David Selden, President, Etc. v. Topaz 1-2-3 Lounge, Inc.

447 F.2d 165

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

Agreeing with the District Court that this case is not moot,¹ we affirm the dismissal on the ground that the Topaz 1-2-3 Lounge, which does not serve food or offer entertainment, is not within the ambit of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,² and that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was not intended to reach places of public accommodations.³

Affirmed.

Footnotes

1

. United States v. W. T. Grant Co., 345 U.S. 629, 73 S.Ct. 894, 97 L.Ed. 1303 (1953) ; Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368, 83 S.Ct. 801, 9 L.Ed.2d 821 (1963) ; National Foundation v. City of Fort Worth, 415 F.2d 41 (5th Cir. 1969) ; Anderson v. City of Albany, 321 F.2d 649 (5th Cir. 1963). Compare, Tyson v. Cazes, 363 F.2d 742 (5th Cir. 1966).

2

. Fazzio Real Estate Co. v. Adams, 396 F.2d 146 (5th Cir. 1968) ; Cuevas v. Sdrales, 344 F.2d 1019 (10th Cir. 1965) ; cert. den., 382 U.S. 1014, 86 S.Ct. 625, 15 L.Ed.2d 528; Robertson v. Johnston, 249 F.Supp. 618 (E.D.La.1966). Cf. Miller v. Amusement Enterprises, Inc. 394 F.2d 342 (5th Cir. 1968).

3

. Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3, 3 S.Ct. 18, 27 L.Ed. 835 (1883) ; see Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., 392 U.S. 409, 88 S.Ct. 2186, 20 L.Ed.2d 1189 (1968) at 417.