Objections of Detroit Board of Education to the Alleged Plan of Desegregation Filed by Plaintiffs

Public Court Documents
March 12, 1972

Objections of Detroit Board of Education to the Alleged Plan of Desegregation Filed by Plaintiffs preview

13 pages

Cite this item

  • Legal Department General, Lani Guinier Correspondence. Correspondence from Pamela Karlan to Larry T. Menefee; Dillard v. Crenshaw County Affidavit of Pamela Karlan and Appendix of Working Hours, 1988. f2685e18-ec92-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/f00862ca-65cc-4848-a940-08f9c7371748/correspondence-from-pamela-karlan-to-larry-t-menefee-dillard-v-crenshaw-county-affidavit-of-pamela-karlan-and-appendix-of-working-hours. Accessed June 01, 2025.

    Copied!

    ED*n'eH.
Larry T. Menefee
5th Floor, Title Building
300 21st Street, North
Bimingham, Alabama 35203

Re: Dillard v. Crenshaw Countv (Subclass B)

Dear lrarry:

Here,s my supplemental affidavit for the
I came in pretty much at what we estimated.

I'm also sending you a copy of the review
Peyton and I did. Sonething steamy for those
in Belize.

I shall be moving to Charlottesville next week. My addressthere is Univer_s_ity of Virginia School of Law, Charlot-tesviffe,vA 22901-. My office phone number wirl be (Bo4) 924-7g].o.

SiffiErely,

\1,,.
Patrela S. Karlan

enclosures (21

Conrribtdiots on dcdtdibh lor U.S ircome tor ptupue"
T:lr. ilAACP L.Cal Dclcn$ & Edrntional Fund, lrr. (LoD ls not parl ot ttu tlrtoml tusoclttion tor thc Mvarccmcnt ot Colond hoplc (ilMCD amouoh
LIlf wrglouilrcdbytlrllMCPand Curusibcommltmcntto{ualrlehb. IDFhr3Mdto]oltrOylars e tparat! Bo8rd, program, stiff, otliccand budget.

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC.
99 Hudson Street, New York, N.Y. 10013 o (212) 21$1900

JuIy 11, 1988

B fee application.

of Abby Thernstrom
steamy beach days



IN THE T'NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

T:_T: _I13:- _ :r :TIT_::_13:Y_*
JOHN DTLIARD, EtaL_,

Plaintiffs,
v.

CRENSHAW COt NTy, ALABAI{Ar g!_BL_r

Defendants.

STATE OF NEW YORK )
)

crTy oF NEw YoRK )

PAIITEI,A S. KARI"AN,

1. I am one of

C.A. No. 85-T-1332-N

AFFIDAVTT

SS:

being duly Eirrorn, deposes and says:

the attorneys for the plaintiffs in this
case.

2. I submit this affidavit as a supplement to my affidavit
of April 5, 1988. That affidavit, which set out my background

and hourly rate, included time spent up to and including March

31, 1988. Attached as Appendix A to this affidavit is a

schedule of the hours which I have spent on this case in
connection with litigation against subclass B after that time.

These hours were compiled from contemporaneous time records which

I have maintained throughout this pegi.od,

A,,],5
Subscribed
before me
1988.

to and sworn to
this 1ffiay of July

c,

Qualltied ln Westchestpr CoPtIL
Gommission Explree +1-2r lSls

Pame1a S. Karlan



Date

4/os/88

4/o5/s8

4/07 /e8

4/08/88

4/LL/88

4/L2/88

4/L3/88

4/L4/88

4/Ls/88

4/L8/88

4/Le/88

4/20/88

4/2L/88

4/22/88

4/25/88

4/26/88

4/27 /88
s/2/88

APPENDIX A

Description

completed fees affidavit; correspondence
from court and from LTM

reviewed correspondence and opinions from
court/magistrate

reviewed transcript of Feb. hearing and
prepared outline for lirnited vote brief
completed reading transcript of Feb. hearing
and read scholarly articles on linited vote

read opinion from court in Baldwin County;
discussion with cocounsel; reviewed corres-
pondence and pleadings

worked on limited vote brief ; corespondence

work on linited vote brief
work on limited vote brief
correspondence

work on limited vote brief (9.O); reviewed
correspondence and orders (.A); tel conv.
with LTM (.3)

finished draft of linited vote brief and
sent to cocounsel

te1 conv with LTI{, ES, and Dick Engstrom
re draft of brief; revisions

finished briefi supervised production and
serrrice

Hours

1.5

o.4

4.0

3.0

2.O

L.7

2.8

3.0

0.3

9.7

6.5

2.4

5.3

0.1

0.3

replaced mat'ls and reviewed correspondence 0.4

reviewed fees motion (.2) i correspondence 0.5
(.1); conv. with LG re reply brief (.21

reviewed Baldwin objection; discussed 0.5
Washington BOE and fees with JUB; corres-
pondence

reviewed correspondence

reviewed orders and correspondence



5/3/88

5/4/88

5/s/88

s/e/88

5/LO/88

s/LL/88

s/L6/e8

5/L7 /88

5/L8/88

5/Le/88

5/2o/88

s/23/88

s/24/88

5/2s/88

5/3L/88

6/L/88

6/ 6/88

6/8/88

6/L6/88

6/L7 /88

6/20/88

revlewed correspondence and spoke to secry O.2re sending package to AG Federal Express

reviewed correspondence and opinions 0.1
tel conv. with secretary re staters extension 0.1
reviewed correspondence and opinions 0.3

reviewed correspondence and opinions; tel O.4calls re deftrs brief
calls to SR re fed ex for brief and discus- O.2sion with GR re getting brief
reviewed correspondence and opinions from O.4court

read B brief (1.0); tel conv. with LTM re 1.8our brief (.Zl t tel conv. with JUB re Baldwin
CC and B brief (.2) I reviewed correspondence
(.21 t conv. with finance dept re fees (.21

conf call with JUB and LTM (.8); work on 3.6reply brief (1.8)

work on post-trial reply briefi corres- 3.5
pondence

research at CA2 library re Connecticut O.2linited vote statute
finished draft of reply brief and sent to 5.5
cocounsel

correspondence from JUB re reimbursements 3.g(.3); revised, completed, and serrred post-
trial reply brief
reviewed correspondence and opinions o.4

reviewed correspondence and opinions O.z

reviewed correspondence and orders O.4

reviewed correspondence and orders O.3

reviewed correspondence and orders O.z

tel con with LTII (.8); reviewed correspon- 1.0
dence and orders

reviewed correspondence and orders

reviewed correspondence and orders

0.3

o.2



5/3/88

5/ 4/88

5/s/e8

5/e/88

5/Lo/88

5/LL/88

5/L6/88

5/L7 /88

5/L8/88

5/te/88

5/20/88

s/23/88

5/24/88

5/2s/88

s/3L/88

6/L/88

6/6/88

6/8/88

6/L6/88

6/L7 /88

6/20/88

revierred correspondence and spoke to secry O.2
re eending package to AG Federal Express

reviewed correspondence and oplnions O.1

te1 conv. with secretary re staters extension O.1

revl-ewed correspondence and opinions O. 3

reviewed correspondence and opinlons; tel O.4
calls re deft'e brief
calls to SR re fed ex for brief and
sion with GR re getting brief
reviewed correspondence and opinions

discus- O.2

from O.4

1.8

3.5

o.2

5.5

o.4

o.2

0.4

o.3

o.2

1.0

0.3

o.2

our brief (.2) i te} conv. with JUB re Baldwin
CC and B brief (.2) t reviewed correspondence
(.2) t conv. with finance dept re fees (.2)

conf call sith JUB and LTM (.8); work on 3.G
reply brief (1.8)

work on post-tria1 reply briefi corres-
pondence

research at CA2 lLbrary re Connecticut
Iimited vote statute
finished draft of reply brief and sent to
cocounsel

correspondence from JUB re reimbursements 3.8
(.3); revised, completed, and served post-
trial reply brief

court

read B brief (1.O); te1 conv. with LTII re

reviewed correspondence and opinions

reviewed correspondence and opinions

reviewed correspondence and orders

reviewed correspondence and orders

reviewed correspondence and orders

tel con with LTM (.8); reviewed correspon-
dence and orders

reviewed correspondence and orders

reviewed correspondence and orders



6/2L/88

6/23/88

6/28/88

7 / 4/88

7 /s/88
7 /6/88

7 /8/88
7 /LL/88

revLewed correBpondence and orders

revierred correspondence and orderE

reviewed correapondence and orders

reviewed reinbursenent for B subclass
e)q)enseB and prepared memo to finance

revl.ewed correspondence and orders

dLEcuEsed B eubclass reimbursement matrls
with Iani Guinier

reviewed correspondence and orders

prepared supplemental B affidavit and sent
to Ll[M

0.3

o.5

o.3

1.O

o.2

o.2

o.2

o.5

TOTAL 7L.7

4

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

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.

Return to top