Fax From Chachkin to Cox RE: Edits on Motion To Intervene As Appellants

Correspondence
October 1, 1998

Cite this item

Fax From Chachkin to Cox RE: Edits on Motion To Intervene As Appellants preview

2 pages

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

Impact area
- Political Participation
Topic
- Redistricting
LDF Attorneys
Cooperating Attorneys
Organizations
Matter
- Cromartie v. Hunt (Daly v. Hunt)
Case
- Cromartie v. Hunt (Daly v. Hunt)
U.S. state
- North Carolina
Collection
- Case Files
Taxonomy
Identifier
- bebce4ab-e40e-f011-9989-7c1e5267c7b6

Cite this item

Case Files, Cromartie Hardbacks. Fax From Chachkin to Cox RE: Edits on Motion To Intervene As Appellants, 1998. bebce4ab-e40e-f011-9989-7c1e5267c7b6. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/10ec0685-b71c-460f-a391-5f06197e4542/fax-from-chachkin-to-cox-re-edits-on-motion-to-intervene-as-appellants. Accessed October 05, 2025.

Copied!

OCT. -01" 98 (THU) 15:15 WO gt DEFENSE TEL:212 ®

MOTION OF ALFRED SMALLWOOD, DAVID MOORE, WILLIAM M, HODGES,
ROBERT L. DAVIS, JR., JAN VALDER, BARNEY OFFERMAN, VIRGINIA NEWELL,

CHARLES LAMBETH, AND GEORGE SIMKINS
(CURRENTLY DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS IN THE COURT BELOW)

TO INTERVENE AS APPELLANTS IN THIS COURT

Alfred Smallwood, David Moore, William M. Hodges, Robert L. Davis, Jr., Jan Valder,

Bamey Offerman, Virginia Newell, Charles lambeth and George Simkins (“Applicants”), by their

undersigned attorneys, respectfully move this court for leave to intervene as appellants in the

above-captioned action, so that they may protect their interests (which have been recognized by

the court below in permitting their intervention as defendant-intervenors below following entry of

the order under review on this appeal) in sustaining the constitutionality of the Twelfth

Congressional District. As grounds for this motion, Applicants state the following:

1. Applicants are white and black registered voters residing in either North Carolina’s

Twelfth Congressional District or its First Congressional District (as reconfigured in the

legislature’s 1997 plan).

3... . over nine months and four months respectively . . . [no bold]

7. [drop everything after first sentence]

8... . Even before applicants were allowed to participate as a party in this case, they filed

pleadings throughout the litigation, including in the summary judgment and preliminary injunction

phases of the litigation, and appeared at the hearing on these issues in March, 1998. _ _ .

OCT. -01" 98 (THU) 15:15 wa DEFENSE TEL: 212 0 P. 001

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Fax From Chachkin to Cox RE: Edits on Motion To Intervene As Appellants

Impact area

Topic

LDF Attorneys

Cooperating Attorneys

Organizations

Matter

Case

U.S. state

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in