Cooper v. Aaron Brief for Respondents

    HUNTER.HODGMAN,UREENTZ&:GOODMAN
ATTORNEYS A'[ LA“
51'1'1‘1‘. -1l()
GATE CITY SAVINGS 8: LOAN BI'ILDING
20] \NEST MARKET STREET
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA 27402

ROBERT N, HI'NTER,JR
ROBERT SAM'YER HODGMAN
R]('HARD M GREENE

GARY B, GOODMAN

PAI'I. THOMAS M'IIJJAMS

January 28, 1983

Mr. J. Rich Leonard

Clerk of United States District Court
North Carolina Eastern District
Raleigh Division

Post Office Box 25670

Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
RE: Pugh, et al., v. Hunter, et a1.
81—1066-CIV—5
Dear Mr. Leonard:

Enclosed please find for filing the First
rogatories of Plaintiffs.

In accordance with Local Rule 3.09,

P. 0. BOX 3245
91E” 873-0934
010 275413-11

set of Inter—

Plaintiffs are filing

these materials for use in the above captioned matter.

4.41: .

Thank you in advance for your cooperation and assistance.
Very tr y yours
Robe t N. Hunter, Jr.
Attorney for Plaintiffs
RNH:dp
Enclosures
cc: Mr. J. Levonne Chambers

Leslie Winner
Jack Greenberg
James M. Nabritt,
Lani Guinier
James M. Wallace,
Kathleen Heenan
Hamilton C. Horton,
Wayne T. Elliott

Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.

III

Jr.

Jr.

. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ,
FOR THE ELSTIRN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINI
RALEIGH DIVISION
’RALPH SINGLES, et al., No. 81-803-CIV—5

Plaintiffs,
vs.
RUFUS L. EDMISTEN, et al.,
Defendants.
- and —
ALAN V. PUGH, et al., NO. 81-1066-CIV-5
Plaintiffs,
vs.
JAMES B. HUNT, JR., et al.,
Defendants.
— and —
JOHN J. CAVANAGH, et al., No. 82-545-CIV-5
Plaintiffs,

VS.

ALEX K. BROCK, et al.,

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvVvvvvvvvvv

Defendants.

PLAINTIFF‘S FIRST SET OF
INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR
PRODUCTION; REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION

 

COME NOW the Pugh Plaintiffs in the above—styled action
and, pursuant to Rules 33, 34, and 36 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure propound to Defendants in the actions entitled

Gingles, et al. v. Edmisten, et al., No. 81—803—CIV—5 and Pugh, et

 

al. v. Hunt, et al., No. 81-1066—CIV—5, and their attorneys of

 

record the following interrogatories, requests for production, and
requests for admission to be answered and responded to within 30

days after service hereof.

’ 0
INSTRUCTIONS

1n answering these interrogatories, you are required to
furnish all information available to you, including information in
the possession of your attorney or any person acting on your
behalf, and not merely such information as is known of your own
personal knowledge. If you cannot answer any particular inter—
rogatory or interrogatories in full, after exercising due dili—
gence to secure the information sought, so state and answer to the
extent possible, specifying the reasons for your inability to
answer the remainder.

You are reminded that under the provisions of Rule 26(a) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, you are under a duty to-
supplement seasonably your response with respect to any question
directly addressed to (a) identity and location of persons having
knowledge of discoverable matter, and (b) the identity of each
person expected to be called as an expert witness at trial, the
subject matter on which he is expected to testify and the sub—
stance of his testimony.

Base your responses on the statistics in your possession and
on which you have based your allegations.

You are under a duty to amend seasonably a prior response
if you obtain information upon the basis of which (a) you know
that the response, though correct when made, is no longer true or
complete, and the circumstances are such that a failure to amend
the response is, in substance, a knowing concealment.

Any such supplemental response is to be filed and served
upon counsel of record for this Plaintiff within fifteen (15) days

after receipt of such information.

-2-

DEFINITIONS
Unless otherwise indicated, the following definitions
shall be applicable to these interrogatories and requests for

production:

You and your shall mean the defendants and each of their

 

attorneys, agents, or representatives and all other persons acting
on their behalf.

Person shall mean any individual, partnership, firm, assoc-
iation, corporation or other business, governmental or legal
entity.

Address shall mean the post office box number, street

 

number, street, route number, route, town, city, county and state
of subject person, business or other entity.

Document shall mean any written, recorded, transcribed,

 

 

punched, taped, drawn, filmed or graphic matter of any kind or
description, however produced or reproduced.

Paragraph, your paragraphL_or paragraph of your Answer

 

 

refers to the numbered paragraphs of your Answer as supplemented.

I. Do you deny that the documents attached hereto labeled
Exhibit #1 represent the State legislative policy criteria used
by the North Carolina General Assembly in reapportioning the 1980
State House and Senate Districts?

2. If the answer to the previous interrogaotry is "yes,"
state what you contend the State legislative policy criteria used
by the North Carolina General Assembly in reapportioning the 1980
State House and Senate Districts was?

3. Do you contend that the final State legislative re—
apportion plans as enacted to the North Carolina General Assembly
conforms to the policy as set forth in Exhibit #1 with respect to
the criteria that concentrations of racial minority shall not be‘
submerged, fractured or divided?

4. Do you admit that by the use of large multi—member
legislative districts in Mecklenburg County, Durham, Wake and
Forsyth County concentrations of racial minority voters were
submerged by the use of multi—member districts?

'5. What do you contend was the rational basis for departing
from the legislative criteria expressed in Exhibit #1?

6. State in order of population the areas of the state
counties where you contend concentrations of minority voters
reside.

7. Do you contend that the use of at large election systems
has not been used to minimize and cancel out minority voting
strength?

8. Do you contend that the use of at large elction systems
in the past have not been a cause of lack of minority repre-

sentation in the State legislature?

9 o
9. Do you contend that the use of at large election systems
in the counties regulated by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Acts
has a different effect or result than in those counties not
regulated by the Act? If so, explain how the use of such at large
system is different in areas not regulated by Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act?

10. Do you deny that minorities dandidates have failed to win
party nominations in the past in part because of multi—members in
at large election districts?

11. Do you deny that one of the purposes in maintaining the
use of multi—member districts in counties not regulated by Section
5 of the Voting Rights Act was to minimize or cancel out minority-
voting strength?

12. Do you deny that the use of at large multi—member
districts together with the majority vote run-off requirement acts
to minimize or cancel out minority voting strength?

13. Do you deny that North Carolina residents of single
member districts are denied equal representation because residents
in large multi—member districts who are electing representatives
proportional to their members have a more than proportionate
chance of affecting election outcomes?

14. What, if any, is the rational basis the State contends
for placing some North Carolina residents in multi-member dis—
tricts and others in single member districts?

15. Do the defendants contend that this policy is uniformily
applied throughout the State?

16. If the answer to the previous interrogatory is "no,"
what is the rational basis of the State's policy of not uniformily

applying this policy?

17. State what, if any, special efforts which the North
Carolina State Board of Elections has taken over the past 5 years
to incease minority voter registration.

18. Do you deny that unusually large at large legislative election
districts exist in North Carolina?

19. Do you contend that the multi-member legislative dis—
tricts comprising Mecklenburg, Forsyth, Wake, Durham and Bancombe
Counties are not unusually large legislative election districts?
Explain your answer.

20. Do you contend that, within the past five years, there
has been a significant responsiveness on the part of the General
Assembly of North Carolina to the particularized needs of the.
members of any minority group? If so, set forth each responsive—
ness with respect to which you intend to introduce evidence at
trial, identify each witness you intend to call to testify as to
such responsiveness, summarizing his testimony, and produce copies
of all documents or other paperwritings you intend to introduce to
prove such significant responsiveness.

21. Do you contend that recent political campaigns in
North Carolina have not been characterized by overt or subtle
racial appeals on the part of either minority or non-minority
voters or candidates? If so, identify the campaigns that have not
been characterized by racial appeals.

22. If you intend to introduce proof of any such lack of
racial appeals, identify each witness who will testify to the
occurrence of such racial appeals and summarize his testimony;

23. If you intend to introduce proof of lack of any such
racial appeals, please produce copies of all documents or other
paperwritings you intend to introduce to prove the lack of occur-

rence of such racial appeals.

of

24. D; you deny that North Carolina's use large nmlti—
member district? in counties not covered by the Voting Rights
Act's preclearance requirements and in which there are large
concentration of minority voters continues a voting practice which
denies minority voters the same opportunity to participate in the
political process as other citizens enjoy in counties covered by
the Voting Act's preclearance requirements?

25. If your response to the previous Interrogatory was
"yes," explain why you contend such policy does not continue
the effects of discrimination.

26. Do you deny that minority voters in North Carolina
have been denied the same opportunity to participate in the
political process as other citizens enjoy, or to elect candidates'
of their choice?

27. Do you deny that North Carolina has a history of official
discrimination in the State that has adversely affected the right
of the members of any minority group to register, to vote, or to
participate otherwise in the democratic process?

28. Do you deny that such discrimination continues to ad—
versely affect the right of the members of any minority group?

29. If not, do you admit that North Carolina has a history of
official discrimination, have the rights of members of minority
groups to register, to vote and to otherwise participate in the
democratic process been remedied by any official state action, If
so, what action has the State taken to remedy such discrimination?

30. Do you deny that voting in the elections for members
of North Carolina's Senate and House has been racially polarized
in areas of North Carolina containing concentration of racial

minorities?

31. If your response to Interrogatory No. 30 is "yes,"

do you intend to introduce evidence to prove your contention at

trial?
32. If your response to Interrogatory No. 31 is "yes," please
set forth the following:
a. Each election's contest with respect to which you

contend voting was not racially polarized;

b. The district in which said election was held;

c. The date on which said election was held;

d. The manner in which you will attempt to prove that

said election did not involve racially polarized voting;

e. Produce the documentary evidence you intend to offer.

at trial to support your contention;

f. Identify the witnesses you will call to testify in

support of your contention and give a summary of their

testimony.
33. Have you prepared, or have you had prepared, any analysis
rof past and/or current voting practices of any ethinically or
racially identifiable group of voters in North Carolina for the
purpose of attempting to determine whether racially polarized
voting has occurred, or continues to occur, in the State. If so,
please produce all documents which indicate the results of the
analysis.

34. State the name, address, employment, and telephone
number of each person you will or may call as a witness at the
trial of this matter (with the exception of those experts, if any,
referred to in the next interrogatory) and further state the

substance of each such person's expected testimony.

35. State the name, address, employment, telephone number,
and qualifications of each person you expect to call as an
expert witness at the trial of this matter and further state the
subject matter on which each such expert is expected to testify.

36. As to each expert named in the answer to interrogatory
number 35, state the substance of the facts and opinions to which
said experts are expected to testify and give a summary of the
grounds for each opinion.

37. Please attach to your answers to these interrogatories
true, complete, and correct copies of any and all documents
prepared by any such experts or expert relating to this action.

38. State the name, address, telephone number, and qualifi—-
cations of each expert whom you have retained or specifically
employed in anticipation of litigation of preparation of trial and
who is not expected to be called as a witness of the trial of this
action

39. Indicate each occasion on which each person named in the
answers to interrogatores number 38 and 35 has testified in other
legal proceedings regarding State legislative reapportionment and
describe the nature of his or her testimony in each of those

proceedings.

1

CERTIFICATE OF

SERVICE

 

I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing

Plaintiff's First Set of Interrgatories and Requests for Pro—

duction; Requests for Admission by placing a copy of same in the

United States Post Office, postage prepaid, addressed to:

Mr. J.

Levonne Chambers

Ms. Leslie Winner

Chamber,

Ferguson, Watt, Wallas,

Adkins & Fuller, P. A.
951 South Independence Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Mr. Jack Greenberg

Mr. James M. Nabritt, III
Ms. Lani Guinier

10 Columbus Circle

New York, New York 10019

Mr. James M. Wallace, Jr.

Deputy Attorney General for
Legal Affairs

Post Office Box 629

Raleigh, North Carolina 27602

Jerris Leonard

Kathleen Heenan

Jerris Leonard & Associates, P. C.
900 17th Street, N.W.

Suite 1020

Washington, D. C. 20006

Wayne T. Elliott

Southeastern Legal Foundation
1800 Century Boulevard, Suite 950
Atlanta Georgia 30345

Hamilton C. Horton, Jr.
450 NCNB Plaza
Winston—Salem, North Carolina 27101

This the -2ZZ day of January,

 
 

 

Robért N. Hunter: Jr.
Attorney for Plaintiff

OF COUNSEL:

HUNTER, HODGMAN, GREENE & GOODMAN
POST OFFICE BOX 3245

GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA 27402
TELEPHONE (919) 373-0934

. Exhibit 1 page 1.

Ref Fla/1*.I'ZOIJI‘ZZJI CRITEEZ,‘
Ctr cozzittee responsible for redistricting the North
Carolina House of Hrpresentatives, assisted by the legislative

staff, shall be guided by the following standards in the

1

O€V€-C;LtLl oi 1L6 plan for the State House:

1. Each legislative district shall, in accordance with the
requirements of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States and of Article II, Sections 5(1) and 5(1) of the
Constitution of North Carolina, be drawn so as to contain as
nearly as possible 49,015 for each House member in such legislative
districts. The population variation (relative deviation) of each
district shall fall between plus and minus five percent (35%).

2. In order to avoid the dilution of the voting rights of
racial minorities as protected by the Voting Rights Act of 1965
and the 14th and 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution,
concentrations of racial minorities shall not be fractured, divided,
or diluted or submerged by the use of multi-member districts, as
Opposed to single member districts in violation of the Voting
Rights Act of 1965 and the 14th and 15th Amendments to the United
States Constitution or the Constitution of North Carolina.

5. All legislative districts shall consist of contiguous
territory as required by the North Carolina Constitution and shall
be as compact as is practicable consistent with requirements 1
and 2 above.

4. To the extent consistent with all of the above require-
ments, districts should be constructed so as to recognize the
state's historic communities and commonalities of interests with

respect to the inhabitants and constituencies within such districts.

Exhibit 1 page 2

5. To the extent not inconsistent with all of the above
standards and in order to minimize voter confusion and maintain
the interests set out in paragraph 4 above, present legislative
district lines shall be preserved.

6. No county shall be subdivided nor shall a county line
be broken unless necessary to meet the requirements of 1 through
5 above.

7. During the course of its work, the committee shall
consult with the legislative staff, the Attorney General and
retained counsel with respect to any legal issues.

8. The committee shall complete its work to the end that
a legislative prOposal is prepared for the committee to hold a
public hearing on its pr0posed plans the week of February 1, 1982.
The committee shall, in consultation with counsel, prepare mailings
notifying interested individuals and organizations throughout the
state of the date and time of the public hearing and shall also
cause appropriate press releases to be prepared for the media.
The committee shall also prepare notices for publication in the
legal notices section of appropriate newspapers.

9. After the public hearing has been held, the committee
shall seek such opinions from the Attorney General and retained
counsel as they deem appropriate and to report a bill favorably

to be acted upon by the Legislature the week of February 8, 1982.

I Exhibit 1 page 3 I

‘._. ;,.5-.., 17?.“ it: i‘Lcir :1; ting the fifth (ngtljnzz Crucial
Ly :hr lcpislativt rtaff,shall bC SHIUUO by the foljoujnz
andh‘g; jn the development of the plan for the State house and the Senate:
)w

. . ~ 1 -j,,' 1" .',, ‘3‘,
,. “up ,_tzi:..rt.\.t ulnilltt .m...,

in {itit’xil'dmxff with Lin” Tequii‘cltttlits
‘ Lhw léth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and of Article
1], Sections 3(1) and 5(1) of the Constitution of North Carolina, be drawn

so as to contain 117,635 for each Senate member and 49,015 for each House
member in such legislative districts. The population variation (relative
deviation) of each district shall fall between plus and minus five percent
(:52)

2. In order to avoid the dilution of the voting rights of racial
minorities as protected by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the 14th and 15th
Amendments to the United States Constitution, concentrations of racial
minorities shall not be fractured or divided.

3. All legislative districts shall consist of contiguous territory as
required by the North Carolina Constitution and shall be as compact as is
practicable consistent with requirements 1 and 2 above. I

4. No county shall be subdivided nor shall a county line he broken
unless necessary to meet the requirements of l and 2 above.

5.‘ To the extent consistent with all of the above requirements, districts
should be constructed so as to recognize the state's historic communities and
commonalities of interests with respect to the inhabitants and constituencies
within such districts.

6. To the extent not inconsistent with all of the above standards and

in order to minimize voter confusion and maintain the interests set out in

paragraph 5 above, present legislative district lines shall be preserved.

 

Exhibit 1 page 4

 

. I‘ f k
1‘. .t 'Ictivt‘i. f, Wu A'l 1 t . ‘vux.rt' i ' """ £1. ( 1‘ w .
1" "‘ l4'."7 1‘ 'k:
a
8 T'w cc 'v «\« flul7 r» 1' . :1 t1 «it 11 . trv ‘a
proposal if ;tu;atrm {tr the «wugflztcc: to tx=o a :uhxit Klarjht (H their

Proposed plans the week of lchruary l, 1983. The (munitions shall, in con-

sultition with counsel, prepare mailings notifying interested individuals and
organizations throughout the state of the date and time of the public
hearing and shall also cause appropriate press releases to be prepared for
the media. The committees shall also prepare notices for publication in the
legal notices section of appropriate newspapers.

9. Aiter the public hearing has been held the committees shall seek
such opinions from the Attorney General and retained counse as they deem

appropriate and to report a bill favorably to be acted upon by the Legislature

the week of February 8, 1982.