522. Suits to enforce integration
||Matthews et al. v. Launius, et al.
(Bearden Dist.) (WD Ark., Civ., #570.)*
||Aaron, et al. v. McKinley, et al.
(Little Rock.) (ED Ark., W Div., #3113.)*
||Dove v. Parham.
(Dollarway School Dist.) (CA 8.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 82, 108, V DOCKET 16. Feb. 19, 1960: DC held Pl.-Negro pupils could not transfer to allwhite school spring term 1960, ordered Def.-Dist. to file positive plan of racial integration within 30 days. March 14, 1960: CA 8 denied Pls'. motion to expedite hearing on appeal. Hearing date: fall 1960. May 1960: 3 Negro children applied for admission to white school in Sept. 1960; School Bd. has not yet acted on applications.
||Evans, et al. v. Ennis, et al.
(CA 3, 13018-13024.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 30, 82, 108, V DOCKET 16, 39. Apr. 22, 1960: appeal argued; decision awaited.
||Dennis, et al. v. Baker, et al.
(Dover.) (DC Dela.)*
Supt. Carl F. Hansen, Addendum: A five year report on desegregation of public school in Dist. of Col., Anti-Defamation League, 1960.
||Gibson, et al. v. Dade Co. Bd. of Public Instruction, et al.
(SD Fla., #6978-M.) (272 F. 2d 763.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 30, 60, 82, V DOCKET 39. DC approved Def.-Bd's. letter to all parents detailing children's right to apply to any school in Co. Bd. rejected applications of six Negro students to attend white schools, on ground it would disrupt classroom procedure at this time. Pending.
46 Va. L. Rev. 337-340.
||Mannings, et al. v. Bd. of Public Instruction of Hillsborough Co.
(Tampa.) (CA 5, #17,939.) For facts, see V DOCKET 16. CA 5 reversed, held Pls. entitled to have suits heard on merits whether or not they had followed procedures required by pupil assignment laws.
||Re Lake Co. School Bond Issue.
(Fla. S. Ct.)*
||Tolbert, Augustus, et al. v. Escambia Co. Bd. of Public Education.
(Pensacola.) (ND Fla.)*
And see 523.Fla2.
||Calhoun v. Latimer.
(Atlanta.) (ND Ga., Atlanta Div., #6298.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 30, 82, V DOCKET 16, 39. May 9, 1960: DC postponed effective date of integration order to May 1961, requiring integration of 12th and 11th grades in Fall 1961, to give Ga. legislature opportunity to change statutes to permit integration rather than closing of schools.
||Bush, et al. v. Orleans Parish School Bd., et al.
(ED La., #3630.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 30, 60, 82, 108, V DOCKET 39. May 16, 1960: Def.-Bd. having failed to propose plan, DC ordered Def.-Bd. to desegregate under stairstep plan beginning with first grade in Fall 1960.
||Hall, et al. v. St. Helena Parish School Bd., et al.
(ED La., Civ. #1068.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 30, V DOCKET 39. Apr. 28, 1960: DC granted Pl's. motion for summary judgment against continued segregation by Def.-Bd.
||Angel, et al. v. La. State Bd. of Educ., et al.
(ED La., Baton Rouge Div., #1658.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 30. Apr. 28, 1960: DC granted Pl's. motion for summary judgment against continued segregation by Def.-State Bd. in 6 trade schools.
||Davis, Jr., et al. v. Baton Rouge Parish School Bd., et al.
(ED La., Baton Rouge Div., #1662.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 30, V DOCKET 39. Apr. 28, 1960: DC granted Pl's. motion for summary judgment against continued segregation by Def.-Bd.
||Williams, et al. v. Prather, et al.
(WD La., #5000.)*
- 63 -
||Henley, et al. v. La. State Univ. Bd. of Supervisors.
(CA 5,# 17421.)*
||Pettit v. Harford Co. Bd. of Educ.
(DC Md.) 1959-60: under Moore decision, (522.Md2, III DOCKET 61,) stairstep integration plan covered 1st-8th grades, pupils in higher grades seeking transfer to white schools must pass special tests. Pl.-9th grader refused transfer after taking tests, sued to challenge pupil placement procedure. May 1960: DC heard case, ordered Pl. admitted to white school.
||Russell v. Adams, Heffley, et al.
(Maplewood-Richmond Hts.) (St. Louis Co. Cir. Ct.) For facts, see V DOCKET 39. Dec. 1959: Ct. denied Def's. motion to quash. June 1960: hearing on merits.
||Howard Savings Institution v. Tr., Amherst College, et al.
(Essex Co. Super. Ct.) Pl.-executor sought judicial construction of provision of will bequeathing money to Def.-College for scholarship loan fund "for deserving American born, Protestant, Gentile boys of good moral repute, not given to gambling, smoking, drinking or similar acts". Def. declined legacy under its Charter forbidding religious tests for faculty or students. Apr. 20, 1960: Super. Ct. dismissed claim of distant kin; held words "Protestant" and "Gentile" not of paramount importance to carry out intent of dec'd. to loan to students of good moral repute: "Surely, sound construction should not rest only on membership in a particular religion for the indubitable reason all sects hold peculiar claim to morality". Ct. directed Pl., under cy pres doctrine, to turn funds over to Def. to administer without reference to "Protestant" and "Gentile" provisions.
||Covington, et al. v. Edwards, Supt. of Schools, et al.
||Jeffers v. Whitley, N.C. State Supt. of Public Instruction, N.C. Bd. of Educ., et al.
(Caswell Co.) (MD NC., Greensboro Div., #1079.)*
||Holt, Jr. v. Bd. of Educ.
||McCoy, et al. v. Greensboro City Bd. of Educ., N.C. Advisory Comm. on Educ., N.C. State Bd. of Educ., et al.
(MD N.C., #C-25-9-59.)*
||Morrow, et al. v. Mecklenburg Co. Bd. of Educ., et al.
(WD N.C., #1415.)*
||Griffith, et al. v. Robinson, et al.
(Yancey Co.) (WD N.C., #1881.) For facts, see V DOCKET 39. Hearing on merits: Jy. 11, 1960:
||Becton, et al. v. Greene Co. Bd. of Educ., et al.
(DC N.C.) Apr. 1960: suit filed by 5 Negro students for injunction against Def.-Bd. operating segregated schools and denying Pls. admission to all-white schools after they exhausted all administrative remedies. Pending.
||68 Pls. v. Durham City Bd. of Educ.
(MD N.C.) 1959: 225 Negro students applied for transfers to white schools. Def.-Bd. accepted 8 requests for transfers. Apr. 1960: suit by parents of 161 Negro students not permitted to transfer, alleging: Pls. have exhausted administrative remedies under N.C. pupil placement laws, Def.-Bd. acted arbitrarily in holding meeting after term began to consider some assignment requests and denying without further consideration all requests by students whose parents not represented in person at Bd. meeting. Pending.
||Vickers v. Chapel Hill Bd. of Educ.
(MD N.C.) Pl.-Negro student sued to restrain Def.-Bd. from making assignments solely on basis of race, to require reassignment of Pl. to white school nearer his home. Pending.
||Briggs v. Elliott.
(Clarendon Co.) (ED S.C., #2657.)*
||Brunson v. Bd. of Tr., Clarendon Co. School Dist. No. 1.
(Clarendon Co.) (ED S.C.) April 1960: suit filed seeking desegregation of Summerton schools in Co. Def's motions to dismiss or find suit not a class action pending.
||Kelly, et al. v. Bd. of Educ.
(Nashville.) (U.S.S.C.) (270 F. 2d 209.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 32, V DOCKET 40.
40 Boston U. L. Rev. 150.
||Goss v. Bd. of Education.
(Knoxville.) (ED Tenn., #3984.) For facts, see V DOCKET 40. Apr. 8, 1960: Def.-Bd. submitted stairstep desegregation plan beginning with first grade in fall 1960. Apr. 18, 1960: Pls. submitted objections to plans as perpetuating racial segregation, asked early hearing.
||Northcross, et al. v. City of Memphis Bd. of Educ.
(WD Tenn.) March 30, 1960: suit filed by parents of 18 Negro pupils for total, immediate desegregation of all city schools. Def. alleges Pls. have not availed themselves of appeal procedure under Tenn. pupil placement law, not yet tested in cts. Def's. motion to dismiss pending.
||Mapp, et al. v. City of Chattanooga Bd. of Educ.
(ED Tenn.) Apr. 1960: suit filed by parents of 4 Negro pupils asking desegregation of students, teachers and principals in city schools. May 5, 1960: DC sustained Def.-Bd's. motion to strike all issues re personnel assignment. Pending.
||Borders, et al. v. Rippy, et al.
(Dallas.) (CA 5, #18046.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 109. Mar. 11, 1960: CA 5 ordered (2-1) Def.-Bd. to submit public school desegregation plan by May 1, 1960. Def.-Bd. proposed stairstep integration plan starting in first grade in Sept. 1961. June 4, 1960: DC suggested Bd. prepare new plan, not as broad as proposal.
- 64 -
||Ross v. Rogers, Pres., Houston Independent School Dist.
(DC Tex., Houston, #10,444.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 32. June 4, 1960: Def.-Bd. called referendum election on whether dist. should desegregate schools. June 10, 1960: Pls. filed objections to Def.-Bd's. proposal to integrate one elementary school, one junior high, one senior high school leaving 174 other public schools segregated. Under plan, students attending integrated schools must take special academic and medical examinations. Pending.
W. J. Durham, Esq., Dallas; Weldon H. Berry, Esq., Houston; Thurgood Marshall, Esq., N.A.A.C.P. Legal Defense and Educ. Fund, Inc., 10 Columbus Circle, NYC.
||Pls. v. Bd. of Educ.
(Abilene.) (Texas Sup. Ct.)*
||Flax, et al. v. Potts, et al.
(Fort Worth.) (ND Tex., Fort Worth Div., #4205.)*
||Simmons v. Edwards.
(Friendship School Dist.) (DC Tex., Lubbock.) For facts, see V DOCKET 40. Voters approved integration; case moot.
||Robinson v. Evans.
(Galveston.) (SD Tex., #2643.)*
||County School Bd. v. Allen, et al.
(Prince Edward Co.)*
||Crisp, et al. v. School Bd.
(formerly Corbin v.) (Pulaski Co.) (WD Va., Roanoke, #341.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 33. Apr. 21, 1960: DC ordered 14 Negro pupils admitted to white high school in Sept. 1960.
||Atkins, et al. v. School Bd., et al.
(Newport News.) (ED Va., Newport News Div., #489.)*
||Adkinson v. School Bd.
(Newport News.) (ED Va., Newport News Div., #642.) For facts, see DOCKET 40. Apr. 15, 1960: Def.-Bd. submitted plan for desegregation requiring applicants for transfer to be tested, assignments on basis of mental and moral health, intelligence, suitability of existing curricula, pupil's adaptability to emotional and social adjustment to be made. Pending.
||Beckett, et al. v. School Bd.
(Norfolk.) (CA 4.) For facts, see IV DOCKET 33, 62, 83, V DOCKET 17, 40. Apr. 22, 1960: CA 4 heard appeal by Def.-Bd. from DC decision finding Va. pupil placement law unconstitutional and appeal by 18 Negro-Pls. whose denial of admission to all-white schools upheld by DC. Decision awaited.
||Allen, et al. v. School Bd.
(Charlottesville. (WD Va., #51.)*
||Hamm, et al. v. School Bd.
(Arlington.) (ED Va., #1341.)*
||Warden, et al. v. School Bd.
(Richmond.) (ED Va., Richmond.)*
||Warden, et al. v. School Bd.
(Richmond.) (ED Va., see V DOCKET 41. Apr. 20, 1960: CA 4 affirmed DC order admitting 9 Negro children to all-white schools, denying admittance to 5 Negro children, held lack of academic ability and residences closer to Negro school than to white school valid criteria: "The record in this case is insufficient in demonstrating that the criteria were not so applied . . . If the criteria should be applied only to Negroes seeking transfer and enrollment in particular schools and not to white children, then the use of the criteria could not be sustained. Or, if the criteria are, in the future, applied only to applications for transfer and not to applications for initial enrollment . . . then such action would also be subject to attack on constitutional grounds. For by reason of the existing segregation pattern it will be Negro children, primarily, who seek transfers".
||Walker v. School Bd.
(Floyd Co.) (DC Va., Roanoke.)*
||Brooks v. School Bd.
(Galax.) (DC Va., Roanoke.)*
||Blair v. School Bd.
(Grayson Co.) (DC Va., Roanoke.)*