Bradley v. School Board of the City of Richmond Pre-Trial Conference Proceedings
Public Court Documents
March 31, 1970

Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Bradley v. School Board of the City of Richmond Pre-Trial Conference Proceedings, 1970. 12caaac6-ca9a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/27f33857-2958-4fe8-ac1c-3c716c88e940/bradley-v-school-board-of-the-city-of-richmond-pre-trial-conference-proceedings. Accessed April 29, 2025.
Copied!
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