Letter from Everett to Smiley RE: Plaintiffs’ designation of witnesses

Correspondence
September 23, 1999

Letter from Everett to Smiley RE: Plaintiffs’ designation of witnesses preview

3 pages

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Cromartie Hardbacks. Letter from Everett to Smiley RE: Plaintiffs’ designation of witnesses, 1999. f939024f-ee0e-f011-9989-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/59a2bbcc-63e7-45e0-a3f5-9637cb68debe/letter-from-everett-to-smiley-re-plaintiffs-designation-of-witnesses. Accessed July 13, 2025.

    Copied!

    EVERETT & EVERETT 
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 

  

  

SUITE 300 

R.O. EVERETT (1878-1971) 301 W. MAIN STREET 
KATHRINE R. EVERETT (1893-1992) 
ROBINSON O. EVERETT P.O. BOX 586 
DAWN T. BATTISTE DurHAM, NORTH CAROLINA 27702 TEL: (919) 682-5691 

FAX: (919) 682-5469 

OF COUNSEL 
ROBERT D. HOLLEMAN 

September 23, 1999 

VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL 

Ms. Tiare Smiley 

North Carolina Dept. Of Justice 

P.O. Box 629 

Raleigh, NC 27602-0629 

Re: Designation of Witnesses 

Dear Tiare: 

The plaintiffs hereby designate the following witnesses: 

1. Dr. Ronald Weber, expert in voting behavior, redistricting standards, political science. Dr. 

Weber will explain how race predominates in the construction of the 1997 congressional districts, 

and provide information concerning crossover voting by white citizens for candidates of choice of 

black North Carolinians. His expert report has previously been provided to opposing counsel. 

2. Mr. Lee Mortimer, an expert on local political trends and events, will explain how the splits of 

counties demonstrate the predominance of race. His expert report has previously been provided 

to opposing counsel. 

4. Former State Representative John Weatherly, a member of the enacting body, will discuss 

legislative intent and the predominance of race as a consideration by members of the General 

Assembly in 1997. An affidavit was provided in the 1998 proceedings. 

5. Associated Press reporter Dennis Patterson, will discuss a survey of legislators reflecting 

legislative intent on redistricting for the 1997 enactment. 

 



Ms. Tiare Smiley 

September 23, 1999 

Page 2 

6. Mr. Neil Williams, a former Charlotte City Council member and candidate for Congress, will 

discuss the racial and political climate, and the racial assignment of precincts and communities in 

Charlotte and Mecklenburg County. An affidavit was provided in the 1998 proceedings. 

7. Mr. Martin Cromartie, plaintiff, will discuss the racial and political climate in regards to 

redistricting in Eastern North Carolina and Edgecombe County, and his objection to racial 

classification of communities. 

8. Mr. Jake Froehlich, plaintiff, will discuss the racial and political climate, and racial assignment 

of precincts and communities in High Point, Greensboro, and Guilford County, and voter 

confusion from redistricting. 

9. Mr. R. O. Everett, plaintiff, will discuss the racial and political climate, and racial assignment 

of precincts and communities in Rowan County. 

10. North Carolina State Senator Hamilton Horton may be called to testify as to racial 

configurations of Forsyth County in the 12™ District. (He is presently out of the country until 

October 7, 1999) 

11. North Carolina State Representative Steve Wood may be called to testify as to racial 

configurations of High Point in the 12" District. 

The plaintiffs also reserve the right to use portions of prior testimony or sworn statements, 

or to call as adverse witnesses Mr. Gerry Cohen, Sen. Roy Cooper, Rep. Ed McMahan, Sen. 

Leslie Winner, Mr. Gary Bartlett, and Mr. Linwood Jones. 

In the event that details of the chronology of redistricting in the 1990s, technical details of 

precinct structure, assignment and division, and redistricting computer operation and data cannot 

be stipulated, plaintiffs would in such an instance call either Mr. William Gilkerson, Mr. Dan Frey 

of the Information Systems office, or the respective county election official. 

In the event that matters relating to MDA designations and meaning cannot be stipulated, 

the plaintiffs plan to call an attorney knowledgeable regarding FCC matters, or an owner or 

operator of a media station.  



  

Ms. Tiare Smiley 

September 23, 1999 
Page 3 

cc: Adam Stein 

eC. Tod Cox 

  

Sincerely yours, 

by: Jet A. Toyo t 

Robinson O. Everett

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