HAMM

v.

CITY OF ROCK HILL

Citator

Cited By

• Hamm v. City of Rock Hill, 379 U.S. 306 (U.S. 1964)
  …ed convictions based upon state' trespass statutes against petitioners, who are Negroes, for participating in “sit-in” démonstrations in the luncheon facilities of retail stores in their respective States^ We granted certiorari in each of the cases, 377 U. S. 988, 989, and consolidated them for argument. The petitioners asserted both in the state courts and here the denial of rights, privileges, and immunities secured by the Fourteenth Amendment; in addition, they claim here that the Civil Rights Act of 1964…
• United States v. Mississippi, 380 U.S. 128 (U.S. 1965)
  …he registrars could not be sued jointly and that venue was improper as to the registrars who did not live in the district and division in which the court was sitting. 229 F. Supp. 925. Circuit Judge Brown dissented. We noted probable jurisdiction, 377 U. S. 988, and set the case down for argument immediately preceding Louisiana v. United States, post, p. 145. The basic issue before us in this case is whether the dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted was proper. The Unit…
• Bell v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 226 (U.S. 1964)
  …ou speaking of other business such as your business? “A. I can only speak in our field, yes. “Q. In your field, so that the other stores in your field do not serve Negroes at their lunch counters? “A. Yes, sir.” [*276] 5. Hamm, v. City of Rock Hill, 377 U. S. 988. Mr. H. C. Whiteaker, the manager of McCrory’s in Rock Hill, testified: “Q. All right. Now, how many departments do you have in your store? “A. Around twenty. “Q. Around twenty departments? “A. Yes, sir. “Q. All right, sir, is one of these departm…

  ← 1 / 3 →