had prevailed in opposing racial discrimination leading to the decision in Brown v. Board of Education. Among their first efforts toward that end were their amici briefs in the Mendez and Henderson cases, referred to above. Subsequent efforts included the providing of pro bono counsel in behalf of the students challenging the Plessy Doctrine, removing a burden from the students which otherwise would have prevented such a challenge.

I have been similarly motivated to represent the "Groundswell" students in San Diego, who dissented to mandatory assignments to particular schools solely on a racial basis just as Miss Brown had; and to file their amici brief in support of similarly situated students in Oklahoma City.

Although I was confident that I could get it filed, I knew I would have to husband my resources to produce a brief which would meet the following concerns:

First, it must not unduly strain the resources of the "Groundswell" parents who had been "passing the hat" for eleven years to contribute to my out-of-pocket expenses. Economies were achieved in a way that will interest those single practitioners who, like me, must rely upon resources where they can find them. I rough-drafted my brief at a computer class at Ramona High School. Then, with my son Robert's help, I completed the brief in final form on a friend's computer which provided the right type size and spacing required by Supreme Court rules. These two computer experts then aided me in printing a master copy of the brief, to be duplicated by a commercial printer at less cost than a legal specialty printer.

This entire reliance upon my own efforts contrasted with help I got in preparing briefs on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as one of the two Assistant United States Attorneys who manned the San Diego branch office from 1959 to 1964. There, my drafts of the appellate briefs in cases I had tried were sent for perusal by appeal experts in the main Los Angeles office who sent them on to a legal publisher. A product was thus finely tuned, served and filed in accordance with the appellate court rules in every respect.

This contrasts with the painstaking effort necessary to handle, as a sole practitioner, for non-affluent clients, all aspects of a brief, which hopefully was not too roughly hewn, in order to be able to file it in accord with the rules of the high court.