(originally filed September 19, 1950, amended April 9, 1951 (below) and dismissed May 16, 1956)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

ATLANTA DIVISION

MATTIE JEAN AND FANNIE R. AARON, infants, by Willie R. Aaron, their mother and next friend, et, al.

Plaintiffs,

vs.

E. S. COOK, DEVEREAUX McCLATCHEY, JR,, CHARLES C. RIFE, J. H. LANDERS, D. M. THERRELL and J. AUSTIN DILBECK, constituting the Board of Education of the City of Atlanta, and MISS IRA JARRELL, Superintendent of Schools.

Defendants.

CIVIL CASE 3923

AMENDED COMPLAINT

1. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under Title 28, United States Code, Section 1331, this being a suit which arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, viz., the Fourteenth Amendment to said Constitution, and Title 8, United States Code, Sections 41 and 43, wherein the matter in controversy exceeds, exclusive of interest and costs, the sum of $3,000.00.

2. The jurisdiction of this Court is also invoked under Title 28, United States Code, Section 1343, this being a suit authorized under the law to be brought to redress the deprivation under color of law, statute, regulation, custom, and usage of a state of rights, privileges and immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States providing for the equal rights of citizens of the United States, and of all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States, viz., Title 8, United States Code, Sections 41 and 43.

3. The jurisdiction of this Court is further invoked under Title 28, United States Code, Section 2281. This is an action for an interlocutory and a permanent injunction restraining the enforcement, operation and execution of the Constitution and statutes of the State of Georgia by restraining the action of defendants, officers of such state, in the enforcement and execution of such Constitution and statutes as herein more fully appears.

4. Plaintiffs further show that this is a proceeding for a declaratory judgment and injunction under Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2201 and 2202, for the purpose of determining questions in actual controversy between the parties, to-wit:

a. The question of whether the policy, custom, practice and usage of defendants, and each of them, in denying on account of race and color, the infant plaintiffs and other Negro children of public school age, similarly situated, residing in Atlanta, Georgia, educational opportunities, advantages and facilities in the public elementary and secondary schools of Atlanta, Georgia, including those hereinafter specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to white children of public school age, similarly situated is unconstitutional and void, as being a denial of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States,

b. The question of whether the policy, custom, practice and usage of defendants, and each of them, in denying on account of race and color, the adult plaintiffs and other parents and guardians of Negro children of public school age, similarly situated, residing in Atlanta, Georgia, rights and privileges of sending their children to public schools in Atlanta, Georgia, with educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including those hereinafter specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to white children of public school age is unconstitutional and void, as being a denial of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States,

c. The question of whether Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution of 1945 of the State of Georgia and of Section 32- 937 Ga. Code Ann. which require that the infant plaintiffs be prohibited from attending the only public schools of the City of Atlanta affording an education equal to that afforded all other qualified students who are not Negroes and be forced to attend segregated public elementary and secondary schools set apart for Negroes in the City of Atlanta is unconstitutional and void as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

5. Infant plaintiffs are among those generally classified as Negroes; are citizens of the United States and of the State of Georgia. They are within the statutory age limits of eligibility to attend the public schools of the City of Atlanta, Georgia. They satisfy all the requirements for admission to such schools and are in fact attending public schools under the supervision, operation and control of the defendants. These plaintiffs comprise two general categories, viz., those who are eligible to attend and are attending public elementary schools and those who are eligible to attend and are attending public secondary schools in Atlanta, Georgia, both types of schools being under the supervision, operation and control of defendants

6. The adult plaintiffs are among those classified as Negroes; are citizens of the United States and of the State of Gecrgia; are residents of and domiciled in Atlanta, Ga. They are taxpayers of the City of Atlanta, of the State of Georgia, and of the United States. They are guardians and parents of the infant plaintiffs referred to in the paragraph above and designated in the caption of this bill, and are required by laws of the State of Georgia to send children between the ages of seven and sixteen under their charge and control to public or private schools (Georgia Code, Annotated, Sections 32-2104, 32-9913 and 32-9914).

7. Plaintiffs bring this action in their own behalf and in behalf of approximately twenty thousand Negro children attending the public schools of Atlanta, Georgia, and their parents and guardians similarly situated and affected with reference to the matters here involved. They are so numerous as to make it impracticable to bring them all before the Court. There being common questions of law and fact, a common relief being sought as will hereafter more fully appear, plaintiffs present this action as a class action, pursuant to Rule 23 (a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

8. Defendants, E. S. Cook, Devereaux McClatchey, Jr., Charles C. Rife, J. H. Landers., D. M. Therrell, and J. Austin Dilbeck, are members of the Board of Education of the City of Atlanta, Georgia, which exists pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the State of Georgia, discharging essential governmental functions (Constitution of Georgia, Article VIII, Section 4; Atlanta Charter of 1874, as amended Sections 3373-3377). Defendant, Ira Jarrell, is Superintendent of Schools of the City of Atlanta and holds office pursuant to the laws of the State of Georgia as an administrative officer of the public school system in the City of Atlanta. Defendants, and each of them, are residents and citizens of the State of Georgia and are being sued in their official capacities.

9. The State of Georgia has declared public education to be a state function of primary importance. The Constitution of Georgia, Article VIII, Section 1, provides:

"The provision of an adequate education for the citizens shall be a primary obligation of the State of Georgia, the expense of which shall be provided by taxation. Separate schools shall be provided for the white and colored races."

10. Pursuant to the above mandate the Legislature of the State of Georgia has established a system of free public schools throughout the State. The establishment, maintenance, administration and control of the public school system is vested in a State Board of Education, State Superintendent of Schools, County and Independent Boards of Education (Constitution of Georgia, Article VIII, Sections II, III, V and VII; and Georgia Code, Annotated, Sections 32-401, 32-501, 32-603. 32-902, 32-1601, and 32-1111).

11. The public schools of Atlanta, Georgia, are under the direct supervision and control of the defendants acting as an administrative department or division and as administrative officers of the State of Georgia. Defendants, members of the Atlanta Board of Education are authorized to use public tax funds for the maintenance and operation of the public schools in the Atlanta School System (Constitution of Georgia, Article VIII, Section 7; Georgia Code, Annotated, Sections 32-111 and 32-614). Defendants have sole authority to purchase, lease or rent school houses and buildings, to purchase necessary school supplies, furniture and equipment, to determine the courses of study to be pursued and the method of teaching to be followed, and to make all other arrangements necessary and essential to the efficient operation of the public schools in the City of Atlanta.

12. Defendants have pursued and are pursuing the policy, practice, custom and usage of establishing and maintaining separate schools for white and Negro children residing in the City of Atlanta, and the policy, practice, custom and usage of denying to said Negro children on account of their race and color, the right and privilege of attending schools established, operated and maintained exclusively for white children in the said City of Atlanta in accordance with Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution of 1945 of the State of Georgia and Section 32-937, Georgia Code Annotated.

13. Defendants are now operating and maintaining the following elementary schools: Adair, Bush Mountain, Capitol View, Carter, Connally, Cook, Couch, Crew, Crogman, Davis, East Lake, Faith, Formwalt, Forrest, Georgia Avenue, Goldsmith, Gordon, Grant Park, Gray, Harris, Haygood, Highland, Hill, Home Park, Hope, Howell, Inman, Johnson, Jones, Key, Kingsberry (or English Avenue), Kirkwood, Lee, Linn, Luckie, Milton, Moreland, Morningside, Peeples, Pryor, Ragsdale, Slaton, Smilley, South Atlanta, Spring, Stanton, Sylvan Hills, Walker, Ware, Wesley, West, Whitefoord, Williams, and Yonge. Of these elementary schools, Negroes can only attend Bush Mountain, Carter, Crogman, Davis, Gray, English Avenue, Hill, Hope, Johnson, South Atlanta, Walker, Ware, Wesley and Yonge as required by Article VIII Section 1 of the Constitution and Section 32-937, Georgia Code Annotated.

14. Pursuant to the aforesaid constitutional and statuatory provisions of the State of Georgia, defendants are now operating and maintaining the following secondary schools: Bass, Brown, Grady, Howard, Murphy, O'Keefe, Roosevelt, Smith, Sylvan Hills, and Washington Of these schools, Negroes can attend only Howard and Washington,

15. Defendants have pursued and are pursuing the policy, practice, custom and usage of denying on account of their race and color, infant plaintiffs and other Negro children similarly situated, residing in the City of Atlanta, elementary educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including buildings, sites, heating, sanitary facilities, classrooms, libraries, laboratories, study halls, auditoriums, gymnasia, cafeterias, offices, rest rooms, clinics, infirmaries, and other equipment, essential to the sound and efficient operation of elementary schools equal to such elementary educational opportunities, advantages and facilities which are provided and afforded to white children attending public schools in the City of Atlanta, all of which has occurred in their being required to follow Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution and Section 32-937, Georgia Code Annotated.

16. Defendants have pursued and are pursuing the policy, practice, custom and usage of denying on account of their race and color, infant plaintiffs and other Negro children similarly situated, residing in the City of Atlanta, secondary school educational opportunities advantages and facilities, including buildings, sites, heating, sanitary facilities, classrooms, libraries, laboratories, study halls, auditoriums, gymnasia, cafeterias, offices, rest rooms, clinics, infirmaries, stadia and other facilities and equipment, essential to the sound and efficient operation of secondary schools equal to secondary school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities which are provided and afforded to white children attending public secondary schools in the City of Atlanta, all of which has occurred in their being required to follow Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution and Section 32-937, Georgia Code Annotated.

17. Defendants have pursued and are pursuing in both the elementary and secondary schools the policy, custom, practice and usage of denying to plaintiffs and other Negro children similarly situated, on account of race and color, curricula and programs of instruction, programs for academic, scientific, commercial, cultural, artistic, physical and recreational development with guidance and counseling of pupils and organized extra curricula activities equal in terms of quantity, equality, efficiency, diversity and value to those aforesaid facilities offered and afforded white children attending the public elementary and secondary schools of the City of Atlanta.

18. Defendants are maintaining and operating elementary and secondary public schools for approximately 32,000 white children, having a total plant evaluation in excess of $17,000,000.00; staffed with approximately 752 elementary school teachers, averaging one teacher per 22 plus white elementary school pupils; and approximately 444 secondary school teachers averaging one teacher per15 white school pupils; with the school population distributed throughout approximately 699 classrooms in the elementary schools, averaging 24 white elementary school pupils per classroom, and approximately 413 classrooms in the secondary schools, averaging 16 high school pupils per classroom.

19. Defendants are also maintaining and operating elementary and secondary schools for approximately 20,000 Negro children having a total plant evaluation in excess of $5,000,000.00; staffed with approximately 317 elementary school teachers, averaging one teacher per 36 Negro elementary school pupils, and approximately 182 secondary school teachers, averaging one teacher per 25 Negro secondary school pupils; with the school population distributed throughout approximately 235 classrooms in the elementary schools, averaging 48 plus Negro pupils per classroom, and approximately 133 classrooms in the secondary schools, averaging 35 plus Negro pupils per classroom. These conditions and situations have been well known to defendants for a long period of time, but they have continually refused to afford to plaintiffs and the class they represent educational opportunities, advantages and facilities in the respects above mentioned or in any other respect, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities which are afforded to white children.

20. Beginning in December, 1945, and periodically since then, petitions have been filed with defendants on behalf of plaintiffs and the class they represent, bringing to defendants' attention the inequalities in educational opportunities, advantages and facilities offered to infant plaintiffs and other Negro children of public school age in the City of Atlanta, as contrasted with the educational opportunities advantages and facilities afforded to white children and requesting that defendants take steps to afford to Negro children of public school age educational opportunities, advantages and facilities equal to those afforded white children. Despite these petitions and repeated requests made upon the defendants, they have ignored the requests and failed to remedy the inequalities complained of.

21. Infant plaintiffs and the class they represent can only secure educational advantages, opportunities and facilities equal to those afforded white children in the public schools of Atlanta by being allowed to attend the elementary and secondary schools set out in paragraphs 13 and 14 above which defendants are now unlawfully and illegally maintaining and operating exclusively for white children.

22. All the plaintiffs, both infant and adult plaintiffs., are by these illegal and unlawful acts of defendants being unlawfully discriminated against because of their race and color, in violation of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States.

23. Plaintiffs and those similarly situated and affected, on whose behalf this suit is brought, are suffering irreparable injury and are threatened with irreparable injury in the future by reason of the acts herein complained of. They have no plain, adequate or complete remedy to redress the wrongs and illegal acts herein complained of other than this suit for a declaration of rights and an injunction. Any other remedy to which plaintiffs and those similarly situated could be remitted would be attended by such uncertainties and delays as to deny substantial relief, would involve multiplicity of suits, cause further irreparable injury and occasion damage, vexation and inconvenience, not only to the plaintiffs and those similarly situated, but to defendants as governmental agencies.

24. THEREFORE, plaintiffs respectfully pray the Court that upon the filing of this complaint, as may appear proper and convenient to the Court, the Court convene a three judge court, advance this cause on the docket and order a speedy hearing on this action according to law, and that upon such hearings:

1, This Court adjudge, decree and declare the rights and legal relations of the parties to the subject matter here in controversy in order that such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree.

2. This Court enter a judgment or decree declaring that the policy, custom, practice and usage of defendants and each of them, in denying on account of their race and color, to infant plaintiffs and other Negro children of public school age in the City of Atlanta elementary and secondary educational opportunities, advantages and facilities equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded to white children is a denial of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and is therefore unconstitutional and void.

3. This Court enter a judgment or decree declaring that the policy, custom, practice and usage of defendants, and each of them, in refusing to allow infant plaintiffs, and other Negro children, to attend elementary and secondary public schools in the City of Atlanta, which are maintained and operated exclusively for white children and where educational opportunities, advantages and facilities are far superior to those educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to Negroes, is a violation of the equal protection of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and is, therefore, unconstitutional and void.

4. That this Court enter a judgment or decree declaring that Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution and Section 32-937, Georgia Code Annotated, which require that infant plaintiffs be forced to attend separate schools solely because of their race and color, is a denial of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and is therefore unconstitutional and void.

5. That the Court issue a permanent injunction forever restraining and enjoining the defendants, and each of them, from denying, failing or refusing to provide to plaintiffs and other Negro school children in the City of Atlanta, on account of their race and color, rights and privileges of attending public schools where they may receive educational opportunities, advantages and facilities equal to those afforded to white children in the City of Atlanta.

6. That the Court issue a permanent injunction forever restraining and enjoining the defendants, and each of them, from making any distinction based upon race or color in the opportunities, advantages and facilities provided by the defendants for the public education of school children in the City of Atlanta,

7. That the Court issue a permanent injunction restraining and enjoining the defendants, and each of them, from following and enforcing Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution of 1945 of the State of Georgia and Section 32-937, Georgia Code Annotated as being in contravention of rights guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

8. Plaintiffs further pray that the Court will allow them their costs herein and such further, other or additional relief as may appear to the Court to be equitable and just.

source: Federal Archives, East Point, GA