Fax From Chachkin RE Draft Stipulations

Correspondence
July 16, 1999

Fax From Chachkin RE Draft Stipulations preview

3 pages

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Cromartie Hardbacks. Fax From Chachkin RE Draft Stipulations, 1999. 9ebec7a3-e70e-f011-9989-7c1e5267c7b6. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/591a09c3-280b-465c-890c-44c008eeb6ad/fax-from-chachkin-re-draft-stipulations. Accessed June 03, 2025.

    Copied!

    sol 88: PY WIS 

JUL. -16" 99 (FRI) 11:12 Wey DEFENSE TEL:212 ® P. 002 

es ah BY Bl 
2080p "398d £9.991L616 

5. The plaintiffs be allowed to serve up to 50 interrogatories and the defendants, including 

defendant-intervenors, be allowed to file up to 50 interrogatories which shall be apportioned between 

defendants and defendant-intervenors as they may agree and, absent agreement, divided equally. 

4. The plaintiffs be allowed to notice up to 15 depositions of non-expert witnesses, and the 

defendants, including defendant-intervenors,be allowed to notice up to | 5 depositions of non-expert 

witnesses which shall be apportioned between defendants and defendant-intervenors as they may 

agree and, absent agreement, divided equally. In noticing depositions, reasonable effort should be 

made 10 accommodate the schedules of wimgsses and counsel. 

5. The pities be required to identify expert witnesses and serve their Rule 26 reports on or 

before August 20, 1999, and such witnesses shall be made available for deposition at times and 

places agreeable ro the witnesses and counsel. 

6. The parties be allowed until August 31, 1999 to make a good faith effort to disclose the 

identity of all trial wimesses, together with a brief statement of what a parry proposes to establish 

by their testimony. 

7. All motions, except those relating to the admissibility of evidence at trial, are to be filed on 

or before October 1, 1999. 

For purposes of this trial, the parties stipulate and agree that should it become material during 

the tal with respect to the drawing of the First Congressional District whether these Gingles 

preconditions exist — namely that (1) the minority group is sutficiontly large and geographically 

compact 10 constitute 2 majority in a single member district, (2) the minority group is politically 

cohesive, and (3) the white majority votes sufficiently as a block to enable it usually to defeat the 

20°d 61:1 66. ¥I INC ¢9/9912616: XR 4 117 HID34S 9G IN 

 



    JUL. -16" 99 (FRI) 11:12 a DEFENSE TEL:212 ® P. 003 

21 86. vi. AL 
£09 399d. EILISILBILE 

Ln BBS | 

minority 's preferred candidate -- aril contest the existence of preconditions 2 and 3 

above, but only contest the exisience of precondition }e 

Bd (%) For purposes of this trial, the parties further stipulate and agree African-Americans in North 

Carolina for many decades were victims of racial discrimination and a substantial majority of 

African-American citizens in North Carolina are still at a disadvantage in comparison to white 

citizens with respect to income, housing, education and health; 

9. With regard to the North Carolina congressional preclearance materials submatted to the 

United States Department of Justice pursuant to § 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the parties stipulate 

and agree as follows: 

a. The 1997 Submission, comprising five volumes (sections 97C-27A-1 through 97C-28H- 

1), 1s a complete and accurate copy of the legislative history of the enactment of Chapter 11, the 

1997 congressional redistricting plan. The parties further stipulate and agree that the 1997 

Submission previously filed with the court under the affidavit of Gary O. Bardett on March 2, 1998, 

constitutes a joint exhibit for trial and shall be designated as Exhibit 1. 

b. The 1998 Submission, comprising two volumes (sections 98C-27A-] through 98F-28F- 

2), is a complete and accurate copy of the legislative history of the enactment of Chapter 2, the 1998 

congressional redistricting plan. The parties further stipulate and agree that the 1998 Submission 

previously filed with the Court under the Third Affidavit of Gary O. Bartlett on June 1, 1998, 

constitutes a joint exhibit for tial and shall be designated as Exhibit 2. 

¢. Al the request of a party, the Court may take judicial notice of materials offered as an 

exhibit from the 1992 Submission. 

L
F
 

ead OTIS eee PL oh $9/99T/616: X04 117 WIJ34S 94 ON 

 



JUL. -16" 99(FR1} 11:12 wa DEFENSE TEL:212 ® P. 001 

198 390d E£8.3881LB16 6l1:¢1 88, v1 Nr 

10°d BIySl “85, rl. 100 $9/991/616: XEA 117) WID3HS Od ON

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

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.

Return to top