Atlanta Restaurant Suit to Test New Rights Act

Press Release
July 10, 1964

Atlanta Restaurant Suit to Test New Rights Act preview

Suit Against Lester Maddox Pickrick Rest. to Test Civil Rights Act

Cite this item

  • Press Releases, Volume 1. Atlanta Restaurant Suit to Test New Rights Act, 1964. e163880a-b592-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/fa5d67ad-3c25-4068-8e91-55fad85793ae/atlanta-restaurant-suit-to-test-new-rights-act. Accessed April 22, 2025.

    Copied!

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

NAACP 

Legal Defense and Educational Fund 
PRESS RELEASE 
President 

Dr. Allan Knight Chalmers July 10, 1964 ’ 
Director-Counsel 

ack Greenberg 
Associate Counsel 

Constance Baker Motley 

ATLANTA RESTAURANT SUIT 
TO TEST NEW *RIGHTS ACT 

NAACP Legal Defense Fund Attorneys Score Historic "First" 

ATLANTA, GA.--Federal District Judge Frank A, Hooper here 

has named Friday (July 17th) as the day on which the new 

civil rights act will be tested. 

NAACP Legal Defense Fund attorneys secured an order to 

have segregationist restaurant owner Lester Maddox “show 

cause" why Negro citizens should not be served. 

The suit, filed by Legal Defense Fund Cooperating Attor- 

ney William Alexander, is in behalf of three Atlanta clergymen. 

It is the nation's first suit to enforce Title Two of 

the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It is also the first suit of 

a series of suits to be filed in hard core southern states, 

according to Constance Baker Motley, associate counsel of 

the Fund. 

In the Atlanta suit, George S. Willis Jr., Woodrow T. 

Lewis and Albert L. Dunn, all clergymen and students at the 

Interdenominational Theological Center here, asked the U.S. 

District Court for an injunction against discriminatory 

practices of Maddox and the Pickrick Restaurant. 

The plaintiffs, acting on behalf of themselves and other 

Negro citizens of Atlanta, were "denied and deprived" ser- 

vice at the Pickrick on Friday, July 3rd. 

Maddox, on that day, confronted the neatly dressed Negro 

clergymen with a drawn pistol. He called for Pickrick cus- 

tomers to grab ax handles (which he keeps in a box at the 

door) and charge the Negroes. 

(more) 

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



Atlanta Restaurant Suit -2- July 10, 1964 
to Test New "Rights Act 

Some of his customers, including women, responded and 

descended on the Negroes, who retreated, saying they would 

return. 

The complaint states that discimination against Negroes 

at the Pickrick is in violation of plaintiffs' rights to full 

and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, priv- 

ileges, advantages and accommodations of places of public 

accommodation. 

The Pickrick restaurant serves and offers to serve inter- 

state travelers. Its operations affect travel, trade, traf- 

fic, commerce and transportation between states. A substantial 

portion of the food it serves moves in commerce. 

This places it precisely within the scope of the new civil 

rights act. 

Meanwhile in New York City, Jack Greenberg, Fund director- 

counsel, announced that his staff “is prepared to move quickly 

and vigorously in any community where there is interference 

with or violation of Negro citizens' rights secured by the 

new act." 

A survey this week of the Fund's 120 cooperating attorneys 

in deep south and border states indicates that compliance to 

date has been good. 

However, several suits are imminent in Alabama at this 

time and the Fund staff has been augmented in the event 

pockets of defiance erupt, Greenberg said. 

Joining Alexander and Mrs. Motley in the Atlanta suit was 

Assistant Counsel Michael Meltsner of the Fund's New York 

City headquarters. 

= 302

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.

Return to top