Minute Entry - Status Conference; Pre-Trial Notice; Minute Entry - Filing of Affidavit; Affidavit of Silas Lee, III

    DSTR1CT COURT 
&E ASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA 
a  1 

MINUTE ENTRY 
July 11, 1988 
SCHWARTZ, J. 

RONALD CHISOM, ET AL. 

VERSUS 

EDWIN EDWARDS, ET AL. 

LED 

LORETTA G 
et EPK 

,..V. .412,101MSM1111.611NIMOWIAMMUCK.OLICOM'an  

Civil Action 

No. 86-4075 

Section HAH 

A status conference was held in this matter on June 7, 1988. 

Participating were: 

Bill Quigley 
Ronald L. Wilson 
Roy Rodney 
Judith Reed 
Bob Pugh 
Moise W. Dennery 
A.R. Christovich 
Charles A. Kronlage 
Peter J. Butler 

for plaintiffs 
plaintiffs 
plaintiffs 
plaintiffs 
defendants 
defendants 
defendants 
J. Calogero, amicus curiae 
J. Marcus, amicus curiae 

In light of the Court's now having issued a preliminary injunc-

tion and pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 16(b) and the agreement among 

counsel at the conferenc, it is now ORDERED that: 

Trial shall commence on Wednesday, October 19, 1988, at 9 

a.m. The final pre-trial conference shall be held on Friday, Oc-

tober 7, 1988, at 3:30 p.m. All motions to join other parties or 

to amend the pleadings shall filed on or before August 6, 1988. 

All pre-trial motions shall be filed so as to be heard on or be-

fore September 16, 1988. All discovery shall be complete on or 

before September 30, 1988. The parties shall file witness lists 

on or before August 31, 1988. Plaintiffs' expert reports shall be 

exchanged on or before August 16, 1988; defendants' expert reports 

shall be exchanged on or before September 16, 1988. 

DATE OF r LIMY 0/:• ,--, 41 l'PE1  



THIS PRETRIAL NOTICE CONTAINS NEW MATERIAL 

REVISED JULY, 1985 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA 

PRE-TRIAL NOTICE  

IT IS ORDERED that a pretrial conference will be held 
in chambers before Judge Charles Schwartz, Jr., Section "A", in 
the cases shown on the attached list on the dates and the times 

there indicated. 

The purpose of the pretrial conference is to secure 
a just and speedy determination of the issues. If the type of 
pretrial order set forth below does not appear calculated to 

achieve these ends in your case, please arrange a conference 
with the Judge and opposing counsel immediately so that alter-
native possibilities may be discussed. 

The procedure necessary for the preparation of the 
formal pretrial order that will be reviewed and entered at this 

conference is as follows: 

I. 

The pretrial-order, in duplicate, must be delivered to 
the Court's chambers by 4:30 p.m. on a day that allows one full 

work day prior to the conference, excluding Saturdays, Sundays 
and holidays (i.e., if the conference is set for 10:00 a.m. 
Friday, it must be delivered by 4:30 p.m. Wednesday. If the 
conference is set on Monday, the pretrial order will be delivered 

to the Judge on Thursday by 4:30 p.m.). 

Counsel for all parties shall confer in person (face 

to face) at their earliest convenience for the purpose of arriv-
ing at all possible stipulations and for the exchange of copies 
of documents that will be offered in evidence at the trial. It 
shall be the duty of counsel for plaintiff to initiate this con-
ference, and the duty of other counsel to respond. If, after 
reasonable effort, any party cannot obtain the cooperation of 
other counsel, it shall be his duty to communicate immediately 

with the Court. 

THIS PRETRIAL NOTICE CONTAINS NEW MATERIAL 

REVISED JULY, 1985 



The conference of counsel shall be held at least ten days prior 
to the date of the scheduled pretrial conference in order that 
counsel for all parties can furnish each other with a statement 
of the real issues each party will offer evidence to support, 
eliminating any issues that might appear in the pleadings about 
which there is no real controversy, and, including in such state— 
ment issues of law as well as ultimate issues of fact from the 
standpoint of each party. Counsel for plaintiff then will pre— 
pare a pretrial order and submit it to opposing counsel, after 
which all counsel jointly will submit the original and one copy 
of the final draft of the proposed pretrial order to the Judge. 

At their meeting, counsel must consider the following: 

A. Jurisdiction. Since jurisdiction may not ever be con— 
ferred by consent and since prescription or statutes of limitations 
may bar a new action if the case or any ancillary demand is dis— 
missed for lack of jurisdiction, counsel should make reasonable 

effort to ascertain that the Court has jurisdiction. 

B. Parties. Correctness of identity of legal entities; 
necessity for appointment of tutor, guardian, administrator, 
executor, etc., and validity of appointment if already made; 
correctness of designation of party as partnership, corporation 

or individual d/b/a/ trade name. 

C. Joinder. Questions of misjoinder or nonjoinder of parties. 

IV. 

At the pretrial conference counsel must be fully autho— 
rized and prepared to discuss settlement possibilities with the 
Court. Counsel are urged to discuss the possibility of settlement 
with each other thoroughly before undertaking the extensive labor 
of preparing the proposed pretrial order. Save your time, the 

Court's time, and the client's time and money. 

V. 

The pretrial •conference must be attended by the attorneys 
who will try the case, unless prior to the conference the Court 
grants permission for other counsel to attend. These attorneys 
will familiarize themselves with the pretrial rules, and will come 
to the conference with full authority to accomplish the purposes 
of Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

VI. 

Pretrial conferences will not be continued except for 
good cause shown in a written motion presented sufficiently in 
advance of the conference for opposing counsel to be notified. 

—2— 



VII. 

Failure of counsel to appear at the conference may 
result in sanctions, including but not limited to sua sponte 
dismissal of the suit, assessment of costs and attorney fees, 
default or other appropriate sanctions. 

VIII. 

All pending motions and all special issues or defenses 
raised in the pleadings must be called to the Court's attention 

in the pretrial order. 

IX. 

The pretrial order shall bear the signatures of all 
counsel at the time it is submitted to the Court; the pretrial 
order shall contain an appropriate signature space for the Judge. 
Following the pretrial conference, the signed copy of the order 
shall be filed into the record, and the additional copy shall be 
retained in the Judge's work file. The order will set forth: 

1. The date of the pretrial conference. 

2. The appearance of counsel identifying the party(s) 

represented. 

3. A description of the parties, and in cases of insurance 
carriers, their insured must be identified. The legal 
relationships of all parties with reference to the 
claims, counterclaims, third party claims and cross 

claims, etc. 

4. a. With respect to jurisdiction, a brief summary of 
the factual basis supporting each claim asserted, 
whether original claim, counterclaim or third-party 
claim, etc., and, the legal and jurisdictional basis 
for each such claim, or, if contested, the jurisdic-

tional questions; 

b. In diversity damage suits, there is authority for 
dismissing the action, either before or after trial, 
where it appears that the damages reasonably could 
not come within the $10,000 jurisdictional limitation. 
Therefore, the proposed pretrial order in such cases 
shall contain either a stipulation that $10,000 is 
involved or a resume of the evidence supporting the 
claim that such sum reasonably could be awarded. 

5. A list and descriRtion of any motions pending or contem-
plated and any special issues appropriate for determina-
tion in advance of trial on the merits. If the Court 
at any prior hearing has indicated that it would decide 

-3-



certain matters at the time of pretrial, a brief summary 
of those matters and the position of each party with re— 
spect thereto should be included in the pretrial order. 

6. A brief summary of the material facts claimed by: 

a. 
b. 
C. 

Plaintiff 
Defendant 
Other parties. 

7. A single listing of all uncontested material facts. 

8. A single listing of the contested issues of fact. (This 
does not mean that counsel must concur in a statement 
of the issues; it simply means that they must list in 
a single list all issues of fact.) Where applicable, 
particularities concerning the following fact issues 

shall be set forth: 

a. Whenever there is in issue the seaworthiness of a 
vessel or an alleged unsafe condition of property, 
the material facts and circumstances relied upon 
to establish the claimed unseaworthy or unsafe 
condition shall be specified with particularity; 

b. Whenever there is in issue negligence of the de— 
fendant or contributory or comparative negligence 
of the plaintiff, the material facts and circum— 
stances relied upon to establish the claimed 
negligence shall be specified with particularity; 

c. Whenever personal injuries are at issue, the nature 
and extent of the injuries and of any alleged dis— 
ability shall be specified with particularity; 

d. Whenever the alleged breach of a contractual obli— 
gation is in issue, the act or omissions relied 
upon as constituting the claimed breach shall be 
specified with particularity; 

e. Whenever the meaning of a contract or other writing 
is in issue, all facts and circumstances surrounding 
execution and subsequent to execution, both those 
admitted and those in issue, which each party con— 
tends serve to aid interpretation, shall be specified 

with particularity; 

f. Whenever duress or fraud or mistake is in issue, and 
set forth in the pleadings, the facts and circumstances 
relied upon as constituting the claimed duress or fraud 
or mistake (see Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b)) shall also be set 

forth in the pretrial order; 



g. If special damages are sought, they shall be item— 
ized with particularity. (See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

9(0); 

h. If a conspiracy is charged, the details of facts 
constituting the conspiracy shall be particularized. 

9. A single listing of the contested issues of law. (See 

explanation in 8, above.) 

10. For each party, a list and description of exhibits 
intended to be introduced at the trial. Prior to the 
confection of the pretrial order, the parties shall 
meet, exchange copies of all exhibits, and agree as to 
their authenticity and relevancy. As to any exhibits 
to which the parties cannot agree, memorada shall be 
submitted on or before five working days prior to trial. 

a. Each list of exhibits first should describe those 
that are to be admitted without objection, and then 
those to which there will be objection, noting by 
whom the objection is made (if there are multiple 
adverse parties), and the nature of the objection. 
Markers identifying each exhibit shall be attached 
to the exhibits at the time they are shown to oppos— 
ing counsel during preparation of the pretrial order. 

b. If a party considers he has good cause not to dis— 
close exhibits to be used solely for the purpose 
of impeachment, he may ex parte request a confer— 
ence with the Court and make his position known to 

the Court in camera. 

c. Where appropriate to preserve trade secrets or 
privileges, the listing of exhibits may be made 
subject to a protective order or in such other 
fashion as the Court may direct. If there are 
such exhibits, the pretrial order will state: 
The parties will discuss exhibits alleged to be 
privileged (or to contain trade secrets, etc.) 
at the pretrial conference. 

d. The trial will be expedited if, in addition to the 
formal list of exhibits, copies are made for oppos— 
ing counsel, and a bench book of exhibits is pre— 
pared and delivered to the Court five working days 
before the start of the trial. If the trial is a 

jury trial and counsel desires to display exhibits 
to the members of the jury, then sufficient copies 
of such exhibits must be available so as to provide 
each juror with a copy, or alternatively, enlarged 
photographic copies •or projected copies should be 
used. The Clerk of Court has available an opaque 
projector, and arrangements for its use should be 
made directly with the Clerk. 

—5— 



e. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, only exhibits 
included on the exhibit list and/or for which memoranda 
have been submitted shall be included for use at trial. 

Each counsel shall submit to the Court on the day of 
trial a list of exhibits properly marked for identifi— 
cation he or she desires to use at trial. 

11.0.. A list of all deposition testimony to be offered into 
evidence. The parties shall, prior to trial, meet and 
agree as to the elimination of all irrelevant and re— 
petitive matter and all colloquy between counsel. In 
addition, the parties shall, in good faith, attempt to 
resolve all objections to testimony so that the Court 
will be required to rule on only those objections to 
which they cannot reach an agreement as to their merit. 
As to all objections to the testimony which cannot be 
amicably resolved, the parties shall deliver to the 
Court, not less than three days prior to trial, a 
statement identifying the portions objected to, and 
the grounds therefor. Proponents and opponents shall 
furnish the Court appropriate statements of authorities 
in support of their positions as to the proposed testi— 

mony. 

‘). In non—jury trials, the parties shall, at least three 
days prior to trial, submit to the Court: 

A summary of what each party intends to prove and 
convey to the Court by the deposition testimony, in— 
cluding, where appropriate, particular page and line 
reference to said depositions. The parties shall indi— 
cate to the Court by page and line numbers, those parts 
of the deposition which each party intends to use, and 
upon which each party shall rely, in proving their 

respective cases. 

12. a. A list and brief description of any charts, graphs, 
models, schematic diagrams, and similar objects 
which, although not to be offered in evidence, 
respective counsel intend to use in opening state— 
ments or closing arguments; 

b. Either a stipulation that the parties have no 
objection to the use of the listed objects for 
such purpose, or a statement of the objections 
to their use; and a statement that if other such 
objects are to be used by any party, they will 
be submitted to opposing counsel at least three 
days prior to trial and, if there is then opposi— 
tion to their use, the dispute will be submitted 
to the Court at least one day prior to trial. 



S 

13. a. A list of witnesses for all parties, including 
the names, addresses and statement of the general 
subject matter of their testimony (it is not 
sufficient to designate the witness simply "fact", 
"medical" or "expert"), and an indication in good  
faith of those which will be called in the absence 
of reasonable notice to opposing counsel to the 
contrary, and of those which may possibly be called. 

b. A statement that the witness list was filed in 
accordance with prior court orders. No other 
witness shall be allowed unless agreeable to all 
parties and their addition does not affect the 
trial date. This restriction will not apply to 
rebuttal witnesses whose necessity cannot be 
reasonably anticipated. Furthermore, in the case 
of expert witnesses, counsel shall certify that 
they have exchanged expert reports in accordance 
with prior court orders. Expert witnesses whose 
reports have not been furnished opposing counsel 
shall not be permitted to testify nor shall ex— 
perts be permitted to testify to opinions not 
included in the reports timely furnished; 

c. Except for good cause shown, the Court will not 
permit any witness to testify unless with respect 
to such witness there has been complete compliance 
with all provisions of the pretrial order and 

prior court orders; 

d. Counsel shall not be allowed to ask questions or 
cross—examination of an economic expert which 
would require the witness to make mathematical 
calculations in order to frame a response unless 
the factual elements of such questions shall have 
been submitted to that expert witness not less 
than three full working days before trial. 

14. A statement indicating whether the case is a jury or 

non—jury case. 

a. If the case is a jury case, then indicate whether 
the jury trial is applicable to all aspects of the 
case or only to certain issues, which issues shall 
be specified. In jury cases add the following pro— 

visions: 

"Proposed jury instructions, special jury inter— 
rogatories, trial memoranda and any special ques— 
tions that the Court is asked to put to prospective 
jurors on voir dire shall be delivered to the .Court 
and opposing counsel not later than five full work— 
ing days prior to the trial date, unless specific 
leave to the contrary is granted by the Court." 

—7— 



• 

b. In a non—jury case, suggested findings of fact 
and conclusions of law and a separate trial 
memorandum, unless the Court enters an order 
that such is not required. Same are to be 
submitted not less than five full working days 

prior to trial. 

c. In a jury case, a trial memorandum shall be 
required only when and to the extent ordered 
by the Court. However, any party may in any 
event submit such memoranda not less than five 
working days prior to trial and should accom— 
plish this with respect to any anticipated 
evidentiary problems which require briefing 
and jury instructions requiring explanation 
beyond mere citation to authority. 

15. In cases where damages are sought, include a state— 
ment for completion by the Court, that "The issue 
of liability (will or will not) be tried separately 
from that of quantum." It is the policy of this 
Court in appropriate cases to try issues of liabil— 
ity and quantum separately. Accordingly counsel 
should be prepared to discuss at the pretrial con— 
ference the feasibility of separating such issues. 
Counsel likewise should consider the feasibility 
and desirability of separate trials as to other 

issues. 

16. A statement describing any other matters that might 
expedite a disposition of the case. 

17. A realistic estimate of the number of trial days 
required. Where counsel cannot agree upon the 
number of trial days required, the estimate of 
each side should be given. In addition, the pro— 
posed order must contain a sentence including the 
trial date and time previously assigned. 

18. The statement that "This pretrial order has been 
formulated after conference at which counsel for 
the respective parties have appeared in person. 
Reasonable opportunity has been afforded counsel 
for corrections, or additions, prior to signing. 
Hereafter, this order will control the course of 
the trial and may not be amended except by consent 
of the parties and the Court, or by order of the 
Court to prevent manifest injustice." 

19. The statement that "Possibility of settlement of 

this case was considered." 



• 

20. The proposed pretrial order must contain appropriate 
signature spaces for counsel for all parties and the 

Judge. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the foregoing pretrial notice be 
mailed to counsel of record for all parties to these cases, and 
counsel will comply with the directions set forth herein. 

New Orleans, Louisiana 

EACH NUMBERED PARAGRAPH IS TO BE PRECEDED 
BY A HEADING DESCRIPTIVE OF ITS CONTENT. 



CLERK'S OFFICE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA 

NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $900 

C. Lani Guinier, Esq. 
99 Hudson St., 16th Fl. 
New York, NY . 10013 

••• 

Q 

diF. 

IIIIIIIIIIMMIN 

USMAM 
immonom 

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID 

UNITED STATES COURTS 
USC 426 



MINUTE ENTRY 
July 5, 1988 
SCHWARTZ, J. 

RONALD CHISOM, ET AL. 

VERSUS 

EDWIN EDWARDS, ET AL. 

Civil Action 

No. 86-4075 

Section "A" 

This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs' motion for 

preliminary injunction. 

Attached hereto is the affidavit of Silas Lee III, which 

plaintiffs have previously filed with the Fifth Circuit. Plain-

fiffs inadvertently omitted the affidavit as an exhibit to their 

instant motion before this Court. 

The Clerk of Court is directed to file the affidavit, which 

shall be deemed as having been submitted with the •instant motion 

and part of the record for the Court's consideration of the in-

stant motion. 

DATE OF EittiRYJUL 5 1988  

•••• • 

6.1;;;#/• 

1.4.1 

• 



,7 

IN THE 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT 

No. 87-3463 

RONALD CHISOM, et al., 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 
V . 

EDWIN EDWARDS, et al., 

Defendants-Appellees. 

AFFIDAVIT OF SILAS LEE, III  

STATE OF LOUISIANA ) 

PARISH OF ORLEANS ) 
SS: 

SILAS LEE, III, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 

1. I make this affidavit in support of appellants' Motion 

for a Preliminary Injunction or, in the Alternative, for Issuance 

of the Mandate. 

2. I am president of Silas Lee and Associates, a public 

opinion, research and consulting firm in New Orleans, •Louitiana, 

and Richmond Virginia. Silas Lee and Associates engages in 

consulting for numerous businesses, retail and fast food 

corporations, government agencies, broadcasting stations, 

newspapers, politicians, and banks. It also publishes numerous 

studies, polls, and commentaries, which have appeared in the New 

Orleans Times-Picayune, USA Today, the Louisiana Weekly, the 



suburban voters to support black candidates makes it virtually 

impossible for a black candidate to win in the present First 

#. 
Supreme Court District. 

5. Judicial contests have traditionally involved expensive 

campaigns. A successful campaign within Orleans Parish alone may 

cost more than $100,000. In addition, judicial races 

traditionally have been low visibility races without tremendous 

voter interest. 

6. In contrast to white candidates, most black candidates 

lack the personal financial resources to underwrite a 

significant portion of their campaign. 

7. In my opinion as a political consultant, I believe that 

the chance that a black candidate could win a seat on the 

Louisiana Supreme Court from the First Judicial District in its 

present form is nonexistent. 

8. It would be possible, however, for a black candidate to 

win election from a district containing only Orleans Parish. 

Black candidates have consistently achieved election to Parish-

wide office within Orleans Parish. This reasonable chance of 

success would make fundraising and attracting media exposure and 

support substantially easier. 

9. The logistics of a judicial race require that a 

candidate begin the planning process long before the actual 

election. In my opinion, a black candidate would not be able to 

compete effectively for a Supreme Court seat unless he made the 

decision to run at least six months prior to the election date. 



• 410., 

10. I therefore believe that the scheduled election for a 

seat from the First Supreme Court District should be enjoined 
?r 

because, even if the district were"te) be redrawn later this 

spring to include only Orleans Parish, it would be difficult, if 

not impossible, for a black candidate to mobilize financial and 

political support in the short time remaining before the October 

1, 1988, election. 

Sworn to and SubscAbed 
Before me this  ,7"  day 
of May 1988.