Letter from Judge John C. Collet to plaintiff's attorney Charles H. Houston regarding Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Collet writes to confirm the plaintiff's amended petition was received and filed, and assuring Houston that he will be informed if there are any complaints about the form of filing of the petition.
National Archives at Kansas City, Missouri
Displaying 97 - 108 of 790
Bluford vs. Canada, Civil Action No. 42: Letter from Charles H. Houston to U.S. District Court Clerk
Letter from plaintiff's attorney Charles H. Houston to the U.S. District Court clerk regarding Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Houston writes to enclose an amended second count in the case, and notes a registered mail receipt confirming the amendmend has been also forwarded to defense attorney William Hogsett.
Summons in Civil Case No. 128: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada issued to defendant Canada, ordering a response to plaintiff's attorney Carl R. Johnson within 20 days.
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.
Brief in support of defendant's motion to dismiss in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. The defendant's attorneys argue for the dismal of Bluford's suit against Canada, the registrar of the University of Missouri, stating that she has no standing for the damages she seeks.
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.
Reply brief of defendant on motion to dismiss in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. The document responds to a memo by Bluford's attorneys, which in turn responds to Canada's attorneys brief requesting dismissal of the case.