Letter to Judge Roth from Roumell, Jr. RE: Order

Public Court Documents
August 16, 1972

Letter to Judge Roth from Roumell, Jr. RE: Order preview

1 page

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Milliken Hardbacks. Letter to Judge Roth from Roumell, Jr. RE: Order, 1972. c215ce68-53e9-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/31f00a9d-b021-45cf-80bb-d3475c883e23/letter-to-judge-roth-from-roumell-jr-re-order. Accessed July 16, 2025.

    Copied!

    («
Ri ley  and  Roumell

A T T O R N E Y S  A N D  C O U N S E L O R S  A T  LAW

7 T~H F L O O R  FORD B U I L D I N G

W A L L A C E  D .  R I L E Y  

G E O R G E  T .  R O U M E L L ,  J R .  

D O R O T H Y  C O M S T O C K  R i L E Y

D E T R O I T ,  M I C H I G A N  4 8 2 2 6 T E L E P H O N E  

(313) 9 6 2 - 3 255

J A N E  K E L L E R  S O U R I S  

L O U I S  D .  B E E R  

K. P A U L  Z O S E L  

E M M E T  E .  T R A C Y ,  J R .  

T E R E N C E  V. P A G E  

T  P A T R I C K  F R E Y D L

Dear Judge Roth:

I have your Order of August 15, 1972, in regard to the 
filing of objections to the report of the Panel, Prior to receipt 
of your Order, I had been advised by counsel for the Defendant- 
Intervenors Allen Park Public Schools that there would be an extens­
ion of time for filing objections to the Panel's report and it 
would apply to all parties.

I am assuming that the Order also applies to the Detroit
Board of Education, although we did not formally file a Motion 
for Extension as our policy is to follow all orders of the Court 
when issued.

We reiterate to the Court that the Detroit Board is
commited, if there be a remedy, to a metropolitan remedy. However, 
we may have objections to some of the details formulated by the 
Panel which we would like to make known to the Court.

Although we were prepared to file a broad outline of
objections by the 15th of August, we assumed that we would have 
the additional time. Therefore, I ask that the Board's staff 
delve into the Plan with specificity so as to furnish the details 
of any objections to the Court.

If I am incorrect that the Order does not apply to the
Detroit Board, I would like to be so advised so I can file the 
appropriate motion.

J O H N  W. F R A S C O
August 16, 1972

Honorable Stephen J. Roth 
United States District Court 
600 Church Street 
Flint, Michigan 48500

Re: Bradley v. Milliken, et al

Most respectfully
r\

GTR: L
CC: All counsel of record

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.


Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top