Emergency Motion for Stay or Suspension of Proceedings

    UNITED S T A T E S  DISTRICT COURT 
E A S T E R N  DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

R O N A L D  B R A D L E Y ,  et al .  , )
)

Pla int i f fs  )
v.  )

)
W I L L I A M  G. M ILLIKEN , et al . , )

)
Defendants  )

)
and ) CIVIL A C TIO N

) NO. 35257
D E T R O IT  F E D E R A T I O N  OF TE A C H E R S ,  )
L O C A L  231, A M E R I C A N  F E D E R A T IO N  )
OF T E A C H E R S ,  A F L - C I O ,  )

)
Defendant-  )
Intervenor  )

)
and )

)
DENISE MAGDOWSKI,  et al.  , )

)
D e fendants -  )
Intervenor  )

)
et a l .  )

)

E M E R G E N C Y  M OTIO N  BY  D E F E N D A N T S -  
INTERVENORS A L L E N  P A R K  PU B L IC  SCHOOLS, 

E T  A L ,  GROSSE POINTE PU B LIC  SCHOOLS AND 
SO U TH FIE LD  PU B LIC  SCHOOLS, FOR A S T A Y  

OR SUSPENSION OF PROCEEDINGS_________

NOW COME D e fe n d a n ts - In te r v e n o r s ,  A l le n  P a r k  Pu b l ic  S ch o o ls ,  et al, 

G r o s s e  Po in te  Pu b l ic  Schoo ls  and Southf ie ld  Pu b l i c  S ch oo ls ,  by their  r e s p e c ­

tive a t torneys ,  Butzel ,  Long,  Gust,  K le in  & Van Z i i e ,  Hil l ,  L e w is ,  A d a m s ,  

G o o d r i c h  & Tait,  and Condit and M c G a r r y ,  and m o v e  fo r  an o r d e r  staying 

the " O r d e r  f o r  D e v e lo p m e n t  of  Plan of D e s e g r e g a t i o n "  en tered  June 14, 1972. 

This  M ot ion  is m ade  pursuant to F R C P  62.



The A l le n  P a r k  Pu b l i c  S c h o o ls ,  et al, G r o s s e  Po in te  Pu b l ic  S c h o o ls ,  

and Southfie ld  Pu b l i c  S ch oo ls  a re  entit led to a stay or  su sp en s ion  f o r  the 

f o l low ing  r e a s o n s :

1 . On June 20, 1972, the A l l e n  P a rk  Pu b l i c  S c h o o ls ,  et al,  

G r o s s e  Po inte  Pu b l i c  S ch oo ls  and Southf ie ld  P u b l i c  Schoo ls  f i l ed  a N ot ice  

of  A p p e a l  with the C le r k  of the United States D i s t r i c t  Court  f o r  the E a s t e r n  

D i s t r i c t  of  M ich igan ,  Southern D iv is ion ,  and s im u lta n e o u s ly  f i l ed  a co p y  

o f  the N ot ice  o f  A p p ea l ,  together  with  the d ocket  fee  of  $25. 00 with  the 

C le r k  of the United States  Court  of  A p p e a ls  f o r  the Sixth C ircu it .

2. D e fe n d a n ts - In te r v e n o r s  ba s e  their  appea l  on 28 USC §1291 

and 28 USC §1292 (a)(1).  This  M ot ion  f o r  Stay o r  Suspension  of  P r o c e e d i n g s  

is b a s e d  on F R C P  62 (d) and F R C P  62 (c) .

3. Defendants - Intervenors further base this M otion on the

p rov is ion s  of §803 of the "Education  Am endm ents of 1972", which p rov ides :

"Notwithstanding  any other law o r  p r o v i s i o n  of  law, 
in the c a s e  of  any o r d e r  on the part  o f  any United States 
d i s t r i c t  c o u r t  w h ich  r e q u ir e s  the t r a n s fe r  or  transportat ion  
of any student or  students f r o m  any s c h o o l  attendance area  
p r e s c r i b e d  by c o m peten t  State o r  l o c a l  author ity  f o r  the 
p u r p o se s  of  ach iev ing  a ba lance  am ong  students with  r e s ­
pect  to r a c e ,  sex ,  r e l ig io n ,  or  s o c i o e c o n o m i c  status,  the 
e f f e c t iv e n e s s  of  such  o r d e r  shal l  be  postponed  until  a ll  
appeals  in connect ion  with such  o r d e r  have been  exhausted  
or ,  in the event no appeals  a r e  taken, until the t ime fo r  
such  appeals  has exp ired .  This se c t io n  shal l  e x p i r e  at 
midnight,  January 1, 19 7 4 . "

4. T h is  c a s e  p re se n ts  new and nov e l  quest ions  oi  consticucionai

law not h e r e t o f o r e  ru led  on by the United States S uprem e Court  and to 

r e q u i r e  Defendants  - In tervenors  to d ism antle  the educat ional  f a c i l i t i e s  and 

p r o g r a m s  a s s e m b l e d  o v e r  a span of  m any  ye a rs  b e f o r e  obtaining definit ive  

guidance f r o m  the S up rem e  Court  would  w o r k  in cre d ib le  hardship  upon 

Defendants  - k i te rv e n o rs  and the students and parents  w h o m  they s e r v e .

- 2 -



• •
5. T h e re  is a substantia l quest ion  as to the va l idity  of  this 

C o u r t ' s  O r d e r  in l ight o f  the C o u r t ' s  fa i lure  to im pane l  a three judge panel 

as r e q u i r e d  by  28 USC §2281.

6. This  C o u r t ' s  O rd e r  co n f l i c t s  d i r e c t l y  with the d e c i s i o n s  of  

the United States C ou rt  of  A p p e a ls  f o r  the Sixth, F ou rth  and Tenth C ircu i ts  

w h e r e  c a s e s  involving substantia l ly  s i m i l a r  quest ions  w e r e  d e c id e d  c o n t r a r y  

to this C o u r t ' s  O rd e r .  Dea l  v Cincinnati  B o a rd  of Education ,  419 F 2 d  1387 

(CA 6, 1969), B r a d le y ,  et a l  v S choo l  B o a r d  of the City of  R i c h m ond, 338

F  Supp 67 (1972), r e v e r s e d _____ F2d_____  (June 5, 1972, CA 4) and K e y e s  v.

S c h o o l  D is t r i c t  No. 1, D e n v e r , 445 F2d  990 (CA 10, 1971) , c e r t  granted 404 

US 1036 (1972).

7. This  Courts  O rd er  co n f l i c t s  with  p rev iou s  d e c i s i o n  of  the 

United States S up rem e  Court  in Swann v C h a r lo tte -M e c k le n b u r g  B o a r d_of 

Educat ion ,  402 US 1 (1971) and S p encer  v K u g l e r , 404 US 1027 (1972).

8. This  Court  has p la c e d  g re a t  r e l ia n c e  on the c a s e s  o f  Davis  v 

S c h o o l  D is t r i c t  of the City of  Pontiac  Inc. , 309 F Supp 734 (ED M ich ,  1970),  

a f f 'd  443 F 2 d  573 (CA 6, 1971), B r a d le y  v S c h o o l  B oard  of the City of

R i c h m o n d , 338 F Supp 67 (1972),  r e v e r s e d _____ F2d_____  (CA 4, June 5, 1972),

and N o r t h c r o s s  v B o a r d  of Educat ion  of  the City of  M e m p h i s , 312 F  Supp 

1150 (WD Tenn,  1970).  O rd e r s  staying p r o c e e d in g s  pending appea l  w e r e  

en tered  in each  of  these c a s e s .

9. A ba lancing  o f  the equ it ies  in this a c t ion  c le a r ly  re q u ire s  

granting D efendants - In te rv e n o rs ' M otion .

- 3 -



F o r  the re aso n s  set f o r th  h ere in  and in the B r i e f  f i l ed  herewith ,

Defendants  - In tervenors ,  A l le n  P a r k  Pu b l ic  S c h o o ls ,  et al , G r o s s e  Po inte  

P u b l i c  Schoo ls  and Southf ie ld  Pu b l ic  S ch oo ls  r e q u e s t  this Court  enter  an 

o r d e r  staying or  suspending fur th er  p r o c e e d in g s  in this m atter  pending 

d e c i s i o n  of Defendants  - I n te r v e n o r s ' appeal.

R e s p e c t fu l l y  submitted ,

B U T Z E L ,  LONG, GUST,  K LEIN  & V A N  Z IL E

W i l l ia m  M. Saxton 
John B. W e a v e r  

R o b e r t  M. V e r c r u y s s e
1881 F i r s t  National Building 
D etro i t ,  M ich igan  48226 
T e lephon e :  (313) 963-8142
A t to r n e y s  fo r  Defendants  - In tervenors  A l le n  
P a r k  Pu b l i c  S ch o o ls ,  et al

H ILL ,  LEWIS, A D A M S ,  GOODRICH & TAIT

'0 ~ O

Douglas  H. W est  
R o b e r t  B.  W e b s t e r  

3700 P e n o b s c o t  Building 
D etro i t ,  M ich igan  48226 
T e lephon e :  (313) 962 -6485
A tto rn e ys  f o r  D e fend an t - In tervenor  
G r o s s e  P o in te  Pu b l i c  S choo ls

CONDIT AN D  M c G A R R Y ,  P. C.

R ic h a rd  P .  Condit 
860 W est  Long Lake Road  
B l o o m f i e l d  H i l l s ,  M ich igan  48013 
T e lephon e :  (313) 645-5205
A ttorneys  f o r  D e fend an t - In tervenor  
Southf ie ld  P u b l i c  Schoo ls

- 4 -