Fax From Chachkin RE Draft Stipulations
Correspondence
July 16, 1999

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