Telegram from Clerk to Chachkin Re: Probable jurisdiction; Correspondence from Nabrit to Leventhal; Affidavit in Support of Motion for Award of Attorney's Fees

     [||175afad3-8b27-48f7-8167-f4b080020075||] @® —— S1A362 401P EDT OCT 10 72 (20)MC176 CTB148 WE043 
NFAO24 RL INTER FR REG COLLECT 

OTC NF WASHINGTON DC 1§ 10-10 1147AEDT 
NORMAN J CHACHKIN J) ZA 

10 COLUMBUS CIRCLE /NYK 10019 
PROBABLE JURISDICTION NORWOOD AGAINST HARRISON NOTED TODAY. 
LETTER FOLLOWS. 

MICHAEL RODAK JR CLERK SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. 

« /2029999999/ 

SF-1201 (R5-69)  



  

August 20, 1974 

Mel R. Leventhal, Esq. 
Anderson, Banks, Nichols & 
Leventhal 

538% North Parish Street 
Jackson, Mississippi 39202 

Re: Jorwood v. Harrison 
  

Dear Mel: 

Please find enclosed the original and four copies of 
my Affidavit In Support Of Motion For Award Of Attorney's 
Fees, 

Sincerely, 

James M. Nabrit, III 

JMN:cCC 

Encls. 

 



or” 

: : , . . 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

  

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI 

WESTERN DIVISION 

i ol ol se i A i Or mt et ae PY 

DELORES NORWOOD, et al., : 

Plaintiffs, : CIVIL ACTION 

Vv. : No. WC70-53-K 

D, L. HARRISON, SR., et .al., : 

Defendants. : “ 

rl at dena a i 

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION 

FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEY'S FEES 
  

STATE OF NEW YORK ) 
) SS.: 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) 

I, James M. Nabrit, III, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 

l. That I am Associate Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense 

and Educational Fund, Inc., 10 Columbus Circle, New York, N.Y. 

10019; that I am a graduate of Bates College and Yale Law School 

and was admitted to practice in the District of Columbia in 1955; 

that from 1955 to 1956 and 1958 to 1959 I was engaged in the 

general practice of law in Washington, D. C. (during 1956-1958 I 

served in the United States Army); that since 1959 I have been 

employed as a staff attorney and subsequently as Associate Counsel 

of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. at their 

offices in New York; that in that capacity I have been engaged in 

litigation primarily in federal courts throughout the United 

States handling civil rights matters of all kinds; that I am 

admitted to the Bar of the United States Court of Appeals for the 

Fifth Circuit as well as several other United States Courts of 

Appeals and I am a member of the Bar of the United States Supreme 

  
RR— 

 



  
as 

A 5 
ER 

Court; and that in my work with the Legal Defense Fund I have 

argued approximately ten cases before the United States Supreme 

'| Court and numerous cases in the United States Courts of Appeals. 

2. Among the cases 1 have argued in the supreme Court are 

several involving school segregation, namely, Monroe v. Board of 
  

Commissioners, 391 U.S. 450 (1968); Swann v. Board of Education, 
  

  

402 U.S. 1 (12971) ;-Keyes v. School District No. 1, Denver, Colo... 
  

413 U.8. 189 "(1973). In addition, I have gerved as counsel for 

| plaintiffs in a large number of school segregation cases from 

1958 to date and have handled numerous such matters in trial 

courts and on appeal. 

3... During 1972 and 1973 I was one of petitioners counsel in 

Norwood v. Harrison in the Supreme Court. I worked with Mr. 
  

Leventhal and other staff attorneys of the Legal Defense Fund in 

evaluating and preparing the case for presentation to the Supreme 

Court, including working on preparation of the Jurisdictional 

Statement, the Appellants Brief, arranging and participating in a 

practice oral argument of the case and attending the actual 

argument of the case. 

4. I have expended time on this case as follows: 

Date service Performed Hours Expended 
  

  

| May 4-5, 1972 Review record and de- 

cision.of District Court 

Conference with M. Leventhal, 

J. Greenberg, N. Chachkin, 

1L.. Pfeffer 6 

July 3-7, 1972 Work on Jurisdictional State- 
ment 18 

July 10-14, 1972 Work on Jurisdictional State- 

ment 12 

January 18-19, 1973 Work on Appellants Brief 4 

| February 19-21, 1973 Preparation for oral argu- 
ment, attended oral argument 8 

48 hours 

- yi 

  

 



> og 4 

  

5. In summary, I have expended time and request an award 

of fees as follows: 

In the Supreme Court, 

48 hours x $50 $2400 

po 

6. The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund is a non- 

profit organization engaged in providing legal assistance in 

civil rights matters without charge to the clients it represents. 

The Legal Defense Fund has been approved to function as a legal 

aid organization by a New York court, however, the relevant court 

order provides that the Legal Defense Fund may receive fees 

awarded by courts. Legal Defense Fund staff attorneys, including 

the undersigned, .are salaried and do not receive any portion of 

such awards. Various courts in the Fifth Circuit have awarded 

  

fees to the Legal Defense Fund. See, e.g9., Clark v,., American 

Marine Corporation, 320. P. Supp. .709," 711. (E.D. la. 1970), aff'd, 
  

437 P.24 959 (5th Cir. 1971); Miller v, Amusement Enterprlses, 
  

Ing. , 426 F.24 534 «(5th Cir. 1970). 

) 7 (~~ 
> .- >» 

JAMES M. NABRIT, TIT 
  

| 

Sworn to and subscribed before 
S 

me this > day of August 1974. 

  

yer AE pe by v ERIC ECHWAPCER 
Notary bli i :blic, i Moa: 

“7 NY aAnOaco- 
ido. J¥-9822935 

    

Nr 
ar York 

Qualiii: d in New York County 
Insc I vest vane Nf weve Op Commission Lxpires March 30, 1975 

  TE 
of 
4 

{ 
2 

hk [||175afad3-8b27-48f7-8167-f4b080020075||]