Amended Notice of Deposition and Subpoena Duces Tecum to Murray; Defendant Wood's Motion for Leave to Shorten Time; Order

    ATTORNEYS 

A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING 

PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 

EVELYN V. KEYES 

(713) 226-0611 

PorTER & CLEMENTS 
FIRST REPUBLICBANK CENTER 

700 LOUISIANA, SUITE 3500 

HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002-2730 

  

TELEPHONE (713) 226-0600 

TELECOPIER (713) 228-1331 

TELECOPIER (713) 224-4835 

TELEX 775-348 

August 18, 1989 

Clerk, U.S. District Court FEDERAL EXPRESS 
200 E. Wall St., Buite 316 
Midland, Texas 79702 

Re: 

Dear Sir: 

  

No. MO88-CA-154; League of United Latin American 
Citizens (LULAC), et al. v. James Mattox, Attorney 

General of Texas, et al.; In the United States District 

Court for the Western District of Texas, Midland-Odessa 
Division 

Enclosed for filing in the above-referenced case are the 
following 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Pleas 
enveloped 

documents: 

Amended Notice of Deposition and Subpoena Duces Tecum 
to Prof. Richard Murray; 

Defendant Wood's Motion for Leave to Shorten the Time 
for the Deposition Upon Written Questions of Richard 
Murray; and 

Order. 

e return a file stamped copy of these documents in the 
provided. 

A copy of this filing is being mailed by Federal Express and 
first class United States mail, postage prepaid, to all counsel 
of record. 

EVK/br 

enclosures 

Sincerely yours, 

Evelyn V. Keyes 

 



  

Clerk, UB.5. 'District Court 
August 17, 1989 
Page -2- 

CC: Mr. William L. Garrett 
Ms. Brenda Hall Thompson 
Garrett, Thompson & Chang 
Attorneys at Law 

8300 Douglas, Suite 800 
Dallas, Texas 75225 

Mr. Rolando L. Rios 
Southwest Voter Registration & 

Education Project 
201 ‘N. St. Mary's, Suite 521 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 

Ms. Susan Finkelstein 

Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc. 
201 "NN. St. Mary's, Suite 500 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 

Mr. Julius Levonne Chambers 
Ms. Sherrilyn A. Ifill 
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 
99 Hudson Street, l6th Floor 
New York, New York 10013 

Ms. Gabrielle K. McDonald 
Matthews & Branscomb 

301 Congress Ave., Suite 2050 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Mr. Jim Mattox, Attorney General of Texas 
Ms. Mary F. Keller, First Assistant Attorney General 
Ms. Renea Hicks, Spec. Assistant Attorney General 
Mr. Javier Guajardo, Spec. Assistant Attorney General 
P. O. Box 12548 
Capitol Station 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Mr. Fdward B. Cloutman, III 

Mullinax, Wells, Baab & Cloutman, P.C. 
3301 Elm Street 

Dallas, Texas 75226-1637 

Mr. E. Brice Cunningham 
777 So. R.L. Thornton Freeway, Suite 121 
Dallas, Texas 75203 

 



  

Clerk, U.S. District Court 
August 17, 1989 
Page -3- 

CC: Mr. Robert BH. Mow, Jr. 

Hughes & Luce 
2800 Momentum Place 

1717 Main Street 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

 



  

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION 

LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN 

CITIZENS (LULAC), et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

Vv. NO. MO-88-CA-154 

JIM MATTOX, et al., 

Defendants. 

AMENDED NOTICE OF DEPOSITION ON WRITTEN 
QUESTIONS AND SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM 
  

  

TO: Prof. Richard Murray, Department of Political Science, 
University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77209-3474 

Please take notice that, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, 31, 

and 45, Defendant-Intervenor Harris County District Judge 

Sharolyn Wood will take the deposition on written questions of 

Richard Murray before an officer authorized to administer oaths 

at such time and place as shall be designated by the court 

reporter, Allied Court Reporters, Esperson Building, Houston, 

Texas 77002, On or before, the time of the taking of his 

deposition, the witness shall produce for inspection and copying 

by Defendant Wood or her counsel the documents designated in 

Exhibit 1 attached hereto and shall answer the questions. 

Parties are invited to submit cross questions pursuant to Fed. R. 

Civ. PP. 31ta). 

 



  

DEFINITION OF DOCUMENTS 
  

The term "document" means every writing or record of any 

type and description that is in your possession, control, or 

custody, including without limitation, checks, correspondence, 

memoranda, stenographic or handwritten notes, drafts, accounts, 

voice recordings, reports, statistical compilations, work papers, 

data processing cards, computer tapes or printouts, or any other 

writing ‘or recordings of any kind. The term "document" also 

includes every copy of a writing or record which contains any 

commentary or notation of any kind which does not appear on the 

original or any other copy. A document is deemed to be within 

your "control" if you have ownership, possession, or custody of 

the document or a copy thereof, or the right to secure the 

document or a copy thereof from any other person or public or 

private entity having physical possession thereof. 

Direct questions to be propounded to the witness are: 

1. State your name, address and occupation. 

2. | State‘whether or not ‘you. have in your custody or 
subject to your control any and all documents as 
defined in Exhibit 1 attached hereto. 

3. Hand to the notary public taking this deposition the 
originals of all such documents. 

4. State whether or not the records you have furnished to 
the notary public in response to the foregoing question 
are a complete and accurate copy of the documents in 
your possession pertaining to the above mentioned 
request categories. 

5. State whether or not the records you have furnished to 
the notary public in response to Interrogatory No. 3 
were kept in your regular course of business. 

 



State whether or not it was in your regular course of 
business for you or one of your employees with personal 
knowledge of the acts recorded to make these records or 
to transmit the information which is included in this 
record. 

State whether or not the records you have furnished to 
the notary public in response to the foregoing 
inquiries were made at or near the time of the acts 
which are recorded, or reasonably soon thereafter. 

State your occupation, giving title, institution, and 
length of time you have held that position. 

Describe your preparation for the professional position 
you currently hold. Include your academic and honorary 
degrees; your principal fields of study; your 
membership and any offices you have held in any 
honorary and professional societies; all previous 
professional positions you have held; all courses you 
have taught that are related to demographics or 
politics; all of your publications ‘in the fields of 
demographics and politics, with a brief description of 
their contents; all of your academic, professional, and 
political honors; and all employment you have had in 
the fields of politics or demographics, including all 
special projects you have been employed to undertake. 

Describe all affiliations you have had of any type with 
any political party. 

Describe. all affiliations you have had with any 
minority or civil rights group and all commissions or 
employment you have received regarding minority 
political interests or civil rights. 

Have ever been employed to testify as an expert in 
court; and, if so how many times have you so testified, 
what subjects did you testify about, and for whom did 
you testify? 

Have you ever been employed as a political consultant 
in a judicial race? 

If so, who employed you and for which race(s) in which 
year(s)? 

State whether or not you are producing each of the 
following documents: 

(1) Untitled report "in four parts" marked Murray 
Exhibit "1";  



  

16, 

18, 

19. 

20. 

(2) "Election Prospectus for the Houston Area 
Appellate Courts, November, 1982," marked Murray 
Exhibit "2%; 

{3) "Judicial Courts in Harris County, 1982," marked 
Murray Exhibit "3": 

(4) "Judicial Elections in Harris County: A Review of 
the Judges Committee Compaign Effort," marked 
Murray Exhibit "4"; 

(5) "Partisan Judicial Elections in Harris County, 

Texas," marked Murray Exhibit "5"; and 

(6) "The Selection of Judges in Texas" marked Murray 
Exhibit "6". 

State whether or not your answers to questions 1 
through 7 are affirmative for each of the documents 
marked Murray Exhibit 1 through Murray Exhibit 6 and, 
if not, why not. 

Have the court reporter mark as exhibits each of the 
documents you have produced other than Murray Exhibits 
1 through 6. 

Identify each of the documents marked as exhibits by 
the court reporter in response to question number 17. 

State whether or not your answers to dguestions 1 
through 7 are affirmative for each of the documents 
marked as exhibits in response to questions 17 and 18; 
and ‘if not, why not. 

Please answer each of the following subquestions with 
respect to Murray Exhibit 1: 

(a) are you the author of the document identified in 
this question? 

(b) for whom was the document prepared? 

(c) for what purpose was the document prepared? 

(d) what topics does the document address? 

(e) are those topics ordinarily addressed by persons 
in your profession? 

(f) what inferences, conclusions and opinions did you 

draw in the document? 

 



  

21, 

22. 

(h) 

(1) 

(3) 

on what facts, data, or opinions did you base 

those inferences, conclusions, and opinions? 

are the facts, data, or opinions on which you 
relied in drawing your inferences or conclusions 
and forming your opinions of a type reasonably 
relied on by persons in your profession? 

in your opinion are the conclusions and inferences 
you drew and the opinions you formed correct? 

what is the basis for your answer to the preceding 
subquestion, 20(1i)? 

Please answer each of the following subgquestions with 
respect to Murray Exhibit 2: 

(a) 

(h) 

(i) 

(3) 

are you the author of the document identified in 
this question? 

for whom was the document prepared? 

for what purpose was the document prepared? 

what topics does the document address? 

are those topics ordinarily addressed by persons 
in your profession? 

what inferences, conclusions and opinions did you 
draw in the document? 

on what facts, data, or opinions. 4id you Dbase 
those inferences, conclusions, and opinions? 

are the facts, data, or opinions on. which you 
relied in drawing your inferences or conclusions 
and forming your opinions of a type reasonably 
relied on by persons in your profession? 

in your opinion are the conclusions and inferences 
you drew and the opinions you formed correct? 

what is the basis for your answer to the preceding 
subquestion, 21(i)? 

Please answer each of the following subgquestions with 
respect to Murray Exhibit 3: 

(a) are you the author of the document identified in 

this question? 

 



  

23. 

(1) 

(3) 

for whom was the document prepared? 

for what purpose was the document prepared? 

what topics does the document address? 

are those topics ordinarily addressed by persons 
in your profession? 

what inferences, conclusions and opinions did you 
draw in the document? 

on what facts, data, or opinions did you base 
those inferences, conclusions, and opinions? 

are the facts, data, or opinions on which you 

relied in drawing your inferences or conclusions 
and forming your opinions of a type reasonably 
relied on by persons in your profession? 

in your opinion are the conclusions and inferences 
you drew and the opinions you formed correct? 

what is the basis for your answer to the preceding 
subquestion, 22(1i)? 

Please answer each of the following subquestions with 
respect to Murray Exhibit 4: 

(a) 

(£) 

are you the author of the document identified in 
this question? 

for whom was the document prepared? 

for what purpose was the document prepared? 

what topics does the document address? 

are those topics ordinarily addressed by persons 
in your profession? 

what inferences, conclusions and opinions did you 
draw in the document? 

on what facts, data, or opinions d4id8 you base 
those inferences, conclusions, and opinions? 

are the facts, data, or opinions on which you 
relied in drawing your inferences or conclusions 
and forming your opinions of a type reasonably 
relied on by persons in your profession? 

 



  

24. 

25, 

(1) 

(3) 

in your opinion are the conclusions and inferences 
you draw drew and the opinion you formed correct? 

what is the basis for your answer to the preceding 
subquestion, 23(i)? 

Please answer each of the following subgquestions with 
respect to Murray Exhibit 5: 

(a) 

(£) 

(h) 

(1) 

(3) 

are you the author of the document identified in 
this question? 

for whom was the document prepared? 

for what purpose was the document prepared? 

what topics does the document address? 

are those topics ordinarily addressed by persons 
in your profession? 

what inferences, conclusions and opinions d 
id you 

draw in the document? 

on what facts, data, or opinions did you base 

those inferences, conclusions, and opinions? 

are the facts, data, or opinions on which you 
relied in drawing your inferences or conclusions 
and forming your opinions of a type reasonably 
relied on by persons in your profession? 

in your opinion are the conclusions and inferences 
you drew and the opinions you formed correct? 

what is the basis for your answer to the preceding 
subquestion, 24(i)? 

Please answer each of the following subquestions with 
respect to Murray Exhibit 6: 

(a) 

(b) 

{c) 

(d) 

are you the author of the document identified in 

this question? 

for whom was the document prepared? 

for what purpose was the document prepared? 

what topics does the document address? 

 



  

26. 

(e) 

(£) 

(g) 

(3) 

are those topics ordinarily addressed by persons 
in your profession? 

what inferences, conclusions and opinions did you 

draw in the document? 

on what facts, data, or opinions did you base 
those inferences, conclusions, and opinions? 

are the facts, data, or opinions on which you 
relied in drawing your inferences or conclusions 
and forming your opinions of a type reasonably 
relied on by persons in your profession? 

in your opinion are the conclusions and inferences 
you drew and the opinions you formed correct? 

what is the basis for your answer to the preceding 
subquestion, 25(i)? 

Please answer each of the following subquestions with 
respect to Murray Exhibit 7: 

(a) 

(£) 

(h) 

(1) 

are you the author of the document identified in 

this question? 

for whom was the document prepared? 

for what purpose was the document prepared? 

what topics does the document address? 

are those topics ordinarily addressed by persons 

in your profession? 

what inferences, conclusions and opinions did you 

draw in the document? 

on what facts, data, Or opinions did you base 

those inferences, conclusions, and opinions? 

are the facts, data, or opinions on which you 
relied in drawing your inferences or conclusions 
and forming your opinions of a type reasonably 
relied on by persons in your profession? 

in your opinion are the conclusions and inferences 
you drew and the opinions you formed correct? 

 



(j) what is the bases for your answer to the preceding 

subquestion, 26(1i)? 

(lernards 
l TI | por rs 

J. Eugene (lementk 
Attorney in Charge for Pafenitont 
Harris County District Judge 
Sharolyn Wood 
700 Louisiana, Suite 3500 
Houston, Texas 77002-2730 

(713) 226-0600 

  

OF COUNSEL: 

PORTER & CLEMENTS 

John E. O'Neill 
Evelyn V. Keyes 
700 Louisiana, Suite 3500 
Houston, Texas 77002-2730 

(713) 226-0600 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

I hereby certify that on the {Hh aay Of ‘August, 1989, a 
true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Amended Notice 
of Deposition on Written Questions and Subpoena Duces Tecum was 
served upon counsel of record in this case by first class United 
States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: 

William L. Garrett, Esq. 
Brenda Hall Thompson, Esq. 
Garrett, Thompson & Chang 
Attorneys at Law 

8300 Douglas, Suite 800 
Dallas, Texas 75225 

Rolando L. Rios, Esq. 
Southwest Voter Registration & 

Education Project 
201 N. St. Mary's, Suite 221 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 

Susan Finkelstein, Esq. 
Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc. 
201 N. St. Mary's, Suite 600 
San Antonio, Texas 78205  



  

Julius Levonne Chambers, Esq. 
Sherrilyn A. Ifill, Bsqg. 
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 
99 Hudson Street 
16th Floor 
New York, New York 10013 

Gabrielle K. McDonald, Esq. 
Matthews & Branscomb 

301 Congress, Avenue 
Suite 2050 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Jim Mattox, Attorney General of Texas 

Mary F. Keller, First Assistant Attorney General 
Renea Hicks, Spec. Assistant Attorney General 
Javier Guajardo, Spec. Assistant Attorney General 
P. O. Box 12548 
Capitol Station 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Edward B. Cloutman, III, Esq. 

Mullinax, Wells, Baab & Cloutman, P.C. 

3301 Elm Street 

Dallas, Texas 75226-1637 

E. Brice Cunningham, Esq. 
777 So. R.L. Thornton Freeway 
Suite 121 
Dallas, Texas 75203 

Robert H. Mow, Jr. 

Hughes & Luce 
2800 Momentum Place 

1717 Main Street 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

bore, V Key a 
Evelyn V. Keyes / 
  

WO001/23/cdf 

 



  

The 
produced: 

1. 

2. 

EXHIBIT 1 
  

DOCUMENTS, FILES AND THINGS TO 
BE PRODUCED BY RICHARD MURRAY 

following documents, files and things are to be 

All documents ‘relating to the 1986 campaign for 
judicial positions in Harris County, Texas. 
  

All documents prepared for the Judges Committee 
including, but not limited to, reports generated 
pre-campaign, during the campaign, and post-campaign in 
1986-1987. 

  

All documents relating to the role of race and/or 
ethnic background in Harris County primary and general 
elections for judicial office since 1980. 

  

All documents provided since January 1, 1984, to any of 
the following regarding elections or election returns, 
voting districts, or demographics that relate in any 
way to racial or minority language (a) discrimination 
and/or (b) voting patterns and results in Harris 
County. 

  

League of United Latin American Citizens ("LULAC") 
LULAC Council No. 4434 
LULAC Council No. 4451 
Aguilla Watson 
Christina Moreno 
Matthew W. Plummer 
Houston Lawyers' Association 
Alice Bonner 
Weldon Berry 
Francis Williams 
Rev. William Lawson 
Deloyd T. Parker 
Bennie McGinty 
Jesse Oliver 
Fred Tinsley 
Joan Winn White 
Legislative Black Caucus 
Larry Evans 

Albert Price 
Harold Dutton Jr. 
Senfronia Thompson 
Fred Blair 
Karyne Conley 

 



  

Wilhelmina Delco 
Al Edwards 
Samuel Hudson 
Eddie Bernice Johnson 
Jerald Larry 
Garfield Thompson 
Sylvester Turner 
Craig Washington 
Ron Wilson 
Algenita Scott Davis 
Benjamin Pigott 
Peggy Foreman 

McKen Carrington 
Willie Rhodes 
The Judges Committee 
Gabrielle K. McDonald 
Southwest Voter Registration & 

Education Project 
Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc. 
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 

5 The witness’ resume, including academic degrees, 
publications, professional honors, and professional 
employment. 

 



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION 

LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN 

CITIZENS (LULAC), ET AlL., 

Plaintiffs, 

JIM MATTOX, Attorney General 
of the State of Texas, ET AlL., 

Defendants. 

S 
S 
$ 
S 
S 

V. § NO. MO-88-CA-154 

S 
S 
S 
S 
S 

DEFENDANT WOOD'S MOTION FOR LEAVE 

TO SHORTEN THE TIME FOR THE DEPOSITION 

UPON WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF RICHARD MURRAY 

  

  

  

TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE: 

COMES NOW Harris County District Judge Sharolyn Wood 

(Defendant "Wood") and, pursuant +to0 Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 31(a), files this Motion for Leave to Shorten the Time 

for ‘the Deposition of Richard Murray, and in support thereof 

would respectfully show the Court the following: 

Civ. P. 31 permits a party to serve cross- 

questions upon all other parties within thirty (30) days after a 

notice of deposition on written questions is served. The Rule 

also permits re-direct questions to be served upon all other 

parties within ten (10) days after being served with. cross- 

questions. The Rule further permits a party that has been served 

with re-direct questions to serve re-cross questions upon all 

other parties within ten (10) more days. The Rule permits the 

Court to shorten the time for the service of cross-questions,  



  

re-direct questions, and re-cross questions for cause shown. 

2... ‘The trial of this cause is set for September 18, 1989, 

The discovery cut-off date is September 4, 1989. Defendant Wood 

has shown due diligence in pursuing all avenues of discovery in 

this case, as shown by her numerous filings with the Court. Two 

prior efforts to depose Dr. Murray have been postponed for the 

convenience of other counsel. Because of the approaching 

discovery cut-off date and trial date in this cause, it ls not 

possible for Defendant Wood to meet the deadlines for cross- 

questions, re-direct questions, and re-cross questions in regard 

to the above-referenced deposition on written questions in the 

short time remaining to her. 

3. Counsel for Defendant Wood requests that all counsel 

inform her on Monday, August 21, whether or not they agree to 

shorten the time for cross-questions, re-direct, and re-cross 

quetions regarding the Deposition on Written Questions of Richard 

Murray as set forth in this Motion so that she may inform the 

Court whether an agreement can be reached. Counsel for Defendant 

Wood certifies that by virtue of the service of this Motion on 

all parties she has made a good faith effort to reach agreement 

in the most expedient manner available to her -- particularly in 

light of the absence of Ms. McDonald and Ms. Ifill from their 

offices. 

WHEREFORE Defendant Wood requests that, in regard to the 

deposition on written questions of Richard Murray, the Court 

shorten the time for serving cross-questions to ten (10) days, 

 



  

that it shorten the time for serving re-direct questions to five 

(5) days, and that it shorten the time for serving re-cross 

questions to three (3) days. 

Respectfully submitted, 

PORTER & CLEMENTS 

By: WwW) JHA ore 
J. Eugene Clements / / 
700 Louisiana, Suite 3500 

Houston, Texas 77002-2730 

{713) 226-0600 

  

ATTORNEYS FOR HARRIS COUNTY 

DISTRICT JUDGE SHAROLYN WOOD 

OF COUNSEL: 

PORTER & CLEMENTS 

John E. O'Neill 
Evelyn V. Keyes 
700 Louisiana, Suite 3500 
Houston, Texas 77002-2730 

(713) 226-0600 

Michael J. Wood 

Attorney at Law 

440 Louisiana, Suite 200 
Houston, Texas 77002 

(713) 228-5105 

 



  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

1 hereby certify that on the JSR aay of August, 1989, a 
true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Defendant Wood's 
Motion for Leave to Shorten the Time for the Deposition Upon 
Written Questions of Richard Murray was served upon counsel of 
record in this case by Federal Express or first class United 
States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: 

Mr. William L. Garrett 
Ms. Brenda Hall Thompson 
Garrett, Thompson & Chang 
Attorneys at Law 

8300 Douglas, Suite 800 
Dallas, Texas 75225 

Mr. Rolando Ll. Rios 
Southwest Voter Registration & 

Education Project 
201 N. St. Mary's, Suite 521 

San Antonio, Texas 78205 

Ms. Susan Finkelstein 
Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc. 
201 N. St. Mary's, Suite 600 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 

Mr. Julius Levonne Chambers 
Ms, Sherrilyn A. Ifill 
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 
99 Hudson Street 

16th Floor 

New York, New York 10013 

Ms. Gabrielle K. McDonald 

Matthews & Branscomb 

301 Congress Ave., Suite 2050 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Mr. Jim Mattox, Attorney General of Texas 
Ms. Mary F. Keller, First Assistant Attorney General 
Ms. Renea Hicks, Spec. Assistant Attorney General 
Mr. Javier Guajardo, Spec. Assistant Attorney General 
P. O. Box 12548 
Capitol Station 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Mr. Edward B. Cloutman, III 

Mullinax, Wells, Baab & Cloutman, P.C. 

3301 Elm Street 

Dallas, Texas 75226-1637 

 



  

Mr. E. Brice Cunningham 
777 So. R.L. Thornton Freeway 
Suite 121 
Dallas, Texas 75203 

Myr. Robert H. Mow, Jr. 

Hughes & Luce 
2800 Momentum Place 

1717 Main Street 
Dallas, Texas 75201 

i - V. le, Mig 
Evelyn V. Keyes 
  

WO003/06/cdf 

 



  

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION 

LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN 
CITIZENS (LULAC), ET AL., 

Plaintiffs, 

JIM MATTOX, Attorney General 

S 
S 
S 
S 
S 

V. § NO. MO-88-CA-154 

S 
S 

of the State of Texas, ET AL., § 

S 
S Defendants. 

  

Came on for consideration Defendant Wood's Motion for Leave 

to Shorten the Time for the Deposition Upon Written Questions of 

Richard Murray; and the Court, having reviewed the Motion, is of 

the opinion that it should be GRANTED. Accordingly, 

It is ORDERED that the time for serving cross-questions 

regarding the Deposition on Written Questions of Richard Murray 

be shortened to ten (10) days after service of the Deposition; 

that the time for serving re-direct questions be shortened to 

five (5) days; and that the time for serving re-cross questions 

be shortened to three (3) days. 

SIGNED and ENTERED this day of August, 1989. 

  

LUCIUS D. BUNTON, Chief Judge 

WO003/06