Plaintiff-Intervenors Legislative Black Caucus First Response to Wood's First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents

    MATTHEWS & BRANSCOMB 
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 

  

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

SICH CONGRESS AVENUE, SUITE 2080 

{800 FIRST CITY BANK TOWER AUSTIN, TEXAS 7870Il ONE ALAMO CENTER 

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78477 TELEPHONE S(2-320-5055 SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78205 

s12-888-9261 TELECOPIER 512-320-5013 512-226-4211 

GABRIELLE K. MCDONALD 

Maweh 21, 198% [DM Prro 
[ || dd — 2 3 1M 

(¥ bs whi 

| of MA 3" - 

  

CERTIFIED MAIL - RRR l/l 
[7 

J. Eugene Clements ld 

Porter & Clements Bap ect 
700 Louisiana, Suite 3500 

Houston, TX 77002-2730 

  

RE: #88-CA-154; League of United Latin American Citizens 
(LULAC), et al, Houston Lawyers' Association, et al 

vs. William Clements, Governor of the State of Texas, 

et al; pending in the U..8. District Court for the 
Western District of Texas, Midland-Odessa Division 

Dear Mr. Clements: 

Please find enclosed Plaintiff-Intervenors Legislative Black 
Caucus of Texas' First Response to Defendant-Intervenor Wood's 
First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of 
Documents. 

Sincerely yours, 

MATTHEWS & BRANSCOMB 

A Professiopal Corporation    

   
McDonald 

2GKMed ; kd 

enc. 

cc: All Counsel of Record 

 



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, 

VS. 

WILLIAM CLEMENTS, GOVERNOR OF 

THE STATE OF TEXAS: JIM MATTOX, 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE 

OF TEXAS: JACK RAINS, SECRETARY 

OF STATE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

S 
S 
§ 
§ 
S 
S 
S 
S 
S 
$ 
S 
§ CIVIL ACTION NO. MO-88-CA-154 

ALL IN THE OFFICIAL CAPACITIES; § 

S 
S 
S 
$ 
N 
S 
S 
S 
S 
S 
S 
S 

  

THOMAS R. PHILLIPS, JOHN F. 

ONION, JR.; RON CHAPMAN; THOMAS 

J. STOVALL, JR.; JAMES F. 

CLAWSON, JR.; JOE E. KELLY; JOE 

B. EVINS; SAM B. PAXSON; 

WELDON KIRK; CHARLES J. 

MURRAY; RAY D. ANDERSON; JOE 

SPURLOCK II, ALL IN THEIR 

OFFICIAL CAPACITIES AS MEMBERS 

OF THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS BOARD 

OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

DEFENDANTS. S 

PLAINTIFF-INTERVENORS LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS OF 

TEXAS' FIRST RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT-INTERVENOR 

WOOD'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS 

FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 

  

  

  

  

Plaintiff-Intervenors The Legislative Black Caucus, et al., 

through undersigned counsel, submit the following responses to 

Defendant-Intervenor Wood's 

Requests for Production of Documents. In accordance with Rule 

26 (e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 

Plaintiff-Intervenors will supplement their responses as further 

relevant information becomes available.  



  

INTERROGATORY NO. 1: 
  

in
 

WH
 

i As to each person you expect to call as an expert witnes 

the trial of this case: 

(a) identify each person; 
  

(b) state the matter (s) on which each person is expected to 

testify; 

(c) state the substance of the facts and opinions to which 

the person is expected to testify, and summarize the grounds for 

each opinion; and 

(d) identify each person whom you have retained as a   

consulting expert in connection with the instant litigation, to 

the extent such person's opinion will be relied upon, in whole or 

in part, by any person identified in Answer to subpart (a) 

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 1:   

Plaintiff-Intervenors Legislative Black Caucus have not yet 

determined whom they intend to call as expert witnesses in the 

trial in this" case. When that determination has been made, 

Defendants will be informed in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 
  

  

including, without limitation, each and every demographic report 

for study or compilation of demographic data, that has been 

submitted to, prepared by, or used by each person you expect to 

call as an expert witness, including his/her associates, with 

 



regard to the subject matter of this litigation and all documents   

furnished to persons identifi in Answer to Interrogatory No.   

1{(4) above. 

RESPONSE TO REQUEST POR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 
  

At ‘this time, Plaintiff-Intervenors have no documents 

responsive to this request. If Plaintiffs: obtain any such 

documents, Defendants will be informed in accordance with Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 26ie). 

INTERROGATORY NO. 2:   

State the qualifications of each expert witness and/or 

consulting expert identified in response to Interrogatory No. 1   

to render an opinion with respect to the matters for which you 

have retained his services. 

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 
  

See response 

INTERROGATORY NO. 3: 
  

State whether you claim to represent the interests of anyone 

other than the members of Black Legislative Caucus, and explain 

the reasons for your claim. 

PONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO, 13: 
  

-Intervenors Legislative Black Caucus 

themselves as Black voters, and in 3itl bring 

on behalf of Black voters of the State of Texas. The Legislative 

Black Caucus of Texas 1s a statewide organization made up of the 

duly elected Black State Representatives and Senators who serve 

in the Texas Legislature. Each House Member represents  



  

1 

approximately 95,000 voters throughout the State of Texas and 

each Senator represents approximately 500,000 voters throughout 

the State of Texas. In each representative and senatorial 

district the population of voters if 50% (percent) or more Black. 

  

Produce for inspection and copying all documents that 
  

provide the factual bases for your answer to Interrogatory No. 3. 

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: 
  

At this time, Plaintiffs have no documents responsive to 

this request. If Plaintiffs obtain any such @ documents, 

Defendants will be informed in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 

26 (e). 

INTERROGATORY NO. 4: 
  

Identify all officers and members of the Black Legislative   

Caucus. 

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 4 
  

Rep. Larry Q. Evans - Houston Chairman 
Rep. Al Price - Beaumont Vice Chairman 
Rep. Senfronia Thompson - Houston Secretary 

Rep. Harold Dutton - Houston Treasurer 
Rep. Fred Blair - Dallas 
Rep. Wilhelmina Delco - Austin 
Rep. Al Edwards - Houston 
Rep. Ron Givens - Lubbock 
Rep. Samuel Hudson III - Dallas 
Sen. Eddic Bernice Johnson - Dallas 
Rep. Jerald Larry - Dallas 
Rep. Lou Nelle Sutton - San Antonio 
Rep. Garfield Thompson - Ft. Worth 
Sen. Craig Washington - Houston 
Rep. Ron Wilson - Houston 

 



INTERROGATORY 

  State whether 

in Harris County and explain 

your answer. 

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 5: 

Plaintiff-Intervenors claim that Black voters are denied the   

and 

right to participate equally in the judicial electoral process in 

Harris County under the currently constituted at large system, 

impermissibly dilutes the voting strength of Blacks, which 

prevents them from electing their preferred candidates for state 

that documents 

  

judicial office. 

to 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 

inspection 

relate, your answer 

  
= 
Tor 

herwise refer, 

No. 3. 

TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: 

rvenors have no documents 

1 iY such 

-— 

  
Plaintiff-Int 

R. 

time, 

claiming that you have personally been 

judges of your choice 

  State whether 

state district denied the right to elect 

and the reason for your answer.  



  

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 6: 
  

Plaintiff-Intervenors claim that as Black voters thev have 

because the currently constituted at large system of electing 

district judges dilutes the voting strength of Black voters. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4: 
  

Produce for inspection and copy all documents which support   

or otherwise relate to answer to Interrogatory No. 6. 

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4: 
  

At this time, Plaintiff-Intervenors have no documents 

responsive to this request. TZ Plaintiffs obtain any such 

documents, Defendants will be informed in accordance with Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 268ile}. 

INTERROGATORY NO. 7: 
  

State whether you are alleging that the system of electing 

state district judges at large in Harris County is the result of 

an intent to discriminate against blacks and/or Hispanics and 

explain the reasons for your answer. 

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 7 
  

district judges at large in Texas was adopted with the intention 

of, and/or has been maintained for the purpose of minimizing the 

political strength of Black voters. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5: 
  

Produce for inspection and copying all documents that 
  

support or otherwise relate, or pertain to your answer to 

Interrogatory No. 7. 

 



  

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5: 
  

Plaintiff-Intervenors refer Defendants to the legislative 

history accompanying the passage of Art. 5, Sec. 7 of the Texas 

Constitution. These documents are a matter of public record, 

available for inspection at the Legislative Reference Library in 

the State Capitol in Austin, Texas. Tapes of House debates are 

available in the House Committee Coordinator's Offices in Austin, 

Texas. Tapes of Senate debates and bill discussions are 

available for public examination in the Senate Staff Services 

Offices in Austin, Texas. 

INTERROGATORY NO. 8: 
  

(a) tate whether or not you are claiming that the system, 

currently in effect in Harris County, Texas, of electing district 

judge at large to serve specialized functions, such as the 

adjudication of civil disputes or criminal disputes or family law 

matters, should be abolished or otherwise changed; and 

(b) 1f your answer to part (a) is affirmative, describe in 

detail how you would change said system; and 

(c) if negative, fully describe how each single member 

judicial district could be drawn to preserve judicial 

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 8: 
  

Plaintiff-Intervenors do not claim that the District Courts 

of specialized functions should be abolished. In those counties 

that have specialized courts, concurrent jurisdictions would 

exist. 

 



  

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6: 
  

Produce for inspection and copving all documents which   

support or otherwise relate, or pertain tc your answer to 

<
 

3]
 

wn
 

av
) 

OQ
 

2
 

wn
 

tf
 

+3
 

O
 

8
 x3)
 

©
 cl
 

tx
 

wn
 

+3
 

(Es
 

0
 

ry
 

HJ
 

rv
) 
O
 

= 3
 0
 

+3
 

+
 

oO
 

2 Fy
 

>
 

N
 

  

At this time, Plaintiff-Intervenors have no documents 

responsive to this request. I Plaintiffs obtain any such 

documents, Defendants will be informed in accordance with Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 26fe). 

INTERROGATORY NO. 9: 
  

State whether or not you are claiming that blacks and 

Hispanics are or have been denied the right to participate fully 

in the election of state district judged generally in Texas or 

only in certain counties and explain the reasons for your answer. 

  

Plaintiff-Intervenors claim, within the context of this 

lawsuit, that Blacks are and have been denied the right to 

participate in elections only in certain counties. However, the 

Plaintiff-Intervenors ccmplain only of certain counties because 

Plaintiff-Intervenors, in their respective capacities as 

elected members of the 71st Session of the Texas Legislature have 

filed and support Legislation which challenges the method by 

which all judges are elected in Texas and mandates single-member 

Sistricts for all Texas courts. The reason for this answer is, 

 



¥F 

is unconstitutional 

unconstitutio 

judicial offices. 

REQUEST 
  

Produce for inspection and 

support or otherwise relate or 

Interrogatory No. 9. 

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 

itution of the State of 

cf district judges, 

to the election of 

documents 
  

your answer to 

7: 
  

At thls time, Plain 

responsive to this request. IZ 

documents, Defendants will 

Civ. P. 26ie). 

INTERROGATORY NO. 1G: 
  

State whether you are 

County are characterized by racial 

reasons for your answer. 

INTERROGATORY NO. 

tiff-Intervenors 

claiming 

have no documents 

Plaintiff obtain any such 

be informed 1i 

elections in Har 

bloc voting and explain 

  

overwhelmingly support 

overwhelmingly vote for 

Black candidate is running against 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: 
  

Produce for inspection and 

support or otherwise relate or 

Interrogatory No, 12, 

County 

documents that 
  

your answer to  



  

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: 
  

Racial bloc voting is determined through examination and 

analysis of election returns. Harris County district. 3undge 

election returns are available at the Secretary of State 

offices in Austin, Texas or at the Harris County Clerk's offices 

in Houston, Texas. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: 
  

££ Produce for inspection and copying all documents in your 
  

possession regarding the size of Texas' population, the total 

number and percentage of blacks, Hispanics, and whites in Texas, 

the number and percentage of blacks, Hispanics, and whites of 

voting age 1n Texas, and the number and percentage of black, 

Hispanic, and white registered voters in Texas. 
\O
 

v
e
 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 

  

Documents containing this information are public records 

available for inspection and copying in Department of Commerce, 

Bureau of the Census "Population, Housing and Gecgraphic Subject 

for the State of Texas. 

  

- 3. £ : . 3 Bev . 0 $i K. 
ProgGuce il inspection and copying all documents nn your 

  

possession regarding the size of the population of Harris County; 

the number and percentage of blacks, Hispanics, and whites in 

Harris County; the number and percentage of blacks, Hispanics, 

and whites in the voting population of Harris County; and the 

number and percentage of black, Hispanic, and white registered 

voters in Harris County. 

10 

 



RESPONSE TO REQUEST FCR PRODUCTION NO. 10: 
  

See Response to Request for Production No. 9. 

  

for inspection and copying . all documents that 
  

indicate the size of the pool of potential black and Hispanic 

attorneys eligible for election as state district judges in Harris 

County, including, without limitation, all documents 

indicate the number of black and Hispanic attorneys in 

County and/or their years in practice. 

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: 
  

Plaintiff-Intervenors object to this request on the grounds 

that this information is not in the possession or control of 

Plaintiff-Intervenors, and that compilation of this information 

would be equally burdensome to Plaintiff-Intervenors as to 

Defendants. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: 
  

Produce for inspection and copying all documents 
  

indicate the percentage of black and Hispanic attorneys among all 

evs eligible to run for election a 

Harris County. 

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR 
  

See response toc Request 

INTERROGATORY NO. 11: 
  

State whether you are claiming that blacks and/or Hispanics 

form a politically cohesive group or groups of voters in Harris 

County and explain the reasons for your answer.  



  

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11: 
  

Plaintiff-Intervenors claim that Blacks form a politically 

cohesive group of voters in Harris County, in that Black voters 

overwhelmingly support Black candidates, in races in which a 

Black candidate 1s running against a white candidate. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO, 13: 
  

Produce for inspection and copying all documents that 
  

support or otherwise relate or pertain +o your answer to 

4
 

pm Ce
 

0} a! H ogatory No. 11. 

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13: 
  

Harris County election returns are available at the Harris 

County Clerk's office in Houston, Texas and at the Secretary of 

State's offices in Austin, Texas. 

INTERROGATORY NO. 12: 
  

State whether and, if so, the reasons why, you are claiming 

that black voters and Hispanic voters will combine their votes in 

districts where together they constitute a majority of the 

electorate to vote for a minority judicial candidate over a white 

candidate. 

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12: 
  

Plaintiff-Intervenors have not yet determined whether Black 

and Hispanic voters will combine their votes in districts where 

together they constitute a majority cf the electorate to vote for 

a minority Judicial candidate over a white candidate. If 

Plaintiff-Intervenors make such a determination, Defendants will 

be informed in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e). 

12 

 



FOR PRODUCTION NO. 
  

for inspection documents 
  

otherwise relate tai ( your an 

Interrogatory No. 12. 

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14: 
  

At the present time, Plaintiff-Intervenors have no documents 

responsive to this request. If Plaintiffs obtain anv such 

documents, Defendants will be informed in accordance with Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 26{e). 

INTERROGATORY NO. 13: 
  

Describe in terms of location and demographic makeup each 

and every single member judicial district that you claim could be 

in Harris County with a black, Hi or combined black 

0. 13: 
  

Plaintiff-Intervenors will supply maps indicating where each 

single member geographically compact district with Black 

in accordance with Fed. R. 

FOR PRODUCTION 
  

for inspection and copying 1 documents that 
  

otherwise relate or pertain your answer to 

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15: 
  

At the present time, Plaintiff-Intervenors have no 

documents responsive to this request. If Plaintiffs obtain any  



  

such documents, Defendants will be informed in accordance with 

Fed. R. Civ, DP, 26te=).. 

  

State whether or not you are alleging that the 

determination of the size and location of state judicial election 

districts is or should be made ion the basis of population and 

explain the reasons for your answer. 

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 14: 
  

laintiff-Intervenors object to Interrogatory No. 14 on the 

answer. However, without waiving that objection, 

Plaintiff-Intervenors do not allege or state that the size and 

location of state judicial election districts is or should be 

made on the basis of population numbers, since 

are not bound by the "one-person, one vote 

principle. Wells v. Edward, 409 U.S... 1095 (1973), summarily 
    

aff'g 347 F.Supp. 453 (M.D. La. 1972). 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16: 
  

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16:   

See response to Interrogatory No. 14. 

14 

 



  

INTERROGATORY NO. 15: 
  

State whether or not you are alleging that under "a 

single-member district system, a minority voter residing in a 

non-minority district should have the right to venue of his case 

in a minority district and the reasons for your answer. 

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15: 
  

Plaintiffs do not at this time allege that under a single 

member district system, a ‘minority voter residing in =a 

non-minority district should have the right to venue of his case 

in 2a minority district. 

DATED: March 20, 1989 

STATE OF TEXAS § 

COUNTY OF TRAVIS § 

LARRY EVANS, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that 
he is above the age of eighteen years, and has the capacity to 
make this Affidavit, having personal knowledge of the matters 
herein contained, and that he is the Chairman of the Legislative 
Black Caucus of Texas for the purpose of making the foregoing 
responses to the First Response to Defendgnt-Intervenor Wood's 
First Set of Interrogatories and Re <¥s for Production of 
Documents and said Responses are e— 22%’ correct to the best of 

fle available to him. 

    
   

   
  

LARRY EVANS il 

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME by the said Larry Evans on 

this Jp ,4 day of March, 1989.    

  

  

NOTARY//PUBLIC IN AND/FOR 
STATE OF TEXAS 

Printed Name of Notary: 

erry wrXAY 
  

MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 

Lgl nS - Lr 
  

15 

 



  

Respectfully submitted, 

ots AL 
  

RIELLE K. McDONALD is 

OF COUNSEL: State Bar I.D. # 13546000 
301 Congress Avenue, Suite 2050 

MATTHEWS & BRANSCOMB, Austin, Texas 78701 

A Professional Corporation Phone: (512) 320-5055 

ttorneys for Plaintiff-Intervenors 
Legislative Black Caucus 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

I, Gabrielle K. McDonald, hereby certify that on this 20th 
day of March, 1389, &. ftrve: and. ‘correct copy of "this 
Plaintiff-Intervenors Legislative Black Caucus of Texas' First 
Response to Defendant-Intervenor Wood's First Set of 
Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents was duly 
mailed, via certified mail, return receipt requested, correctly 
addressed and postage prepaid, and placed in an official 

- 
i depository of the U. S. Mail to all counsel of record, to-wit: 

William L. Garrett Rolanda L. Rios 
Brena Hull Thompson 201 NN. St. Mary's #521 
8300 Douglas, #800 San Antonio, TX 78205 
Dallas, TX 75225 

Susan Finkelstein Edward B. Cloutman, III 
201 N St. Mary's #521 3301 Elm 
San Antonio, TX 78205 Dallas, TX 75226-9222 

E. Bruce Cunningham Julius Levonne Chambers 
777 8S. R.L. Thornton Fwy #12] Sherrilyn A. Ifill 
Dallas, TX 75203 99 Hudson St., 16th Floor 

New York, N.Y. 10013 

Jim Mattox J. Eugene Clements 
Mary F. Keller John E. O'Neill 
Renea Hicks Evelyn V. Keys 
Javier Guajardo Porter & Clements 

Attorney General's Office 700 Louisiana #3500 
P. 0. Box 12548 Houston, TX 77002-2730 

Austin, TX 78711 

Darrell Smith Michael J. Wood 
10999 Interstate Hwy 10, #905 440 Louisiana #200 
San Antonio, TX 78230 Houston, TX 77002 

16 

 



  

Mark H. Dettman Ken Oden 

Midland County Attorney Travis County Attorney 
P. 0. Box 2559 P. ODO. Box 1748 

Midland, TX 79702 Austin, TX 78767 

David R. Richards Robert H. Mow, Jr. 

600 W 7th St. 2800 Momentum Place 

Austin, TX 78701 1717 Main St. 

Dallas, TX 75201 

   i 
RIELLE K. MCDONALD 
  

4GKMcj; kd 
03-20-89 

17