Judge Entz's Supplemental Interrogatory Answer; Motion to Admit Pro Hac Vice; Affidavit of Cloutman; Order Granting Motion

    HUGHES & LUCE 
2800 MOMENTUM PLACE 

1717 MAIN STREET 
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201 

(214) 939-5500 
TELECOPIER (214) 939-6100 

. TELEX 730836 
Direct Dial Number 

(214) 939-5581 

August 21, 1989 

CERTIFIED MAIL 

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

P-129-260-709 

      

Ms. Susan Fin stein 
Texas Rur Legal Aid, Inc. 

Mary's, Suite 600 
Texas 78205 

  

   

  

1500 FIRST STATE BANK BUILDING 

400 WEST 15TH STREET 

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 

(512) 482-6800 

TELECOPIER (512) 474-4258 

Re: League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), 
et al. Vv. Jim Mattox, 

MO 88 CA 154 

Dear Ms. Finkelstein: 

Enclosed please find Dallas 

Civil Action 

District Judge 
F. Harold Entz's Supplemental Interrogatory Answer. 

Very truly yours, 

wi 1 7) ne L 

David C. Godbey : 

DCG/pai 

Enclosure 

cc: All Counsel of el 

 



  

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, 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 
V. MO 88 CA 154 

JIM MATTOX, et al., 

Defendants. C
A
I
 

L2
IL

PI
 
CP

I 
LA
I 

LA
 

LA
I 

CA
I 

LA
I 

LD
 

DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT JUDGE F. HAROLD ENTZ'S 
SUPPLEMENTAL INTERROGATORY ANSWER 
  

Judge Entz supplements his answer to Interrogatories Nos. 

1 and 2 of Plaintiffs as follows: 

Judge Entz anticipates calling the following persons as 

expert witnesses at trial of this action, and/or that the 

following persons may have knowledge of facts relevant to this 

action: 

1. Professor Anthony Champagne, University of Texas at 

Dallas, P.O; Box * 830688, Richardson, Texas 75083-0688, 

(214)690-2927. Prof. Champagne will testify that: 

(a) Electoral success in Dallas County judicial elections 

is predicated primarily upon partisan affiliation rather than 

racially polarized block voting. This opinion is based upon 

election results in Dallas County since 1970, a general 

analysis of voting trends in Dallas County and throughout 

Texas since 1970, academic publications relating to voter 

awareness of judicial and other elections, and a survey of 

JUDGE ENTZ'S SUPPLEMENTAL 

INTERROGATORY ANSWER -- PAGE 1 
  

 



  

voter knowledge of judicial candidates and the race of 

judicial candidates. 

(b) The lower percentage of minority judges relative to 

overall minority population in Dallas County is not caused by 

racially polarized block voting, but is caused by the 

relatively low percentage of minorities in the pool of 

potential legally qualified judicial candidates, and will 

naturally increase as the pool of legally qualified minority 

judicial candidates increases over time. This opinion is 

based upon the 1983 and 1989 surveys of Dallas County 

attorneys performed by the Dallas Bar Association, demographic 

information relating to Dallas County attorneys obtained from 

the State Bar of Texas, demographic information on minority 

lawyers nationwide obtained from the American Bar Association, 

information on minority enrollment in law school and 

applicants for admission to the State Bar of Texas obtained 

from Educational Testing Services of Princeton, New Jersey, 

information from the Census Bureau on minority and 

non-minority lawyers from the 1960, 1970, and 1980 census, and 

research performed under the direction of Prof. Champagne by 

Sherion Stevens and Nicholas Alozie. 

(c) Significant policies support the use of multiple 

overlapping county-wide single-member judicial districts, 

rather than non-overlapping judicial districts smaller than a 

county. This opinion is based upon Prof. Champagne's research 

in judicial selection over a period of years. 

JUDGE ENTZ'S SUPPLEMENTAL 
INTERROGATORY ANSWER -- PAGE 2   

 



  

(d) Judicial elections in Dallas County generally have 

not been characterized by overt or covert racial appeals. 

This opinion is based upon Dr. Champagne's general awareness 

of judicial campaigns in Dallas County formulated in 

connection with his research into judicial selection over a 

period of years. 

2 Hon. John McClellan Marshall, presiding judge of the 

14th Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas. Judge 

Marshall will testify (a) that the current system of district 

courts in Dallas County, together with the associated systems 

for case assignment and jury selection, were implemented 

and/or maintained for a variety of significant policy reasons, 

including but not limited to (i) maintaining a system that 

will equalize court dockets and thus provide for timely 

resolution of disputes and criminal prosecutions in the Dallas 

County courts, (ii) providing a fair and equitable 

cross-section of the community at large as a pool for juries 

in Dallas County as required under the federal and state 

constitutions, and (iii) providing a cost-effective means of 

administering court dockets and jury pools; and (b) that 

implementing non-overlapping judicial districts smaller than a 

county in Dallas County, Texas would result in insurmountable 

administrative problems and would likely disrupt the 

administration of justice in Dallas County, Texas. These 

opinions are based on Judge Marshall's experience as presiding 

and administrative judge for Dallas County and as a sitting 

district court judge. Judge Marshall may also offer what 

JUDGE ENTZ'S SUPPLEMENTAL 
INTERROGATORY ANSWER -- PAGE 3 
  

 



  

technically would be expert opinions relating to the Zimmer 

factors and the three-part Gingles test, but only as they 

might incidentally arise in discussion of his personal 

electoral and judicial experiences. 

3. Hon. Carolyn Wright, presiding judge of the 256th 

Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas. Judge Wright will 

testify that voting in judicial elections in Dallas County, 

Texas 1s not characterized by racially polarized block voting, 

that non-overlapping single member districts will accentuate 

problems that would damage the integrity of an independent 

judiciary, and that non-overlapping single member districts 

will cause racially polarized voting and have a long-term 

effect of reducing the opportunity of minorities to elect 

judicial candidates of their choice. These opinions are based 

on Judge Wright's experience in running for office in Dallas 

County. Judge Wright may also offer what technically would be 

expert opinions relating to the Zimmer factors and the 

three-part Gingles test, but only as they might incidentally 

arise in discussion of her personal electoral and judicial 

experiences. 

4. Tom James, Esq., Blanchette & James, 8330 Meadow 

Road, Suite 226, Dallas, Texas 75231, (214) 369-7220. Mr. 

James will testify that: 

(a) Housing patterns for Hispanics in Dallas County have 

changed dramatically since the 1980 census. This opinion is 

based upon Mr. James' activities in Dallas County politics and 

JUDGE ENTZ'S SUPPLEMENTAL 
INTERROGATORY ANSWER -- PAGE 4   

 



  

his activities as chairman of the Dallas County Republican 

Party. 

(b) Hispanics are a collection of diverse groups with 

varying political interests and needs, and are not all 

internally politically cohesive or politically cohesive with 

Blacks in Dallas County with regard to judicial selection. 

This opinion 1s based upon Mr. James' activities in Dallas 

County politics, his activities as chairman of the Dallas 

County Republican Party, and his review of published accounts 

of the interests and needs of Hispanics in Dallas County and 

in the state. 

(c) Judicial elections is Dallas County generally have 

not been characterized by overt or covert racial appeals. 

This opinion is based upon Mr. James' general awareness of 

judicial campaigns in Dallas County, his activities in Dallas 

County politics, and his activities as chairman of the Dallas 

County Republican Party. 

5 Prof. Delbert A. Taebel, University of Texas at 

Arlington. Judge Entz understands that Prof. Taebel will 

testify on behalf of the State Defendants regarding a 

statistical analysis of election returns and voter 

demographics. To the extent that testimony relates to Dallas 

County, Judge Entz adopts it. 

JUDGE ENTZ'S SUPPLEMENTAL 
INTERROGATORY ANSWER -- PAGE 5 
  

 



  

Respectfully submitted, 

LAA Lolly 
Robert H. Mow, 

David C. 

Bobby M. Rubarts 

Esther R. Rosenblum 

  

of HUGHES & LUCE 

2800 Momentum Place 

1717 Main Street 
Dallas, Texas 75201 

(214) 939-5500 

ATTORNEYS FOR DALLAS 

COUNTY DISTRICT JUDGE 

F. HAROLD ENTZ 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing 
instrument was,K served upon all counsel of record by certified 

| ane A) 
yr 

mail this IN Ei day of August, 

  

JUDGE ENTZ'S SUPPLEMENTAL 

INTERROGATORY ANSWER -- PAGE 6 
  

 



MuLLINAX, WELLS, BAAB & CLouTMAN, P.C. 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

3301 ELM STREET/DALLAS TEXAS 75226-1637 

  

EDWARD B. CLOUTMAN, II ‘ PHONE (214) 939-9222 
Board Certified-Labor Law Auqu st 2 2 r l 9 8 ° METRO 263-1547 

Texas Board of Legal Specialization TELECOPIER (214) 939-9229 

EXPRESS DELIVERY 
  

Mr. John Neill 

United States District Court 
316 U.S. Courthouse 
200 East Wall Street 

Midland, Texas 79701 

RE LULAC Council #4434, et al. vs. 
Mattox, et al. 

Case No. MO-88-CA-154 

Dear Sir: 

Enclosed please find an original and two copies of 
Motion to Admit Pro Hac Vice, Affidavit of Edward B. Cloutman, 
IIT and Order Granting Motion to Admit Pro Hac Vice in regard 
to the above referenced matter. 

Please file same and return file marked copies to the 
undersigned in the enclosed self-addressed envelope. 

By copy of this letter, I am forwarding copies of 
these documents to counsel of record. 

Very truly yours, 

MULLINAX, WELLS, BAAB 
& CLOUTMAN, P.C. 

thf Patrick 
fo dward B. Cloutman 

By: 
  

/K1p 
Encl. 

CC: Mr. William L. Garrett 
Mr. Rolando L. Rios 
Ms. Susan Finkelstein 
Ms. Sherrilyn A. Ifill 
Ms. Renea Hicks 
Mr. Javier Guajardo 
Mr. Robert H. Mow, Jr. 

Ms. Gabrielle K. McDonald 

   



  

Page 2 
Auqust 22, 1989 

cc: Mr. E. Brice Cunningham 
Mr. Ken Oden 

Mr. David R. Richards 
Mr. J. Eugene Clements 
Mr. Darrell Smith 
Mr. Michael J. Wood 
Mr. Mark H. Dettman 

 



  

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 
MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION 

LULAC COUNCIL #4434, ET AL. 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 
VS. 

MO-88-CA-154 

A
 
W
A
 
W
n
 

JIM MATTOX, ET AL. 

MOTION TO ADMIT PRO HAC VICE 
  

Comes now plaintiffs-intervenors Jesse Oliver, Fred 

Tinsley and Joan Winn White in this action and move this Court 

to admit Edward B. Cloutman, III pro hac vice in this case. 
  

Edward B. Cloutman, III will assume the role of counsel and 

attorney in charge for Jesse Oliver, Fred Tinsley and Joan Winn 

White, in this case upon admittance pro hac vice to this Court. 
  

Based upon the accompanying affidavit, plaintiffs-intervenors 

Oliver, Tinsley and White move this Court to admit as counsel 

in presentation of their case, filed before this Motion, Edward 

B. Cloutman, 111, pro hac vice. 
  

Respectfully submitted, 

MULLINAX, WELLS, BAAB 

& CLOUTMAN, P.C. 
3301 Elm Street 

Dallas, Texas 75226-1637 
(214) 539-9222 

Edward B. Cloutman, III 
  

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF-INTERVENORS 
OLIVER, TINSLEY AND WHITE 

 



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing instrument has been served upon counsel of record, by 

placing same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, on this 

the 21 day of August, 1989. 

$0 AHA rr 

Edward B. Cloutman, III 

  

  

 



  

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 
MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION 

LULAC COUNCIL #4434, ET AL. 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 
VS. 

MO-88-CA-154 

2
 
D
W
 
W
w
 

JIM MATTOX, ET AL. 

AFFIDAVIT OF EDWARD B. CLOUTMAN, III 
  

STATE OF TEXAS § 

COUNTY OF DALLAS § 

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day 

personally appeared EDWARD B. CLOUTMAN, III, who after being by 

me duly sworn, hereby deposes and says:; 

1. I am an attorney admitted to practice before the 

Supreme Courts of the States of Louisiana and Texas. I was 

first admitted toc practice in 1969. Both admissions were by 

examination. I am also admitted to practice before the Supreme 

Court of the United States, United States Courts of Appeals for 

the Fifth, Sixth, Tenth and Eleventh Circuits, and before the 

United States District Courts for the Northern, Eastern and 

Western Districts of Texas, and Western District of Louisiana. 

2 I am a 1969 graduate of Louisiana State Univer- 

sity, School of Law. My experience as a practicing attorney has 

included two years as a Reginald Heber Smith Fellow assigned to 

Legal Services Offices in Louisiana and in Texas. Thereafter, 

I spent two (2) years as a partner in the lawfirm of Johnston, 

 



  

Cloutman & Dixon in Dallas, Texas, primarily engaging in federal 

litigation and civil rights practice. Subsequently, and up to 

the present, I have been a partner in the lawfirm of Mullinax, 

Wells, Baab & Cloutman, P.C., (1973 to present). My practice 

since 1969 has been almost exclusively involved in the area 

federal and state litigation in the areas of employee relations 

and civil rights and is presently exclusively limited to labor 

relations practice and civil rights matters. I am certified in 

Texas as a labor law specialist. 

3. My practice has enabled me to gain an extensive 

experience in federal court litigation at all levels. The 

practice I have been engaged in since 1969 has involved several 

Or more appearances each year before several United States Court 

of Appeals, as well as many trials in several United States 

District Courts for each of these years. My experience in 

employee relations and civil rights matters includes particip- 

ation as counsel in Lipscomb v. Wise, 459 F.2d 335 (5th Cir. 
  

19723): 399 P.Supp. 782 (N.D. Tex. 1975); 551 F.2d 1043 (5th Cir. 

1977): 437. U.8..535 (1978); and 583 F.24 212 (5th Cir. 1978); 

Tasby v. Estes (Wright), 444 F.24 124 (5th Cir. 1971); 342 
  

F.Supp. 945 (N.D. Tex. 1971); 517 F.24 92 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. 

denied, 423 U.S. 939 (1875); 412 F.Supp. 1185 (N.D. Tex. 1975); 

412 ‘F.Supp. 1192. (N.D. Tex. 1976); 572 F.2d 1010 ‘(5th Cir. 

1978), writ dismissed 423 U.S. 939 (1981); 520 F.Supp. 683 (N.D. 

 



  

Tex. 1981); 542 F.Supp. 134 (N.D. Tex. 1981); 530 F.Supp. 262 

(N.D. Tex, 1982); 713 F.24 90 (83th Cir. 1983); 585 P.Supp. 453 

(N.D. Tex. 1984) 771 F.2d 849 (5th Cir. 1985), 630 F.Supp. 597 

(N.D. Tex. 1986); Robinson v. City of Dallas, 514 F.2d 1271 (5th 
  

Cir. 1975); Reynolds v. Wise, 375 F.Supp. 145 (N.D. Tex. 1974); 
  

Tasby v. Walker, 356 F.Supp. 469 (E.D. Tex. 1972); 495 F.2d 1250 
  

(5th Cir. 1974); City of Dallas v. United States of America, et 
  

al., and Felix A. Zamora, et al., and Elsie Fave Eeggins, et 
  

al., 482 F.Supp. 183 (D.D.C. 1980); Heggins v. City of Dallas, 
  

  

469 F.Supp. 739 (N.D. Tex. 1979); Johnson v. Combs, 471 F.2d 84 
  

(5th Cir. 1972), cert. Qenied, 413 0.8. 922 (1973): Gupta V. 
  

  

E.T.S.U., 654 F.2d 411 (5th Cir. 1981); Coke v. G.A.B., 640 F.2d 
  

  

584 (5th Cir. 1981) (en banc); Rarnes v. Yellow Freight Systems, 
  

778 F.2d 1096 (5th Cir. 1985); Stu Adams-Lundy, et al. v. APFA, 
  

792 F.28 1368 (5th Cir. 1986); Nosh v. State of Texas, 632 
  

F.Supp. 951 (E.D. Tex. 1986); Gault v. TRLA, 615 F.Supp. 916 
  

(N.D. Tex. 1985), 848 F.28 544 (5th Cir. 1988); Chavez v. LTV, 
  

412 F.Supp. 4 (N.D. Tex. 1976); and Trevino, et al. v. Holly 
  

Sugar Corporation, et al., 811 F.2d 896 (5th Cir. 1987). I have 
  

further participated in many unreported proceedings at the trial 

court level resulting in decisions for labor and civil rights 

plaintiffs. Such experience includes litigation in the area of 

employee relations, voting rights, school desegregation, equal 

employment, equal housing, police misconduct, and employee due 

 



  

¢ * 

process matters, pursuant to claims under Title 42, U.S.C., 

Sections 1981, 1982, 1983 and/or 2000e. 

4. I make this affidavit in support of an applica- 

tion for my admission to practice pro hac vice before this Court 
  

in a case styled LULAC v. Mattox. I seek to appear as counsel 
  

for plaintiffs-intervenors Oliver, Tinsley and White in the 

presentation of this case. 

Further, affiant sayth not. 

Sho. 
Edward B. Cloutman, III 

MULLINAX, WELLS, BAAB 

& CLOUTMAN, P.C. 

3301 Elm Street 
Dallas, Texas 75226-1637 
(214) 939-9222 

  

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME by the said Edward 

B. Cloutman, 111 on this the Sa A day of August, 1989, to 

certify which witness my hand and seal of office. 

NOTARY BFUBLIC, in and for 
the Sfaf 

5 

  

  

   

   

  

Ss. of Texas... 

   

 



“ ¢ 

  

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
~~ WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION 

LULAC COUNCIL #4434, ET AL. 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 
Vs. 

MO-88-CA-154 

W
n
 
n
w
a
 

JIM MATTOX, ET AL. 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO ADMIT PRO HAC VICE 
  

Edward B. Cloutman, III is allowed to appear pro hac 

vice for the plaintiffs-intervenors Oliver, Tinsley and White. 

  

  

ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED this the day 

of August, 1989. 

  

LUCIUS D. BUNTON, 

Chief, U.S. District Judge