Pleadings Hardback Index #4
Public Court Documents
July 6, 1998 - November 10, 1998

2 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Sheff v. O'Neill Hardbacks. Plaintiffs' Request for Admissions, 1990. c14cf13f-a246-f011-877a-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/925422b7-8cb8-4047-a5ab-ecc8fc9a3f19/plaintiffs-request-for-admissions. Accessed August 19, 2025.
Copied!
MOLLER, HORTON & FINEBERG, P. C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 90 GILLETT STREET HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06105 WILLIAM R. MOLLERA TELEPHONE WESLEY W. HORTON (203) 522-8338 DAVID L. FINEBERG® TELECOPIER CHARLES M. RICE, JR. (203) 728-0401 ALEXANDRA DAVIS ROBERT M. SHIELDS, JR. SUSAN M. CORMIER September 20, 1990 KIMBERLY A. KNOX JEFFREY A. HOBERMAN *ALSO ADMITTED IN FLORIDA AALSO ADMITTED IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Honorable Harry Hammer P.O. Box 325 Rockville, CT 06066 Re: Sheff v. O'Neill Dear Judge Hammer: Enclosed is a copy of document served on the defendants today. Very truly yours, Wesley W. Horton WWH:jt cc: John R. Whelan, Esq. Diane Woodfield-Whitney, Esq. Wilfred Rodriguez, Esq. Helen Hershkoff, Esq. Adam S. Cohen, Esq. Marianne Lado, Esq. Ronald Ellis, Esq. Philip Tegeler, Esq. Jenny Rivera, Esq. Martha Stone, Esq. Professor John R. Brittain Cv89-0360977S MILO SHEFF, ET AL VS. WILLIAM A. O/NEILL, ET AL PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS SUPERIOR COURT JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD/ NEW BRITAIN AT HARTFORD SEPTEMBER 20, 1990 of service of this request. e A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W 32 Grand Street, Hartford, CT M O L L E R , H O R T O N & F I N E B E R G , P. C. 90 GI LL ET T ST RE ET e H A R T F O R D , CT 06 10 5 e (2 03 ) 52 2- 83 38 ee JU RI S NO . 38 47 8 You are requested pursuant to §§237 et seq. of the Connecticut Practice Book to admit the truth of the following matters within 30 days Service shall be made at the office of the Plaintiffs’ counsel, The Connecticut Civil Liberties Union Foundation, 06106. l. Although blacks comprise only 12.1% of Connecticut’s school-age population, Hispanics only 8.5%, and children in families below the United States Department of Agriculture’s official "poverty line" only 9.7% in 1986, these groups comprised, as of 1987-88, 44.9%, 44.9% and 51.4% respectively of the school-age population of the Hartford school district. The percentage of black and Hispanic (hereafter "minority") students enrolled in the Hartford City schools has been increasing since 1981 at an average annual rate of 1.5%. RL A TR SO I TA TR SN SAN TI TRY RG AA YT RE LS Sh PT Ba TT I 2 2. Hartford schoolchildren, on average, perform at levels significantly below suburban schoolchildren on statewide Mastery Tests. For example, in 1988, 34% (or 1 in 3) of all suburban sixth graders score at or above the "mastery benchmark" for reading, yet only 4% (or 1 in 25) of Hartford schoolchildren meet that standard. While 74% of all suburban sixth graders exceed the remedial benchmark on the test of reading skills, no more than 41% of Hartford schoolchildren meet this test of "essential grade-level skills." In other words, fifty-nine percent of Hartford sixth graders are reading below the State remedial level. e A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W 3. Improved integration of children by race, ethnicity and economic status is likely to have positive social benefits. M O L L E R , H O R T O N & F I N E B E R G , P. C. 90 GI LL ET T ST RE ET ee H A R T F O R D , CT 06 10 5 e (2 03 ) 52 2- 83 38 e JU RI S NO . 38 47 8 4. Improved integration of children by race, ethnicity and economic status is likely to have positive educational benefits. ta i ” ATI - LEE Ph I ok pr ia pre oh RT WT, oa EET es oy: TASTES TA LDR TYR SY TN TARTS, TRE MA oy NY LOPS RW Xe A ST Tp AR a CN, aN Pa SO mp XT A NT NE A Te Rhee pex x e A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W M O L L E R , H O R T O N & F I N E B E R G , P. C. 90 GI LL ET T ST RE ET e H A R T F O R D , CT 06 10 5 e (2 03 ) 52 2- 83 38 e JU RI S NO . 38 47 8 5. In 1956, the Hartford Board of Education and the City Council hired educational consultants from the Harvard School of Education who concluded: (i) that low educational achievement in the Hartford schools was closely correlated with a high level of poverty among the student population; (ii) that racial and ethnic segregation caused educational damage to minority children; and (iii) that a plan should be adopted, with substantial redistricting and interdistrict transfers funded by the State, to place poor and minority children in suburban schools. The defendants or their predecessors were made aware of these conclusions in or about 1965. 6. Neither the defendants nor their predecessors recommended that the Legislature adopt legislation to invest the State Board of Education with the authority to direct full integration of local schools. - a CEE 1 —_— ei ie " MY ARTERY LA AS A SpA TT We OTN SE ARE en CR PE ET SRE I SRT Re A RT A Ea Ra TT Sy Ta ET 4 0 BEE A Se a 3 Ry Ty ST a FR TIE pw SR FB ST SA Pani AE a e A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W M O L L E R , H O R T O N & F I N E B E R G , P. C. 90 GI LL ET T ST RE ET ee H A R T F O R D , C T 0 6 1 0 5 e (2 03 ) 52 2- 83 38 ee JU RI S NO . 38 47 8 cho do 7. In 1966, the Committee of Greater Hartford Superintendents proposed to seek a federal grant to fund a regional educational advisory board and various regional programs, one of whose chief aims would be the elimination of school segregation within the metropolitan region. 8. In 1969, the Superintendent of the Hartford School District called for a massive expansion of "Project Concern," a pilot program begun in 1967 which bused several hundred black and Hispanic children from Hartford to adjacent suburban schools. The Superintendent argued that without a program involving some 5000 students -- one quarter of Hartford’s minority student population -- the City of Hartford could neither stop white citizens from fleeing Hartford to suburban schools nor provide quality education for those students who remained. 9. The school finance system in effect prior to the institution of the Horton v. Meskill litigation in 1973 supported local control over school districts. -, . er rls a a eh I mat Ce Ta TR RS EE Te » I ar a Teen Cid id A NNT LIT IY he A “lev. ~~ OEE Boat pt ue SEDANS JRA REA cl i Ay fk Fe ttn EN eS RE ion Sn a ip Bod A i pr J IN AGRE. le oi Tein ha be OR BL LA SH PER ae 8 Se ier AOE Ree sb Sneak ub MR eR Tl lio et Paci Jl Ci don ARS RR J U R I S NO . 3 8 4 7 8 A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W A LJ (2 03 ) 52 2- 83 38 M O L L E R , H O R T O N & F I N E B E R G , P. C. 90 G I L L E T T S T R E E T H A R T F O R D , CT 06 10 5 10. One of the legislative goals in the revised guaranteed tax base formulas for distributing state educational aid to towns in compliance with Horton v. Meskill was to continue supporting local control over school districts. 11. Local control over school districts is not significantly diminished today from what it was before 1973 except in those few instances where a district is out of compliance with the statutory racial balance or minimum expenditure requirements. 12. Throughout the 20th century, the defendants or their predecessors have authorized local school districts within the Hartford area to transport schoolchildren across school district and town lines for educational reasons. TE A a I DE A a TT TRA AR I PE AT SN TTI es TE ROT os Rg or SN PEN ARIA CR A ER Na Te ST ENLIST Ph Sie A & EE IR Ey of Sh ep t Yee TRAN IN! Pia Lia] RR aE i i aN % a L$ Chai > e A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W M O L L E R , H O R T O N & F I N E B E R G , P. C. 90 GI LL ET T ST RE ET e H A R T F O R D , CT 06 10 5 e (2 03 ) 52 2- 83 38 e JU RI S NO . 38 47 8 13. Throughout the 20th century, there have been several regional school districts comprised of two or more towns. 14. Throughout the 20th century, there have been several public, vocational secondary schools that enroll students from many towns. MARTHA STONE CONNECTICUT CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 32 Grand Street Hartford, CT 06106 (203)247-9823 Juris No. 61506 PHILIP D. TEGELER CONNECTICUT CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 32 Grand Street Hartford, CT 06106 (203)247-9823 Juris No. 102537 PLAINTIFFS, By MILO SHEFF, ET AL BT A TF np EE GS A ee I Re TT RA pty! Lee CE A a SC i SNA Pa cari WESLEY W. HORTON MOLLER, HORTON & FINEBERG, P.C. 90 Gillett Street Hartford, CT 06105 (203)522-8338 Juris No. 38478 WILFRED RODRIGUEZ HISPANIC ADVOCACY PROJECT Neighborhood Legal Services 1229 Albany Avenue Hartford, CT 06102 (203)278-6850 Juris No. 302827 EA SIT TAT per wpe ® A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W M O L L E R , H O R T O N & F I N E B E R G , P. C. (eo) ~ < «Q ™ Oo 2 4 ac = - * QQ mM ™ ® oN oN (Fo) 2) o oN ® WO o © o —. Q S ae) o WU. foe < x ° - wi wl oc fa wn free J. wi 1 = Q eS (0) MARIANNE LADO RONALD ELLIS NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. 99 Hudson Street New York, NY 10013 (212)219-1900 Pro Hac Vice HELEN HERSHKOFF ADAM S. COHEN JOHN A. POWELL AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 132 West 43rd Street New York, NY 10036 (212)944-9800 Pro Hac Vice Attorneys for the Plaintiffs JOHN BRITTAIN UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCHOOL OF LAW 65 Elizabeth Street Hartford, CT 06105 (203) 241-4664 Juris No. 101153 JENNY RIVERA PUERTO RICAN LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FUND 99 Hudson Street New York, NY 10013 NE AMT To OE LR TR RE fn ST ET TN eR A I TT HN i TI TTR NE * A T T O R N E Y S AT L A W M O L L E R , H O R T O N & FI NE BE RG , P C. 90 GI LL ET T ST RE ET e H A R T F O R D , CT 06 10 5 * (2 03 ) 52 2- 83 38 * JU RI S NO . 38 47 8 ® TE LE FA X 72 8- 04 01 Cv89-0360977S MILO SHEFF, ET AL : SUPERIOR COURT VS. 3 JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD/ NEW BRITAIN AT HARTFORD WILLIAM A. O"NEILL, ET AL : SEPTEMBER 20, 1990 | NOTICE OF FILING REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS The Plaintiff file notice that they have served a request for admissions on all defendants in accordance with P.B. §120 on September 20, 1990. PLAINTIFFS, MILO SHEFF, ET AL om ht— Weslgfd W. Horton MOLLER, HORTON & FINEBERG, P.C. 90 Gillett Street Hartford, CT 06105 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was mailed to all counsel of record on September 20, 1990. | beng M5 Wes Y&y . "HOrton |