Gingles v. Edmisten and Pugh v. Hunt Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production (Pugh)

    IN TEE tnSITtsD STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
RALEIGH DTVISION

IJ RALPH GINGLES , eT !1., )
li plaintiffs )
it I No.81-803-crv-s
ll v. )
ll I
ll nurus r. BDt{IrsrEN, €t ar., )
ll Pefendants )
illl ***
ll

ll * u. PucH, €t ar., )

ll praintiffs)r! ) No- 81-1056-crv-5
illi v.)li ) .
il

ll aalos a. EUNT, JR., etc., €t ar-r)
l!li pBTENDA!{Ts' rlnsr ser
l! or TNTEFRoGAToRTES elTD REDUEsTs FoR PRoDucrrorylPUGHl-
lr

ii oME Now ttre Defendants in the above-styled action and,
ri

ii p,rr=rr"nt to Rules 33 and 34 of the Federal Ru1es of Civil
l:'procedure, pr.opound to all Plaintiffs in the aetion entitled

, 
*o. 81-1065-CIV-5 and their attorneys of record the following

'irrterrogatories and requests for production, to be answered

, ana responded to, Pursuant to stipulation of the parties, wittt-
i

liin (15) days after service hereof -

li In answering ttrese interrogatories, You are required to

furnish all information available to you, including information

in the possession of your attorney or any Person acting in your

If, and not merely such information as is knowrof your orn

personal knowledge. If you cannot ans\rer any particular

terrogatoty or interrogatories in fu}I, after exercising due

diligence to secure the information sought, Bo Etat'e anrd angwer

ttre extent Possible, specifying the reasons for your inability

answer the remainder.

You are reminded that, under ttre provisions of RuIe 26 (e)

f the Fedleral Rules of Civil Procedure, you are turder a duty

supplement seasonably your resPonse wittt respect to any

Alan V. et aI., V. James B. Hunt, et9.r-9!-a1:-,

uestion directly addressed to (a) t.Le identity and location of



l:

li
li
il

li

li

itI
li

lr

ti

ll

ll-li

il
tl
ir

i:

l;

l.

-2-

persons having knowledge of discoverable matter, and (b) the

identity of eactr person expected to be called as an expert

witness at trial, ttre subject matter on which he is expected to

testify and ttre aubstance of his testiraony'

Base your responses on ttre statistics in your possession

and on which you harze based your allegations '
you are rurder a duty to amend eeasonably a prior resPonEe

if you obtain information upon ttre basis of which (a) you knotl

ttrat ttre response, ttrough correct when made, is no longer true

or complete, and the circumstances are such ttrat a failure to

amend ttre response is, in substance, a knowing concealment'

Any suctr supplemental resPonse is to be filed and served

upon counsel of record for tJlis Defendant within fifteen (15)

days after receipt of such information'

DEFINITIONS

unless othenrrise indicated, the following definitions

shall be applicable to these interrogatories and requests for

production:
you and your shall mean ttre Plaintiffs and each of their

attorneys, agentsr or rePresentatives and aII other Persons

acting on their behalf.

Person shall mean any individual, PartnershiP, firm,

other business, governmental orassociation, corPoration or

legal entitY.
Address shall mean the post office box number, street

number, street, route number, route, town, city' eounty and

state of subject person, business or ottrer entity.

Document shaIl mean any written, recorded, transcribed,

punched, taped, drawn, filmed or graphic matter of any kind or

description, hovrever produced or reProduced'

refers to ttre numbered paragraphs of your Corplaint, as eupple-

mented.



-3-

Gross deviation is ttre total figure, plus or uinus, com-

puted by subtracting the ideal population district from ttre

total population within ttre BPecific district.
Census rmit shaLl refer to tracts, enumeration districts,

ll Uf".* groups and blocks as these terrns are defined by ttre
il

li urritea States Bureau of tlre Census -
il

ll ldeal population district or equal population of tlre State
ll 

-

lr

ll of Uorttr Carolina divided by the total nuruber of Stat-e House
il

ll of Representatives or State Senate districts.
ti
ll

ll Nunrber of each d.istrictr nr:mber of each House district or
tl

li nr:mUer of each Senate district refers to ttrose numbers applied
il

ii to eactr legisLative district for identifieation PurPoses.
I

District refers to districts wittrin the House of Repre-

li sentatives and,/or Senate of ttre Statc of North Caro1ina.

Percent by which a district deviates from the i4ea1

population disirict is that percentage whictr is conputed by

dividing t.l.e gross deviation by the ideal population district

and converting that fraction into a Percentage.

Overall range of deviations is that term used whictt is

identical in meaning to the term used by ttre United States

Supreme Court in lvlahan v. HoweII, 410 U.S. at 319r iS "maximum

percentage variation from that ideaI" or "maximum variation or

maximum deviationr" 4IO U.S. at 323. Ttris overall range of

deviations is equal to ttre sum of ttre percentage by which the

most populous district deviates from ttre ideal population

district and ttre percentage by which the least populous district

deviates from the ideal population district, ignoring ttre plus

and minus signs of these percentages.

1an or vour revised reapportionrent al or

revised roposal is ttrat PIan or ProPosa1 whiclt

odies any adjustments, changes, alterationsr oE arendrnents to

e basic legislative reapportionment plans embodied in Chapters

and 5 of the Extra Session Laws of 1982 whidr ttre Plaintiffs

Your revised reapportionment ele4- oI



itii
lr

,i
i:
'l
ll
lr
i

rl
i,
li
il
lr
I
lr
lr
lt

ll
il

il
il
lt
illl

It

lt
ti
liI
lr

li
lt
ll
li
tl
ll

t:
ii
tl
l:
rl

i:

i,

i

-{-

Buggestaspossiblesolutionstovariousallegeddificiencies
within ttre legislative reapportionrent plans' DeBcribe this

plan or proposal ia tensof lncrerental ctranges to the Plan

embodied in chapters rl apd 5 of ttre Extra seesion Lrys of 1982 '
crl

r.stateurefurrnamerag€rdateofbirthrpreaentresidence
addrees,placeofbirt}r,andplaceoferrplolrmentofeach
plaintiff in ttris action'

2. State (a) whettrer each plaintif f has read tlre introduetory

paragraphstotheseinterrogatoriesand(b)whethereactrplain-
tiff understands that these intcrrogatories are to be answered

under oath.

t



i;

i: -5-
li

ii 
g. In paragraph 37 of your complaint, aB supplemented, you

i allege ttrat tlre 1971 enactJEnts of N.C.G.S. 120-1 and N'C'G'S'

iit ;ZO-Z had ttre purpose to and ef fect of discriminating against
li

li ur".r citizens of f,ortb Carolina in tlrat eaid 1971 plans sgb-
l!
lt

li nergea black voting strengttr ttrrough ttre use of large, multi-
il
ll member districts. with regards to ttris allegation, 8et out the
il
il

ll tottowing:
il
lr

li t") tjre number of each House district where the
ilii rg71 enactments submerged black voting strength
li

|l *rough ttre use of large, multi-meuiber districts.
lrli tu) set out specifically ttre objections which you
lr

illioranyoft}replaintiffshavetothespecific
t:

:,

ir comPosition.

,, ,., set out in detail ttre effect of the House enact-

'mentinsrrbmergingtheblackvotingstrengttrofthe
plaintif fs. 'In answering ttris interrogatorlr set out,

' at a minimum, ttre following:
(1) Each whole county, township or census unit

whichthel,egis].atureinc].udedoromittedwithin
each House district with ttre effect of submerging

black voting strengttt.

(2tEachwholecountyrtownshiporcensusunit

whictrttreLegislatureincludedoromittedwithin
each House distriet wittr ttre purpose of submerging

black voting strengtlt'

(d) The number of eactr senate district where the enact-

mentsrrbmergedtheblackvotingstrengthwittrinthat
Senate distriet-
(e) Set out specifica]-Iy ttre objections which you or

arryoftheplaintiffsharretottrespecificHousediEtrict
and its conPosition.

(f)Setoutindetailtheeffectoft}reHouseenactment
in submerging black voting strength of the plaintiffe.

In answering this interrogatory, Bet out' at a minimtn'

ttre folloring:
(1) Each whole county, townshipr ot oensus tutit

which ttre Legielature included or omitted within

eaclr senate dietrict with the effeet of eubnerging



t1!i -6-I'
I
:i
i!

:l c black notlng ltrcngtlr.
li
I

'i (2) Each rhole eounty, townlhtpr ol censut
rl

iiil o'.rt rhich tic LcgillaturG Lncludcd or onlttGd

rltil.n .aeh Scnatc dlctrLct rl.tt tbe purlnrc

of rubrnrglng blach vot.ing rtrcngrtlr.

ri

ll
il
ll

li
lr
t:
I

t:

,;
,.



,\;l

4. In Paragraph 58 Of your complaint, as supplemented, you

alleged that any attempt to rely on plans enacted in 1971 for

future electioas silt result in gross mal-apportionment in botlt

the North Carolina Senate and ttre North Carolina Eouse of

Representatives. lllith regard to this allegation, eet out the

following:
(a) Number of each House district where such gro6s

mal-apportionment will result.

(b) Set out specifically tJre objections which you or

any of the plaintiffs have to that specific House

district in its comPosition.

(c) Set out in detail the violation of the rights

of the ptraintiffs affected by such gross mal-apportionment'

(d) the number of each senate district where the gross

mal-apportionment will result.
(e) Set out specifically the objections which you or

any of the pLaintiffs has to the specific Senate district

l'

il
tl

I

;,

l:
rl
lr
lr
t.

tl

tl
ll

ll

ti
t.

li
I--1,
li
ii

I

I

I

:

,

and its composition.

(f) Set out in detail the

of plaintiffs ttrat wiII be

apportionment.

(g) Define the term grosE

particular violation of rights

affected bY such gross mal-

mal-apportionment.



r!\ll
!,
Ir

!

t;

ri

ii
li
ill,
li
l;

li

li

Ir

It

il

li
l,
II

I

I

t,

i

-8-

5. In Paragraph 50 Of your COmplaint, as supplemented, you

allege that the North carolina General AEeembLy has failed to

make an honest and good faittr effort to construct aenatorial and

representative districts on at least three occasions. I{itrt

regard to t.hie allegation, set out the following:

(a) Define ttre terms honest and good faith effort.

(b) Provide any etatements, documents, summaries

of testirpny, o! any other evidence to show a lack

of an honest and good faith effort on the Part of

ttre North Carolina General Assemb1y.

(c) State wittr regard to each of the three occasions

particular evidence which illustrates a failure to

make an honest and good faith effort on ttre part of

ttre North Carolina General Assembly.



,\i;
l
,I

'i

ll
ll
I

i:
ll
rl
li
ll
ll
ll
it
il
il
il
il
:l
il
il
il
lr
il
il
ll
Ir
tl

lr
t:

-ii
li
tl
li
li
t:
tr
ll
t'
lr

I,

i,

:

-9-
6. In ParagraPh 50 of your comPlaint, aE BuPPlemented, you

allege that the North Carolina General Assembly has on ttrree

aeparate occasions eitier created grossly rral-apportioned

districts or submerged ttre blaek voting strengtl in large multi-

member districts. nith regard to this allegation, Bet out the

following:
(a) The number of each Eouse district where grossly

mal-apportioned districts were created-

(b) The nr:mber of each senate district where grossly

mal-apportioned districts were created.

(c) The nr:mber of each large, multi-member House district

where black voting strength is submerged-

(d) The number of each large, multi-member Senate

district where black voting strength is submerged.



3-

r\ _l

;1.r: -I0-
I'
rl

i

i, 7. In Paragraph 60 of your eomplaint, as supplenented, you
lr

li aUege that ttre North Carolina General Assembly has failed to
II

ii proauce constitutioaal red.istri.cting pl.ans and has effectively
lr

ll abandoned its right to redlistrict any furttrer. nith regard to
il

ll tfri" allegation, set out the following:
il
il

ll ta) lny rights of the North Carolina General
II
lr

ll Aseembly to redistrict and the particulars of
il

li how ttrey were abandoned.
tiI

_ li (b) Any law or fact which prohibits ttre Norttt
lr

ii Carolina General Assembly from redistricting any
llii further.
ti

I'
't

ll

ll



,\;; -11-

8. In Paragraph 62 of your comPlaint, as EuPPIetEnted, you

li allege that during its eecond extra EesBion, the North Carolina
;r

:i General AssedbJ.y declined to create single mernber districts in
li

ti ttre piedrcnt and Iestera ;nrtioas of North Carolina, and 'ttratlt-
ll Ur" purpoae and effect of such actione was to prevent ttre foma-
il
ll tion of predominantly black distriets in ttecklenburg, Foreyttt,
lt

ll o"rt "r, and lvake Courties, and at ttre Bame time to create ttre

ll .irrir* anrprrnt of single member districts in ttre Eastern portion
il

li of Norttr Caro1ina.'. With regards to this allegation, aet out
ti

ll ar,. forlowing:_1,t ll (a) The nnmber of each House district so created
li

li tfrat had ttre purpose and effect to prevent ttrelr'
ir

,' tormation of predominantly black districts in the

i: forenamed counties and t}te number of each House

district referred to in ttre Eastern portion of Norttr

Carolina

(U) set out specifically t.}.e objections which you or

, any of the pJ.aintiffs have to the epecific House

district and its composition.

: (c) set out in detail the effect of these actions on

r the plaintiffs or members of their class.
ii

il (d) The number of each Senate district which Pre-

vented ttre fortnation of predominantly blaek districts
in ttre forenamed counties and the number of each Senate

district referred to in the Eastern portion of Norttt

CaroIina.
(e) Set out specifieally the objections which you or

any of tlre plaintiffs have to ttre specific Senate

district and itE comtrrcsition.

(f) set out in detail the effect of these actions on

the plaintiffs or members of their class.



-12-
9. In Paragraph 62 of your complaint, aB auPPlerentedr YoU

allege ttrat the Norttr Carolina General Assenbly had the

statistical capability of creating single member districts in

lltecklerrburg, Forslrttr, Dlrrham and Wake Counties, which would

enhance blaclc rcting strengttr, but refuBed to do so. nittt

regard to ttris allegation, aet out the folloring:
(a) Any testirony, documentation, or Proof of

facts that shors such statistical capability

including identification of any machinery,

instruments, PersonneL or Program illustrating
such capability.
(b) Any testimony, identifying speaker by name,

date and place illustrating a refusal to create single

member districts in the forenamed counties. In

answering this interrogatory, include any evidence of

refusal by an individual, a grouP of individuals, a

corrnittee, . htt"" of ttre General Assenbly, or the

fuII body of ttre General Assemloly.



,ir\r
it -rs-
t;

::

l; 10. In Paragraph 62 of your complaint, as eupplerented, you

allege ttrat ttre purpose and effeet of treating various areas of

ttre etate differently was to eubmetgo, dilute, and invidiously
discriminate against blachs in the corrrties of Ittecklenburg,

Forsyth, Ihrrham and llalce, and at the sane time reeognizing the

rights of blaek citizens in only forty cor:nties of Norttr

Carolina. Witb regard to ttris allegation, set out the following:
(a) Set out in detail the effects which submerge ,

dilute or invidiously discriminate against blacks

in the four counties.
(b) Set out in detail ttre purposeto submerge, dilute
or invidiously discriminate against the plaintiffs or

members of their c1ass.

(c) Set out any evidence including testimony, docu-

mentation, or other proof of faets illustrating a

purpose on ,the part of the General Assembly to

submerge, dilute or invidiously discriminate against

blacks in the forenamed counties.

l,



-14-
I

,l It. In Paragraph 64 of your complaint' as eupplemented' you

I

i allege tlrat ttre presently ratifiedt redietricting plans for the

ii nor* carorina senate and Norttr carolina Eouse of Repreeentatives;
I

i' - s--!l rr--al inr Fane+ittrtion in Iii -, -^-^^- *,1 )ha rtl^rilr e.aro]'ina Constitution in
ii ,iof.t" ttre llnited States ard ttre North Carolina Con

tr

li *"a,t5ey provide single mernber districts for some areas of the
ltti-
|istateandnotothers,forcolq)Ietelyarbitraryarrdcapricious
ll ="""or", to wj,t: avoidance of disapproval of such plans by ttre

ll ,rrra.o states Department of J,stice under tlre voting Rights Act

Ir

|iandnotonanyottrerrationalstatepolicyorbasis."Withre-
I

l, gara to ttris allegation, set out ttre following:
ii

ii t.l set out in particular any testimony, documenta-

ii aion or other proof of facts ttrat cites the above

,reasonastheonlyreasonforttreGeneralAssemblyls

. actions.
(b) Set out any and aII testimony and docunentation

,i
that avoidance of disapproval by ttle U' S' Department

of Justice was the reason for the General Assemblyrs

actions in answering ttris interrogatory, include the

name of ttre speaker or writer, tlre place and time in

which ttre testimony was given or the document prepared

and the context in which it was used'



F'. :.

ri

i'

ii

ii

li

I

ll

ll

il
II

li

ll

ii
ii
;1

-r5-
L2. In paragraphs 66 and 67 of your comPlaint, as supplemented,

you allege that the Senate Coromittee on Senate Redistricting and

the Bouse Legislative Redistricting Comittee adoPted respective

reapportiorent criterla. You furttrer allegre thit the actions of

the General Assembly in failing to follon ltE own criteria was

arbitrary and capricious. With regard to ttris allegation, Bet

out the folloring:
(a) Any enactment of the General Assembly as a

bodty of either the North carolina senate or the

North carolina House of Representatives making

thesereaPPortionmentcriteriabinclinguponthe
actions of the General AssenblY.

(b) set out in detail the effect of ttre configura-

tions and populations of House District 12 as eet

out in Subparagraph (c) of Paragraph 69 as it relates

to this criteria and as it affects the plaintiffs.



-16-
i

i, tr. In Paragratr*rs 2I and 22 of youl complal'nt you alleged that
i'

ii *.".c.s. I2o-l andt 120-2 'institutionalizes' glxteen multi-
t:

ii member Benatorial diEtricts and thLrty-one multi-nember rePre-
II
lr

ll sentative digtricts. fith regard to tJris allegation, set out
ll
lr

li tte following:
il

ll t"l Defi,ne wittr sufficient particularity ttre
il

ll t"r,. 'institutionaliz€Ern.
l1

li tul ser out in detail the obJections which you

il
ii "r any of the plaintiffs have to ttre institutional-
ti
lr

ll ization of multi-member dietricts '
ll

ll t.l set out in detair the effect of murti-rnember

eenatorial and representative districts on the

plaintiffs or members of their class'



/ ! li

I

i
li
rl

i
ll

I

ii
Ir
il
ll

tl
I
ll

lt
Ir

il
il
il

il
ti
ll
lril

ll
Ir
ti

ll
il-lt. li
lt
t,
ii
ll
I

II
I'
ll,l
L
I

':
1l
I

-17-

14. In paragraph 33 of your comPlaint y-ou allege that eingle

member senatorial and eingle member repreBentative dietricts

deny voters due process and equal Protection of the law and

violate the one-nD oDG-TrDte rul,e. IiIitJI regard to ttris all'ega-

tion, Bet out ttre following:
(a)ThenrrnlrerofeachBouseorSenatedistrict
where noters are denied due Process' egual Protec-

tion or one-man one-vote'

(b) Set out specifically the objections which you

or any of the plaintiffs have to the sPecific House

or Senate district and its composition'

(c) Set out any evidence where you or any of the

plaintiffsormembersoftheirclasshavebeenunable
toweighttheirvote.Inansweringttrisinterrogatory
set out "a 1 minimum ttre following:

(f) Definition of the word "weight"'

(2) SPecific examples of ttris praetiee'



-18-

15. In Paragraph 35 of your complaint you aIlege ttrat by allow-

ing the election of repreEentatives and senators in multi-mernber

districts at large it ie possiJcle and indeed likely that most

aenatorE and representatives will be electcd frou a certain

limited geographic location andl from a eertain limited eocio-

economic class. !{ith regard to t}ris allegation, set out the

following:
(a) The number of each llouse or senate district

where most senators and representatives were

elected from such location and such class'

(b) The minorities who are excluded of pro-

portional rePresentation -

(c) Set out in detail the effect of the House or

senate district that excludes proportional repre-

sentation for the plaintiffs or members of their
li

class. In'answering thiS interrogatory 6et out at a

minimum the following:
(1) Eactr whole county, township or census

unit which the General Assernbly included or

omitted wittrin each llouse or senate district

wittr ttre effect of excluding ProPortional

rePresentation for the plaintiffs'
(2) Each whole county, township or census

unitwhichttreGeneralAsserrrblyineludedor
omitted within each House or senate district

with the purpose of excluding ProPortional

representation for the plaintiffs'



-19-
i,

i' fO. In paragraph 35 of your coruplaint you allege that multi-
I

i

member districts exPoEe the voter to numerouB candidates and in
i,

li orae, for ttre voter to cast an infotmed vote logistical problems

li "ror. 
deny t5e nrlti-uember district voter ttre ability to dis-

li
lr

li criminate betrveen and a,ong the v1erys of numerous candidates'
ll

il nt* regard to ttris allegati'on' eet out tJre following:

ll ,", The rogisricar probleurs of multi-member diErricrs
lr

ll "s compared to the logistical problems of single mernber
il

li aistricts and in particular, aet out in detail each House
i!

l, or senate district where rogistical probrems alone deny

the voter the ability to discriminate between and among

the vierrrs of numerous candidates'

(b) Define the term "informed vote"

(c) Set out in detail ttre effect of any multi-member

district t:rat denies the plaintiffs or any members of

their cla6s the ability to discriminate between and

among the views of numerous candidates and prevents

t}remfromcastinganinformed\,ote.Inansweringtttis
interrogatoryrsetoutataminimumttrefollowing:

(1) Ihe time, place and results of any

eLection where a voter was unable to cast

an informed vote'

(21 Any and all instances where ttre plaintiff

or members of ttreir class were unable to dis-

criminatebetweenandamongttrevier.lsofnumerous

candidatesinamulti-memberdistrictelection.

I

t,

I



i

I

:r

;i
ir
:,

l,

litl
rl

li
I'
il

ii

il
lr

ll

ll
l:

lr_lt
I

i:
t:
I'
li
I'
il

il

l.
I

;

-20-

17. In Paragraph 37 of your complaint you allege that the

multi-member district candidate in Senate district 2{ and

Representatirre &istrict 29 must nrn againat more iltan one

opponent, ttrereby incurring larger cost in telas of dollars,

time, organization and interest in ttre pursuit of pr:blic office.

with regard to this allegation, set out ttre following:

(a) The cost in terms of dollars, time, organization

and interest in pursuing public office in senate

district 24 and Representative district 29'

(b) Specify in a relative term ttre word "larger',
i.e., larger than what.



t,. t :;

Ir

i.

I:
li

l,

lr
lrl.

lr
il
lr
rllt
tl
II

ll
ti
lr
ll
!t
il
il
lr
ti
lt
rl
ti
L
I'

lr
I
t,

-t-l
t'
I
I

lr

li
:l

t',:

lr

-21-

18. Paragraph 37 of your corq)laint you allege that the multi-

member Benatorial and rePresentative candidate is exPosed to the

hazard of tbe reighted vote and related organized political

maneuvering ttrat does not confront ttre candidate in a aingle

member district. With regard to tlris allegation, Bet out the

following:
(a) Definition of ttre phrase 'hazard of the

eeighted vote. "
(b) Definition of tlre phrase "organized

political maneuvering. n

(c) Set out in detail ttre effect of suctr phrases

on ttre plaintiff or members of their class'

(d) set out specifically any and.aII instances

where these two phrases have occurred in a multi-

member district.



a'
I

'ii
't
t:

t:

li
l.

_22_

19. In Paragraph 37 of your corylaint you allege tbat the

representative or Benator of a multi-rnember dietrict ls

acconntable to a nunber of constituents far in excess of that

nr:mber to rhich the representati\re or oenator of a eingle member

district is aceorntable. lflith regard to ttris allegation, set

out the follouiag:
(a) Define the term accountable'

(b) set out ttre House and senate districts where

ttrere has been lack of accountability'

(c) Give any and aII examples of a rePresentative

or Eenator being less accountable in his public

actions.
(d) state how ttris issue affects ttre plaintiffs or

any members of ttreir class.
lr
I

;

r.

t,



' I ir

t,
t:
i
t'
ii

t,
lr

i
ii
il

it
ll

il
Ir

ti
lt

il
t;
il
il
lr
II
il
il
lt
lr

ti
ti

ti
ll
li
ll
t!

li
tl

ii
I

I

-23-
20. In ParagraPh 42 of your complaint you allege tbat the re-

distrcting plan for ttre Senate is now grossly rnal-apportioned.

Wit}t regard to t]ris allegation, set out t]re following:

(a) Ibe number of each Senate district uhere

tbe redistrieting plan is grossly rnal-apportioned.

(b) Set out epecifieally ttre objeetions which you

or any of t].e plaintiffs have to ttre apecific senate

district and its eomPosition-

(c) Set out in detail ttre effect of the Senate

plan on the plaintiff or members of their class

in answering this intcrrogatory set out at a

minimum the following:
(1) Each whole county, township or census

tract which ttre General Assernbly included or

omitted within eactr Senate district wittt the

effect'of denying ttre plaintiff rs equal

protection.
(2) Each whole cor,urty, township or census

tract which the General Assembly included or

omitted within eactr Senate district with the

purpose of denying ttre plaintiff rs equal

protection.



a-

2L.

of

to

_24_

In Paragraph 12 of your complaint you allege that ttre Bouse

Representatives is now grossly nal-apportioned. With regard

ttris allegation, set out the following:
(a) lhe nn$er of eadr EouBe district rhere the

reapportionnent plan is grossly mal-apportionecl.

(b) Set out epecifically the objections whictt you

or any of ttre plaintiffs have to the epecific House

district and its composition.

(c) Set out in detail the effect of ttre House plan

on the plaintiffs or members of their class. In

answering this interrogatory set out at a minimum

the folJ.owing:

(f) Eactr whole county, township or census

r.:nit which ttre Legislature included or

omitted within eactr House district wittt the

effect gf denying the plaintiffrs egual

protection.

l2l Each whole county, township or census

unit which the General Assembly included or

omitted within each House district wittt the

purpose of denying the plaintiffrs equal

protection.

lr

ti
t!

lr

ii

ti

ll

li
Ir

li

li

il

t.
l;



;i -25-
rl

i' 22. In paragraph {5 of your corylaint you a1lege that ttre re-
,i

li "pportionment 
and redietricting of ttre North Carolina General

it essernuly as codified in N.c.G.s. 120-1 and 120-2 has ttre lntent
ilil

!l ana purpoae a'd effect of dimiuishing ttre concentration of black
li

li ,oa"r" and decreasing ttre ef fectivenees of blach citizens. wittt
il

ll regara to tlris allegation, eet out ttre folloring:
il

i{ t.l Define 'diminishing ttre concentration of brack
ll

li "oters" in bottr guantitative and descriptive teros.
il

ll tul Define "decreasing ttre effectiveness of blaek
ll

li .itizens. "
ll
It (c) Set out eactr HouBe and Senate district where
t:

h

ll ,ou allege t]re General Assenrbly intended to diminish
t;i: the concentration of black voters, and, or decrease
il

. tfre effectiveness of black citizens'

, tal set. out each House and senate district where

t}reGeneralAsserrrblyhadttreeffectofdiminishing
the concentration of black voters and decreasing the

effectiveness of black citizens'



ii-,-
li

y;,24. If you identified any Bouee dietrict in your answer to
lr

il tta.ttogatory nurnber 22' eet out the follouing:
;l

ii tal Each whole corrnty' township' or census unit
rl

ii ,itlrin eadr Eouse district lieted in your atrBwer to
ll

ti interrogatory nurnber 22 rttich ras i'ncluded wittrin
I

ll *. idenrified House dlistrict for the purpose of
ll

ll uiminishing tlre concentration of black voters and

lr

li Oecreasing t}re ef fectirreness of black citizens '

li ,o, Eactr who!'e county' township' or census unit
ll

i: *ithin eactr House district listed in your atrs\rer
li

li to interrogatory n,mber 22 which was included within
ll

il trr" identified House district which had the effect

i, o, diminishing ttre concentration of black voters and

i decreasing ttre ef fectiveness o'f black citizens '
I

(c) Each whole county' township' or census urit

, within any House district whictr was excluded from
:

any House district listed in your answer to inter-

rogatory number 22 for tlre PurPose of diminishing

t}teconcentrationofblackvotersanddecreasingthe
effectiveness of black citizens'



e..
i

-28- i

IfyouhaveidentifiedanYEousedietrictinyorrrangwerto'
rrogatory nurnber 22 r Eet out t.he following: \

(a)AllHousedistrictsgtrereinyouwou}dlaltcrt}re\
legislativereaE[rorticnreatplan@correctt}reallegedlt

I

deficiencies set out in Paraglaph {5 of your @ryIaint' 
I

(b) $ittrin each Bouse dietrict Eet out in your anewer 
\

to interrogatory number 24 (a) ' Bet out tJre following: \

(1)Eachwholecounty'township'orcensusruritl I

wittrin tjre reviseil House district under your 
I

\

proPosal -^-,i aari House \

l2l The total PoPulation of ttre reviseil Rouse 
\

- --an^Szrl. \

district rrnder your proposal 
,h6 re- i

(3) lfhe total number of whites within the re-

vised House district under your prop'osal'

(4) The total number of blacks witjrin tjre re-

visb{ io,o=t district under your proposal'

' (5) The percentage of whites witlrin the revisedl

House district rurder your proposal'

(6) The percent'age of blacks wittrin tlre reviEedl

House district under your proposal'

(?) The gross deviation of the reviseil House

I
I

t
I

I

I

\

district turder your proposal'



27.

_30_

If you identified any Senate district ln your answer to

interrogatory nunber 22, ' set out the following:
(a) Each whole county, townshipr ot census tutit
within each Senate district listed in your answer

to interrogatory nu$er 22 rhich was iacludecl ritbin
the identified Senate district for ttre purpose of

diminishing ttre concentration of black voters and

decreasing the effectiveness of black citizens.
(b) Each whole corlnty, townshiP, ot a"rr=os unit
wittrin each Senate district list-edl in your answer

to interrogatory number 22 which was included within

ttre identified Senate district which has the effect

of diminishing ttre concentration of black voters and

decreasing the effectiveness of black citizens.
(c) Each whole countyr townshipr ot census unit
wittrin any Senate district which was excluded from

any Senate district listed in your answer to

interrogatory number 22 for the PurPose of diminishing

the concentration of black voters and decreasing the

effectiveness of black citizens.
(d) Each whole cor:nty, township, or census pnit within

any Senate district which waE excluded from any Senate

distriet listed in your answer to interrogatory number

22 which had the effect of diminishing the concentration

of black voters and decreasing the effectiveness of

black citizens.



r'li
!r

I

;r

I

t'
tl
i'

ii

II

li

li
il

il

ll
tl
il
lr
lt

ll

li
ll
li
lr-t'
il
lr

i,

I
li
t;

I

l

-3r
28. If you have identified any Senatc d.ietrict I'n your ansyer

to interrogatory nurnber 22, aet out ttre follwing:

(a)Allsenat.edistrictewhereinyouwouldalter
ttre legislative real4nrtionEnt Plan to correct

ttre alleged deficiencieE eet out in Paragratrih 15

of your comPlaint.

(b) wittrin each senate district set out in your

arrswer to int-errogatory number 27 lal, set out the

folloring:
county, townshiP, or census

revised Senate district under

(2) l[he total population of ttre revised Senate

district under Your ProPosal.

(3) The total number of whites within the re-

vised Senhte diEtrict under your proposal'

(4) ihe total number of blacks wittrin the re-

vised Senate district of your proposal'

(5)Thepercentageofwhiteswittrinttrerevised
Senate district turder your proposal'

(6) The percentage of blacks wittrin the revieed

Senate district under your pro'posal'

(7)ThegrossdeviationofttrerevieedSenatc
district tutder Your ProPosal'

(1) Each whole

unit within the

your proposal.



-32-

29. If you identified any Eouse district in your an6wer

interrogatory nurnber 23, set out ttre following:

(a) Each whole county, townshiP, or eenaus unit

wittrin eadr xoree district listed in your anewer to

interrogatory nurnber 23 ntrictr sas included within

the identified House district for ttre purpose of

diluting ttre votes of black citizens.
(b) Each whole countyr townshipr oE census unit

within eactr House district listed in your anslfer

to intcrrogatory number 23 which was included wittrin

ttre identified House district which had ttre effect

of diluting t}re votes of black citizens.
(c) Each whole county, township, or oensus unit

wittrin any House district which was excluded frorn

any House district listed in your answer to inter-

rogatory numbeir 23 for the purpose of diluting the

votes of black citizens-

to



L
:

-33-

30. If you have identified any Eouse district in your anrswer to

interrogatory number 23, eet out the following:

(a) All tsor:se districts wherein you would alter the

legislatirze reaptrrrtionrent Plan to correct the alleged

deficiencies set out in ParagraPh {5 of your Complaint.

(b) tlittrin eactr Bouse district eet out in your answer

to interrogatory number 29 (a), set out ttre following:

(I) Eactr whole county, township, oE census unit

wittrin the revised House district under your

proposal.

12) The total population of ttre revised House

district under Your ProPosal.

(3) The total number of whites within the re-

vised House district under your proposal.

(4) total ntrmber of blaeks within the re-

vised llciuse district under your proposal.

(5) The percentage of whites within tJre revised

House district under your proposal.

(6) The percentage of blacks within ttre revised

House district under your proposal.

(7) The gross deviation of ttre revised House

district turder Your ProPosal-



-34-

31. In your rcvl,sed rctPPortl,dtDnt ProPo.al ar .Gt forur I'n

your atrrrcp to Lntrrrogatory nrdcr 30, bavg yOu placod t'hc

arB yholc @lurtY, tonnrhlpr oli olntut unlt rlt[ln trro Boure

alrtrtetr or alt!3d to pl^ee t rholc county, tovrthlPr ot

ecnrul unlt wll*rI'n a Eoulc dllrtrlct?

.l_i'.'-+-'--t.-r-*-.



32.

_35_

If you identified any senate dist-rict in your answer to

interrogatoty number 23, eet out ttre folloning:

(a) Each whole county, township, or oensus unit

wittrin each senate district listed in your answer

to j.ntcrrogatory armber 23 uhich was includedl wittrin

ttre identified senate district for the purpose of

diluting the votes of blaclk citizens.
(b) Bach whole county, township, or census unit

wittrin each senate district listedl in your anB\rer

to interrogatory number 23 which was included within

the identified Senate district whiclr has ttre effect

of diluting ttre votes of bLack citizens.

(c) Each whole county, township, or eensus unit

wittrin any senate district which was excluded from

any Senate district listed in your answer to

interrogatory nurnber 23 for the purpose of diluting

tlte votes of black citizens.
(d) Each whole cor:nty, township, or eensus unit

within a-ny senate district whictr was excluded from

any Senate district listed in your ansrrer to interrogatory

number 23 which had the effeet of diluting the votes of

black citizens.



E^ 
-

-36-

33. If you have identified any Senatc district in your answer

to interrogatoly number 23, eet out ttre following:

(a) All Senate districts sherein you would alter

ttre legislative reaPPorticr'rent Plan to correct

ttre allegedt deticiencies set out in Paragraph 15

of your Conplaint.

(b) Ilithin each Senate dist-rict eet out in your

answer to interrogatory number 32 (a), set out the

folloring:
(1) Each whole county, township, or census

unit wittrin the revised Senate district under

your proposal.

12) The total population of the revised Senate

district under your ProPosal.
(3) The total number of whites within the re-

vised Senate district under your proposal.

(4) The total nurnber of blacks within the re-

vised Senate district of your proposal.

(5) The percentage of whites wittrin ttre revised

Senate district under your proposal-

(6) rire percentage of blacks within ttre revised

Senate district under your proposal.

(7) The gross deviation of ttre revised Senate

district under your ProPosal.



al

-3F

35. Docr clthcr tlrc Bourc of 8.Prcllatatlrru or Scaatr roap-

portlonrnt ptan oaactrd by ttrc Iegklaturc tn 1982 lo3lsn tlrc

o6porturtQr of rqr btac*' tncdoot to ontintr la offt'cc? If ro,

neme tbe l.ncr,rnbcnt andl ttrc uanncr ln rhlch thc oPportuitlt rar

lcllcned.



:--
a)

-37-

34.Doeseit}rerttreBouseofRepresentatirresorSenate
reapportionnentPlanenactedbyttrel,egielatureinlgE2errhance
ormaintaintlreopportr:nityofarryblackincurnbenttocontinue
in offie? If eo, DaE tse incuabent and tlre oanner ln shich

the opportunity was enhanced or maintained'



t,a , ir

:

lr
i
lr
t:
:I
!

il
ii
li

-40-

37. If your ans\rer to interrogatory nunber 35 was in the af-
firmative, Bet out the follming:

(a) Identify ttre whole eounty, townehip or census unit.
(b) Ilre Eouse or Senat-e district uherein the rhole

county, townshipr ot oenaus unit is now located.

(c) Ttre percentage of blacks within the House or Senate

district as presently constituted in ttre 1982 legislative
reapportionment plans. '

(dl) The nurnber of people wittrin ttre district as presently

consti tuted.
(e) The House or Senatc district in which you believe this
whole county, tarnshipr or census unit should be relocated,

its present percentage of blacks and number of people.

(f) The percentage of blacks wittrin the two districts if
the switch you advocated were made.

:(g) The total number of residents in the two districts if
the whole county, township, or census unit were switched

as you advocate.

(h) The number (s) or name (s) of ttre whole county, town-

shipr oE census unit previously specified in answer to

interrogatory nurnber 24(a) in order to satisfy the oD€-Eitl,

one-vote requirement.

(i) The House or Senate district from which such whole

county, township, or eensus unit would be removed.

(j) The gross deviations of all House and Senate districts
by district as a consequence of the foregoing shifts in

whole county, township, or censug units.



i'
:i

a . it
lr
i;
!i
!t
I'
ll

li 38. If you harrc drara or bave in your porecrion rtatcrLda
i
rl

li rcapportlonrent tntpB for tlrc Eousc of Rcpreaentatincr and thc
il
ll Senetc Gtd Jrou prafcr to bc adopted, plearc attacb tlre ttr.
lr

',i



a,

-12-

ri

ii lg. If you have no m!p8 referred to Ln lnterrogatory nrder 38

I

ii ,r.."" attact, a drawing of sactr new dr.etrr.ct a'd the dLetricts

contl.guoua to ttrat dl,ctrict tf prrgtr dirtrl'ct rere drawn aB !'ou

advocate !.a responee to intsrrogatory arder 37'



la
t.
li
ll
ri
t.

i.

ii rr. strt, thc nanc, lddnllr cnproyrnt, terephorr nu&orr rnd
l'

il gutfftlcatl.onc of ractr Pcrtorl you .:Pcct to call tl ltt .4'crt
sLtncrs at lic trtal of ttir nattar end lurthor rtetr ths

tnbJoct rattcr on rhictr cach ruch cxPGrt Ll cx;rcct d to tartlfy.



:.-.r-

al
ili -.r-

it
:i
ii
rl

ll a2 . A8 to cach oxlnrt nard Ln thc lnlrsr to Lntrrrogatory
I'

jl nu6cr 11, rtate ttre gubrtarrcs of thc factr and opLnlonr to

ll "na* ral,d c:qprts !!e .IlrGetad to tutl.fy rnd glrt a nmar?
ll "t ttre Erorurds for cach opLaicr.
il

il
il
il

il

il
lt

il
lt

ll-lt
ll
li

il
ll
il
tl
lr
l:

il
l.

ii



ii

.rll ll -{6-
ti
i'

li lf . P1carc ettach rto your rnrrrn to ttrue Lntcrrogrtori.ce
li

li aor", eryIcte, lnd oorrect ooptce of rrry and r11 docruntr
il
ll prcpared by any rucb cxpcrtr or .xlrCrt rclatl.ag to tlrl.r rctJ,or.
il

lt

lt

il

li-'-lr
lr
ti

l!

it

li
t!
lt
ll

i



. r, 
--..-

rit r, 
ll

li -tz-
tl
Ir

14. state tlre nam, addrcae, telephone nrdcr, aDd quallfica-
tione of cactr expert vhom you have retaLncd or apeeificarly
eryloyed ia antlcipation of lttigation or paeparation of t_rLal
and who La not aurected to be callcd aa a rl.tncge of ttre trlal
of ttris aetlon.



t-

-48 -

45. Indicate each occasion on which each Person named in the

answers to interrogatories number 40 and 4L has testified in

other legal proceedings regarding State legislative reapportion-

ment and describe the nature of his or her testimony in each of

those proceedings.

Respectfurry submitted ttris the ZE a"y "r47;J ,

19 82.

Attorney

s Wallace, J

y'o, Lega1 Affairs
ttorney Generalrs Office

N. C. Department of Justice
P. O. Box 629
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Telephone: (919) 733-3377

Norma Harrell
Tiare ley

General

Attorney General

Jerris Leonard
Kathleen Heenan
Jerris Leonard &

900 17th Street,
Suite I020
Washington, D. C.
Telephone: 1202)

Associates, P.C.
N.W.

2000 6
872-I095

RUFUS L. EDMISTEN



i .r.

-49-

CERTIF'ICATE OF SERIITICE

I hereby certify that I have this day served the fore-

going Interrogatories and Requests for Production uPon

Plaintiff's Attorneys by placing a copy of same in the United

States Post Office, Postage prepaid, addressed to:

Levonne Chambers
Les1ie Winner
Chambers, Ferguson, Watt, Wa1las,

Adkins & FuIIer, P.A.
951 South IndePendence Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Jack Greenbert
James !1. Nabrit, III
Lani Guinier
10 Columbus Circ1e
New Yorkr New York 10019

Arthur J. Donaldson
Burke, Donaldson, Holshouser & Kenerly
309 North Main Street
Salisbury, North Carolina 28L44

Robert N. Hunter, ,fr.
Attorney at Law
Post Office Box 3245
201 West Market Street
Greensboro, North Carolina 27402

rhis xne ), day of 
%, 

Ls82.

V

s Wallace, Jr.
uty Attorney Geheral for

Legal Affairs