Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

459 F.2d 1037

Docket No. 30595.

Thomie v. Dennard

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1972-05-16

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently June 1977

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2283

Relies on Younger v. Harris · Dombrowski v. Pfister · Samuels v. J Mackell Fernandez

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1972-05-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Thomas M. Jackson, Macon, Ga., Jack Greenberg, Jonathan Shapiro, Charles S. Ralston, New York City, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Manley F. Brown, Macon, Ga., D. P. Hulbert, Tom W. Daniel, Aultman, Hulbert, Buice & Cowart, Perry, Ga., for defendants-appellees.

Before THORNBERRY, COLEMAN and INGRAHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

The instant suit was filed on May 22, 1970, as a class action on behalf of plaintiffs and other Negro citizens similarly situated, seeking injunctive relief against pending and future prosecutions pursuant to the parade ordinance of Perry, Georgia and a declaratory judgment that said ordinance was facially unconstitutional as a derogation of plaintiffs' right of free speech.

¶2

The district court, after holding a full hearing on the merits of the controversy, denied relief on the basis that the anti-injunction statute 28 U.S. C.A. Sec. 2283 barred relief. Moreover, the court concluded, in regard to the exception provided by Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479, 85 S.Ct. 1116, 14 L.Ed.2d 22 (1965), that the evidence failed to establish a threat of irreparable harm or a purpose by the state to harass, intimidate, or otherwise discourage the Negro citizens of Perry from exercising their right of free speech. Although these findings were made by the district court on July 9, 1970, well before the Supreme Court's decision in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971), they substantially conform to the requirements enunciated in that case. Moreover, we find no unusual circumstances present in the instant case sufficient to overcome the strong policy against federal interference with pending state criminal prosecutions. See also Samuels v. Mackell, 401 U.S. 66, 91 S.Ct. 764, 27 L.Ed.2d 688 (1971); Boyle v. Landry, 401 U.S. 77, 91 S.Ct. 758, 27 L.Ed.2d 696 (1971); Perez v. Ledesma, 401 U.S. 82, 91 S.Ct. 674, 27 L.Ed.2d 701 (1971); Dyson v. Stein, 401 U.S. 200, 91 S.Ct. 769, 27 L.Ed.2d 781 (1971); Byrne v. Karalexis, 401 U.S. 216, 91 S.Ct. 777, 27 L.Ed.2d 792 (1971).

¶3

Affirmed.

/459/f2d/1037 · .json · Public domain