Correspondence from Lucas to Judge Roth
Public Court Documents
December 10, 1971
1 page
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Milliken Hardbacks. Correspondence from Lucas to Judge Roth, 1971. a69c8192-52e9-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/4d946039-8990-40b1-a060-d3e919ea293b/correspondence-from-lucas-to-judge-roth. Accessed November 28, 2025.
Copied!
R A T N E R , S U G A R M O N & L U C A S
P H O N E ( 9 0 1 ) 5 2 3 - 8 6 0 1
A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W
S U I T E 5 2 5
M A R V I N L . R A T N E R
R . B . 8 U G A R M O N , J R .
L O U I S R. L U C A S
W A L T E R L . B A I L E Y , J R .
I R V I N M . S A L K Y
M I C H A E L B. K A Y
W I L L I A M E . C A L D W E L L
C O M M E R C E TITLE B U I L D I N G
M E M P H IS . T E N N E S S E E 3 8 1 0 3
December 10, 1971 B E N L . H O O K S
OF COUNSEL
Honorable Stephen J. Roth
United States District Judge
600 Church Street
Flint, Michigan 48502
RE: Bradley, et al. v. Milliken, et al.,
Civil Action No. 35257
Dear Judge Roth:
We are in receipt of the Consent and Stipulation to
Substitution of Counsel and the proposed Order for Sub
stitution filed by Mr. Curtner in the above matter.
We, of course, have no objection to the addition of
counsel for the Detroit Board defendants. But for the
reasons set forth in our letter of November 26, 1971 ( a
copy of which is attached hereto) we continue to have
reservations about the withdrawal of present counsel. If
the Court and the parties could be assured in writing by
new counsel for the Detroit Board that no delay with regard
to any matter in this cause will be sought because of the
substitution of counsel, plaintiffs would withdraw their
objections.
Respectfully submitted,
LRL:pww
cc: George E. Bushnell, Jr., Esq.
Eugene Krasicky, Esq.
George T. Roumell, Jr., Esq.
Robert E. Manley, Esq.
Theodore Sachs, Esq.
Alexander B. Ritchie, Esq.
Enclosure