Skip to content


Black Unity League of Kentucky Vs. Miller - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number394 U.S. 100
AppellantBlack Unity League of Kentucky
RespondentMiller
Excerpt:
black unity league of kentucky v. miller - 394 u.s. 100 (1969) u.s. supreme court black unity league of kentucky v. miller, 394 u.s. 100 (1969) black unity league of kentucky v. miller no. 892 decided march 3, 1969 394 u.s. 100 appeal from the united states district court for the western district of kentucky syllabus dismissal of appellant organizations' suit for injunctive and declaratory relief against threatened investigations by kentucky un-american activities committee upheld as appellant failed to respond to motion to dismiss as required by local court rules, and trial court could thus take conclusory allegations of irreparable injury as insubstantial, and not justifying federal intervention. affirmed. per.....
Judgment:
Black Unity League of Kentucky v. Miller - 394 U.S. 100 (1969)
U.S. Supreme Court Black Unity League of Kentucky v. Miller, 394 U.S. 100 (1969)

Black Unity League of Kentucky v. Miller

No. 892

Decided March 3, 1969

394 U.S. 100

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY

Syllabus

Dismissal of appellant organizations' suit for injunctive and declaratory relief against threatened investigations by Kentucky Un-American Activities Committee upheld as appellant failed to respond to motion to dismiss as required by local court rules, and trial court could thus take conclusory allegations of irreparable injury as insubstantial, and not justifying federal intervention.

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant organizations brought this suit for injunctive and declaratory relief against investigations which appellees, members of the Kentucky Un-American Activities Committee, were allegedly threatening to conduct. They contended that the investigations and accompanying contempt prosecutions would violate various rights, primarily those under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. They did not allege that any of their officers or members had been called as witnesses, or that any subpoenas had been issued, or that any criminal prosecutions had been begun. The allegations of harassment were entirely conclusory. Appellees moved to dismiss, and appellants failed to respond, as was required by local court rules. These rules also stated that "[f]ailure to respond may be good grounds for sustaining the motion." D.C.W.D.Ky.Rule 5(a). We hold that, in this procedural

Page 394 U. S. 101

context, the trial court could take appellants' conclusory allegations as insubstantial and could dismiss the complaint for failure to allege sufficient irreparable injury to justify federal intervention at this early stage. For this reason, the motion to affirm is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS dissents.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //