Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute Archives logo

Vol. IX, No. 4
July, 1964
$10.00 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

The DOCKET is published four times each year, October to July.
MICHAEL TIGAR, Assistant Editor



Law review articles:

Norman Dorsen, Arthur Garfield Hays conference: The proper role of the U.S. Supreme Court in civil liberties cases. 10 Wayne 457-489.

Edwin W. Tucker, The Supreme Court and the indigent defendant. 37 S. California U. 151-80.

Comment: The powers of the Supreme Court justice acting in an individual capacity. 112 Pennsylvania U. 981-1024.


Symposium: Justice William O. Douglas: Earl Warren, A tribute; Hans Linde, On freedom in the welfare state; Leonard F. Manning, Douglas' concept of God in government; Vern Countryman, The Constitution and job discrimination; Jerre S. Williams and William R. Ming, Jr., Critique of Countryman. 39 Washington U. 1-114.

Law review articles:

Erwin C. Surrency, The lawyer and the revolution. 8 Am. J. of Legal History 125-235.

Robert B. McKay, Stability and change in constitutional law. 17 Vanderbilt 203-19.

Jerre S. Williams, Stability and change in constitutional law. 17 Vanderbilt 221-38.

John G. Wofford, The blinding light: The uses of history in constitutional interpretation. 31 Chicago U. 502-33.

Paul A. Freund, New vistas in constitutional law. 112 Pennsylvania U. 631-46.


Thomas W. Top, Judicial review of legislative declaration of emergency. 39 Washington U. 155-65.

Constitutional guarantees of a certain remedy. 49 Iowa 1212-23.

Ross R. Runkel, The abstention doctrine. 39 Washington U. 308-17.


Law review articles:

Carl A. Auerbach, Scope of authority of fed'l administrative agencies to delegate decision making to hearing examiners. 48 Minnesota U. 823-84.

Kenneth Kulp Davis, Hearsay in administrative hearings. 32 G. Washington 689-700.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH, PRESS, ASSEMBLY (0-99) See also Association (200-299)
Law review article: Wallace Mendelson, The first amendment and the judicial process: A reply to Mr. Frantz. 17 Vanderbilt 463-78.
10. Licensing
11. Of Meetings (see also 201)
City Attorney's Opinion: Monterey Park, Calif. Muni. Code §§4317, 3245 and Recreation Dept. rules are valid in requiring sponsor's affidavit that a park meeting will not be used for an unlawful purpose, in requiring adequate notice of parades, in authorizing denial of permit when serious breaches of peace may be expected, invalid in requiring disclaimer of sponsor's Communist affiliation, in delegating authority to issue permits to Dept. without standards, in absolutely proscribing amplifying devices.

Charles Martin, Jr., City Atty., 2304 Huntington Dr., San Marino.

11.3a. ACLU of S. Calif. v. Bd. of Educ. of the City of L.A. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 1, 69, 91, 121, IX DOCKET 1. Cite for cert. denied: 375 U.S. 823.
11.15. Fields v. City of Fairfield, Ala. (U.S.S.C., #30.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 69, 91, IX DOCKET 1. Cite: 372 U.S. 940, reversing 143 So.2d 177.
11.16. Tennessee v. Weinberger. (Brownsville.) (Haywood Co. Ct.)*
11.17. Forbes v. Redondo Beach City Council. (Los Angeles Co. Super Ct.)*

A. L. Wirin, Esq., for ACLU of S. Calif., 257 S. Spring St., Los Angeles.

12. Of Motion Pictures (see also 52)
13. Of Peddlers

13.2. City of Indianola v. Defs. (Indianola, Miss.) (City Ct.)*
- 74 -

14. Of Books, Magazines (see also 52)

14.10. Haiman and Grove Press v. Morris. (Ill. Sup. Ct., #37276.)*
14.10a. Grove Press and Henry Miller v. Morris. (ND Ill., E. Div., #61 C 1784.)*
14.11. Grove Press v. Calissi, Bergen Co. Pros. (U.S.S.C.)*
14.12. Arnebergh v. Zeitlin. (U.S.S.C., #584.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 2, 69, 121, IX DOCKET 36. Cite for cert. denied: 375 U.S. 957.
14.13. Grove Press v. Gerstein. (U.S.S.C., #718) (156 So.2d 537.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 2, 121. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, granted cert., reversed. Warren, C. J., Clark, Harlan, JJ. diss. from grant of cert.
14.15. Larkin v. G. P. Putnam's Sons. (NY Ct. of App.)*
14.16. Tralins v. Gerstein. (U.S.S.C., #246.) (151 So.2d 19.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 6, 71, 93 at 52.37. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, granted cert., reversed. Warren, C. J., Clark, Harlan, JJ. diss. from grant of cert.
14.17. Hudson Co. News Co. v. Sills. (U.S.S.C., #1037.) (195 A.2d 626.) Facts: IX DOCKET 1. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, dismissed appeal for want of substantial fed'l. question.
15. Of Miscellaneous Activities

15.5. F.C.C. v. Palmetto Broadcasting Co., S.C. (CA DA.)*
15.6. City of Baltimore v. Moore, Henderson. (Crim. Ct.)*
15.7. Coleman v. City of Torrance, Calif. (Super Ct.)*

And see 58.8 and 533.63.

15.8. California v. Canon. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 36. Atty. Genl's. appeal pending.

Marshall Krause, Esq., ACLU of No. Calif., 503 Market St., San Francisco.

15.9. City of San Francisco v. Stephenson. (S.F. Muni. Ct.) June 1964: Def. distributed religious tracts, accepted contributions without permit required by Police Code; arrested. June 17: Muni. Ct. granted Def.'s motion to dismiss.

Marshall Krause, Esq., for ACLU of N. Calif., 503 Market St., San Francisco.

20. Administrative Restrictions
21. By U. S. Customs
22. By U. S. Postmaster

22.15. Heilberg v. Fixa. (ND Calif., #41660.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 122, IX DOCKET 2. Sept. 15: 3-judge ct. trial.
22.16. Amlin v. Postmaster General. (SD Calif., #63-635-PH.)*
22.17. McReynolds, Pappenheim v. Christenberry. (formerly McReynolds v.) (SD NY.) Facts: IX DOCKET 36. April 9, 1964: Pl. filed supplemental pleading, adding a second Pl. who ordered books by Engels, G. Thomson, and Anna Louise Strong from N.Y. bookseller, received card from postal officials asking whether he wished to receive "Communist political propaganda." Pl. requested further information of Def.; books delivered. Pls. seek declaratory judgment that 39 USC §4008 is unconstitutional, expunging Pls.' names from all records maintained in connection with censorship of alleged Communist propaganda, and injunction against delaying or processing mail deemed Communist propaganda.
23. On Government Information and Secrecy
24. On Students and Professors (see also 223, 262, 281 and 342)
Law review article: George R. Coan, Dismissal of California probationary teachers. 15 Hastings 284-309.

Comment: Dismissal of permanent teacher for public criticism of school system. 15 Hastings 360-63.

See Henry, 571.14.

24.20. Koch v. Bd. of Trustees, U. of Illinois. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 9, 92, 122, IX DOCKET 36. Cite for cert. denied: 375 U.S. 989.
24.21. Egan v. Moore, Trs. of State Univ. of State of New York. (App. Div., 3d Dept., #6143.)*
24.25. Byrd v. Gary. (ED S.C.)*
24.26. Ritter v. Matthews, Trs. (N. Texas State U.) (ED Tex., Sherman Div., #1525.)*
24.27. Wilkinson and Schwartz v. Bd. of Trs., Ohio State Univ. (SD Ohio, E. Div., #6611.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 122, IX DOCKET 36. June 8, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied motion for leave to file petition for mandamus (sub nom. Schwartz v. Underwood).
24.29. Re Gordon Lish. (San Mateo Union High School Dist. Bd. of Trs.)*
24.30. Morial v. Orleans Parish School Bd. (ED La.)*
24.31. Finot v. Pasadena Bd. of Educ. (Los Angeles Super Ct., #827326.)*
24.32. Woods v. Wright. (Birmingham.) (ND Ala., S. Div., #63-249.)*
24.33. Re Gloria Rackley. (Orangeburg, S.C. School Bd.)*
24.34. Due v. Florida A & M Univ. (Tallahassee.) (ND Fla., Civ., #947.) (8 RRLR 1396.) Oct. 3, 1963: Pls.-Negro students at Def.-Univ. convicted of criminal contempt of Leon Co. Cir. Ct. Oct. 17: Def.-Univ. Dean told Pls. to return to school, see Disciplinary Comm. chairman. Chairman examined Pls. about Cir. Ct. convictions. At 10:30 p.m. that evening, Pls.' atty. telegraphed Def's. president, demanding public hearing with rights of confrontation and cross-examination. Oct. 19: Pls. received notice of indefinite suspension from Def.-Univ. Oct. 24: Pls. filed suit in DC for reinstatement. Nov. 12: Pls. appealed action of Univ. Disciplinary Comm. to Fla. State Bd. of Control. Nov. 18: DC denied Pls.' motion for preliminary injunction: (1) Pls. counsel stipulated to fact and validity of Cir. Ct. contempt convictions; (2) notice and opportunity to be heard, citing Dixon v. Ala. State Bd. of Educ. (294 F.2d 150) were given; (3) Def.-Univ. had authorized Comm. to proceed
- 75 -

as it did, its order is therefore prima facie valid. Dec. 7: Bd. of Control unanimously affirmed Univ. Disciplinary Comm.

Tobias Simon and Herbert Heiken, Esqs., 223 SE First St., Miami, Fla.

25. On Miscellaneous Activities

25.11. Belshaw v. City of Berkeley. (Alameda Co. Super. Ct.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 122, IX DOCKET 37. July 30: hearing.
25.12. Forstner v. Civil Service Comm. (formerly v. Personnel Bd.) (San Francisco Super. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 37. May 15, 1964: Super. Ct., after hearing, ordered Pl. reinstated with full back pay: prohibition on beard-wearing is unjustified interference with Pl.'s personal life—a "nitpicking blockade which forces him to choose between his career and a surrender of the right to control his own personal appearance within the bounds of propriety." Def.'s appeal pending.
30. Economic Restrictions (see also 251, 261, 268, 281)

30.1. Independent Productions Corp., and I.P.C. Distributors, Inc. v. Loew's Inc. (SD NY, Civ. #110-304.)*
30.7. Young v. Motion Picture Assn. of America, Inc. (DC DC.)*
30.13. Turn Toward Peace v. Al Molaikan Temple. (Los Angeles Muni. Ct., #908264.)*
30.14. Fort v. Co. of Alameda. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 92. Transferred from DCA; decided with Kinnear, 30.14a. May 29: Calif. Sup. Ct. affirmed Super. Ct.: (1) Alameda Co. charter provision prohibiting political activity is overbroad, infringes on First Amendment rights; (2) Pl. must be reinstated.
30.14a. Kinnear v. City and Co. of San Francisco. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) 1959: Pl.-deputy sheriff fired when he filed as candidate for public office: sheriff. Similar charter provision to that in Fort, 30.14, invoked. Decided with 30.14.

And see Hilburn, 251.16.

40. Contempt (see also 63)
41. Of Federal Courts

522.Miss.1b. U.S. v. Barnett. (U.S.S.C., #107) (316 F.2d 236) Facts: VIII DOCKET 47 at 522.Miss.1, IX DOCKET 24 at .Miss.1a. Apr. 6, 1964: U.S.S.C. (5-4) answered CA 5 query: Def. not entitled to jury trial, Clark, J.: "It has always been the law of the land, both state and federal, that the courts—except where specifically precluded by statute—have the power to proceed summarily in contempt matters." But see note 12: "Some members of the Ct. are of the view that, without regard to the seriousness of the offense, punishment by summary trial without a jury would be constitutionally limited to that penalty provided for petty offenses." Goldberg, J. (Warren, C.J., Douglas, J) diss.: Def. had statutory right to jury trial under 18 U.S.C. §3691 because DC was source of order, violation was criminal offense under 18 U.S.C. §1509, suit brought by Meredith, not U.S.; also had constitutional right, Art. III, §2, Sixth Amendment. Black, J. (Douglas, J.) diss.: "As I said in Green [365 U.S. 165, 193], I think that this doctrine that a judge has "inherent" power to make himself prosecutor, judge and jury seriously encroaches upon the constitutional right to trial by jury and should be repudiated."
42. Of State Courts
Case notes: Publication of false or grossly inaccurate report of judicial proceeding (Penal Law, §600 (7))—necessity of intent to assail dignity and authority of court: People v. Post Standard Co. (195 N.E.2d 48, 1963) 28 Albany U. 285-89.

Right of press to refuse to disclose confidential sources of information: In re Taylor (193 A.2d 181, 1963) 10 Wayne 599-601.

42.11. Louisiana v. Defs. (19th Jud. Dist. E. Baton Rouge Parish.)*
42.12. Re Dawley and Holt. (Va. Sup. Ct.)*
42.17. Ex parte Mary Hamilton. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: IX DOCKET 3, 37. Cite: 376 U.S. 650.
42.18. In re Will Harrison. (Dona Ana Co. Dist. Ct., #11060; N.M. Sup. Ct.) Nov. 12, 1963: Def. wrote column questioning lenient treatment given Asst. DA Morris convicted of involuntary manslaughter (DA, drunk, rammed another car, killed 5 persons, fined $1000 and probation), contrasted with treatment given Mexican-Def. in similar case: 1-5 yrs. Jan. 24, 1964: After 5 other columns by Def. on DA's case, DA's atty. moved in Dist. Ct. to have Def. found in criminal contempt. Mar. 27: Def. found guilty; 10 days. Appeal pending. Issues: (1) Def.'s publication did not interfere with pending trial; (2) Can Dist. Ct., by retaining jurisdiction of case until probation period is up for review of sentence, prohibit comment on its actions during probation period?

W. B. Kelly, Esq., Gilbert, White & Gilbert, P. O. Box 787, Santa Fe, N.M.

42.19. Ungar v. Sarafite. (U.S.S.C., #167) (189 NE.2d 629, 190 NE.2d 539) During retrial of Hulan Jack for conspiracy to violate NY's conflict of interest laws, Def.-atty. was hostile prosecution witness who asked for recess due to his mental state, made comments judge found contemptuous in hearing after trial. NY cts. affirmed denial of motion for trial before another judge. Mar. 30, 1964: U.S.S.C. affirmed (6-3), White, J. Harlan, J., conc. Douglas, J. (Black, Goldberg, JJ.) diss.: "An impartial judge, not caught up in the cross-currents of emotions enveloping the contempt charge, is the only one who can protect all rights and determine whether a contempt was committed or whether the case is either one of judicial nerves on edge or judicial tyranny."

Osmond K. Fraenkel, Esq., 120 Broadway, and Emanuel Redfield, Esq., 60 Wall St., NYC.

43. Of Other Agencies (see also 270s, 330s)
50. Criminal Sanctions
Practice Aid: Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assistance in the South, Attorneys' Brochure on Mississippi Law Relating to Civil Rights and Constitutional Guarantees—1964: Principal U.S. Sup. Ct. and Miss. appellate ct. opinions, texts of 1964 Miss. legislation on picketing, leafleting, obstruction of business, breach of peace, and forms. Southern Guild Office, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson, Miss.

Law review article: Charles E. Rice, Sit-ins: Proceed with caution. 29 Missouri 39-70.

- 76 -

51. Against Disorderly Conduct and Similar Offenses (see also 55, 541, 542, 551, 552)
And see cases at 304.
51.19. South Carolina v. Carras, Stradley. (Sumter Muni. Ct.)*
51.25. Rev. Cox v. Louisiana. (Baton Rouge.) (U.S.S.C., #735.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 5, 122, IX DOCKET 3, 37. May 4, 1964: U.S.S.C. noted prob. juris.

And see Cox, 51.25a, 53.5.

51.25a. Louisiana v. Rev. Cox. (Baton Rouge.) (U.S.S.C., #934) (158 So.2d 172.) Facts: IX DOCKET 3. May 4, 1964: U.S.S.C. noted prob. juris. To be argued after #735, 51.25.
51.27. South Carolina v. Randolph. (Sumter.) (Sumter Co. Cir. Ct.)*
51.34. Georgia v. Forman. (Albany Recorder's Ct.)*
51.35. Georgia v. Patch. (Albany Recorder's Ct.)*
51.36. City of Albany v. Rev. Anderson. (Albany Recorder's Ct.)*
51.37. Mississippi v. Block. (Greenwood.) (Leflore Co. Ct.)*
51.40. Connecticut v. Petty. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 123, IX DOCKET 3. Cite for cert. denied: 375 U.S. 848.
51.41. New York v. 15 Defs. (Rochester Co. Ct.)*
51.42. New York v. 8 Defs. (Manhattan Supr. Ct.)*
51.43. New York v. Blackmon, Beebe and Hicks. (Manhattan Crim. Ct.)*
51.44. City of Plaquemine, La. v. Farmer. (Crim. Dist. Ct.)*
51.45. Alabama v. 200 Defs. (Selma.) (Selma Recorder's Ct., Dallas Co. Ct.)*

And see 56.12, and other peace bond cases at 59.

51.46. Louisiana v. I. S. Daniel and 85 Defs. (New Orleans.) (Crim. Ct.)*
51.47. District of Columbia v. Am. Nazi Party. (D.C. Muni. Ct.)*
51.48. Tennessee v. Gustafson. (Blount Co. Genl. Sessions Ct., Juv. Ct., # #36761-36770.)*
51.49. Pennsylvania v. 100 Defs. (Media Co. Ct.)*
51.50. Pennsylvania v. Dotort. (Ct. of Quarter Sessions, Phila. Co., #759.) Facts: IX DOCKET 38. On appeal, all Defs. found not guilty of disorderly conduct. Defs. prosecuted again on charges of unauthorized use of city facility (room in which sit-in took place), breach of peace (dismissed). Defs. filed 28 USC §1443 removal petitions; DC remanded, denied injunction against prosecutions. Defs. convicted of unauthorized use of city facility. Appeal pending.
51.51. City of Newark v. Gibson, Wims. (Newark Muni. Ct., # # #57574, 57575.)*
51.52. New York v. Stauble. (Yonkers City Ct.)*
51.53. California v. Huss, Krauss, McLaughlin, Holstein, Reeves. (Los Angeles.) (L.A. Co. Super. Ct., #274332.)*
51.54. Maryland v. Frankhouser. (Riverside Park.) (Muni. Ct.)*
51.55. Mississippi v. Stoner. (Hattiesburg Justice Ct.) (SD Miss.)*
51.56. New York v. World's Fair Defs. (NY Crim. Ct., Queens Co.) Many persons arrested in CORE protest in opening days of World's Fair: disorderly conduct, resisting arrest. Many Defs. pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct, (not technically a criminal offense under NY law); all other charges dismissed. Sentences: $5.-$25.; 5-15 days (suspended).

Schiffer & Cohen, Esqs., 40 E. 49th St., NYC.

And see Collins, 58.24.

51.57. Tennessee v. McKinnie. (Nashville.) (Tenn. Sup. Ct.) (9 RRLR 83.) Oct. 21, 1962: Defs.-Negroes sought service at Nashville restaurant, refused, blocked entrance; arrested: violation of Tenn. Code Ann. §39-1101 (7), §62-711 (conspiring to injure trade and commerce; turbulent conduct within or about hotel, inn, or restaurant). Cir. Ct. jury found Defs. guilty; $50.00 and 90 days. Jan. 8, 1964: Tenn. Sup. Ct. affirmed: (1) possibility that restaurant could not lawfully exclude Defs. irrelevant, because Defs.' conduct clearly prohibited by statutes; (2) indictment sufficiently apprised Defs. of offenses charged; (3) conspiracy may be inferred from nature of acts, relation of Defs., and their common interest; (4) Peterson, 552.SC.8, 373 U.S. 244, and Lombard, 552.La.2, 373 U.S. 267, distinguishable because no blocking of entryways; (5) statutes sufficiently define proscribed conduct; (6) Defs. not prejudiced in jury selection, in drawing of grand and petit jury panels, in inclusion of whites who professed belief in segregation but alleged they could lay such belief aside, or in allowing challenges to Negroes on panel for various reasons. Mar. 9: Rehearing denied.
51.58. Mississippi v. Marcia Moore. (Laurel) (Police Ct.) Jy. 5, 1964: 6 pm: Northern white teacher and student and Negro SNCC worker driving home from Sunday School, followed by police, stopped, questioned, 2 whites taken to police station, questioned separately by Co. Pros. Pickering. Teacher asked address, occupation, offered free busfare to NYC to work in Harlem, "Does your wife know you are traveling around with young girl?" Co. Pros. questioned Def.-Moore, called her parents in Ia. to confirm their approval of her civil rights work. 7:30 pm: Teacher released, told Def.-Moore would be tried Jy. 6 at 3 pm for vagrancy. 11:00 pm: Def. told she needed no attorney; pleaded not guilty; tried; convicted: 10 days, suspended; released.

Many other civil rights workers were similarly questioned, arrested and charged with disturbing the peace, vagrancy, trespass, assault, or disorderly conduct: June 22—4 in Clarksdale; June 26—3 in Belzoni; June 30—1 in Green-

- 78 -

54.3. Diamond v. Louisiana. (U.S.S.C., #100.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 7, 71, 124, IX DOCKET 39. Cite: 376 U.S. 201.
54.6. Georgia v. Perdew, Harris, Allen. (Americus.) (Ga. Ct. of App., #40728.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 124, IX DOCKET 4 (at 54.7a), 39. July 1964: Ct. of App. reversed conviction of Def.-Allen for assault with intent to commit murder: reversible error to deny without hearing Def.'s motion to quash indictment and challenge to array of petit jurors: (1) systematic exclusion of Negroes from grand and petit juries violates due process and equal protection clauses of Fourteenth Amendment; (2) such exclusion may be raised by white-Def., not a member of the excluded class, under Thiel v. Southern Pacific, 328 U.S. 217, held applicable to Georgia state grand and petit juries; (3) but, "were it necessary for the Def. to show prejudice, judicial notice might be taken that where prejudice exists against the advocacy of the Negro's full privileges and duties of citizenship, a white person active in promoting participation in government by Negroes would be the object of as strong adverse prejudice as would a Negro engaged in such activities, and perhaps stronger"; (4) Ga. Code, Tit. 59, proscribes selection of jurors on ground of race.
54.7. Georgia v. Aelony. (Americus.)*

See 54.7a.

54.7a. Aelony v. Pace, Ga. Solicitor Genl.; Dir., Dept. of Public Safety; Mayor and City Council and City of Americus; Sumter Co. Sheriff. (MD Ga., #530-1963.)*
54.8. Louisiana v. Bell. (Clinton.) (20th Jud. Dist. Ct., B4281, B4283-B4293.)*
55. Against Picketing, Leafleting, and Demonstrating (see also 51, 123, 541, 542, 551, 552)
(Some cases involving picketing charges are reported under the subject matter of the protest for which the picketing was conducted, e.g., against discrimination in dining places, 552.)
55.7. Tennessee v. Defs. (Madison Co. Ct.)*
55.18. Alabama v. Dr. McNair. (Talladega Recorder's Ct., #3165 closed; Cir. Ct.)*

And see Alabama v. Gray, 63.2

55.19. Moore v. Louisiana. (U.S.S.C., #734.) (156 So.2d 606.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 7, 94, IX DOCKET 5, 39. Cite for cert. denied: 376 U.S. 912.
55.25. Jackson v. Allen. (Co. Ct., 1st Jud. Dist., Hinds Co., Miss., #21.)*
55.26. North Carolina v. Frinks. (Chowan Co. Super. Ct.)*
55.28. Illinois v. Tranquilli, Thomas, J. Lewis, Bridges. (Cairo.) (Justice of Peace Ct., Alexander Co. Ct.)*
55.32. Crawford, Mitchell, Poole, Salter v. Mississippi. (CA 5.)*
55.34a. Barnes v. CORE. (Butte Co. Super. Ct., Calif., #40296.)*
55.35. Baines v. City of Danville. McGhee v. City of Danville. (CA 4, ##9080, 9082.) Issues arising re removal in these cases reported at 73. under 55.35.
55.36. Chase v. McCain. Chase v. Aiken. (CA 4, ##9081, 9082.)*


55.37-55.66. All cases pending on appeal.
55.37a. Georgia v. DeLissovoy. (Rec. Ct.) July, 1964: Def.-white SNCC worker, one of Defs. in 55.37, arrested for drunkenness and refusing to leave cafe. Released when cafe owner said Def. was not drunk, had not been asked to leave. Five hours later, Def. arrested for "reckless driving" and driving without license, while going 20 mph. with proof of Georgia license on hand.
55.67. U.S. v. Anderson. (CA 5.)


55.68. U.S. v. Rabinowitz. (CA 5.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 126, IX DOCKET 5.

Amicus brief in support of Def.-Rabinowitz filed by 73 scholars: Profs. Matthew J. Ahern, Clyde R. Appleton, Sylvester E. Berki, A. K. Bierman, David Blackwell, Coleman Blease, Francis M. Carney, J. David Colfax, David J. Danielski, Norman Dorsen, Douglas T. Dowd, Robert I. Edenbaum, Richard Estes, Aaron B. Everett, Edward W. Fox, Alan Goldberg, Edmund W. Gordon, Joseph R. Gusfield, Louis M. Hacker, Fowler Harper, Philip Hauser, Mark DeWolfe Howe, Leo A. Huard, Fred M. Hudson, Norman Jacobson, Alfred E. Kahn, Harry Kalven, Jr., Gaylord C. LeRoy, Jack London, Oliver S. Loud, Lucian C. Marquis, George McFadden, Wilson C. McWilliams, Philip Monypenny, Hans J. Morgenthau, Arval Morris, William R. Morrow, J. Neyman, David E. Novack, Arthur Pearl, Daniel H. Pollitt, Arthur J. Robins, Milton I. Roemer, John H. Schaar, John Schuder, Henry Nash Smith, Will Solomon, Ralph Slovenko, Pete Steffens, John M. Swackhamer, Joseph Tussman, Doxey A. Wilkerson, William Appleman Williams, Marshall Windmiller, Robin M. Williams, Jr., H. H. Wilson; student leaders, Paul R. Booth, Galen W. Fox, Todd Gitlin, Thomas Hayden, Neal Johnston, Thomas W. Ramsay, Vance Opperman, Loretta A. Wasmund; Marshall Axelrod, teachers' union leader; Robert Hutchins; Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn; elementary teacher Jessica Davidson; Rev. Howard R. Johnson; Otto Nathan; Norman Uphoff; Mark Van Doren. Ann Fagan Ginger, Laurent B. Frantz, of counsel.

Amicus brief in support of all Defs. by Samuel Rosenwein, Esq., and Ernest Goodman, Esq., for Natl. Lawyers Guild, 2801 Cadillac Tower, Detroit.

55.69. New Jersey v. Whipper. (Elizabeth.) (Union Co. Ct.)*
55.70. New York City v. Defs. *

And see Gaynor, 573.4a.

55.71. Wisconsin v. 3 Defs. (Milwaukee.) (Milwaukee Co. Ct.)*
55.72. Alabama v. 10 Defs. (Selma.) (Crim. Ct.)*
55.73. Georgia v. Tuttle, Jr. (Savannah.) (Chatham Co. Ct.)*
55.74. Georgia v. Havice. (Macon.) (Macon Co. Ct.)*
55.77. Alabama v. 2,500 Defs. (Birmingham.) (Jefferson Co. Cir. Ct.)*

And see 55.77a, 63.7.

55.77a. Birmingham v. Croskey. (ND Ala., S. Div., #63-143 Cr.)*
- 79 -

55.79. City of Birmingham v. Primm. (Ala. Ct. of App.) (9 RRLR 88.) 1963: Def., walking alone across the street with 3 × 5 card pinned to his chest: "Three went to jail for freedom. Was it worth it?", arrested: parading without a permit (City Code Sec. 1159). Recorder's Ct. found Def. guilty; $25. Cir. Ct. affirmed on trial de novo. Ct. of App. reversed: (1) ordinance obviously intended to control and regulate crowds, not single individuals; (2) Def. did not obstruct traffic, did not attract public attention, or other things associated with a parade, hence no evidence on which a conviction can be sustained.
55.80. Alabama v. Chace. (Tuscaloosa.) (Tuscaloosa Co. Ct., ##14735-38; ND Ala., Civ. #64-260.) Apr. 23, 1964: 600 persons, mostly Negro, demonstrated against segregated rest rooms, etc., in new Tuscaloosa courthouse. Def.-white English prof. Stillman College, Tuscaloosa, singled out of picket line; arrested: unlawful assembly, vagrancy, resisting arrest, assault. Def. filed removal petition in DC; see 55.80 at 73. June 1964: 15 white and 2 Negro profs. at local colleges protested Def.'s arrest in letter to Birmingham News on grounds of academic freedom.

Oscar W. Adams, Jr., Esq., 1630 4th Ave. North, Birmingham.

55.81. Mississippi v. 25 Meridian Defs. (Meridian City Ct.; Lauderdale Co. Ct.; SD Miss., Meridian Div.) June 13, 1964: Defs. began to picket Kress, Woolworth, Newberry's; arrested: obstructing the sidewalk (Ord. §2—18). City Ct. found Defs. guilty. Defs. appealed to Co. Ct. for trial de novo. Defs. filed removal petition in DC; see 55.81 at 73.

Don Loria, Esq., Cadillac Tower, Detroit; Charles Markels, Esq., 105 So. LaSalle St., Chicago; Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson.

55.82. Mississippi v. 7 Defs. (Columbus.) (City Ct.) June 26, 1964: 7 Defs.-Negro civil rights workers handed out leaflet explaining provisions of 1964 Civil Rights Act; arrested: distributing leaflets without a permit, in violation of "An ordinance providing it shall be unlawful for any person to distribute . . . printed matter in any public place . . . without written permission of the Chief of Police. . . ." Bail: $400 each. June 29: Trial scheduled. One Def. taken to state prison before trial for violation of probation on previous burglary conviction. Two members of Miss. Bar objected to out-of-state lawyers' appearance. Cases continued to July 6. Ct. dismissed charges against all but two Defs. June 30: 2 remaining Defs. filed removal petitions in DC; see 55.82 at 73. Issues: prior restraint; lack of standards to guide police chief in issuing permits.

Henry McGhee, Esq., 309 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago; Ralph Shapiro, Esq., 9 E. 40th St., NYC; Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson.

55.83. Mississippi and City of Greenwood v. Carmichael. (Police Ct.) "Freedom Day," July 16, 1964: 98 COFO voter registration workers engaged in peaceful picketing at Leflore Co. Cthouse; arrested: violating House Bill 546, Mississippi Laws (April) 1964 prohibiting picketing or demonstrations which "obstruct" or "interfere with" either "free ingress or egress to and from any public premises . . . courthouses . . . etc. . . . or with free use of public streets adjacent or contiguous thereto." Defs. filed removal petitions in DC; see 55.83 at 73.

Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson; Smith, Waltzer, Jones & Peebles, Esqs., 1006 Baronne Bldg., 305 Baronne St., New Orleans.

55.83a. Mississippi and City of Greenwood v. Albertz. (Police Ct.) July 1964: 14 cases involving COFO voter registration workers arrested on misdemeanor charges: assault, profanity and abusive language to policeman, improper license tag, reckless driving, parading without a permit, disturbing the peace, interfering with duties of police officer, contributing to delinquency of a minor, distributing leaflets without written permission of police chief or mayor in alleged violation of city ordinance, etc. All Defs. timely filed removal petitions in DC; see 55.83a at 73.

Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson.

Other civil rights workers were arrested in Mississippi for passing out leaflets, picketing or attending mass meetings: Jy. 15—Mike Ingraham in Gulfport; Jy. 18—8 arrested in Batesville; Jy. 22—1 in Leland; Jy. 30—Fred Miller and Betty Williams in Drew. Defs. were released on $100-$500 bond.

55.84. City of Drew, Miss. v. McNair. (Police Ct.) July 1964: 27 COFO voter registration workers held civil rights rally at Holly Grove Church for purpose of petitioning Gov't in redress of grievances and violations of rights under Fifteenth Amendment in connection with COFO voter registration drive; when church deacon ordered COFO workers out, they continued rally on vacant lot across street; lot owner ordered them off. As they touched the sidewalk, arrested: violation of 2 city ordinances forbidding (1) use of streets for any purpose but "normal, customary and usual pursuits" of everyday life, and requiring written permit from mayor or chief of police for parading or passing out leaflets; (2) cursing, insulting, deriding, ridiculing, or using abusive language toward police. Defs. filed removal petitions in DC; see 55.84 at 73.

Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson.

55.85. Cameron v. Johnson. (Hattiesburg.) (SD Miss., #1891-Civ.) Apr. 13, 1964: Pls.-civil rights leaders sued Def.-Miss. Gov. and other state officials to enjoin enforcement of new Miss. anti-picketing statute (House Bill #546), asked for 3-judge ct. Pending.

Smith, Waltzer, Jones, & Peebles, Esqs., 1006 Baronne Bldg., 305 Baronne St., New Orleans; Dixon L. Pyles, Esq., E. Pearl St., Jackson.

55.86. Young v. Davis. (St. Augustine.) (MD Fla., 64-133-Civ-J.) May 28 and 29, 1964: Defs.-Mayor, Sheriff, Chief of Police orally ordered an end to nighttime civil rights demonstrations of any sort by Negroes and whites because such demonstrations had in the past ended in violence. June 1964: Pl.-Negro civil rights worker brought class suit to enjoin interference with nighttime demonstrations. June 9: DC (Simpson, C. J.) held order an unlawful prior restraint on freedom of speech, assembly, and petition, enjoined Defs. or those acting under their direction from enforcing the order or any similar orders. June 22: Fla.
- 80 -

Gov. Bryant issued order banning nighttime demonstrations. DC issued order to show cause why Gov. should not be held in contempt. June 25: Hearing. July 2: DC quashed order to show cause without prejudice.

Tobias Simon, Esq., 223 S.E. First St., Miami; William Kunstler, Esq., 511 Fifth Ave., NYC.

Case note: First Amendment protection of the right to picket and state public policy: Schwartz-Torrance Inv. Corp. v. Bakery & Confectionery Workers (35 Cal. Rptr. 179, 1963) 5 Boston College Ind'l. & Comm. L. Rev. 768-73.

56. Against and Concerning Minors (see also 430)

56.10. White and Cromwell v. Maryland. (Cambridge.) (Md. Ct. of App.) (192 A.2d 777; 194 A.2d 88.)*
56.11. Florida v. A.N.E. (formerly Singleton and Anderson v. Davis and Walters.) (St. Augustine.) (Juv. Ct.; Fla. Dist. Ct. of App., # #E-318—E-321; Fla. Sup. Ct., #33040.) (156 So.2d 525; 158 So.2d 513; 8 RRLR 1376.) Add to IX DOCKET 6: July 19, 1963: Juv. Ct. ordered St. Augustine Chief of Police, St. Johns Co. Sheriff and other police officials to bring before him (with their parents) all juveniles found picketing or demonstrating at local businesses; found such activity "detrimental to the health, morals and well being" of juveniles, hence within jurisdiction of ct. to supervise; sent letter to all known local NAACP officials advising them of its action. July 21: Defs.-four Negro juveniles (two 14 and two 16) ordered to appear in Juv. Ct. July 24: After hearing, Juv. Ct. found Defs. had caused breach of peace and violated Fla. trespass law by refusing to leave restaurant when ordered to do so by manager; found Defs. delinquent; ordered them committed to state detention schools when their parents refused to accept condition that Defs. not demonstrate. Sept. 3: Defs. moved in Dist. Ct. of App. for release on bail pending appeal; parents now ready to accept conditions. Sept. 11: D.C.A. remanded to Juv. Ct. for consideration of terms of probation. Dec. 1963: Defs. petitioned Fla. Sup. Ct. for habeas corpus, citing delay in Juv. Ct. proceedings. Sup. Ct. (sub. nom. Florida ex rel. Singleton v. Walters) dismissed petition: Defs. can get all relief they seek in pending Juv. Ct. action.
56.12. Alabama v. Defs. (Selma.) (Dallas Co. Juv. Ct.)*
56.13. City of Americus v. 32 Defs. (Sumter Co., Ga.) (Crim. Ct.)*

And see Gustafson, 51.48.

56.14. Florence v. Myers. (Ocala) (MD Fla., #64-3-Civ.-Ocala.) Dec. 20, 1963: Def.-Judge Myers, Marion Co. Juv. Ct., enjoined juveniles from picketing and demonstrating without written consent of Juv. Ct., directed anyone found violating injunction brought before Juv. Ct. Pls.-Negro juveniles and parents sued in DC to enjoin enforcement of Juv. Ct. order (28 USC §1343(3); 42 USC §§1981, 1983). Jan. 22, 1964: DC (Simpson, J.) held: (1) Defs.-city and Co. officials proper party Defs.; (2) order of Def.-Myers, issued without notice or hearing, contravened Pls.' First Amendment rights. Jan. 31: DC issued preliminary injunction declaring Juv. Ct. order void, enjoined Defs. from enforcing it.
57. Against Vagrancy

57.3. Louisiana v. Trumpower. (E. Baton Rouge Crim. Dist. Ct.)*
57.4. Georgia v. Sherrod and Allen. (Dawson.)*
57.5. Mississippi v. Rev. A. Jones. (Jackson.) (Hinds Co. Ct.)*

And see Jones, 58.12, 58.13, 401.7.

57.9. California v. Sandness, Hill. (Dist. Ct. of App.)*
58. Against Trespassing (see also 541, 542, 551, 552)

58.1. California v. Poland and Cage. (U.S.S.C., #21 Misc.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 8. May 18, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert. (Douglas, J. diss.)
58.2. Delaware v. Anderson, Livington. (Kent Co. Ct. of Com. Pleas.)*
58.3. Alabama v. Zellner. (Talladega.) (Ala. Sup. Ct.)*

And see 63.2.

58.4. Maryland v. Grubb. (Cambridge.)*
58.6. Alabama v. Student Defs. (Huntsville.) (Ala. Ct. of App.)*
58.7. Ohio v. Schlesinger. (Xenia.) (Greene Co. Com. Pleas Ct., # #9850-9866.)*
58.9. New York v. 7 Defs. (NYC.) (Crim. Ct.)*
58.12. Georgia v. Rev. A. Jones. (Fulton Co. Super. Ct.)*
58.13. Georgia v. Rev. A. Jones, et al. (ND Ga.)*
58.14b. U.S. v. Whittlesey. (Dist. of Col. Ct. of Gen. Sess., Crim. #9415-63.)*


58.15. California v. Hallinan. (San Francisco Muni. Ct., #H 65768, J 65805-H 65826.)*
58.16. California v. Bradley, Gregory. (San Francisco Muni. Ct., # #J 14447, 14140.)


58.17. California v. Sims. (San Francisco Muni. Ct., # #J 15591, 15602-15701.)


58.18. California v. Burbridge. (San Francisco Muni. Ct., #J 24265.) Facts: IX DOCKET 41. Trials continuing in groups of 10. Apr. 22: 10 Defs. in 58.17 moved for order requiring transcript prepared of portion of proceedings in another trial of 58.17 Defs., so defense attys. could more effectively cross-examine prosecution witnesses who had testified at other trials. Muni. Ct. (Ames, J.) granted motion. Judge in other dept. (Lawless, J.) ordered his reporter not to provide transcript. Apr. 24: Defs. sought prohibition in Super. Ct.; denied. May 1: Asst. DA was allowed to interrupt four pending trials for short "Law Day Address" on need for law and order. Defs. objected, moved for mistrial; denied.
- 81 -

In all trials, Defs. submitted instructions on malice, on fact Defs. demonstrating in favor of declared state public policy, on First Amendment issues (Edwards, 372 U.S. 229). Most such instructions denied. After several acquittals and hung juries in trials where Negro jurors were seated, prosecuting attorneys began peremptorily challenging Negro jurors; 10 Defs. filed removal petition in DC; see 58.18 at 73. In many cases, judges insisted Defs. be present throughout trials, despite usual practice to the contrary in misdemeanor cases; hence, many Defs. lost jobs, flunked courses. 4 lawyers (3 Negro and 1 white) cited for contempt during trials; most charges dism'd. at end of trials. As of July 1: charges against 17 Defs. dismissed for prosecution inability to make positive identification; 88 Defs. pleaded nolo contendere; 212 convicted, 46 acquitted, 108 hung jury verdicts. 29 retried: 10 convicted, 19 hung jury verdicts. Of 161 sentenced on nolo pleas and convictions: modal sentence—30 days and $56 to $200 fine; mean sentence—24 days and $79. All sentences heavier than for non-civil rights misdemeanant-first offenders. 5 Negro-Defs., leaders, given heavier sentences than co-defendants. Nolo sentences much lower than others. Appeals to be taken.

Additional counsel: Michael Berger, Esq., 1255 Post St.; Jack Berman, Esq., 995 Market; Frank Brann, Esq., Flood Bldg.; James Carter, Esq., 260 California St.; Ben Davis, Esq., 1095 Market; Herbert Donaldson, Esq., 333 Franklin St.; Hartley Fleischman, Esq., 593 Market; Aubrey Grossman, Esq., 1095 Market; Gordon Gaines, Esq., 123 2d St.; Frank Gentes, Esq., 737 Wisconsin St.; James Herndon and Donald Kerson, Esqs., 341 Market; Michael Lewton, Esq., 504 Van Ness; George Martinez, Esq., Mills Bldg.; Lloyd McMurray, Esq., 228 McAllister; Richard Peritz, Esq., 861 Bryant St.; Ted W. Rosenak, Esq., 220 Montgomery St.; Edward Solomon, Esq., 57 Post St.; Edward Stern, Esq., 690 Market; Ruth Harwitz, Esq., 1903 Baker; Phyliss Kassler, Esq., 345 Franklin; Bernard Cohn, Esq., 1255 Post St., all of San Francisco. Acklin Brown and John George, Esqs., 428 - 13th St.; William Belcher and Joseph Morozumi, Esqs., 360 - 22nd St.; Ben Travis, Esq., 428 13th St., of Oakland. Carlton Innes, Esq., 2975 Sacramento and Lemuel Washington, Esq., 3106 Shattuck, both of Berkeley. Harold Bremond, Esq., 801 Welch Rd., Palo Alto. Harold Gross, Esq., 745 Distal Dr., Los Altos. John Thorne, Esq., 510 N. 3d St., San Jose. George Corey, Esq., 201 Broadway Ave., Millbrae.

And see 58.18 at 73.

58.19. Delaware v. Brown. (Newark.) (Super. Ct., Dela. Sup. Ct.) (195 A.2d 379.) June 12, 1963: Def.-Negro refused service at Deer Park Hotel restaurant; refused to leave; arrested: trespass. July 1963: Def. and Atty.-Gen. stipulated refusal of service on ground of race, petitioned trial ct. to certify 14th Amendment question to Sup. Ct. Super. Ct. granted petition. Nov. 6, 1963: Sup. Ct. held Def. could not be prosecuted: (1) Def. a transient who sought only food, so no common law innkeeper's duty toward him; (2) Dela. statute (24 Del. C. §1501) permitting owners of places of public accommodation to exclude those whose presence would offend other customers is constitutional to extent it allows discrimination against Negroes; (3) owner's right to exclude is not state action solely because his premises are licensed; (4) but state may not, by prosecution for trespass, encourage or assist in private discrimination, citing Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1; (5) this ruling may prompt owners to use violent self-help, but state may not act unconstitutionally just to prevent threat of violence.
58.20. North Carolina v. Davis, Blow. (Enfield.) (N.C. Sup. Ct.) (135 S.E.2d 14, 17) Aug. 6, 1963: Defs.-Negroes entered Plantation Restaurant, sat at tables where white customers being served. Aug. 7: Defs. sought to enter restaurant, mgr. locked door, requested them to leave; arrested: trespass (G.S. §14-134); convicted. Mar. 18, 1964: N.C. Sup. Ct. affirmed: (1) statute applicable to Defs. conduct; (2) conviction does not violate due process and equal protection clauses of 14th Amendment.
58.21. Georgia v. Rachel. (Fulton Co. Super. Ct.) May-June 1963: Sit-ins at restaurants in Atlanta; many arrested. Aug. 2: Fulton Co. Grand Jury indicated Defs. for trespass (Ga. Code Ann. Tit. 26 §3005). Feb. 17, 1964: Defs. filed removal petitions in DC; see 58.21 at 73.

Donald Hollowell and Howard Moore, Jr., Esqs., 859½ Hunter St., NW, Atlanta 30314; NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund, Inc., 10 Columbus Cir., NYC 10019.

58.22. North Carolina v. Dove. (New Bern.) (N.C. Sup. Ct.) (134 S.E.2d 684, 9 RRLR 142.) July 16, 1963: Defs.-civil rights workers sat-in at A & W Drive-In; arrested: trespass after warning (G.S. §140134). July 29: Recorder's Ct. convicted; $25. each. Defs. appealed to Craven Co. Super. Ct. Sept. 1963: Co. Grand Jury indicted Defs. for trespass after warning; Super. Ct. convicted. Feb. 26, 1964: N.C. Sup. Ct. reversed: Recorder's Ct. has exclusive original jurisdiction of misdemeanors; Defs. may be tried in Super. Ct. on record of Recorder's Ct. proceedings, or in Recorder's Ct. on indictment.
58.23. U.S. v. Ballard. (San Francisco.) (ND Calif., Cr. 39732.) May 1964: Six Defs. demonstrated against American activity in Vietnam at Presidio Army Base; arrested: trespass. Pending.

Patrick Hallinan, Esq., 345 Franklin St., San Francisco.

58.24. New York v. Collins. (N.Y. Criminal Court—Queens, # #B2772-B2779.) Apr. 28, 1964: Defs.-four young women peacefully picketed Florida pavilion at NY World's Fair; arrested by Pinkerton officers: trespassing (N.Y. Penal Law §2036), disorderly conduct (§722 (2) and (4)). June 12: Crim. Ct. overruled demurrer, found Defs. guilty; sentences suspended. Defs. appeal to App. Term, NY Sup. Ct., pending. Issues: (1) Is World's Fair public property because of extensive subsidy by NY state and local govts., because of NY statute (Laws of N.Y., 1963, c. 892(3)) making acts committed on Fair grounds cognizable under state penal statutes, and under Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501? (2) Defs. only paraded peacefully, only crowd which collected was Pinkerton men and reporters—can Defs. be convicted of disorderly conduct as defined in NY statute?

Marvin Karpatkin, Esq., 660 Madison Ave., NYC 21; Janet Johnson, Esq., NYCLU, 156 Fifth Ave., NYC 10.

And see World's Fair Defs., 51.56.

58.25. Texas v. Wilson. (Dallas.) (Muni. Ct.) June 1964: Defs. sat-in at segregated cafeteria; arrested. July 3: When 1964 Civil Rights Act signed, all charges dismissed.

John B. Wilson, Jr., Esq., 2606 Fidelity Union Tower, Dallas.

- 82 -

59. Against Miscellaneous Criminal Activities
See cases at 123.
59.22. North Carolina v. Crowder, Covington, Lowry, Reape, Mallory. (Union Co. Super. Ct.) (Mallory extradition appeals: 318 F.2d 816, cert. den. 375 U.S. 935, 1963). Facts: VIII DOCKET 9, 72, IX DOCKET 7, 41. Feb. 28: Def.-Mallory sentenced—32-40 yrs.; Crowder—14-20 yrs.; Reape—10-14 yrs.; Lowry—6-10 yrs.
59.22b. North Carolina v. R. Covington. (Union Co. Super. Ct.)*
59.26. Mississippi v. Bevel. (Jackson.) (Hinds Co. Ct.)*
59.27. Mississippi v. Aaron Henry. (Clarksdale.) (Cir. Ct.)*
59.27a. Mississippi v. Aaron Henry. (U.S.S.C., #537.) (154 So.2d 289, cert. granted 376 U.S. 904.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 95, IX DOCKET 7. Correction: On appeal to Miss. Sup. Ct., conviction reversed: search of Def.'s car, parked in his driveway, was illegal without warrant, tho Def. was at time of search in custody and Def.'s wife consented and gave police the key. On reconsideration, Sup. Ct. affirmed conviction; tho search unlawful, failure to object at trial waived Def.'s right to have evidence excluded. Feb. 17: U.S.S.C. granted cert.

And see Collins, 61.23 and Henry, 571.14.

59.28. Kentucky v. Pfuhl and Duffey. (Louisville City Ct.)*
59.31. U.S. v. Gibson. (ED Ky., Jackson Div., #10,095.)*
59.31a. Kentucky v. Gibson. (Whitesburg.) (Letcher Co. Cir. Ct.) Oct. 1962: Def.-Gibson and 6 other members of roving-picket movement arrested: armed robbery and assault with intent to commit murder for allegedly setting upon group of men who attempted to crash Defs.' picket line. May 1, 1964: After jury trial, Defs. acquitted.

Harry Caudill, Esq., Whitesburg, Ky.; Dan Jack Combs, Esq.

59.33. Louisiana v. Rev. Davis. (Baton Rouge.) (La. Sup. Ct., Crim. #47-225.)*


In several southern cities recently, civil rights leaders have been arrested and held until they put up peace bonds.

59.34. Lubeck v. Hosea Williams. (Savannah.) (Muni. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 7. Text of statement signed by Defs. to secure release in 8 RRLR 1380.
59.35. Anderson and Long v. Alabama. (Selma.) (Ala. Ct. of App.) Facts: IX DOCKET 7. Mar. 6, 1964: Ala. Ct. of App. reversed peace bond sentences.
59.36. Mississippi v. Brown. (Walthall City Ct.; ND Miss.) June 20, 1964: Def. driving COFO workers in Webster Co., stopped by Miss. Highway Patrol, cited for reckless driving. June 22: City Ct. ordered Def. to appear June 27. June 26: Def. filed removal petition; see 59.36 at 73.

Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson.

Many other civil rights workers were arrested in Mississippi for traffic violations, held a few hours or overnight, released on $60—$300 bond; or tried, convicted and fined $15 to $50. One Def. was acquitted: June 17—Vicksburg; June 25—Jackson, Durant; June 26—Holmes Co.; June 27—Batesville; June 29—Hattiesburg; June 30—Jackson; Jy. 3—Meridian, Columbus; Jy. 15—Moss Point, Clarksdale; Jy. 21—Clarksdale, Holly Springs, Jackson; Jy. 23—Jackson, Moss Point, Grenada, Natchez, Tchula; Jy. 27—McComb; Jy. 28—Holly Springs; Jy. 31—Meridian, Greenwood.

60. Civil Sanctions (and Contempt Charges)
61. Against Defamation

61.9. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. (U.S.S.C., #39.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 9, IX DOCKET 42. Cite: 376 U.S. 254.

Case note: 9 Villanova 534-39.

61.9a. Commr. James v. The New York Times, Rev. Shuttlesworth, et al. (Montgomery Cir. Ct.)*
61.9b. Commr. Parks and Patterson v. The New York Times. (U.S.S.C., #52.) (308 F.2d 474.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 10, 72, 127. Mar. 23, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert.
61.10. Gov. Patterson v. The New York Times, Rev. King, Shuttlesworth. (Montgomery Cir. Ct.)*
61.11. The New York Times v. Connor and Bessemer City Commrs. (ND Ala.)*
61.16. Barton v. Gov. Barnett. (Hinds Co. Cir. Ct., #16,525.)*
61.17. Franklin v. Paradise American Legion Post 259. (Butte Co. Super. Ct., Calif., ##39103, 39906.)*
61.18. Pauling v. Anti-Communist League of York Co. (MD Pa., #7940.)*
61.18a. Pauling v. National Review. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.)*
61.18b. Pauling v. News Syndicate Co. Inc. (CA 2.)*
61.18d. Pauling v. St. Louis Globe-Democrat. (ED Mo., E. Div. #6 C 312(3))*
61.19. Brent v. Singlemann, Citizen's Council of New Orleans. (ED La.)*
61.20. Harper v. National Review and Buckley. (NYC Sup. Ct.)*
61.22. Normile v. Am. Medical Assn. (DC DC, #CA 2806-23.)*
61.23. Collins and Pearson v. Henry. (Clarksdale.) (Miss. Sup. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 8. Cite in Miss. Sup. Ct.: 158 So.2d 28.

And see Henry, 59.27, 59.27a, 571.14.

61.24. City of Gadsden v. Am. Broadcasting Co. (Etowah Cir. Ct., #9072.)*
62. By Injunction in Labor Disputes
Case note: Unfair labor practice—availability of injunction prior to exhaustion of administrative remedies: Automobile Trade Assn. v. Madden, (215 F. Supp. 828, N.D. Ill. 1963) 17 Vanderbilt 602-08.
63. By Injunction in Other Situations (see also 40)
And see cases at 204.
63.2. Alabama ex rel. Atty. Genl. Gallion v. Gray. (Talladega.) (Ala. Sup. Ct., #630.)*
- 83 -

63.3. Fair Share Organization v. Mitnick, d/b/a Central Fourth St. Drugs. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 10, 123. Ind. Sup. Ct. upheld permanent injunction and $5,000 damages against Def.-organization. Petition for cert. pending.
63.3a. Fair Share Organization v. Philip Nagdeman & Sons. (East Chicago, Ind.) (Ind. App. Ct., #20018; U.S.S.C.) (191 NE. 2d 1; 193 N.E.2d 257.) Feb. 1962: Pet. demanded Resp. hire Negro salesman; Resp. refused. Pet. began to picket Resp. Aug. 11: Resp. sued for injunction against picketing and damages. Mar. 21, 1963: Cir. Ct. held for Resp.: $10,000 and costs and permanent injunction against picketing. Apr. 5: Pets. sought writ of mandate in Ind. Sup. Ct. requiring Cir. Ct. to enter findings and conclusions denying relief sought by Resp. June 14: Ind. Sup. Ct. denied writ (sub. nom. Indiana ex rel. Fair Share Org. Inc. v. Cir Ct.); mandate is improper remedy. Oct. 22, 1963: App. Ct. affirmed Cir. Ct. Feb. 25, 1964: Sup. Ct. denied petition to transfer. Pet. filed petition for cert. in U.S.S.C. Issues: (1) whether judgment denies Pet.'s First and 14th Amendment rights; (2) whether labor dispute is involved, making Indiana statutes relied on by trial and appellate cts. inapplicable.

Hilbert L. Bradley, Esq., 1649 Broadway, Gary, Ind.; Charles P. Howard, Jr., Esq., 1300 American Bldg., Baltimore.

And see 63.3, and 55.4, 55.4a, 55.4b (V DOCKET 23—VIII DOCKET 38).

63.4. B & B Cash Grocery Stores, Inc. v. Young Adults for Progressive Action. *
63.5. Kelley v. Page. (Albany.) (CA 5, #20720.)


Anderson v. City of Albany. (CA 5, #20711.)*

63.7. City of Birmingham v. Walker. (Cir. Ct., 10th Jud. Cir., 91a., #130-173.) (Ala. Sup. Ct., 6th Div., #999.)*
63.8. City of Jackson v. Salter. (Hinds Co. Chancery Ct., 1st Jud. Dist., #63,429.) (374 U.S. 818.)*
63.8a. NAACP v. Thompson. (Jackson.) (SD Miss., #3432.) Facts: IX DOCKET 8. Jan. 10, 1964: DC denied preliminary injunction. Feb. 3: Trial began. Pls. put on 49 witnesses in support of allegation that Defs. suppress all protest against segregation. Feb. 28: Trial completed. June 1: DC denied all relief, dismissed complaint.
63.9. Zellner v. Lingo. (MD Ala., #1924-N.)*
63.10. Alabama ex rel. Flowers v. M. Robinson. (Gadsden.) (Etowah Co. Cir. Ct., #16,743.)*
63.10a. Ex parte Marvin Robinson. (Gadsden.) (Ala. Ct. of App.)*
63.11. Town of Clinton v. CORE. (formerly Louisiana v. CORE.) (20th Jud. Dist. Ct., #A6539; ED La., Civ. #2840; CA 5, #20960.) Facts: IX DOCKET 9. Correction: CA 5 stay of state court proceedings was in connection with CA 5 consideration in this case of appealability of remand order after 28 USC §1441 removal; pending. See 63.11 at 73. La. Dist. Ct. proceedings are in abeyance.

William M. Kunstler and Arthur Kinoy, Esqs., 511 Fifth Ave., NYC; Nils R. Douglas and Robert F. Collins, Esqs., 2211 Dryades St., New Orleans; Carl Rachlin, Esq., 164 W. 46th St., NYC; Floyd B. McKissick, Esq., 213½ W. Main St., Durham, N.C.

63.12. U.S. ex rel. Louisiana v. CORE. (Plaquemine.) (CA 5.)*
63.13. City of Tallahassee v. 150 Defs. (City Ct.)*
63.14. Porzio Restaurant v. Williams. (Savannah.) (Super. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 9. June 15, 1964: At hearing on Def's. motion to dismiss for want of service, Super. Ct. gave Pls. 30 days to get proper service, denied motion to dismiss.
63.15. U.S. v. Patridge. (Winona, Miss.) (SD Miss., Jackson Div.)*
63.17. Burford v. Nonviolent Action Comm. (Inglewood, Calif.) (Los Angeles Co. Super. Ct., #SWC 3816.)*
63.18. Long v. Isen. (L.A. Super. Ct.)*
63.19. Carson v. Corleto (formerly Pa. NAACP v. Mummers.) (Philadelphia.) (Ct. of Com. Pleas.) Facts: IX DOCKET 43. Case closed.
63.19a. Nichols v. Phila. Chapter of CORE (formerly Pa. Council of Churches v. Mummers.) (Philadelphia.) (Ct. of Com. Pleas, #1648-Eq.) (9 RRLR 326.) Facts: IX DOCKET 43. Case closed.
63.20. Levitt & Sons, Inc. v. Prince George's Co. CORE. (Co. Cir. Ct.; DC Md., #14942.) (221 F.Supp. 541, 8 RRLR 1386.) Aug. 16, 1963: Pl. sued, alleging he built a tract of homes, did not want to sell to Negroes, but Def.-CORE chapter planned demonstrations aaginst Pl. including trespass on property; asked for injunction. Cir. Ct. issued temporary injunction. Aug. 23: Defs. filed petition for removal to DC (28 U.S.C. 1441). Sept. 17, 1963: DC remanded to Cir. Ct.: (1) neither diversity nor federal claim appears in Pl's. complaint; (2) Defs. failed to show their civil rights denied under color of state law.
63.21. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. CORE. (San Diego Co. Super. Ct., Civ. #281132; 4th Dist. Ct. of App., Civ. #7650.) Jan. 1964: Pl. sued for injunction against mass picketing and sitting-in in protest of Pl.'s allegedly discriminatory hiring practices. Jan. 17: Super. Ct. granted preliminary injunction. Pls'. appeal pending in DCA. Issues: (1) Is scope of injunction excessive, violating First Amendment? (2) Is rule of Hughes v. Superior Court, 339 U.S. 460, inapplicable to present conditions? (3) Has state FEPC exclusive jurisdiction?

John W. Porter, Esq., 1346 Garnet Ave., San Diego 92109.

63.22. Bank of America v. CORE. (San Diego Co. Super. Ct., #286777.) June 1964: Pl. sued for injunction against mass picketing, "stalling-in" (pickets stand in line at teller's windows to change bills into small change, etc.) and other trespass. June 26: Temporary restraining order issued. Issues same as 63.22. Pending.

John W. Porter, Esq., 1346 Garnet Ave., San Diego.

63.22a. California v. Brown. (San Diego.) (San Diego Muni. Ct.) July 1964: Defs.-10 CORE members arrested at Bank of America, charged with trespass (Cal. Penal §602(j), (1)) and wilful violation of temporary restraining order (Cal. Penal Code §166 (4)). Pending.

John W. Porter, Esq., 1346 Garnet Ave., San Diego.

- 84 -

63.23. Jefferson Bank & Trust Co. v. Curis, CORE. (St. Louis.) (Cir. Ct., #57945; Ct. of App., ##31777 - 31779.) (374 S.W.2d 557.) Aug. 30, 1963: Pl. bank sued, alleging threat of "direct action" by CORE if it did not hire Negro tellers, sought injunction against picketing and sit-ins. Cir. Ct. issued temporary restraining order. 4 p.m. Aug. 30: Two individual Defs. and 100 members and supporters of Def.-CORE picketed Pl., blocked doors of Pl.'s bank. Sept. 1: Orders to show cause why they should not be found in contempt served on 8 persons. Oct. 4 and 5: CORE continued demonstrations. Cir. Ct. found 19 persons in contempt; up to 1 yr. and up to $1000. Dec. 6: Cir. Ct. issued permanent injunction, barring interference with Pl.'s business by conduct inside or outside bank. Jan. 15, 1964: In original proceedings in habeas corpus filed by contemners, Ct. of App. found (sub. nom. Curtis v. Tozer) overwhelming evidence of guilt of 15 contemners, ordered 4 others released as they had counselled against violation of restraining order and had not entered bank: (1) dispute between CORE and bank not a "labor dispute," so state ct. has jurisdiction; (2) sentences not cruel and unusual punishment—contemners are school teachers, attorneys and college students and hence aware of nature of conduct; (3) All Defs. had notice of order; (4) due process not denied by appointing officers of bank as special prosecutors.
64. Against Miscellaneous Activities

64.4. Reed v. CORE. (Cir. Ct., Etowah, Alabama, #8795.) June 19, 1963: Pl.-white woman sued for damages, alleging battery by group of demonstrators as she passed them on sidewalk. Pending.

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, 10 Columbus Circle, NYC.

70. Procedureal Problems
71. In Alleging Standing to Sue
72. In Raising and Preserving Constitutional Questions
73. In Removing from State to Federal Courts
(Cases reported here will usually bear a number determined by the substantive crime with which the Def. is charged, e.g., trespass, contempt, disorderly conduct, and issues uniquely related to that crime will be reported under that category. The removal issues only will be reported here.)

1964 Civil Rights Act:

§901. Title 28 of the United States Code, section 1447(d), is amended to read as follows:

"An order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise, except that an order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed pursuant to section 1443 of this title shall be reviewable by appeal or otherwise."

73.1. Lefton v. City of Hattiesburg. (CA 5, #21441.) Facts: IX DOCKET 43. June 5, 1964: CA 5, per Wright, J. (sitting by designation) held: (1) question of separate removal petitions for each prosecution is a matter for the informed discretion of the DC, 28 USC §1446(a); (2) filing fees and removal bonds are not authorized in criminal removal cases, 28 USC §§1914, 1446(d); (3) local counsel have been found to associate with Pets.' chosen counsel, but waiver of local rules requiring this, or admission pro hac vice, should be allowed when it is alleged that local counsel are not available to associate, Button, 204.4a, 371 U.S. 415. Ct. declined to issue mandamus as DC had indicated in memorandum that it would comply with views of CA.
73.2. North Carolina v. Francis. (Elizabeth City.) (N.C. Sup. Ct.) (134 S.E.2d 681.) Nov. 1963: Defs. arrested: trespass. Defs. filed removal petition (28 USC §1443) in DC, with copy to trial judge. Trial judge wrote "motion denied" on his copy, tried and convicted Defs. Feb. 26, 1964: Sup. Ct. reversed: In 1948, Congress amended 28 USC §1443 to provide that DC, not trial court, pass on criminal petitions; when petitions filed in DC, state court loses jurisdiction and all acts after filing are void.

And see Dotort, 51.50.

55.35. Baines v. City of Danville, McGhee v. City of Danville. (CA 4, ##9080, 9082.) Facts: 55.35 at VIII DOCKET 125-126, IX DOCKET 40, 78. July 1963: CA 4 issued writs of habeas corpus cum causa to remove state prisoners from state custody: Defs. had been tried and convicted in state court following filing of 28 USC §1443 removals in DC.
55.80. Alabama v. William Chace. (Tuscaloosa Co. Ct.; ND Ala., Civ. #64-260.) Facts: 55.80 at IX DOCKET 79. Motion to remand pending.

Oscar W. Adams, Jr., Esq., 1630 N. Fourth Ave., Birmingham.

55.81. Mississippi v. 25 Meridian Defs. (SD Miss., Meridian Div.) Facts: IX DOCKET 79 at 55.81. Removal petition alleges: (1) Defs. arrested because of Miss. state and local officials' policy to harass civil rights workers; (2) segregation is public policy of Miss. citing Miss. Code §4065; (3) and numerous anti-civil rights, anti-picketing statutes passed in 1964; (3) Defs. will be and have been tried in segregated courtroom, called by their first names, tried by judges and prosecutors elected and appointed contrary to 14th Amendment equal protection clause, and by jury from which Negroes are systematically excluded; (4) Defs. unable to find volunteer Miss. counsel so seek relief from SD Miss. rule-of-court requiring attys. appearing specially to associate local counsel. DC required Defs. to file separate removal petitions for each Def. Pending.

Don Loria, Esq., Cadillac Tower, Detroit; Charles Markels, Esq., 105 So. LaSalle St., Chicago; Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson.

55.82. Mississippi v. 7 Defs. (SD Miss.) Facts: 55.82 at IX DOCKET 79. Removal petition raises same issues as 25 Meridian Defs., 55.81.

Henry McGhee, Esq., 309 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago 6; Ralph Shapiro, Esq., 9 E. 40th St., NYC 16; Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson.

55.83. Mississippi and City of Greenwood v. Carmichael. (ND Miss., Greenville Div., #GCR 6429) Facts: 55.85 at IX DOCKET 79. Removal petitions and Pets'. brief in opposition to City's motions to remand allege: Miss. statute
- 85 -

HB 546 passed for sole purpose of denying to members of Pets.' class equal protection of laws, Miss. statutes in toto explicitly deny equal rights; Pets. acting under color of authority of Constitution and laws of U.S. guaranteeing equal rights; removal perfected by actual notice to Resp. and cases were providently removed as civil rights cases. Pets. filed motion for order granting hearing on factual issues put in controversy by Resp's. pending motion to remand.

Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson; Smith, Waltzer, Jones & Peebles, Esqs., 1006 Baronne Bldg., 305 Baronne St., New Orleans; Fay Stender, Esq., 341 Market Street, San Francisco.

55.83a. Mississippi and City of Greenwood v. Albertz. (ND Miss., Greenville Div., #GCR 6435-GCR 6448 (14 cases)) Facts: 55.83a at IX DOCKET 79. Removal petitions and Def.-Pets.' brief in opposition to Resp's. motions to remand allege various misdemeanor prosecutions instituted solely to attempt to intimidate, threaten and coerce Negro citizens for purpose of interfering with their right to register and vote by impeding Pets. in their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of free speech and assembly; customary law of Miss. more coercive and effective than statutory law, both of which types of law explicitly and effectively deny members of Pets.' class equal protection. Pets. filed motion for order granting hearing on factual issues put in controversy by Resp's. motion to remand; pending.

Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson; Fay Stender, Esq., 341 Market Street, San Francisco.

55.84. City of Drew, Miss. v. McNair. (ND Miss., Greenville Div. #GCR 6417-6420, 6430-6434.) Facts: 55.84 at IX DOCKET 79. Removal petitions and briefs raise same issues as 55.83 except with reference to City of Drew ordinances rather than Miss. statute HB 546. Same motions pending.

Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson; Fay Stender, Esq., 341 Market Street, San Francisco.

58.18. California v. Burbridge. (San Francisco Muni. Ct., J24265; ND Calif.) Facts: IX DOCKET 41, 80. June 16, 1964: 11 Defs. filed 28 USC §1443 removal petition in DC, alleging 2 prosecutors assigned from Calif. Atty. Genl.'s office were under instructions to peremptorily challenge Negro jurors. Atty.-Innis served copy of removal petition on Muni. Judge Lawless just before trial of removed cases due to begin. Muni. Ct. ordered selection of jury to continue without Defs., ordered Atty.-Innis jailed for contempt, issued bench warrants for Defs. Super. Ct. issued writ of habeas corpus; Atty-Innis released from custody. June 17: DC remanded to Muni. Ct.: remedy for alleged violation lies by appeal through state courts, for removal is contemplated under §1443 only when state laws and procedures themselves deny equal protection.
58.21. Georgia v. Rachel, Georgia v. Tuttle. (Fulton Co. Super. Ct.; ND Ga., ##23869-Cr., 23875-Cr., 23886-Cr.; CA 5, #21354; U.S.S.C., #1361 Misc.) Facts: 58.21 at IX DOCKET 81. Feb. 17, 1964: Defs. in #23869 filed 28 U.S.C. §1443 removal petition in DC. Feb. 18: Without hearing, DC remanded to Super. Ct. Mar. 5: Defs. filed notice of appeal from remand order in CA 5. Mar. 12: CA 5 (2-1) ordered stay pending decision of Town of Clinton, 63.11, on appealability of remand order. Mar. 12 and 19: Defs. in ##23875 and 23886 removed to DC under 28 U.S.C. §1443. Mar. 21: DC enjoined Ga. Solicitor Genl. from prosecuting Defs. in removed cases, ordered Mar. removal petitions held in abeyance until CA 5 decision on appealability. Mar. 25: DC enjoined Fulton Co. Sheriff Grimes from taking Defs. into custody. Mar. 20: Fulton Co. Super. Ct. Judge Pye entered order declining "to surrender jurisdiction" to DC and CA 5, directing Solicitor Genl. to prosecute Defs. Apr. 1: Fulton Co. Super. Ct. Judge Pye ordered Solicitor Genl. to seek mandamus in U.S.S.C. to secure order vacating CA 5 Mar. 12 order as in excess of its jurisdiction. Issues: (1) Appealability of 28 U.S.C. §1443 remand in light of 28 U.S.C. §1447 (d); (2) whether filing of appeal from remand order was untimely; (3) whether there is any basis for removal. Apr. 20: Fulton Co. Super. Ct. Judge Pye noted DC injunctions, ordered removed cases taken off calendar "until the rule of law shall be restored within the territorial limits of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Judicial Circuit." June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied Judge Pye's motion for leave to file petition for writ of prohibition or mandamus.

Donald Hollowell and Howard Moore, Jr., Esqs., 859½ Hunter St., N.W., Atlanta 30314; NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund, Inc., 10 Columbus Cir., NYC 10019.

59.36. Mississippi v. Brown. (ND Miss.) Facts: IX DOCKET 82. Removal petition raises same issues as 25 Meridian Defs., 55.81.

Natl. Lawyers Guild Comm. for Legal Assist. in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson.

63.11. Town of Clinton v. CORE. (ED La., Civ. #2840; CA 5, #20960.) Facts: 63.11 at IX DOCKET 9, 83. Aug. 28, 1963: Defs. removed under 28 USC §1441, covering removal of civil actions (note language of 1964 Civil Rights Act re appealability). Sep. 13: DC remanded. Oct. 14: CA 5 ordered La. Dist. Ct. proceedings stayed pending decision on appealability of remand order or Def's. alternative request for mandamus directing DC to accept jurisdiction.

For list of attorneys, see 63.11 at 63.

And see Levitt, 63.20.

90. Miscellaneous Freedom of Thought
And see 560's.
110. Separation of Church and State
Law review article: Jonathan Weiss, Privilege, posture and protection: "Religion" in the law. 73 Yale 593-623.

Comment: The free exercise and establishment clauses: Conflict or coordination? Minnesota U. 929-46.

111. In Education
Law review article: Robert C. Casad, On teaching religion at the state university. 12 Kansas U. 405-16.

Comment: The place of religion in the schools of Iowa. 49 Iowa U. 771-88.

- 86 -

111.10. Chamberlin and Resnick v. Miami and Dade Co. Bds. of Educ. (Fla. Sup. Ct.) (U.S.S.C., #939.) (143 So.2d 21; 374 U.S. 487; 160 So.2d 97.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 11, 96, 128. Fla. Sup. Ct. held statute (Fla. Stat. §231.09) requiring Bible reading and reading of prayer encourages good citizenship among pupils, is not repugnant to the establishment clause. June 1, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, reversed as to constitutionality of statutes, refused to decide other questions raised (baccalaureate services, religious census of pupils, religious test for teachers) "for want of properly presented fedl. questions." Douglas, Black, JJ.: other questions should be decided: baccalaureate services and religious census present "no substantial fedl. question"; religious test for teachers should be argued on merits.
111.23. Polster v. Centennial Joint School Bd. (Bucks Co., Pa. Super. Ct. #M 1 (1962).)*
111.26. Re Five Pupils . (N.J. State Educ. Comm.)*
111.27. New Jersey v. Hawthorne School Bd . (N.J. Sup. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 9. May 18, 1964: Sup. Ct. affirmed Super. Ct. decision for Atty. Genl. without opinion.
111.28. Prayer Rights for American Youth v. N.Y. Bd. of Educ. (ED NY.)*
111.29. Balgooyen v. Los Gatos Joint Union High School Dist. (Santa Clara Co. Super. Ct.) 1962-63: Lengthy debate over propriety and legality of vesper services on public school property with participation of students and Christian clergy, and in connection with high school graduation. Apr. 22, 1963: Co. Counsel ruled use of school property by community organization for vesper services not contemplated by Calif's. Civic Center Act. Def.-trustees rejected advice of Co. Counsel, approved vesper services for June 1964 if sponsored by PTA. May 1964: Pl.-parent of high school student sued. June 5: Super. Ct. granted temporary restraining order. June 8: Services held off school property. Trial on permanent injunction to be set.

ACLU of N. Calif., 503 Market St., San Francisco.

Case note: Use of school property for temporary erection of privately-financed religious symbol: Lawrence v. Buchmueller (40 Misc. 2d 300, 243 N.Y.S. 2d 87, Sup. Ct. 1963) 30 Brooklyn U. 356-59.

Case note: Constitutionality of transporting non-public school children on public school buses: Bd. of Educ. v. Antone (384 P.2d 911, Okla. 1963) 17 Oklahoma U. 174-77.

112. In Public Places

112.25. Co. of Los Angeles and Bethlehem Star Parade Assn. v. Hollinger. (Dist. Ct. App., 2nd Dist., #26868.)*
112.26. In re Jenison (formerly Jenison v. Minnesota.) (120 N.W. 2d 515.) Cites: 375 U.S. 514; on remand, 125 N.W.2d 288.
120. Conscientious Objection to War
Comment: Freedom of conscience and compulsory military service. 13 Buffalo U. 463-76.
121. Through Application for C. O. Status
Comment: Constitutionality of requiring belief in supreme being for draft exemption as conscientious objector. 64 Colorado U. 938-50.
121.29. Mang v. Pasadena Draft Bd. No. 91. (SD Calif.)*
121.30. U. S. v. Stolberg. (CA 7.) Facts: IX DOCKET 9. Action delayed pending U.S.S.C. decision in Seeger, 121.32.
121.31. U.S. v. Peter. (U.S.S.C., #787.) (324 F.2d 173.) Facts: IX DOCKET 10, 44. Apr. 24, 1964: U.S.S.C. granted cert.: to be argued with Seeger, 121.32.
121.32. U.S. v. Seeger. (U.S.S.C., #936.) (326 F.2d 846.) Facts: IX DOCKET 44. Apr. 24, 1964: U.S.S.C. granted cert.

Case notes: 48 Minn. U. 271-78, 25 Pitt. U. 596-601.

121.33. U.S. v. Jakobson. (U.S.S.C., #937.) (325 F.2d 409.) Facts, issues, status same as Seeger, 121.32. Apr. 24, 1964: U.S.S.C. granted cert.
121.34. U.S. v. MacMurray. (SD Calif.; CA 9, #18792.) (330 F.2d 928.) Def. said on SSS No. 150 he did not believe in Supreme Being. Local Selective Service Bd. refused to classify him 1-0. Def. convicted of failure to report for induction. Apr. 8, 1964: CA 9 reversed.

J. B. Tietz, Esq., 410 Douglas Bldg., S. Spring and 3d Sts., Los Angeles.

122. Through Refusal to Register

122.31. U.S. v. Hoertkorn. (ND Calif., #39509.) Def. did not apply for CO status, did not consider himself religious objector even within broad test in Seeger, 121.32. Aug. 6, 1963: Def. failed to appear for induction after order to do so: indicted under 50 USC App. §462(a). May 1964: Def. pleaded guilty; 2 yrs. probation on condition he work at VA Hospital as volunteer worker.

Jerrold Levitin, Esq., 1231 Market St., San Francisco.

123. Through Civil Disobedience

123.26. Council v. Donovan, NYC Supt. of Schools. (Kings Co. Sup. Ct., #3496/1963.)*
123.27. McCaffrey v. N.Y.C. Bd. of Educ. (Kings Co. Sup. Ct.)*
130. Denial of Tax Exemption to Institutions (see also 202, 266)
140. Sunday Closing Laws
Comment: Sunday blue laws. 18 Wyoming U. 42-7.
140.31. Sherbert v. Verner. (374 U.S. 398.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 129. Case notes: 11 UCLA 423; 49 Iowa U. 952-60.
150. Miscellaneous Restrictions
151. In Prisons
And see cases at 304.
151.4. Sewell v. Pegelow. (ED Va.)*
151.4a. Childs v. Pegelow. (U.S.S.C., #570 Misc.) (321 F.2d 487.) Facts: IX DOCKET 45. Feb. 24, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert.
151.5. SaMarion v. McGinnis. (Attica State Prison) (CA 2.)*
- 87 -

151.6. Cooper v. Pate. (CA 7, U.S.S.C., #1134 Misc.) (324 F. 2d 165.) Facts: IX DOCKET 10. Addition: CA 7, citing use of sociological data in Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 347 U.S. 483, took "judicial notice" of Chicago Police Dept. report on Black Muslims, found Muslims could become serious prison discipline problem if allowed to practice their religion. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, granted cert., reversed: taking as true allegation that Pls. deprived of privileges given other prisoners, it was error to dismiss complaint.
152. In Other Places

152.5. Dawud and Dakota Staton v. Muhammad and Muhammad's Temple of Islam. (ED Pa., #21,367.)*
Case note: Interrogation of employees concerning union activities. Offner Electronics, Inc. (134 N.L.R.B. No. 89, 1961) 17 Oklahoma U. 207-15.


200. Organizational Privileges Challenged
201. As to Meetings (see also 11, 63)
202. As to Tax Exemption (see also 130, 266)

202.4. U.S. v. Communist Party, Hall, Flynn, Davis, Bart. (SD N.Y.)*

And see 202.4a.

202.4a. Communist Party v. Commr. of Internal Revenue. (Tax Ct.)*
202.5. Re Revocation of Exemption of Fellowship of Reconciliation. (Int. Rev. Serv.)*
203. As to N.L.R.B. Certification (see also 245, 291)

203.3. U.S. v. R. Dennis. (CA 10.)*
204. As to Continued Existence (see also 63, 213, 223)

204.1. NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Flowers. (U.S.S.C., #169.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 13, 74. June 1, 1964: U.S.S.C. unanimously reversed, Harlan, J.: (1) 23 claimed errors in trial ct. are inadequate nonfederal basis for Ala. S. Ct. decision; (2) the allegation that NAACP "has failed to comply with the statutory requirements for a foreign corp. to do business in Ala., furnishes no basis under Ala. law for its ouster"; (3) "Neither furnishing [Arthurine Lucy and Polly Anne Meyers] . . financial assistance . . . to attend the Univ., nor providing them with legal counsel to assist their efforts to gain admission was unlawful or could . . . be inhibited because contrary to the Univ's. policy against admitting Negroes."; (4) Organized refusal to ride buses in Montgomery "could not constitutionally be the basis for a permanent denial of the right to associate for the advocacy of ideas by lawful means."; (5) "It is obvious that the complete suppression of the Assn's. activities in Ala. which was accomplished by the order below is an even more serious abridgement" of freedom of association than compelling disclosure of members' names; (6) Remanded to Ala. Sup. Ct. to enter decree vacating permanent injunction against NAACP, permitting it to take all necessary steps to qualify to do business in Ala.
204.4. NAACP Legal Defense and Educ. Fund, Inc. v. Button. (ED Va., #2436.)*
204.4b. NAACP Legal Defense Fund v. Gray. (Richmond Cir. Ct., #B-2879.)*
204.4c. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar v. NAACP, NAACP Legal Defense and Educ. Fund, Inc., Va. State Conf. of Branches, NAACP. (Richmond Chancery Ct., #503.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 14, IX DOCKET 10. Case dismissed by stipulation; Defs. agreed to operate within Button, 204.4a, 371 U.S. 415.
204.8. Arkansas ex rel. Bennett v. NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund. (Cir. Ct., Pulaski Co., #44679.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 14. Correction of VIII DOCKET 129, IX DOCKET 10: Facts listed under 204.8 and 204.9 refer to Bennett, 204.9a, below, not previously reported. Statuts of 204.8 is as reported at VIII, 14: pending on cross-motions for judgment on pleadings.
204.9. Arkansas ex rel. Bennett v. NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund. (Cir. Ct., Pulaski Co., #45183.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 14. See above, 204.8, for correction. Status of case is as reported at VIII, 14: pending on Def.'s objections to interrogatories propounded by Pl.-Atty. Genl.
204.9a. NAACP v. Bennett, Atty. Genl. (ED Ark.; U.S.S.C.; Pulaski Co. Ch. Ct.; Ark. Sup. Ct.) (4 RRLR 349, 178 F. Supp. 188; 360 U.S. 471; 5 RRLR 179, 178 F.Supp. 191; 8 RRLR 620, 370 S.W.2d 79.) 1959: Pl. sued to restrain enforcement of state statutes on barratry, maintenance, interference with state operation of schools, and authorizing state officials to compel organizations to file information if interfering with state operation of schools. DC granted Defs'. motion to stay pending interpretation of statutes by state courts. U.S.S.C. vacated and remanded, for consideration in light of Harrison, 204.4, 360 U.S. 167: When state statute challenged as unconstitutional, "reference to state courts should not automatically be made." On remand, 3-judge ct. noted Pl. conceded statutes could be construed to save constitutionality, held whether and to what extent statutes apply to Pl. a question of state law, Pl. not in immediate danger of having statutes enforced, affirmed stay, retained jurisdiction pending Pl.'s exhaustion of state ct. remedies. 1961: Chanc. Ct. held 3 of 4 statutes unconstitutional: vague, repose too much discretion in Co. judges, without procedural safeguards. June 3, 1963: Ark. Sup. Ct. affirmed as to 3 acts, Button, 204.4a, 371 U.S. 415; reversed as to 4th, holding it unconstitutional also, Bates, 204.10, 361 U.S. 516.
210. Compulsory Registration
211. Under 1950 Internal Security (McCarran) Act

211.1a. Communist Party v. U.S. (CA DC, #17583.) (209 F. Supp. 132.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 15, 74, IX DOCKET 10-11, 45, June 8, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied Gov'ts. petition for cert.

Case note: 42 Tex. U. 891-94.

- 88 -

211.1b-1c. U.S. v. Hall and Davis. (DC DC, Cr. ##228-62, 229-62.)*
211.1d-1m. Albertson and Proctor v. S.A.C.B. (U.S.S.C.)*
211.1n-1t. Kennedy v. Taylor, Dobbs, Stanford, L. Libson, Gabow, A. Libson, Tormey. (S.A.C.B.)*
211.2. Jefferson School v. S.A.C.B. (CA DC, #12876.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 15, IX DOCKET 11, 45. Cite: 331 F.2d 53.
211.5. Patterson, as Liquidator of Civil Rights Congress v. S.A.C.B. (CA DC.)*
211.8. California Labor School v. S.A.C.B. (CA DC.)*
211.9. Am. Comm. for Protection of Foreign Born v. S.A.C.B. (U.S.S.C., #909.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 16, IX DOCKET 11-12, 45. Issues in U.S.S.C.: (1) constitutionality of Communist-front registration provisions; (2) whether Pet. can be collaterally estopped by S.A.C.B. finding that CP is Communist-action organization, when Pet. was not party to that proceeding; (3) evidence admitted and excluded by S.A.C.B.
211.10. Kennedy v. California Emergency Defense Comm. (S.A.C.B.)*
211.13. Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade v. S.A.C.B. (U.S.S.C., #1068.) (331 F.2d 64.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 16, IX DOCKET 12, 45. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. granted cert.
211.14. Weinstock v. S.A.C.B. (CA DC, #13422.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 16, IX DOCKET 12. Cite: 331 F.2d 75.
211.15. Kennedy v. Advance. (S.A.C.B.)*
212. Under 1954 Communist Control Act

212.1. Kennedy v. Intl. Union of Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers. (CA DC, ##17,135, 18,429.)*
213. Under State Laws (see also 204)
220. Listing
221. By the Attorney General of the United States
222. By Congressional Committees
And see cases at 271.
223. By State Authorities (see also 24, 281)

223.3. Elfbrandt v. Russell, Ariz. Gov. Fannin. (U.S.S.C., #553 Misc.) (381 P.2d 554.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 17, 98, IX DOCKET 12. June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C. granted motion to proceed in forma pauperis, granted cert., vacated and remanded to Ariz. Sup. Ct. for reconsideration in light of Baggett, 281.1a.

And see Dulgov, 281.19.

240. Criminal Penalties for Membership
241. Under Smith Act: for Conspiracy
242. Under Smith Act: for Mere Membership
243. Under 18 U.S.C. 2384
244. Under Kennedy-Landrum-Griffin Act (29 U.S.C. 504) (See also 203, 291)

244.1. U.S. v. Brown. (CA 9.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 17, 75, IX DOCKET 46. June 1964: CA 9 (5-3) reversed, held unconstitutional section of Kennedy-Landrum-Griffin Act making it a crime to be union officer while member of Communist Party: (1) evil sought to be avoided is interference with interstate commerce, but relation between that evil and conduct prohibited is too tenuous to justify conviction under due process clause of Fifth Amendment; (2) specific intent to disrupt interstate commerce would be requisite for conviction consistent with First and Fifth Amendments, but "This statute is not susceptible of such a limiting judicial construction"; (3) section under which Def. convicted "far broader than the threat it is designed to meet—is unreasonably broad. To relieve Congress from having to wait until it can punish the act, it is given power not simply to remove the threat but to punish it; and with no showing whatsoever that the act in fact is threatened by the person punished. We conclude that this statute as construed by the DC constitutes an invalid restraint on the freedom of association protected by the First Amendment."
245. Under State Laws (see also 54)

245.15. Indiana v. Levitt, Bingham, Morgan. (Ind. Sup. Ct., #30611.)*
245.16. Louisiana v. Smith, Waltzer, Dombrowski. (Baton Rouge Crim. Dist. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 12, 46. May 1964: Dist. Ct. ruled search of SCEF office illegal, sustained Defs'. motion to suppress evidence.
245.16a. Dombrowski v. La. State Police. (CA 5.)*
245.16b. SCEF v. Eastland. (DC DC.)*
245.16c. SCEF v. La. Officials. (SD La.)*
245.16d. Dombrowski v. Pfister. (U.S.S.C., #941.) Facts: IX DOCKET 13, 46. June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C. noted prob. juris., granted motions of ACLU and Natl. Lawyers Guild to file amicus briefs. Issues: (1) do La. Rev. Stat. Tit. 14 §§358-374, 390-390.8 on their face violate freedoms guaranteed by First and Fourteenth Amendments; (2) are statutes so vague as to deny due process; (3) have statutes been superseded by existing fedl. legislation; (4) does complaint state cause of action under 42 USC §§1983, 1985.

Milton E. Brener, Esq., 1304 National Bank of Commerce Bldg., A. P. Tureaud, Esq., 1821 Orleans Ave., Leon Hubert, Edward Baldwin, Robert Zibilich, Esqs., 300 Oil & Gas Bldg., 1100 Tulane Ave., all of New Orleans. Arthur Kinoy and William Kunstler, Esqs., 511 Fifth Ave., NYC.

245.17. Stanford v. Texas. (U.S.S.C., #869.) Facts: IX DOCKET 46. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. granted cert.
246. Under 1950 Internal Security (McCarran) Act

246.1. U.S. v. Robels. (WD Wash. N. Div., #50,676.)*
- 89 -

250. Civil Disabilities for Membership: Federal
251. In Federal Employment (see also 30, 268)

251.15. Dew v. Halaby. (U.S.S.C., #844.) (Cert. granted 376 U.S. 904)*

Case note: 49 Iowa U. 891-98.

251.16. In the Matter of Barney Hilburn. (Oakland, Calif.) (Civil Service Comm., #255.) Dec. 11, 1962: Resp.-Negro, mgr. of federally-assisted housing units, charged with violation of Hatch Act, §12(a), for holding positions in local and state Republican Party. Feb. 26, 1964: Hearing Examiner found charges true, warranted dismissal from job. June 2: Civ. Service Comm. affirmed.

Harold B. Hove, Esq., Tribune Tower Bldg.; Malcolm M. Champlin, Esq., Financial Center Bldg., both of Oakland.

251.52. Garrott v. U.S. (U.S. Ct. of Claims, #19-63.)*

See cases at 30.5, 30.6.

251.53. In re Loletta Leary. (U.S. Civ. Serv. Comm.)*
252. As to Passport Applications and Right to Travel
Pamphlet: Phillip Abbott Luce, "The Freedom to Travel: A Study." X Rights 4 & 5 (Nov.-Dec., 1963.) Emergency Civil Liberties Comm., 421 7th Ave., NYC. 25c.

Comment: The right to travel. 18 Wyoming U. 57-60.

252.27a. Worthy v. U.S. (CA 5, #20062.) (328 F.2d 601.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 17, 46. Addendum: CA 5 (per Jones, J.) distinguished between clauses of 28 USC §1185B dealing with ingress and egress, saying that prosecution for leaving country without valid passport would present "a less difficult problem. . . . The citizen, culpable though he may have been in leaving his country without a passport which he could not obtain, and subject as he probably was to a criminal penalty for departing without a passport, cannot, we think, be required to choose between banishment or expatriation on the one hand or crossing the border on the other hand, being faced with criminal punishment."

Case note: 17 Oklahoma U. 245.

252.33. Elizabeth Gurley Flynn v. Secy. of State. (U.S.S.C.)


252.34. Aptheker v. Secy. of State. (U.S.S.C., #461) (219 F.Supp. 709) Facts: VIII DOCKET 75, 99, 130. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (6½-2½), Goldberg, J.: (1) "Since freedom of association is itself guaranteed in the First Amendment, restrictions imposed upon the right to travel cannot be dismissed by asserting that the right to travel could be fully exercised if the individual would first yield up his membership in a given association." (2) 50 U.S.C. §785(6) applies "whether or not the member actually knows or believes that he is associated with what is deemed to be a 'Communist-action' or a 'Communist-front' organization." It therefore "sweeps within its prohibition both knowing and unknowing members." (3) "Sec. 6 also renders irrelevant the member's degree of activity in the organization and his commitment to its purpose." It "establishes an irrebuttable presumption that individuals who are members . . . will, if given passports, engage in activities inimical to the security of the U.S."

(4) Sec. 6 applies "regardless of the purposes for which an individual wishes to travel" and "regardless of the security-sensitivity of the areas in which he wishes to travel." (5) Sec. 6 is therefore unconstitutional on its face. (6) "The clarity and preciseness of [Sec. 6] . . . make it impossible to narrow its indiscriminately cast and overly broad scope without substantial rewriting." So unconstitutional as applied. (7) "freedom of travel is a constitutional liberty closely related to rights of free speech and association."

Douglas, J., conc.: Freedom of movement "is the very essence of our free society," . . . "it often makes all other rights meaningful—knowing, studying, arguing, exploring, conversing, observing and even thinking. Once the right to travel is curtailed, all other rights suffer, just as when curfew or home detention is placed on a person." Black, J., conc. Clark, J. (Harlan, J. and White, J., in part) diss.

252.35. Zemel v. Rusk and Kennedy. (U.S.S.C.)*
252.36. MacEwan v. Rusk and Kennedy. (ED Pa., #33038.)*
252.55. Copeland v. Secretary of State. (U.S.S.C., #1041, Misc.) (226 F.Supp. 20.) June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, granted motion to proceed in forma pauperis, vacated and remanded to DC for consideration in light of Aptheker, 252.34. Clark, Harlan, White, JJ.; diss.
252.56. Mayer v. Rusk. (U.S.S.C., #746.) (224 F.Supp. 929.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 99, IX DOCKET 47. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, vacated and remanded for consideration in light of Aptheker, 252.34. Clark, Harlan, White, JJ., diss.
252.58. U.S. v. Travis. (SD Calif., #32380-1R.) Facts: IX DOCKET 47. May 14: DC found Def. guilty, rejected argument that State Dept. decree banning Cuba travel omitted reference to 8 USC §1185B, the only relevant section providing for criminal sanctions.
252.59. U.S. v. Laub. (ED NY, 62-Cr.635.)*
252.60. U.S. v. Druckman. (ND Calif.)*
252.61. U.S. v. Siegel. (ED NY.)*
253. As to Army Discharges (see also 341)
254. As to Veterans Disability Payments

254.2. Thompson v. Gleason. (Veterans Affairs Adm.)*
255. As to Social Security Benefits (see also 263, 346)
256. In Housing Projects
257. As to Federal License Applications

257.6. Halaby, Admr., Fed'l. Aviation Agency v. Susemihl. (Fedl. Aviation Agency.)*
- 90 -

258. Through Deportation Proceedings (see also 358)
Law review article: George Liviola, Jr.: Deportation law and the social interest. 13 Cleveland-Marshall 355-64.
258.7. In re Wolf. (Imm. Serv.)*
259. Through Denaturalization and Naturalization Proceedings (see also 358)

259.8. U.S. v. Bimba. (ED NY.)*
260. Civil Disabilities for Membership: State, Local and Private
261. In State or Local Government Employment

261.1. Wilkins v. Carlander. (Super. Ct. Kings Co., #490844.)*
261.17. Re Cecil A. Thomas. (Albany, Calif.) (City Council.) 1961: Thomas, white, arrested in Jackson, Miss., when he entered coffee shop with a Negro. 1964: Thomas nominated for position on Albany Civil Service Bd. May 26: Council rejected nomination (3-2): Thomas "too controversial." June 2: Council again rejected nomination (4-1): due to Thomas' record of activity with Society of Friends and related organizations.
262. In Teaching (see also 24, 267, 281 and 342)

262.9. Bd. of Trustees, Fullerton Jr. College v. Phillips. (Calif. Dist. Ct. of App. #4 Civ. 7194.)*
262.10. Schenk v. Ormsby. (NY Sup. Ct., 10th Jud. Dist., #11438-1963.) June 1961: Pl.-probationary teacher at Brentwood High School, Long Island, N.Y., fired. 1964: Pl. sued school superintendent, principal, alleging his firing part of administrative campaign to "maliciously threaten" teachers who refused to join Natl. Education Assn. affiliate and instead joined Am. Fed. of Teachers-AFL-CIO. Pl. asks $50,000 actual and punitive damages. Apr. 1964: Sup. Ct. denied Def's. motion to dismiss.
263. As to State Unemployment Insurance Benefits (see also 255, 346)

263.5. Lewis v. Bennett. (CA 4, #9083.)*
264. As to State License Applications

264.5. Morgan and Pursley v. Berkeley Realty Bd. (Alameda Co. Super. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 47. Addendum: Pl. alleges of 137 licensed real estate brokers, 105 members of Bd., 9 not active, remaining 23 are Negroes deliberately excluded from Bd. membership. Apr. 16: Super. Ct. granted injunction keeping temporary restraining order provisions in force pendente lite.
265. In Proceedings Against Attorneys and Bar Applicants (see also 345, 373)
See Smith and Waltzer, 245.16-245.16d.
266. Through Deprivation of Right to Tax Exemption (see also 130, 202)
267. In Private Employment—Teaching (see also 24, 262, 281 and 342)
268. In Private Employment — Defense Establishments (see also 344)
And see Robels, 246.1.
268.1a. Graham v. Richmond. (CA DC.)*
268.7. Kreznar v. Wilson. (DC DC.)*
268.12a. Greene v. U.S. (U.S.S.C., #84) Earlier litigation: v. Wilson, 268.6, II DOCKET 55; v. McElroy, 268.12, IV DOCKET 14, 96, 360 U.S. 474. 1953: Private corp. producing parts for U.S. military agencies discharged Pl. when Navy revoked his security clearance. 1959: U.S.S.C. held corp. could not discharge Pl. without opportunity for him to confront and cross-examine accusers. Dec. 1959: DC held revocation of clearance not validly authorized, expunged records. 1960: Pl. asked Dept. of Defense for restitution of loss of earnings 1953-1959, under 1955 Regs. Dept. refused because, under 1960 Regs., no restitution unless Pl. currently entitled to clerance. Ct. of Claims ordered case suspended pending exhaustion of administrative remedies. Feb. 17, 1964: U.S.S.C., Goldberg, J., reversed: Pl's. rights matured and were asserted under 1955 Regs.: "The directive's language does not reasonably warrant the implication that a claimant, who has sustained the burden of demonstrating that the Gov't. acted without authority in revoking his clearance without fair procedures, must take on the additional burden of showing at a later time that if had he been afforded fair procedures in the first instance he would have been able to demonstrate successfully that he was entitled to access authorization." Harlan, White, JJ., diss.

Eugene Gressman, Esq., Washington, D.C.

268.18. Margolin v. U.S. (U.S. Ct. of Claims.)*
269. In Private Employment — Other

269.1. Faulk v. AWARE. (N.Y. Ct. of App.)*

Note: COFO reports numerous instances of Negroes losing jobs in Mississippi after registering to vote or attempting to register, after signing up for or attending Freedom Schools. No litigation has been filed to test such dismissals, but see Henry, 571.14.

270. Criminal Penalties for Non-disclosure (see also 330)
271. Before Congressional Committees (see also 222, 330)

271.9. U.S. v. Russell. (DC DC.)*
271.12. U.S. v. Gojack. (DC DC.)*
271.15. U.S. v. Shelton. (CA DC.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 20, 100, IX DOCKET 48. Cite: 327 F.2d 601.
271.19. U.S. v. Price. (CA DC, #18,374.)*
271.20. U.S. v. Liveright. (CA DC.)*
271.33. Yellin v. U.S. (374 U.S. 100.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 21, 131-2. Case note: 37 South Carolina U. 342-49.
271.40. U.S. v. O'Connor. (ND N.J.)*
- 91 -

272. Before State Committees (see also 204, 213, 332)

272.4a. NAACP v. Committee. (formerly in Matter of Investigation by Comm. on Offenses Against Administrative of Justice.) (Va. Sup. Co. of App., #5614, 5615.) (204 Va. 693.)*
272.12. Jordan v. Hutcheson. (CA 4.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 22, 76, IX DOCKET 14. Cite: 323 F.2d 597.
272.3a. Maynard v. DeGregory. (Merrimack Co. Super. Ct., #15,236.) Nov. 12, 1963: After 10 yrs. litigation, (see DeGregory, 272.3, 137 A.2d 512 (N.H. Sup. Ct., 1957), 360 U.S. 717 (1959); 162 A.2d 612, 169 A.2d 1 (N.H. Sup. Ct., 1961), aff'd. 368 U.S. 19 (1961); II DOCKET 39 —VII DOCKET 44), Def. swore he is not currently a member of Communist Party, refused to name associates or discuss events of 1930s and 40s. May 20, 1964: Super. Ct. found Def. guilty of contempt of state legislature; 1 yr. June 26: Def's. appeal to N.H. Sup. Ct. pending.

Howard Whiteside, Esq., 30 State St., Boston; Lawrence J. Walsh, Esq., Wolfeboro, N.H.

273. Before Legal and Administrative Tribunals (see also 333)
Comment: Refusals to answer same questions on different days before same grand jury punishable as separate criminal contempt: Second Additional Grand Jury v. Cirrillo (12 N.Y.2d 206, 188 N.E.2d 138, 237 N.Y.S.2d 709, 1963) 77 Harvard 1330-33.
274. For Refusal to Produce Records
280. Civil Penalties for Non-disclosure
Comment: Loyalty oaths, conscience, and the constitution. 5 Arizona 254-64.
281. By Teachers (see also 24, 223, 262, 342)

281.1a. Baggett v. Bullitt. (U.S.S.C., #220) Facts: VIII DOCKET 22, 100, IX DOCKET 14. June 1, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (7-2), White, J.: Both 1931 oath of allegiance and 1955 loyalty oath "are invalid on their face because their language is unduly vague, uncertain and broad," as in Cramp, 281.15, 368 U.S. 278: (1) "Does the statute reach endorsement or support for Communist candidates for office? Does it reach a lawyer who represents the Communist Party or its members or a journalist who defends constitutional rights of the Communist Party or its members or anyone who supports any cause which is likewise supported by Communists or the Communist Party?" "Is it subversive activity ... to attend and participate in int'l. conventions of mathematicians and exchange views with scholars from Communist countries? What about the editor of a scholarly journal who analyzes and criticizes the manuscripts of Communist scholars submitted for publication? Is selecting outstanding scholars from Communist countries as visiting professors and advising, teaching, or consulting with them at the Univ. of Wash. a subversive activity if such scholars are known to be Communists, or regardless of their affiliations, regularly teach students who are members ...?" "Would ... any organization or any person supporting, advocating or teaching peaceful but far-reaching constitutional amendments be engaged in subversive activity?" "Measures which purport to define disloyalty must allow public servants to know what is and is not disloyal."

(2) "The State may not require one to choose between subscribing to an unduly vague and broad oath, thereby incurring the likelihood of prosecution, and conscientiously refusing to take the oath with the consequent loss of employment, and perhaps profession, particularly where 'the free dissemination of ideas may be the loser.' " (3) Abstention doctrine involves discretion, does not apply here. Clark, J. (Harlan, J.) diss.

281.5b. Nash v. Allen. (Albany Co. Super. Ct.)*
281.16. Macks v. Calif. Bd. of Educ. (Dist. Ct. of App.)*
281.19. Dulgov v. Bd. of Educ. (Tucson.) (Pima Co. Super. Ct., #82067.)*
281.20. Starbuck v. Bd. of Regents. (State Univ. of NY at Buffalo.) (WD NY, # Civ. 10741.) Sept. 1962: Buffalo U. merged with NY public schools; faculty members and other employees became subject to state disclaimer affidavit requirement. 1963: Pl. hired as library asst. and English instructor. Weeks later, Pl. asked and refused to disclose whether he had ever "advised or taught" forcible overthrow of U.S. government. Pl.'s employment continued until Apr. 1, 1964 "pending investigation." Feb. 1964: Pl. sued to enjoin his dismissal. June 18, 1964: DC denied motion for temporary injunction, found precodures followed in hiring Pl. and asking him to sign oath afforded due process, found Univ. had right to demand information, invited Defs. to file formal motion to dismiss.

Richard Lipsitz, Esq., Andrews, Bldg., Buffalo.

282. By Others (see also 343, 344)

282.6. Sublett v. Thyberg. (Los Angeles Co. Super. Ct., #837072.) Dec. 1963: Pl.-14-yr. old jr. high student (W. Covina) began washing dishes in school cafeteria to earn his lunch. Jan. 1964: Def.-school officials demanded Pl. sign loyalty oath for state employees. Apr. 17: Pl. sued for mandatory injunction that he be allowed to continue to work without signing oath. Jun. 11: Ct. issued temporary injunction as prayed.

A. L. Wirin, and Fred Okrand, Esqs., 257 So. Spring St., Los Angeles.

290. Penalties for False Disclosure
291. Under Taft-Hartley Oath (see also 203, 245)
292. On Government Security Questionnaires

292.2. Ogden v. U.S. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 23, 76, IX DOCKET 14, 48. Cite for cert. denied: 376 U.S. 973.

And see Robels, 246.1.

293. In Miscellaneous Cases

293.3. Los Angeles Bd. of Educ. v. Sloat. (Los Angeles Super. Ct., #794678.)*
293.4. Wellbaum v. State Bd. of Educ. (Los Angeles.) (L.A. Co. Super. Ct., #830731.)*
- 92 -

295. Right of Privacy
Law review article: Donald H. Gordon, Recoveries for violation of right of privacy in quasi-contract and fedl. income tax. 10 Wayne 368-80.

Comment: Right of privacy—scope and limitations. 9 S. Dakota U. 209-13.

295.4. Hall v. Graybill. (Los Angeles Co. Super. Ct.)*

Case notes: Right of privacy—civil liability from criminal statute: Nappier v. Jefferson Standard Life Ins. Co. (322 F.2d 502, 4th Cir. 1963) 49 Iowa U. 1370-77.

Right of privacy—method of debt collection regarded as unreasonable invasion: Pack v. Wise (155 So.2d 909, La. App., cert. denied, 157 SE.2d 231, 1963) 38 Tulane 591-96.


300. Searches and Seizures
Law review articles: Robert G. Blakey, The rule of announcement and unlawful entry: Miller v. U.S. and Ker v. California. 112 Pennsylvania U. 499-559.

Henry B. Rothblatt, The arrest: Probable cause and search without a search warrant. 35 Mississippi U. 252-69.

Comments: Search and seizure since Mapp. 36 Colorado U. 391-403.

Arrest without warrant in Delaware. 68 Dickinson 308-30.

301. By Wiretapping
Comment: Electronic eavesdropping: A new approach. 52 California U. 142-56.
301.16. Washington v. Cory. (Wash. Sup. Ct.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 24, 132. Cite: 382 P.2d 1019. Case notes: 17 Vanderbilt 568-72, 38 Tulane 404-11, 10 Wayne 440-43.
301.20. U.S. v. Sen. Harris. (ED La., Baton Rouge Div., ##1422-1424.)*

Case notes: Wiretapping: Admissibility of evidence in state courts. Kentucky v. Brinkley (362 S.E.2d 494, Ky. 1962) 52 Kentucky 475-78.

Conversations recorded on telephone extension admissible in criminal proceedings: Ferguson v. U.S. (307 F.2d 787, 10th Cir. 1962) 5 Arizona U. 295-99.

302. In Other Federal Criminal Cases

302.22. U.S. v. Wallace. (CA 5.)*
302.23. U.S. v. Cohn. (SD NY.) Facts: IX DOCKET 49. Upon death of juror's father, Def. refused to consent to continuing trial with 11 jurors. Apr. 19: DC declared a mistrial.
302.24. Ramsey v. U.S. (CA 9.)*
302.25. Preston v. U.S. (U.S.S.C., #163) (305 F.2d 172) Police questioned 3 men in a car, arrested them: vagrancy, searched them for weapons, took them to police headqrtrs. Later police searched car, found burglar tools; 1 man confessed plan to rob bank; police turned over to FBI items found in search. Convicted; affirmed. Mar. 23, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed: "Once an accused in under arrest and in custody, then a search made at another place, without a warrant, is simply not incident to the arrest. . . . At [point at which search of car made] . . . there was no danger that any of the men arrested could have used any weapons in the car or could have destroyed any evidence of a crime. . . . The search of the car without a warrant failed to meet the test of reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment, rendering the evidence obtained as a result of the search inadmissible."

Francis M. Shea, Esq., Washington, D.C.

303. In Other State Criminal Cases
Law review article: William I. Siegel, The New York "frisk" and "no-knock" statutes: Are they constitutional? 30 Brooklyn U. 274-84.

Comment: The "no-knock" and "stop and frisk" provisions of New York code. 38 St. John's U. 392-405.

52.25. Mapp v. Ohio. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VI DOCKET 4. Cite: 367 U.S. 643.

Case note: Retrospective application of Mapp in Linkletter v. Walker (323 F.2d 11, 5th Cir. 1963) 62 Michigan U. 1250-54.

303.42. Ker v. California. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 25, 133. Cite: 374 U.S. 23. Case notes: 38 Tulane 414-18, 11 UCLA 426-38.
303.43. New York v. Randazzo. (NY Sup. Ct., 1st Jud. Dist.)*
303.45. Illinois v. Mike's Place. (Chicago Muni. Ct.)*
303.46. California v. Parham. (U.S.S.C., #955 Misc.) Facts: IX DOCKET 50. May 25, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert. Case note: 16 Stanford 326, 347.
303.47. Camara v. San Francisco Municipal Ct. (5th Dist. Ct. of App.)*
303.48. California v. Randazzo. (Calif. Dist. Ct. of App.) Dec. 12, 1962: Def. removed garments from department store rack, took them to dressing room, concealed them in her purse; store detective observed this through spy-hole from adjacent dressing room: no reason to suspect Def. in particular, detective was instructed only to spy on dressing rooms. Def. convicted of theft (Penal C. §484). Sept. 30, 1963: Dist. Ct. of App. affirmed: Calif. and U.S. constitutional prohibitions against illegal searches and seizures apply to such searches by state officials only, not to searches by private persons; not error to admit detective's evidence, Burdeau v. McDowell, 256 U.S. 465.

A. L. Wirin and Fred Okrand, Esqs., as amici curiae for ACLU of S. Calif., 257 S. Spring St., Los Angeles.

303.49. U.S. v. Walker. (ED La.; CA 5.) 1959: Def. arrested, surrounding area searched; Def. tried; convicted. 1960: La. Sup. Ct. affirmed. 1961: State Ct. denied habeas corpus. DC denied petition for writ of habeas corpus. Sept. 12, 1962: CA 5 affirmed (2-1): (1) search of Def. at time of arrest plainly illegal; police right to make search incident
- 93 -

to valid arrest extends only to place at which arrest is made; (2) relief by habeas corpus not available to attack pre-Mapp conviction on basis of Mapp rule. Tuttle, C.J., diss.
303.50. Angelet v. New York. (CA 2.) 1951: Def. arrested by state police who entered his apartment without warrant or probable cause; convicted of possession of narcotics. 1963: DC denied petition for habeas corpus writ. June 12, 1964: CA 2 affirmed (7-2); held per Medina, J.: exclusionary rule of Mapp, 52.25, 367 U.S. 643, does not have retroactive effect as to pre-Mapp state conviction after an admittedly illegal search. Marshall, J., diss.
303.51. New York v. Evergreen Review, Inc.; Evergreen Review, Inc. v. Dist. Atty. Cahn. (Nassau Co. Sup. Ct.; ED NY, #64-C-441.) Apr. 24, 1964: DA obtained warrant, seized 21,000 copies of Evergreen Review on information from worker at bindery, commenced criminal prosecution of Def.-Co. and 2 of its officers in Sup. Ct. Co. sued in ED NY for return of magazines, permanent injunction, and damages under fed'l. civil rights statutes. DC convened 3-judge ct. June 12: DC granted preliminary injunction directing return of magazines, enjoined further interference with publication or distribution until judicial determination of obscenity: (1) warrant secured on basis of hearsay, and without probable cause; (2) warrant was general, leaving determination of obscenity to discretion of executing officer. June 18: Case settled: DA returned magazines, agreed not to prosecute Def's. officers; Def. dropped claim for damages.

Charles Rembar, Esq., 521 Fifth Ave., NYC.

303.52. Aguilar v. Texas. (U.S.S.C., #548) (362 SW.2d 111) Houston police submitted affidavit in support of application for search warrant: "Affiants have received reliable information from a credible person and do believe" narcotics kept at described premises; warrant issued. Def. seized in act of attempting to dispose of narcotics. At trial, Def. objected to introduction of evidence obtained as result of execution of warrant; overruled; convicted; 20 yrs. Tex. Ct. of Crim. App. affirmed. June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (6-3), Goldberg, J.: (1) Ker, 303.42, 374 U.S. 23, involving search without warrant, "must certainly be read as holding that the standard for obtaining a search warrant is likewise 'the same under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.' " (2) Affidavit did not contain affirmative allegation that affiant spoke with personal knowledge, therefore warrant should not have been issued and evidence obtained from search was inadmissible. Harlan, J. conc. Clark, J. (Black, Stewart, JJ.) diss.

Clyde W. Woody, Esq., Houston, Tex.

Case notes: Search prior to arrest: New York v. Salerno (235 N.Y.S.2d 879, 1962) 52 Kentucky U. 483-85.

Protection for motor vehicles afforded by Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments: Michigan v. Carr. (121 N.W.2d 449, 1963) 33 Cincinnati U. 140-47.

Evidence found in search of trunk of automobile stopped for minor traffic violation admissible to convict occupants of another offense: Oregon v. Krogness (388 P.2d 120, Oregon 1963) 2 Houston U. 128-32.

Probable cause for search and seizure. Pennsylvania v. One 1958 Plymouth Sedan (186 A.2d 52, 1962) 52 Kentucky U. 488-91.

Search and seizure under Colo. Code: Hernandez v. People (385 P.2d 996, Oct. 1963) 36 Colorado U. 435-38.

304. Suits for False Arrest, Police Practices (see also 580 and 151)
Study: Gartner, The police and the community: Police practices and minority groups. Unpub. Alan Gartner, Florina Lasker Fellow in Civil Liberties (Brandeis Univ.), 148 Kirkstall Rd., Newtonville, Mass.
304.1. Prof. Genovese v. N.Y.C. (N.Y. Co. Sup. Ct.)*
304.2. Hallowell v. N.Y.C. (NYC Comptroller, #155363.)*
304.3. Massey v. NYC Police Commr. (Queens Co. Ct.)*
304.4. Jackson v. City of New York. (NYC Comptroller.)*
304.5. Richichi v. Bielski. Richichi and Bielski v. City of Chicago. (Ill. Ct. of App., #48974.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 26. 1950: Def.-Bielski, Chicago police officer, assaulted Pl.-Richichi. Bielski defended by Chicago Corp. Counsel, who maintained Bielski not guilty even of negligence. 1957: After trial in Cook Co. Super. Ct. on issue of negligence, jury returned $40,000 verdict for Pl.-Richichi. Bielski without assets, paid only $1.01 of judgment. 1959: Super. Ct. ordered Bielski to assign his claim for indemnity against City to Richichi (Ill. Rev. Stat., 1957, ch. 24, para. 1-15.) Dec. 1959: Richichi and Bielski joined as Pls. to sue City. 1962: Jury held for Pls., answered special interrogatory that Bielski not guilty of wilful misconduct, only of negligence. (Ill. Indemnitory Stat. provides no indemnity when the indemnitee guilty of wilful misconduct.) At trial, Def.-City now maintained Bielski guilty of wilful misconduct. 1964: Ill. Ct. of App. affirmed: (1) City is liable even though indemnitee has not paid judgment; (2) evidence supports jury finding that Bielski not guilty of wilful misconduct.
304.8. Duble v. Brown and Chicago. (Cook Co. Super. Ct., #60 S 19040.)*
304.10. Gonzales v. Genl. Investigators Inc. (ND Ill., #60 C 1806.)*
304.11. Dean v. Smith and Chicago. (Cook Co. Cir. Ct., #58 C 12494.)*
304.13. Wirin v. Hilden. (SD Calif.)*
304.14. Goldberger v. Lewis. (San Francisco Super. Ct.)*
304.16. Lucero v. Donovan, Carnover. (CA 9.)*
304.17. Rev. Morris v. Capt. Ray. (CA 5, #21325.)*
304.18. Rev. Jones v. Teasely. (CA 5.)*
304.19. Sullivan v. Nesmith. (MD Ala.) Cite for U.S.S.C. denial of Def's. petition for cert.: 375 U.S. 975.
304.20. Horn v. Baille, Greenwood and U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co. (CA 9, #5319.)*
304.21. Ware v. Johnson. (MD Ga., Albany Div., #749.)*

And see Anderson, 55.67, Rabinowitz, 55.68

- 94 -

304.22. Brazier v. Cherry. (MD Ga., Americus Div., #475.)*
304.24. Harkins and Frankfort v. NYC. (Brooklyn Sup. Ct.)*
304.25. California v. Imbler; In re Imbler. (Calif. Sup. Ct. ##6699, 7212 Cr.) (387 P.2d 6.) Calif. Sup. Ct. denied rehearing.
304.27. Duzynski v. Nosal. (U.S.S.C.)*
304.28. Thomas v. McCain. (WD Va., #591.)*
304.30. Williams v. Clinton. (WD Wash., N. Div., #5997-Civ.)*
304.31. Pritchard v. Downie. (Little Rock.) (CA 8.) (216 F.Supp. 1621; 289 F.2d 153; 309 F.2d 634.) Facts: IX DOCKET 16, 50. Cite in CA 8: 326 F.2d 323, 9 RRLR 333.
304.32. U.S. v. Partridge. (Winona, Miss.) (SD Miss., Jackson Div., #1122-Civ.)*
304.33. Gaston v. Tobriner. (DC DC, Civ. #3994.)*
304.34. Giancana v. J. Edgar Hoover and Johnson. (ND Ill., 63-C-1145.)*
304.35. Griffin v. Kerr. (ND Calif.)*
304.36. Thomas v. Jackson. (Flint) (DC Mich.) June 1, 1963: Pl. seated at lunch counter where he had ordered food; Def.-police officer said Pl. was loitering, told him to leave. Pl. and Def. scuffled—testimony conflicts on who threw first punch; Pl. came up with Def's. gun, which Pl. threw away. Def. arrested Pl.: loitering. June 3: Pl. also charged with assault with deadly weapon, on ground that, before throwing gun away, he pointed it at bystander. July 12: Flint Muni. Ct. acquitted Pl. of loitering. Oct. 1963: Genessee Co. Cir. Ct. acquitted Pl. of assault after jury trial. 1964: Pl. filed suit for $50,000. damages for unlawful arrest and detention. Pending.

A. Glenn Epps, Esq., 2501 Saginaw St., Flint, Mich.

304.37. Booker v. City of Chicago. (ND Ill., #62-C-1805.) 1962: Pl.-Muni. Ct. judge shot by off-duty policeman during argument. Sept. 1962: Pl. filed suit alleging negligence. City claimed "a police officer is always on duty." 1964: After jury trial, DC gave judgment for Pl. for $254,000. Pl. negotiating settlement to avoid appeal.

Jay Horberg, Esq., 100 N. LaSalle St., Chicago.

304.38. Gause and Avant v. City of Chicago. (Cir. Ct., Cook Co., #64-L-9071.) 1963: Chicago police officer assaulted minor Pl.-Avant. Apr. 15, 1964: Pls. sued officer, joined city as respondeat superior. Pending on City's motion to strike on grounds of governmental immunity.

Herbert Fisher, Esq., 343 S. Dearborn, Chicago.

304.39. Mock v. City of Chicago. (Cir. Ct., Cook Co., #63-S-15147.) 1963: Pl. shot by arrestee in Chicago police station. Pl. sued City and police officers, alleging negligence in restraining arrestee. Pending on City's motion to strike on ground of governmental immunity.

Herbert Fisher, Esq., 343 S. Dearborn, Chicago.

304.40. Elijah Muhammad v. Sommers. (Flint) (ED Mich., Civ. #81.) Oct. 27, 1963: Pl. was conducting religious meeting at rented hall in Flint; Defs.-City Atty. and police officers entered with weapons displayed. Pl., who teaches that weapons of any kind are not permitted at religious meetings of Nation of Islam, requested Defs. to leave; they refused. Pl. discontinued his meeting. Apr. 2, 1964: Pl. sued for $1,000,000. under 42 USC §1983, demanded jury trial. Pending on Defs'. motion for summary judgment.

Stuart Dunnings, Jr., 530 S. Pine St., Lansing.

304.40a. Nation of Islam, Muhammad Mosque of Flint v. Industrial Mutual Assn. (Genessee Co. Cir. Ct., #1880.) Facts: same as 304.40. Dec. 2, 1963: Pl. sued Def.-owner and lessor of IMA Building, which Pl. had leased for religious meeting. Pl. alleges oral agreement with Def. that no person with weapons would be permitted by Defs. to enter meeting, asks $2,097 damages for breach of contract, $25,000. for injury to Pl's. reputation.

Stuart Dunnings, Jr., Esq., 530 S. Pine St., Lansing.

304.41. Thornton v. Bookman. (ED Wisc., #64-C-53.) Jan. 6, 1964: Gas station attendant murdered. Def. taken into custody by Defs.-city detectives while at his place of work, questioned, not allowed to use telephone, not brought before magistrate, not advised of right to counsel or to remain silent, given 2 lie detector tests, transported from Kenosha to Madison and back, placed in cold cell without a bed overnight. After 25 hrs., Defs. released Pl. Feb. 20: Pl. sued under 28 USC §§1331, 1333, 42 USC §§1983, 1988. Pending.

M. Michael Essin, Esq., 623 N. 2d St., Milwaukee.

304.42. Stanzione v. Hubbard. (ED Mich., S. Div., #25099.) Aug. 26, 1963: Pl.-white homeowner rented upper flat of his house to white man and his Nisei wife. Sept. 2: Moving company employees—3 Negro men, 1 Negro woman—began moving tenants' furniture in. Neighbors, thinking Negroes were moving into neighborhood, began to pelt house with eggs, etc. Pl., arriving, beaten with bedrail, sugar poured into his gas tank, convertible top slashed. During 29 hr. period, Pl. requested police assistance 6 times; police arrived, observed, made no arrest or attempt to halt demonstration. Mar. 16, 1964: Pl. sued Mayor, Dir. of Public Safety of Dearborn, Chief of Police, and 13 police officials, alleged: (1) as part of pattern of racial discrimination carried on by Def.-Mayor and those acting under his direction, responsible officials refused to carry out statutory responsibility to protect Pl. (Dearborn City Charter, §§8.3; 8.17; Mich. Stat. Ann. §§28.789, 28.792), thus denying Pl. rights under 42 USC §1983; (2) Defs. conspired to deprive Pl. of due process and equal protection, making them liable under 42 USC §1985. June 19: DC denied Defs. motion to dismiss.

Hanlon, Hanlon, & Carpenter, Esqs., 1226 S. Monroe Blvd., Dearborn; ACLU of Michigan, 401 Washington Blvd. Bldg., Detroit 48226.

And see cases at 530s.

Case note: Liability under act for injuries suffered by fed'l. prisoners: U.S. v. Muniz (83 Sup. Ct. 1950, 1963.) 35 Mississippi U. 317-19.

- 95 -

310. Indictment
311. Challenge to Composition of Grand Jury (see also 510s)
312. Attacks on Character of Evidence

312.33. U.S. ex rel. Butler v. Maroney. (CA 3, #14016.) Facts: IX DOCKET 16. Cite in CA 3: 319 F.2d 622.
313. Charge of Entrapment
Case note: Defendant allocated burden of persuasion on entrapment: Gorin v. U.S. (313 F.2d 641, CA 2, 1963) 48 Minnesota U. 801-08.
314. Charge of Conspiracy
See Gibson, 59.13; Bell, 54.8.
315. Inspection of Pre-Trial Statements of Government Witnesses
(Including Jencks point, 353 U.S. 357, and Jencks Act, 18 USC 3500.)

Law review article: Roger J. Traynor, Ground lost and found in criminal discovery. 39 New York U. 228-50.

Comment: The Jencks right: Judicial and legislative modifications, the states and the future. 50 Virginia U. 535-55.

316. Inspection of Grand Jury Minutes
320. Double Jeopardy
Comment: Double jeopardy: The reprosecution problem. 77 Harvard U. 1272-89.
321. In Federal Cases

321.12. U.S. v. Tateo. (U.S.S.C., #328) (216 F.Supp. 850) 1956: Def. charged with bank robberty, kidnaping, etc. On 4th day of trial, judge told Def's. counsel if Def. found guilty he would impose life sentence on kidnaping charge, consecutive sentences on other charges. Counsel said likelihood of conviction great. Def. pleaded guilty; jury dismissed; kidnaping count dismissed with Gov't's. consent; 22 yrs. DC granted Def's. motion to set aside judgment and for new trial because Def's. guilty plea not voluntary under these circumstances. DC dismissed counts to prevent double jeopardy. June 8, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (6-3), Harlan, J.: "Tateo contends that his situation must be distinguished from one in which an accused has been found guilty by a jury, since his involuntary plea of guilty deprived him of the opportunity to obtain a jury verdict of acquittal. We find this argument unconvincing. . . . If Tateo had requested a mistrial on the basis of the judge's comments, there would be no doubt that if he had been successful, the Gov't. would not have been barred from retrying him." Goldberg, J. (Black, Douglas, JJ.) diss.: Because the judge coerced the guilty plea, Def. was denied chance of acquittal by jury. He should not have to run the gantlet twice.

Robert Kasanof, Esq., NYC.

Case note: Double jeopardy: discharge of jury over Defs. objection: Downum v. U.S. (372 U.S. 734, 1963, rev'g. 300 F.2d 137, CA 5, 1962) 11 U.C.L.A. 407-14.

322. In State Cases

322.7. New York v. Martinis. (N.Y. Sup. Ct., App. Div., #6670.)*

Case notes: Imposition of higher sentence on reconviction for same offense violates prohibition against double jeopardy: People v. Henderson (35 Cal. Rptr. 77, 1963) 9 Villanova 517-22.

Juvenile ct. proceeding a bar to subsequent criminal trial for same act: Garza v. Texas (369 S.W. 2d 36, Tex. Crim. App. 1963) 17 Vanderbilt 291-94.

Contempt citation does not bar later conviction for substantive crime: U.S. v. Mirra (220 F. Supp. 361, SD NY 1963) 48 Minnesota 995-1001.

330. Self-incrimination: Criminal Sanctions for Exercising Privilege (see also 270)
Comment: Adoptive admissions, arrest and privilege against self-incrimination: A suggested constitutional imperative. 31 Chicago U. 556-76.

Case notes: Attorney may plead privilege against self-incrimination on behalf of client if client could have so pleaded: U.S. v. Judson (322 F.2d 460, CA 9, 1963) 42 Texas U. 553-57; 1964 Duke 362-68; Iowa U. 967.

331. Before Congressional Committees
332. Before State Committees

332.1. Malloy v. Hogan. (U.S.S.C., #110) (187 A.2d 744) 1959: Def. arrested during gambling raid, pleaded guilty to misdemeanor; placed on probation after serving short sentence. 1961: Def. refused to answer questions before Super. Ct. referee re gambling "on the grounds that it may tend to incriminate me." Ct. adjudged Def. in contempt, to be held til he answered. Super. Ct. denied petition for habeas writ; Conn. Sup. Ct. affirmed. June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (5-4), Brennan, J.: (1) "We hold that the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed the Pet. the protection of the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, and that under the applicable fedl. standard, the Conn. Sup. Ct. of Err. erred in holding that the privilege was not properly invoked." (2) "We have held that the guarantees of the First Amendment, [Gitlow, Cantwell, La. ex rel. Gremillion v. NAACP,] the prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures of the Fourth Amendment, [Ker,] and the right to counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, [Gideon,] are all to be enforced against the States under the Fourteenth Amendment according to the same standards that protect those personal rights against fedl. encroachment. . . . The Ct. thus has rejected the notion that the Fourteenth Amendment applies to the states only a 'watered-down, subjective version of the individual guarantees of the Bill of Rights,'. . . . It would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in a state or fedl. ct." (3) Conn. Ct. failed to take sufficient account of the setting in which the questions were asked; Def. might apprehend that he was being asked to disclose a link
- 96 -

in a chain connecting him to a more recent crime for which he might still be prosecuted. Harlan, J. (Clark, J.) diss. White, J. (Stewart, J.) diss. [italics added; cites omitted]

Harold Strauch, Esq., Hartford, Conn.

333. Before Grand Juries and Tribunals
334. Grants of Immunity: Federal
335. Grants of Immunity: State

335.11. Murphy v. Waterfront Comm. of NY Harbor. (U.S.S.C., #138) (189 A.2d 36) Defs. subpoenaed to testify at hearing of Def.; refused to answering questions about work stoppage on ground of self-incrimination; granted immunity from prosecution under laws of N.J. and N.Y.; still refused on ground answers might tend to incriminate under fedl. law, to which grant of immunity did not purport to extend. Held in civil and criminal contempt of ct. N.J. Sup. Ct. reversed criminal contempt, affirmed civil contempt, citing Knapp v. Schweitzer, 335.7, 357 U.S. 371, Feldman v. U.S., 322 U.S. 487, U.S. v. Murdock, 284 U.S. 141. June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C. held, Goldberg, J.: After extensive review of English and American cases, (1) "we now accept as correct the construction given the privilege by the Eng. cts. and by Chief Justice Marshall and Justice Holmes. See U.S. v. Saline Bank of Va. [1 Pet. 100]; Ballmann v. Fagin [200 U.S. 186]. We reject—as unsupported by history or policy—the deviation from that construction only recently adopted by this Ct. in Murdock and Feldman. We hold that the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination protects a state witness against incrimination under fedl. as well as state law and a fedl. witness against incrimination under state as well as fedl. law." (2) "We hold the constitutional rule to be that a state witness may not be compelled to give testimony which may be incriminating under fedl. law unless the compelled testimony and its fruits cannot be used in any manner by fedl. officials in connection with a criminal prosecution against him. We conclude, moreover, that in order to implement this constitutional rule and accommodate the interests of the State and Fedl. Gov't's. in investigating and prosecuting crime, the Fedl. Gov't. must be prohibited from making any such use of compelled testimony and its fruits. This exclusionary rule, while permitting the States to secure information necessary for effective law enforcement, leaves the witness and the Fedl. Gov't. in substantially the same position as if the witness had claimed his privilege in the absence of a state grant of immunity." (3) Defs. may now be compelled to answer questions; Defs. should be afforded opportunity, in light of overruling Feldman, to answer. Vacated, remanded. Conc. opinions by Black, J.; White, J. (Stewart, J.); Harlan, J. (Clark, J.). [italics supplied]

Harold Krieger, Esq., NYC.

336. Criminal Registration Laws
And see 1950 Internal Security Act, 211. and 245.16.
337. Miscellaneous
340. Self-incrimination: Civil Sanctions for Exercising Privilege (see also 280)
341. Effect on Army Discharges (see also 253)
342. Effect on Employment — Public School Teachers (see also 24, 262, 267, 281)

342.4a. Mass v. San Francisco Bd. of Educ. (Calif. Dist. Ct. of App. 1st Dist., Div. 3, #21,330.)*
343. Effect on Employment — Other Public Officers (see also 261)
344. Effect on Employment — Private (see also 30, 268, 269)
345. Effect on Attorneys (see also 265, 373)
346. Effect on Unemployment Insurance and Social Security (see also 263)
350. Due Process
Law review article:

Daniel E. Murray, Power to expel criminal Def. from his own trial: A comparative view. 36 Colorado U. 171-86.

351. In Arraignment (Delay)
Comment: Denial of access to accused during period of prolonged detention violative of constitutional rights. 10 New York Law Forum 89-96.
351.4. McNear v. Rhay, Supt., Wash. Penitentiary. (Wash. Sup. Ct., #36981.)*

Case note: Confession obtained by police in violation of New York's prompt arraignment statute and in disregard of Def's. right to counsel held inadmissible: New York v. Donovan (13 N.Y. 2d 148, 193 N.W. 2d 628, 243 N.Y. S.2d 841, 1963) 15 Syracuse U. 572-75.

352. In Grand Jury Procedures (see also 311, 316)
353. In Obtaining Confessions
Law review articles: J. A. Spanogle, The use of coerced confession in state courts. 17 Vanderbilt 421-61.

Otis H. Stephens, Jr., The Fourteenth Amendment and confessions of guilt: Role of Supreme Court. 15 Mercer 309-34.

Adria Goodkin, The lie detector: An analysis of its place in the law of evidence. 10 Wayne 381-414.

Comment: Ross R. Runkel, Confessions: Fruit of unlawful arrest. 39 Washington U. 185-91.

353.21. Ralph v. Pepersack, Warden. (CA 4.)*
353.22. Davis v. North Carolina. (ED N.C., Raleigh Div., #1302.)*
353.23. U.S. ex rel. Coleman v. Denno. (U.S.S.C.) (313 F.2d 457.)*
353.25. Massiah v. U.S. (U.S.S.C., #199) Def. indicted under narcotics laws; retained lawyer; pleaded not guilty; released on bail. Co-Def. agreed to cooperate with Gov't. agents, arranged for Def's. words to be heard by them. At trial, evidence of these statements introduced over Def's. objection; convicted; affirmed. May 18, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (6-3), Stewart, J.: "We hold that the Pet. was denied the basic protections of that guarantee when there was used against him at his trial evidence of his own incriminating words, which fedl. agents had deliberately elicited from him after he had been indicted and in the absence of his counsel . . . it was entirely proper to continue an investigation of the suspected criminal activities of the Def. and his alleged confederates, even though the Def. had already been indicted. All that we hold is that the Def's. own incriminating statements, obtained by fedl. agents under the circumstances here disclosed, could not constitutionally be used by the prosecution as evidence against him at his trial." White, J. (Clark, Harlan, JJ.) diss.

Robert J. Carluccio, Esq., New York City.

- 97 -

353.26. Jackson v. Denno. (U.S.S.C., #62) (206 F.Supp. 759, 309 F.2d 573) 1960: Def. entered hotel, held it up, fought with policeman who shot him and died; Def. questioned in hospital by police, given demerol and scopolamine, confessed. At trial, Def. did not object to introduction of confession, but testified it was not made voluntarily; convicted of first degree murder; death. NY cts. affirmed. Def. filed habeas petition in DC, dismissed; CA 2 affirmed. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (5½-3½), White, J.: (1) Under NY law, jury is at once given both evidence going to voluntariness and all corroborating evidence showing confession is true and Def. committed crime; "In our view, the NY procedure falls short of satisfying . . . constitutional requirements. Stein v. NY [346 U.S. 156] is overruled." (2) Def. entitled to "an adequate evidentiary hearing productive of reliable results concerning the voluntariness of his confession" in NY state ct., not DC; not necessarily entitled to new trial on guilt; "practical and desirable that in cases to be tried hereafter a proper determination of voluntariness be made prior to the admission of the confession to the jury which is adjudicating guilt or innocence." Appendix: state statutes on determination of admissibility of confessions. Black, J. (Clark, J.) diss. in part; Clark, J. diss. Harlan, J. (Clark, Stewart, JJ.) diss.

Daniel G. Collins, Esq.

Case notes: Confession after illegal arrest not excluded by Fourteenth Amendment: Prescoe v. Maryland (191 A.2d 226, Md. 1963) 48 Minnesota U. 792-800.

Pre-arraignment confession obtained after refusal to permit counsel to confer with suspect—New York policy: New York v. Donovan and Mencher (193 N.E. 2d 148, 628, 1963) 30 Brooklyn U. 366-70.

354. In Press Releases and Newspaper Coverage

354.4. New York v. Martin and Giles. (NY Sup. Ct., App. Div.)*
355. In Admitting Perjured Testimony (see also 312)

355.4. Sobell v. U.S.
355.11. U.S. ex rel. Miller v. Pate. (CA 7, #14570.)*
356. In Courts Martial (see also 390)
357. In Naturalization Proceedings (see also 259)
358. In Expatriation, Denaturalization and Deportation Proceedings (see also 258, 259)
Law review articles: Abraham Scharf, A study of the law of expatriation. 38 St. John's U. 251-308.

Charles Gordon, Finality of immigration and nationality determinations—can the Gov't. be estopped? 31 Chicago U. 433-66.

358.20. Re Albert Gallo. (Imm. & Nat. Serv., Spec. Inquiry Officer.)*
358.22. Woo Tai King v. Holton, Dist. Dir. (ND Cal., S. Div.)*
358.23. Schneider v. Rusk. (U.S.S.C., #368) Facts: VIII DOCKET 31, 79, 104, IX DOCKET 17. May 18, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (5-3), Douglas, J.: ". . . while the Fifth Amendment contains no equal protection clause, it does forbid discrimination that is 'so unjustifiable as to be violative of due process.' . . . A native-born citizen is free to reside abroad indefinitely without suffering loss of citizenship. The discrimination aimed at naturalized citizens drastically limits their rights to live and work abroad in a way that other citizens may. It creates indeed a second-class citizenship. Living abroad, whether the citizen be naturalized or nativeborn, is no badge of lack of allegiance and in no way evidences a voluntary renunciation of nationality and allegiance." Clark, J. (Harlan, White, J.J.) diss. Brennan, J. took no part.
358.24. Ting v. Immigration Service. (Imm. & Nat. Serv.)*
358.59. U.S. ex rel Marks v. Esperdy. (U.S.S.C., #253) (315 F.2d 673) Facts: VIII DOCKET 31, 104. May 18, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, affirmed by equally divided ct. Brennan, J., took no part.
358.61. Matter of Joseph Douglas Johnson. (Imm. & Nat. Serv., St. Paul.) 1953: Resp.—native-born American citizen—then 22, left Minn. home for Canada, where he engaged in socialist political activity. 1959: Canadian police said FBI sought him for draft evasion, Resp. voluntarily returned to U.S.; pleaded guilty to draft evasion; 2 yrs., then paroled. May 1, 1964: Imm. & Nat. Serv. began deportation proceedings against Resp. on grounds his residence in Canada was expatriatory act (8 USC §1481(a)(2). Pending.

Leonard B. Boudin, Esq., 30 E. 42d St., NYC; Joseph Perry, 516 New York Bldg., St. Paul.

359. In Loyalty Hearings (see also 251 and 268)

359.2. Scott v. Macy. (CA DC, #1050-63 Civ.)*
360. Speedy and Public Trial
Comment: The detainer system and the right to a speedy trial. 31 Chicago U. 535-55.

Case note: Convict's right to speedy trial on pending indictment: Partsch v. Haskins (191 N.E. 2d 922, 1963.) 21 Washington and Lee 128-32.

370. Right to Counsel
Comment: Counseling the indigent—an analysis of defender systems. 38 St. John's U. 310-26.
371. In Federal Cases

371.5. Hyser v. Reed (formerly Jamison v. Chappel). (U.S.S.C.) (318 F.2d 225.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 31, 105, IX DOCKET 53. Cite for cert. denied: 375 U.S. 957.

Case notes: The post-indictment interrogation of prisoner in absence of counsel violates his constitutional rights: Lee v. U.S. (322 F.2d 770, CA 5, 1963) 42 Texas U. 898-904.

Right of counsel under §2255 of Judicial Code: Campbell v. U.S. (318 F.2d 874, CA 7, 1963) 62 Michigan U. 1246-50.

Unsworn statement—assistance of counsel: Lovett v. Georgia (Ga. App. 133 S.E.2d 595, 1963) 15 Mercer 512-13.

- 98 -

372. In State Cases
Comments: Colorado's defender act—Has the time arrived to implement its provisions? 36 Colorado U. 235-44.

Waiver of right to counsel in state court cases: Effect of Gideon v. Wainwright. 31 Chicago U. 591-602.

372.14. Alabama v. Hamilton. (Jefferson Co. Cir. Ct., #98942)*
372.20. Pennsylvania ex rel. Simon v. Maroney. (U.S.S.C., #2 Misc.) (171 A.2d 889, 176 A.2d 94) Facts: VIII DOCKET 32. Mar. 30, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert. Douglas, J. diss.
372.21. New York v. Coe. (Oneida Co. Ct., #113608).*

And see cases at 452.

372.23. Hazel v. Pepersack, Warden. (MD., #13781; Balt. City Sup. Bench.)*
372.24. New York v. Mawbey. (App. Div., 3rd Dept.)*
372.25. Smith v. Mississippi. (U.S.S.C., #374 Misc.)*
372.26. Simon v. Maroney. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 81.

Correction: This is the same case as 372.20.

372.27. Walton v. Arkansas. (Ark. Sup. Ct., #5001.)*
372.31. Mississippi v. Broom. (Leflore Co. Cir. Ct., #17857) Nov. 10, 1962: Def.-Negro woman arrested. Nov. 12: Def. arraigned, charged with false pretenses, pleaded not guilty. Nov. 26: Under promise of leniency, Def. pleaded guilty. Cir. Ct. sentenced Def.: to 2 yrs., suspended sentence, admitted Def. to probation. May 18, 1964: While attending regular appointment with probation officer, Def. informed she had violated her probation. Cir. Ct. revoked probation, sentenced Def. to 1 yr. in Parchman Prison. July 3, 1964: Def. filed petition for writ of error coram nobis in trial ct., alleging all proceedings conducted without counsel, without advice of right to counsel, or opportunity to employ counsel; Def. innocent of offense; Def. not financially able to employ counsel, unable to find volunteer counsel admitted to practice in Mississippi. Def. asked for hearing, admission of her out-of-state attorneys to practice for this case, order vacating the 1962 judgment of conviction and 1964 probation order. Pending.

Claudia Shropshire, Esq., 3200 Cadillac Tower, Detroit; Bruce Waltzer, Esq., 305 Baronne St., New Orleans, La.; Comm. for Legal Assistance in the South, 507½ N. Farish St., Jackson, Miss.

372.32. Williams v. Superior Court. (Modesto, Calif.) (Fifth Dist. Ct. of App.) (214 A.C.A. 842.) Mar. 1964: Pet. arrested for felony narcotics violations, paid bail bondsman $550 to secure release on $5500 bond. At preliminary examination in Muni. Ct., and in Super. Ct., Pet. asked for court-appointed counsel. Cts. refused to appoint counsel: any Def. released on bail is not entitled to public defender services, as he could have used money paid for bail to retain private counsel. Pet. contacted ACLU atty., who wrote Super. Ct., which replied that Pet. was treated according to usual practice in Co.; if Pet. did not retain counsel, he would be tried without counsel. May 1964: Dist. Ct. of App. granted Pet's. petition for writ of prohibition, ordered arraignment and plea set aside, declined to order charges dismissed.

Marshall Krause, Esq., for ACLU of No. Calif., 503 Market St., San Francisco.

372.33. New York v. Baker. (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Co., #2195-64) 1964: Defs.—6 Negro youths—arrested; charged with murder of white Harlem shopkeeper and attempted murder of her husband. In N.Y., indigent Def. is entitled to counsel, who is paid designated fee and given daily free copy of the transcript. Four Defs. requested particular counsel be appointed; Sup. Ct. declined to appoint counsel of Defs'. choice, appointed others instead.

Mary M. Kaufman, Esq., 30 E. 42d St.; Conrad Lynn, Esq., 401 Broadway; William Kunstler, Esq., 511 Fifth Ave., all of NYC.

And see 372.33a.

372.33a. Baker v. New York (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Co.) Facts same as 372.33. Defs. filed petition for writ of habeas corpus testing ct. refusal to appoint counsel of their choice. Sup. Ct. dismissed writ.
372.34. Escobedo v. Illinois. (U.S.S.C., #615) (190 NE.2d 825) Jan. 19, 1960: Def.—22 yrs. old of Mexican extraction, no previous experience with police—arrested without warrant, interrogated after fatal shooting of brother-in-law. Def. made no statement, released on habeas by atty. Jan. 30: Def. rearrested, taken to police station, interrogated, repeatedly asked to speak to his atty., told atty. didn't want to see him, tho atty. simultaneously sought to see Def., without success. Spanish-speaking policeman told Def. he and his sister could be released if Def. "pinned" shooting on another person; Asst. State's Atty. took statement from Def. without advising Def. on his constitutional rights; Def. implicated himself to a degree. Before and during trial, Def. moved to suppress statement, denied; convicted. 1963: Ill. Sup. Ct. held statement inadmissible, reversed. On rehearing, Ill. Sup. Ct. affirmed: Officer denied making promise to release Def. and trial ct. believed him. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (5-4), Goldberg, J.: Def., layman, "was undoubtedly unaware that under Ill. law an admission of 'mere' complicity in the murder plot was legally as damaging as an admission of firing the fatal shot. . . . This was the stage [during interrogation] when legal aid and advice was most critical to Pet." "We have learned the lesson of history . . . that a system of criminal law enforcement which comes to depend on the 'confession' will, in the long run, be less reliable and more subject to abuses than a system which depends on extrinsic evidence independently secured through skillful investigation." "We hold . . . that where . . . the investigation is no longer a general inquiry into an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a particular suspect, the suspect has been taken into police custody, the police carry out a process of interrogations that lends itself to eliciting incriminating statements, the suspect has requested and been denied an opportunity to consult with his lawyer, and the police have not effectively warned him of his absolute constitutional right to remain silent, the accused has been denied 'the Assistance of Counsel' in violation of the Sixth Amendment . . . as 'made obligatory upon the States by the Fourteenth Amendment . . . and that no statement elicited by the police during the interrogation may be used against him at a criminal trial." Harlan, J. diss. Stewart, J. diss. White, J. (Clark, Stewart, JJ.) diss.

Barry L. Kroll, Esq., Park Forest, Ill

Bernard Weisberg, Esq., amicus for ACLU.

- 99 -

373. Indirect Restrictions (see also 265, 345)
See also Smith, 245.16.
373.13. U.S. v. Taylor. (CA 4.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 80, 105. Cite: 321 F.2d 339.
373.14. In re Proceedings Against R. Jess Brown. (SD Miss., #3382 Civ.)*
374. Opportunity for Appellate Review

374.21. Hardy v. U.S. (CA DC.)*
374.22. In Matter of Application of Vincent S. Henderson. (Calif. Sup. Ct., Crim. #7631) Nov. 28, 1961: Pet. convicted of lewd vagrancy (Calif. Penal C. §647a). Jan. 23, 1962: Pet. appealed, pro se, and requested reporter's transcript. Jy. 17: Super. Ct., App. Dept. affirmed. App. Dept. denied pro se petition for rehearing. Jy. 1963: Ct. clerk refused to file another pro se petition for rehearing, which alleged Def. had no official notice of result of prior petition, citing Douglas, 374.18, 372 U.S. 353 (1963), and asking for counsel on appeal. Dec. 4, 1963: Pet., having obtained counsel, filed petition for writ of habeas corpus in Sup. Ct. Jy. 9, 1964: Sup. Ct. (7-0) granted writ, remanded to Muni. Ct.: (1) while free transcript is not automatically required in misdemeanor appeals, it must be granted if Def. is indigent and "the transcript is necessary for adequate and effective appellate review"; (2) orderly administration of justice requires Def. to allege indigence when requesting free transcript, but it would work an "undue hardship" on Def. to deny him relief on that ground, as he filed all papers pro se; (3) as there is no indication that a settled statement would be an adequate basis for appeal, provision of a transcript is appropriate here; (4) a Def. convicted under §674a is entitled to services of an attorney on appeal, and one must be appointed by the court if he is indigent, as conviction under this section entails registration with police as a sex offender and ineligibility to hold a teaching certificate.

Benjamin Dreyfus and Donald Kerson, Esqs., 341 Market St., San Francisco.

Amicus brief filed by Natl. Lawyers Guild, by Richard B. Weinstein, Esq., 45 Polk St., San Francisco.

374.23. Fallen v. U.S. (U.S.S.C., #210.) (306 F.2d 697.) Indigent-Def. convicted of violating postal laws; ct.-appointed counsel declined to handle appeal. Def. sent to prison facility (hospital), sent letters asking for new trial and appeal. CA 5 held motion for new trial not timely filed. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (5-4), Warren, C.J.: "Overlooked, in our view, was the fact that the Rules [of Crim. Procedure] are not, and were not intended to be, a rigid code to have an inflexible meaning irrespective of the circumstances . . . in spite of the promise of the Rule [39(a) (2)], Pet. was forced to take his appeal without the assistance of counsel. He was whisked away . . . and . . . not permitted to have visitors, nor afforded the opportunity to secure another attorney. . . . Since Pet. did all he could under the circumstances, we decline to read the Rules so rigidly as to bar a determination of his appeal on the merits" when delay in receipt of his letter asking appeal was due to prison regulations and lack of access to counsel. Stewart, J. (Clark, Harlan, Brennan, JJ.) diss.

Isaac N. Groner, Esq., Washington, D.C.

374.24. Hardy v. U.S. (U.S.S.C., #112) Def.-indigent convicted; sentenced. Ct.-appointed lawyer on trial withdrew; new Ct.-appointed lawyer on appeal sought transcript in forma pauperis; denied. Jan. 6, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (8-1), Douglas, J.: "How can [new counsel] faithfully discharge the obligation which the Ct. has placed on him unless he can read the entire transcript [of trial]?" Goldberg, J. (Warren, C.J., Brennan, Stewart, JJ.) conc.: "This Ct. should require, under our supervisory power, that full transcripts be provided, without limitation in all fedl. criminal cases to Defs. who cannot afford to purchase them, whenever they seek to prosecute an appeal." "I believe [the rule stated] is equally applicable to one whose appointed lawyer on appeal was also his lawyer at trial. No responsible retained lawyer who represents a Def. at trial will rely exclusively on his memory (even as supplemented by trial notes) in composing a list of possible trial errors which delimit his appeal. . . . [He] needs a complete trial transcript to discharge his full responsibility of preparing the memorandum supporting the application to proceed in forma pauperis." Clark, J. conc. in result. Harlan, J. diss.

Mozart G. Ratner, Esq., Washington, D.C.

380. Confrontation
381. In Criminal Cases

381.4. California v. Davenport. (Cal. Sup. Ct.)*
382. In Civil Cases
390. Jury Trials (see also 356, 510)
Case note: Right of defendant to waive trial by jury. New York v. Duchin (190 N.E.2d 17, 1963) 10 N.Y.L.F. 108-14.
400. Excessive Bail; Parole Conditions
Comment: Granting bail to indigent defendant. 29 Missouri U. 72-76.

Case note: Restraint of the accused during trial: French v. Oklahoma (377 P.2d 501, Okla. Cr. 1962) 1 Tulsa 54-58.

Law review article: Daniel W. Toohey, Handcuffing Def. during trial. 8 St. Louis U. 401-06.

- 100 -

401. Amount of Bail
Law review articles: Marshall W. Krause; Bail: Handcuffs of Poverty on Administration of Criminal Justice, 2 California Comm. on Law and Social Action Law Commentary 53, Spring 1964. American Jewish Congress, 47 Kearney St., San Francisco 8.

Bail or jail, 19 Record of Assn. of Bar of New York City 11, Jan. 1964.

Amendment to Rules of Ct.: July 1, 1964: California Judicial Council ruled: "The fact that a Def. in a criminal case has or has not asked for a jury trial shall not be taken into consideration in fixing the amount of bail, nor shall bail once set be increased or reduced by reason of such fact."

And see Gaar, 401.9, IX DOCKET 55.

401.4. Fernandez v. U.S. (CA 9)*
401.6. Minnesota v. Mastrian. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 136, IX DOCKET 18. Cite for cert. denied: 375 U.S. 942.
401.12. U.S. v. Piper. (ND Tex.) (227 F. Supp. 735) 1964: DC convicted Def. of failure to make return and pay manufacturer's excise taxes of $340,000. Def. applied to DC for bond pending appeal (Fed. Rules Crim. Proc. 46). DC set bond at $75,000, stated appeal was probably frivolous, but considered factors held relevant in federal appellate case law: ability of Def. to post bond, nature of offense, penalty imposed, Def.'s character, probability that Def. will appear, evidence on which conviction is based, Def.'s demeanor in court, Def.'s attitude toward the legal process.

Samuel Donosky, Esq., Davis Bldg., Dallas, Texas.

401.13. White v. U.S. (CA 8) (330 F.2d 811) 1963: DC convicted Def. of narcotics violations. Def., on appeal, raised for first time DC setting bail pre-trial at $5,000, alleged denial of motion for release on own recognizance prevented him from having pre-trial freedom necessary to prepare his defense. 1964: CA held: (1) poverty and inability to prepare one's defense are not relevant in setting bail; test is whether bail is set at a higher figure than will insure presence of accused at trial; (2) review of DC order is improvidently raised on appeal, as proper procedure is by motion for reduction and appeal from order denying motion.

Alan Popkin, Esq., by appointment, 411 N. Seventh St., St. Louis, Mo.

402. Conditions Imposed

402.6. U.S. v. Dumeur. (DC N.Y.)*
402.9. Butler v. Crumlish. (DC Pa.) (229 F. Supp. 565) 1964: Pls.—in custody for want of bail on criminal charges—applied for preliminary injunction under Civil Rights Act to enjoin police from placing them in line-up. DC issued injuction, held: there is substantial merit in Pls.' claim that involuntary line-up to which Pls. were subjected was discrimination depriving Pls. of equal protection since those on bail were free from such treatment: "Constitutional authority for a state to distinguish between criminal Defs. by freeing those who supply bail pending trial and those who do not furnishes no justification for any additional inequality of treatment beyond that which is inherent in the confinement itself. Nor may a court ignore the common knowledge that the system of bail, based as it is on financial ability, is weighted heavily against the poor," citing Sullivan, Proposed Rule 46 and the right to bail, 31 Geo. Washington 419.

Herman Pollock, Esq., and Vincent J. Ziccardi, Esq., both of Defender's Assn. of Phila., and Bernard L. Segal, Esq.

But see White, 401.13.

403. Denial of Bail

403.12. California v. Gaston. (San Francisco Co. Super. Ct.) Apr. 1964: Def.-retired longshoreman, 65, arrested for murder of his maid during argument. June 30: Super. Ct. (Neubarth, J.) admitted Def. to $11,000 bail: Def. has good reputation, owns his home, and "circumstances" of the case justify bail despite Calif. policy against it in murder cases.
404. Miscellaneous Bail Problems
410. Cruel and Unusual Punishment
411. In Criminal Cases

411.11. Winston v. U.S. (ED N.Y.)*
411.13. Cobb v. Georgia. (Ga. Sup. Ct.)*
411.16. Robinson v. California. (370 U.S. 660.) Facts: VII DOCKET 113. Case note: 59 Northwestern 271-77.
411.20. Delaware v. Cannon. (U.S.S.C.) (190 A.2d 514; 196 A.2d 399.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 81, 106. Correction: Def's. original sentence was 3 years and 20 lashes, suspended. Whipping sentence was reimposed on violation of parole. Sep. 3, 1963: On rehearing, Del. Sup. Ct. declined to consider constitutionality of whipping as punishment, remanded for hearing on Def.'s mental condition and possible adverse psychological effect of whipping on him.
411.21. Virginia v. Wansley. (Va. Sup. Ct. of App.)*
411.22. Delaware v. Balser. (Dela. Sup. Ct.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 106, IX DOCKET 55. Cite in Del. Sup. Ct.: 195 A.2d 757.
411.23. New York v. LaFountain. (N.Y. Sup. Ct., App. Div., 3rd Dept. (249 N.Y.S.2d 744.) Facts: IX DOCKET 18. Correction: Aug. 8, 1963: Defs. convicted. May 20: App. Div. reversed, dismissed indictments: Defs. refusal to work was because snow was too deep, and after their refusal, Defs. asked to be put to work again; there was no showing Defs. conduct "wilful" or "designed" to interfere with administration of relief program. Ct. did not reach constitutional issue.
- 101 -

412. In Extradition Cases
Law review article: Manuel R. Garcia-Mora, Crimes against humanity and principle of nonextradition of political offenders.
413. In Civil Cases
430. Due Process for Juvenile Offenders (see 56)
440. Due Process for Incompetent Defendants

440.1. New York v. Codarre. (N.Y. Ct. of App.)*

Law review article: G. H. L. Fridman, Mental incompetency—Part II. 80 Law Quarterly Rev. 84-104.

Case note: Insane persons: Judgment, sentence and final commitment—Test for criminal responsibility should conform to language of Model Penal Code of American Law Institute. Wion v. U.S. (325 F.2d 420, CA 10, 1963) 42 Texas U. 886-90.

450. Post-Conviction Remedies
Law review article: Ammon Rubinstein, Habeas corpus as a means of review. 27 Modern L. Rev. 322-32.
451. In State Courts in State Cases
Case note: Failure of assigned counsel to file timely notice of appeal is not sufficient grounds for vacating judgment by writ of error coram nobis: New York v. Kling (19 App. Div. 2d 750, 242 NYS.2d 977, 2d Dept. 1963) 15 Syracuse U. 578-80.
452. In Federal Courts in State Cases
Law review article: Gerald S. Gold and Carol G. Emerling, Federal habeas corpus for state prisoner—A new look. 25 Ohio State U. 60-70.

Comment: Collateral post-conviction remedies available to New York state prisoners. 32 Fordham 803-22.

452.1. Fay v. Noia. (372 U.S. 391.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 35, 82, 107. Case note: 12 Kansas U. 557-61.
452.7. U.S. ex rel. Durocher v. LaVallee. (CA 2) (330 F.2d 303.) Pets.-four state prisoners sought fed'l. habeas corpus because they were denied counsel in criminal proceedings later used by NY authorities to give Pets. "second-offender" status and possibility of higher sentences for New York convictions for which they were, at the time of filing petitions, incarcerated. DC, in pre-Gideon, 372.1, 372 U.S. 335, ruling, denied all petitions: substantial justice was done. CA 2, in banc, reversed for hearing on allegations in petitions: (1) there is no exhaustion of remedies question because the first convictions are all from other states and a N.Y. Def. is not compelled at his New York trial to challenge prior convictions from other states; (2) mere possibility of a shorter sentence is enough to justify giving fedl. habeas corpus, despite fact Pls. were sentenced to less than permissible maximum for first offenders; (3) a prior state conviction may be invalidated by fedl. court on application by second offender currently in jail; (4) requirement of court-appointed counsel in state criminal proceedings is not limited to cases where no guilty plea is entered; (5) failure to advise Def. of right to counsel will invalidate guilty plea; (6) rule of Gideon as interpreted here is retrospectively applicable to all state prisoners. Pending.

Leon B. Polsky, Esq., Legal Aid Society, NYC.

And see 372.

452.8. U.S. ex rel. Walker v. LaVallee. (ND NY, Civ. #9576) (224 F.Supp. 661.) 1953: At trial, Def.'s atty. objected to introduction of Def.'s confession, but stipulated it could go to jury to be evaluated in light of testimony on coercion; convicted; sentenced. 1961: DC denied Def.'s petition for habeas corpus. Pet. pursued state remedies; New York courts denied relief. U.S.S.C. denied cert. Dec. 26, 1963: DC granted new petition, ordered Pet. released unconditionally or retried immediately: (1) record of state prosecution shows physical abuse of Pet., invalidating his confession; (3) certainty of guilt not in issue when considering coerced confession; (4) trial record shows sufficient objection by Pet.'s atty.; (5) state cts. must take responsibility to review old convictions, else fedl. intervention will release prisoners wholesale, causing social problems.

And see 353.

Case note: Federal cts. have power to grant writ of habeas corpus if state court has deprived Pet. of constitutional right: Application of Tomich (221 F.Supp. 500, DC Mont. 1963) 25 Montana U. 264-70.

453. In Federal Cases

453.2. Harris v. Settle. (CA 8) (322 F.2d 908; 8 RRLR 1349.) 1963: Pet.-Negro fedl. prisoner spat upon by white fellow-inmate, responded with two blows with his fist. Pet. placed in solitary and later in restriction; white inmate not punished. Pet. filed petition for habeas corpus pro se and in forma pauperis, alleging "one sided punishment is bias and prejudice and cruel." DC dismissed. Oct. 3, 1963: CA affirmed: (1) facts alleged do not show cruel and unusual punishment; (2) routine discretionary prison discipline does not present justifiable issue.

And see 304., 553.

460. Sentencing and Clemency Procedures
Law review articles: Sol Rubin, The model sentencing act. 39 New York U. 251-62.

Herbert L. Packer, Making the punishment fit the crime. 77 Harvard 1071-82.

Comment: The need for articulate goals at acquittal, commitment and release stages. 112 Pennsylvania U. 733-53.

Case notes: Use of indefinitely suspended sentence in Pennsylvania: Pa. v. Duff (192 A.2d 258, 1963) 68 Dickenson 340-47.

Sentence of life imprisonment in initial trial precludes death sentence for same offense in trial on remand: California v. Henderson (386 P.2d 677, 1963.) 50 Virginia U. 559-64.

461. Sentencing Process
Law review article: J. E. Hall Williams, Alternative to definite sentences. 80 Law Quarterly Rev. 41-62.
- 102 -

461.2. Wood v. Denna. (CA 2.)*
461.3. Rudolph v. Alabama. (U.S.S.C., #308) (152 So.2d 662.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 137, IX DOCKET 19. Cite for cert. denied: 375 U.S. 889.
461.4. California v. Morse. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 56. Cite: 388 P.2d 33.

Case note: Statements pertaining to parole as improper argument: Bell v. Oklahoma (381 P.2d 167, Okla. Cr. 1963) 17 Oklahoma U. 195-97.

461.5. U.S. v. Behrens. (U.S.S.C., #86.) Facts: IX DOCKET 56. Cite: 375 U.S. 162.
462. Applications for Probation
463. Applications for Parole
464. Applications for Pardons or Executive Clemency
Law review article: Michael V. DiSalle, Comments on capital punishment and clemency. 25 Ohio State U. 71-83.

Case note: Pardon conditional on agreement to leave state not unconstitutional: Mansell v. Turner (384 P.2d 394, Utah 1963) 77 Harvard 1138-42.

465. Applications for Expungement or Certificates of Rehabilitation
490. Miscellaneous Due Process

490.4a. Pauling v. McNamara, U.S. Secy. of Def. (U.S.S.C., #965) Facts: VIII DOCKET 35, 83, 107, 137. May 18, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert.
490.6d. Connecticut v. Griswold and Buxton. (Conn. Sup. Ct.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 35, 83. May 11: Conn. Sup. Ct. affirmed, held act prohibiting use of birth control devices and dissemination of birth control information constitutional.

Law review article: Peter Smith, The history and future of legal battle over birth control. 49 Cornell 275-303.

490.21. In re Martin. (374 P.2d 801.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 36, 83. Case note: 21 Washington & Lee 158-62.
490.22. Sills v. Gotthilf. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 36, 83, 107, IX DOCKET 19. Cite: 375 U.S. 79.
490.23. U.S. v. Cook. (E.D. S.C., #23,705.)*
490.24. New York v. Sanabria, Scifo. (N.Y. Ct. of App.) (242 N.Y.S.2d 986.) Facts: IX DOCKET 19. Apr. 1964: App. Div. affirmed, held split verdict in 3-judge criminal ct. constitutional: while concept of guilt beyond reasonable doubt is in Penal Code, it is not mandated by state constitution; judgment of the ct., tho concurred in by only two judges, establishes guilt beyond reasonable doubt. May 14: Ct. of App. affirmed.
490.25. Pennsylvania v. Giaccio. (Pa. Sup. Ct. #218.) (196 A.2d 189) Facts: IX DOCKET 57. Correction: Act under which Def. assessed costs of his prosecution dates from 1860. Jun. 1964: Pa. Sup. Ct. affirmed Super. Ct., held since act is not penal, protections of due process ordinarily observed in criminal trials do not apply.


Charles Morgan, Jr., A time to speak. Harper & Row. $3.95. (Morgan is young white atty. recently of Birmingham. See e.g., Zellner, 57.7, 57.8.)

Civil rights and civil wrongs. 98 pp. 150 photos of integration struggles North and South. Front Page Publications, 6650 Franklin Ave., Hollywood 28. $1.00 paper, $2.00 Cloth.

Elliot M. Rudwick, Race riot at East St. Louis, July 2, 1917. S. Illinois U. Press, Carbondale, Ill. 320 pp. $6.00.


B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League & Southern Regional Council, The Price we pay: A discussion of economic costs of segregation. Anti-Defamation League, 315 Lexington Ave., NYC; Southern Regional Council, 5 Forsyth St., NW, Atlanta.

Law review articles:

Arthur J. Goldberg, Equality and governmental action, 39 NYU. 205-27.

Louis Lusky, The stereotype: Hard core of racism. 13 Buffalo U. 450-61.

Berl I. Bernhard, Civil rights U.S.A.—1963. 8 St. Louis U. 359-78.

Arthur Earl Bonfield, State civil rights statutes: Some proposals. 49 Iowa U. 1067-1129.


John C. Satterfield, Civil regimentation in the name of civil rights. 35 Mississippi U. 217-40.


Immunity of public official from liability under fed'l. civil acts. 18 Ark. U. 81-95.

- 103 -

500. Elections
501. Racial Discrimination

501.Ala.6. U. S. v. Penton, Registrars. (Montgomery Co.) (MD Ala., #1741-N.)*
501.Ala.9. U.S. v. Mayton and Alabama. (Perry Co.) (CA 5.)*
501.Ala.10. U.S. v. Bd. of Registrars, Jefferson Co. (ND Ala., S. Div., #CA64-367.)*
501.Ala.11. U.S. v. Cartwright and Alabama. (Elmore Co.) (MD Ala., Civ. #1957-N) Suit by U.S. to enjoin use of voter registration tests drawn up in Feb. 1964 by Ala. Sup. Ct. under 1961 law. Jan. 17, 1964: DC ordered Defs. to add 102 Negroes to registration lists, enjoined use of new tests until "the prior discrimination and the effects thereof have been eliminated," retained jurisdiction.

Ben Hardman, Esq., U.S. Atty., Montgomery.

501.Ga.2. U.S. v. Raines. (Terrell Co.) (MD Ga., Americus, #442.)*
501.Ga.2a. U.S. v. Matthews and Chappell. (Terrell and Sumter Cos.) (MD Ga., Americus Div., #516) Facts: VIII DOCKET 37, IX DOCKET 57. Cite: 9 RRLR 225.
501.La.1b. U.S. v. Citizens Council, Lucky and Louisiana. (Ouachita Parish.) (WD La.)*
501.La.2. U.S. v. McElveen, Registrar Thomas, Citizens' Council. (Washington Parish.) (ED La., #9146) (180 F. Supp. 10; 362 U.S. 58) Facts: VIII DOCKET 37, IX DOCKET 19. Corrected statement of facts: Jan. 11, 1960: DC ordered 1,377 challenged Negro voters returned to rolls within 10 days, ordered Def.-Thomas to report to DC if more than 3% of registrants of any one race challenged in any 3-mth. period, to refrain from allowing racially-discriminatory challenges to voters, enjoined Def.-Council and officers from challenging voters on grounds of race, retained jurisdiction. Jan. 26, 1960: CA 5 granted Def. stay of execution pending appeal. Feb. 29, 1960: U.S.S.C. granted Pl.'s petition for cert., citing Raines, 501.Ga.2, 361 U.S. 17, vacated CA 5 stay, affirmed DC order. Mar. 9, 1960: Def.-McElveen, and other Citizens' Council officials filed notice of appeal to CA 5. Mar. 1, 1961: Def. withdrew appeal. Case closed.
501.La.6a. U.S. v. Manning. (E. Carroll Parish.) (WD La., Monroe, Shreveport Div., #8257.)*
501.La.7. Anderson v. Martin. (U.S.S.C., #51) Facts: VIII DOCKET 38, IX DOCKET 57. Cite for U.S.S.C. rev'g. 3-judge ct.: 375 U.S. 399. Case note: 25 Pitt. U. 583-87.
501.La.8. U.S. v. Fox and Louisiana. (Plaquemine Parish.) (ED La., #11625.)*
501.La.9. U.S. v. Ward. (Madison Parish.) (WD La., Monroe Div., Civ. #8547.) (222 F. Supp. 617, 8 RRLR 1527.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 38. Oct. 22, 1963: DC found Def. required each Negro applicant to be identified by 2 registered voters when all registered voters in parish were white, enjoined Def. from refusing to accept certain forms of documentary identification offered by applicants, from using different tests for white and Negro applicants, from engaging in any practice having purpose or effect of discriminating on basis of race, ordered Def. to file detailed monthly reports on registration, retained jurisdiction.
501.La.10. U.S. v. Wilder and Louisiana. (Jackson Parish.) (WD La., Monroe Div., Civ. #8695.) (222 F. Supp. 749, 8 RRLR 1531.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 38. Oct. 23, 1963: DC found Citizens' Council had challenged 85% of all Negro voters, found Def. had removed voters challenged, ordered them reinstated on rolls, enjoined continuation of discriminatory testing procedures for applicants, directed use of specified procedures in determining qualification to register and vote, directed Def. to prepare detailed written monthly reports of actions taken on registration applications and make reports available for inspection and copying by Pl.
501.La.11. U.S. v. Louisiana. (ED La., Baton Rouge Div., #2548; U.S.S.C., #1073.) (225 F. Supp. 355.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 37, IX DOCKET 19. Addition: 3-judge ct. (Wisdom, J.) held La. a proper party-Def., La. citizenship test, requiring interpretation of section of state constitution, invalid on its face and as applied to Negro registrants, found test part of historical pattern of discrimination (extensive review of La. voting history), held newly-adopted test purporting to substitute for citizenship test also unconstitutional as it would "freeze" results of past discrimination unless rolls cleared and new test administered to all persons of voting age alike, held Defs. must admit Negroes to registration on terms previously accorded to whites if unwilling to consider general re-registration. Jun. 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. noted prob. juris. on Def.'s appeal.

But see 501.Miss.16.

501.La.12. Carter v. Registrar and Sheriff. (St. Francisville, W. Feliciana Parish, La.) (DC La.)*
501.Miss.1a. U.S. v. Daniel, Registrar, and Mississippi. (Jefferson Davis Co.) (SD Miss., Hattiesburg Div., #1655.)*
501.Miss.2. U.S. v. Registrar and Mississippi. (Panola Co.) (SD Miss., #D-C-45-61.)*
501.Miss.3. U.S. v. Ramsey. (Clarke Co.) (CA 5, #20596.) (8 RRLR 156; 9 RRLR 233.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 38, 138. Feb. 20, 1964: CA 5 modified and affirmed: (1) complaint properly dismissed as to Def.-Miss. as full relief could be granted without enjoining state; (2) DC refusal to find pattern of discrimination supported by evidence, altho contrary finding would likewise have found support; (3) DC refusal to prescribe standards for registration was proper, as DC should not force registrar to violate valid Miss. laws on registration; (4) decree should be modified to require Def.-registrar to file monthly reports on applications for registration, and to apply to Def.'s successors in office. Rives, J., diss. in part.
501.Miss.4. U.S. v. Mississippi, Wood, Registrar. (Walthall Co.) (SD Miss., Hattiesburg Div., Civ. #1656; U.S.S.C., #1097.) (8 RRLR 1537.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 38. Oct. 25, 1963: DC found Def.-Wood had discriminated against Negro applicants: required them to copy more difficult portions of Constitution, helped white applicants, but not Negroes, answer questions on registration form: ordered
- 104 -

Def. to register 1 named Negro; enjoined Def. from discriminating between applicants on basis of race; found Def. an agent solely of Walthall Co., not of Miss., dismissed complaint as to Miss.
501.Miss.4a. U.S. v. Wood. (Walthall Co.) (SD Miss., Hattiesburg Div., #1656.)*
501.Miss.5. U.S. v. Lynd. (Forrest Co.) (CA 5; SD Miss.) (301 F.2d 818; 321 F.2d 26.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 38-39, 84. Jul. 15, 1963: CA 5 reaffirmed granting of preliminary injunction, directed injunction continued in effect until DC disposes of case, ruled U.S. need not allege specific details of discrimination in its complaint, and proof to establish practice of discrimination need not be confined to incumbency of present registrar, remanded to DC. Jan. 6, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert.
501.Miss.5a. Re Theron C. Lynd, Registrar. (Forrest Co.) (CA 5.)*
501.Miss.6. U.S. v. Green, Cir. Clerk, and Mississippi. (George Co.) (SD Miss., #2540.)*

And see U.S. v. Bd. of Educ., 571.12.

501.Miss.7. Kennedy v. Lewis, Cir. Clk. and Registrar. (Boliver Co.) (U.S.S.C., #938.) (325 F.2d 210, 9 RRLR 227.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 39, 84, IX DOCKET 58. May 18, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert.
501.Miss.8. U.S. v. Dogan. (Tallahatchie Co.) (ND Miss., Delta Div., #D-C-53-61.)
501.Miss.9. Higgs v. Kennedy and Hoover. (DC DC.)*
501.Miss.10. U.S. v. City of Greenwood. (ND Miss., Greenville Div., #GC638.)*
501.Miss.11. U.S. v. Sheriff Edwards. (Rankin Co.) (SD Miss., Jackson Div., #3413.)*
501.Miss.12. U.S. v. Ashford, Registrar (Hinds Co.) and Mississippi. (SD Miss., #3457.)*
501.Miss.13. Kennedy v. Owen. (Mississippi.) (SD Miss., Jackson Div.) (321 F.2d 116.)*
501.Miss.14. U.S. v. Holmes Co. (SD Miss., Jackson Div., Civ. #3417(J)(C).) 1963: U.S. sued under 42 USC §1971d against Co., Co. sheriff, DA, and Co. Atty., seeking permanent injunction against intimidation and coercion of Negro registrants and registration drive leaders. Feb. 25, 1964: DC found criminal prosecutions for arson, cohabitation, and interference with sheriff's investigations had been brought against drive leaders, found local white populace relatively unconcerned with Negro registration, held only violation of §1971d in past 4 yrs. was sheriff's refusal to allow Negroes to pay poll tax, which practice had stopped when suit was filed, declined to issue injunction, dismissed as to Co. as it "not a person" and not amenable to suit under §1971d, retained jurisdiction over sheriff to insure he continued to accept poll tax from Negroes, dismissed as to all other Pls.
501.Miss.15. U.S. v. Mississippi. (SD Miss., Jackson Div., #3312.) (9 RRLR 241) 1963: U.S. sued Miss., Miss. Bd. of Education Commrs., 6 Co. registrars alleging several Miss. statutes and state constitutional provisions unconstitutional on their face and as applied to Negro citizens seeking to register, under 42 USC §§1971c, 1971d, 28 USC §§1345, 2281. Mar. 6, 1964: 3-judge ct. (2-1) granted Def.'s motions to dismiss. held: (1) Miss. cannot be joined as party unless there are no Co. registrars against whom relief may be obtained individually; (2) §1971c is of doubtful constitutionality to extent it authorizes "sovereign" states to be made parties; (3) Election Commrs. not proper parties as they do not administer statutes nor appoint registrars; (4) venue improper as to 4 of 6 registrars sued; (5) power to determine voting qualifications committed to states by U.S. Constitution; (6) literacy and "good moral character" requirements for voter registration constitutional, as producing more qualified, tho smaller, electorate; (7) statutes authorizing registrars to destroy records required to be preserved by Civil Rights Acts permissive only, hence not in conflict; (8) strict procedures for registration are applicable to all unregistered voters alike, hence not violative of 14th Amendment, despite statistical survey showing vast majority of unregistered voters are Negroes. Brown, J., diss. as to all procedural and substantive holdings of majority. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. noted prob. juris. on appeal of U.S.

But see Wisdom, J., in 501 La. 11.

501.Miss.16. Gray v. Mississippi and Gov. Johnson. (ND Miss., Greenville Div.) June 19, 1964: Pls.-Negro "Freedom Democratic Party" candidates for U.S. Congress and Senate, registered voters, and unsuccessful applicants for registration sued Defs.-Mississippi state officials, and Miss. Democratic Party officers: (1) 1963 Mississippi legislation provides that unless political party specifies to the contrary, its electors shall be placed on ballot as "unpledged," other legislation provides that no organization may use name of registered political parties (Democratic and Republican); these provisions, taken together, have purpose and effect of denying Mississippians opportunity to vote for National Democratic Party nominee in Nov. 1964 election; this legislation should be declared unconstitutional; (2) 50,000 Negro citizens of Mississippi have attempted to register and been turned down because of racially discriminatory administration of voter registration tests administered by Defs.-state officials; injunctive relief is prayed; (3) as Negro citizens have been denied opportunity to register, vote, and participate in activities of Miss. Democratic Party, primary elections of June 16 should be voided, holding of Co. and state Democratic conventions enjoined until Negroes have had fair chance to register. Pls. requested 3-judge ct., invoked DC jurisdiction under U.S. Const., art. II, Amendments 14 and 15; 42 USC §§1971, 1983, 1985, 1988; 28 USC §§1331, 1343, 1344, 2201, 2202, 2281, 2284.

L. H. Rosenthal, Esq., Suite 4, 221 No. President St., Jackson, Miss.; Morton Stavis, Esq., 744 Broad St., Newark, N.J.; Benjamin Smith and Bruce Waltzer, Esqs., 1006 Baronne Bldg., New Orleans; William Kunstler and Arthur Kinoy, Esqs., 511 Fifth Ave., NYC; Melvin Wulf, Esq., 156 Fifth Ave., NYC.

501.Miss.17. Gray v. Johnson. (SD Miss., Jackson Div., #3580) Since adoption of 24th Amendment forbidding poll tax requirement for voters, Miss. requires certificate of nonpayment of poll tax in order to vote. Certificate of nonpayment must be obtained from city officials. June 23, 1964: Pl. sued challenging procedure, sought 3-judge ct. Pending.

L. H. Rosenthal, Esq., Suite 1, 221 N. President St., Jackson.

- 105 -

501.N.Y.3. Application of Cardona. (NY Sup. Ct., 1st Dist., #12434-63.) 1963: Pl.-Puerto Rican sued to require NY Bd. of Elections officials to administer her voter registration literacy test in Spanish. Mar. 13: Sup. Ct. dismissed petition: no valid reason advanced for departing from precedents denying relief asked. Pet.'s appeal pending.

Paul O'Dwyer, Esq., 350 Central Park, NYC.

501.NC.2. Alston v. Butts. (ED N.C.) (Halifax Co.) May 1964: Pls.-Negroes sued under 42 USC §1971 for injunction directing expeditious registration of Negroes on equal basis with whites. May 8: DC issued temporary restraining order. May 13: After full hearing, DC issued preliminary injunction: (1) Defs.-registration officials must provide sufficient personnel to process all applicants for registration within 5 minutes; (2) Negro applicants not to be hindered or delayed in registration; (3) Defs. shall permit 3 registrants to be processed at the same time. May 26: In 13 days, 2,020 Negroes registered.

William Kunstler and Arthur Kinoy, Esqs., 511 Fifth Ave., NYC; Morton Stavis, Esq., 744 Broad St., Newark, N.J.; Samuel S. Mitchell, Esq., 126½ E. Hargett St., Raleigh, N.C.

501.Va.1. Butts v. Harrison. (Norfolk, Va.) (ED Va., #3912.)*
502. Political Discrimination
Comments: The "equal time" provisions: Has broadcasting come of age? 36 Colorado U. 257-68.
503. Urban Discrimination
Note: The number of malapportionment cases pending makes it impossible to cover each case in detail in the DOCKET, as the factual and legal issues are not identical. All pending cases on which facts are available will be listed by title, docket no., court, names and addresses of counsel. The more significant, and those decided in the U.S.S.C., will be summarized in more detail. See reports by Natl. Municipal League, 47 E. 68th St., NYC, for complete coverage.

Law review article: William H. Stoffers, Reapportionment in California counties. 4 Santa Clara Lawyer 201-11.

Comments: Beyond Wesberry: State apportionment and equal protection. 39 NYU 264-89.

Wyoming legislative reapportionment in the light (?) of Baker v. Carr. 18 Wyoming U. 23-33.

503.Ala.1.. Vann and McConnell v. Baggett.


503.Ala.2. Alsup v. Mayhall.


503.Ala.3. Reynolds v. Sims. (U.S.S.C., ## 23, 27, 41) (208 F.Supp. 431) Correction: These 3 are in U.S.S.C. as one appeal and 2 cross-appeals. June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C., per Warren, C.J., affirmed, remanded, held: existing apportionment of Alabama's bicameral legislature, and 2 proposed alternatives, invalid under equal protection clause because apportionment is not based on population. Harlan, J., dis.
503.Calif.3. Silver v. Jordan. (SD Calif., Cent. Div. #62-953-MC)*
503.Calif.4. Mutnick v. Bd. of Supervisors. (Contra Costa Co. Super. Ct., #88406)*
503.Colo.1. In re Legislative Reapportionment. (formerly Stein v. General Assembly.) (Colo. Sup. Ct.) (374 P.2d 66) Correction: This is same case as 503.Colo.5. Colo. Sup. Ct. disposed of it without reaching constitutional issues, retained jurisdiction until Nov. 1962. Case closed.
503.Colo.2. Lucas v. 44th Gen'l. Assembly of State of Colo. (formerly Lisco v. McNichols.)


503.Colo.3. Ryan v. Tinsley. (U.S.S.C., #508) (208 F.Supp. 471, 219 F.Supp. 922) Correction: These 2 are now same case, consolidated for trial before 3-judge ct., which held Colorado's 1962 apportionment scheme comported with equal protection clause. June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C., per Warren, C.J., reversed, remanded, held: neither 1962 bicameral apportionment, nor its statutory predecessor, is sufficiently grounded on population to be sustainable under equal protection clause. Harlan, Stewart, Clark, JJ., diss.
503.Colo.5. Re Legislative Reapportionment. See correction at 503.Colo.1.
503.Conn.1. Pinney v. Butterworth. (formerly Butterworth v. Dempsey.) (U.S.S.C., #1078) Facts: IX DOCKET 58. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, without opinion, affirmed, remanded. Harlan, J., diss.
503.Conn.2. Valenti v. Dempsey. (DC Conn., #9544)*
503.Dela.1. Sincock v. Terry.


503.Dela.2. Roman v. Sincock. (U.S.S.C., #307) (207 F.Supp. 205, 210 F.Supp. 395, 215 F.Supp. 169) Correction: These are same case, in U.S.S.C. sub nom. Roman v. Sincock. June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C., per Warren, C.J., affirmed, remanded, held: Delaware bicameral legislature apportionment before and after 1963 amendment violates equal protection clause—it is not substantially on a population basis. Harlan, J., diss.
503.Fla.1. Lund v. Mathas. (Fla. Sup. Ct.)*
503.Fla.2. Swann v. Adams. (formerly Sobel v.) (U.S.S.C., #297) (214 F.Supp. 811) June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam and without opinion, reversed, remanded. Stewart, Harlan, JJ., diss.
503.Ga.2. Gray v. Sanders. (DC Ga.) (372 U.S. 368)*
503.Ga.3. Wesberry v. Sanders. (ND Ga., #7889)*

Case notes: 15 Mercer 504-06, 9 Villanova 415-21, 13 Amer. U. 200-06.

503.Ga.4. Toombs v. Fortson. (ND Ga., Atlanta Div., #7872) Facts: VIII DOCKET 40, 109. June 19: 3-judge ct. denied petition of intervenors to require apportionment of lower
- 106 -

house before Nov. elections, held legislature could not submit proposed reapportionment plan to Ga. voters, ordered new legislature to be elected in Nov. and seated in Jan. to proceed with reapportionment.
503.Ida.2. Hearne v. Smylie. (U.S.S.C., #1075) (225 F.Supp. 645) DC denied relief. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam and without opinion, reversed, remanded. Harlan, JJ., diss.
503.Ill.1. Germano v. Kerner. (U.S.S.C., #636) (220 F.Supp. 230) June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam and without opinion, reversed, remanded. Clark, Stewart, Harlan, JJ., diss.
503.Ind.2. Stout v. Hendricks. (SD Ind., #1 P61-C-236)*
503.Ind.3. Grills v. Welsh. (Marion Co. Super. Ct., #559-600)*
503.Ia.2. Hill v. Davis. (formerly Davis v. Synhorst.) (U.S.S.C., #1079) June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam and without opinion, affirmed, remanded, noted that appeal presents no question on temporary reapportionment plan adopted by Ia. Genl. Assembly in Feb. 1964. Harlan, J., diss.
503.Kan.2. Meeks v. Anderson. (DC Kan., #KC 1774)*
503.Ky.1. Schmied v. Combs. (WD Ky., #4380)*
503.Ky.2. Combs v. Mathews. (Franklin Cir. Ct.)*
503.La.1. Daniel v. Davis. (ED La.)*
503.Md.2. Maryland Comm. for Fair Representation v. Tawes. (U.S.S.C., #29) (182 A.2d 877, 184 A.2d 715) June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C., per Warren, C.J., reversed, remanded, held apportionment of Md.'s bicameral legislature is not on population basis, denies equal protection.
503.Md.2. Maryland Comm. for Fair Congressional Redistricting v. Tawes. (DC Md., #15178 Civ.) Dec. 20, 1963: Pls. filed suit. 3-judge ct. convened. Md. legislature met, unable to agree on apportionment. Mar. 20, 1964: DC declared existing districts void, stayed effective date of decree until after Nov. to allow elections to be held under current statute.
503.Mass.1. Fishman v. Secy. of Commonwealth. (Mass. Sup. Jud. Ct., #12970)*
503.Mich.1. Beadle v. Scholle. (U.S.S.C., #24) (116 NW.2d 350) Facts: VIII DOCKET 41. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert.
503.Mich.2. Calkins v. Hare. (ED Mich., S. Div., #22720) Facts: VIII DOCKET 41. Mar. 23, 1964: 3-judge ct. held Mich. congressional districts drawn in manner repugnant to equal protection, ordered either immediate redistricting or atlarge election of Congressmen.
503.Mich.3. Marshall v. Hare. (U.S.S.C., #962) (227 F.Supp. 989) June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam and without opinion, reversed DC decision that legislative apportionment is rational and does not frustrate majority rule, remanded. Clark, Stewart, Harlan, JJ. diss.
503.Minn.1. Hedlund v. Hanson. (DC Minn., #4-62-122)*
503.Minn.2. LaRose v. Takash. (Minn. Sup. Ct.)*
503.Miss.1. Fortner v. Barnett. (1st Jud. Dist., Hinds Co., Ch. #59,965)*
503.Mo.1. Preisler v. Hearnes. (Mo. Sup. Ct., #49,370)*
503.Mo.2. Roddy v. Dalton. (DC Mo.)*
503.Neb.1. League of Nebraska Municipalities v. Marsh. (DC Nebr., Lincoln, #551L)*
503.Nev.1. Paley v. Sawyer. (DC Nev., #1593)*
503.NH.1. Levitt v. Atty. Genl. (N.H. Sup. Ct., ##5021, 5043)*
503.NH.2. Levitt v. Atty. General. (N.H. Sup. Ct.)*
503.NJ.2. Jackson v. Bodine. (Hudson Co. Super. Ct., Ch.)*
503.NM.1. Cargo v. Mechem. (N.M. Dist. Ct., Santa Fe)*
503.NY.1. WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo. (formerly v. Simon.) (U.S.S.C., #20) (208 F.Supp. 368) June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C., per Warren, C.J., held NY Const. and statutes do not apportion bicameral legislature substantially on population basis and are therefore repugnant to equal protection clause. Harlan, Stewart, Clark, JJ., diss.
503.NY.2. Wright v. Rockefeller. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: IX DOCKET 59. Cite: 376 U.S. 52.
503.NY.3. Honeywood v. Rockefeller. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 84, 139, IX DOCKET 59. Cite: 376 U.S. 222.
503.ND.1. Lien v. Sathre. (ND N.D., SW Div., #424)*
503.Ohio.1. Nolan v. Rhodes. (formerly v. DiSalle.) and
503.Ohio.2. Sive v. Ellis. (U.S.S.C., #454, 455) (218 F.Supp. 953) DC dismissed complaints. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, reversed, remanded. Stewart, Harlan, JJ., diss.
503.Okla.3. Jones v. Winters. (Okla. Sup. Ct., #39,857)*
503.Okla.4. Brown v. State Election Bd. (Okla. Sup. Ct.)*
503.Okla.5. Reed v. State Election Bd. (Okla. Sup. Ct.)*
503.Okla.6. Williams, Okla. Farm Bureau, Baldwin v. Moss. U.S.S.C., # #476, 534, 546) (207 F.Supp. 885, 374 U.S. 93, 103) June 22, 1964: On appeal from final judgment, U.S.S.C. affirmed on merits, remanded. Harlan, J., diss.
503.Pa.1. Start v. Lawrence. (Dauphin Co. Ct., Eq. #2536 and Law #187)*
503.RI.1. Sweeney v. Notte. (R.I. Sup. Ct.)*
503.RI.2. Needham v. LaFrance. (DC R.I., #2930)*
503.Tenn.1. Baker v. Carr. (MD Tenn., Nashville Div., #2724)*
503.Tex.1. Martin v. Bush. (U.S.S.C., #675) (224 F.Supp. 499; 376 U.S. 222)*
503.Utah.1. Petuskey v. Clyde (DC Utah, Central Div.)*
503.Va.1. Davis v. Mann. (U.S.S.C., #69) (213 F.Supp. 577) June 15, 1964: U.S.S.C., per Warren, C.J., affirmed, remanded, held neither house of Va. legislature apportioned in accord with 14th Amendment equal protection clause. Harlan, J., diss.
- 107 -

503.Va.2. Donovan v. Harrison. (DC Va.)*
503.Vt.1. Mikell v. Rousseau. (Vt. Sup. Ct.)*
503.Vt.2. Buckley v. Hoff. (DC Vt.)*
503.Wash.1. Meyers v. Thigpen. (U.S.S.C., #381) (211 F.Supp. 826) June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, affirmed that portion of DC judgment holding invalid Wash. legislature districts, noted that appeal did not present question of Wash. Congressional districts, held validly apportioned by DC. Harlan, J., diss.
503.W.Va.1. Kanawha v. Carson. (SD W.Va.)*
503.Wis.1. Wisconsin v. Zimmerman. (DC Wyo., #4717)*
503.Wyo.2. Schaefer v. Thompson. (DC Wyo., #4717)*
504. 14th Amendment §2 Enforcement

504.2. Denman, Lampkin v. Hodges. (DC DC, #1355-63.)*
510. Jury Selection and Appeals to Prejudice (see also 311)
Case note: Challenging jury panel for bias: Nebraska v. Eggers (120 NW.2d 541, 1963) 43 Nebraska U. 629-40.
511. Involving Federal Employees
512. Involving Racial Discrimination
Comment: Racial discrimination—systematic exclusion in jury selection. 24 Louisiana U. 393-400.
512.29. Alabama v. Seals. (DC Ala.)*
512.32. Giles and Giles v. Maryland. (Gov. Tawes.)*
512.38. U.S. ex rel. Davis v. Gov. Davis. (DC La.)*
512.39. U.S. ex rel. Poret and Labat v. Davis and Walker. (SD La., #550 Misc.)*
512.40. Mississippi v. George Gordon. (U.S.S.C.; Miss. Sup. Ct.; ND Miss.) (140 So.2d 88; 149 So.2d 475; 150 So.2d 851; 374 U.S. 852; 160 So.2d 73) Facts: VIII DOCKET 111, IX DOCKET 60. Correction: Following events at VIII DOCKET 111, on June 17, 1963, U.S.S.C. denied cert. Def. sought leave to file writ of error coram nobis, alleging exclusion of Negroes from grand and petit juries in second trial. Jan. 27, 1964: Miss. Sup. Ct. denied petition: Def. represented by counsel at second trial, but did not raise point; effective waiver shown. Def.'s petition for habeas corpus pending in DC.
512.41. U.S. ex rel. Rogers v. Davis. (DC La.) (323 F.2d 653)*
512.42. Henderson v. Louisiana. (SD La.)*
512.43. Henslee v. Stewart. (Pulaski Co., Ark., Cir. Ct.)*
512.44. Lillard v. Arkansas. (U.S.S.C.)*
512.45. Arnold v. North Carolina. (U.S.S.C., #572) Facts: VIII DOCKET 140. Apr. 6, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed, per curiam: Negro-Defs. offered testimony in support of motion to quash that 12,250 whites and 4,819 Negroes in Co., 5,583 white and 2,499 Negro men listed for poll tax, in 24 yrs. ct. clerk could remember only 1 Negro serving on grand jury; testimony made out prima facie case of denial of equal protection.

J. Harvey Turner and Fred W. Harrison, Esqs., Kinston, N.C.

512.46. Louisiana v. Barksdale. (New Orleans) (Crim. Ct., #177037)*
512.47. Alabama v. Swain. (Talladega Co.) (Ala. Sup. Ct.; U.S.S.C., #1051) (156 So.2d 368, 8 RRLR 1623) 1963: Def.-Negro indicted for rape of 17-yr. old white girl, moved to quash indictment and trial venire: only token Negro membership on grand and petit juries. After hearing, Co. Ct. affirmed: (1) 2 Negroes on grand jury which indicted Def.; their presence does not reflect policy of merely token inclusion; (2) Negroes included in jury venire; their exclusion from trial juries results from peremptory challenges by Gov't., exercise of which is no infringement of Def.'s rights regardless of Gov't.'s motive. Apr. 27, 1964: U.S.S.C. granted cert. Black, J., as Cir. J., granted indefinite stay of execution.

NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund., Inc., 10 Columbus Cir., NYC.

512.48. U.S. v. Chance. (Miami) (CA 5, #19597) (322 F.2d 201) 1962: Def.-Negro indicted in SD Fla. for violation of fedl. revenue laws, moved to dismiss indictment: Negroes, women, and laborers systematically excluded. DC denied motion, convicted Def. Aug. 27, 1963: CA 5 found Miami jury list drawn from list of male registered voters, women registered for state jury service, and Negroes recommended by Negro business and professional leaders; found jury list contained 10% Negroes in community where Negroes comprise 12% of population; affirmed: (1) use of voter registration lists not per se unlawful, absent showing that those not registered are intentionally and systematically excluded; (2) inclusion of Negroes is not token; (3) inclusion of only those women who register for jury service is no deprivation of right; (3) there is no right to jury or jury list comprising cross-section of community; intentional and systematic exclusion is test. Brown, J., diss.: De facto inclusion of only registered males and inclusion of only those females who volunteered for jury service does not meet requirements of 28 USC §1861, citing U.S. v. Hoffa, 196 F.Supp. 25.
512.49. Florida v. Porter. (Martin Co.) (Fla. Sup. Ct., #31,854) (8 RRLR 1631) 1963: Def.-Negro indicted for first degree murder, moved to quash indictment: Negroes excluded from grand jury. Cir. Ct. denied motion; Def. convicted: death. Oct. 16, 1963: Fla. Sup. Ct. affirmed: Def. showed that 10.8% of registered voters of Co. are Negro, only 1.2% on jury list are Negroes; as Def. offered no evidence of discriminatory selection procedure, mere numerical disparity does not sustain Def's. burden to overcome presumption of legality in jury selection.
512.50. Louisiana v. Goree. (La. Sup. Ct.) (139 So.2d 531, 7 RRLR 577; 158 So.2d 203, 8 RRLR 1639) 1961: Defs.-four Negroes on trial for aggravated battery moved to quash jury list: Negroes systematically excluded. Crim. Dist. Ct. overruled motion: absence of Negroes due not to race, but to practice of selecting only "best men" to serve on jury. Defs. convicted. Mar. 26, 1962: La. Sup. Ct. reversed, held: (1) "best men" standard cannot be used to exclude Negroes; (2) lack of Negroes on list established
- 108 -

prima facie case of exclusion which prosecution did not rebut. On remand, Crim. Dist. Ct. overruled Defs'. motions to quash jury list. 3 Defs. pleaded guilty; Def.-Howard pleaded not guilty, convicted. Nov. 12, 1963: La. Sup. Ct. affirmed: Negroes were on jury list; their presence in proportion to number of Negroes in population not required. Hamlin, McCaleb, JJ., diss.: testimony at hearing on Def's. motion indicates systematic exclusion of Negroes.
512.51. North Carolina v. Inman. (Mecklenburg Co.) (N.C. Sup. Ct., #218) (132 S.E.2d 613) 1963: Def.-Negro indicted for assault with intent to commit rape, robbery, moved to quash indictments: Negroes systematically excluded from grand and petit juries. Super. Ct. summarily overruled motion. Def's. counsel moved for extension of time to produce evidence in support of motion. Super. Ct. denied motion, convicted Def. Oct. 9, 1963: Sup. Ct. reversed, held "due process of law demands he have his day in court on this matter, and such day he does not have unless he has a reasonable opportunity to produce his evidence," suggested prompt arraignment after indictment so that motions to quash may be brought on before case is calendared.
512.52. Georgia v. Glass. (Ga. Ct. of App., #40628) 1963: Def.-Negro charged with pointing gun at another, filed challenge to array of trial jurors. Co. Ct. overruled challenge, convicted Def. Ga. Sup. Ct. transferred case to Ct. of App. Mar. 13, 1964: Ct. of App. reversed: Solicitor in trial Ct. testified no Negro had served on trial juries in Co. for 12 years, that different color slips of paper used for names of Negro and white prospective jurors; this established prima facie case of discrimination which Gov't. did not rebut; hence, "further proceedings were nugatory."

And see Allen, 54.6, decided by same ct.

512.53. Coleman v. Alabama. (U.S.S.C., #583) At trial of Negro for murder of white man, Ct.-appointed counsel did not raise question of systematic exclusion of Negroes from grand and petit juries; convicted: death. Trial ct. permitted Def. to proceed on motion, but sustained objections to all questions on systematic discrimination because not raised prior to trial; denied motion; Ala. Sup. Ct. affirmed for lack of proof. May 4, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (Clark, J.): Def. now entitled to have his day in ct. to prove systematic exclusion.

Michael C. Melsner, Esq., NYC.

512.54. Collins v. Walker. (Jefferson Davis Parish.) (CA 5, #20537) (138 So.2d 546; 215 F.Supp. 805; 329 F.2d 100) 1960: Def. arrested for aggravated rape, held in jail 6 mths. until new grand jury chosen on which jury commr. intentionally included 6 Negroes, choosing other members at random. Grand jury indicted Def.; Dist. Ct. convicted: death. 1962: La. Sup. Ct. affirmed. Def. petitioned SD La. for habeas corpus. 1963: DC denied writ. Mar. 11, 1964: CA 5 reversed, held Def. entitled to have grand jurors selected without regard to race, remanded to DC for further proceedings if necessary after Def. reindicted and retried.
513. Involving Economic Discrimination
See 512.48.
514. Involving Political Discrimination
515. Involving Discrimination Against Women
See 512.48.
520. Education
Comment: Racial imbalance in the public schools—legislative motive and the Constitution. 50 Virginia U. 465-534.
521. Challenges to Unequal Facilities

521.1. Holland v. Bd. of Pub. Inst. (Palm Beach, Fla.) (SD Fla., #7161.)*
522. Suits to Enforce Integration

522.Ala.2a. Armstrong v. Bd. of Educ., City of Birmingham. (CA 5) (323 F.2d 333; cert. den., 376 U.S. 908) Facts: VIII DOCKET 44, 140, IX DOCKET 22, 60. Add.: Sept. 6, 1963: CA 5 denied petition for intervention and stay of white citizens of Birmingham who alleged possible racial violence if schools integrated: "Law and order cannot be preserved by yielding to violence and disorder, nor by depriving individuals of constitutional rights." Sept. 9: In response to request from Gov. Wallace, Ala. Sup. Ct. found Gov. has power to close schools if necessary to keep peace. Gov. Wallace ordered no Negroes be admitted to schools in Birmingham, Tuskegee, 522.Ala.5, or Mobile, 522.Ala.7, 7a. Sept. 10: Pres. Kennedy ordered Gov., all others, to desist from interference with DC orders, ordered Secy. of Defense to be in readiness to enforce order to desist. Sept. 24: DC granted, at U.S. Justice Dept. request, preliminary injunction against Gov. and others interfering with integration. In this context, 5 Negro children admitted to 3 formerly all-white schools.
522.Ala.2b. Nelson v. Birmingham Bd. of Educ. (CA 5)*
522.Ala.3. Koen v. Knight. (Ala. Vocational Schools.) (SD Ala., #2434)*
522.Ala.4. Reed v. Pearson. (Reeds Chapel.) (CA 5)*
522.Ala.5. Lee and U.S. (Pl. and Amicus) v. Macon Co. Bd. of Educ. and Ala. Bd. of Educ. (Tuskegee) (MD Ala., E. Div., #604-E) (9 RRLR 148) Facts: VIII DOCKET 85, 140, IX DOCKET 60. Feb. 28, 1964: Co. Bd. of Educ. filed desegregation plan based on Ala. Pupil Placement Law. Apr. 17: Macon Co. High School (which 6 Negro-Pls. had been attending) destroyed by fire. Def.-Co. Bd. transferred Pls. to all-Negro Tuskegee Institute High School, alleging that to transport Pls. to white high school would be dangerous and expensive; white school which Pls. originally sought to enter closed for economic reasons. Apr. 28: 3-judge ct. reaffirmed Feb. 3 order that Negro and white students must be assigned to schools on equal basis, found fire damage to Macon Co. High School not extensive, held fact that fire apparently set to discourage integration did not excuse Def.-Co. Bd. from duty to integrate schools, enjoined Co. Bd. from failing to provide equal facilities at Macon Co. High School for white and Negro students.

And see 522.Ala.5a, 5b.

- 109 -

522.Ala.5a. U.S. v. Rea, Mayor. (Notsaluga, Macon Co.) (MD Ala., E. Div., #637-E) (9 RRLR 148) Feb. 3, 1964: DC ordered Negroes admitted to Macon Co. High School (Notsaluga) and Shorter High School after Macon Co. Bd. of Educ. closed Tuskegee High School; Def.-Notsaluga mayor secured passage of city ordinances authorizing him to close public facilities to preserve peace, and to declare number of persons which would constitute danger in case of fire in certain public buildings. Feb. 5: When 6 Negroes-Pls. in 522.Ala.5 attempted to enter Macon Co. High School, Def. told them their presence would cause number in school to exceed that which he had set as maximum consistent with fire safety. Feb. 14: DC found Def. had sought to obstruct and evade DC orders, enjoined Def. from enforcing ordinances, from failing to keep peace and order around Macon Co. High School, from preventing Pls. in 522.Ala.5 or any Negroes subsequently admitted from entering High School, retained jurisdiction.
522.Ala.5b. Opinion of the Justices. (Ala. Sup. Ct., #180) (160 So.2d 648) Feb. 10, 1964: Gov. Wallace asked for advisory opinion on constitutionality (under Ala. Constitution) of laws granting authority to state Bd. of Educ. to transfer pupils within districts, to close schools, to direct local Bds. of Educ. to provide bus transportation, and to require local Bds. to make grants-in-aid to school children. Feb. 18: Ala. Sup. Ct. found powers referred to were in local Bds., not in State Bd., noted that Ct. is authorized to give advisory opinions only on important constitutional questions, held no such question presented by Gov.'s request.
522.Ala.6. Hereford v. City of Huntsville. (ND Ala. #63-109)
522.Ala.6a. Lorder v. Huntsville Bd. of Educ. (ND Ala. #63-612) Facts: IX DOCKET 60. Mar. 20: DC denied motion to consolidate with 522.Ala.6, ordered Defs. to include Redstone Arsenal children in desegregation plan.
522.Ala.7. U.S. v. Mobile Co. Bd. of School Comm. (CA 5)*
522.Ala.7a. Davis v. Mobile Co. Bd. of School Comm. (SD Ala., #3003-63) (318 F.2d 63; 322 F.2d 356) Facts: VIII DOCKET 111, 140, IX DOCKET 22. See 522.Ala.2a for details of Gov. Wallace's attempts to halt desegregation.
522.Ala.8. U.S. v. Madison Co. Bd. of Educ. (CA 5, #20772) (326 F.2d 237, 9 RRLR 165) Facts: VIII DOCKET 140. Jan. 7, 1964: CA 5 affirmed ND Ala. and judgments of SD Miss. in related cases, 522.Miss.4, 522.Miss.5, held: (1) local educational agencies could not be held to have contracted with U.S. that children of fedl. personnel would be assigned to integrated schools; (2) primary jurisdiction of U.S. Commr. of Educ. to determine whether contract provision that children of fedl. personnel would be schooled in accordance with state law had changed meaning due to Brown decision; (3) Congress can legislate its desire; injunctive remedy inappropriate; (4) maintenance of segregated schools for children of fedl. personnel in areas receiving aid as "impacted" is not undue burden upon war power of U.S.
522.Ala.9. Franklin and U.S. v. Parker, Dean, Auburn Univ. Grad. School. (MD Ala., #621-E, CA 5) (223 F.Supp. 724, 331 F.2d 841) Facts: IX DOCKET 22, 60. Clarification: Nov. 5, 1963: DC found Def. had not graduated from accredited college because all Negro colleges in Ala. are nonaccredited, issued preliminary injunction against refusing to admit Pl. in Jan. 1964, and against discrimination against other qualified Negroes. May 18: CA 5 affirmed DC order admitting Pl., found Def. had begun expeditiously to process applications from Negroes once accreditation requirement struck down, ordered decree modified to reflect this.
522.Ala.10. Gunn v. Norton (formerly v. Florence State College Trs.) (ND Ala., NW Div., Civ. #63-418) (8RRLR 1395) Facts: IX DOCKET 29. Aug. 1963: DC found Def.-College Pres. had discriminated against Pl. on account of Pl's. race, held suit proper class action (FRCP Rule 23(a)(3)), ordered Defs. to admit Pl. and all qualified applicants similarly situated, taxed costs to Def.
522.Ala.11. Miller v. Bd. of Educ. of Gadsden. (ND Ala.)*
522.Calif.3. Brock v. Bd. of Educ. (San Francisco.) (ND Calif., S. Div., #41034.)*
522.Calif.4. Keller v. Sacramento City Unified School Dist. (formerly Pls. v. Bd. of Educ.) (Sacramento Co. Super. Ct., #146,525) Facts: IX DOCKET 23. Addendum: 1963: Jr. High School with 50% Negro and 30% other minority enrollment burned down. Def.-Bd. planned to use temporary classrooms, then rebuild on same site. Sept. 30, 1963: Pl. sued to enjoin building, to require submission of desegregation plan. Super. Ct. granted temporary restraining order. Oct. 8: Super. Ct. dissolved restraining order, denied temporary injunction against rebuilding jr. high, held that, while segregation was result of housing patterns, Defs. had affirmative responsibility to draw school lines and take other measures to achieve racial balance, found Defs. had begun good faith study of school desegregation, ordered plan submitted by Sept. 1964, citing Jackson, 522.Calif.1, Branche, 522.NY.6.

L. Archie Harris, Esq., 2116 16th St., Sacramento; Robert Carter, Esq., NAACP, 20 W. 40th St., NYC.

522.Calif.5. Crawford v. Bd. of Educ. (Los Angeles City.) (Super. Ct., #822854)*
522.Fla.2. Gibson v. Bd. of Pub. Inst. (Dade Co.) (SD Fla., #6978)*
522.Fla.3. Manning v. Bd. of Pub. Inst. of Hillsborough Co. (Tampa.) (SD Fla., #3554) (277 F.2d 310, 8 RRLR 496) Facts: VIII DOCKET 45, 141. Feb. 18, 1964: Pls. filed motion for further relief.
522.Fla.5. Augustus v. Escambia Co. Bd. of Ed. (Pensacola.) (ND Fla., #1064)*
522.Fla.6. Tillman v. Bd. of Pub. Inst., Volusia Co. (SD Fla., Jacksonville Div., #4501)*
522.Fla.7. Bd. of Pub. Inst., Duval Co. v. Braxton. (Jacksonville) (U.S.S.C.) (326 F.2d 616) Facts: VIII DOCKET 45, IX DOCKET 23, 61. May 4, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied Defs.' petition for cert.
522.Fla.9. Weaver v. Bd. of Pub. Inst., Brevard Co. (Cape Canaveral) (SD Fla., Orlando Div., #1172)*
- 110 -

522.Fla.10. Mays v. Bd. of Pub. Inst., Sarasota Co. (SD Fla., Tampa Div., #4242-Civ.-T) (8 RRLR 930) Facts: VIII DOCKET 45, IX DOCKET 61. Correction: Apr. 19, 1963: DC found Defs. operating all elementary schools but one in accordance with Brown, 349 U.S. 294, found Defs. agreed to grade-a-year plan for higher grades, ordered Defs. to integrate remaining elementary school, held in abeyance question of segregatd teaching staffs.
522.Fla.11. Ellis v. Kipp, Bd. of Pub. Inst., Orange Co. (Orlando.) (SD Fla., Orlando Div., #1215)*
522.Fla.12. Steele v. Bd. of Pub. Inst., Leon Co. (Tallahassee.) ND Fla., TCA #854)*
522.Fla.13. Mills v. Boone. (Polk Co.) (MD Fla., #63-50)*
522.Fla.14. Scott v. Bd. of Inst. (St. John's Co.) (SD Fla., transferred to MD Fla.)*
522.Fla.15. Hall v. Bd. of Pub. Inst. (Broward Co.) (SD Fla., #10,820)*
522.Fla.16. Milledge v. State Bd. of Control. (Tallahassee) (Leon Co. Cir. Ct., #18946) (8 RRLR 1402) Facts: VIII DOCKET 141, IX DOCKET 23. Correction: Aug. 8, 1963: Cir. Ct. sustained Defs.' motion to dismiss: (1) determination to open or close school is for legislature; (2) both Florida A & M and College of Law at Univ. of Fla. are integrated by law, though no whites attend the former and no Negroes attend the latter, so no question of racial discrimination presented.
522.Fla.17. Hammond v. Univ. of Tampa. (MD Fla., #63-51, Civ. T.)*
522.Fla.18. Youngblood v. Bd. of Pub. Inst. (Bay Co.) (DC Fla.) Nov. 15, 1963: Pls. sued to desegregate public schools.

NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund., Inc., 10 Columbus Cir., NYC.

522.Ga.3. Calhoun v. Latimer. (Atlanta) (U.S.S.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 45, 85, IX DOCKET 23. After CA decision, and again after argument. Def.-Bd. added to its desegregation plan. May 25, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, vacated and remanded for DC to appraise new provisions in light of Goss, 522.Tenn.6, 373 U.S. at 689.
522.Ga.6. Stell v. Savannah-Chatham Co. Bd. of Educ. (CA 5)*
522.Ga.6a. Chandler v. Savannah City Bd. of Public Educ. (U.S.S.C.) Facts: IX DOCKET 61. Cites: 313 F.2d 636; cert. denied 375 U.S. 835.
522.Ga.7. Emory University v. Georgia. (Atlanta) (Ga. Sup. Ct., #21731)*
522.Ga.8. Gaines v. Dougherty Co. Bd. of Educ. (CA 5, #20984) (8 RRLR 936; 329 F.2d 823, 9 RRLR 169) Facts: VIII DOCKET 112, 141, IX DOCKET 23. Mar. 20, 1964: CA 5 ordered plan modified to provide first two grades and all Co. vocational schools be integrated in first year, postponed decision on adequacy of grade-a-year thereafter pending U.S.S.C. decision in Calhoun, 522.Ga.3.
522.Ga.9. Harris v. Gibson and Glynn Co. Bd. of Educ. (CA 5; U.S.S.C.) (322 F.2d 780) Facts: IX DOCKET 23, 61. Feb. 17, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied white-Pls. petition for cert.
522.Ga.10. Bivins v. Bd. of Public Educ., Bibb Co. (Macon) (MD Ga., #1926) Facts: IX DOCKET 61. Feb. 24, 1964: Defs. filed reverse grade-a-year plan. DC, over Pls. objections, approved. Pls'. appeal pending.
522.Ga.11. Bryan and Lockett v. Muscogee Co. Bd. of Educ. (MD Ga., #991) Facts: IX DOCKET 61. Defs. have voluntarily begun grade-a-year desegregation, accepted Pls.' applications for transfer.
522.Ga.12. Acree v. Richmond Co. (SD Ga.) Suit to desegregate Co. public schools.

NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund, Inc., 10 Columbus Cir., NYC.

522.Ill.1. Webb v. Bd. of Educ. (Chicago) (CA 7)*
522.Ill.1a. Webb v. Bd. of Educ. (Chicago) (ND Ill., E. Div., #63 C 1895)*
522.Ill.3. McNeese v. Bd. of Educ. (Centerville) (DC Ill.)*

Law review article: John Kaplan, Segregation litigation and the schools—Part III: The Gary litigation. 59 Northwestern U. 121-70.

522.Kan.2. Downs v. Bd. of Educ. (Kansas City) (CA 10)*
522.Ky.10. Walker v. Richmond Bd. of Educ. (ED Ky., Richmond Div., #241)*
522.Ky.11. Mack v. Bd. of Educ. (Frankfort) (ED Ky., #216) Facts: VIII DOCKET 46, 141. Cite: 8 RRLR 945.
522.Ky.14. Rimbert v. Knott Co. Bd. of Educ. (ED Ky., Pikeville Div., Civ. #824) (8 RRLR 1419) 1963: Pls. sued, alleging racial discrimination. Sept. 24: After trial, DC found for Pls., ordered immediate compliance with order restraining Def.-Bd. from assigning pupils to schools on basis of race, and from assigning teachers, principals, and other professional personnel to the schools on the basis of their race or that of pupils at school to which assigned.
522.Ky.15. Senters v. Bd. of Educ. of Mayfield. (WD Ky., Paducah Div., Civ. #1284) 1962: Pls.-Negro children sued to desegregate Def.-Bd.'s elementary schools. Oct. 31, 1962: DC ordered to submit desegregation plan by Nov. 15. Nov. 5: unanimously passed motion to desegregate all grades beginning Sept. 1963. Dec. 14, 1962: DC gave summary judgment for Pl., adopting Def.'s motion as basis for desegregation.

Joseph S. Freeland, Esq.

522.La.1. Bush v. Orleans Parish School Bd. (New Orleans) (ED La., #3630) Facts: VIII DOCKET 46, IX DOCKET 24, 62. May, 1964: Pls. moved to accelerate desegregation.
522.La.2. Hall v. St. Helena Parish School Bd. (ED La., Baton Rouge Div., #3630) Facts: VIII DOCKET 47, 85, IX DOCKET 24, 62. May 29, 1964: Pls. filed petition for writ of mandamus to DC to rule on Feb. 14 motion for further relief. June 5: CA ordered DC to answer within 20 days.
522.La.3. Angel v. La. State Bd. of Educ. (La. Trade Schools) (ED La., Baton Rouge Div., Civ. #1658) (287 F.2d 33; 8 RRLR 1075)*
- 111 -

522.La.4. Davis v. Baton Rouge Parish School Bd. (ED La., Baton Rouge Div., #1662) Facts: VIII DOCKET 47, 121, IX DOCKET 24. Def. has accepted 59 of 97 applicants to attend 11th and 12th grades at white schools for 1964-65 term.
522.La.13. Harris, Crayton v. St. John the Baptist Parish School Bd. (ED La., New Orleans Div., #13212) Facts: VIII DOCKET 85. Pls. motion for summary judgment pending.
522.La.14. U.S. v. Bossier Parish School Bd. (WD La., Shreveport Div., Civ. #9282) (220 F.Supp. 243, 8 RRLR 964) Facts: VIII DOCKET 85. Aug. 20, 1963: DC granted Defs. motion to dismiss: (1) fact that fedl. school construction funds used by impacted school district does not require that district desegregate its schools, for U.S.S.C. holdings do not require immediate desegregation; (2) Congress' intent in providing aid was to assist segregated and desegregated schools alike; (3) U.S. has no standing to sue.
522.La.15. Booker v. Calcasieu Parish School Bd. (WD La.)*
522.La.16. Conley v. Lake Charles School Bd. (WD La.)*
522.La.17. Williams v. Iberville Parish School Bd. (Plaquemine) (ED La., #2921)*
522.La.18. McCoy v. La. State Bd. of Educ. (Northeast State College) (ED La., #2916) Facts: IX DOCKET 62. May 10, 1964: Pls. filed petition for writ of mandamus in CA 5 to compel DC to rule on motion for preliminary injunction. May 18: DC dismissed State Bd. as Def., ordered Pls. to join individual Bd. members as Pls. within 60 days or suit dismissed. June 5: CA 5 granted Pls. motion for injunction pending appeal. June 10: Pl. and 2 other Negroes entered the college.
522.La.19. Welch v. La. State Bd. of Educ. (Southern Univ.) (ED La.)*
522.La.20. Naguin v. Terrebone Parish School Bd. (ED La., New Orleans Div., Civ. #13291) (8 RRLR 1421) 1963: Pls.-Indian children sued to end segregation. DC issued preliminary injunction, ordered prompt desegregation of 11th and 12th grades, ordered Def.-Bd. to submit desegregation plan for other grades.
522.La.21. Nweze v. Bd. of Supers., La. State Univ. & A. & M. College. (New Orleans) (ED La., #13,544) (8 RRLR 884) June 1963: Pl.-Nigerian student at Southern Univ. in New Orleans applied to La. State Univ. to take summer session courses not available to him at Southern. Defs. denied application: La. State does not admit non-resident Negroes. June 1963: Pl. sued to gain admission. June 12: DC issued temporary restraining order requiring Defs. to admit Pl. pending hearing on preliminary injunction.

Smith & Waltzer, Esqs., 1006 Baronne Bldg., New Orleans.

522.Md.2a. Christmas v. Bd. of Educ. (Harford Co.) (DC Md.) 1955-58: After extensive litigation, grade-a-year desegregation plan went into effect, Slade, 522.Md.2, see also Pettit, 522.Md.5, V DOCKET 53-VI DOCKET 38. May 1, 1964: Suit filed to speed desegregation and end discrimination in hiring and assignment of teachers.
522.Mich.3. Sherrill School Parents Comm., Bentley v. Bd. of Educ. (Detroit) (ED Mich., S. Div., #22092)*
522.Miss.1a. Green v. Fair. (U. of Miss.) For decision in U.S. v. Barnett, see IX DOCKET 75, at 42.
522.Miss.2. Evers v. Jackson Municipal Separate School Dist. (CA 5, #20824; SD Miss., #3379) (328 F.2d 408, 9 RRLR 171) Facts: VIII DOCKET 113, 141, IX DOCKET 24, 62. Feb. 13: CA 5 consolidated with Hudson, 522.Miss.3, and Mason, 522.Miss.4a, reversed and remanded with instructions to enter temporary injunctions: (1) DC holding that since pupils failed to use Miss. pupil assignment laws, segregation is voluntary, overlooks fact that Miss. law provides for separate schools, makes attendance at integrated school a criminal offense; (2) cases denying relief for failure to exhaust administrative remedies are not in point, as they arose in jurisdictions where applications to enter white schools would be considered in good faith. Mar. 4: DC granted petition of white parents to intervene, issued identical injunctions in this case and 2 other remanded cases: (1) Defs. enjoined from racial discrimination until they prepared plan for orderly integration; (2) Defs. to present desegregation plan by July 15, 1964, providing for at least a grade-a-year beginning Sept. 1964.
522.Miss.3. Hudson v. Leake Co. School Bd. (CA 5, #20825; SD Miss., #3382) (328 F.2d 408; 9 RRLR 171) Facts: VIII DOCKET 113, 141, IX DOCKET 24, 62. Facts same as 522.Miss.2.
522.Miss.4. U.S. v. Biloxi Muni. Separate School Dist. (CA 5) (326 F.2d 237, 9 RRLR 165) Facts: VIII DOCKET 113, 141, IX DOCKET 24, 62. Jan. 7, 1964: CA 5 affirmed in consolidated opinion, see Madison Co., 522.Ala.8.
522.Miss.4a. Mason v. Biloxi Muni. Separate School Dist. (CA 5, #20826; SD Miss., #2696) Facts: VIII DOCKET 113, 141, IX DOCKET 24, 62. Facts, issues, status same as 522.Miss.2 and 522.Miss.3.
522.Miss.5. U.S. v. School Bd. (Gulfport) (CA 5) (326 F.2d 237, 9 RRLR 165) Facts: VIII DOCKET 141, IX DOCKET 24. Jan. 7, 1964: CA 5 affirmed in consolidated opinion; see Madison Co., 522.Ala.8.
522.Miss.6. McDowell v. Tubb. (U. of Miss. Law School) (SD Miss., Jackson Div., Civ. #3425; Miss. Bd. of Trs. of Higher Educ.) Facts: IX DOCKET 24. Sept. 4, 1963: Univ. authorities expelled Pl. for bringing loaded revolver on campus; Pl. alleged weapon necessary for self-defense, punishment more severe than meted out to white students for similar offenses. Jan. 24, 1964: State Bd. affirmed Univ. action. Mar. 17: Univ. affirmed order of expulsion. Mar. 17: State Bd. affirmed.
522.Miss.7. Donald v. U. of Miss., Bd. of Trs. of Higher Educ. (SD Miss.) Pl. applied to Bd. of Trs. for admission to 1964 Summer Session at U. of Miss. Bd. denied application pending DC ruling in Green, 522.Miss.1. June 1964: Pl. sued to gain admission. June 11: DC issued restraining order: directing Defs. to admit Pl., enjoining "all persons and corporations" from interfering with Pl's. presence on campus, ordering Pl. to refrain from civil rights activity and participation in any "publicity program" during summer session.
- 112 -

522.Mo.2. Davis v. Bd. of Educ. (Charleston) (ED Mo., #S62 C 51)*
522.Mo.3. Lewis v. Bd. of Educ., Deering. (Pemiscot) (DC Mo.)*
522.NJ.4a. Fisher v. School Bd. of Orange. (N.J. Commr. of Educ.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 142. Resp.-Bd. appealed Commr.'s determination to N.J. Bd. of Educ., which ordered appeal stayed pending final action by Commr. Jy. 30, 1963: Commr. notified Bd. that stay left his order in effect, since Bd. had not complied, state aid funds for 1963-64 would be withheld. Aug. 28: Bd. resolved that for 1963-64, steps would be taken to integrate 3rd and 4th grades. Aug. 29: Commr. notified Bd. state aid would be reinstated.
522.NY.4a. Taylor v. Bd. of Educ. (New Rochelle) (SD NY) (195 F.Supp. 231, 294 F.2d 36, cert. den., 368 U.S. 940, 222 F.Supp. 275.) Facts: VI DOCKET 38 — VII DOCKET 54. 1963: As result of 1961 DC decree authorizing transfers, enrollment at previously all-Negro school fell from 483 to 210. Def.-Bd. petitioned DC for modification of decree authorizing closing of school, agreeing to provide free bus transportation (not part of earlier desegregation plan) for children inconvenienced by closing. Pls. assented. June 24, 1963: DC amended decree to permit closing and reassignment of pupils to achieve racial balance throughout school system.
522.NY.6. Branche v. Bd. of Educ. (Hempstead) (ED NY, #62,-C-176)*

See also 523.NY.1, 523.NY.2.

522.NY.6a. Mitchell v. Bd. of Educ. (Hempstead) (NY State Commnr. of Educ., #7257) (8 RRLR 1422) Facts: VIII DOCKET 48, IX DOCKET 24. Case closed as to Pl., but Vetere, 523.NY.2, is collateral attack on Commnr.'s ruling, and further developments in Hempstead will be reported under that heading.
522.NY.7. Blocker v. Bd. of Educ. (Manhasset, Long Island) (ED NY, #62-C-285) (226 F.Supp. 208) Facts: VIII DOCKET 48. Jan. 4, 1964: DC found Defs. assigned children to 3 elementary schools in accord with neighborhood plan, found all-Negro school had unduly small attendance area (12.38% of school population went to Negro school, remainder to two white schools), found racial segregation by means of neighborhood school concept has same detrimental effect on Negro children as segregation condemned in Brown decision, found neighborhood schools as run by Defs. is state action in violation of 14th Amendment, held neighborhood schools neither unconstitutional per se, nor immune from judicial scrutiny, ordered Defs. to submit desegregation plan. The decision contains extensive review of law and socio-economic facts at issue.
522.NY.9. Aikens v. Bd. of Educ. (Rochester) (WD NY, #9,-736)*
522.NY.10. Bailey v. Bd. of Educ. (Westbury) (DC NY)*

See also 523.NY.1, 523.NY.2.

522.NC.12. Griffith v. Robinson. (Yancey Co.) (WD NC., #1881)*
522.NC.13a. Farmer v. Greene Co. Bd. of Educ. (CA 4, #9125; ED N.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 86, 142, IX DOCKET 62. Questions on appeal included exhaustion of state remedies. Apr. 14: CA directed Pls. to apply for admission to white schools. May 1: CA remanded to DC.
522.NC.14. Wheeler v. Durham City Bd. of Educ. (M.D. N.C., #C 54-D-60) (8 RRLR 975)*
522.NC.14a. Spaulding v. Durham City Bd. of Educ. (MD N.C., #C-116-D-60)*
522.NC.14b. Thompson v. Durham Co. Bd. of Educ. (MD N.C., Greensboro Div., C-140-D-63)*
522.NC.16b. Chance v. Harnett Co. Bd. of Educ. (ED N.C., Civ. #1331) Facts: IX DOCKET 63. Cites: 224 F.Supp. 472, 9 RRLR 200.
522.NC.16b. Felder v. Harnett Co. Bd. of Educ. (ED N.C., Raleigh Div., #1469-Civ.) Facts: IX DOCKET 63. DC ordered parties to confer, report back June 17. If no agreement reached, trial will be set to insure relief before 1964-65 school term.
522.NC.17. Wynn v. Trs., Charlotte Community College System. (U.S.S.C.)*
522.NC.18. Hunter v. Raleigh City Bd. of Educ. (ED N.C., Raleigh Div., #1308)*
522.NC.19. Belo v. Randolph Co. Bd. of Educ. (MD NC, Greensboro Div., #C-209-G-62) (8 RRLR 1432, 9 RRLR 199) Facts: IX DOCKET 25, 63. Mar. 20, 1964: DC entered consent order approving Def's. plan for free choice transfer.
522.NC.20. Conley v. Transylvania Co. Bd. of Educ. (WD N.C., #2094)*
522.NC.21. Gilmore v. High Pt. Bd. of Educ. (MD N.C.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 86, IX DOCKET 25, 63. Apr. 16, 1964: DC entered consent order providing for free choice transfers.
522.NC.23. Ford v. Cumberland Co. Bd. of Educ. (ED N.C., #668) Facts: VIII DOCKET 113, IX DOCKET 25. May 6, 1964: DC entered consent order adopting open enrollment desegregation plan agreed on by Pls. and Def.
522.NC.24. Ziglar v. Reidsville Bd. of Educ. (MD N.C., Greensboro Div., #C-226-S-62) (9 RRLR 207) Facts: VIII DOCKET 86, 113, IX DOCKET 25. Mar. 20, 1964: DC entered consent order providing that first grade children in Sept. 1964 be assigned to school of choice, children of all other grades be allowed to apply for transfers to other schools, held this order did not prejudice Pls'. rights to further relief, ordered Pls. and Defs. to confer on operation of school for subsequent years, said if agreement is not reached by Feb. 1965, suit will be tried.
522.NC.25. DuBissette v. Cabarrus Co. Bd. of Educ. (MD N.C., Salisbury Div., Civ. #C-190-S-63) (9 RRLR 205) Facts: IX DOCKET 25. Mar. 17, 1964: DC entered consent order providing for free transfer of pupils in 1964-65 school year, ordered parties to negotiate permanent plan for desegregation, said suit will be tried if no agreement by Feb. 1965.
522.NC.26. Turner v. Warren Co. Bd. of Educ. (ED N.C.) Facts: IX DOCKET 25. May 6, 1964: DC overruled Def's. contention
- 113 -

Pls. must exhaust remedies under N.C. Pupil Placement Act, ordered parties to confer, report back June 17.
522.NC.27. Gill v. Concord City Bd. of Educ. (MD N.C., #C-223-S-63) Facts: IX DOCKET 63. Parties have agreed on desegregation plan. Consent order to be entered.
522.NC.28. Williams v. Hendersonville City School Bd. (WD N.C., #2182) Facts: IX DOCKET 63. Apr. 2, 1964: DC entered consent order providing for free choice transfers for 1964-65 school year.
522.NC.29. Bowditch v. Buncombe Co. Bd. of Educ. (WD N.C., #2196)*
522.NC.30. Brown v. School Dist. No. 20. (Charleston) (ED S.C., Charleston Div., #7747) (8 RRLR 998, 328 F.2d 618, 9 RRLR 208) 1963: Pls. sued to desegregate schools. Aug. 22, 1963: DC found Defs. maintained segregated schools, held failure of Pls. to exhaust administrative remedies no bar to this action as such remedies not administered in good faith, rejected contention of Defs. and white Intervenors that Negroes have ethnic characteristics justifying segregation, enjoined Defs. to assign all Negro children to same school a white child from same area would attend beginning Sept. 1964; injunction to remain in effect until Defs. submit desegregation plan. Jan. 27, 1964: CA 4, per curiam, affirmed, adopting DC opinion as its own.
522.NC.31. Sowers v. Lexington Bd. of Educ. (MD N.C.) Mar. 1964: Pls. sued to desegregate public schools. Pending.

NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund, 10 Columbus Cir., NYC.

522.NC.32. Nesbitt v. Statesville City Bd. of Educ. (WD N.C.) Pls. sued to desegregate public schools. Pending.

NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund, 10 Columbus Cir., NYC.

522.NC.33. Eaton v. New Hanover Co. (ED N.C.) Mar. 1964: Pls. sued to desegregate public schools. Pending.
522.Okla.6. Dowell v. Bd. of Educ. (Oklahoma City) (WD Okla., #942-Civ) Facts: VIII DOCKET 49, 142, IX DOCKET 25, 63. Addendum: Def's. steps toward integration of pupils and teaching staffs taken under interim plan filed by them and approved by DC Aug. 8, 1963. Feb. 28, 1964: DC rejected Bd. plan for desegregation, ordered study of entire school system. Pls. moved to hire experts to conduct study.
522.Okla.7. Hill v. New Lima Bd. of Educ. (DC Okla.)*
522.Pa.1. Chisholm v. Bd. of Educ. (Philadelphia) (ED Pa., #29706)*
522.SC.1. Briggs v. Elliott. (Clarendon Co.) (CA 4)*
522.SC.2. Brunson v. Bd. of Trs., Clarendon Co. School Dist. No. 1. (ED S.C., #7210)*
522.SC.5. Stanley v. Darlington Co. School Dist. No. 1. (ED S.C., #7749)*
522.SC.6. Brown v. School Dist. 20. (Charleston) (CA 4) (226 F.Supp. 819, 328 F.2d 618)*
522.SC.10. Randall v. Sumter School Dist. No. 2. (Sumter) (ED S.C.)*
522.SC.11. Whittenberg v. Greenville Co. School Dist. (WD S.C., #4396) Facts: IX DOCKET 25. Apr. 25, 1964: DC ordered Pls. admitted to white schools, approved desegregation plan.
522.SC.12. Adams v. School Dist. No. 5. (Orangeburg Co.) (DC S.C.) Mar. 20, 1964: Pls. sued to desegregate schools.

Matthew J. Perry, Lincoln C. Jenkins, Jr., Esqs., 1107½ Washington St., Columbia, S.C.; Zack E. Townsend, Earl W. Coblyn, Esqs., Orangeburg, S.C.; NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund, 10 Columbus Cir., NYC.

522.Tenn.1a. Boyce v. Humphreys Co. Bd. of Educ. (Nashville) (MD Tenn., #3130)*
522.Tenn.6. Goss v. Bd. of Educ. (Knoxville) (CA 6) Facts: VIII DOCKET 50, 86, 113, IX DOCKET 25. During oral argument on appeal to CA 6, Defs. announced desegregation of all grades beginning Sept. 1964. CA 6 remanded.
522.Tenn.7. Northcross v. Memphis Bd. of Educ. (CA 6, #150389) Facts: VIII DOCKET 50, 86, 142. June 12, 1964: CA 4 reversed, remanded: (1) DC should hold further hearing with Def. having risk of nonpersuasion on issue whether school lines are gerrymandered; (2) desegregation plan must integrate all elementary grades in 1964, jr. high grades in 1965, senior high in 1966; (3) Def. should submit teacher desegregation plan.
522.Tenn.8. Mapp v. Bd. of Educ. (Chattanooga) (ED Tenn., S. Div., Civ. #3564) Facts: VIII DOCKET 50, 142, IX DOCKET 63. Dec. 31, 1963: DC found sound educational policy counselled against midyear entrance into vocational training, ordered desegregation of all city technical schools Sept. 1964, restored to complaint stricken allegations of teacher segregation, but declined to rule on them, declined to rule on Pl's. allegations that former orders of DC not being followed until Pls. formally serve and file them.
522.Tenn.9. Maxwell v. Davidson Co. Bd. of Educ. (near Nashville) (CA 6, #14607; MD Tenn.) (319 F.2d 858) Facts: VIII DOCKET 50, 86, 113, 142. On remand from U.S.S.C., CA 6 reversed DC approval of transfer plans.
522.Tenn.10. Sloan v. Tenth School Dist. (Wilson Co.) (MD Tenn., Nashville Div., Civ. #3017) (6 RRLR 744, 999; 8 RRLR 1440) Facts: VII DOCKET 23, 55. 1963: Negro children not parties to original suit petitioned to intervene and for modification of 1961 DC degree. Sept. 24, 1963: DC found Defs. acting in good faith, found Defs.' pupil attendance zone, assignment and transfer plan did not comply with 1961 order, ordered Defs. to admit Intervenors to specified schools and file new desegregation plan by May 1, 1964.
522.Tenn.11. Vick v. Co. Bd. of Educ. (Obion Co.) (WD Tenn., #3129)*
522.Tenn.12. Monroe v. Bd. of Commrs., City of Jackson. (WD Tenn., E. Div., #1327) (221 F.Supp. 986) Facts: VIII DOCKET 113, 143, IX DOCKET 25, 63. Correction: This is same case as 522.Tenn.13; Jackson is a city with its own school system within Madison Co. Def.-City Bd. never
- 114 -

demanded jury trial. Aug. 20, 1963: DC approved 4-year plan. Pl's. appeal withdrawn.
522.Tenn.13. Robinson v. Brown. (formerly Monroe v. Madison Co. Bd. of Educ.) (WD Tenn., E. Div., #1227; CA 6; U.S.S.C., #676) (320 F.2d 503) Facts: VIII DOCKET 143. See correction at 522.Tenn.12. June 14, 1963: DC denied motion of Def.-Co. Bd. member for severance of Co. school bd. and its members and for jury trial. Def.-member sought mandamus on jury trial issue. Jy. 31: CA 6 denied writ. Aug. 20: DC approved 4-year desegregation plan. Feb. 17, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert.
522.Tenn.14. Robinson v. Shelby Co. Bd. of Educ. (formerly v. Memphis Bd. of Educ.) (WD Tenn., W. Div., Civ. #4916) (9 RRLR 209) Facts: VIII DOCKET 143. Mar. 17: DC approved Def's. plan for desegregation providing for limited free transfer, rejected Pl's. population-ration plan.
522.Tenn.15. Hill v. Franklin Co. Bd. of Educ. (ED Tenn.)*
522.Tex.7. Ross v. Dyer. Ross v. Houston Ind. School Dist. (formerly Ross v. Rogers) (CA 5, #19912; SD Tex., Houston Div., Civ. #10,444) (5 RRLR 703, 7 RRLR 394, 1075, 8 RRLR 1442) Facts: VIII DOCKET 50. Dec. 1962: CA 5 reversed, (sub nom. Ross v. Dyer) held rule requiring all members of same family to attend same school discriminates between Negro children with siblings and those without, compelling former group to attend segregated schools, held use of rule by Def.-Bd. was not contempt of court. Sept. 17, 1963: Negro student petitioned to be admitted to previously all-white school not yet scheduled for integration under DC decree of 1960. Dec. 4: DC denied petition, holding to grant it would be to scrap "program for orderly transition."
522.Tex.14. Eastland v. Wheat. (Northeast Houston) (SD Tex., #13,330)*
522.Tex.16. Sanders v. Ransom. (U. of Tex.) (WD Tex., Austin Div., #1231)*
522.Tex.17. Thomas v. Bowen. (Bryan) (SD Tex., #13,850)*
522.Tex.18. McGrue v. Williams. (WD Tex., Waco Div., #2291)*
522.Tex.20. Carter v. Hix. (Gatesville) (WD Tex., Waco Div., #2276)*
522.Tex.23. Miller v. Barnes. (Georgetown) (CA 5, #20882) (8 RRLR 1035, 328 F.2d 810, 9 RRLR 211) Facts: VIII DOCKET 143. Feb. 27, 1964: CA ordered 2 grades desegregated first year of grade-a-year plan, held gradual desegregation permissible based on judge's assessment of local conditions, conceded Pls. in this suit may never attend integrated schools. Tuttle, C.J., diss.: "sole reason for delaying desegregation . . . is a refusal of the white community to accept [it] at a more rapid pace."
522.Tex.23a. Kreger v. Bd. of Trustees, Georgetown Ind. School Dist. (Tex. Sup. Ct.) Pls. filed taxpayers' suit to restrain Def.-Bd. from spending public funds on segregated schools. Dist. Ct. dismissed. Ct. of Civil App. reversed, held such expenditure illegal, enjoined Defs. Jy. 24, 1963: Tex. Sup. Ct. vacated judgment, held issue moot due to DC order in Miller, 522.Tex.23, dismissed.
522.Tex.24. Rice Institute v. Carr. (DC Tex.)*
522.Tex.25. Price v. Denison Independent School Dist. (ED Tex., #1565; CA 5) Facts: IX DOCKET 64. DC upheld Def.'s grade-a-year plan, dismissed. Pl's. appeal pending.
522.Tex.26. Brown v. Hendrix. (Beaumont) (ED Tex.)*
522.Tex.27. Richard v. Christ. (Jefferson Co.) (ED Tex.)*
522.Va.1. Griffin v. Co. School Bd. (Prince Edward Co.) (U.S.S.C., #592; ED Va.) (133 SE.2d 565) Facts: VIII DOCKET 51, 143, IX DOCKET 26, 64. May 25, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed CA, affirmed DC, Black, J.: (1) Accepting opinion of Va. Sup. Ct. of App. (133 SE.2d 565) that each Co. has option to operate or not to operate public schools as binding on U.S.S.C., "but we cannot accept the Va. ct's. further holding . . . that closing the Co's. public schools under the circumstances of the case did not deny the colored school children of . . . Co. equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fedl. Constitution." (2) "the Equal Protection Clause relates to equal protection of the laws 'between persons as such rather than between areas.'" (3) Clearly sole purpose in closing Co. schools here and nowhere else in State was to ensure no desegregated schools: "Whatever nonracial grounds might support a State's allowing a Co. to abandon public schools, the object must be a constitutional one." (4) "Relief needs to be quick and effective"; DC enjoined Co. from paying tuition grants or giving tax exemptions and from processing applications for state tuitions grants so long as Co's. public schools remained closed; DC had power to make this order and to make all other necessary orders to prevent further racial discrimination, including adding new parties, and "to enter a decree which will guarantee that these Pets. will get the kind of education that is given in the State's public schools." Clark and Harlan, JJ. "disagree with the holding that the fedl. cts. are empowered to order the reopening of the public schools in . . . Co., but otherwise join" in opinion.

June 9: Pls. moved in DC for integration of teaching staffs, order to Def. to open schools. June 17: DC ordered Bd. to levy taxes and collect funds to reopen schools. June 23: Bd. voted (4-2) to reopen schools, appropriate $189,000 for 1964-65 school year for public schools, $375,000 for tuition grants to white students attending "private" school. ($189,000 is approximate amount formerly spent by Bd. to maintain Negro schools.) June 29: Pls. moved to order Bd. to appropriate funds for public schools sufficient to educate both white and Negro pupils; pending.

And see Pettaway, 522.Va.33.

522.Va.1a. U.S. v. Prince George Co. Bd. of Educ. (ED Va., Richmond Div., Civ. #3536) Facts: VIII DOCKET 86. 1963: DC denied Def.'s motions to dismiss and for summary judgment, held provision in fed'l. impacted areas assistance contract required Defs. to provide integrated schools for children of fed'l. personnel, dismissed state as Def.

But see 522.Ala.8, 522.La.14.

522.Va.3a. Adkinson v. School Bd. (Newport News) (ED Va., Newport News Div., #642)*
- 115 -

522.Va.4. Hill v. School Bd. (Norfolk) (ED Va.)*
522.Va.5. Dillard v. School Bd. (Charlottesville) (DC Va.) (cert. den., 374 U.S. 827)*
522.Va.6. Brooks v. School Bd. (Arlington Co.) (ED Va.) (324 F.2d 303)*
522.Va.13. Kilby v. Warren Co. School Bd. (WD Va.)*
522.Va.14a. Bradley v. School Bd. (Richmond) (ED Va., #3353) Facts: VIII DOCKET 52, 115, IX DOCKET 26. Mar. 16, 1964: DC approved free transfer plan.
522.Va.20. Blackwell v. School Bd. (Fairfax Co.) (ED Va., #1967)*
522.Va.20a. Blakeney v. Fairfax Co. School Bd. (ED Va., Alexandria Div., Civ. #3067) (226 F.Supp. 713, 9 RRLR 217) June 14, 1963: Pls.-Negro children petitioned DC to intervene in Blackwell, 522.Va.20, alleging continued discrimination, requesting desegregation of teaching and admr. staffs. By stipulation, DC treated petition as complaint, tried case as original proceeding filed by Pls. against Defs. Mar. 2, 1964: DC found Defs'. pupil assignment regulations discriminatory on their face, but nondiscriminatorily applied, found no evidence of racial discrimination in assignment of teaching staffs.
522.Va.21. Green v. School Bd. (Roanoke) (WD Va., Roanoke Div., #1093) (8 RRLR 1045)*
522.Va.21a. Marsh v. School Bd. (Roanoke Co.) (WD Va., Roanoke Div., #1095)*
522.Va.24. Jackson v. School Bd. (Lynchburg) (WD Va., Lynchburg Div., #534) (321 F.2d 230) Facts: VIII DOCKET 52, 86, IX DOCKET 64. DC approved revised plan: grades 1-6 to be desegregated 1964, grades 1-9 in 1965, all grades in 1966.
522.Va.25. Anderson v. School Bds., West Point and King William Co . (Richmond) (ED Va., #3365)*
522.Va.26. McLeod v. Chesterfield Co. School Bd. and Va. Pupil Placement Bd. (near Richmond) (ED Va., #3431)*
522.Va.27. Williams v. Winchester School Bd. (WD Va., Harrisonburg Div., #629)*
522.Va.28. Scott v. Fredericksburg School Bd. (ED Va., #3438)*
522.Va.29. Brown v. Co. School Bd. (Frederick Co.) (WD Va., Civ. #642; CA 4, #9193) (327 F.2d 655, 9 RRLR 224) IX DOCKET 26. Correction: July 22, 1963: DC noted state Pupil Placement Bd. assigned all Pls. to schools they desired to attend, ordered case stricken from docket subject to be reopened by Pls. or any intervenor. Pls. appealed. Jan. 27, 1964: CA 4, per curiam, reversed: record shows Defs. maintain segregated schools; case should remain on docket until DC considers injunctive relief for class Pls. represent and counsel fees asked by Pls. Mar. 11: DC ordered case restored to docket, taxed certain of Pls'. filing and brief printing fees to Defs.
522.Va.30. Gilliam v. School Bd. (Hopewell) (ED Va., Richmond Div., Civ. #3554; CA 4) Facts: VIII DOCKET 143. Sept. 1963: When Pls. reported to schools to which Jy. 12 injunction admitted them, turned away, told they had been reassigned to their former schools by Va. Pupil Placement Bd. Sept. 13: DC ordered Pls. admitted to schools to which they had applied, ordered Def. to submit desegregation plan within 90 days. Sept. 17: Byran, J., of CA 4, denied stay of injunction pending appeal. Def.-School Bd. filed desegregation plan. Pending.
522.Va.31. Buckner v. School Bd. (Greene Co.) (DC Va.)*
522.Va.32. Bell v. Co. School Bd. of Powhatan Co. (DC Va.)*
522.Va.32a. Powhatan Co. School Bd. v. Pupil Placement Bd. (Richmond) (Richmond Cir. Ct., Ch. #B-2903)*
522.Va.33. Pettaway v. Co. School Bd. (Surry Co.) (ED Va., Richmond Div., Civ. #3766) 1962: Va. Pupil Placement Bd. assigned 7 Negro pupils to previously all-white school. Private school for whites organized, all white pupils in Co. enrolled, Def.-Bd. provided tuition grants, closed previously all-white public school for insufficient enrollment. Pls.-Negro children sued to restrain Def.-Bd. from paying tuition grants, failing to operate any school in Co., to restrain Def.-Bd. of Supers. from appropriating less to run public schools than in previous years. Sept. 30, 1963: DC found case turned on constitutionality of state and Co. subsidy of private segregated schools, noted similar question at issue in Griffin, 522.Va.1, denied Pls'. motion for preliminary injunction. May 25, 1964: CA 4 reversed, ordered hearing on merits. June 19: DC enjoined Defs. from processing applications for state or Co. funds for use at segregated schools, from any discriminatory action in operation of public schools, and from closing any schools which they operated during 1962-63 school year.
522.Va.34. Belton v. Co. School Bd. (King George Co.) (ED Va., Richmond Div., Civ. #3579) (8 RRLR 1443) 1963: Pls.-Negro children sued Def.-Bd., Co. Sup't. of Schools and Va. Pupil Placement Bd., asking Defs. be enjoined to end segregation or submit desegregation plan. Sept. 1963: DC found white students given free choice of schools, Negroes had to fulfill onerous administration criteria prescribed by Va. Pupil Placement Bd. to attend white schools, held this a denial of equal protection, held failure of Pls. to go through these procedures excusable failure to exhaust administrative remedies, enjoined Defs. from discrimination in pupil assignment, held if Defs. filed desegregation plan within 90 days, DC approval of plan would allow Defs. to proceed in accord with it. Defs. filed plan. Pending.
522.WVa.3. Taylor v. Raleigh Co. Bd. of Educ. (SD W.Va., Beckley #159)*
523. Suits To Prevent Integration (see also 204, 213, 223)
Report: NY Educ. Commr.'s Advisory Comm. on Human Relations, Desegregating the Public Schools of N.Y. City. May 12, 1964. Available from N.Y. State Department of Educ., Albany, N.Y.
523.NJ.1. Morrean v. Bd. of Educ. (Montclair, N.J.) (N.J. Sup. Ct.) (48 N.J. 237) 1962: Def. closed 1 of 4 jr. high schools, ordered predominantly Negro student body transferred to other jr. highs. Bd. heard citizens' comm. report that this would accentuate racial imbalance, decided to close 2 of 3 remaining jr. highs by 1966, and in interim to assign pupils from closed jr. high to remaining 3 schools
- 116 -

by system of parental choice as far as possible. July 1962: Pls.-white students filed complaint with N.J. Commr. of Educ., alleging application of neighborhood school policy to all Montclair except students at closed school denied Pls. equal protection. July 3, 1963: Commr. decided Def. acted reasonably within its statutory discretion. May 4, 1964: Sup. Ct. noted Pls. raised no questions of state law, and did not attack Commr.'s finding, found Pls'. citation of language in Plessy, 163 U.S. 537, and Goss, 522.Tenn.6, 373 U.S. 683, inapposite, held "[t]he Montclair Bd.'s obligation was to maintain a sound educational system by the furnishment of . . . equal educational opportunities. It could not, consistently with either sound legal principles or with sound educational practices, maintain an official policy of segregation with its inherent inequalities of educational opportunities and its withholding of the democratic and educational advantages of heterogeneous student populations. [Citing cases.] Nor need it close its eyes to racial imbalance in its schools which, though fortuitous in origin, presents much the same disadvantages as are presented by segregated schools. [Citing Jackson, 522.Calif.1, Blocker, 522.NY.7, Branche, 522.NY.6, Balaban, 523.NY.1.]"
523.NJ.2. Fuller v. Volk. (Englewood) (D N.J., Civ. #847-63) 1963: Intervening Defs. petitioned N.J. Commr. of Educ. charging Def.-Englewood Bd. of Educ. with maintenance of racially segregated schools. Commr. found schools segregated due to housing pattern, ordered Bd. to reduce concentration of Negroes at one elementary school and submit desegregation plan, found such segregation interfered with learning, was deprivation of educational opportunity. Aug. 1, 1963: Commr. approved Bd. plan assigning all sixth grade pupils in city to former all-Negro school, distribution of Negro school pupils grades 1-5 among 4 remaining elementary schools. State Bd. of Educ. affirmed. Intervening Pls. filed, then withdrew appeal. Oct. 11: Pls.-white parents sued Englewood Bd. of Educ., Bd. of School Estimate claiming racial discrimination, seeking to enjoin expenditure of tax funds. N.J. Commr. of Educ. and original Comp. intervened as Defs.; several white parents intervened as Pls. Oct. 21: DC denied Commr.'s motion to dismiss for want of subject matter jurisdiction. Dec. 3: CA (sub nom. Raubinger v. Augelli) denied writ of prohibition. Apr. 20, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied writ of prohibition; Douglas, J., noted diss.

June 3, 1964: DC found no genuine issue of fact as to educational soundness of plan, found uncontroverted Supt. of Schools' view that Negro children in all-Negro school performed less well due to inherent deprivation of educational opportunity in such a situation, distinguished Bell, 522.Ind.1, on ground it held only that Bd. of Educ. need not ameliorate fortuitous segregation, cited Balaban, 523.NY.1, Jackson, 522.Calif.1, Morrean, 523.NJ.1, held Pls. deprived of no right by Bd.'s action, held even tho Defs. had not moved for summary judgment, DC could enter it for them.

Morton Stavis, Esq., 744 Broad St., Newark; William Kunstler, Esq., 511 Fifth Ave., NYC, Herbert H. Tate, Esq., Barbara Morris, Esq., for intervening Defs.

523.NY.1. Balaban v. Rubin. (Brooklyn) (N.Y. Ct. of App.) (248 N.Y.S.2d 574, 9 RRLR 174, 14 N.Y.2d 193) Facts: IX DOCKET 26, 64. May 7, 1964: Ct. of App. affirmed App. Div., held local bd. can take racial factors into consideration in drawing attendance lines where plan has sound educational objectives and does not foster racial segregation.

Case note: 51 Syracuse U. 561-65.

523.NY.2. Vetere and Hummel v. Allen, Comm'r of Educ. (Hempstead) (Albany Co. Sup. Ct., #5217-63, #5440-63) (245 N.Y.S.2d 682) Facts: IX DOCKET 27, 65. Addendum: Ct.'s decision annulled Def.'s order of June 17, 1963, reported at IX DOCKET 24 sub nom. Mitchell v. Bd. of Educ., 522.NY.6a.
523.NY.3. Strippoli v. Bickal. (Rochester) (Sup. Ct., App. Div., 4th Dept., #242) 1964: Defs.-members of Bd. of Educ. transferred some 5th and 6th grade Negro pupils from overcrowded 98% Negro elementary school to 100% white school with 7 vacant classrooms, rearranging classes in manner resulting in integrating classrooms at white school. Pls.-white parents assn. organized school boycott, filed suit. Apr. 1: Sup. Ct. enjoined Bd. from continuing to transport Negro pupils to white school. June 25: App. Div. reversed: (1) tho denied by Supt. of Schools, one aim of plan is undoubtedly to begin to achieve racial balance; (2) taking race into consideration in drawing school lines is permissible where Bd.'s action is otherwise reasonable; here, transferring pupils from overcrowded school without integrating classes at new school might have been state action in support of segregation; (3) reliance on testimony of 5th and 6th grade white children who had not attended school since transfer and who are scarcely qualified to discuss educational policy was error.
524. Miscellaneous Suits to End Segregation (see also 555)

524.2. Shaffer v. White Citizens' Council Forum, Miss. Sovereignty Comm., Miss. Gov. Barnett, Treas. Gandy. (SD Miss., #3068)*
530. Housing — Racial Discrimination
Law review article: Martin E. Slane, One year's experience: Current and potential impact of the housing order. 32 George Washington U. 457-88.

Comment: California's forced housing act: A reply to the F.E.P.C. 37 S. California U. 276-78.

531. In Public and Publicly-Assisted Housing — Urban Renewal (Title I)
Report: Iowa Advisory Comm. to U.S. Comm. on Civil Rights, Urban renewal programs and their effect on racial minority group housing in 3 Iowa cities. 23 pp.
531.10. Arena v. Columbia Univ. (Comm. on Human Rights)*
531.11. Smith v. Holiday Inns of America. (Nashville) (CA 6, #3409) (220 F.Supp. 1.)* Case note: 38 Tulane 434-35.
531.12. Johnson v. Redevelopment Agency of City of Oakland. (U.S.S.C., #415 Misc.) Facts VIII DOCKET 114, IX DOCKET 27. Cite: 375 U.S. 915.
531.13. Re House and Home, Ltd. (Veterans' Admin.)*
- 117 -

532. In Publicly-Assisted Housing — FHA and VA

532.24. Hudson v. Branden Enterprises, Tropicana Village. (Calif.) (Santa Clara Co. Super. Ct.)*
532.26. Gregory v. Zehman. (Cleveland) (Com. Pleas Ct., #742-019)*
532.29. Scott v. Houston. (Berkeley) (Alameda Co. Super. Ct.)*
533. In Private Housing
Law review articles: Harold W. Horowitz, Fourteenth amendment aspects of racial discrimination in "private" housing. 52 Calif. U. 1-45; Francis A. Allen, Critique of "Racial discrimination in 'private' housing." 52 Calif. U. 46-49; Norman Dorsen, Critique of "Racial discrimination in 'private' housing." 52 Calif. U. 50-55.

Comment: Application of the fourteenth amendment to builders of private housing. 12 Kansas U. 426-35.

533.22. Divine v. Koch. (Calif.) (Sacramento Super. Ct.)*
533.31. McKibben v. Mich. Corp. & Sec. Comm. (Mich. Sup. Ct.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 54, 87, 115. Cite: 119 NW.2d 557.

Case note: 52 Ky. U. 471-5.

533.32. Smith v. Curt Craft. (Portland) (Multnomah Co. Cir. Ct., #265957, #266890)*
533.37. Droeger v. DeVries, Select Realty and Rentals. (San Francisco Super. Ct., #508828)*
533.39. Johnson v. Coldwell, Banker and Co. (Sacramento) (Sacramento Co. Super. Ct., #132566)*
533.49. Ruiz v. Bertolotti. (App. Div., N.Y. Sup. Ct., 2d Dept., #277 HE)*
533.55. Curtis and Washington State Board Against Discrimination v. Interlake Realty. (King Co. Ct., #H-708)*
533.56. Thomas v. Goolis, Paxinos. (San Francisco Muni. Ct. #477388)*
533.57. Mason v. Grenell. (Shaker Hts.) (Cuyahoga Co., ##771,-611, 771,612)*
533.60. Illinois Terra Realty and Building, Inc. v. Flanagan, Bldg. Comm'r. (Harvey, Ill.) (ND Ill., ED., #63-C-1329)*
533.61. Bolden v. Perlstein. (NY State Comm. for Human Rights, #CH-9122-62) (9 RRLR 417)*
533.63. California v. Don Wilson Builders. Don Wilson Builders v. Super. Ct. and California. (2d App. Dist. Ct. of App., #27491) (33 Cal. Reptr. 631)*

And see 533.63a.

533.63a. FEPC v. Don Wilson Builders. (Los Angeles Super. Ct., #829678)*

And see 15.7 and 58.8.

533.65. Wagner v. O'Bannon. (Pomona, Calif.) (Los Angeles Co. Super. Ct., #East C-2148)*
533.66. Bell v. Eyring Investment Co. (Berkeley-Albany Muni. Ct., #15010)*
533.68. Cooney v. Katzen. (N.Y.) (Sup. Ct., Onondaga Co.) Facts: IX DOCKET 28. Cite: 248 NYS.2d 548.
533.70. N.J. Home Builders Assn., N.J. Assn. of Real Estate Bds., and Montoro v. Div. on Civil Rights. (Super. Ct., App. Div.) (81 N.J. Super. 243, 195 A.2d 318) Facts: IX DOCKET 28, 66. Correction: Pls'. appeal pending.

Howard Kestin, Esq., Deputy Atty. Genl., State House Annex, Trenton 08625.

533.71. David v. Vesta Co. (Bergen Co. Super. Ct., App. Div., #A-391-63) (196 A.2d 286, 8 RRLR 1592)*
533.72. Terry v. City of Toledo. (Ct. of Appeals, Lucas Co.) (194 N.E.2d 877, 9 RRLR 316) Facts: IX DOCKET 28. Dec. 20, 1963: Ct. of App. reversed, held ordinance unconstitutional: (1) unenforceable because too loosely drawn in regard to powers vested in administering agencies, Bd. of Community Relations and Fair Housing Bd.; (2) [dicta] violates rights of private property and freedom of contract.
533.73. Diaman and Howard v. Shannon. (San Francisco Muni. Ct.)*
533.75. In the Matter of Accusation of Ciufo, Parker, Marlin, (Calif. FEPC, L.A. No. 3)*
533.76. Porter v. City of Oberlin. (Ohio Sup. Ct., #38,734) Facts: IX DOCKET 66. Correction: Com. Pleas Ct. held ordinance unconstitutional as infringing property rights, not within home rule powers of municipality. Jan. 22, 1964: Ct. of App. reversed, held ordinance constitutional; it bears reasonable relation to public health, comfort, and welfare, and is thus within municipal police power.
533.77. Bachrach v. 1001 Tenants Corp. (N.Y. Sup. Ct., App. Div., First Dept.) (245 N.Y.S.2d 912, rev'd. 249 N.Y.S.2d 855) Facts: IX DOCKET 66. May 20, 1964: App. Div. reversed, ordered complaint dismissed: NYC Admin. Code §§D1-1.0-D1-4.0 provide exclusive remedy for racial or religious discrimination in housing: that NYC Commn. on Human Rights is sole proper party-Pl.; only relief available is equitable; statute's purpose is not compensatory.

See 533.77a.

533.77a. City of NY Commn. on Human Rights v. 1001 Tenants Corp. (NYC Sup. Ct., #40637-63) 1963: On complaint of Pl. in 533.77, Commn. sued Def., asking end to discrimination. Jan. 22, 1964: Sup. Ct. denied Defs'. motion to dismiss.
533.78. State Commn. on Human Rights v. Eshoo. (Comm. on Human Rights; N.Y. Sup. Ct., Westchester Co., Spec. Term, Part I, Index No. 5066/1963) (8 RRLR 1576, 1720) Feb. 1963: Defs. refused to rent house to Hicks, a Negro. June 26: Commn. ordered Defs. to rent apt. to Hicks, to cease discrimination, provide Commn. with list of available apartments, make available records for Commn. inspection, and post Commn. posters in their offices, found it had no power to consider challenges to statute creating Commn. Oct. 29, 1963: Sup. Ct. affirmed.
533.79. Stanton Land Co. v. City of Pittsburgh. (Allegheny Co. Ct. of Com. Pleas, #1741) 1962: Pl. refused to sell house to Nickens. Jan. 24, 1964: City Commn. on Human Relations (Ord. No. 523) found Pls. discriminated against Nickens because he is Negro, ordered Pls. to sell him a home. Nov. 30, 1963: On appeal Ct. found Pls. violated ordinance, held state may restrict private property rights to extent necessary to prevent racial discrimination in sale of housing, found state legislature vested city with power to enact ordinance, found ordinance valid delegation to administrative agency.

David W. Craig, Esq., City Solicitor, Pittsburgh.

- 118 -

533.80. Morton v. Koda; Lefkowitz v. Koda. (Commn. for Human Rights; N.Y. Sup. Ct., Westchester Co.) Mar. 1964: Comp.-Negro woman alleged Resp.-apt. owner refused to rent to her on grounds of race. Apr. 3: Commn. hearing officer found probable cause. Apr. 8: On application of State Atty. Genl. (N.Y. Exec. Law §63.9), N.Y. Sup. Ct. issued restraining order against Resp. renting apt. Comp. wanted. May 8: At Commn. hearing, Resp. agreed to lease apt. to Comp.; lease signed. Commn. retained jurisdiction.

George Zuckerman, Esq., Asst. Atty., Genl., 80 Centre St., NYC.

533.81. Beaman v. Principe; Lefkowitz v. Principe. (Commn. for Human Rights; N.Y. Sup. Ct., Westchester Co.) Mar. 16, 1964: Comp.-Negro alleged Resp.-homeowner refused to sell him house on ground of race. Commn. hearing officer found probable cause. Sup. Ct. issued injunction against sale or rental of Resp.'s house pending Commn's. final disposition. Apr. 10: Resp. agreed to sell to Comp. Injunction remains in effect; Commn. retains jurisdiction until sale completed.

George Zuckerman, Esq., Asst. Atty. Genl., 80 Centre St., NYC; Solomon G. Heifetz, Supervising Atty., NY State Commn. for Human Rights, 270 Broadway, NYC 7.

533.82. Washington v. Manwed. (San Francisco Muni. Ct., #514226) Apr. 20, 1964: Pls.-Negro man and wife, applied to Def.-apt. house mgr. for apt.; Def. refused. May 7: Pls. sued for actual damages, statutory penalty (Cal. Civ. C. §§51, 52) of $250.00 and punitive damages, alleging denial solely on ground of race, joining Def.-mgr. and four John Does—owners and other managers and rental agents. Pending.

Ephraim Margolin, Esq., 683 McAllister, San Francisco 2.

534. Omnibus Suits to End Housing Segregation

534.1. Cotillion Club. Inc. v. Detroit Real Estate Bd. (ED Mich., S. Div., #22058)*
535. Miscellaneous Housing Suits
And see Stanzione, 304.42.
535.2. Lewis v. Jordan. (Calif. Sup. Ct.) Facts: IX DOCKET 66. June 1964: Calif. Sup. Ct. denied writ of prohibition. Tobriner, Peters, JJ., diss. Anti-Rumford and Fair Housing initiative No. 14 on Nov. 1964 ballot.
535.3. Turner v. Ledbetter. (Detroit, Mich.) (Mich. Atty. Gen., Op. #4195; Cir. Ct., Wayne Co., Civ. #13734) 1963: Initiative petition for "Home Owners' Ordinance" guaranteeing owners' right to dispose of their property filed with city clerk. Fair Housing Ordinance proposed to Detroit City Council. Oct. 3, 1963: Mich. Atty. Genl. ruled both ordinances beyond power of municipalities to adopt: 1964 Mich. Const. art. V, §29 occupies field and confers sole authority to Mich. Civil Rights Commn. Pls. sought to mandamus city clerk to compel him to certify to city council that proposed Home Owners' Ordinance does not meet statutory requirements, and for injunction against submission to electorate. Feb. 3, 1964: Cir. Ct. granted relief requested: (1) proposed ordinance clearly unconstitutional on its face; (2) Ct. can determine constitutionality before ordinance becomes law and is applied; (3) Ct. has duty to protect public from racially inflammatory political campaign. Mich. Sup. Ct. reversed: Ct. may not interfere with citizens' right of referendum and initiative. Sept. 1964: Election.
535.4. Crowell v. Isaacs. (Oakland, Calif.) (Dist. Ct. of App., 1st Dist., 1 Civ. #21646) Mar. 10, 1963: Pl.-white union leader listed suburban house with Def.-realtor for sale or lease. Pls. told Def. to seek buyers or tenants of all races. May 9: Pl. inserted ad for house in paper, including words "all races welcome." May 10: Def. cancelled ad. without consulting Pl. Pl. sued, asking damages for violation of Civil Rights Act, Cal. Civ. C. §§51, 52. breach of listing contract, libel to Pl.'s reputation, and for declaratory judgment. Super. Ct. sustained Def.'s demurrer to all counts. Issues on appeal: (1) Is Pl. real party in interest; (2) Whether §§51, 52, providing actual and punitive damages, is exclusive money remedy.

Milton Nason, Esq., 1220 Latham Sq. Bldg., Oakland 12, Calif.; Samuel Tennenbaum, Esq., Russ Bldg., San Francisco.

540. Transportation — Racial Discrimination
541. In Interstate Facilities

541.Ala.1. Baldwin v. Morgan. (Birmingham) (ND Ala.)*
541.Ala.6. Alabama v. Zweig. (Birmingham) (Birmingham Muni. Ct.)*
541.Ala.9. Abernathy v. Alabama. (Montgomery) (U.S.S.C., #575) (375 U.S. 963)*
541.Ala.12. U.S. v. City of Montgomery, Bd. of Commrs., Ranch Enterprises, Inc. (CA 5)*
541.Ala.13. Alabama v. Sizemore, Greyhound Restaurant Mgr. (Birmingham) (Birmingham Muni. Ct.)*
541.Ala.14. U.S. v. City of Birmingham Officials. (ND Ala.)*
541.Calif.3. Thomas v. Nevada Club. (San Francisco Muni. Ct., #447044) Facts: VIII DOCKET 56. 1963: Case settled and dismissed.
541.Fla.2. Dresner v. City of Tallahassee. (Fla. Sup. Ct.; U.S.S.C., #35) (164 So.2d 208) Facts: VIII DOCKET 56, 115, 148, IX DOCKET 28. Fla. Sup. Ct. held Defs. could have obtained state review of properly preserved constitutional questions. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. dismissed certiorari as improvidently granted. Defs. serving sentences.
541.Fla.3. Smith, Callender and O'Connor v. Florida. (Ocala) (Fla. Sup. Ct.)*
541.Fla.4. Lamb v. Hillsborough County Aviation Auth. (SD Fla., #4020.)*
- 119 -

541.Ga.2. Georgia v. Defs. (Atlanta) (Atlanta City Ct.; Fulton Co. Crim. Ct.)*
541.Ga.3. Georgia v. Rev. Moss. (Atlanta) (Fulton Co. Crim. Ct.)*
541.Ga.5. Georgia v. Defs. (Atlanta) (Atlanta City Ct.)*
541.Ill.1. Wright v. C. B. & Q. R.R., Vanderbilt Better Tours. (CA 7)*
541.La.1. Adams v. City of New Orleans. (CA 5, #19898) (208 F.Supp. 427, 321 F.2d 493) Facts: VIII DOCKET 56, 115. Aug. 8, 1963: CA 5, per curiam, affirmed: once it is shown facilities are segregated and state action is evident, injunction must issue.
541.La.5. Louisiana v. Walmsley, Trailways Station Mgr. (Shreveport) (Caddo Parish Ct.)*
541.Miss.1, 1a-1c. Mississippi v. Thomas, Farmer, "Freedom Riders." (Jackson) (Miss. Sup. Ct.; U.S.S.C., #1217) Facts: VIII DOCKET 56, IX DOCKET 67. After filing opinions in Thomas, 160 So.2d 657, Farmer, 161 So.2d 159, and Knight, 161 So.2d 521, Miss. Sup. Ct. affirmed other cases in per curiam memoranda not reported in state reports. Appeals were not consolidated. Defs'. petitions for cert. pending.
541.Miss.4. Mississippi v. Frieze, Carey, Luster. (Jackson) (Miss. Sup. Ct.)*
541.Miss.6. Bailey v. Atty. Gen. Patterson; City of Jackson v. Bailey (Jackson) (SD Miss.) (323 F.2d 201, cert. den. 376 U.S. 910) Facts: VIII DOCKET 57, 87, 116, IX DOCKET 29, 67. Apr. 13, 1964: On remand, DC enjoined police from arresting those who violate regulations segregating waiting rooms and carriers.
541.Miss.7. U.S. v. Fraiser. (Greenwood)*
541.Miss.8. Mississippi v. Moses. (McComb) (Cir. Ct.)*
541.Miss.9. U.S. v. Mayor and Selectmen of McComb City. (SD Miss., #3215)*
541.Miss.13.. Mississippi v. Rev. Chas. Jones, Taylor and G. Jackson. (Jackson) (Jackson Muni. Ct.)*
541.Miss.15. Mississippi v. Bell. (Jackson) (Jackson City Ct.)*
541.Miss.16. U.S. v. Oxford City Officials. (Oxford) (DC Miss.)*
541.Miss.17. Mississippi v. Nelson, Thompson and Smith. (Poplarville) (Pearl River Co. Ct.)*
541.NY.3. Ephraim v. Safeway Trails. (NYC to Georgia.) (SD NY, #61 Civ. 210) 1959: Pl.-Negro nurse purchased ticket to Montgomery, Ala. from Def. Pl. rode Def.'s buses to Washington, D.C., transferred to connecting carriers from whom Def. received 10% agent's commission. In Ga., bus driver told Pl. to move to rear; Pl. refused; driver made telephone call. At next stop, Pl. dragged from bus; beaten. Pl. sued for damages. May 22, 1964: DC, without jury, found for Pl. because seriously injured in "a clear case in which the driver maliciously initiated, instigated, and brought about [Pl.'s] unlawful ejection"; $5,000 damages.

Lubell, Lubell, and Jones, Esqs., 165 Broadway, NYC.

542. In Intrastate Facilities (and see 51, 54, 55, 58)

542.4. Evers v. Dwyer. (Memphis) (DC Tenn.)*
542.16. City of Montgomery v. Taylor. (Montgomery City Ct., #16372)*
542.17. City of Petersburg v. Defs. (Petersburg Muni. Ct.)*
542.20. Georgia v. Defs. (Macon) (Macon Muni. Ct.)*

See summary of Albany cases at 55.

542.21. Georgia v. 5 Defs. (Albany) (Albany Recorder's Ct.)*
542.21a. Georgia v. Forman, Lee, Collings. (Albany) (Albany Super. Ct.)*
542.21b. Georgia v. 267 Defs. (Albany) (Albany Recorder's Ct.; Juvenile Ct.)*
542.21d. Georgia v. 198 Defs. (Albany) (Albany Recorder's Ct.)*
550. Miscellaneous Racial Discrimination (and see 51, 54, 55, 58)
Law review articles: Thomas P. Lewis, The role of law in regulating discrimination in places of public accommodation. 13 Buffalo U. 402-38.

Alfred Avins, Freedom of choice in personal service occupations: Thirteenth amendment limitations on anti-discrimination legislation. 49 Cornell 228-56.

551. In Recreational Facilities

551.Ark.1. Freeman v. City of Little Rock. (ED Ark., W. Div., #LR-62-C-40)*
551.Calif.5. Santa Clara Voiture 365 v. American Legion 40 & 8 Society. (Santa Clara Super. Ct., #110512)*
551.Fla.6. Wimbish v. Pinellas Co. (Florida) (CA 5, #21494) 1964: Pls. sued to desegregate golf course operated by lessee on Co.-owned land; Co. shares revenue, sets fees, approves development of course. Feb. 3: DC denied injunction. Pl's. appeal pending.
551.Ga.5. King v. Mayor Hartsfield, Judge Webb. (Atlanta) (ND Ga., #7603)*
551.Ga.7. Georgia v. Defs. (Atlanta) (Fulton Co. Crim. Ct.)*
551.Ga.8. Patterson v. MacLean. (Savannah) (SD Ga., #1321) Facts: VIII DOCKET 116, IX DOCKET 68. May 1964: DC dismissed complaint. Pl's. motion for new trial filed.
551.Ga.9. Law v. Jekyll Island State Park Auth. (ND Ga.)*
551.Ga.10. Newton v. City of Macon. (Bibb Co. Super. Ct., #25864) (9 RRLR 309)*
551.Ky.2. Walker v. Bd. of Educ. (Richmond) (ED Ky., #238)*
551.La.4. Bynum v. Schiro. (New Orleans) (U.S.S.C., #580) Facts: IX DOCKET 29, 68. Cite: 375 U.S. 395, affirming 219 F.Supp. 204.
551.La.5. New Orleans v. Barthe. (U.S.S.C., #663) Facts: IX DOCKET 68. Cite: 376 U.S. 189, affirming 219 F.Supp. 788.
- 120 -

551.Md.1. Griffin, Drews v. Maryland. (Baltimore) (U.S.S.C., ##6, 3) (167 A.2d 341, 171 A.2d 717) Facts: VIII DOCKET 59-60. June 22, 1964: In Griffin, U.S.S.C. reversed, Warren, C.J., held: action of amusement park employee, also deputized as deputy sheriff, in telling Pets. to leave park, arresting and filing charges against them, was "state action" in violation of equal protection. Douglas, J., conc. for reasons in Bell, 552.Md.5. Harlan, White, Black, JJ., diss. In Drews, #3, U.S.S.C. vacated in light of Griffin, Bell.
551.Md.2. Statom v. Co. Commissioners. (Prince Georges Co.) (Md. Ct. of App.)*

Case note: 50 Virginia U. 556-59.

551.Miss.2. U.S. v. Harrison Co., Co. Bd. of Supervisors, Co. Sheriff, City of Biloxi, City Mayor, Police Chief. (CA 6)*
551.Miss.3. Mississippi v. Defs. (Jackson) (Jackson Muni. Ct.)*
551.Miss.4. Pls. v. City of Jackson. (CA 5, #19961)*

And see 555.Miss.1.

551.NY.8. New York v. Komisar. (NYC Adolescent Ct.)*
551.NC.4. Edwards v. Abercrombie Enterprises. (Durham) (MD NC., #C-138-D-62)*
551.S.C.4. Brown v. S.C. State Forestry Commn. (CA 5) (8 RRLR 1109) Facts: VIII DOCKET 60, IX DOCKET 30. CA 5 rejected appeal by newspaper editor-Intervenor.
551.SC.5. Walker v. Shaw. (Greenville) (WD S.C., #2983)*
551.SC.6. James v. Carnegie Public Library. (Sumter) (ED S.C., #AC-1163)*
551.Tenn.8. City of Knoxville v. Defs. (Knoxville Muni. Ct.)*
551.Va.7. Virginia v. James. (Hampton) (Va. Sup. Ct. of App.)*
551.Va.9. Brown, Picott v. City of Richmond. (formerly Pls. v.) (Va. Sup. Ct. of App.) (132 S.E.2d 495) Facts: VIII DOCKET 61. Sept. 11, 1963: Ct. of App. reversed, ordered injunctions issued: (1) city's lessees are no less bound by 14th Amendment than city; (2) state segregation statutes unconstitutional; (3) Dist. Atty. who admitted he would prosecute violations of segregation statutes should be enjoined as well as operators of baseball field and auditorium.
552. In Dining Places (and see 51, 54, 55, 58)

552.Ala.4a. City of Montgomery v. King and Embry. (Ala. Ct. of Appeals.)*
552.Ala.10. City of Birmingham v. Burks. (Birmingham Muni. Ct.)*
552.Ark.2. Briggs, Lupper v. Arkansas. (U.S.S.C., #432.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 61, 146, IX DOCKET 30. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. granted cert.
552.Fla.4. Robinson v. Florida. (Shell City, Miami) (U.S.S.C., #60) (144 So.2d 811) Facts: VIII DOCKET 61. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed and remanded (9-0), Black, J.: held Florida Bd. of Health and state food and drink service regulations requiring separate toilet and lavatory facilities where whites and Negroes served in same restaurant, amounted to significant state incentive for and involvement with segregation to bring Pets.' arrest within holding in Peterson, 552.SC.8, 373 U.S. 244. Douglas, J., conc. for reasons in Bell, 552.Md.5. Harlan, J., "acquiesced," "considering himself bound by" Peterson.
552.Ga.10. Georgia v. King. (Atlanta City Ct.)*
552.Ga.11. Georgia v. Def. (Atlanta) (City Ct.)*
552.Ga.13. Georgia v. 8 Drs. (Atlanta) (Fulton Co. Ct.)*
552.Ga.14. Clark v. Georgia. (formerly Van Clark v.) (Savannah) (U.S.S.C.) (135 S.E.2d 270) U.S.S.C. granted extension of time to file petition for cert.
552.Ky.1. Kentucky v. Defs. (Louisville) (Muni. C.)*

And see 551.Ky.1.

552.Ky.2. Kentucky v. Defs. (Louisville) (Muni. Ct.)*
552.La.1. Garner, Briscoe, Hoston v. Louisiana. (Baton Rouge) (U.S.S.C.)*
552.La.5. Pania v. City of New Orleans. (ED La., #14240) Suit to declare unconstitutional city ordinance requiring segregation in bars. Pl's. motion for summary judgment pending.
552.Md.4. Maryland v. Wagner. (Queenstown) (Centerville Muni. Ct.)*
552.Md.5. Bell v. Maryland. (Baltimore) (U.S.S.C., #12) (176 A.2d 771) Facts: VIII DOCKET 61. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. reversed (6-3) Brennan, J.: remanded for consideration by Md. Ct. of App. whether state public accommodations statute, enacted after Pets.' convictions while case pending in U.S.S.C., required reversal of Pets.' convictions under common law rule that if statute is repealed or amended, convictions pending on appeal under it are voided. Douglas, J. (Goldberg, J., in part) conc.: (1) Ct. should reach and decide constitutional questions; (2) the decision of restaurants, most of them owned by corporations, not to serve Negroes, is actuated by belief that there is more money to be made running segregated facilities; (3) to hold that state-backed discrimination by corporate managers is beyond the reach of Fourteenth Amendment is to remit to those with economic control of public facilities basic decisions about integration and segregation; (4) public accommodations, as distinguished from private homes, etc., cannot logically be classified as private property in such a way as to allow their managers to exclude Negroes, especially when these accommodations serve public needs.

Goldberg, J. (Warren, C.J., joined in part by Douglas, J.) opinion dealt with questions raised in dissent: (1) Fourteenth Amendment not only proscribes state action in aid of discrimination, but commands that no state shall by inaction tolerate denial to Negroes of full participation in American life; (2) public accommodations should be distinguished from private homes in giving weight to claims of property right. Black, J. (Harlan, White, JJ.) diss. (1) Ct. should reach constitutional questions; (2) Fourteenth Amendment is no more than a command that a state shall not act to foster or abet discrimination; (3) Maryland's acion here is not state action; (4) freedom of expression does not extend to going on private property to criticize acts of the owner; (5) regulation of trades and professions is for Congress and legislatures.

- 121 -

552.Mo.2. Missouri v. Def. (Columbia) (Police Ct.)*
552.NC.4. Williams v. North Carolina. (Monroe) (U.S.S.C., #4) (117 S.E.2d 824) Facts: VIII DOCKET 62, 87. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, granted cert., vacated, remanded in light of Robinson, 552.Fla.4. Black, Harlan, White, JJ., diss.
552.NC.9. Fox v. North Carolina. (Raleigh) (U.S.S.C., #5) (118 SE.2d 47) Facts: VI DOCKET 75, 98. Mar. 21, 1960: Defs. sat-in at lunch counter marked "employees and guests only"; arrested. N.C. Sup. Ct. affirmed. Petitions for cert. filed Oct. Term 1960. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, granted cert., vacated and remanded to N.C. Sup. Ct. for consideration in light of Robinson, 552.Fla.4. Douglas, J. would reverse, see Bell, 552.Md.5. Black, Harlan, White, JJ., diss.
552.NC.10. North Carolina v. Defs. (Rutherford) (Muni. Ct.)*
552.NC.11. North Carolina v. Nelson. (Statesville) (Crim. Ct.)*
552.SC.2. Fields v. South Carolina. (Orangeburg) (S.C. Sup. Ct.) (375 U.S. 44)*
552.SC.2b. South Carolina v. Davis. (U.S.S.C.)*
552.SC.3a. Barr, Bouie v. City of Columbia. (U.S.S.C., ##9, 10) (123 SE.2d 521, 124 SE.2d 332) Facts: VIII DOCKET 62. June 22, 1964: In Bouie, U.S.S.C. reversed (6-3), Brennan, J., held: "no trespassing" sign having been put up after Pets. were seated in restaurant, all requests to leave having been given after Pets. were seated, S.C. Sup. Ct. construction of trespass statute prohibiting "entry upon the lands of another . . . after notice prohibiting such entry" "to include remaining on lands of another after notice to leave" amounted to ex post facto judicial enlargement of criminal statute and denied Pets. due process in that they had no notice that their conduct was proscribed. Douglas, J., conc. for reasons in Bell, 522.Md.5. Black, Harlan, White, JJ., diss.: Many S.C. civil trespass cases hold remaining on lands to be actionable, hence Pets. might have anticipated Sup. Ct. construction of criminal statute.

In Barr, U.S.S.C. reversed (6-3) Black, J., trespass convictions on same basis as in Bouie, unanimously reversed breach of peace conviction: (1) S.C. Sup. Ct.'s holding that exceptions taken by Pets. were too general to justify review of evidence is such marked departure from that court's previous procedure that Ct.'s holding does not deprive U.S.S.C. of right to review; (2) undisputed evidence is that Pets. were orderly and peaceful; there is no evidence to sustain their convictions for breach of the peace.

552.SC.4. Henry and 64 Others v. City of Rock Hill. (U.S.S.C., #826) (128 SE.2d 775, 375 U.S. 6) Facts: VIII DOCKET 62, IX DOCKET 30, 69. Add.: Apr. 6, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, reversed, citing Edwards, 552.SC.3b, 372 U.S. 229: Defs. were engaged in peaceful expression of unpopular views.
552.SC.4b. South Carolina v. Rev. Ivory, Dietrich, Hackley. (Rock Hill) (Muni. Ct.)*
552.SC.4c. South Carolina v. Ivory. (Rock Hill) (York Co. Cir. Ct.)*
552.SC.4d. City of Rock Hill v. Hamm. (U.S.S.C., #105) Facts: VIII DOCKET 62, 118. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. granted cert.
552.SC.6. City of Florence v. George. (Florence Co. Cir. Ct.)*
552.SC.7. City of Spartanburg v. Defs. (Spartanburg Recorder's Ct.)*
552.SC.9a. City of Darlington v. Stanley. (U.S.S.C.)*
552.SC.10. Mitchell v. City of Charleston. (U.S.S.C., #8) Facts: VIII DOCKET 63. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C., per curiam, granted cert., reversed. Black, Harlan, White, JJ. diss.
552.SC.11. South Carolina v. 8 Defs. (Greenville)*
552.Tenn.4a. City of Nashville v. Carnaham. (Nashville) (Cir. Ct.)*
552.Tenn.8. Tennessee v. Lewis. (Nashville) (Crim. Ct., #15866)
552.Va.9. Virginia v. Allen. (Hopewell) (U.S.S.C.)*
552.Va.10a. Wood v. Virginia. (Va. Sup. Ct. of App.)*
553. In Other Facilities (and see 42)

553.Ala.1. Alabama v. Defs. (Talladega) (Muni. Ct.)*
553.Calif.1. Neville v. Peralta Steam Baths. (Berkeley Muni. Ct.)*
553.Calif.2. Cobbs v. Rockridge Woman's Club. (Oakland-Piedmont Muni. Ct., #158671) Sept. 1963: Pls.-members of CORE reserved Def.'s hall for party Nov. 23. Nov. 1963: Due to death of Pres. Kennedy, Pls. changed date to Dec. 14. Nov. 23: Def. notified Pls. reservation cancelled. Feb. 20, 1964: Pls. filed suit under Cal. Civ. C. §§51, 52, alleging cancellation motivated solely by racial prejudice. Pending.
553.Ga.1. Henderson v. Grady Hotel Corp. (Atlanta) (CA 5)*
553.Miss.1. Mississippi v. Defs. (Jackson) (Muni. Ct.)*
553.NY.1. Patterson v. Max Beauty Salon. (Minneola, L.I.) (Nassau Co. Dist. Ct.)*
553.Ohio.1. Gegner v. Graham. (Yellow Springs) (Ohio Dist. Ct. of App.) Facts: IX DOCKET 69: Mar. 1964: Ct. of App. held Pls. conduct violated public accommodation statute, statute constitutional. Mar. 15: Pl. closed shop pending Ohio Sup. Ct. decision.
553.Miss.2. Poole v. Barnett. (Jackson) (SD Miss., #3489; CA 5, #21196) Oct. 1963: Several groups of whites and Negroes attempted to worship at white Jackson churches; arrested. Pls. sued to enjoin arrests. DC declined to rule on motion for temporary injunctive relief. Dec. 7: Pls. filed petition for writ of mandamus in CA 5. Jan. 8: As Pls. travelling to argue mandamus petition, DC telegraphed CA 5 clerk he denied temporary injunction, mandamus petition therefore moot, should be denied. Pls. appealed from denial of injunction. Issues: (1) whether arrests at request of church authorities state action in violation of equal protection clause; (2) whether arrests on police initiative without church requests state action; (3) whether arrests deny Pls. freedom to worship; (4) power of DC to enjoin threatened arrests.
- 122 -

553.Pa.1. Johnson v. Cafaro. (Ct. of Common Pleas., Dauphine Co., Pa., #521-1963)*
553.Tenn.1. Tennessee v. Freeman and Exum. (Memphis) (Memphis Muni. Ct.)*
553.Tenn.2. Ford v. Tennessee. (Memphis) (U.S.S.C., #15.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 63. June 22, 1964: U.S.S.C. denied cert.
553.Wash.1. In re Johnson and Wheeler and Washington State Board Against Discrimination. (Spokane Co. Super. Ct. #172524)*
554. In Hospitals
Comment: State action, state law, and the private hospital. 62 Michigan U. 1433-45.
554.Ga.1. Bell v. Fulton DeKalb Hospital Authority. (formerly v. Grady Memorial Hospital.) (Atlanta) (ND Ga., #7966) Facts: VIII DOCKET 64. Feb. 11, 1964: At pretrial conference, DC dismissed as to Hospital Auth. which has desegregated. Mar. 1964: DC denied Defs.-Dental Societies' motion to dismiss, indicated they would be enjoined from exclusion of Negro dentists if DC upheld on appeal.
554.NC.1. Simkins and U.S. v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital and Wesley Long Community Hospital. (Greensboro) (MD N.C., Greensboro Div., #C-57-G-62) (323 F.2d 959, c.d. 376 U.S. 938) Facts: VIII DOCKET 64, 88, IX DOCKET 31, 69. Apr. 16, 1964: DC issued injunction. Case notes: 38 Tulane 401-04, 25 Pitt. U. 591-96, 54 Georgetown 624-28.
554.NC.2a. Eaton v. Grubbs. (CA 4, #9058) (329 F.2d 710, 9 RRLR 304) Facts: VIII DOCKET 64, IX DOCKET 31. Apr. 1, 1964: CA 4 reversed, held actions of hospital state action despite opposite finding in earlier suit: (1) standard for state action has changed, e.g., Burton, 365 U.S. 715; (2) new allegations of state action here include showing that hospital exercises power of eminent domain, enjoys tax exemption, sits on land deeded from city with condition subsequent to fee that if land used for other purposes than hospital, city will again be seised; (3) Defs.' atty. admitted hospital soon to be transferred to state, with buildings and equipment.
554.NC.3. Dr. Hawkins v. N.C. Dental Society and Second Dist. Dental Society. (WD N.C., #1505.)*
554.NC.5. Cyress v. Newport News. (ED Va.) Suit by physicians and patients to desegregate Hill-Burton Act hospital. Defs'. answer denies discrimination, attacks Pls.-physicians' qualifications.
554.SC.1. Rackley v. Bd. of Trs., Orangeburg Regional Hospital. (ED S.C., Columbia Div., #AC-887.)*
554.Va.1. Wood v. Hogan. (CA 4.)*

And see 555.Va.1.

555. In Government Facilities: Omnibus Suits

555.Ala.2. Faulkner v. City of Gadsden. (ND Ala., Birmingham Div.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 64. Apr. 22, 1964: DC found "[t]he plaintiffs have been and are being illegally . . . discriminated against in the use of the city-owned and operated swimming pool, recreational facilities, municipal auditorium, and the coffee shop in the city hall," found "police officers in the city . . . have commanded [Pls.] to sit in the rear of" local busses, enjoined Defs. from discriminating and against leasing facilities to private persons with intent to evade injunction, declined to order desegregation of library since Defs. had desegregated it and showed no intention of reneging.
555.Ala.4. Gardner v. Kendrick. (Birmingham) (ND Ala., S. Div.)*
555.Fla.2. Brown v. Bryant. (SD Fla., Miami Div., #63-161)*
555.Miss.1. Clark v. Thompson. (DC Miss.)
555.Va.1. Wood and Thaxton v. Vaughn. (CA 4, # #8689, 8874) (321 F.2d 474, 480)*
555.Va.2. Rev. Dunlap v. Councilmen of City of Danville. (WD Va., Danville Div., #540.)*
560. Family Matters—Racial, Religious Problems
561. In Marriage and Divorce

561.3. McLaughlin v. Florida. (formerly Hoffman v.) (U.S.S.C., #585) (153 So.2d 1) Facts: IX DOCKET 31. Apr. 21, 1964: U.S.S.C. noted prob. juris.
562. In Adoption Proceedings

562.4. Re J. Rockefeller. (Sup. Ct., Mineola)*
563. In Custody Proceedings

563.10. Cude v. Arkansas. (Polk. Co.) (Ark. Sup. Ct.) (377 SW.2d 816) 1963: Ark. filed petition to vest custody of Appt.'s 3 children (12, 10, 8) in Child Welfare Div. of state Welfare Dept.: children not attending school because not vaccinated, due to Appt's. religious beliefs; Appt. would not accept them in his home if vaccinated. Probate Ct. appointed State Dir. of Child Welfare guardian, Chancery Ct. gave Child Welfare Div. custody. Apr. 1964: Sup. Ct. affirmed: (1) good faith religious beliefs no excuse for resisting exercise of state police power to protect health; (2) Ct. could find "neglect" justifying ending of parental custody; (3) chancery's inherent power over children not terminated by creation of Juv. Ct. Apr. 6: Polk. Co. sheriff took children into custody.
564. In Miscellaneous Proceedings
570. Employment
FEPC Statement: Nov. 1963: Calif. FEPC noted "information is always neutral," said racial composition surveys taken unobtrusively and by "common sense" means not without state FEPC Act where racial information not made part of employee's operational personnel record and not used as basis for promotion, hiring or transfer.

Atty. Genl.'s Opinion: May 2, 1964: Calif. Atty. Genl. ruled demands for fixed racial quotas in work crews repugnant to equal protection clause, but demands that number of Negroes employed be increased are lawful, as are agreements calling for "reasonable racial balance."

571. Racial Discrimination Against Teachers

571.3b. Goode v. Bd. of Educ. (Summers Co.) (SD W.Va., Civ. #213) (8 RRLR 1985.) See IV DOCKET 37. 1957: Pl.-Negro teacher not rehired for next school year. Def. claiming transfer of Negro students to previously all-white schools made possible staff cutbacks. Pl. sued for reinstatement and damages. 1958: Defs. reemployed Pl. Sept. 12, 1963: DC held for Defs. on issue of damages, held no discrimination proved.

Willard L. Brown, Esq., Washington & Shrewsbury Sts., Charleston, W. Va.

- 123 -

571.11. McPherson v. Connellsville Joint School Bd. (Pa. Human Relations Commn.)*
571.12. U.S. v. Bd. of Educ. (Greene Co., Miss.) (SD Miss. Hattiesburg Div., #1729)*
571.13. Taylor v. Bd. of Educ. of City of Chicago. (Ill. FEPC, #62-1) Facts: VIII DOCKET 66, 119, IX DOCKET 70. Cite: 9 RRLR 414.
571.14. Henry v. Coahoma Co. Bd. of Educ. (ND Miss., Delta Div., #D-C-43-62) (8 RRLR 1480) Facts: VIII DOCKET 66. Dec. 23, 1963: DC found Pl. fired because Supt. did not recommend continued employment (Miss. law gives teachers no tenure); found Supt's. actions based on conviction of Pl's. husband on morals charge (Henry, 59.27 and .27a), two libel suits pending against him (61.23), and conveyances by him to her of property which might be subject to litigation as fraudulent attempts to avoid execution on judgment in civil actions; found Pl. not discriminated against on ground of race or NAACP activities; dismissed complaint.
571.15. Ross and Simmons v. Taylor Township Bd. of Educ. (Mich. Sup. Ct.)*
572. Racial Discrimination by Government Agencies
NYC Mayor's Executive Order: June 28, 1963: Mayor Wagner created Mayor's Council on Expanded Employment Opportunity and Training. (8 RRLR 1251.)

But see 572.10, VIII DOCKET 147.

572.10. In the Matter of Investigation of New York City Dept. of Commerce and Industrial Development. (formerly In re Kelly.) (NY State Commn. on Human Rights, Case # Inv. 1548-63.) Facts: VIII DOCKET 147. Addendum: State Commn. took jurisdiction after two-month delay by N.Y.C. Commn. State Commn. order included provision that Mayor Wagner issue statement re discrimination in city employment.
572.11. Roberts v. Township of Millburn. (Essex Co. Super. Ct., #L1212-61 P.W.) 1961: Pl.-Negro policeman sued to obtain promotion to sergeant and damages. 1964: Super. Ct. ruled Def. must accept or reject Pl. for promotion before promoting anyone else, denied claim for damages. Appeal pending.
572.12. Folks v. Coffeyville Police Dept. (Kansas Commn. on Civil Rights, Case #86-63) (9 RRLR 413) 1963: Comp.-Negro police officer alleged discrimination in training and promotion. Feb. 24, 1964: After hearing, Commn. entered consent order providing for Comp.'s immediate promotion, consideration of his further advancement, and for statement of policy by Coffeyville city officials outlining program of nondiscrimination.
573. Racial Discrimination Involving Government Contracts
Note: The President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity does not make available to the public lists of complaints pending before it, or the disposition of particular complaints. For this reason, the DOCKET will describe only complaints which are reported in the press at the time of their conclusion.

Law review article: Paul H. Norgren, Government contracts and fair employment practices. 29 L. & C.P. 225-37.

Executive Order: June 22, 1963: Amending Exec. Order 10925, Order 11114 extended prohibition against discrimination involving contracts partly financed with fedl. funds. (8 RRLR 799) May 5, 1964: Pres. Comm. on Equal Employment Opportunity published in Federal Register notice of intent to adopt regulations drafted by Secy. of Labor dealing with discrimination in apprenticeship programs on contracts covered by Exec. Orders 10925 and 11114.

But see Universal Atlas, 576.18.

573.3. Farmer v. Philadelphia Electric. (CA 4, #14,460) (329 F.2d 3) Facts: VIII DOCKET 148. Mar. 12, 1964: CA 4 affirmed DC dismissal of complaint: Executive Orders requiring FEP provisions in Govt. contracts give no cause of action to persons discriminated against in violation of such clauses; remedy is administrative.
573.4. Bishop Childs v. Rockefeller, Wanger. (SD NY, #632,-127)*
573.4a. Gaynor v. Rockefeller. (NYC) (NY Sup. Ct., App. Div., First Dept.) Facts: IX DOCKET 32, 70. Apr. 21, 1964: App. Div. reversed denial of Def's. motion to dismiss: (1) "fatal deficiency" of suit is failure to join contracting companies who, with named city and state officials, signed construction agreements; (2) State Commn. for Human Rights does not have primary jurisdiction; (3) in properly constructed lawsuit, "the courts might, if they so elected, take judicial notice" of Defs.-unions' racial discrimination.
574. Racial Discrimination by Transportation Companies

574.8. Cooks v. Bro. of Railway Carmen, Locals 991 and 783; and Texas and New Orleans R.R. Co. (CA 5)*
574.16. Baker v. Bro. Ry. & Steamship Clerks, Louisville & Nashville R.R. (WD Ky. #4605)*
574.17. Wilcox v. Jacksonville Terminal Co. and Bro. of Railway Clerks. (Jacksonville, Fla.) (MD Fla., #63-120-Civ-J)*
575. Racial Discrimination by Unions

575.18. Howard v. St. Louis, San Francisco RR and Bro. of RR Trainmen. (ED Mo., #62-C-358(3))*
575.19. Randolph v. Intl. Exec. Bd., Am. Federation of Musicians. *
575.20. Lefkowitz v. Farrell, Pres. Local 28, Sheet Metal Workers' Intl. Assn., Joint Apprenticeship Comm. *
575.22. Stout v. Construction & Genl. Laborers Dist. Council of Chicago. (ND Ill., E. Div., No. 63 C 494) (226 F.Supp. 673) 1963: Pls.-Negro members of hod carriers' union sued alleging they did not get fair share of work because of racial discrimination, seeking damages and injunction. Dec. 31: DC granted Def's. motion to dismiss: primary jurisdiction in NLRB.
- 124 -

575.23. In re Housing, Inc. and Local 387 Carpenters' Intl. Union. (Columbus, Miss.) (NLRB, TXD 98-64-28-CA-1578) 1963: Housing, Inc. awarded Govt. contract to build 4 post offices, told by Govt. representative it could not discriminate in hiring (Exec. Orders 10925, 11114), refused to sign wage agreement with Local 387 on ground local did not admit Negroes to membership. Feb. 28: Hearing examiner ruled Housing, Inc. must sign. Pending before full Bd.

And see cases at 573.

575.24. Todd v. Joint Apprenticeship Comm. of Steel Workers of Chicago. (ND Ill., E. Div., #63 C 1739) (223 F.Supp. 12) 1963: Pls.-Negroes brought class suit to gain employment as apprentices in iron trade. Oct. 1963: DC held for Pls.: (1) Defs.-union and union apprentice comm. discriminated in accepting apprentices; (2) Defs.-General Services Administrator and Bureau of Apprenticeship & Training, U.S. Dept. of Labor, aided discrimination by continuing to award contracts, to allow construction to proceed, and to accept without review union recommendations for apprentices even when Defs. knew discrimination was being practiced; (3) Def.-City Bd. of Educ. provided instructional facilities for union program with knowledge of discrimination; (4) Def.-contractor did not discriminate; complaint dismissed as to him; (5) Def.-subcontractor did not discriminate, but he is necessary party; (6) Pls. to be admitted to union membership and apprenticeship; (7) costs taxed to union and union apprentice comm.; (8) Pls. cannot sue as third-party beneficiaries of Gov't. contract FEP provisions.
575.25. Delaney v. Conway. (N.Y. Commn. for Human Rights; NY Co. Sup. Ct., Spec. Term, Part I) (241 NYS2d 384) 1963: Def.-Negro longshore union member complained to Commn. of loss of seniority rights, other harassment due to opposition to discrimination on waterfront. Commn. ordered Pl.-Union Local Pres. and certain business to refrain from discrimination and to restore Def.'s seniority rights. Pl.-Union sued to set aside portion of order applicable to it. Commn. filed cross-application to enforce order. May 1963: Sup. Ct. found evidence supported Commn. finding, found federal law has not preempted field of civil rights, found no restraint of interstate and foreign commerce activities of union, affirmed.
575.26. N.Y. State Commn. for Human Rights on complaint of Mitchell v. R & S Plumbing; Local 373, United Assn. of Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry, U.S. and Canada (AFL-CIO). (NY State Commn. for Human Rights, Case #C-9092-62) (243 NYS2d 61; 9 RRLR 406) Sept. 27, 1962: Comp. charged discharge from job because of failure to join Local 373, tho Local had refused him membership. 1963: Commn. investigated, found probable cause, could not conciliate. Resp.-Local sued. Sept. 23, 1963: Sup. Ct. held finding of probable cause not final order, not reviewable; dismissed. Feb. 19, 1964: After formal hearing, Comm. found Resps. discriminated against Comp., ordered Comp. enrolled in Resp.-Local with priority position for hiring, ordered Resp.-Local and Resp.-R & S to cease discriminatory practices.
576. Other Racial and Religious Discrimination
Comment: The Jewish law student and New York jobs—discriminatory effects in law firm hiring practices. 73 Yale 625-60.
576.13. Calhoun v. General Motors. (Michigan FEPC, #1165)*
576.16. St. Paul FEPC ex rel. White v. Midwest Bldg. Services. (St. Paul FEPC) (9 RRLR 385) 1961, 1962, 1963: Comp.-Negro for employment as patrolmen to Resp., refused. Oct. 16, 1963: Comp. filed complaint. Mar. 19, 1964: FEPC found Resp. discriminated on ground of race, ordered Comp. employed, paid damages for loss of work, ordered Resp. to indicate within 45 days whether it will comply, ordered case certified to city counsel for prosecution if Resp. does not comply.
576.17. May v. Bohn Aluminum & Brass Co. (Detroit) (Mich. Civil Rights. Comm., Claim #1489) 1964: Comp. applied to Resp. for job as piston inspector, rejected, filed complaint. May 26: After hearing, Commn. entered order embodying agreement reached between Comp. and Resp.: (1) Comp. to be employed; (2) Resp. to pay Comp. $1500 in costs; (3) no reprisal to be taken against Comp. for filing claim; (4) order does not imply Resp. does or has practiced discrimination; (5) Resp. will use Commn.'s services in furthering equal employment opportunity.

Gerald D. White, Asst. Atty. Genl. of Mich.

576.18. Lefkowitz v. Universal Atlas Cement Div. of U.S. Steel Corp. (N.Y. State Commn. for Human Rights, #C-9635-63) May 14, 1963: Comp.-NY Atty. Genl. filed complaint with Commn. alleging Resp. aided and abetted racial discrimination by private employment agency in N.Y.C., and itself discriminated in hiring. Mar. 23, 1964: Investigating Commr. found Resp. employed one Negro chauffeur of 265 employees in N.Y.C. office, found Resp. had instructed employment agency to code Resp.'s job request cards with symbol indicating Negroes not to be sent for interviews, found Negroes, Jews, Puerto Ricans had applied to Resp. and been rejected, held "it is a matter of common knowledge that Negroes . . . often do not apply where they have reason to believe they won't be hired," found Resp. advertised itself as "Equal Opportunity Employer" as it had contracts covered by Exec. Order 10925, ordered Resp. to send letters explaining it does not discriminate to all employment agencies it uses, to send job opening reports to civil rights organizations, and local public schools, colleges and universities, to keep on file all rejected applications from minority group members indicating reasons for rejection.
577. Nationality Discrimination
578. Sex Discrimination
U.S. Congress: June 11, 1964: Provisions of Equal Pay Act of 1963 go into effect in firms not covered by collective bargaining agreements; June 11, 1965 is date for firms with such agreements. Act requires equal pay for jobs done by women in same classification as men.
579. Age Discrimination
580. Civil Actions under Civil Rights Law Not Otherwise Covered (see 304)

580.6. Royal News Co., Inc. v. Schultz. (Detroit) (ED Mich., S. Div., Civ. #23094) Facts: VIII DOCKET 68, 148. Aug. 8,
- 125 -

1963: Muni. Ct. criminal proceeding dismissed. Aug. 1963: Wayne Co. Dist. Atty. (Def. in 580.6a) seized magazines from Pls., instituted civil suit against Pls. in Cir. Ct., and got order restraining Pl. from distributing certain magazines, among them magazines covered in DC order of June 6. Jan. 13, 1964: Co. Dist. Atty. filed criminal proceeding against Pl.'s officers in Cir. Ct., including in complaint magazines covered in DC order of June 6. May 1964: Pl. moved in DC to hold Defs., Wayne Co. Dist. Atty. and Michigan state police officer in contempt of June 6 order. June 19: DC found Dist. Atty. had notice of order, had jointly agreed with Defs. not to appeal from it, and had acted in circumvention of the order; ordered Dist. Atty. and officer to comply with order, and cease interference with distribution and sale of magazines named in it, declined to find Dist. Atty. in contempt.
580.6a. Royal News Co. v. Olsen. (Detroit) (ED Mich., Civ. #24262) 1964: Pl. sued Def.-Wayne Co. Dist. Atty. and Detroit police officials under Civil Rights Act for declaratory judgment that Censor Bureau operated by Detroit Police Dept. deprives Pls. and readers of their magazines of First Amendment rights, for injunction against seizures of magazines, and damages for past seizures and criminal prosecutions. June 29: DC denied Def.-DA's motion to dismiss: (1) Dist. Atty., tho quasi-judicial officer, not immune from suit for participation in conspiracy to deprive Pl. of constitutional rights; (2) tho relief requested by Pls. may involve enjoining state court actions against Pl., 28 U.S.C. §§1343 and 2283 empower fedl. ct. to do this; (3) since there is no question of local law which would dispose of controversy, and since deprivation of constitutional rights is alleged, abstention doctrine not appropriate.
580.7. Council of Federated Organizations, Schwerner, Chaney v. Rainey, Ku Klux Klan, Americans for Preservation of White Race, White Citizens Councils, Doe. (SD Miss., Jackson Div.) Jy. 1964: Class suit by Pl.-coordinated organization of all civil rights groups working in Mississippi to register Negro citizens and achieve their full rights of citizenship, parents and husband of murdered civil rights workers, Negro and white citizens of Miss., and parents of COFO workers against Neshoba Co. sheriff, dep. sheriff, Miss. Commr. of Public Safety, Def.-organizations, their members and other white terrorists unknown to Pls., under U.S. Constitution, Art. IV, Amendments 1, 13, 14 and 15, 28 U.S.C. §§1331, 1343, 42 U.S.C. §§1971, 1981, 1983, 1985, 1988, 1989, 1964 Civil Rights Act. Pls. allege Defs. for yrs. conspired under color of statutes, ordinances, regulations, customs and usages of Miss. to subject Pls.-citizens to deprivation of rights, privileges and immunities; Defs. committed acts of violence, specifically: June 19, 1964: with force and violence and use of armed weapons beat several Negro citizens of Co., burned Negro church; June 21; contrived without lawful reason to arrest 3 COFO workers, conspired to remove them from Philadelphia, Miss. jail and use other forcible action against them; Defs. continue to conspire to utilize force and terroristic acts to impede and harass Pls. from exercising constitutional rights. Pls. allege no adequate remedy at law in state or fedl. cts.; DC can enforce equitable relief under 42 U.S.C. §1989 by appointing U.S. Commissioners to enforce 42 U.S.C. §1987. Pls. pray for permanent and temporary injunction against all Defs.; appointment of Commrs. to protect Pls. and enforce their right to register. DC issued order to show cause on Jy. 23, 1964; pending.

L. H. Rosenthal, Esq., 221 N. President St., Jackson; William M. Kunstler and Arthur Kinoy, Esqs., 511 Fifth Ave., NYC; Ben Smith and Bruce Waltzer, Esqs., 305 Baronne St., New Orleans; Melvin L. Wulf, Esq., 156 Fifth Ave., NYC; Morton Stavis, Esq., 744 Broad St., Newark.

580.8. In Matter of Petition of Henry Moses, Dennis, and King. (CA 5, #535) Mar. 30, 1964: Pets.-Negro and white citizens of Miss. concerned with civil rights filed petition with CA 5 for order under superintending powers of Ct. (28 USC §332) or CA 5 as Judicial Council for Fifth Circuit alleging SD Miss. Judge Harold Cox has demonstrated racial prejudice, asking that Judge Cox not be assigned to hear any civil or criminal cases involving questions of civil rights. Apr. 7, 1964: CA 5 (Rives, Jones, Bootle, JJ.), per curiam, held "judicial power extends only to cases and controversies," citing U.S. Const., art. 3, §2, denied leave to file petition.

William M. Kunstler and Arthur Kinoy, Esqs., 511 Fifth Ave., NYC.

590. Criminal Prosecution under Civil Rights Law

590.5. U.S. v. Donald Jones, Wm. King. (Birmingham) (ND Ala.)*
600. Suits Involving Constitutional Rights of American Indians
601. Civil Actions between Individual Indians and Indian Tribes
602. Civil Actions Against Indians on Reservations
603. Criminal Actions Against Indians on Reservations
604. Actions Involving Property Rights

604.5. Washington Dept. of Games and Fisheries v. Kautz. (Pierce Co. Super. Ct., #158824) Facts: IX DOCKET 71. Correction: Defs. have no connection with Puyallup Indian tribe, but claim rights under Treaty of Medicine Creek, which included other tribes, e.g., the Nisquallys. Mar. 1964: Defs. arrested for contempt of ct. for fishing-in. U.S.S.C. denied leave to file petition for habeas corpus. DC denied writ of habeas corpus. Petition for habeas corpus filed in Wash. Sup. Ct., which set hearing two days before Defs. to be released. Writ became moot. Main case is pending.

Correction: Jack Tanner (not Tenner), 812 Puget Sound Bank Bldg., Tacoma 2, Wash.

604.6. Crain v. First National Bank of Portland. (DC Ore.; CA 9, #18564) (324 F.2d 532) 1962: Pl.-Indian sued to gain uncontrolled use of his liquidated share of tribal property from Def.-trustee appointed by Secy. of Interior after Pl. withdrew from tribe, under Secy's. power (25 USC §§564-564x) to appoint trustees for Indians not, in his judgment, qualified to manage their affairs. DC gave judgment for Defs. Nov. 13, 1963: CA affirmed, held Act constitutional: "Congress has the power to determine when, how and by what steps it will emancipate the Indian and whether the emancipation shall be complete or only partial."
605. Condemnation of Land of American Indian Reservations