Correspondence from Stein to Nabrit Re: Jurisdictional Statement

Public Court Documents
August 14, 1970

Cite this item
Correspondence from Stein to Nabrit Re: Jurisdictional Statement preview

2 pages

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hardbacks. Correspondence from Stein to Nabrit Re: Jurisdictional Statement, 1970. a1681cbb-2e34-f111-88b4-0022482cdbbc. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/e6727669-6201-4d3c-9992-dae4ef192664/correspondence-from-stein-to-nabrit-re-jurisdictional-statement. Accessed June 02, 2026.

    Copied!

     [||abbebc9e-bcc1-4863-8d16-410b4ddafc73||] CHAMBERS, STEIN, FERGUSON & LANNING 
ATTORNEYS AT LAw 

216 "WEST TENTH STREET 

CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202 

JuLius LEVONNE CHAMBERS P. O. BOX 20428 

ADAM STEIN AREA CODE 704 

JAMES E. FERGUSON, II August 14, 1970 TELEPHONE 375.8461 
JAMES E. LANNING 

James M. Nabrit, III, Esq. 
NAACP Legal Defense and 

Educational Fund, Inc. 

10 Columbus Circle 

Suite 2030 

New York, New York 10019 

Moore v. Charlotie-Mecklenhurg 

Board of Education, No. 444, 0.T. 1970 

and North Carolina State Board of 

Education v. Swann, No. 498, O.T. 

1970 

  

  

  

Dear Jim: 

I am enclosing a photocopy of the jurisdictional statement filed in the Moore 

case. They did not serve a copy on us and I made a request by telephone of 

Booe that we be supplied a copy on Monday, August 10, 1970. He said that 

he only had one copy . I said that we would be glad to photocopy his copy if 

that were alright with him. He said that he would get in touch with Blakeney 

to see whether Blakeney had a copy or whether or not they would give us some 

kind of copy. I have not yet heard from them. The copy I have is one which 

Waggoner gave to us. 

I forget the exact date on which the Moore jurisdictional statement was filed. 
I first noticed it by looking at Law Week. However, Waggoner informs me 

that he has been instructed by the Clerk to respond by September 7, 1970. 
  

The North Carolina State Board of Education filed a jurisdictional statement 

on August 4, 1970 and the response is due on September 3, 1970. 

I am assuming that you will have enough time to either file the motion to dis- 

miss and/or affirm in time or will get an extension. I spoke to Jack 

Greenberg about the case briefly and he suggested that we might urge as one  



James M. Nabrit, III, Esq. 

Page 2 

August 14, 1970 

ground for dismissal of the Moore case the fact that they did not serve us with 

their jurisdictional statement. 

The local board has not yet filed and Waggoner does not seem to know when he 

will file. It might be a reason for extension the fact that the local board has 

not filed and we will want to cover all three jurisdictional statements in our 

motion to dismiss and affirm. 

Yours truly, 

fl + 
1} 

He 

Adam Stein [||abbebc9e-bcc1-4863-8d16-410b4ddafc73||]

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

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.