Letter from Chachkin to Supreme Court RE: Petitions Petitions for Writs of Certiorari
Public Court Documents
December 26, 1972
3 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Milliken Hardbacks. Letter from Chachkin to Supreme Court RE: Petitions Petitions for Writs of Certiorari, 1972. 4d53993e-54e9-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/b37bbe56-6cc5-4e16-a357-07fc3731da03/letter-from-chachkin-to-supreme-court-re-petitions-petitions-for-writs-of-certiorari. Accessed November 23, 2025.
Copied!
# »
December 26, 1972
Hon. Michael Rodak, Jr., Clerk
Supreme Court of the United States
Washington, D.C. 20543
Re: Bloomfield Hills School District
vs. Stephen J. Roth, et al.
O.T. 1972, No. __________
West Bloomfield School District
vs. Stephen J. Roth, et al.
O.T. 1972, N o . _____ ____ _
School District of Birmingham
vs. Stephen J. Roth, et al.
O.T. 1972, No. 72-817
Dear Mr. Rodak
1
■
■M
!?•••
b
f f
■4
-1
I received service of the Petitions for
Writs of Certiorari in the three above-captioned
matters in late November and early December, 1972,
as one of counsel for the respondents Ronald Bradley,
et al..
- ^ u i i
The most significant issue sought to be
raised in each of the Petitions (the Petitioners
are all similarly situated school districts within
the State of Michigan and outside the City of Detroit)
concerns the propriety of a district court desegre
gation order against each district as a state agency
which was entered without each of the petitioning
school districts having entered the litigation as a
party. In the view of respondents - Bradley et al.,
this issue is mooted in light of the recent Sixth
Circuit ruling in Bradley v. Milliken, Nos. 72-1809 -
72-1814 (Dec. 8, 1972) [see Supplemental Brief in
Support of Petitions for Writs of Certiorari, Nos.
72-549 and 72-550] wherein the Court of Appeals
ruled that the petitioning school districts were each
necessary parties, vacated the district court's order
and remanded for a new hearing at which the Petitioners
would participate.
£r-'
lr iUi * 3?mi
li!i-
. .
0,b *
■ik"'
. m 1#m ■
• i . - h• -b< *
■ J;
if
- jA
%
; 1
rf
f j
L»lS; l n
l O C O L U M B U S C I R C L E 5 8 6 - 8 3 9 7 N E W Y O R K , N . Y . 1 0 0 1 9
f jf- li t
1 ijt .11
■i
Hon. Michael Rodak, Jr. -2 December 26, 1972
Indeed, Petitioner Bloomfield Hills School
District recognized the likelihood of this result
by requesting that disposition of its Petition be
held in abeyance pending the decision of the Sixth
Circuit (at p. 4).
Accordingly, prior to filing any response
on behalf of Ronald Bradley, et al., I contacted
attorneys for each of the Petitioners by telephone
last week. I am informed that none of the Petitioners
realistically expects to withdraw their Petitions in
light of the Sixth Circuit's decision. In fact, counsel
for Bloomfield Hills and the West Bloomfield Petitioners
-expressed an expectation that they would shortly
supplement their Petitions to take into account this
recent development; such a supplement may also be
forthcoming from the School District of Birmingham
although that Petitioner has reached no determination
on the matter as yet.
Respondents Bradley et al. would desire to
prepare and file a single Brief in Opposition to these
three Petitions for Writs of Certiorari, and we
would desire to incur the expense of printing only -•
one document. Under the circumstances here, it would
seem appropriate for us to defer any response for a
reasonable period of time so as to allow the Petitioners
to file such supplementary material as they might
desire.
I recognize, however, that the Court's
docket functions independently of such agreements
between litigants, and that the Court may desire to
take up consideration of the Petitions notwithstanding
the fact that they have not yet been supplemented.
Should that be the case, I stand ready upon your ^
advise to expeditiously prepare and file responses
as the Court desires.
Hon. Michael Rodak, Jr. -3- December 26, 1972
In the meantime I am enclosing executed
appearance forms on behalf of the respondents
Bradley et al. in each of these cases.
I regret the additional difficulty
which this request will cause you and your staff
but I believe this to be the most efficient method
of handling this rather complicated matter.
Best personal regards of the season.
Very truly yours,
Attorney for Respondents
Bradley et al.
cc: Counsel of record
[see attached list]
n >