues similar to Jackson (610.34). Pending.

Louis L. Redding, Esq., 923 Market St., Suite 300, Wilmington, Dela.

610.41. Staten, et al. v. Buchanan, Members of Dela. Bd. of Educ., and Bd. of Educ., Milford Special School Dist., et al. (DC Dela., Civ. #1817.) Facts and issues similar to Jackson (610.34). Pending.

Louis L. Redding, Esq., 923 Market St., Suite 300, Wilmington, Dela.

610.42. Angel, et al. v. La. State Bd. of Educ., et al. (ED La., Baton Rouge Div., Civ. #1658.) Suit by Negro-Pls. for admission, on integrated basis, to five state-operated trade schools. Pending on Pls'. application for interlocutory injunction.

A. P. Tureaud and A. M. Tureaud, Jr., Esqs., 1821 Orleans Ave., New Orleans; U. Simpson Tate, Esq., 2600 Flora St., Dallas, Texas; Thurgood Marshall and Robert L. Carter, Esqs., N.A.A.C.P., 107 W. 43rd St., NYC.

610.43. Shedd, et al. v. Bd. of Educ., Logan Co., W. Va. (SD W. Va., Huntington Div., Civ. #833.) Suit by Negro-Pls. for admission to integrated schools. By agreement of parties, desegregation of some elementary grades to begin at beginning of school year, Sept. 1956 and complete desegregation of jr. and sr. high schools when there is room for more pupils or at beginning of second semester of school year 1956-57.

T. G. Nutter, Esq., 609½ Virginia St., East, and Willard L. Brown, Esq., Brown Bldg., Washington and Shrewsbury Sts., both of Charleston, W. Va.

610.51. County School Bd. of Hanover Co. v. Shelton. (Va. S. Ct. of App., #4545.) For facts, see I DOCKET 27. June 18: Va. S. Ct. unanimously reversed trial ct., held: Pl.-Bd. of Educ. could now sell school construction bonds which were approved by voters prior to U.S.S.C. decision in Brown (610.1). (Va. has not authorized desegregation.)
610.55. 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 Counsel of Arkansas, unincorp. assn. (CA 8, #15510.) For facts, see I DOCKET 47, 63, 83. May 9: CA denied Pl.-Appellee's motion to dismiss Def.'s appeal. Brief to be filed during Summer; case continued to Sept. 1956 session.
610.56. Brewer, et al. v. Howell, Bd. of Educ. Pres., Hoxic. (Ark. Chancery.) For facts, see I DOCKET 47, 83. March 3: Lawrence Co. grand jury criticized Def.-Bd. of Educ. for its handling of funds, but returned no indictments.
610.57. Adams, et al. v. Le Blanc, La. Atty. Genl., et al. (La. Sup. Ct.)*
610.58. Riddle v. Bd. of Co. Commrs. of Wagoner Co. (ED Okla.)*
610.59. Cook, Atty. Genl . v. Valdosta Board of Educ. (Lowndes Co. Sup. Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 63. June: case dismissed.
610.60. Jordan v. Day (formerly listed as Jordan v. Bd. of Elections.) (Cir. Ct., Richmond, #B-2851.) For facts, see I DOCKET 64.
610.61. Nash v. Sharper, N.A.A.C.P. Sumter Chapter, et al. (Sumter Co. Ct. of Com. Pleas, S. C.)*
610.62. Grubbs, et al. v. Gov. Chandler, et al. (Franklin Cir. Ct., Ky.) Suit by 110 Pls. to cause Def. Gov. and other Ky. officials to enforce compliance with Ky. laws forbidding racial integration in the public schools.
615. Suits by Negro teachers in connection with integration

615.1. Wise v. Gasaway, et al. (ED Ark., CA #2736.)*
615.2. Brooks, et al. v. Bd. of Educ., et al. (ED Mo. N. Div., #551.) For facts, see I DOCKET 64, 84. Cause set for trial May 30; reset several times to Aug. 20, 1956.

And see 650.

620. Colleges and universities

620.1. Florida ex rel. Hawkins v. Bd. of Control of Fla. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 27, 64. April 23: U.S.S.C. denied petition for rehearing. May: hearing held before State judge named as Comm. by Fla. S. Ct. to gather facts re effects of Pl.'s admission. Def.-Univ. presented results of questionnaire submitted to parents and students showing that "violence and trouble" would ensue if Pl. admitted. Ct. passed testimony on to S. Ct. without recommendation.
620.2. Tureaud v. Bd. of Supervisors of La. State Univ. and Agric. and Mech. Coll., et la. (U.S.S.C., #777.) For facts, see I DOCKET 27, 47, 84. May 7: Def.'s petition for writ of certiorari denied.
620.3. Williams, et al. v. Prather, et al. (WD La., #5000S.)*
620.6. Whitmore, et al. v. Stilwell, et al. (DC Tex., Texarkana Div.)*
620.7. Lucy v. Adams, et al. (ND Ala. W. Div., Civ. #652.) For facts, see I DOCKET 28, 48, 64, 84. Pl.'s motion pending to modify last decree of Ct. to make its decree for Pl.'s entrance effective in Sept. 1956, Def.-Univ.-Bd.'s order to contrary notwithstanding.
620.8. Booker, et al. v. State of Tennessee Bd. of Educ., et al. (CA 6, #12,775.) For facts, see I DOCKET 28, 48, 64, 84. (U.S.S.C. Misc. #692.) May 28: U.S.S.C. denied motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus to compel convening of 3-judge ct.; trial ct. had correctly decided that no constitutional question was involved since decision in Brown (610.1).
- 104 -

620.8a. Davidson, et al. v. Coope, et al. (formerly listed as Tennessee Federation for Constitutional Government v. Tenn. State Treas.). (Davidson Co. Ct., Nashville, Rule #77014.) For facts, see I DOCKET 64. May 7: Tenn. Chanc. Wade held Tenn. laws and constitutional provisions requiring segregation unconstitutional under Brown (610.1). Pl.-pres. of Tenn. Bd. for Constitutional Gov't will appeal.

Advocate Gen'l Nat. Tipton and Solicitor Gen'l Allison B. Humphreys, Supreme Ct. Bldg., Nashville, Tenn.

620.12. Ward v. Regents, Univ. System of Georgia, et al. ND Ga., Civ. #355.)*
620.13. Jackson, et al. v. McDonald, Pres., Lamar State College of Technology, et al. (DC Tex., Beaumont Div., Civ. #3172.) Pl.-Negro students suing for admission to Def.-college. Def., in answer, suggested that 17 public colleges are integrated and state should continue to provide some segregated colleges. Pending.

Theodore R. Johns and Elmo R. Willard, III, Esqs., 2370 Washington Blvd., Beaumont, Texas; U. Simpson Tate, Esq., 2600 Flora St., Dallas, Texas; Robert L. Carter and Thurgood Marshall, Esqs., N.A.A.C.P., 107 W. 43rd St., NYC.

C. IN HOUSING
630. Public

630.2. Heyward v. Savannah Housing Authority, et al. (CA 5, #16040.) For facts, see I DOCKET 28, 48. Hearing date: October, 1956.
630.4. Watts v. Housing Authority of Birmingham District. (ND Ala. S. Div., Civ. #7690.)*
630.5. Askew, et al. v. Benton Harbor Housing Commission, et al. (WD Mich., S. Div., Civ. #2512.)*
640. Private

640.3. S. End Fed'l Svgs. & Loan v. Roan, Braden and Wade. (Jeff. Cir. Ct., Chanc. Branch, 2nd Div., Ky.)*

And see Braden (130.3).

640.4. Ming v. Horgan, et al. (Calif. Super. Ct., Sacramento Co., #97130.)*
640.5. Beddoe v. Southeast Realty Bd., et al. (Calif. Super. Ct., South Gate.) For facts, see I DOCKET 85. Demurrer overruled. Trial date to be set.
D. IN EMPLOYMENT
Law review note:

Pennsylvania Fair Employment Practice Act, 17 Univ. of Pittsburgh, L. R. 438-453 (Spring, 1956).


650.1. Syres and Warrick and Local Union No. 254, Oil Workers Intl. Union v. Oil Workers Intl. Union, Local No. 23, and Gulf Oil Corp. *
650.2. Complaint against Esso Standard Oil Co., et al. (Before sub-comm. of President's Comm. on Government Contracts.)*
650.3. Jeanpierre v. State Commission Against Discrimination. (NY Co. Sup. Ct., Spec. Term. Pt. I.)*

And see 615.

E. IN PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS
660. Recreational facilities

660.1. Dist. of Col. v. Central Amusement Co., Inc. (D.C. Muni. Ct. of App.) For facts, see I DOCKET 29, 48. April 3: Ct. of App. affirmed judgment against Def. by Muni. Ct. Crim. Div. May 18: CA DC denied Def.'s petition for allowance by an appeal.
660.3. Fletcher v. Coney Island, Inc. (Ohio S. Ct., #34569.) For facts, see I DOCKET 29. April 18: S. Ct. (5-2) affirmed judgment of Ct. of App. that courts cannot enjoin violations of state Civil Rights Act.
660.4. Tate, et al. v. Dept. of Conservation and Development. (CA 4.) For facts, see I DOCKET 29, 49, 85. Cite: 231 F. 2d 615.
660.5. Byars, et al. v. White, Mayor of San Antonio, et al. (DC Tex., Civ. #2109.)*
660.6. Castle Hill Beach Club v. Arbury. (N. Y. App. Div.) (150 NY Supp. 2d 367.) For facts, see I DOCKET 30, 65. April 18: App. Div. unanimously affirmed NY Sup. Ct. decision.
660.7. Leeper v. Charlotte Park and Recreation Comm. For facts, see I DOCKET 30, 65, 85.

Law review notes in:

54 Michigan L. R. 698-701 (Mar., 1956);

30 St. Johns L. R. 285-287 (May, 1956);

104 Univ. of Pennsylvania L. R. 421-424 (Dec., 1955);

17 Univ. of Pittsburgh L. R. 478-483 (Spring, 1956);

13 Washington & Lee L. R. 28-37 (1956, No. 1).

660.8. Crutcher v. Hayes. (MD Tenn., Civ. #1344.) For facts, see I DOCKET 30, 65. May 1: petition for rehearing filed by 12 citizens alleging that Jan. 25 decision ordering desegregation of golf courses was improper because 1) case should have been heard by 3-judge ct.; 2) park bd. failed to interpose a number of defenses and exceeded authority in deciding to desegregate; 3) by opening courses to both races, park comm'rs were individually liable for misappropriation of park funds.
660.11. Odom, et al. v. Berin dba Steak Bar, et al. (Denver Superior Ct., CA 5-1416.) For facts, see I DOCKET 30. March: action dismissed after Defs. made reasonable settlement for damages to Pls.
660.15. McClain, by guardian ad litem v. City of S. Pasadena. (Calif. Super. Ct. for Los Angeles Co., Pasadena Branch.) For facts, see I DOCKET 65. Trial ct. decided in favor of Def. on ground that City has right to restrict use of its facilities to residents. Appeal to be taken.
660.17. Moorman v. Morgan, et al. (Ky. Ct. of App.)*
- 105 -

660.18. Clark, et al. v. S. C. Forestry Commission. (CA 4.) For facts, see I DOCKET 66, 85. April 19: Dist. Ct. dismissed action. May 18: notice of appeal to CA 4 filed.
660.21. North Carolina v. Simkins, et al. (Super. Ct., Guilford County, N. C., #4641.)*
660.22. Illinois v. Kavadas. (Lee Co. Ct., Ill.) Def.-restaurant owner charged with violating Ill. Crim. Code, Chap. 38, Sec. 1, para. 125 in that he, through his agent, refused to serve food to two Negroes who entered his restaurant with 3 white companions. April 30: in trial without jury, Ct. found Def. not guilty because testimony failed to establish that Def. had given his employees instructions concerning the giving or denying of service to Negroes. But Ct. added, off the record, that controversy could have been eliminated if Pls. had been served "as they are all respectable citizens of our community."
670. Transportation

670.1. Flemming v. S. Carolina Electric and Gas Co. (U.S.S.C.) For facts, see I DOCKET 30, 66, 85. April 23: U.S.S.C. unanimously dismissed Def.'s appeal because it was premature. Case returned to Dist. Ct. June 13: Fedl. Judge Timmerman dismissed case a second time, holding bus driver had acted under segregation statutes valid at the time and CA 4 decision outlawing segregation could not apply retroactively.
670.. Virginia v. Ritter. (Richmond Hustings Ct.) For facts, see I DOCKET 30, 66. Case has been continued indefinitely.
670.5. City of Montgomery v. Parks. (Ala. Ct. of App.) For facts, see I DOCKET 66, 86. May 9: Cir. Judge Jones directed Montgomery City Bus Lines to abandon its integration policy (based on erroneous conclusions from U.S.S.C. action in Flemming, 670.1), holding state and city segregation statutes constitutional.

And see Browder (670.6), Rev. King (40.3).

670.6. Browder, et al. v. Gayle, et al. (MD Ala., Civ #1147.) For facts, see I DOCKET 86. June 5: 3-judge ct. ruled (2-1) state and city statutes requiring segregation on Montgomery city buses unconstitutional. June 19: Ct. issued injunction to stop enforcement of said laws, but suspended it pending Def's. appeal from ruling.

Fred D. Gray and Charles D. Langford, Esqs., 113 Monroe St., Montgomery, Alabama.

And see Parks (670.5), Rev. King (40.3).

670.8. Fitzgerald v. Pan American World Airways, Inc. (SD NY, Civ. #97-356.) (229 F. 2d 499).*
670.9. Evers, et al. v. Dwyer, Comm's of Public Service of City of Memphis, et al. (WD Tenn., Civ. #2903.) Negro-Pls. brought suit to test constitutionality of state statutes requiring segregation on intra-state buses. Pending.

H. T. Lockard, Esq., 322½ Beale St., Memphis, Tennessee; Thurgood Marshall and Robert Carter, Esqs., N.A.A.C.P., 107 W. 43rd St., NYC.

670.10. Tallahassee v. Jakes and Patterson. May 29: 2 co-eds at Florida A & M University for Negroes arrested and charged with placing themselves in a position to cause a riot by refusing to move to the rear of a segregated bus. There were only two seats in front when they boarded. They had offered to leave the bus if their fares were refunded. Released on $25 bail. Boycott of bus system instituted by Negro community. May 30: charges dropped; boycott continued.
670.11. Miami v. Reid. (Miami Police Ct.) June 12: Def.-organizer in N.A.A.C.P. Miami Youth Council arrested after he refused to move to rear of city bus to make way for a white patron. Def. charged with tending to create a breach of the peace. Pending.

G. E. Graves, Jr., Esq., Miami, Florida.

680. Miscellaneous facilities

680.2. Davis v. Brownell, et al. (CA DC.)*
F. IN FAMILY MATTERS
690. Adoption and custody

690.3. Smith v. Smith. (Calif. Dist. Ct. of App., #15881.)*
690.4. Adoption of Hildy Ellis. (Mass. Sup. Judicial Ct.)*
692. Marriage and Divorce
G. IN PROTECTION OF LIFE AND PROPERTY
695. Actions under Federal Civil Rights Act
696. Actions under State statutes to suppress mob violence
IV. RIGHTS OF CITIZENSHIP—FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

700. Citizenship status
710. Loss of citizenship by native-born Americans

710.1. Trop v. Dulles. (CA 2.) For facts, see I DOCKET 87. May 31: Judgment for Def. in ED NY. Appeal pending.
701.2. Dias-Estrata v. Press. (SD Calif.) For facts, see I DOCKET 86. Ct. reserved judgment on Gov't's motion to dismiss amended complaint.
710.3. Matter of Bean. (Bd. of Immigration Appeals.) Exclusion proceeding. Respondent, born in U.S., left with family for Mexico in 1953. Forcibly shoved over the border by Mexican police to U.S. Immigration officers at Brownsville, Texas, he was held as alien "applying" for entry to U.S. Hearing deferred while Resp. charged and convicted of failing to report for induction in armed forces. After serving 3-yr. sentence, exclusion hearing reopened, Govt. contending Resp. had expatriated himself