Crenshaw County Intervenors Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees and Expenses
Public Court Documents
December 22, 1986

4 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Dillard v. Crenshaw County Hardbacks. Crenshaw County Intervenors Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees and Expenses, 1986. 72105aba-b7d8-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/b39303b8-4a40-431d-9788-8c455abaca14/crenshaw-county-intervenors-response-to-plaintiffs-motion-for-award-of-attorneys-fees-and-expenses. Accessed April 06, 2025.
Copied!
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION JOHN DILLARD, ET AL., Plaintiffs, VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 35~T-1332~N CRENSHAW COUNTY, ALABAMA, ET AL., Defendants. se % % ON OF OF OF % % % ¥ ¥ CRENSHAW COUNTY INTERVENORS RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND EXPENSES Comes now Billy J. Sexton, Jerry L. Hudson, Walter Barnett King, Aubrey Alford and John Bryce Smith, hereinafter referred to as Intervenors and in response to the Plaintiffs' Motion For Award of Attorneys' Fees and Expenses say as follows: l. The Intervenors deny that the Plaintiffs were the prevailing parties as far as the interest of four out of the five Intervenors and further deny that the Plaintiffs did obtain all the relief in the remedial contempt motion. 2. Intervenors deny that the Plaintiffs' Motion To Enjoin The November 4 General Elections For The Crenshaw County Commission contained novel or procedural questions as did possibly the prior litigation. Intervenors further respond that said Motion To Enjoin the November 4 Elections only involved one county as opposed to the multiple Defendants and multiple 1 jurisdictions which were involved in the initial litigation. 3. 1Intervenors aver that the time and expenses expended by the Plaintiffs in said remedial action were a duplication of the time and expenses which would have been required in pursuant of said motion in that said motion was diligently opposed by three of the remaining Defendants, viz: Ira T. Harbin, Chairman of the Crenshaw County Commission, Frances Smith, Sheriff of Crenshaw County, and Ann Tate, Clerk of the Circuit Court of Crenshaw County. oly Intervenors further respond that they are not liable jointly as to any fees or expenses with any other Defendants other than possibly the Crenshaw County Defendants who have settled the fee issue matter with said settlement being approved by this Court. 5. Intervenors further respond that the rates requested by plaintiff's attorneys are not reasonable in view of the litigation in which the Intervenors were involved. 6. Intervenors aver that they are unable to ascertain from Plaintiff's Motion For Award of Attorneys' Fees and Expenses what, if any, time and expenses were directly attributable to their intervention in this matter. 7. Intervenors further assert that they have no liability for any fees or expenses for which the time and expenses are not directly attributable to the Plaintiff's work and expenses caused solely by the intervention of said Defendants. The Intervenors aver that if they have any liability for any fees and expenses that the Plaintiffs should be required to separate and identify said time and expenses from that of any other Defendants. Bet Intervenors respond that the need for the relief requested by the Plaintiffs in Plaintiffs' Motion To Enjoin The November 4 General Elections For The Crenshaw County Commission, was not caused by any action or violation of any law on their parts in their individual capacities, but, on the other hand, was directly caused by the conduct of the Party Primary Elections which were conducted by other Defendants in this matter. Plaintiffs assert that their intervention was strictly in their individazl capacities and none of the intervening Defendants have any control over the election process complained of by Plaintiffs. LIGHTFOOT, NICHOLS & SMYTH of lt N A. NICHOLS Attorney for Crenshaw County Intervenors P. O. Box 369 Luverne, Alabama 36049 205-335-5628 —- 335-6548 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing have been mailed to James W. Webb, Esquire, Webb, Crumpton & McGregor, P. O. Box 238, Montgomery, Alabama 36101, Larry T. Menefee, Esquire, James U. Blacksher, Esquire and Wanda J. Cochran, Esquire, Blacksher, Menefee & Stein, 405 Van Antwerp Building, P. O. Box 1051, Mobile, Alabama 36633, Terry G. Davis, Esquire, 3 Seay & Davis, 732 Carter Hill Road, P. O. Box 6125, Montgomery, Alabama 36106, Deborah Fins, Esquire and Julius L. Chambers, Esquire NAACP Legal Defense Fund, 99 Hudson Street, 16th Floor, New York, New York, 10013, Jack Ployd, Esquire, Renner '§ Cus inanc, 816 Chestnut Street, Gadsden, Alabama 35999, D. iL. Martin, Esquire, 215 S., Main Street, Yorleon, Alabama 35650, David ‘RR, Boyd, Esquire, Balch & Bingham, P. O. Box. 78, Montgomery, Alabama 36101, WwW. OO. Rirk, Jr., Esquire, Curry & Kirk, Phoenix Avenue, Carrollton, Alabama 35447, . Barry: D. Vaughn, Esquire, Proctor & Vaughn, .121 N. North Avenue, Sylacauga, Alabama 35150, H. R. Burnham, Esquire, at Klinefelter, Halsey, Jones & Cater, 401 SouthTrust Bank Building, P. O. Box 1618, Anniston, Alabama 36202, Warren Rowe, Esquire, Rowe, Rowe & Sauter, P. O. Box 150, Enterprise, Alabama 36331, Edward Still, Esquire, 714 South 29th Street, Birmingham, Alabama 35233-2810, Reo Kirkland, Jr., Esquire, P. O. Box 646, Brewton, Alabama 36427, and all defendants not represented by counsel by placing copies of the same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, this the aad rd sy of Dggcember, 1986. 0) ) Lu OHX A. NICHOLS P70. Box 369 Luverne, Alabama 36049