Correspondence from Tegeler to Whelan Re: Disclosure of Experts and September 12, 1991 Notes

    CCL connecticut civil 440 4 
liberties union foundation 

32 grand street 

hartford, connecticut 06106 

telephone: 247-9823 

    

  

September 16, 1991 

Mr. John R. Whelan 
Assistant Attorney General 
MacKenzie Hall 
110 Sherman Street 
Hartford, CT 06105 

RE: Sheff v. O'Neill, Disclosure of Experts 
  

Dear John, 

Pursuant to the Court's order regarding disclosure of 
experts, as set out in our letter of May 15, 1991, please be 
advised that plaintiffs have no additional expert witnesses to 
disclose at this time. 

Sincerely, 
4 1 ya 4 — - - , oF 

; r 4 gl AZ oth 

Philip D. Tegeler 
Attorney for Plaintiffs 

PDT/dmt 

CC: All Counsel of Record 

 



   National Office 

A A Suite 1600 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE 99 Hudson Street = 

AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. New York, N.Y. 10013 (212) 219-1900 Fax: (212) 226-7592 i 

September 12, 1991 

John Brittain, Esq. Wilfred Rodriguez, Esd. 

University of Connecticut Hispanic Advocacy Project 

School of Law Neighborhood Legal Services 

65 Elizabeth Street 1229 Albany Avenue 

Hartford, CT 06105 Hartford, CT 06112 

Philip Tegeler, Esq. Wesley Horton, Esd. 

Martha Stone, Esq. Mollier, Horton & Fineberg, P.C. 

Connecticut Civil Liberties 90 Gillett Street 

Union Hartford, CT 06105 

32 Grand Street 

Hartford, CT 06106 Jenny Rivera, Esq. 
Puerto Rican Legal Defense 

Adam Cohen, Esq. and Educational Fund 

Helen Hershkoff, Esq. 99 Hudson Street, 14th Fl. 

American Civil Liberties New York, NY 10013 

Union 

132 West 43rd Street Elizabeth Sheff 

New York, NY 10036 Connecticut Conference of the 

United Church of Christ 

125 Sherman Street 
Hartford, CT 06105 

Dear Folks: 

Enclosed please find a copy of the minutes to our yesterday's 

conference call. 

I hope that everyone is well. 

Cheers, 

ol. 
Marianne Engelman Lado 

  

cc. Ron Ellisv 
Regional Offices 

Contributions are The NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF) is not part Suite 301 Suite 208 

deductible for U.S. of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 1275 K Street, NW 315 West Ninth Street 

income tax purposes. (NAACP) although LDF was founded by the NAACP and shares its Washington, DC 20005 Los Angeles, CA 90015 

commitment to equal rights. LDF has had for over 30 years a separate (202) 682-1300 (213) 624-2405 

Board, program, staff, office and budget. 
Fax: (202) 682-1312 Fax: (213) 624-0075 

 



  

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 

conference Call: Plaintiffs' Attorneys 
Sheff v. O'Neill 
  

Hartford and New York, September 12, 1991 

Noon - 1:00 p.m. 

On The Call: 

In Hartford: Wes Horton, Willy Rodriguez, Martha Stone, Phil 

Tegeler. John Brittain joined during the first portion of the 

conversation. 

In New York: Ron Ellis, Marianne Engelman Lado, Jenny Rivera. 

Note: Please see drafts of brief in opposition to defendants’ 

motion for summary judgment and proposed affidavits 

circulated by LDF and the CCLU. 

Discussion: 

The group began with a discussion of the brief in opposition 

to defendants' motion for summary judgment. Wes Horton went on 

record with his support for the draft of the brief prepared by Ron 

Fllis. Wes stated that he had no problem with Ron's revisions. 

The group decided that any more specific comments and all suggested 

revisions should be sent to Ron Ellis by Monday, September 16. Ron 

will then integrate comments, as appropriate, and send the finished 

product to Wes by FAX on Wednesday, September 18. Ron also agreed 

to prepare a signature page, to circulate it to all New York 

counsel, and to send it to Wes by overnight mail as soon as 

possible. If all goes as planned, Wes will file the brief on 

Friday, September 20. 

  

  

  

The question whether the court should be asked for an 

extension of time to file the brief was asked and answered. Ron 

Ellis expressed the opinion that a request for an extension might 

signify that defendant's motion has more strength than we believe 

that it has. Martha Stone agreed but stated her concern about 

obtaining the supporting affidavits in a timely manner. Jenny 

Rivera agreed to speak with Ruben Franco about the LaFontaine 

affidavit. The group then turned to a fuller discussion of the 

affidavits: are affidavits necessary and, if so, which are 

desirable? 

All agreed with the position taken by Martha Stone -- that 

affidavits are needed to illustrate and focus on the factual 

dispute. Five possible affidavits were list on the agenda: (a) 

John Allison, (b) Hernan LaFontaine, (c) Charles Senteio or 

catherine Kennelly, (4d) JoMills Braddock or Bob Crain, and (e) 

Charles Willie. The group first dispensed with the question of the 

latter two affidavits, as no one spoke in support of affidavits by 

the non-Connecticut experts. Phil Tegeler explained that Braddock 

 



  

: 

» 

2 

was listed for the general point that increased funding alone 

cannot remedy the harm caused by racial and economic isolation. 

However, LaFontaine's affidavit can also address this issue and 

affidavits from our outside experts risk the hazards of any 

premature statements of our case. 

Phil suggested that Willie's name had been listed because 

someone had heard that he recently drafted an article in response 

to Rossell's argument against mandatory desegregation. An 

affidavit from Willie, on the other hand, has the additional 

problem attendant to his unique status in this case and the fact 

that he may not ultimately be our expert. No one dissented from 

the decision to omit affidavits by the non-Connecticut experts. 

Neither did anyone disagree with the conclusion reached by 

Martha, Wes and Phil that we should try to include the other three 

affidavits. Attempts will be made to ensure that John Allison's 

affidavit is completed in a timely way. If LaFontaine finds 

himself unable to go on record at this time, Charles Senteio will 

be asked to attest to the information in the draft of LaFontaine's 

affidavit. Catherine Kennelly can then be asked to attest to the 

budgetary information. 

John Brittain asked whether discussions of the facts should 

be included in the text of the brief or, instead, whether they 

should be submitted as attachments. The group decided that 

integration into the brief was preferable. Martha agreed to try 

to send the fact-based text by Monday, September 16. 

The draft will also be sent for comment to Galil Westerman, 

with the understanding that only minor revisions are appropriate 

at this time. 

John next turned the discussion to the next friends group 

meeting. John reported that he had attended the meeting and that 

the participants had engaged in a probing discussion of where we 

should be going. Phil and Willy Rodriguez, who had also been 

present, added that people had done a lot of "venting" about the 

need for change in areas of housing and employment, for example, 

but that they seemed to understand the need to focus the direction 

of the group. Willy mentioned that the group had discussed 

possible fundraising activities. 

  

Jenny Rivera raised concerns about the procedure that had been 

agreed upon for the establishment of the next friends group. 

Willy, Martha, and Jenny all expressed concern that they had not 

known about the meeting in advance. Jenny had believed that Sheff 

counsel had agreed to discuss the goals of the group and to 

identify potential members of the group before any such meeting. 

Phil explained that Barbara Perry, who organized the meeting, 

apparently -- and mistakenly -- thought she had a green light. 

While counsel for the plaintiffs need to define the role of the 

 



  

3 

friends, the plaintiffs viewed the creation of this group as 

somewhat independent of the lawsuit and within their purview, since 

it is at heart community organizing. The group agreed, with Jenny, 

that it is important to clarify the role of the group before such 

meetings are called. Willy agreed to contact Barbara Perry and 

clarify what had happened and the process to be followed in the 

future. Martha volunteered to consult with Elizabeth, create a 

master list of potential "friends," and to circulate the list. 

Martha next reported that the plaintiffs gave a green light 

to the addition of Danny Perez to the group of plaintiffs. Jenny 

and Willy each discussed the breakfast meeting that they attended 

with some of the plaintiffs and Danny Perez. 

  

With no objection sounded by Sheff counsel, Wes agreed to file 

a motion for the addition of Danny Perez to the list of plaintiffs. 

Jenny agreed to call Perez for the particulars and pass the 

information along to Wes. Some discussion ensued about whether 

this process should await the jdentification of an additional 

African American plaintiff. Wes dismissed the concern that two 

separate motions would annoy the judge and the group agreed that, 

if papers are in order, we would file the motion to add Danny Perez 

along with our brief in opposition to the motion for summary 

judgment. In the meantime, the search for an African American 

plaintiff should begin. 

The Connecticut team next informed the New Yorkers about a 

"very exciting" Connecticut Public Television documentary that 

focused on issues of equal educational opportunity, in which 

Elizabeth Sheff and John Brittain appeared. Bill Olds, John 

Brittain, John Mannix, David Carter, and a representative of the 

Connecticut Education Association then appeared on a panel to 

discuss the state of the schools. The final product was very pro- 

Sheff and created momentum. A tape of the show will be circulated. 

  

Jenny mentioned that PRLDF had produced colorful maps of 

demographic data in the Hartford area and that they are available 

for the Sheff case. Jenny also noted that the plaintiffs are in 

discussion with the United Church of Christ about possible 

financial support. 

Marianne Engelman Lado reported that money for the community 

organizer had run dry and that LDF planned to contribute at this 

time. Martha suggested that the community organizers be pressed 

for their monthly reports. 

The last item on the agenda was the next conference call: 

Wednesday, September 25 at noon. 
  

7eL