State Defendants' Response to Motion to Intervene by Judges Rickhoff, Reed, Specia, Harle, Macrae, and Peden

Public Court Documents
December 28, 1989

Cite this item

State Defendants' Response to Motion to Intervene by Judges Rickhoff, Reed, Specia, Harle, Macrae, and Peden preview

4 pages

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

Impact area
- Political Participation
Topic
- Voting Legislation and Constitutional Amendments
LDF Attorneys
Cooperating Attorneys
Organizations
Matter
- LULAC and Houston Lawyers Association v. Attorney General of Texas
Case
- LULAC and Houston Lawyers Association v. Attorney General of Texas
U.S. state
- Texas
Collection
- Case Files
Creator
Publisher
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 4497f899-247c-f011-b4cc-6045bdd81421

Cite this item

Case Files, LULAC and Houston Lawyers Association v. Attorney General of Texas Hardbacks, Briefs, and Trial Transcript. State Defendants' Response to Motion to Intervene by Judges Rickhoff, Reed, Specia, Harle, Macrae, and Peden, 1989. 4497f899-247c-f011-b4cc-6045bdd81421. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/89033d15-96f5-4123-9375-09b9d423a8c6/state-defendants-response-to-motion-to-intervene-by-judges-rickhoff-reed-specia-harle-macrae-and-peden. Accessed November 07, 2025.

Copied!

    N 
i £ 4 

# # [ &, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MIDLAND/ODESSA DIVISION 

LULAC COUNCIL #4434, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

Civil Action No. 

MO 88 CA 154 

VS. 

JIM MATTOX, et al., 

Defendants, C
O
R
 

LO
R 

LO
N 

CO
N 

LO
R 

LO
N 

LO
M 

STATE DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO MOTION 
TO INTERVENE BY JUDGES RICKHOFF, REED, 

SPECIA, HARLE, MACRAE, AND PEDEN 

The State Defendants reply as follows to the motion to intervene filed 

by six state district judges sitting in Bexar County ("Bexar County judge- 

intervenors"): 

Without conceding the validity of the assertions made in the 

intervention motion and supporting documents, the State Defendants do 

not oppose the motion insofar as the Bexar County judge-intervenors seek 

to intervene in their individual, or personal, capacities. In its rulings 

concerning the attempted intervention of thirteen Travis County judges, 

this Court has held that personal capacity intervention by sitting judges 

may be appropriate whereas official capacity intervention is not. In an 

appeal arising out of this case, the Fifth Circuit has agreed, by holding that 

sitting district judges have no legally cognizable interest in this case in 

their official capacity. See LULAC v. Clements, 884 F.2d 185, 188 (5th Cir. 

19389), 

 



  

Respectfully submitted, 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

MARY F. KELLER 
— Attorney General 

[7 VAY ya 5H and car Fo = 

RENEAHICKS NJ 
Special Assistant Attorney General 

    

JAVIER GUAJARDO 

Assistant Attorney General 

P. O. Box 12548, Capitol Station 

Austin, Texas 78711-2548 
(512) 463-2085 

ATTORNEYS FOR STATE DEFENDANTS 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that on this 28th day of December, 1989, I sent a copy of 
the foregoing document by overnight courier to each of the following: 
William L. Garrett, Garrett, Thompson & Chang, 8300 Douglas. Suite 800, 
Dallas, Texas 75225; Rolando Rios, Southwest Voter Registration & 
Education Project, 201 N. St. Mary's, Suite 521, San Antonio, Texas 78205: 
Sherrilyn A. Ifill, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., 99 
Hudson Street, 16th Floor, New York, New York 10013: Gabrielle K. 
McDonald, 301 Congress Avenue, Suite 2050, Austin, Texas 78701: Edward 
B. Cloutman, III, Mullinax, Wells, Baab & Cloutman, P.C., 3301 Elm Street. 
Dallas, Texas 75226-1637; J. Eugene Clements, Porter & Clements, 700 
Louisiana, Suite 3500, Houston, Texas 77002-2730: Robert H. Mow, Jr., 
Hughes & Luce, 2800 Momentum Place, 1717 Main Street, Dallas, Texas 
75201; and Seagal V. Wheatley, Oppenheimer, Rosenberg, Kelleher & 
Wheatley, Inc., 711 Navarro, Sixth Flo Antonio, Texas 78205. 

New hick 
    

   
  

Renea Hicks 

 



Ei aly! Am i | BU CPL hag 
PI I TE || AW LAREN 

  

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 
MIDLAND/ODESSA DIVISION 

Civil Action No. 

MO BB CA 154 

SE TO MOTION 

KHOFF, REED, 
   

    

= i
 

om ch
 

 



1:37 AW FIRM=212 228 7587 819 ROSENBERG 4 2-25-81 311: 32AM LAW FIRM=212 226 7582 #18 

  

Respectfully submitted, 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

MARY F. KELLER 
First -Agsistant Attorney General 

ret y3 
Assistant Attorney nr 

  

  

      

  

YY rien, 
yf en Bh - pens] 
A \ wt 

“a

Copyright notice

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.

State Defendants' Response to Motion to Intervene by Judges Rickhoff, Reed, Specia, Harle, Macrae, and Peden

Impact area

Topic

LDF Attorneys

Cooperating Attorneys

Organizations

Matter

Case

U.S. state

Collection

Creator

Publisher

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in