Georgia Statute Barring Indigent Tenant Defenses Taken to High Court for Review
Press Release
December 2, 1966
Cite this item
-
Press Releases, Volume 4. Georgia Statute Barring Indigent Tenant Defenses Taken to High Court for Review, 1966. 2931135d-b792-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/b375154e-ff75-4c48-bce0-fafa70aa34a1/georgia-statute-barring-indigent-tenant-defenses-taken-to-high-court-for-review. Accessed December 04, 2025.
Copied!
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.