Correspondence from Lucas to Judge Roth
Public Court Documents
November 26, 1971

1 page
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Milliken Hardbacks. Correspondence from Lucas to Judge Roth, 1971. dfb47e98-52e9-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/722c81a2-e39e-4d35-bf26-7d545a111e20/correspondence-from-lucas-to-judge-roth. Accessed April 05, 2025.
Copied!
P H O N E (9 0 1 ) S 2 5 - e e O IRATNER, SUGARMON & LUCAS A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W S U I T E 5 2 5 C O M M E R C E T I T L E B U I L D I N G M A R V I N L. R A T N E R R. 9 . S U G A R M O N , JR . L O U IS R. L U C A S W A L T E R L. BA ILEY , JR . IR V I N M. S A L A Y M I C H A E L B. KAY W I L L I A M E. C A L D W E L L MEMPHIS, T E N N E S S E E 3 8 1 0 3 ■ E N L . H O O K S o r COU N S E L November 26, 1971 Honorable Stephen J. Roth District Judge United States District Court 600 Church Street Flint, Michigan The substitution of Counsel is ordinarily a matter entirely within the purview of the party retaining that attorney. However, plaintiffs are concerned with the question of substi tution of counsel insofar as it may affect the question of delay. In other cases and in particular, in school cases, courts have required counsel to remain in the case along with new counsel for such period of time as may be necessary for new counsel to be fully familiar with the record and the pro ceedings. This is usually done on the basis that continued presence of counsel familiar with the cause will avoid delay in either the Court's docket or in effectuating constitutional rights. We would respectfully suggest that the Court defer final action on the request of Mr. Bushnell to withdraw until there is no possibility that a delay will be either requested or result from a change in counsel. LRL/wsc cc: Eugene Krasicky George E. Bushnell, Jr. Theodore Sachs Alexander Ritchie Re: Bradley V. Milliken, et al., Civil Action No. 35257 Dear Judge Roth Respectfully submitted