Greene v. Fair

• Decision Date: 18 February 1963
• Docket Number: No. 20318.,20318.
• Citation: 314 F.2d 200
• Parties: Dewey R. GREENE, Jr., Appellant, v. Charles D. FAIR et al., Appellees.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

314 F.2d 200 (1963)

Dewey R. GREENE, Jr., Appellant, v. Charles D. FAIR et al., Appellees.

No. 20318.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

February 18, 1963.

William Kunstler, New York City, for appellant.

Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen., of Mississippi, Charles Clark, Jackson, Miss., for appellees.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and JONES and BELL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Upon notice to appellees, the appellant requested an emergency hearing on his "Motion for Injunction and Other Relief Necessary to Effectuate the Judgment and Orders of this Court" pending an appeal from an order issued by the District Court of the Southern District of Mississippi on the 4th day of February, 1963.¹

The proceedings in which the order was entered were commenced by the appellant, Dewey R. Greene, Jr., a Negro citizen of the state of Mississippi, who, having made application for admission to the University of Mississippi and having been denied such admission by the Registrar, on the final day for registration for the current term filed this proceeding as a member of the class protected by the orders in the case of Meredith v. Fair, D.C., 202 F.Supp. 224 in which the respondents had been enjoined from denying the admission of prospective students on account of race or color. Stressing the time element as it bears upon the desire of appellant to achieve his admission at the earliest college term if he is entitled to being admitted, he here urges this Court to grant him the immediate relief in the nature of an order requiring his admission at the present term, prior to the docketing and hearing of his appeal in this Court. The power of this Court to take such extraordinary action is asserted to lie under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651 (commonly known as the All Writs Statute),² and Rules 62(c) and 62(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.³ The relief sought here is extraordinary relief. It is granted only in exceptional cases.

Upon oral argument, counsel for appellant conceded that it should be granted in this case only if, on the record presented before us, this Court should hold as a matter of law that the action of the Registrar constituted a violation of the Meredith injunction.

The reason for the sparing use of this power is apparent. Litigants are given the opportunity to try their cases in a district court and they are given an unlimited right of appeal to the Courts of Appeal. The rules of this Court make possible a prompt hearing of all regularly docketed appellate cases. The rules provide for accelerated hearings in cases in which cause therefor is shown. The vindication of private rights by litigation necessarily entails some delay. Laymen and courts alike regret any delay in the vindication of a right that is not the natural and proper result from the orderly handling of the litigation. Historically and traditionally within our system of justice, appellate procedure calls for the docketing of a case, the furnishing of the transcript of the record to the appellate judges, a full briefing by the appellant, with an opportunity for response to be made by the appellee, and oral argument after consideration of the records and briefs by the Court. The time required to prosecute an appeal in this manner is recognized by all to be time well spent in the ordinary case.

Unless an appellant can demonstrate to the court on such an emergency motion as this that there is great likelihood, approaching near certainty, that he will prevail when his case finally comes to be heard on the merits, he does not meet the standard which all courts recognize must be reached to warrant the entering of an emergency order of this kind.

The absence of any specific findings of fact on the true issue in controversy, the...