Witness summons in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada, commanding Miss G. A. Wadkins, Acting Business Officer of Lincoln University, to appear in court on October 21, 1940, with general ledgers for several Lincoln accounts as well as budget sheets documenting state appropriations money.
U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri
Displaying 97 - 108 of 575
Memorandum on plaintiff's motion for extension of time for filing and designation of transcript of record and statement of errors in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. The memo was sent by Judge John C.
Bluford vs. Canada, Civil Action No. 42: Letter from Charles H. Houston to U.S. District Court Clerk
Letter from attorney Charles H. Houston to the U.S. District Court Clerk in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada, providing notice that they are dismissing their appeal in the case, and asking to pay the court costs currently due. Houston also writes that he plans to file a new action on Bluford's behalf.
Letter from Charles H. Houston to the clerk of the United States District Court for the Central Division of the Western District of Missouri, writing that he was enclosing a motion and order in the Lucile Bluford vs. S. W. Canada case, and asking that it is called to the attention of the court.
Civil subpoena in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada, commanding Duke Diggs, Robert S. Cobb, Charles E. Robinson, Sr., Myron Leonard, and Rev. C. B. Johnson to appear in court on October 22, 1940.
Motion for extention of time for filing the designation of record, the transcript of record and statement of errors in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Bluford and her attorneys request an extension of 60 days from the date of the original judgement to file documents, including a statment of court errors, in her appeal.
Order in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada, granting 60 additional days for Lucile Bluford to file her appeal to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals.
Memorandum opinion in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada, regarding the defendant's motion to dismiss the case. Judge J. C.
Challenge to the petit jury panel in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Bluford challenges that the jury selected for her trial consists solely of whtie jurors, and that "all qualified Negroes have been excluded solely because of race or color" in violation of the U.S.
Affidavit of Lucile Bluford supporting challenge to panel in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Bluford and her attorneys provided support to her challenge that black citizens were illegally removed from the jury pool for her trial, resulting in an all white jury panel.
Affidavit of Duke Diggs supporting challenge to panel in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Duke Diggs, a resident of Jefferson City, attests that "both from his own personal knowledge and from the general reputation of the community [he] knows that Negroes have never been called to serve as jurors" in the U.S.
Affidavit of Robert S. Cobb in support of challenge to panel in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Cobb, an attorney in Jefferson City, attests that he knows "both from his personal knowledge and general community reputation that Negroes have not been called for jury service in [the U.S.