Jones v. Amalgamated Warbasse Houses, Inc. Motion for Leave to File Brief and Brief Amici Curiae

Public Court Documents
October 3, 1983

Cite this item

Jones v. Amalgamated Warbasse Houses, Inc. Motion for Leave to File Brief and Brief Amici Curiae 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

Filed with the American Civil Liberties Union. Date is approximate.

Collection
- Brief Collection
Taxonomy
Identifier
- d8024566-b99a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873

Cite this item

Press Releases, Volume 1. Defense Fund Triumphs in Memphis School Case, 1964. fa0453f2-b492-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/ca8aca4d-5b23-4940-9709-e635ac0eb73c/defense-fund-triumphs-in-memphis-school-case. Accessed August 19, 2025.

Copied!

    10 Columbus Circle 
New York, N.Y. 10019 
JUdson 6-8397 

NAACP 

Legal Defense and Educational Fund 
PRESS RELEASE 
President 

Dr. Allan Knight Chalmers 
Director-Counsel 

Jack Greenberg 

‘y 

June 16, 1964 

Associate Counsel 
Constance Baker Motley 

DEFENSE FUND TRIUMPHS 
IN MEMPHIS SCHOOL CASE % 

MEMPHIS, TENN,-- The 

school desgregation, 

plan for integrating 

here last week. 

The court acted 

board of education was instructed to speed 

to redraw zoning lines and to consider a 

teaching staffs by a Sixth Circuit court 

on an appeal by the NAACP Legal Defense and 

Educational Fund, 

Struck down was the board's previous desegregation plan, 

under which integration would not have reached all grades until 

after 1970. The new ruling requires that all elementary schools 

be integrated this September, junior high schools in 1965, and 

senior high schools in 1966. 

Defense Fund attorneys had pointed out that as of this year, 

only 294 of the 50,953 Negro youngsters in Memphis attended 

school with the 54,684 white students. Desegregation began 

with 12 students in 1961, after a year and a half of litigation 

by the Legal Defense Fund. 

The court further ordered that new school zones be set up. 

Fund lawyers had argued that when the board had done away with 

dual zone lines (separate maps applied to the two races), it had 

formed new zones by irregular lines or by gerrymandering, thus 

maintaining a high degree of segregation. 

Two other arguments made by the Defense Fund were heeded by 

the court. In outlawing the board's minority transfer plan, the 

judges ruled that the plan was designed to perpetuate segregation 

by allowing pupils to switch from bi-racial schools. 

(more) 

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



Defense Fund Triumphs -2- June 16, 1964 
in Memphis School Case 

In poor ton; the court cited its own decision in a case 

preiget iy the Legal Defense | Fund against the Chattanooga Board 

of E ingetion, in ‘which it Store that "assignment of teachers by 

race may impair the students' rights to an education free from 

any consideration of race." The judges asked the federal district 

judge to determine whether the Memphis Board should submit a 

Arguing the case for the Legal Defense Fund was Assistant 

* Counsel Derrick A. Bell. He was joined ia the action by Fund 

Director-Counsel Gack Greenberg and negéelate Counsel Constance 
‘ 

York, and Fund cppenating attorneys R.B,

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.

Jones v. Amalgamated Warbasse Houses, Inc. Motion for Leave to File Brief and Brief Amici Curiae

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in