This tag was created by Anonymous.
In the Municipal court on September 20 (1)
The newspaper stories about the case highlighted that the outcome of the case could set a precedent for other damage claims after the disorder amounting to $1 million. That was almost ten times the $116,000 reported as the total value of the claims in July. None of the stories provided any explanation for that dramatic jump. In fact, the $1 million total was not attributed to any source in stories in the New York Herald Tribune, New York Post, New York Sun, Daily News and New York Amsterdam News (which continued to be the only Black newspaper to report the damage claims). Other stories attributed the number to Judge Shalleck, with the New York Times quoting him as telling the jury when he discharged them, "I understand that there is possibly $1,000,000 in such suits now pending against the city." The New York American published a similar quotation, while the Times Union, New York World-Telegram and Home News paraphrased Shalleck's statement. The New York Times also quoted Mayor La Guardia making the same claim, in his response to the verdict: "That award opens the way to claims against the city amounting to $1,000,000." A paraphrase of that statement appeared in the Daily News. The stories in the New York Herald Tribune, New York American, and New York Sun that reported a response from the mayor did not include that statement; the Times Union, New York World-Telegram, New York Amsterdam News, New York Post, and Home News did not mention La Guardia at all. The Corporation Counsel lawyers' denial that the case was a test case was reported only in the New York Times. The story dismissed their statement that "each of the many suits growing out of the Harlem riot would be tried on its own merits" by pointing out that "five members of the city's legal staff were present," implying that was far more than was typical for such a trial.
Only the New York Post made clear the questions the jury had to decideNYP - NB NYT on jury instruction that fright was reasonable - it took them just 45 minutes to answer (WT)
- Judge supported verdict
- comment on law
- Corporation Counsel motion to set aside - on typo issues, not a riot, did not do everything could (NYP) (HT says did not give notice to Mayor or Sheriff) --> Shalleck reserved decision, gave parties two days to give him info
- LaG's response “If it were permitted we would have deliberate attempts to start trouble so that someone could collect from the city." [NYT, 9/21]
- little attention to details of case except in NYT - NB how many stories got the address wrong = Lexington Ave instead of Lenox Ave - NB details would only be Shalleck's published decision
This page has tags:
Contents of this tag:
This page references:
- "City Must Pay Loss of Dealer in Riot," New York Times, September 21, 1935, 17.
- "Verdict of $450 Won By Victim of Harlem Riot," New York World-Telegram, September 20, 1935 [clipping].
- "City Loses in Suit Over Riot Damage," New York Post, September 20, 1935, 1.
- "Jury Awards First Damages in Harlem Riot," Daily News, September 21, 1935, 24.
- "City Loses Harlem Riot Test Case," Times Union, September 20, 1935, 17.
- "Riot May Cost City Huge Sum," New York Amsterdam News, September 28, 1935, 11.
- "Harlem Riot May Cost $1,000,000," New York American, September 21, 1935 [clipping].
- "City Liable for $1,000,000 Damage Bill in $450 Award to Harlem Riot Victim," New York Sun, September 21, 1935 [clipping]
- "City Sued for Damage Done in Harlem Riot," Home News, September 19, 1935 [clipping].
- "Jury Gives $450 For Damages in Harlem Riots," New York Herlad Tribune, September 21, 1935