Correspondence from Pamela Karlan to Elizabeth Johnson, Esq. (Southern Poverty Law Center) Re Alabama Judicial Elections Case

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

EASTERN DIVISION 

  

Civil Action No. 4:96-CV-104-BO(3) 

MARTIN CROMARTIE, et al, 

Plaintiffs, 

V. 

JAMES B. HUNT, in his official capacity 

as Governor of the State of North Carolina, 

et al., 

PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF 

INTERROGATORIES TO 

State Defendants, STATE DEFENDANTS 

and 

ALFRED SMALLWOOD, et al., 

Defendant-Intervenors. 

N
a
r
”
 

N
m
?
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
a
 

N
e
”
 

  

TO: DEFENDANTS Gov. JAMES B. HUNT, JR.; Lt. Gov. DENNIS A. WICKER; 

Speaker HAROLD J. BRUBAKER; Sec. of State ELAINE MARSHALL; THE NORTH 

CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS; North Carolina State Board Members 

LARRY LEAKE, KATHERINE BURNETTE, FAIGER BLACKWELL, DOROTHY 

PRESSER, JUNE K. YOUNGBLOOD 

Pursuant to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this court's order on Aug. 

23, 1999 dissolving its stay of proceedings and scheduling discovery, Plaintiffs propound the 

following interrogatories to the State Defendants to be answered under oath, in writing, within 

thirty (30) days from the date of service. These interrogatories are continuing in nature to the 

extent required by Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

  

INSTRUCTIONS: 

1. When an interrogatory answer relates to an oral communication, state whether or not 

the oral communication was by telephone or face-to-face, state the names, present addresses, 

 



  

business or governmental positions, and occupations of all parties involved in that communication 

and the names and addresses of any other persons present while that communication took place. 

2. You are required to furnish all information in the possession of the defendants and all 

information available to them. This includes all knowledge available to each defendant, their 

attorney, their employees, and/or officers and agents, by reason of inquiry, including inquiry of 

their representatives. 
3. Please describe any and all documents relied upon or referred to in preparation for or in 

answering each and every interrogatory. 
4. Whenever in these interrogatories information is requested which was previously fully 

and completely furnished in answer to another interrogatory, such information need not be 

restated, and it will suffice to identify the previous answer containing the information requested. 
5. Each interrogatory should be construed independently and not by reference to any 

other interrogatory herein for purposes of limitation. 
6. In the event the space provided for answering an interrogatory is not sufficient, please 

complete the answer on a separate piece of paper and attach it to these interrogatories. 
7. In the event that you refer to or incorporate other documents in order to answer any 

interrogatory, such as the 1997 Congressional Plan Voting Rights Act submission for 

preclearance to the Justice Department or depositions and affidavits of witnesses, you must give a 
specific reference to the page or pages contained therein which you contend provide substantive 

information with regard to the interrogatory. 

DEFINITIONS: 

The following words have the following meanings: 
(A) "Document" or "documents" refers to all items subject to discovery under Rule 34 of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including, but not limited to, any written or recorded material of 

any kind, including the originals and all non-identical copies, whether different from the originals 

by reason of any notation made on such copies or otherwise; notations of any sort of 

conversations, telephone calls, meetings (minutes or records of meetings) or other 

communications of any nature; studies; letters; notes and correspondence; memoranda reports, 

tests and/or analyses; publications, reports and/or summaries of interviews and reports and/or 

summaries of investigation; opinions or records of consultants, circulars and trade letters; drafts of 

any document, and revisions of drafts of any documents; charts and all graphic or oral records or 

representations of any kind; mechanical or electronic records or representations of any kind 

including tapes, cassettes, disks, or records; and computer tapes, cassettes, disks or records. 

If you consider any document called for in these interrogatories to be privileged from 

production, then you must include in your response a list of documents withheld from production, 

identifying each document by date, addressee, author, title and subject matter. In addition, you 

should identify those persons who have seen the document or who were sent copies. Finally, you 

should state the ground(s) upon which each such document is considered privileged. 

(B) "Identify" or identity as used with respect to a person means to state the person's full name 

and present addresses and his present or last known employment position and business affiliation 

 



if a natural person, and corporate or other status and address if not a natural person. 

"Identify" or "identity" when used in reference to a document means to state the following as to 

each document: | 
. Its nature and contents; 

b. Its date; 

c. The date it was executed if different from the date it bears; 

d. The name, address and position of its author or signer; 

e 

f 

  

fav
] 

. The name, address and position of its addressee, if any; 

Its present location and the name, present address and position of the person or 

persons having present custody; and 
g. Whether it has been destroyed, and if so, with regard to such destruction; 

(1) the date of destruction; 

(11) the reason for destruction; and 

(iii) the identity of the person who destroyed the document. 

(C) "Describe" means to provide a comprehensive, full, frank, fair, complete, accurate and 

detailed description of the matter inquired of. 
(D) "Date" shall mean the exact day, month and year, if known to Defendants, or if the exact date 

is unknown, the best available approximation. 

(E) "You" or "your" shall mean the party to whom these interrogatories are addressed and his 

representatives, attorneys, experts, investigators, insurers, consultants, or anyone acting on behalf 

of the foregoing. 
(F) "Person" shall include any individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation or 

association. 
(G) The male gender includes the female gender and the singular noun or pronoun includes the 

plural. 
(H) "1997 Plan" refers to the Congressional redistricting plan enacted by House Bill 586 as 

amended on the floor of the House and subsequently approved on March 26, 1997 and passed by 

the Senate of the North Carolina General Assembly on March 27, 1997. 
(I) "1992 Plan" refers to the Congressional redistricting plan enacted by House Bill 3 approved 

by the House on January 23, 1992 and the Senate of the North Carolina General Assembly on 

January 24, 1992.. 
(J) "1998 plan" refers to the Congressional redistricting plan enacted by House Bill 1384, 

approved by the North Carolina General Assembly on May 21, 1998. 

(K) "Members or employees of the North Carolina General Assembly significantly involved in the 

drafting of the 1997 plan" specifically includes Senator Cooper, Representative McMahan, Mr. 

Gerry Cohen, and Mr. Linwood Jones. It also includes any other member or employee of the 

North Carolina General Assembly who made a material contribution to the creation or alteration 

of any draft plan which was a precursor to the 1997 plan. 

(L) "Northeastern North Carolina" means all of the 20 counties included in whole or in part in the 
First Congressional District as well as Caswell, Johnston, Sampson, Duplin, Franklin, Nash, 

Chowan, Perquimans, Pasquotank, Camden, Currituck, Tyrrell, Pamlico, Hyde, and Dare 

counties, and any other counties northeast of these counties, but does not include Durham or 

Wake counties. 

 



  

INTERROGATORIES FOR STATE DEFENDANTS: 
  

1. If you claim that the First Congressional District in the 1992 Plan was not drawn in violation 

of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, please state the grounds for that 

claim, including whether race predominated in its creation, what compelling government interests 

led to its creation, and how it was narrowly tailored to serve these interests? 

2. If the Court should find that race predominated in the creation of the 1st District in the 1997 

plan and that therefore the 1st District is subject to strict scrutiny, list all compelling state 

interests you contend that the state of North Carolina has which led to the configuration of the 1st 

District in the 1997 plan and explain how the 1% District of the 1997 plan is narrowly tailored to 

serve each such interest. 

3. If the Court should find that race predominated in the creation of the 12th District in the 1997 
plan and that therefore the 12th District is subject to strict scrutiny, list all compelling state 

interests you contend that the state of North Carolina has which led to the configuration of the 

12th District in the 1997 plan and explain how the 12" District of the 1997 plan is narrowly 

tailored to serve each such interest? 

4. Identify any and all witnesses, sources, and documents which you contend support the position 

that the African-American population in northeastern North Carolina is sufficiently large and 

geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member North Carolina Congressional 

district? 

5. Identify every redistricting map or plan you are aware of which illustrates the presence of an 

African-American population in northeastern North Carolina that is sufficiently large and 

geographically compact to constitute a majority of the total population in a single member 

Congressional District. 

6. Identify every redistricting map or plan you are aware of which illustrates the presence of an 

African-American population in northeastern North Carolina that is sufficiently large and 

geographically compact to constitute a majority of the voting age population in a single member 

Congressional District. 

7. Identify every redistricting map or plan you are aware of which supports or illustrates the 

presence elsewhere in North Carolina of an African-American population that is sufficiently large 

and geographically compact to constitute a majority of the voting age population in a single- 

member North Carolina Congressional district. 

8. Do you claim that the 1997 Plan’s 12™ District was drawn so as to maximize the Democratic 

strength among voters included within the district boundaries? 

 



9. If you claim that race was not a predominant motive in the drawing of the 1997 plan’s 12th 

District, identify any procedures, criteria, principles, tests, or safeguards, whether written or 

verbally agreed to, that were used by the North Carolina General Assembly which you claim tend 

to show that race was not a predominant factor in the drawing up of the 12th District of the 1997 

plan. 

10. If you claim that race was not a predominant motive in the drawing of the 1997 plan’s 1st 

District, identify any procedures, criteria, principles, tests, or safeguards, whether written or 

verbally agreed to, that were used by the North Carolina General Assembly which tend to show 

that race was not a predominant factor in the drawing up of the 1st District of the 1997 plan. 

11. Identify the times and dates of any meetings that took place between any then-incumbent 

North Carolina congressmen and any members or employees of the North Carolina General 

Assembly significantly involved in the drafting process of the 1997 plan, or their respective agents 

or representatives, in which redistricting was discussed between June 28, 1993 and March 26, 

1997 as well as any documents or records produced during or following any such meeting which 

in any way discussed the subject matter or substantive comments made in such meeting. 

12. Identify when, by whom, and under what circumstances lines in the 1997 plan were first 

proposed or thereafter modified for congressional district boundaries that in the 1997 plan split 

any of these counties, in the manner the county was ultimately split in the 1997 plan: Washington, 

Beaufort, Craven, Pitt, Wayne, Lenoir, Jones, Mecklenburg, Iredell, Rowan, Davidson, Forsyth, 

Person, Granville, Wilson and Guilford. 

13. Identify and describe the nature, extent, and use of any and all racial data, demographic data, 

voter registration data, election contests results, or other statistical data used or evaluated by any 

member or employee of the North Carolina General Assembly significantly involved in the 

drawing up of the 1997 plan but not reproduced in the 1997 plan Voting Rights Act Section 5 

submission. 

14. What relative weight did the General Assembly give to each of the measures of 

Democratic/Republican strength or support known to it prior to drawing the plan, in determining 

which precincts to include in each redrawn district? 

15. Prior to adoption of the 1997 plan, was any analysis performed of any other voter 

registration data by race as to any congressional district being drawn other than data which was 

used in the Legislative Services Office, Information Services Division computer program for the 

1992 Plan, and if so, identify the source and date of this voter registration data? 

16. Identify and produce any computer program used by any member or employee of the North 

Carolina General Assembly significantly involved in the drawing up of the 1997 plan to assist that 

person in the drawing up or evaluation of any redistricting map, whether publicly released or not 

(other than the Legislative Services Office, Information Services Division program referred to in  



the VRA Section 5 Submission). 

17. List all plans, whether released publicly or not, that were generated by any member or 

employee of the North Carolina General Assembly who was significantly involved in drawing up 

the 1997 plan as well as the location of the computers and terminals where the plans were 

generated. 

18. List and produce all official listings or records of race of candidates and office holders for the 
last 10 years for political jurisdictions (including county, city, school board, or General Assembly 
positions) which include any part of the 26 counties included in whole or in part in the 1st or 12th 

Districts. 

19. List the names of all black elected officials in all twenty-six counties in the 1997 Plan 1 and 

12™ Districts who were elected during the 1988 to 1996 elections, including elections to county, 

city, school board, or General Assembly positions, together with the black voting age population 

for the jurisdiction from which they were elected. 

20. List and produce any additional data added to the Legislative Services Office, Information 

Service Division's computer system after the 1991-1992 redistricting and before the 1997 plan 
was adopted, as well as any data removed from said computer system since the 1991 redistricting 

and note the time of its removal. 

21. Before the adoption of the 1997 plan, what information from the NCEC or National 
Committee for an Effective Congress was made available to any member or employee of the 

North Carolina General Assembly significantly involved in the drafting of the plan? From whom 

and to whom? 

22. Before the adoption of the 1997 plan, what information from either of the major national 

political parties or their affiliates was made available to any members or employees of the North 

Carolina General Assembly significantly involved in the drafting of the plan? From whom and to 

whom? 

23. List and describe all partial or complete North Carolina Congressional redistricting plans that 

were drawn up between June 28, 1993 and March 27, 1997 by any member or employee of the 

North Carolina General Assembly significantly involved in the drafting of the 1997 plan that are 

not mentioned or described in the Voting Rights Act Submission for the 1997 plan. 

24. What present (August, 1999) precincts will be split between two or more congressional 

districts if the 1997 plan is used in the 2000 cycle of elections? How many registered voters are 
on each side of each split within each such precinct? 

25. What percentage of African-American perspny/who were within the boundaries of the 1992 

Plan Congressional Districts 1 and 12 are withinAhe boundaries of the 1997 Plan Congressional  



Districts 1 and 12 respectively? 

  

26. What percentage of white persons w ere within the boundaries of the 1992 Plan 

Congressional Districts 1 and 12 are within the boundaries of the 1997 Plan Congressional 

Districts 1 and 12 respectively? 

27. What percentage of African-American persons who are within the boundaries of the 1997 

Plan Congressional Districts 1 and 12 were within the boundaries of the 1992 Plan Congressional 

Districts 1 and 12 respectively? 

28. What percentage of white persons who are within the boundaries of the 1997 Plan 

Congressional Districts 1 and 12 were within the boundaries of the 1992 Plan Congressional 

Districts 1 and 12 respectively? 

29. Identify and describe all facts relied upon by the defendants in support of the following 

defenses set out in their Answer. Include among your response the factual support for the 

following specific allegations made in the Answer: 

A. The ang, that plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for relief under the 

Fourteenth or Fift€en ndment. 

B. The Fifth Defense, that the State has a compelling interest in complying with § 5 of the 

Voting Rights Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c. 

C. The Seventh Defense, that the State has a compelling interest in eradicating the effects 

of past racial discrimination. 
D. The Eight Deffnse, that James B. Hunt, Dennis Wicker, Harold Brubaker and Elaine 

Marshall, sued inf their offisiatCapacities, are not proper defendants to this action. 

E. The Ninth Defense, that plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for relief on the grounds 

their claims are barred by the doctrine of claim preclusion. 

30. What, if any, post-1990 census data do you intend to rely upon in order to establish the 

existence of the Gingles preconditions as to District 1? 

31. List any and all persons who provided advice to the North Carolina General Assembly 

concerning the constitutional requirements to comply with the Equal Protection Clause in drawing 

up the 1997 plan as well as any documents authored by these persons in regard to complying with 

the Equal Protection Clause in drawing up the 1997 plan. 

32. If you claim the 1997 plan was drawn with the specific purpose of protecting the incumbency 

of one or more of the existing officeholders elected in the districts of the 1992 Congressional plan 

in the 1996 general election, including specifically Representative Eva Clayton and Representative 

Mel Watt, state the facts and basis of this claim. 

33. What role did race play in the North Carolina General Assembly’s construction of Districts 1 

and 12 in the 1997 plan? 

 



  

This the 31st day of August, 1999 

Robinson O. Everett 

Everett & Everett 

N.C. State Bar No.: 1385 

Attorney for the Plaintiffs 

P.O. Box 586 

Durham, NC 27702 

Telephone: (919)-682-5691 

  

Williams, Boger, Grady, Davis Ge Tuttle, P.A. 

hi 5 
  

Martin B/ McGee Ed 

State Bar No.: 22198 

Attorneys for the Plaintiffs 

P.O. Box 810 

Concord, NC 28026-0810 

Telephone: (704)-782-1173 

 



  

Doves & Mahlon 
  

Douglas EF. Markham 

Texas State Bar No. 12986975 

Attorney for the Plaintiffs 

333 Clay Suite 4510 

Post Office Box 130923 

Houston, TX 77219-0923 

Telephone: (713) 655-8700 
Facsimile: (713) 655-8701 

 



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

  

I certify that I have this day served the foregoing Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories to 

Defendants by hand delivery to the following addresses: 

Mr. Edwin M. Speas, Jr., Esp. 

Senior Deputy Attorney General 

North Carolina Department of Justice 

P.O. Box 629 

Raleigh, NC 27602 

Mr. Adam Stein 

Ferguson, Stein Wallas, Adkins, Gresham, Sumter, P.A. 
312 W. Franklin St. 

Chapel Hill, NC 27516 

This the 31st day of August, 1999 

Robinson O. Everett 

Attorney for the Plaintiffs 

  

10