Hutto v. Finney Brief for Respondents

    President 
Hon. Francis E. Rivers 

PRESS RELEASE Director Counsel 
egal efense und Jack Greenberg 

Director, Public Relations 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. Tous Devore te 
10 Columbus Circle, New York, N.Y. 10019 * JUdson 6-8397 nuGHY NUMBER 212-749-8487 

FOR RELEASE 
FRIDAY 
December 2, 1966 

GEORGIA STATUTE BARRING INDIGENT TENANT 
DEFENSES TAKEN TO HIGH COURT FOR REVIEW 

Seven States With Similar Statutes Could Be Affected 

WASHINGTON---The U.S. Supreme Court was today asked to review the con- 
stitutionality of those statutes of the State of Georgia which prevent 
indigent tenants from making a defense against eviction orders because 
of their inability tc post bond in order to obtain a hearing. 

The petition was filed by attorneys for the NAACP Legal Defense and 
Educational Fund, Inc, (LDF)* on behalf of two indigent Negroes residing 
in Atlanta, Georgia, who were unable to defend an eviction order solely 
on the basis of their poverty. 

The LDF attorneys, in filing the petition for review, argued that the 
“Georgia Code 561-303 which barred the petitioners from a hearing 
because of their poverty is in conflict with the principles declared 
by this court, and is unconstitutional under the equal protection and 
due process clauses of the fourteenth amendment." 

The brief also raised an important constitutional issue in the develop- 
ing field of the Law of Poverty, and in a particularly crucial area of 
that field, landlord-tenant law. 

More specifically, the prief pointed out that the “existence of summary 
eviction procedures, in which there is a substantial economic obstacle 
preventing a tenant from contesting eviction, places an enormous amount 
of arbitrary power in the hands of the landlord." 

These ‘arbitrary powers," the lawyers assert, may be easily used in 
retaliation by landlords against those tenants who choose to complain 
about any housing code violation to the authorities. In such an event, 
the lawyers argue, “many tenants will be intimidated into suffering 
quietly." 

Under the existing statutes of the State of Georgia, a warrant for 
tenant's removal can be obtained by a landlord who goes before a judge 
of the superior court and files an affidavit. 

The tenant may contest the eviction order by filing a counter affidavit 
provided he posts a bond with substantial security as a pre-condition 
to making any defense, 

It is estimated that roughly 1400 eviction proceedings are brought each 
month by landlords in Atlanta, of which less than 1% are contested. 

Besides Georgia, there are seven other states in the U.S. with similar 
(but not identical) statutes, which require substantial security before 
permitting a tenant to defend against eviction orders. 

This is one of the first cases in the LDF's new program of litigation 
to protect and establish the rights of poor people. 

The LDF has become involved in cases seeking to make precedent of 
poverty law questions just as it has done over the years in civil rights 
cases, LDF attorneys filing the petition are Director-Counsel Jack 
Greenberg, James M, Nabrit III, Charles H. Jones, Jr., and Charles 
Stephen Ralston of New York, and Howard Moore, Jr. of Atlanta, 

-30- 

* The LDF is a separate, independent organization from the NAACP, The 
names are similar because the LDF was established as a different organi- 
zation by the NAACP and through the years has gained complete autonomy.