Motion of Bex County Judges to Intervene as Defendants; Original Intervention; Order Granting Motion to Intervene as a Matter of Right

    LAW OFFICES 

OPPENHEIMER, ROSENBERG, KELLEHER & WHEATLEY, nc. 
711 NAVARRO 

JESSE H. OPPENHEIMER THOMAS D. ANTHONY 

STANLEY D. ROSENBERG SIXTH FLOOR 
HERBERT D. KELLEHER 

SEAGAL V. WHEATLEY 

TED CAMPAGNOLO 
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78205 ao ’ 

REESE L. HARRISON, JR. CYNTHIA S. FOX 

STANLEY L. BLEND 

JOHN H, TATE II 

512/224-2000 CHERYL K. FREED 

KIRK L. JAMES 

THOMAS G. SHARPE, JR. TELEX 3787504 ILENE B. KRAMER 
KENNETH M. GINDY 

J. DAVID OPPENHEIMER 

JAMES F. PARKER 

RICHARD N. WEINSTEIN 

BARRY S. BROWN 

RONNIE H. RICKS 

TAYLOR S. BOONE 

GLEN A. YALE 

BRUCE M. MITCHELL 

J. FRANK ONION 

DAN C. PERRY 

FAX 512/224-7540 

DONALD R. PHILBIN, JR. 

WILLIAM LEWIS SESSIONS 

DAVID P. STANUSH 

CRAIG A. STOKES 

December 22 ; 1989 TIMOTHY N. TUGGEY 
ROBERT MICHAEL DUFFEY 

WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 

512 / 299-23 ee 

All Counsel 

Re: League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Council 
#4434 and Houston Lawyers Association v. Jim Mattox, et 
al. and Judge Sharolyn Wood and Judge F. Harold Entz; 

Cause No. MO-88-CA-154. 

  

  

  

Dear Counsel: 

Please find enclosed copies of the following documents which 
were filed of record this date in the above styled and referenced 
cause. 

a. Motion of Judges Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. Reed, John J. 
Specia, Jr., Sid L. Harle, Sharon MacRae, and Michael P. 
Peden to Intervene as Defendants; 

Original Intervention (Answer) of Judges Tom Rickhoff, 
Susan D. Reed, John J. Specia, Jr., Sid L. Harle, Sharon 
MacRae, and Michael P. Peden (As Defendants), Exhibit A; 

Order Granting Motion of Judges Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. 
Reed, John J. Specia, Jr., Sid L. Harle, Sharon MacRae, 
and Michael P. Peden to Intervene as a Matter of Right 
as Defendants in This Cause Pursuant to Rule 24 (a) of the 
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and 

Order Granting Motion of Judges Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. 
Reed, John J. Specia, Jr., Sid L. Harle, Sharon MacRae, 
and Michael P. Peden to Intervene as Defendants Pursuant 
to Rule 24 (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

ely, 

   
Seag V. Wheatley 

  

RAYMOND W. BATTAGLIA 

JOSEPH B. C. FITZSIMONS



LAW OFFICES 

  

OPPENHEIMER, ROSENBERG, KELLEHER & WHEATLEY, Inc. 

All Counsel 
December 22, 1989 
Page 2 

Enclosure 

co: 

Rolando L. Rios 
201 North St. Mary's Street, Suite 501 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 

William L. Garrett 
Brenda Hull Thompson 
Garrett, Thompson & Chang 
8300 Douglas, Suite 800 
Dallas, Texas 75225 

Gabrielle K. McDonald 
Matthews & Branscomb 

301 Congress Avenue, Suite 2050 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Renea Hicks 
Post Office Box 12548 
Capitol Station 
Austin, Texas 78711-2548 

Sherrilyn Ifill 
NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund 
99 Hudson Street, 16th Floor 
New York, New York 10013 

David R. Richards 
600 West 7th Street 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Ken Oden : 
Travis County Attorney's Office 
Post Office Box 1748 
Austin, Texas 78767 

122289-L1t\Agui\DRP\2000\090 

 



  

LAW OFFICES 

OPPENHEIMER, ROSENBERG, KELLEHER & WHEATLEY, Inc. 

All Counsel 
December 22, 1989 

Page 3 

James Greenleaf Boyle 
211 East 7th Street, Suite 807 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Edward B. Cloutman, III 
Mullinax, Wells, Baab & Cloutman 
3301 Elm Street 
Dallas, Texas 75226-1637 

E. Brice Cunningham 
777 S. R.L. Thornton Freeway, Suite 121 
Dallas, Texas 75203 

Joseph E. Clements 
Porter & Clements 
700 Louisiana Street 
3500 RepublicBank Center 
Houston, Texas 77002-2730 

Darrell Frank Smith 
10999 Interstate 10, Suite 905 
San Antonio, Texas 78230 

Robert H. Mow, Jr. 
Bobby M. Rubarts 
David C. Godbey 
Esther R. Rosenblum 
Hughes & Luce 
1717 Main Street, Suite 2800 
Dallas, Texas 75201 

Jay J. Madrid 
Greg Sivinski 
Winstead, McGuire, Sechrest & Minick 
5400 Rennasiance Tower 
112 Elm Street 
Dallas, Texas 75270 

122289-L 1 t\Agui\DRP\2000\090 

 



LAW OFFICES 

  

OPPENHEIMER, ROSENBERG, KELLEHER & WHEATLEY, Inc. 

All Counsel 
December 22, 1989 
Page 4 

James William Walker 
Hugh D. Spears 
Arter & Hadden 

1717 Main Street, Suite 4100 
Dallas, Texas 75201. 

Neil Howard Cogan 
Storey Hall 
3315 Daniel Avenue 
Dallas, Texas 78275 

Eliot D. Shavin 
3800 Oak Lawn 

Suite 240 
Dallas, Texas 75219 

Mark Henry Dettman 
Post Office Box 2559 
Midland, Texas 79702 

SVW:caa 

122289-L1t\Agui\DRP\2000\090 

 



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

LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN § 

CITIZENS (LULAC), COUNCIL 

#4434 et al. 
Plaintiffs, 

and 

HOUSTON LAWYERS ASSOCIATION 

et al., 
Plaintiff-Intervenors, 

MO-88-CA-154 

Ve. 

JIM MATTOX, et al., 
State Defendants, 

and 

JUDGE SHAROLYN WOOD AND 

JUDGE F. HAROLD ENTZ, 

Defendants. wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wr
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 
W
W
W
 

MOTION OF JUDGES TOM RICKHOFF, SUSAN D. REED, 

JOHN J. SPECIA, JR., 8ID L. HARLE, SHARON MACRAE, AND 

ICHAEL P. DEN TO INTERVE AS DEFENDANTS 

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: 

Judges Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. Reed, John J. Specia, Jr., Sid 

L. Harle, Sharon MacRae, and Michael P. Peden move for permission 

to intervene in this action as party defendants pursuant to Rule 

24 (a) and (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and attach 

as Exhibit A to this Motion their original Intervention (as 

Defendants) for the following reasons: 

INTERVENTION OF RIGHT PURSUANT TO RULE 24 (a) 
OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 

l. Rule 24(a)(2) allows intervention as of right by 

intervenors who: (1) are timely; (2) have an interest relating to 

-]l- 

122189-L 1 t\Agui \DRP\2000\079  



the subject of the action; (3) are so situated that the disposition 

of the action may, as a practical matter, impair or impede their 

ability to protect that interest; and (4) are inadequately 

represented by existing parties. Rule 24(b) grants the court 

discretion to allow intervention by intervenors whose claims or 

defenses have a question of law of fact in common with the main 

action and whose intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice 

the adjudication of the rights of the original parties. 

2. Judges Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. Reed, John J. Specia, Jr., 

Sid L. Harle, Sharon MacRae, and Michael P. Peden (the "Bexar 

County District Judge Intervenors") are presently State Court 

District Judges (in the 289th, 144th, 225th, 226th, 290th, and 

285th District Courts): im: Bexar County, Texas. Bexar County is one 
= WIIMRR I, Pid y eg I iT { 3 wd $17, ETN 

of the counties in Texas made the subject of the claims by 

Plaintiff and Plaintiff-Intervenors in this action. All of the 

Bexar County Judge Intervenors are incumbents, and all have filed 

for re-election or announced their intent to file for re-election 

in the upcoming judicial elections. 

3. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors have 

interests relating to the transaction which is the subject of this 

action, the Court's Memorandum and Order of November 8, 1989, as 

they affect Bexar County and in the joint proposed interim plan 

between the Attorney General of the State of Texas and the 

Plaintiffs. Other judges from Dallas and Harris County, Texas, 

already have intervened in this action as Defendants, and the Court 

122189-Li t\Agui \DRP\2000\079  



  

already has recognized the propriety of such intervention of those 

judges. 

4. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors are situated 

so that the Court's disposition of this action will impair and 

impede substantially their ability to protect their interests, and 

the interests of the Bexar County District Judge Intervenors 

certainly are not represented adequately by any existing party in 

this action. In fact, the Attorney General of Texas, counsel for 

the State Defendants, has joined with Plaintiffs in submitting to 

the Court a joint Proposed Interim~«Plan:.that is contrary to these 

Intervenor's interests. 

5. These Intervenor's are also similarly situated with and 

form part of the nexus between the remainder of the Bexar County 

District Judges, and the other district judges of the Fourth 

Judicial Administrative District, who will be impacted by the scope 

of any proposed interim plan or judgment so that the entire group 

of judges affected by any proposed interim plan and judgment will 

be similarly and simultaneously affected. 

6. These Intervenor's, as well as the other judges mentioned 

in paragraph 4 above, are uniquely situated as a group to decide 

proper court administration and determine the rights of litigants. 

7. The joint proposed plan is entirely inconsistent with 

and prejudicial to the interests of the Bexar County Judge 

Intervenors, are contrary to the express wishes and specific 

instructions of the Attorney General's clients and contrary to the 

Texas Constitution. The Attorney General's unauthorized 

-3- 

122189-Li t\Agui\DRP\2000\079 

 



  

impermissible actions have been widely criticized by his clients, 

including the Governor of the State of Texas, the Chief Justice of 

the Supreme Court of Texas, an Associate Justice of the Supreme 

Court of Texas, and numerous State District judges who are directly 

affected. An obvious conflict of interest exists and the court 

should not approve the proposed interim plan of the Attorney 

General under such circumstances. 

8. This case has great and serious implications for all 

Texans and the entire judicial system in Texas, will require 

submission to the voters of amendments to the Texas Constitution, 

will require the Texas Legislature to act, and should not proceed 

in any manner until Defendants can secure counsel who will in fact 

represent Defendants fully and properly. | 

9. This Honorable Court on November 8, 1989, after extensive 

consideration, entered its Memorandum Opinion and Order (the 

"Order") in which the Court made certain explicit comments that are 

pertinent here. The Court expressed the following comments: 

a. Legislation should be done by legislators (Order, 

p. 4): 

b. The Texas Constitution will need to be amended 

(Order, p. 4); and 

Cc. Single member districts may or may not be the answer 

if we are to continue to have partisan elections 

(Order, p.6). 

Should the Legislature fail to adopt a satisfactory remedy in 

the Special Session . . . this Court will consider the granting of 

-4- 

122189-Li t\Agui \DRP\2000\079 

 



  

an expedited appeal to the Fifth Circuit to determine whether or 

not the Declaratory Judgment of this Court [the "Order"] was 

properly made. (Order, p. 94). 

10. In this proceeding, the Intervenors have been represented 

by the Attorney General of the State of Texas, who, following the 

Court's Order of November 8, 1989, has decided, without proper 

authority, to submit an interim plan to this Court to govern 

judicial elections of Intervenors, and others similarly situated, 

for the 1990 election. 

11. In so proposing, the Attorney General's proposed plan 

violates the Texas Constitution, Article 5, § 7 (Vernon Supp. .1989) 

which allows Intervenors to serve a term of four (4) years because 

the proposed plan allows Intervenors to serve only two (2) years 

if elected in 1990. This Court did not find Article 5, § 7 to be 

unconstitutional in any manner, nor does the Attorney General have 

the authority to require a two (2) year term. 

12. Furthermore, the Judicial Districts Board is created by 

the Texas Constitution, Article V, Section 7-A, which among other 

powers, is empowered to internally administer judicial assignments 

within the affected districts. The Court's opinion did nok hold 

the Board's authority to administer internal affairs to be 

unconstitutional. 

13. Without regard to these constitutional limitations, the 

Attorney General's proposed interim plan constitutes a settlement 

which: 

122189-L 1 t\Agui\DRP\2000\079 

 



  

a. Clearly does not take into account all necessary factors 

of the class of judges affected, 

b. Is a clear effort to preclude an appeal of right by 

affected class members, and 

Sh Would create turmoil and confusion as to the internal 

administration of trial dockets which could substantially 

impair the rights of litigants in civil cases, the rights 

of defendants in criminal cases, and the ability to 

fairly assign judges for the trial of cases. 

14. It is unwarranted to deny these Intervenors a right to 

intervene because they will be left without representation as to 

the proposed plans before the Court and will be denied tne: tight 

to the appeal clearly warranted by the Court's Order. : 

15. Because of the lack of adequate representation, any 

action by this court would not be binding upon Intervenors and no 

action should be taken by the Court until this issue is fully 

resolved. It is settled law that where there is not adequate 

representation, parties are not bound by any judgment. A case of 

this nature, extent, importance, and complexity, with its broad 

effects, should not proceed without the Defendants having proper 

representation. Intervenors' interests as well as the interest of 

other judges and the people of Texas cannot be validly and 

determined with finality under the present circumstances. 

16. Because of the crucial importance of this matter, the 

great expense which will be involved in any relief (interim or 

otherwise) that this Court determines, the cloud cast on this case 

-—- 

122189-L1 t\Agui \DRP\2000\079 

 



  

® » 

and the conduct of the Attorney General should not be permitted to 

continue as to these Intervenors who are directly affected as are 

other District Judges, have no adequate representation, and thus 

any judgment entered will not be binding on them or others 

similarly situated. 

17. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors, therefore, 

are entitled to intervene in this action as a matter of right under 

Rule 24 (a), and request that the Court permit their intervention 

in this action only for the purposes being afforded an opportunity 

to be heard and a right to participate in the claims made regarding 

Bexar County and any proposed relief, either interim or permanent, 

affecting election of judges in Bexar County. 

PERMISSIVE INTERVENTION PURSUANT RULE 24 (b 

OF THE FED RULES OF CIV PROCEDURE 

18. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors request as 

an alternative to their claim to intervention as a matter of right 

under Rule 24 (a) that the Court grant them permissive intervention 

under Rule 24 (b). 

19. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors are 

substantially prejudiced by the claims of :Plaintiffs, and have 

defenses with issues of law and fact which are both common to those 

of the State Defendants and have additional defenses. 

20. As in their claim to intervention as a matter of right, 

the Bexar County District Judge Intervenors request that the Court 

allow them to intervene under Rule 24 (b) only for the purposes of 

being afforded an opportunity to be heard and a right to 

-F- 

122189-Li t\Agui \DRP\2000\079 

 



  

participate in the claims asserted in this action about Bexar 

County and any relief, either interim or permanent, affecting the 

election of State Court Judges in Bexar County. 

21. Intervention in this action by the Bexar County District 

Judge Intervenors will not unduly delay or prejudice the rights of 

the original parties. Their Motion is timely filed because no 

final judgment has been entered by the Court and its filing is 

contemporaneous with our understanding of the Court's deadline for 

consideration of plans. 

REQUESTS FOR RELIEF 

21. Accordingly, the Bexar County District Judge Intervenors 

request that the Court grant their Motion to Intervene under 

Rule 24 (a) for the limited purposes of defending their interests 

against Plaintiffs claims for relief in Bexar County, Texas, and 

any relief affecting the election of judges in Bexar County. 

22. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors request 

alternatively that the Court grant their Motion to Intervene under 

Rule 24(b) for the limited purposes of defending their interests 

against Plaintiffs' claims for relief in Bexar County, Texas, and 

any relief affecting the election of judges in Bexar County. 

23. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors request that 

if the Court grants this Motion under either Rule 24 (a) or 24 (b) 

the Court consider as filed for all purposes in this action the 

signed, original Intervention of Judges Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. 

Reed, John J. Specia, Jr., Sid L. Harle, Sharon MacRae, and Michael 

P. Peden as Defendants attached to this Motion as Exhibit A. 

 § 

122189-L1 t\Agui \DRP\2000\079 

 



Respectfully submitted, 

  

Joel H. Pullen 
State Bar No. 16388000 

Royal B. Lea, III 
State Bar No. 12069680 

KAUFMAN, BECKER, PULLEN & REIBACH, INC. 
2300 NCNB Plaza 

300 Convent 

San Antonio, Texas ~~ 78205 
(512) 227-2000 

OPPENHEIMER, ROSENBERG, KELLEHER & 

WHEATLEY, INC. 

711 Navarro, Sixth Floor 
San Antonio, xXas 78205 
(512) 224-20 

BY: 
  

Seagal V. Wheatley '§ 
State Bar No. 21252000 
Donald R. Philbin, Jr. 
State Bar No. 15908800 

Michael E. Tigar 
727 East 26th Street 
Austin, Texas 78705 

Gerald H. Goldstein 
State Bar No. 08101000 

GOLDSTEIN, GOLDSTEIN & HILLEY 

29th Floor, Tower Life Building 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 
(512) 226-1463 

ATTORNEYS FOR BEXAR COUNTY 
JUDGE INTERVENORS 

122189-Li t\Agui\DRP\2000\079 

 



  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that a true and correct copy of the above and 
foregoing has been sent by certified mail, return receipt 
requested, to the following current counsel of record on this 22nd 
day of December, 1989: 

Rolando L. Rios 
201 North St. Mary's Street, Suite 501 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 

Attorney for Plaintiffs, The League of United 
Latin American Citizens, Council #4434; The 
League of United Latin American Citizens, 
Council #4451; Cristina Moreno; Aguilla 
Watson; The League of United Latin American 
Citizens, Council (Statewide); and James 
Fuller. 

William L. Garrett 
Brenda Hull Thompson 
Garrett, Thompson & Chang 
8300 Douglas, Suite 800 
Dallas, Texas 75225 

Attorney for Plaintiffs, The League of United 
Latin American Citizens, Council #4434; The 
League of United Latin American Citizens, 
Council #4451; Cristina Moreno; Aguilla 
Watson; and The League of United Latin 
American Citizens, Council (Statewide). 

Gabrielle K. McDonald 
Matthews & Branscomb 
301 Congress Avenue, Suite 2050 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Attorney for Plaintiff, The Legislative Black 
Caucus and Defendant, The Houston Lawyers’ 
Association. 

Renea Hicks 
Post Office Box 12548 
Capitol Station 
Austin, Texas 78711-2548 

; Trai O- > fe 

122189-L i t\Agui\DRP\2000\079 

 



Attorney for Defendants, The Honorable William 
P. Clements, Governor of the State of Texas; 
The Honorable Jim Mattox, Attorney General of 
the State of Texas; The Honorable Jack M. 
Rains, Secretary of State of Texas; The 
Honorable Thomas R. Phillips, Chief Justice of 
the Supreme Court of Texas; The Honorable John 
F. Onion, Jr., Court of Criminal Appeals; The 
Honorable Ron Chapman, Presiding Judge of the 
First Administrative Judicial Region; The 
Honorable Thomas J. Stovall, Jr.,Presiding 
Judge of the Second Administrative Judicial 
Region; The Honorable James F. Clawson, Jr., 
Presiding Judge of the Third Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Joe E. Kelly, 
Presiding Judge of the Fourth Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Joe B. Evins, 
Presiding Judge of the Fifth Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Sam B. Paxson, 
Presiding Judge of the Sixth Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Weldon Kirk, 
Presiding Judge of the Seventh Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Charles J. 
Murray, Presiding Judge of the Eighth 
Administrative Judicial Region; The Honorable 
Ray D:. Anderson, Presiding Judge of the Ninth 
Administrative Judicial Region; The Honorable 
Joe Spurlock, II, President, Texas Judicial 
Council; and The Honorable John Cornyn, Judge. 

  

Sherrilyn Ifill 
NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund 
99 Hudson Street, 16th Floor 
New York, New York 10013 

Attorney for Defendant, The Houston Lawyers' 
Association. 

David R. Richards 
600 West 7th Street 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Attorney for Defendant, The District Judges of 
Travis County. 

-11- 

122189-L i t\Agui \DRP\2000\079 

 



  

Ken Oden 
Travis County Attorney's Office 
Post Office Box 1748 
Austin, Texas 78767 

Attorney for Defendant, The District Judges of 
Travis County. 

James Greenleaf Boyle 
211 East 7th Street, Suite 807 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Attorney for Defendants, Jesse Oliver, Joan 
Winn White, and Fred Tinsley. 

Edward B. Cloutman, III 
Mullinax, Wells, Baab & Cloutman 
3301 Elm Street 

Dallas, Texas 75226-1637 

Attorney for Defendants, Jesse Oliver, Joan 
Winn White, and Fred Tinsley. 

E. Brice Cunningham 
777 S. R.L. Thornton Freeway, Suite 121 
Dallas, Texas 75203 

Attorney for Defendants, Jesse Oliver, Joan 
Winn White, and Fred Tinsley. 

Joseph E. Clements 
Porter & Clements 
700 Louisiana Street 
3500 RepublicBank Center 
Houston, Texas 77002-2730 

Attorney for Defendant, The Honorable Sharolyn 
Wood, 127th Judicial District Judge of Harris 
County. 

Darrell Frank Smith 
10999 Interstate 10, Suite 905 
San Antonio, Texas 78230 

Attorney for Defendant, The Honorable Sharolyn 
Wood, 127th Judicial District Judge of Harris 
County. 

-12~- 

122189-L 1 t\Agui \DRP\2000\079 

 



Robert H. Mow, Jr. 
Bobby M. Rubarts 
David C. Godbey 
Esther R. Rosenblum 
Hughes & Luce 
1717 Main Street, Suite 2800 
Dallas, Texas 75201 

Attorneys for Defendant, The Honorable F. 
Harold Entz, Judge of the 194th Judicial 
District of Dallas County, Texas. 

Jay J. Madrid 
Greg Sivinski 
Winstead, McGuire, Sechrest & Minick 
5400 Rennasiance Tower 
112 Elm Street 
Dallas, Texas 75270 

Attorneys for The Greater Dallas Chamber of 
Commerce. 

James William Walker 
Hugh D. Spears 
Arter & Hadden 

1717 Main Street, Suite 4100 
Dallas, Texas 75201- 

Attorneys for The Greater Dallas Chamber of 
Commerce. 

Neil Howard Cogan 
Storey Hall 
3315 Daniel Avenue 
Dallas, Texas 78275 

Attorney for The American Jewish Congress. 

Eliot D. Shavin 
3800 Oak Lawn 
Suite 240 
Dallas, Texas 75219 

Attorney for The American Jewish Congress. 

122189-L1t\Agui \DRP\2000\079  



Mark Henry Dettman 
Post Office Box 2559 
Midland, Texas 79702 

  

Attorney for The American Jewish Congress. 

Alii, 
  

SEAGAL V. WHEATLEY 

-14~- 

122189-L i t\Agui\DRP\2000\079 

 



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

  

LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN § 

CITIZENS (LULAC), COUNCIL 
#4434 et al. 

Plaintiffs, 

and 

HOUSTON LAWYERS ASSOCIATION 

et al., 
Plaintiff-Intervenors, 

MO-88-CA-154 

Ve. 

JIM MATTOX, et al., 
State Defendants, 

and 

JUDGE SHAROLYN WOOD AND 

JUDGE F. HAROLD ENTZ, 

Defendants. wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

WN
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

WN
 

Wn
 

Wr
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

ORIGINAL INTERVENTION (ANSWER) OF JUDGES-~. 

TOM RICKHOFF, SUSAN D. REED, JOHN J. SPECIA, JR. 

SID IL. HARLE, SHARON MACRAE, AND MICHAEL P. PEDEN (AS DEFENDANTS 

Judges Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. Reed, John J. Specia, Jr., Sid 

L. Harle, Sharon MacRae, and Michael P. Peden (collectively below, 

the "Bexar County District Judge Intervenors") file their Original 

Intervention (as Defendants). 

RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS IN PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

1. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors admit the 

allegations in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint. 

 



  

yo The allegations in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs' Second 

Amended Complaint include only requests for relief and legal 

conclusions, and do not require an admission or denial. The 

Bexar County District Judge Intervenors, however, deny that 

Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested in Bexar County, 

Texas. 

3. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors admit the 

allegation in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint 

that the Court has jurisdiction over this action. 

4. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors lack 

sufficient information to form a belief about the truth of the 

allegations in Paragraphs 4-17 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended 

Complaint. 

5. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors incorporate 

here in response to Paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended 

Complaint the statements in Paragraph 5 of State Defendants’ 

Original Answer to Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint. 

6. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors adnit the 

allegations in Paragraph 19 in Plaintiffs' Seconded Amended 

Complaint. 

7. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors deny the 

allegations in Paragraph 20 in Plaintiffs' Seconded Amended 

Complaint. 

Page 2 of 6 

 



  

8. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors lack 

sufficient information to form a belief about the truth of the 

allegations in Paragraph 21 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended 

Complaint. 

9. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors deny the 

allegations in Paragraphs 22 and 23 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended 

Complaint. 

10. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors lack 

sufficient information to form an opinion about the truth of the 

allegations in Paragraphs 24-27 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended 

Complaint. 

11. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors deny the 

allegations in Paragraphs 28 and 29 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended 

Complaint. 

12. Paragraph 30 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint 

contains only legal conclusions. 

13. The Bexar County District Judge Intervenors deny the 

allegations in Paragraphs 31 and 32 of Plaintiffs’ Second Amended 

Complaint. 

14. Paragraph 33 of Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint 

contains only legal conclusions and does not require admissions 

or denials. 

Page 3 of 6 

 



  

DEFENSES 

15. Election of judges in Bexar County on a county-wide 

basis does not violate the Voting Rights Act in any manner. To 

the contrary, for many years, there have been Hispanic judges at 

all levels of the courts - in the county courts of Bexar County, 

the District Courts of Bexar County, and on the Court of Civil 

Appeals. In many instances, Hispanic judges have defeated Anglo 

candidates. Further, San Antonio for many years has had an 

Hispanic mayor who was elected city-wide and who had handily 

defeated Anglo candidates. | 

16. County-wide election of district judges is authorized 

by the Texas Constitution which has provided for county-wide 

elections for many years. -In Bexar County, the constitutional 

provisions have not, in any manner, prevented the election of 

Hispanic minority judges. - At the -pregent time, to the extent 

that minority judges have failed to be elected, such action is a 

result only of Bexar County voters' preference or the failure of 

any voter in Bexar County to exercise their right to vote in 

judicial races and does not violate the Voting Rights Act. 

17. Plaintiff's proposed relief violates the Voting Rights 

Act in that it would result in exactly what the Act prohibits in 

the proviso of Section 2 (b) of the Act, i.e., establishment of 

districts where minority candidates would be guaranteed election. 

18. The remedies sought by Plaintiffs would impermissibly 

and unconstitutionally dilute the votes of the citizens of Bexar 

Page 4 of 6 

 



  

County and result in gerrymandering on an unparalled scale. 

Plaintiff's proposed voting districts have areas with 

approximately 100,000 voters receiving two judges while areas 

with approximately 200,000 voters, would only have one judge. 

This disparity is too great to meet constitutional muster. 

Accordingly, all relief sought by Plaintiffs should be denied at 

this time. 

19. Alternatively, this Court's decision and any remedy 

thereunder should be stayed to permit intervenors to review the 

trial record and to present additional evidence that they deem 

appropriate. Intervenors are directly affected by this court's 

order of November 8, 1989, since they are incumbent District 

Judges and have filed for re-election. Any "interim solution" 

will not be interim, but may as a practical manner be a final 

solution. Any such action should only be taken after 

consideration of all facts. 

REQUES OR 

20. Accordingly, Bexar County District Judge Thtervehors 

request that the Court entirely deny Plaintiffs (and 

Plaintiff-Intervenors) the relief they request for Bexar County, 

Texas, and request that the Court set aside, or alternatively, 

hold in abeyance its Memorandum and Order of November 8, 1989, as 

Page 5 of 6 

 



it relates to Bexar County. The Bexar County Judge Intervenors 

also request all other relief to which they are entitled. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Joel H. Pullen 

State Bar No. 16388000 

Royal B. Lea, III 
State Bar No. 12069680 

KAUFMAN, BECKER, PULLEN & REIBACH, INC. 
2300 NCNB Plaza 

300 Convent 

San Antonio, Texas 78205 
(512) 227-2000 

OPPENHEIMER, ROSENBERG, KELLEHER & - 

WHEATLEY, INC. 

711 Navarro, Sixth Floor 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 

nboitt 
(512) 224-2 

  

Seagal V¥ Wheatley / 
State Bar No. 21252000 

Donald R. Philbin, Jr. 
State Bar No. 15908800 

Michael E. Tigar 
727 East 26th Street 
Austin, Texas 78705 

Gerald H. Goldstein 
State Bar No. 08101000 

GOLDSTEIN, GOLDSTEIN & HILLEY 

29th Floor, Tower Life Building 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 
(512) 226-1463 

ATTORNEYS FOR BEXAR COUNTY 
JUDGE INTERVENORS 

Page 6 of 6  



  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that a true and correct copy of the above and 
foregoing has been sent by certified mail, return receipt 
requested, to the following current counsel of record on this 22nd 
day of December, 1989: 

Rolando L. Rios 
201 North St. Mary's Street, Suite 501 
San Antonio, Texas 78205 

Attorney for Plaintiffs, The League of United 
Latin American Citizens, Council #4434; The 
League of United Latin American Citizens, 
Council #4451; Cristina Moreno; Aguilla 
Watson; The League of United Latin American 
Citizens, Council (Statewide); and James 
Fuller. : 

William L. Garrett 
Brenda Hull Thompson 
Garrett, Thompson & Chang 
8300 Douglas, Suite 800 
Dallas, Texas 75225 

A op £5 5 
LIST 

Attorney for Plaintiffs, The Leagieé“8f ‘United 
Latin American’ Citizens’ “Coutici¥ #44%4; The 
League of United Latin American Citizens, 
Council #4451; Cristina Moreno; Aguilla 
Watson; and The League of United Latin 
American Citizens, Council (Statewide). 

Gabrielle K. McDonald 
Matthews & Branscomb 
301 Congress Avenue, Suite 2050 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Attorney for Plaintiff, The Legislative Black 
Caucus and Defendant, The Houston Lawyers' 
Association. 

Y33A TT. o ? ¥ TWENEY he 

Renea Hicks 
Post Office Box 12548 
Capitol Station 
Austin, Texas 78711-2548 

Attorney for Defendants, The Honorable William 
P. Clements, Governor of the State of Texas; 
The Honorable Jim Mattox, Attorney General of 

 



  

the State of Texas; The Honorable Jack M. 
Rains, Secretary of State of Texas; The 
Honorable Thomas R. Phillips, Chief Justice of 
the Supreme Court of Texas; The Honorable John 
F. Onion, Jr., Court of Criminal Appeals; The 
Honorable Ron Chapman, Presiding Judge of the 
First Administrative Judicial Region; The 
Honorable Thomas J. Stovall, Jr.,Presiding 
Judge of the Second Administrative Judicial 
Region; The Honorable James F. Clawson, Jr., 
Presiding Judge of the Third Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Joe E. Kelly, 
Presiding Judge of the Fourth Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Joe B. Evins, 
Presiding Judge of the Fifth Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Sam B. Paxson, 
Presiding Judge of the Sixth Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Weldon Kirk, 
Presiding Judge of the Seventh Administrative 
Judicial Region; The Honorable Charles J. 
Murray, Presiding Judge of the Eighth 
Administrative Judicial Region; The Honorable 
Ray D. Anderson, Presiding Judge of the Ninth 
Administrative Judicial Region; The Honorable 
Joe Spurlock, II, President, Texas Judicial 
Council; and The Honorable John Cornyn, Judge. 

Sherrilyn Ifill 
NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund 
99 Hudson Street, 16th Floor 
New York, New York 10013 

Attorney for Defendant, The Houston Lawyers' 
Association. 

David R. Richards 
600 West 7th .Street 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Attorney for Defendant, The District Judges of 
Travis County. 

Ken Oden 
Travis County Attorney's Office 
Post Office Box 1748 
Austin, Texas 78767 

Attorney for Defendant, The District Judges of 
Travis County. 

 



  

James Greenleaf Boyle 
211 East 7th Street, Suite 807 
Austin, Texas 78701 

Attorney for Defendants, Jesse Oliver, Joan 
Winn white, and Fred Tinsley. 

Edward B. Cloutman, III 
Mullinax, Wells, Baab & Cloutman 
3301 Elm Street 
Dallas, Texas 75226-1637 

Attorney for Defendants, Jesse Oliver, Joan 
Winn White, and Fred Tinsley. 

E. Brice Cunningham 
777 S. R.L. Thornton Freeway, Suite 121 
Dallas, Texas 75203 

Attorney for Defendants, Jesse Oliver, Joan 
Winn White, and Fred Tinsley. 

Joseph E. Clements 
Porter & Clements 
700 Louisiana Street 
3500 RepublicBank Center 
Houston, Texas 77002-2730 

Attorney for Defendant, The Honorable Sharolyn 
Wood, 127th Judicial District Judge of Harris 
County. 

Darrell Frank Smith 
10999 Interstate 10, Suite 905 
San Antonio, Texas 78230 

Attorney for Defendant, The Honorable Sharolyn 
Wood, 127th Judicial District Judge of Harris 
County. 

Robert H. Mow, Jr. 
Bobby M. Rubarts 
David C. Godbey 
Esther R. Rosenblum 
Hughes & Luce 
1717 Main Street, Suite 2800 
Dallas, Texas 75201 

 



Attorneys for Defendant, The Honorable F. 
Harold Entz, Judge of the 194th Judicial 
District of Dallas County, Texas. 

  

Jay J. Madrid 
Greg Sivinski 
Winstead, McGuire, Sechrest & Minick 
5400 Rennasiance Tower 
112 Elm Street 
Dallas, Texas 75270 

Attorneys for The Greater Dallas Chamber of 
Commerce. 

James William Walker 
Hugh D. Spears 
Arter & Hadden 
1717 Main Street, Suite 4100 
Dallas, Texas 75201 

Attorneys for The Greater Dallas Chamber of 
Commerce. 

Neil Howard Cogan 
Storey Hall 
3315 Daniel Avenue 
Dallas, Texas 78275 

Attorney for The American Jewish Congress. 

Eliot D. Shavin 
3800 Oak Lawn 
Suite 240 
Dallas, Texas 75219 

Attorney for The American Jewish Congress. 

Mark Henry Dettman 
Post Office Box 2559 
Midland, Texas 79702 

Attorney for The American Jewish Congress. 

ic 
  

SEAGAL V. WHEATLEY / 

 



  

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

LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN § 

CITIZENS (LULAC), COUNCIL 

#4434 et al. 
Plaintiffs, 

and 

HOUSTON LAWYERS ASSOCIATION MO-88-CA-154 

et al., 
Plaintiff-Intervenors, 

Ve. 

JIM MATTOX, et al., 

State Defendants, 

and 

JUDGE SHAROLYN WOOD AND 

JUDGE F. HAROLD ENTZ, 

Defendants. wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

WD
 

WD
 

Wn
 

WD
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF JUDGES TOM RICKHOFF, 

SUSAN D. REED, JOHN J. SPECIA, JR., 8ID L. HARLE, 

SHARON MACRAE, AND MICHAEL P. PEDEN TO INTERVENE AS A 

MATTER OF RIGHT AS DEFENDANTS IN THIS CAUSE 

PURSUANT RU 4(a) OF T FEDERA 8 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 

on the date below the Court considered the Motion of Judges 

Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. Reed, John J. Specia, Jr., Sid L. Harle, 

Sharon MacRae, and Michael P. Peden (the "Bexar County District 

Judges") to Intervene as Defendants in this action as a matter of 

right. 

After considering the Motion and the Court's records of this 

action, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be, in 

all things, granted. 

122189-L i t\Agui \DRP\2000\080 

 



  

¢ 4 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the signed, Original Intervention 

(Answer) of Judges Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. Reed, John J. Specia, 

Jr., Sid L. Harle, Sharon MacRae, and Michael P. Peden attached as 

Exhibit A to the Motion should be, and hereby is, deemed to be 

filed for all purposes in this action. 

SIGNED AND ENTERED on January , 1990, in ’ 
  

Texas. 

  

Lucius D. Bunton 
Chief Judge ; 
United States District Court 
Western District of Texas 

122189-Li t\Agui \DRP\2000\080 

 



  

¢ » 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 
MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION 

LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN § 

CITIZENS (LULAC), COUNCIL 
#4434 et al. 

Plaintiffs, 

and 

HOUSTON LAWYERS ASSOCIATION MO-88-CA-154 
et al., 

Plaintiff-Intervenors, 

V. 

JIM MATTOX, et al., 
State Defendants, 

and 

JUDGE SHAROLYN WOOD AND 

JUDGE F. HAROLD ENTZ, 

Defendants. wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

WN
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

Wn
 

WD
 

Wn
 

Wn
 
W
W
 

Wn
 
W
W
 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF JUDGES TOM RICKHOFF, 
SUSAN D. REED, JOHN J. SPECIA, JR., 8ID L. HARLE, 
SHARON MACRAE, AND MICHAEL P. PEDEN TO INTERVENE 

AS DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO RULE 24 (Db) 
OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 

On the date below the Court considered the Motion of Judges 

Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. Reed, John J. Specia, Jr., Sid L. Harle, 

Sharon MacRae, and Michael P. Peden (the "Bexar County District 

Judges") to Intervene as Defendants in this action under Rule 24 (b) 

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the limited purpose of 

defending their interests against Plaintiffs' claims for relief in 

Bexar County, Texas, and any relief affecting the election of 

judges in Bexar County. 

122189-L i t\Agui\DRP\2000\082 

 



  

% Ad 
After considering the Motion and the Court's records of this 

action, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be, in 

all things, granted. 

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Motion of the Bexar County 

District Judge to Intervene should be, and hereby is, granted. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the signed, Original Intervention 

(Answer) of Judges Tom Rickhoff, Susan D. Reed, John J. Specia, 

Jr., Sid L. Harle, Sharon MacRae, and Michael P. Peden attached as 

Exhibit A to the Motion should be, and hereby is, deemed to be 

filed for all purposes in this action. 

  

SIGNED AND ENTERED on January , 1990, in : ' 

Texas. 

  

Lucius D. Bunton 
Chief Judge 
United States District Court 
Western District of Texas 

122189-Li t\Agui \DRP\2000\082