Rice v Arnold Respondent's Memorandum in Opposition to Issuance of Writ of Centiorari

    IN THE

S U P R E M E  C O U R T  OF T H E  
U N I T E D  S T A T E S

OCTOBER TERM, 1951

No. 451

JOSEPH RICE,
Petitioner,

vs.

H. H. ARNOLD, AS SUPERINTENDENT OP 
MIAMI SPRINGS COUNTRY CLUB,

Respondent.

RESPONDENT’S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION 
TO ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI

J. W. WATSON, JR., 
JOHN D. MARSH, 
Attorneys for Respondent



S U P R E M E  COURT OF THE  
U NI T E D  S T A T E S

OCTOBER TERM, 1951

IN THE

No, 451

JOSEPH RICE,

vs.
Petitioner,

H. H. ARNOLD, AS SUPERINTENDENT OF 
MIAMI SPRINGS COUNTRY CLUB,

Respondent.

RESPONDENT’S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION 
TO ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI

TO THE HONORABLE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE 
UNITED STATES AND THE ASSOCIATE JUS­
TICES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE 
UNITED STATES:

The Petitioner herein, JOSEPH RICE, originally 
petitioned for the issuance of a writ of certiorari in Cause 
No. 145. The petition was granted and the cause was 
remanded to the Supreme Court of Florida for reconsider­
ation (Tr. 21). This Respondent filed a brief in opposition 
to the issuance of the writ of certiorari in the mentioned 
cause No. 145,



The Respondent now elects to stand upon the argu­
ment presented in his former brief filed in opposition to 
the issuance of writ of certiorari in Cause No. 145, to­
gether with the statements made in the decision of the 
Supreme Court of Florida upon reconsideration of the 
cause in RICE versus ARNOLD, 45 So. 2d 114 (Tr. 23).

In opposing the issuance of writ of certiorari in the 
instant cause, counsel for the Respondent respectfully 
request that such brief heretofore filed together with 
the opinion of the Supreme Court of Florida above men­
tioned may be considered by the Court in determining 
whether or not certiorari should issue in this cause.

Finally, on behalf of the Respondent we submit that 
the mentioned decision of the Supreme Court of Florida 
is not contrary to the decisions heretofore announced by 
this court and that no new or novel question meriting 
consideration by this Court is raised by the petition, and 
therefore respectfully suggest that the petition for writ 
of certiorari should be denied.

Respectfully submitted,

J. W. WATSON, JR., City Attorney 
4th Floor, 28 West Flagler Street 
Miami, Florida 

and
JOHN D. MARSH,
Special Assistant City Attorney 
801 Biscayne Building 
Miami, Florida 
Attorneys for Respondent

By-----------------------  • - • - ■
Of Counsel

2



3

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the above and 
foregoing memorandum together with a copy of the re­
spondent’s brief in Cause No. 145, JOSEPH RICE, Peti­
tioner, versus H. H. ARNOLD, as Superintendent of Miami 
Springs Country Club, Respondent, was mailed to each of 
the following attorneys for the Petitioner:

Robert L. Carter, Esq., 20 West 40th Street, New 
York 18, New York;

G. E. Graves, Jr., Esq., 941 N. W. Second Avenue, 
Miami, Florida;

John D. Johnson, Esq., 171 N. W. Eleventh Street, 
Miami, Florida;

Thurgood Marshall, Esq., 69 Fifth Avenue, New 
York City, New York;

this_______ day of January, 1952.

Of Counsel for Respondent



T H E  R E V I E W  P R I N T I N G  C O .