Bradley v. School Board of the City of Richmond Pre-Trial Conference Proceedings

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

RICHMOND DIVISION

CAROLYN BRADLEY and MICHAEL BRADLEY, 
infants, etc., et al.,

Plaintiffs, :
v. :

THE SCHOOL BOARD OF THE CITY OF :
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA, et al., :

Defendants. :

Richmond, Virginia 
March 3 1 , 19 7 0

Before: HONORABLE ROBERT R. MERHIGE, JR.,
United States District Judge

CIVIL

NO.
ACTION

3353

Gilbert Frank Halasz, C.S.R. 
Official Court Reporter 
Richmond, Virginia



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9
lO

1 1
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

RICHMOND DIVISION

CAROLYN BRADLEY and MICHAEL BRADLEY, 
Infants, etc., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.
THE SCHOOL BOARD OF THE CITY OF 
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA, et al.,

Defendants.

Richmond, Virginia 
March 31, 1970

Before: HONORABLE ROBERT R. MERHIGE, JR.,
United States District Judge

Appearances: LEON ELY, ESQUIRE
NORMAN J. CHACHKIN, ESQUIRE 
For the Plaintiffs
HENRY T. WICKHAM, ESQUIRE 
WILLIAM L. WIMBISH, ESQUIRE, 
Assistant City Attorney,
For the Defendants

CIVIL
NO.

ACTION
3353

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z .  C .S  R. 
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

a
9

10

i i

12

13

14

15

16

17

18
19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Pre-trial Conference 3

(March 31, 1970) (Tuesday at
THE CLERK: Civil Action 335>3» Carolyn Bradley, 

and Michael Bradley, et al., versus the School Board, City of 
Richmond.

Mr. S. W. Tucker represents plaintiffs.
Mr. Henry T. Wickham represents defendant.
THE COURT: All right, gentlemen.
Yes, Mr. Ely, how are you?
MR. ELY: May it please the Court, I would like 

to present to the Court Mr. Norman J. Chachkin, member of the 
Arkansas bar. He ha3 not formally qualified to practice in 
this court, but he meets all of the qualifications for such, 
and at a later date those qualifications will be memorialized 
in writing.

This is Mr. Chachkin.
THE COURT: Delighted to have you with us, Mr.

Chachkin.
MR. CHACHKIN: Delighted to make it, Your Honor.
THE COURT: I asked you to appear here for a 

pre-trial conference for the very reasons stated, the order 
concerning the issue raised by plaintiffs' motion and defendant 
statement filed March 19. And I want to set trial dates. I 
have got to get this docket straight. It is fairly obvious,

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z ,  C .S .R  
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

lO

1 1
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Pre-trial Conference

it seems to me without prejudging it now, and I want to treat 
this as a pre-trial conference, that any actions to be taken 
in reference to any further relief, if the plaintiffs are 
entitled to any further relief, are by virtue of the 
Alexandria case and the cases and decisions of the United 
States Supreme Court and this Circuit in Halifax that precludes 
any delay beyond the beginning of the next school term if any 
further relief is granted, which means that the School Board, 
if further relief is granted, ought to know as soon as possible 
where they are going.

I would imagine it must be quite a task to make 
any rearrangements.

Now, what I waint to know, and I want to know it 
just as straight as a die, without any hesitation, and I direct 
myself to counsel for the School Board, is the City of Richmond 
today, the School Board, City of Richmond, today operating a 
unitary school system where there are neither black nor white 
schools, as required by law? And I don't want any answer, 
please, that tells me they are advised one way or the other.
I want to know whether there is any issue about it. If there 
is, they certainly have a right to make an issue of it, if 
they can honestly do so. I want to set it down for hearing.

If there is no issue then I want to know why I 
can’t rule that the plaintiff is forthwith entitled to furthek

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z ,  C  S R 
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

lO

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Pre-trial Conference 5

relief and enter a mandatory injunction against the defendants 
for operating a system contra to the law.

Now, are they or aren't they? Without "they 
are advised or they are not advised." What is their position? 
That is all I want to know. I can’t be plainer than that.

MR. WICKHAM: It is the School Board's position
they are not operating a unitary system.

THE COURT: Is it your position then that the 
plaintiffs under the law, without saying what relief, are 
entitled to further relief, Mr. Wickham?

MR. WICKHAM: That Is correct.
THE COURT: That saves the necessity of any 

hearing in reference to that, gentlemen. And there Is no 
question.

I would now like to discuss the mechanics, and 
I think that is all it Is, the mechanics as to whether or not 
the Court -- well, the Court has now ruled that the plaintiffs 
are entitled to further relief based upon the very frank
representation of the defendants.

Does that put us in a position where the Court 
ought to enter a mandatory injunction, as is usual In this 
case, directing that they forthwith file a plan? When I say 
forthwith, I mean such time as these gentlemen tell me they 
think they need on that. So we can go from there. Isn't

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z .  C .S  R 
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1
12

13

14

15

16

1 7

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Pre-trial Conference 6

that the appropriate step, the next step? Is there any 
objection to a mandatory injunction enjoining them to do what 
they are supposed to do? Doesn't that really lay it on the 
line to them?

MR. WICKHAM: It is —  we are already under an 
injunction, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Sir?
MR. WICKHAM: We are already under an injunction.

Your Honor.
THE COURT: By whom?
MR. WICKHAM: By this Court.
THE COURT: In what regard? When was it entered*’
You mean to operate a freedom of choice?
MR. WICKHAM: Ho.
THE COURT: You mean by the law?
MR. WICKHAM: That is correct, Your Honor.
THE COURT: But you are not under any specific 

injunction so that the responsibility —
MR. WICKHAM: It was a general order entered 

enjoining the School Board from operating a dual system of 
schools or operating a segregated school system back in 196!|..

THE COURT: They have done that innocently, 
did it under the erroneous impression that freedom of choice 
was all right.

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z ,  C .S  R. 
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9
10

1 1
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Pre-trial Conference 7

Well, it is all right if it works, but it
doesn’t work.

Well, that order is herewith vacated. Freedom 
of choice. Of course it is vacated. So there is no misunder­
standing. I think for their protection I best enter a 
mandatory injunction, as X do in the usual cases, enjoining 
them from operating schools in any method other than in a 
unitary school system wherein there are no black or white 
schools. You all have seen the usual order.

Now, any objection to that order? Of course give 
them all the reasonable time. And then wait for you all to 
submit your plan.

You tell me how long you think it will take,
Mr. Wickham, so we can set a date down for a hearing on it 
should there be any exception. Hopefully there wouldn’t be.

Let me just say this. I think we may get some 
help from court decisions in the next 30 days or so. But, you 
know, you can't tell how long the Court of Appeals will take 
to decide some of these.

MR. WICKHAM: We would like a hearing, if 
necessary, some time during the week of May 18, if the Court 
could arrange it during that week.

We vould hope to file, as we said in our state­
ment to the Court, our plan no later than May 11.

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z .  C .S.R .  
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R



1

a
3

4

5

6

7

8

9
lO

1 1
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Pre-trial Conference 8

THE COURT: All right, sir.
Well, that is fine. I have no trouble with that. 

rnhe problem at that time, I realize it takes time, although 
you have had some time to be working.

MR. CHACHKIN: Your Honor, plaintiffs do have 
some difficulty in that regard.

I think this is going to get to what the issues 
are likely to be when a plan is filed.

Richmond School Board has announced, it has 
already sought the help of HEW in drafting a plan.

THE COURT: But this Court is not bound by what­
ever they draft. But I am delighted they are getting help frorr 
anybody.

MR. WICKHAM: I night say, we are not bound too,
Your Honor.

THE COURT: That's right.
MR. CHACHKIN: No one is bound by HEW. We have 

particular difficulty in light of the President's statement in 
believing that the Department will undertake a thorough 
investigation of all possible remedies.

If the Richmond plan is filed on May 1st I doubt 
that we could be ready in 1 8 days to --

MR. WICKHAM: 11.
THE COURT: May 11. As a matter of fact it gets

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z ,  C .S.R .
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Pre-trial Conference 9

worse. They don’t anticipate having it before May 11, Mr. 
Chachkin.

Let me say this. We will have to set a time 
now, that is all. I want to make it as easy as I can on the 
defendants because I realize the fantastic job they have to do. 
On the other hand I realize it is a job they should have been 
at since the New Kent decision.

I want to give the plaintiffs an opportunity 
to be heard. I don't want to rush them with submitting their 
plan. What is done is done. What hasn't been done hasn't 
been done. Nothing is gained by rushing the defendants in 
the submission of their plan.

MR. CHACHKIN: I am suggesting a later plan, 
certainly not an earlier one, if that is possible in convenient 
to the Court. We anticipate that we will probably have to 
have some fairly detailed alternatives, perhaps we won't.
I share the Court's enthusiasm that if we don't have to 
object in any way —

THE COURT: How much time do you think, based 
on your experience with school systems of this size, how much 
time do you think you will need after the plan is submitted 
before you can file your exceptions? Never mind the hearing, 
now.

MR. CHACHKIN: Well, I would say three weeks to

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z .  C  S R 
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

lO

1 1
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Pre-trial Conference 10

a month. We are going to start working now.
THE COURT: Let me say this. That is not 

unreasonable, but I am really going to expect that the 
plaintiffs chip in and work overtime, so to speak, in order 
to speed up the process, because the only one that gets hurt 
if we don't do it right are the children.

All right. I am going to order in this order,
I will put it in the same order as the injunction, I am going 
to order that the plan be filed by, well, May 11 is a Monday, 
Mr. Wickham. Is that all right?

MR. WICKHAM: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Plan by May 11. That exceptions 

thereto be filed by June 8 . And in the event there are 
exceptions, hearing will be had on June 19, subject to my 
getting the docket clear on that day. And if it is not on 
the 19th, it will be heard on Saturday the 20th.

I would ask that the exceptions be reasonably 
detailed, Mr. Ely and Mr. Chachkin, for this reason. I think 
if you do, certainly those portions of the plan that you may 
not have any exceptions to, I think the defendants would be 
reasonable in going ahead and making their preparation on the 
theory it is going to be approved. This is still an adversary 
system, and while I recognize my responsibility, if you all 
agree on something it would shock me that I didn’t go along.

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z ,  C  S R. 
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9
10

1 1
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Pre-trial Conference 11

And if you are reasonably specific on your 
exceptions it helps me as to the issues and it helps the 
defendants too because they may wish to file an amended plan. 
Sometimes they can accept them.

You may do that, incidentally, Mr. Wickham, 
after the exceptions are filed if you wish to file an amended 
one, quickly.

Any other matters we ought to take up or 
discuss, gentlemen? Any other issues? Any complicated 
issues that may be besides the word everybody doesn't want 
to talk about?

All right, let's see vrtiat the plan is.
Thank you very much. If the Court can be of 

any help I want to do it.
(The hearing in the above-entitled matter
was concluded at five o'clock.)

I certify that the foregoing is a 
true and correct transcript.

G IL B E R T  F R A N K  H A L A S Z ,  C .S .R  
O F F I C I A L  C O U R T  R E P O R T E R