Suit Asks Rights Act Compliance by S. Carolina Restaurant Chain

High Court Ends Fla. Interracial Sex Ban preview

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

Collection
- Press Releases
Creator
- LDF
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 4cd79a7e-b592-ee11-be37-00224827e97b

Cite this item

Press Releases, Volume 2. Suit Asks Rights Act Compliance by S. Carolina Restaurant Chain, 1964. 84cc8d8a-b592-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/bbb6e904-7532-49bf-8c91-d5ab67888776/suit-asks-rights-act-compliance-by-s-carolina-restaurant-chain. Accessed June 01, 2025.

Copied!

    10 Columbus Circle « 

New York, N.Y. 10019 
JUdson 6-8397 

NAACP 2 

Legal Defense and Educational Fund 
PRESS RELEASE 
President 

Dr. Allan Knight Chalmers i o RELEASE 

Director-Counsel 
Jack Greenberg December 29, 1964 

Associate Counsel 

Constance Baker Motley 

SUIT ASKS RIGHTS ACT COMPLIANCE 
BY S. CAROLINA RESTAURANT CHAIN 

COLUMBIA, S.C,---The first South Carolina suit seeking compliance 

by a restaurant with the provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act 

was filed in Federal District Court here last week by attorneys of 

the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, 

Hit in the suit was Piggie Park Enterprises, which operates 

several restaurants in the Columbia area and in other cities 

throughout the state. 

Legal Defense Fund attorneys are currently engaged in 17 suits 

in seven Southern states to enforce the Civil Rights Act. 

In the only previous South Carolina court action under the new 

law, Legal Defense Fund lawyers are seeking an order that would end 

discrimination in Orangeburg movie theaters. 

The suit against the Piggie Park restaurant chain was brought 

after Negroes had been refused service at the downtown Columbia 

branch. Other Negroes represented in the suit by the Legal Defense 

Fund were told at two Piggie Park drive-ins that they could buy food 

but could not eat on the premises. 

» In their complaint, the Legal Defense Fund lawyers asserted 

that a Federal action was necessary to secure enforcement, since 

neither South Carolina nor the city of Columbia has a law 

prohibiting discrimination in places of public accommodation. 

Filing the Legal Defense Fund suit were Director-Counsel, 

Jack Greenberg of New York, and Matthew J. Perry, Lincoln C, Jenkins, 

Jz Sadttemchi ll P, Pride II, all of Columbia. 

-30- 

Jesse DeVore, Jr., Director of Public Information—Night Number 212 Riverside 9-8487 S~ &

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

High Court Ends Fla. Interracial Sex Ban

Collection

Creator

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in