Glover v. City of Atlanta

96 S.E. 562, 148 Ga. 285, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 303
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedAugust 13, 1918
DocketNos. 679, 680
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 96 S.E. 562 (Glover v. City of Atlanta) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Glover v. City of Atlanta, 96 S.E. 562, 148 Ga. 285, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 303 (Ga. 1918).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

1. In Harden v. City of Atlanta, 147 Ga. 248 (93 S. E. 401), a case involving the validity of a race-segregation ordinance of the City of Atlanta, a reproduction of an ordinance adopted by the City of Louisville, Ky., this court as then constituted, in an opinion by a majority of the Justices, held that such ordinance was not repugnant to the 14th amendment of the constitution of the United States.

2. In Buchanan v. Warley, 245 U. S. 60 (38 Sup. Ct. 60, 62 L. ed.), a case involving the validity of the ordinance of the City of Louisville, Ky., decided subsequently to the decision of Harden v. City of Atlanta, the Supreme Court of the United States held: “An ordinance which forbids colored persons to occupy houses in blocks where the greater number of houses are occupied by white persons, in practical effect prevents the sale of lots in such blocks to colored persons, and is unconstitutional. A white owner, who has made an otherwise valid and enforceable contract to convey such a lot to a colored person, for the erection of a house upon it for occupancy by the vendee, is deprived, in violation of the fourteenth amendment, of an essential element of his [286]*286property,—the right to dispose of it to a constitutionally qualified purchaser. . . A city ordinance forbidding colored persons from occupying houses as residences, or places of abode or public assembly, on blocks where the majority of the houses are occupied by white persons for those purposes, and in like manner forbidding white persons when the conditions as to occupancy are reversed, and which bases the interdiction upon color and nothing more, passes the legitimate bounds of police power and invades the civil right to acquire, enjoy, and use property, which' is guaranteed in equal measure to all citizens, white or colored, by the fourteenth amendment.”

Nos. 679, 680. August 13, 1918. Equitable petition. Before Judge Pendleton. Eulton superior court. October 16, 1917. Richard B. Russell and Harry A. Etheridge, for plaintiffs. James L. Mayson and Samuel D. Hewlett, for defendants.

3. In the cases at bar the validity of the race-segregation ordinance of the City of Atlanta, which was upheld in Harden v. Atlanta, supra, is again called in question. The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Buchanan v. Warley is controlling upon the questions made, and the decision in Harden v. Atlanta, upon review, is overruled.

4. While as a general rule equity will not enjoin a criminal prosecution, yet where prosecutions are threatened under a void municipal ordinance, and the effect of such prosecutions would tend to injure or destroy the property of the person so prosecuted and deprive him of the legitimate use and enjoyment of his property, equity will entertain a suit to inquire into the validity of the ordinance and enjoin its enforcement. Carey v. Atlanta, 143 6a. 192 (2) (84 S. E. 456, L. R. A. 1915D, 684, Ann. Cas. 1916E, 1151).

5. Accordingly, it was error to dismiss, upon oral motion, the petitions filed by the plaintiffs. The judgments complained of were entered after the decision by this court in Harden v. Atlanta, supra, and before the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Buchanan v. Warley, supra. Judgments reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

City of Columbus v. Stubbs
158 S.E.2d 392 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1967)
City of Birmingham v. Monk
185 F.2d 859 (Fifth Circuit, 1951)
Bunn v. City of Atlanta
19 S.E.2d 553 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)
Walker v. Mayor of Carrollton
200 S.E. 268 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
Robinson v. City of Macon
144 S.E. 767 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1928)
Chaires v. City of Atlanta
139 S.E. 559 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1927)
Morrow v. City of Atlanta
133 S.E. 345 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1926)
Bowen v. City of Atlanta
125 S.E. 199 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 S.E. 562, 148 Ga. 285, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glover-v-city-of-atlanta-ga-1918.