Chisom v. Roemer Record Summary Volume I-VIII

    S 
Chisom v. Roemer 

Record Summary 

Volume I  

00002 Complaint 

Plaintiffs file a complaint on behalf of all Black 
registered voters in Orleans parish to challenge the 
election of Justices to the Louisiana Supreme Court 
from the New Orleans area. Plaintiffs contend that 
the present system of electing judges is a violation 
of the 1965 VRA , as amended 42 U.S.C. Section 1973, 
because it dilutes the voting strength of Blacks. 
Filed September 19, 1986 

00019 Amended Complaint 

Plaintiffs submitted this amended complaint in order 
to delete all citations to 42 U.S.C. Section 1973 c 
to 42 U.S.C. Section 1973 in sections I, II and VIII. 
Filed September 30, 1986 

00027 Motion to Continue the Hearing On the Motion For A 
Three Judge Court and To Extend Date For Memorandum 

Defendants ask the Court for a continuance of the 
hearing of plaintiffs's motion for a three judge 
panel and for an extension of the deadline for 
filing of memorandum. GRANTED. 
Filed October 7, 1986 

00030 Ex Parte Motion For Enlargment of Time To Plead 
Pursuant to Local Rule 3.15  

Defendants ask for an extention of time to respond 
to the pending hearing on Plaintiffs' request for a 
three-judge court. GRANTED. 
Filed October 24, 1986 

00032 Plaintiffs' Memorandum Concerning The Need For A 
Three-Judge Court  

Plaintiffs submit that they are entitled to a three-
judge court under 28 U.S.C. §2284. DENIED 
Filed November 4, 1986 



00038 Opposition to Plaintiffs' Request for District 
Court of Three Judges: 

Defendants claim that a three judge court is mandated 
by Section 2284(a) in only three instances, none which 
apply to plaintiffs' cause. Defendants request that 
plaintiffs' request for a district court of three 
judges should be denied. GRANTED. 
Filed November 5, 1986 

00058 Motion To Dismiss for Failure To State A Claim Upon  
Which Relief Can Be Granted Pursuant To Federal Rule 
Of Civil Procedure 12 (b) (6)  

Defendants move the Court to dismiss the action of 
plaintiffs' complaint because the complaint fails to 
state a claim against defendant upon which relief can 
be granted on grounds that §2 does not apply to 
judicial elections. 
Filed March 18, 1987 

00060 Memorandum In Support of Defendant's Motion To Dismiss  
For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be  
Granted: 

Plaintiffs fail to state a claim under FRCP 12 (b) (6), 
and Section 2 of the VRA. Defendants claim that the 
statute upon which plaintiffs' base their action does 
not support the complaint, and there is no provision 
authorizing any court to grant the relief which 
plaintiffs seek. GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 
Filed March 18, 1987 

00081 Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants'  
Motion to Dismiss: 

Memorandum alleges that the Court should deny 
defendants' motion to dismiss and should hold that 
§2 of the VRA applies to judicial elections. 
Submitted (by William P. Quigley) April 6, 1987 

Attachments: 

Mem. Appendix A: 

00098 (Kirskey v. Allain, no. J85-0960 (B) order dated 
06/02/86 holding §2 applicable to judicial elections 
citing VIP v. Baton Rouge, 612 F. 2d 208, 212). 
Granting in part and denied in part the 
State Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. GRANTED. 
Dismissed with prejudice in part to the extent that 
plaintiffs claim asserts that the chancery court 
districts, circuit court districts, and county court 



districts are in violation of the 14th Amendment. 
DENIED: In all other aspects. Filed June 2, 1986 

Mein. Appendix B: 

00101 
U.S. Amicus brief agreeing w/our position in Alexander 
v. Martin; Martin v. Haith jurisdictional stm. in 
Supreme Court filed by North Carolina 

Other decisions submitted: 
Alexander, et al. v. Martin, et al.  
Martin v. Haith 
Kirksey v. Allain 

00156 Reply Memorandum to Plaintiffs' Opposition 

Defendants allege that §2 of the VRA of 1965 
does not apply to judicial elections, and therefore 
asks the Court to grant defendants' Motion to Dismiss 
For Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be 
Granted. Submitted (by Kendall Vick) April 13, 1987 

00173 Opinion 

U.S. District Judge, Charles Schwarz GRANTS 
defendants' motion to dismiss for failure of 
plaintiffs to state a claim upon which relief can be 
granted. 
Filed May 1, 1987 

00190 Judgment (06/08/87) dismissing complaint w/prejudice, 
plaintiffs to bear costs. 

00191 Notice of Appeal  

Plaintiffs' Notice of Appeal of judgment of the 
District Court dismissing plaintiffs' complaint. 
June 17, 1989. 

00193 5th Circuit Order remanding for limited purpose of 
amending opinion. 

00194 Order Amending Opinion 

Amending opinion of May 1, 1987, correcting errors of 
oversight and omission, specifically numbers 4, 5 and 
8. July 10, 1987 



S. • 
00198 Amended Opinion: 

U.S. District Judge, Charles Schwarz, enters opinion 
holding § 2 n/a to judicial elections (alluding to 
"conflict" between Wells & Haith) dismissing 
plaintiffs' complaint for insufficient "intent" 
allegations for 15th Amendment despite "purpose and 
effect" in pleading unless plaintiffs' complaint is 
amended. (May 1, 1987) 

00214 Judgment from District Court that dismissed the 
plaintiffs' complaint. APPEALED. 
Filed February 29, 1988 

00218 Court of Appeals opinion holding (1) judicial elections 
covered by VRA; (2) complaint challenging the at-large 
system of electing Justices from their districts 
established theory of discriminatory intent 
under the 14th and 15th Amendments. REVERSED AND 
REMANDED DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT. 
Filed February 29, 1988 

00220 Motion for Leave of Court to Appear Herein As Amicus  
Curiae: 

Walter F. Marcus' Request to Appear as amicus curiae 
with respect to the whether or not the Court should 
enjoin an Oct. 1 election. (supported enjoining) 
GRANTED. 
Filed June 7, 1988 

END VOLUME I 



BEGIN VOLUME II 

00231 Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction  
(06/15/88) asking court to restrain Deft's from 
conducting any elections to fill position in Louisiana 
Supreme Court First Dist., pending disposition. 

00235 Plaintiffs' Statement of Facts as to which no dispute. 

00244 Engstrom Affidavit 

00267 Ortique Affidavit 

00271 Augustine Affidavit 

00275 Valteau Affidavit 

00277 Brief in Support (Kirksey order) 

00317 Dixon Amicus motion to oppose injunction. GRANTED. 

00324 Amicus Brief filed by Chief Justice opposing injunction 
motion (07/21/88) 

00330 Opposition To Plaintiffs' Motion For A Preliminary 
Injunction And Memorandum In Support Thereof  

Defendants' responses to plaintiffs' statement of 
facts, contend that they have no dispute over the 
statement of facts. They also submitted a memorandum 
with accompanying exhibits (5). Filed June 27, 1988 

Exhibit 1 -- Louisiana's Constitution 
Exhibit 2 -- An Act creating seven single-member 

districts for the supreme court. 
Exhibit 3 -- Judicial Selection Methods in the State 
Exhibit 4 -- Affidavit from Pascal F. Calogero, Jr. 
Exhibit 5 -- Affidavit from Gregory Pechukas 



• 

00402 Motion For Leave to Appear As Amicus Curiae 

Pascal F. Calogero, Jr.'s request for leave to appear 
as amicus curiae so as to oppose plaintiffs' motion 
for preliminary injunction. GRANTED. 
Filed June 27, 1988 

00408 Amicus Curiae Brief 

Amicus Curiae Pascal F. Calogero, submits this brief 
in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary 
injunction on the basis that a State Supreme Court 
election should not be delayed, enjoined, cancelled, 
or otherwise disrupted except as a matter of absolute 
necessity. 
Filed June 27, 1988 

00415 Plaintiffs' Reply Memorandum 

Plaintiffs refute defendants' argument against 
plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. Filed 
June 28, 1988 

00430 Minute Entry 

Affidavit of Silas Lee, III to be filed. GRANTED. 
Filed July 5, 1988 

00431 Affidavit of Silas Lee, III  

Affidavit in support of Appellants' Motion for a 
Preliminary Injunction or, in the alternative, for 
Issuance of the Mandate. 
Filed June 29, 1988 

00436 Opinion 

The Court finds that, based solely on limited evidence 
presented, plaintiffs will succeed on the merits and 
finds that it would be unfair to the public to permit 
the election to proceed, GRANTS the 
preliminaryinjunction pending the final resolution on 
the merits. 
Filed July 7, 1988 

00471 Order 

The court orders the State, et al. are enjoined and 
prohibited from conducting any primary or general 
elections in the State of Louisiana to fill the 
position of Justice on the Louisiana Supreme Court from 
the First Supreme Court District. 
Filed July 7, 1988 



00472 Minute Entry 

Court orders trial to begin on Wednesday, October 19, 
1988 at 9 a.m. 
Filed July 11, 1988 

00474 Minute Entry 

Defendants' ex parte motion for stay of order of 
injunctive relief pending appeal is DENIED. 
Filed July 13, 1988. 

00476 Motion For Stay of Order of Injunctive Relief 
Pending Appeal  

Defendants request district court to stay their order 
of injunctive relief pending a final resolution of 
appeal. DENIED (474). 
Filed July 13, 1988 

00481 Notice of Appeal  

Defendants appeal the order from the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit which enjoined defendants 
from conducting any primary or general elections in the 
State of Louisiana. 
Filed July 13, 1988 

00487 Amending and Superseding Opinion 

The Court found, based solely on limited evidence 
presented,that the plaintiffs will succeed on the 
merits. The Court finds that it would be unfair to the 
public for the election to proceed, and exercises its 
discretion to grant the preliminary injunction pending 
final resolution on the merits. The Court grants 
the plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction. 
Filed July 28, 1988 

Discusses affidavit evidence, Bruneau plan for creation 
of 7 districts (dividing Orleans); Calogero aff. (p. 
498/00028) substituting of Deft's (footnote 28 at 13; 
R. 499/29); Certifying class for enjoining purposes 
only (at 501/31). §2 applicable to judges = law of the 
case (at 503/033). 

00523 Order Amending Opinion 

The Court discovered three errors arising from over-
sight or omission in the Opinion. The Court amended 
its earlier opinion. 
Filed July 28, 1988 



00526 Order/Opinion 

Circuit Judges, Garwood, and Jolly, (Johnson 
dissenting) ordered that the appellants' motion for 
stay pending appeal is GRANTED. The preliminary 
injunction is stayed so as to prohibit actions taken 
prior to the qualifying period for the October 
election. Filed July 26, 1988 

00535 Order 

Granting Darleen Jacobs' Motion to file Amicus Brief. 

00536 Order 

(07/26/88) Motion of Plaintiffs-Appellees to have 
preliminary appeal assigned to original panel DENIED 
(Johnson, dissenting) referring District Court request 
for remand to amend opinion to merits panel. 

00538 Order 

Circuit Judges, Johnson, Garwood, and Jolly ordered 
that the appellants' motion for stay pending appeal 
is Held Under Submission until further order; expedited 
appeal granted. 
Filed July 20, 1988 

END VOLUME II 



S 

BEGIN VOLUME III 

0691 Application Of The United States To Intervene 

The U.S. applied to the Court for leave to intervene 
in Chisom v. Roemer pursuant to Rule 24 (a), and 
(c). GRANTED. 
Filed August 5, 1988 

0693 

0699 

Memo in Support  of U.S. intervention 

Order 

By Garza, Clark, and Politz - request by District Court 
for leave to amend 07/88 opinion. GRANTED. 

0689 Minute Entry 

The courts ruling on the application of the U.S. to 
intervene. GRANTED. 
Filed August 8, 1988 

0678 United States Complaint in Intervention 

The Attorney General filed this complaint in inter-
vention, on behalf of the U.S. (and plaintiffs) 
pursuant to Title IX of the CRA of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 
2000h-2, and VRA of 1965, 42 U.S.C. 1973, alleging 
violation by First Dist.; attaching certification by 
A.G. of general public importance. 

Lawsuit is filed to seek redress for a denial of 
equal protection of the laws. 
Filed August 8, 1988 

0664 Answer to Complaint 

(As last amended on September 30, 1986) 
Defendants answer to Plaintiffs complaint. 
Filed August 15, 1988 

0613 Plaintiffs' Motion For Summary Judgment 

Plaintiffs seek summary judgment on their claim of 
violation of section 2 of the VRA based on affidavit 
and 3.9 stm. DENIED. 
Filed August 16, 1988 



0654 Plaintiffs' Statement Pursuant To This Court's Rule 3.9  

Plaintiffs allege that there is no genuine issue to be 
tried concerning some material facts stated in the 
brief. 
Filed August 16, 1988 

0595 Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion For Summary 
Judgment  

Plaintiffs brief in support of summary judgment on 
their claim that the current method of electing judges 
violates the "results" test of Section 2 of the VRA 
of 1965 as amended, 42 U.S.C. §1973. 
Filed August 16, 1988 

0569 Motion To File Supplemental Affidavit 

Plaintiffs request to submit a supplemental affidavit 
of Dr. Richard Engstrom. GRANTED. 
Filed August 23, 1988 

0567 Supplemental Affidavit of Dr. Richard L. Engstrom 

Dr. Engstrom submitted this affidavit in response to 
findings by the District Court that Dr. Engstrom's 
coefficients differ from coefficients by Henderson in 
Major v. Treen.  
Filed August 24, 1988 

0553 Defendants' Opposition To Plaintiffs' Motion For 
Summary Judgment  

Defendants admit statement of facts in response to 
Plaintiffs Statement of Finding of Facts, but deny 
that this Court is bound by such factual findings. 
Filed August 26, 1988 

0546 Minute Entry 

Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment. DENIED. 
The Court ordered that the trial begin on December 14, 
1988 at 9 a.m. 
Filed September 2, 1988 



0548 Motion For Expedited Hearing 

Defendants move for an expedited hearing on August 31, 
1988 of the Motion to Strike filed August 26, 1988. 
The motion to strike affects exhibits attached to 
Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment. 
(I don't know whether it was Granted or Denied) 
Filed August 26, 1988 

0577 Opinion (5th Cir.) 

Circuit Judges, Garza and Politz assign reasons for the 
decision to vacate the preliminary injunction issued by 
the district court which had enjoined the election of a 
justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court from the First 
Supreme Court District. Filed August 19, 1988. 

END VOLUME III 



BEGIN VOLUME IV 

0961 Constitutional Provisions Concerning the Election of 
the Louisiana Supreme Court  

The history and development of Louisiana's constitution 
NO DATE 

0942 Affidavit of Dr. Robert S. Miller 

Dr. Robert Miller submits this affidavit in support of 
the defendants' opposition to plaintiffs' motion for 
summary judgment. 
Filed August 25, 1988 

0835 Affidavit of Dr. Ronald E. Weber 

Ronald Weber submits this affidavit in support of the 
defendants' opposition to plaintiffs' motion for 
summary judgment. 
Filed August 25, 1988 

0800 Memorandum In Support of Defendants' Opposition to 
Plaintiffs' Motion For Summary Judgment And In  
Support of Defendants' Motion To Strike  

Defendants suggest to the Court that this case is a 
matter of vital importance to Louisiana and its 
citizens, and should be fully tried on the merits. 
Filed September 29, 1988 

0792 Motion to Strike 

Defendants move the Court to strike portions of 
certain affidavits filed in support of Plaintiffs' 
Motion for Summary Judgment. (I don't know whether it 
was Granted or Denied) 
Filed September 29, 1988 

0775 Motion To Intervene of Pascal F. Calogero, Jr.  

Justice Calogero moves pursuant to FRCP Rule 24 
to intervene as of right in the action as a 
defendant. GRANTED. 
Filed November 22, 1988 

0770 Response For The United States To Motion For Leave 
To Intervene  

Plaintiffs do not oppose Justice Calogero's motion for 
intervention for the defendants in the case. 
Filed December 13, 1988 



0757 Motion For the United States To Lift Stay of Discovery 

The United States moved for the entry of an order 
lifting the stay of discovery. GRANTED. 
Filed December 20, 1988 

0751 Response To Motion For United States To Lift Stay of  
Discovery 

Defendants response to Plaintiffs request to lift stay 
of discovery. 
Filed January 3, 1989 

0705 Motion To Intervene 

Walter F. Marcus, moves to intervene pursuant to Rule 
24 (a) as a defendant, and that he be entitled to 
permissively intervene in this litigation in conformity 
with Rule 24 (b). GRANTED. 
Filed February 28, 1989 

0702 Supplemental List of Potential Witnesses For The 
United States  

Plaintiffs submit an additional list of potential 
witnesses. 
Filed March 8, 1989 

END VOLUME IV 



• 

BEGIN VOLUME V 

1050 Pretrial Order 

Pretrial order filed pursuant to the Court's pretrial 
notice. 
Entered March 30, 1989 

1011 Pretrial Memorandum for the United States  

Filed by the United States plaintiff-intervenor in 
support of its claim that the multi-member district 
election system in Louisiana's First Supreme Court 
District (First. District) dilutes the voting strength 
of blaCk citizens in violation of Section 2 of the VRA. 
Filed April 3, 1989 

0970 Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 

Filed by the United States, plaintiff-intervenor on 
April 3, 1989 

0969 Pretrial Memorandum 

Filed by Defendants on April 3, 1989 

0968 Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 

Filed by Defendants on April 3, 1989 

END VOLUME V 



BEGIN VOLUME VI 

1300 

1304 

Defendants Answer to Compl. in Intervention 

Notice of Filing Unreported Decisions  

Defendants submitted unreported decisions of two U.S. 
District Courts in its Pretrial Memorandum. 
Filed April 3, 1989. Amending Opinion. 
Attaching: 
Clark (1307) 
NAACP v. Stark (1319) 
Clark Findings (1361) 

1280 Answer Concerning Voter Participation In Judicial • 
Elections  

Defendants submit illustration of turnout in low 
salience elections for Orleans Parish. 
Filed April 28, 1989. 

1291 Exhibit List for U.S. 

1296 Defendants' Exhibit List 

1297 Plaintiffs' Exhibit List 

1201 Plaintiffs' Supplemental Proposed Findings of Fact  

1213 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 7 (Table on Low Salience Elections) 

1220 Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of the 
United States  

The U.S., plaintiff-intervenor submits the proposed 
findings of fact which incorporate the proposed 
findings •and conclusions submitted prior to the trial. 
Filed May 9, 1989 

1199 Plaintiffs' Motion To Supplement the Record 

Plaintiffs move for an order admitting into evidence 
the attached table, provided by Richard Engstrom. 
GRANTED. 



Filed May 9, 1989 

1140 Findings of Fact 

U.S. District Charles Schwarz renders his opinion and 
findings of fact regarding the voting discrimination 
case. DENIED Plaintiffs complaint. 
Filed September 13, 1989 

1138 Judgment 

U.S. District Judge Charles Schwarz ordered judgment in 
favor of Defendants, dismissing suit with prejudice. 
9-13-89. 
Filed September 14, 1989 

1136 Notice of Appeal  

Notice given to U.S. Court of Appeals that plaintiffs 
appeal final judgment entered on 9-13-89, by U.S. 
District Court Judge Schwarz 
Filed September 25, 1989 

END VOLUME VI 



BEGIN VOLUME VII 

Transcript of Proceedings on Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary 
Injunction. (June 29, 1988) 
Counsel for Plaintiffs: Pam Karlan 
Counsel for Defendants: Robert Pugh 

END VOLUME VII 



BEGIN VOLUME VIII 

Transcript of Proceedings on Wednesday, April 5, 1989 

Proceedings for bench trial on the merits. 

Counsel for Plaintiffs: 
Judith Reed 
Roy J. Rodney, Jr. 
Sherrilyn If ill 
William P. Quigley 
Ronald Wilson 
Robert S. Berman 
Steven Rosenbaum 
Lora Treadway 

Counsel for Defendants: 
Robert G. Pugh 
Moise Dennery 

END VOLUME VIII 



SUPPLEMENTAL VOLUME 

U.S. Notice of Appeal from Judgment entered 09/14/89. Filed 
November 13, 1989.