Gingles v. Edmisten and Pugh v. Hunt and Cavanagh v. Brock Discovery Stipulations

Public Court Documents
August 16, 1982

Cite this item

Gingles v. Edmisten and Pugh v. Hunt and Cavanagh v. Brock Discovery Stipulations preview

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

LDF Attorneys
Cooperating Attorney
- Leslie J. Winner
Organization
- NAACP Legal and Educational Defense Fund, Inc.
Matter
- Gingles
Case
- Thornburg v. Gingles
U.S. state
- North Carolina
Collection
- Case Files
Taxonomy
Identifier
- f0d5c873-de92-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873

Cite this item

Case Files, Thornburg v. Gingles Working Files - Guinier. Gingles v. Edmisten and Pugh v. Hunt and Cavanagh v. Brock Discovery Stipulations, 1982. f0d5c873-de92-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/32bbb0c0-8ee2-4553-97f3-813e091ecce8/gingles-v-edmisten-and-pugh-v-hunt-and-cavanagh-v-brock-discovery-stipulations. Accessed May 13, 2025.

Copied!

    (

r

IN THE UNTTED STATES DTSTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

RALEIGH DIVISION

RALPH GINGLES, et aI.,
Plaintiffs

v

RUFUS EDMISTEN, €t dI.,
Defendants

ALAN V. PUGH, €t a1.,
Plaintiffs

v NO. 81-1066-CrV-s

JAMES B. IiUNT, JR., etc., et aI ., )
Defendants

JOHN J. CAVANAGH, JOHN W. FARE,
et a1.,

Plaintiffs
v

ALEX K. BROCK, €tc . r et Er1 . ,
Defendants

NO. B2-545-crv-5

DTSCOVERY STIPULATIONS

counsel for all parties in the above captioned actions
have conferred and have agreed on the follor,rzing schedule for
completion of discovery:

1. The parties io cavanagh v Brock will complete dis-
covery by October B, 1982.

2. The parties to Pugh v Hunt and @
will complete discovery by March 1, 1983

3. The parties to Pugh v Hunt and Gingles v Edmisten

will be prepared to go to trial ty April L, 1993.

)

)

) NO. 81-803-CrV-s
)



,

-2-

4. The parties to Cavanagh v Brock will be prepared to

go to trial as to those issues which are not disposed of by

summary judgment by April 1, 1983.

DateW

o^*17 &>,

Dace I &rJn'z

or Gj.ngles

Attorney

Attorney or Cavana aint i

Copyright notice

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.

Gingles v. Edmisten and Pugh v. Hunt and Cavanagh v. Brock Discovery Stipulations

LDF Attorneys

Cooperating Attorney

Organization

Matter

Case

U.S. state

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in