Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Newman Et Al. v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc., Et Al.

• 1967 • 390 U.S. 400 • Warren Court
The Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises case in 1967 was a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court that affirmed the right of plaintiffs to receive attorney's fees when they win civil rights cases. The lawsuit involved an African American man, John Newman, who sued Piggie Park Enterprises for refusing him service at one of their drive-in restaurants due to his race, which violated Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibiting racial discrimination in public accommodations. The owner...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Warren Court
Term: 1967
Docket: 339
390 U.S. 400
88 S. Ct. 964
19 L. Ed. 2d 1263
1968 U.S. LEXIS 2168
Argued: Mar 07, 1968

Newman Et Al. v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc., Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises case in 1967 was a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court that affirmed the right of plaintiffs to receive attorney's fees when they win civil rights cases. The lawsuit involved an African American man, John Newman, who sued Piggie Park Enterprises for refusing him service at one of their drive-in restaurants due to his race, which violated Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibiting racial discrimination in public accommodations. The owner Maurice Bessinger justified this refusal on religious grounds claiming his belief in racial segregation was based on his interpretation of the Bible. In a unanimous ruling, Justice Hugo Black stated that such claims were "patently frivolous" and upheld lower court decisions awarding damages and attorneys' fees to Newman.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises case, Justice Hugo Black dissented from the majority opinion. He argued that while he agreed with the Court's decision to uphold Title II of the Civil Rights Act as constitutional and applicable in this case, he disagreed with their ruling on attorney fees. The majority held that a plaintiff should ordinarily recover his legal fees unless special circumstances would render such an award unjust. However, Justice Black believed this was too broad and could potentially discourage defendants from exercising their right to trial by making them liable for all legal costs if they lost - even when they had reasonable grounds for believing they might win or where important issues were at stake needing clarification by courts.

Opinion written by Justice
Decided: Mar 18, 1968
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms