Answer; Memorandum of Authorities in Support of Motion to Dimiss

    - JRT H 
Ep Ww A 

OT WJ oe 
Hl un 

5 & 11 
“% 

Bod DI. 

TRICT 5 18 ao Bo ) A 

[ҤP 
A ha. of! 

aT 
’ 
wa 

ta 1 
3 

Apes 

a Sed GY 

p ACTI( TY 11 

®
 h 

pe 

@
 gh und Fh NIOUE 

VS 

oe 
1S or rven wo 

oe 

nt, e epartm 

®
 

ws iy Lo 

WW al 

NL 
dnb 
9% 

eS DEF 
fw pn 

§ 

'# N 

mplaint 

a“ 

City of the yor 
2 

Ma, ] sa 
rf th J 

gL} 3 

y ANY =» 

RS ndent » \CE 

Le: 
1001 

" % 

S061 

jer ] 

=
 

0
 

f& Eg 
E 

in Ww 
“ 

la hr 

ans Ea | wr 

in- 3 % ond 

LEE © 
» 

be | 
ni tw PED 
a3 f 
a 



I1I, 

Respondents in answer to Paragraph 2 of the complaint 

state that any pupil placement is the sole right of the Orleans 

Sehool Board and that any order of this Court to your defendants 

herein would be vain and useless as they have no control over 

the placement of pupils in the public schools of Orleans Parish 

and hence deny the allegations for lack of sufficient information 

to justify a belief. 

IV. 

Respondents in answer to Paragraph 3 of the complaint state 

that this Court did enter a final injunction in this matter on 

October 23, 1958, and an order on May 16, 1960, requiring de- 

segregation of the first grade in the public schools of Orleans 

Parish and state that said injunction and order speaks for itself, 

but as any pupil placement is the sole right of the Orleans Parish 

School Board demy the remaimder of the allegations for lack of 

sufficient information to justify belief. 

Vv. 

Respondents in answer to Paragraph 4 state any pupil placement 

is the sole right of the Orleans Parish School Board and deny the 

allegations for lack of sufficient information to Justify belief. 

V1. 

Respondents in answer to Paragraph 5 state any pupil placement 

is the sole right of the Orleans Parish School Board and deny the 

allegations for lack of sufficient imformation to Justify a belief. 

Vil. 

Respondents in answer to Paragraph 6 state any pupil placement 

is the sole right of the Orleans Parish School Board and deny the 

allegations for lack of sufficient information to justify a belief. 

Yill. 

Respondents in answer to Paragraph 7 sgate any pupll placement 

is the sole right of the Orleans Parish School Board and deny the 

allegations for lack of sufficient information to justify a belief. 



1X. 

Respondents in answer to Paragraph 8 state any pupil 

placement is the sole right of the Orleans Parish School 

Board and deny the allegations for lack of sufficient 

information to justify a belief. 

9 

Respondents in answer to Paragraph 9 state any pupil 

placement is the sole right of the Orleans Parish School Board and 

deny the allegations for lack of sufficient information to justify 

a belief. 

XI. 

Respondents in answer to Paragraph 10 state any pupil place 

ment is the sole right of the Orleans Parish School Board and deny 

the allegations for lack of sufficient information to justify a 

belief. 

WHEREFORE, your respondents herein respectfully urge that this 

Honorable Court dismiss these proceedings as to your respondents 

and, in the alternative, if your respondents be deemed proper 

parties to these proceedings that these proceedings be dismissed 

at plaintiffs’ cost. 

And for all general and equitable relief. 

ALVIN J, LLISKA , City Attormey 

ERNEST LL. SALATICH, 
Assistant City Attorney 

JOSEPH H, HURNDON, 
Assiséant Clty Attorney 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS 

City Hall 
New Orleans, lLoulsiana 



AFFIDAVIT 

STATE OF LOUISIANA 

PARISH OF ORLEANS 

BEFORE ME, ke Vngeralgned authority, personally 

came and appeared: 

ERNEST L. SALATICH, 

who, after being duly sworn, did depose and say: 

That he is one of the attormeys for the respondents herein; 

that he prepared the above and foregoing answer, and that to the 

best of his knowledge, information and belief, all of the 

allegations of fact contained therein are true and correct. 

ERNEST L. SALATICH 

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED 

BEFORE ME THIS DAY 

OF FEBRUARY, 1962. 

NOTARY PUBLLD 

CERTIFICATE 

I hereby certify that copy of the above and foregoing 

answer has this date been served om the plaintiffs herein by 

sending the same to thelr attorneys through the U, 8. mall 

with postage prepaid. 

ERNEST IL, SALATICH, 
Assistant City Attorney 

RLEANS , LOUIBIANA 

FEBRUARY, 1962. 



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA 

NEW ORLEANS DIVISION 

EARL BENJAMIN BUSH, ET AlS; 

Plaintiffs CIVIL ACTION 
NO, 3630 

Vs. : 

ORLEANS PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, ET AILS : 

Defendants 

MEMORANDUM OF AUTHORITIES IN 

SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

BY THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, 

VICTOR H. SCHIRO, MAYOR OF 

THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, AND, 

JOSEPH I, GIARRUSSO, SUPERIN= 

TENDENT OF POLICE OF THE NEW 

ORLEANS POLICE DEPARTMENT 

The City of New Orleams, Vietor H. Schiro, Mayor of the 

City of New Orleans, and, Joseph I. Glarrusso, Superintendent 

of Police of the New Orleans Police Department, as a defense to 

their being made parties to the complaint by intervemors for 

injunctive and other relief have alleged they are not empowered 

by any law of the State of Louisiana to place any pupil in any 

public school of the Parish of Orleans, but that this power vests 

exclusively in the Orlean Parish School Board. The intervenors 

pray that this Court order the defendants to end racial segregation 

and the plan of "pupil placement”. Your defendants cannot possibly 

give the intervemors the relief they seek as they have no control 

over the publie school system in the City of New Orleans either as 

to the segregation of pupils or as to the placement of pupils in 



particular schools, The Constitution and laws of the State of 

louisiana vest exclusively in the Orleans Parish School Board 

control over the public school system in the City of New Orleans. 

Article 12, Section 1 of the Constitution of the State of 

Louisiana of 1921, as amended, provides as follows: 

Section 1 « The legislature shall provide for 

& public educational system of the State to 

consist of all public schools and all institu 

tions of learning operated by State agencies and 

enact laws on all matters regarding the term and 

qualifications for admission to the publie schools, 

* BN % % 2 

Article 12, Section 10 of the Comstitution of the State of 

lLoulsiana of 1921, as amended, provides as follows: 

Section 10 « The legislature shall provide for 

the creation and election of parish school 

boards which shall elect parish superintendents 

for their respective parishes, and such other 

officers or agents as may be authorized by the 

legislature, * * #% # % 

L.S.A., - R.S. 17:81 provides as follows as to the powers 

and duties of school boards: 

"Each parish sheool board shall determine the 

number of schools €o® be opened, the location 

of the school housés, the number of the teachers 

to be employed, and select such teachers from 

nominations made by the parish superintendent, 

# %# # # % The boards shall see that the pro 

visions of the state school law are compiled 

with." (Underscore ours.) 

Page 2 



L.S8S.A, « R. 8. 17:101 through 17:110 (Act 259 of 1958, 

as amended by Act 492 of 1960) provides in part as follows: 

"Section 17:104 - Subject to appeal in 

the limited respect herein provided, each 

local board shall have full and final 

authority, and respensibility for the assign- 

ments, transfer and continuance of all pupils 

among and within the public schools within its 

Jurisdiction, and shall prescribe rules and 

regulations pertaining to those functions.” 

# % #% # # (Underscore ours) 

In the light of the above quoted provisions of the 

Constitution and Laws of the State of lLoulsiana, the City of 

New Orleans, Victor H. Sechiro, Mayor of the City of New 

Orleans and Joseph I. Glarrusso, Superintendent of Police of 

the New Orleans Police Departmert pray that they be dismissed 

as parties defendant to intervenor's complaint for injunctive 

and other relief as they possess no power whatsoever as to the 

segregation of puplls or the placement of pupils in the publie 

schools of New Orleans and could not possibly give to the 

intervenors the relief they seek. 

Respectfully submitted, 

ALVIN J, LLSKA, 
City Attorney 

ERNEST L. SALATICH, 
Assistant City Attorney 

JOSEPH HW. HURNDON, 
Assistant City Attorney 



CERTIFICATE A A i 

1 hereby certifly that copy of the above and foregoing 

memorandum ln support of motion to dismi 88 has this date 

been served on the plaintiff herein b g
 ” 3 ah 2 on " Pe Eee eT 

sending the same €O 

thelr attorneys through the 

ERNEST LL, SALATICH, 
Assistant City Attorney 

New Orleans, loulsiana 

February, 1902