Letter to Judge Thompson from Menefee RE: Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint
Correspondence
December 13, 1985
2 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Dillard v. Crenshaw County Hardbacks. Letter to Judge Thompson from Menefee RE: Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint, 1985. 81b8f503-b9d8-ef11-a730-7c1e5218a39c. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/3c342563-feed-42da-b311-853327e21101/letter-to-judge-thompson-from-menefee-re-motion-for-leave-to-amend-complaint. Accessed October 30, 2025.
Copied!
BLACKSHER, MENEFEE & STEIN, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
405 VAN ANTWERP BUILDING
P.O. BOX 1051
MOBILE, ALABAMA 36633
JAMES U. BLACKSHER TELEPHONE
LARRY T. MENEFEE December 13 1985 (205) 433-2000
GREGORY B. STEIN
WANDA L. COCHRAN
Hon. Myron H. Thompson
United States District Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of Alabama
United States Courthouse
Montgomery, Alabama 36106
Re: t bama ; A . 85-T-1332—
Dear Judge Thompson:
Contemporaneous with this letter we are filing with the Clerk of
Court a motion for leave to amend the complaint and amended
complaint as we discussed in the status conference held with Your
Honor on Friday, December 6. The amended complaint adds a number
of additional county defendants.
I have, of course, sent a copy of the motion and amended
complaint to Mr. Alton Turner, attorney for Crenshaw County. I
have requested Mr. Turner to give his written consent to this
amendment. A literal reading of Rule 15(a), Fed.R.Civ.P., could
indicate that that might be all that is necessary to allow the
amendment.
Nevertheless, I will await an order from Your Honor. If Your
Honor sees fit to allow this amendment, we will then prepare the
necessary copies and summons, in consultation with the Clerk's
Office, for service of the additional defendants.
We have not prepared an additional brief, feeling that the motion
adequately sets forth the controlling procedural rules. If Your
Honor has any questions, we will be glad to provide further
authority. Substantively in this area of law a number of cases
have recognized that a series of events and transactions may be
used to show the discrimination about which plaintiffs complain
herein. Most prominently, Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan
Housing Corp., 429 U.S.252, 50 L.Ed.2d 450, 97 S.Ct.555 (1977):
The historical background of the decision is one
evidentiary source, particularly if it reveals a
series of official action taken for invidious
Hon. Myron H. Thompson
December 13, 1985
Page Two
purposes. ... The specific sequence of events
leading up to the challenged decision also may
shed some light on the decision-maker’'s purposes.
420 U.S. at 267; 50 L.Ed.2d at 465-66. The historical analysis
encompassing a series of transactions and occurrences is also
appropriate under authority such as Rogers v. Lodge, 458
U.S.613 (1982) and the amended section 2 of the Voting Rights Act
of 1965, 42 U.S.C.Section 1973.
Best regards.
Very respectfully,
BLACKSHER, MENEFEE & STEIN, P.A.
LE — na
Larry . Menpfee
LTM:pfm
CC: Alton L. Turner, Esq.
Terry G. Davis, Esq.
Deborah Fins, Esq.