Answer to Second Supplement to Complaint
Public Court Documents
March 26, 1982
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Thornburg v. Gingles Hardbacks, Briefs, and Trial Transcript. Answer to Second Supplement to Complaint, 1982. d31d9a3c-d792-ee11-be37-000d3a574715. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/108ab0d4-a10b-4113-9e98-e33540714cca/answer-to-second-supplement-to-complaint. Accessed November 29, 2025.
Copied!
' 't 3't6-{1.
rN THE UNITED STATES DTSTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRTCT OF NORTH CAROLINA
RALEIGH DIVTSION
crvrl AcTroN }ro. 81-803-crv-5
RALPH GINGLES, €t dI.,
Plaintiffs,
VS. ANSWER TO SECOND SUPPLEI4ENT TO
CO}TPLAINT
RUFUS EDMfSTEN, etc., et dl,
Defendants.
FTRST DEFENSE
The complaint, as supplemented, fails to state a claim
upon vhich relief can be granted.
SECOND DEFENSE
The Defendants in the above-captioned action answer the
allegations contained in the second supplement to com.plaint as
follows:
1. The alleqations contained in paragraph 105, to the
effect that the court has jurisdiction over the claims in the
second supplement to complaj-nt pursuant to the same statutes
that give the court jurisdiction over the original compraint,
28 u.s.c. s1331 and s1343 and 42 u.s.c. S1973c, are admitted.
Defendants deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 105.
2- The allegations contained in Paragraph 105 are adnitted.
3. with respect to paragrapli Lo'l , it is admitted that
following an objection by the United States Department of Justice
pursuant to 55 of the Voting Rights Act, the General Assemhly
repealed the october, 1981 apportionment of the North carolina
House of Representatives contained in Chapter 1130 of the Sessj-on
Laws of 1981 and the Ju1y, L981 apportionment of the North Caro-
lina Senate contai-ned in Chapter 821 of the Session Lar.rs of IgB1.
with respect to those allegations contained in paragraph 107
which arrege that the repeal of chapter 1130 and chapter g2I of
the Session Laws of 1981 r,ras brought about h1z, or was in any ltray
intended as a response to, the filing of this action, those arle-
gations are specifically denied.
-2-
4. The allegations contained in Paragraph 108 are admitted.
5. The allegations contained in Paragraph 109 are denied.
6. The allegations contained in Paragraph 110 are d.enied.
7. The allegations contained in Paragraph I11 are admitted.
8. The allegations contained in Paragraph Ll2 are denied.
9. The allegations contained i-n Paragraph 113 are denied.
10. The allegations contained in Paragraph 114 are admitted.
11. The allegations contained in Paragraph 115 are denied.
12. The allegations contained in Paraqraph 116 are denied.
13. The allegations contained in Paragraph 117 are admitted.
L4. The allegations contained in Paragraph 118 are denied.
15. The allegations contained in Paragraph 119 are denied.
16. I^Iith respect to Paragraph 120 , it is admitted that the
Plaintiffsrattempt to base a claim on 52 and 55 of the Voting
Rights Act of 1965r 6rs amended, 42 u.s.c. 51973 and S1973c. To
the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph l2o
differ from the response herein, those allegations are denied.
17. The allegations contained in paragraph 121 are denied.
18. With respect to Paragraph L22, it is admitted that
Plaintiffs' attempt to found a claim for relief on 42 tr.s.c.
51983 to enforce the Thirteenth Amendment, the eoual protection
clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Fifteenth Amend-
ment to the united states constitution and pursuant to 42 u.s.c.
51981. To the extent that the allegations containerl in para-
graph L22 diffei from the r.=por,". herein, those allegations are
denied.
19. The allegations contained in paragraph 123 are denied.
20. The allegations contained in paragraph 124 are denied.
21. The allegations contained in paragraph ]-zs are denied,
22. The allegations contained in paragraph 126 are denied.
23. The allegations contained in paragraph t27 are denied.
24. The allegations contained in paragraph r2g are denied.
25. rt is admitted that follov,ing an objection hy the rJnitecl
States Department of Justice pursuant to 55 of the \roting F.ights
Act, the North Carolina General Assembly repealecl Chapter 894 of
-3-
the sessions Laws of 1981, which rvas the July, r9g1 Apportion-
ment of North Carolina's Congressional districts. With respect
to the allegations contained in Paragraph 129 which a11ege that
the repeal of chapter 894 was brought about by, or r^ras in any
way intended as a response to, the filing of this action, those
allegations are specifically denied
26. The allegations contained in paragraph 130 are denj-ed.
27. The allegations contained in Paragraph 131 are admitted..
28. The allegations contained in paragraph r32 are denied.
29. The allegatj-ons contained in paragraph 133 are denied.
30. The allegations contained in your second paragraph 133
are deni-ed.
31. ft is admitted that Plaintiffs attempt to found their
clai-m for relief on. the Fourteenth .Frnendment and to bring their
action pursuant to 42 u.s.c. 51983 to enforce the Thirteenth
Amendment, the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amend-
ment, and the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitu-
tion, 42 U.S.C. 51981, and 52 and 55 of the Voting Rights Act
of 1965r dS amended, 42 Il.s.c. s1973 and S1973c. All alIega-
tions contained in Paragraph 134 which are inconsistent lrrith the
response herein are deni-ed.
WHEREFORE, Defendants having fu11y ansr.rered each and every
allegation contained in Plaintiffs' Second Supplement to Complaint,
and having set forth their defenses in their earlier pleadings,
pray that this Court deny the rblief requested and dismiss the
Complaint with prejudice.
Respectfully submitted this the 2-b day of tlarch , 1982.
RUFUS L. EDMISTEIq
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Attorney Generalrs Office
North Carolina Department
of Justice
Post Office Box 629
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Telephone: (919) 733-3377
tv Attorney/fteneral
or Legal Afflairs
-4-
Attorney for Defendants
Norma Harrell
Tiare Smiley
Assistant Attorneys General
John Lassiter
Associate Attorney General
.ferris Leonard
KathLeen Keenan
Jerris Leonard & Associates, P.C.
900 17th Street, N.I{.
Suite 1020
l{ashington, D. C. 20006
Telephone: (202) 872-L095
1..
F5-
CERTTFTCATE OF SERVTCE
r hereby certify that r ha.ve this day served the fore-coing
Answer to Second Supplement to Complaint upon Plaintiffs I attorneys
by placing a cotr'4r of said Pleading in the United States post Off ice,
postage prepaid, addressed to:
J. Levonne Chambers
Leslie Winner
Chambers, Ferguson, Watt, Wa11as,
Adl<ins & Ful1er, p.A.
951 South Independence Boulevarcl
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Jack Greenberg
James M. Nabrit, III
Napeoleon B. WiLliams, Jr.
I0 Columbus Circle
New York, DIew York 10019
This tne JG day of March , IgA2.