Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Motion for a Finding that the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System is Racially Unitary

     [||52b9a29f-a71d-42d2-8b90-3d08fb2f8c75||] CHAMBERS, STEIN, FERGUSON & LANNh. 5 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

  

~ 

  

JULIUS LEVONNE CHAMBERS SUITE 730 EAST INDEPENDENCE PLAZA UNIVERSITY CLUB BUILDING 

hy ER Ep A pi _ 57 EAs SEMARY STREE 
ADAM STEIN 951 SOUTH INDEPENDENCE BOULEVARD 187 Easy Roscnany Gracey 
Jamis E. FERGUSON, UI CHAPEL Hill, NORTH CAROLINA 27514 

nn CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202 TELEPHONE (919) 967.7066 

ma TELEPHONE (704) 375.8461 s—— 
T BELTON IN CHarPEL HILL 

CHARLES L. BECTON 
ADAM STEIN . a : 

FRED A. Hicks Octoberi:19, 1973 CHARLES L. BECTON 
MELVIN LL. WATT 

JONATHAN WALLAS 

KARL ADKINS 

James C., FULLER, JR. 

Miss Elva McKnight, Deputy Clerk 
United States District Court 
Western District of North Carolina 
Post Office Building 
Charlotte, North Carolina 28201 

Swann, et al. v. The Charlotte- 

Mecklenburg Board of Education, et al. 
Civil Action No. 1974 
  

Dear Miss McKnight: 

I enclose original and copy of each of the following 
responses for filing in the above action: 

Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Motion 
for a Finding that the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
School System is Racially Unitary 

an 
and 

Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Report 
to the Court on Lakeview and Elizabeth 
Elementary Schools. 

By copy of this letter, I am serving a copy of each upon 
counsel for the defendant. 

Sincerely yours I 

J. LeVonne Chambers 

JLC:js 
Enclosures 

cc: William W. Sturges, Esq. 

Jack Greenberg, Esq. 7 
James M. Nabrit III Esq.}” 

 



  

* 9. 
IN THE 

. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT | | 

FOR THE 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

CHARLOTTE DIVISION 

21 side SWANN, C WE RE P) 

Plaintiffs, 

Yo 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1974 
THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG 

BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., 

E
T
 

Defendants. 
N
a
t
?
 

N
t
?
 

N
a
t
?
 

a
t
?
 

N
a
n
?
 

N
a
t
 

N
t
”
 

V
a
t
’
 

N
a
?
 

pe
t’
 

p
u
”
 

PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION | 

FOR A FINDING THAT THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG 
SCHOOL SYSTEM IS RACIALLY UNITARY | } 
  

Plaintiffs, by their undersigned counsel, respectfully 

pray that the Court deny the defendants' motions for a finding 

that the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System is racially unitary 

and for dismissal of the above action. In support of their 

i motion, the plaintiffs show the Court the following: |     | l. This Court has noted in numerous orders, parti- 

cularly since April of 1969, that the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 

School System is racially segregated and that the vestiges of 

A 
C
I
I
 A
 
A
G
E
S
 

BA
RE
 

racially discriminatory practices have not been eliminated. 

In one of the most recent orders of the Court, filed August 

16, 1973, the Court again found that a unitary school system 

T
I
 
E
N
T
 
T
R
 

had not been achieved and ordered for the 1973-74 school year 

interim steps by the defendant and the development of a long- 

a
e
d
 

range plan of desegregation to be implemented at the beginning 

| of the 1974-75 school year. In the latest order of the Court 

of August 16, 1973, the Court approved of the interim measures 

 



? . ¢ 

  

direct: implemented bv the Board, but further noted that the 

Board had again defaulted in its obligations to take the measures 

necessary for insuring that the school system remain desegregated. 

rous orders of the Court make clear that we are far from 

achieving in Charlotte-Mecklenburg a racially unitary school 

system where schools are neither "white" nor "black" but simply 

schools without racial orientation. Green v. School Board of 
  

New Kent County, 391 U.S. 430. Even today, there is pending 
  

before the Court a motion challenging the racially discriminatory 

method for assigning students to the newly-instituted kinder- 

garten program in the system, as well as a ruling by the Court 

on the permanent plan of desegregation directed in the June, 

1973, order. 

The various documents referred to by the defendants 

in their motions demonstrate that the school system is still | 

| with problems of continuing effects of past and present 

} racially discriminatory practices. 

WHEREFORE, the plaintiffs respectfully pray that the 

| Court deny the defendants' motions for a finding that the school 

f system is racially unitary and that his action be dismissed. 

Respectfully submitted, 

  

J. LE VONNE CHAMBERS 

CHAMBERS, STEIN, FERGUSON & LANNING 

951 South Independence Boulevard 
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 
Telephone: 704-375-8461 

JACK GREENBERG 

JAMES M. NABRIT III 

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New York 10019 

 



  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE   

xr. 1 my of Bro Ts PEA 
'. Y -“ 1 i | NN y ~ i Ceci 1. £ . 24OLNgG 

Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Motion for a Finding That 

- the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System is Racially Unitary 

has been duly served upon counsel for the defendant by depositing 

a copy of the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, 

  

  

addressed as follows: | 
} 

William W. Sturges, Esq. 
Weinstein, Sturges, Odom, Bigger 

& Jonas 

810 Baxter Street 
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

This 19th day of October, 1973. 

| Attorney for Plaintiffs 

{ 

{i } 

[} 

f wen 

| Lo al 
| 

{ ¢ 

i 

 



  

   

IN THE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

CHARLOTTE DIVISION 

JAMES E. SWANN, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

Ve 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1974 

THE CHARLOTTE~-MECKLENBURG 
BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., 

N
t
”
 

N
t
”
 

N
o
”
 

N
a
t
?
 

N
a
 

N
a
t
?
 

N
t
”
 

N
a
?
 

N
o
 

N
S
 

Defendants. 

PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS 
REPORT TO THE COURT ON LAKEVIEW AND 

ELIZABETH ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 
  

Defendants' report to the Court of depterbay 20,:1973, 

shows that two of the schools in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 

system are now out of compliance with the orders of the Court 

in that they are now more than 50% black in student enrollment. 

The report further shows that several schools also are 

approaching student enrollments of more than 50% black. 

Defendants' report to the Court of Gotchey 10, 1973, proposes 

that the defendants be permitted to correct these problems by 

making certain assignments of newcomers to selected areas in 

the school system. The report suggests that by making such 

assignments, the Board may be able 

already out of compliance with the 

as future schools, under 50% black 

respectfully pray that no approval 

to keep the two schools 

orders of the Court, as well 

enrollment. The plaintiffs 

be given this proposal 

pending some showing by the defendants that the projected 

results will be accomplished. 

E
E
.
.
.
 

 



  

   

As the Court as indicated in several prior orders, 

the Board has refused on numerous occasions to adopt any 

procedure to maintain a stable desegregation program. Many of 

the projected results simply have not been accomplished and the 

£ Court has had to direct further steps by the Board. No 

I~
 

. 

assurances have been given by the Board that the proposal con- 

0 7
 

S
d
 a ct lo) (o)
 

0) = e
e
t
 

o tained in it 1973, report will actually bring the 

schools into compliance with the Court's order. The plaintiffs 

submit that no approval should be given the proposal until the 

defendants can demonstrate that the projected results will 

actually be accomplished. 

WHEREFORE, the plaintiffs respectfully pray that 

unless some showing is made by the Board prior to the end of 

the first semester of this school year that all schools in the 

system are in compliance and will remain in compliance with the 

orders of the Court, that the Court direct the Board to take 

such measures as may be necessary to maintain desegregated 

schools. 

The plaintiffs further pray that they be awarded their 

costs herein, reasonable counsel fees and granted such other 

relief as the Court may deem the plaintiffs entitled. 

Respectfully submitted, 

   
    LA - LE Ti 

77 TE VONNE CHAMBERS 
"HAMBERS, STEIN, FERGUSON & LANNING 

951 South Independence Boulevard 
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 
Telephone: 704-375-8461 

    

JACK GREENBERG 
JAMES M. NABRIT III & 

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, New YOrk 10019 

 



    

  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the 

Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Report to 

Lakeview and Elizabeth Elementary Schools has 

  

foregoing 

the Court 

been duly 

  

on 

served 

upon counsel for the defendant by depositing a copy of the same 

in the United States mail, post 

william W. Sturges, Esd. 

Weinstein, Sturges, Odom, Bigger 

& Jonas 

810 Baxter Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 

This 19th day of October, 1973. 

ALLA = 

  

follows: 

  SHA y ar 

i for Plaintiffs [||52b9a29f-a71d-42d2-8b90-3d08fb2f8c75||]