Defendants' Disclosure of Expert Witnesses
Public Court Documents
March 16, 1992

17 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Sheff v. O'Neill Hardbacks. Defendants' Disclosure of Expert Witnesses, 1992. 4e0ce958-a246-f011-877a-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/bbad333a-d45f-43db-9c51-09e164007442/defendants-disclosure-of-expert-witnesses. Accessed July 29, 2025.
Copied!
NO, CV-89-0360577 8S MILO SHEFF, ET Al. : SUPERIOR COURT Plaintiffs 3 JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF V. : HARTFORD/NEW BRITAIN 3 AT HARTFORD WILLIAM A. O'NEILL, ET AL. : March 16, 1992 Defendants DEFENDANTS' DISCLOSURE OF EXPERT WITNESSES Pursuant to the order of the court establishing a schedule for disclosure of expert witnesses, employees and consultants expected to present testimony at trial, the defendants offer the following amended list and disclosure. This disclosure is provided in lieu of the defendants' disclosure dated January 15, 1992. The defendants wish to emphasize that the particular facts and opinions which will be offered by the witnesses listed below are not the only facts and opinions which the witnesses may offer at trial. The defendants expect to sUpplatient their disclosure after the plaintiffs have fully and finally answered the defendants' first set of interrogatories and requests for production and the defendants have had an opportunity to consider and prepare whatever response may be appropriate to claims made by the plaintiffs in response to that discovery. Defendants also expect to supplement this list with additional names and additional information as work now in progress and work to be undertaken after the plaintiffs fully and finally answer the defendants' interrogatories and requests for production 1s completed. ls Christine Rossell, Ph.D. (Expert Witness) Boston University, 232 Bay State Road, Boston, Massachusetts 02215: Dr. Rossell is a Professor of Political Science at Boston University. Professor Rossell is expected to testify that the State of Connecticut is responding appropriately to the educational conditions in the Hartford area by encouraging voluntary integration and compensating poor school districts for their poverty. Professor Rossell will base her testimony on her scholarly research of the following at least: l. the evolution of school desegregation; 2. national school desegregation trends; 3. measuring the effectiveness of school desegregation; 4, the relative merit of voluntary and mandatory school desegregation plans; 5. white flight as a function of desegregation; 6. the effectiveness of specific approaches to desegregation; 1i.e., freedom of choice, majority-to-minority transfer, controlled choice, magnet schools, etc.; 7. metropolitan-based desegregation plans; 8. State of Connecticut policies and programs to encourage voluntary desegregation and to ald poor districts through compensatory funding, general and categorical. Among other things, Dr. Rossell will rely on her work entitled The Carrot or the Stick for School Desegregation Policy, Temple University Press, 1990. Dr. Rossell's resume has been provided to plaintiffs as Exhibit 19(a) of defendants' response to plaintiffs' fourth request for production. 2. David Armor, Ph.D. (Expert Witness) 5006 Klingle Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20011: Dr, Armor is currently Visiting ‘Professor, Rutgers University; Consultant, American Institutes for Research; and President, National Policy Analysts. Dr. Armor 1s principal investigator for a grant to write a treatise on race, education and the courts; coprincipal investigator on a national study of magnet schools; and an associate investigator on a project that is conducting case studies of school districts with school choice policies. While Dr. Armor may testify on more than one topic, at this time he is expected to testify that research has demonstrated "no significant and consistent effects of desegregation on Black achievement." Dr. Armor may also offer opinions regarding reasons for the differences in performance on the CMT between Hartford and suburban children; however, his work in this area is not yet complete. Dr. Armor will base his testimony on his own original studies as concerning achievement. plaintiffs plaintiffs’ 3. Dr. well as his scholarly analysis of the research the effects of desegregation on Black student Dr. Armor's resume has been provided to the 8s Exhibit 1S(b) to defendants’ response to fourth request for production. G. Donald Ferree (Expert Witness) Institute for Social Inquiry, Roper Center for Public Opinion, P. O. Box 440, Storrs, Connecticut 06268: Dr. Ferree 1s the Associate Director of the Institute for Social Inquiry, University of Connecticut. Dr. Ferree's resume will be provided as Exhibit 19(d) to defendants' response to plaintiffs’ available. fourth request for production as soon as it is Dr. Ferree 1s expected to testify regarding proper methods and procedures for conducting a public opinion poll to ascertain the attitudes of Connecticut residents and/or groups of Connecticut residents. He is expected to present and explain the results of a survey conducted by Institute for Social Inquiry at the request of the Governor's Commission on Quality and Integrated Education. The results to that survey are summarized in the attachment to Exhibit 6 in support of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. 4, Dr. Pasquale Forgione (former DOE Consultant) c/o State Department of Education, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06106: Dr. Forgione is not expected to offer opinion testimony as an expert witness. Instead he will provide testimony regarding the development, implementation and analysis of the CMT and CMT results. The specific analysis of CMT results which will be described by this witness have been provided to the plaintiffs in Exhibit 16(f) of defendants' response to plaintiffs' first request for production, Exhibit 18(d) of defendants' response to plaintiffs’ second request for production, and Exhibit 10(c) of defendants' response to plaintiffs' third request for production. 5. Dr, Douglas Rindone ‘DOE Consultant) c/0C - State Department of Education, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06106: Dr. Rindone is not expected to offer opinion testimony as an expert witness. Instead he may provide testimony regarding the development, implementation and analysis of the CMT and CMT results. The specific analysis of CMT results which will be described by this witness have been provided to the plaintiffs in Exhibit 16(f) of defendants’ response to plaintiffs’ first request for production, Exhibit 18(d) of defendants' response to plaintiffs’ second request for production, and Exhibit 10(c) of defendants' response to plaintiffs' third request for production. ig Dr. William Congero (DOE: Consultant) C/O State Department of Education, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06106: Dr. Congero is not expected to offer opinion testimony as an expert witness. Instead he may provide testimony regarding the development, implementation and analysis of the CMT and CMT results. The specific analysis of CMT results which will be described by this witness have been provided to the plaintiffs in Exhibit 16(f) of defendants' response to plaintiffs’ first request for production, Exhibit 18(d) of defendants response to plaintiffs' second request for production, and Exhibit 10(c) of defendants' response to plaintiffs' third request for production. 7. Dr. Peter Behuniak (DOE Consultant) c/o State Department of Education, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06106: Dr. Behuniak is not expected to offer opinion testimony as an expert witness. Instead he may provide testimony regarding the development, implementation and analysis of the CMT and CMT results. The specific analysis of CMT results which will be described by this witness have been provided to the plaintiffs in Exhibit 16(f) of defendants' response to plaintiffs' first request for production, Exhibit 18(d) of defendants' response to plaintiffs’ second request for production, and Exhibit 10(c) of defendants' response to plaintiffs' third request for production. 8. Dr, Elliot Williams (DOE Consultant) c/o State Department of Education, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06106: Dr. Williams is not expected to offer opinion testimony as an expert witness. Instead Dr. Williams will provide information regarding existing and planned programs promoting interdistrict cooperation and improving integration. Specifically Dr. Williams will describe and verify the accuracy of the information found in Exhibits 3(x-z) to the defendants' response to plaintiffs' second request for production. S. Dr. Robert Brewer (DOE Consultant) c/o State Department of Education, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06106: Dr. Brewer 1s not expected to offer opinion testimony as an expert witness. Instead Dr. Brewer will offer testimony regarding state grants to local school districts generally and the state's financial contribution to the school districts in what the plaintiffs have described as the Hartford area in particular. Dr. Brewer will attest to the accuracy of the information found in Exhibits 4(ee) and 7 of defendants’ response to plaintiffs' second request for production. 10. Dr. Peter Prowda (DOE Consultant) c/o State Department of Education, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06106: Dr. Prowda is not expected to offer opinion testimony as an expert witness. Instead Dr. Prowda will offer testimony regarding the analysis of comparative rates of absenteeism provided to the plaintiffs as Exhibit 7(a) of the defendants’ response to plaintiffs' first request for production. 1. Dr. Theodore Sergi (DOE Consultant) c/o State Department of Education, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06106: Dr. Sergi is not expected to offer opinion testimony as an expert witness. Instead Dr. Sergi will offer testimony regarding -10- the background, implementation and effectiveness of the state's priority school district grant program. Dr. Sergi's testimony will include an explanation of the analysis found in Exhibit 4(ff) of defendants' response to plaintiffs' second request for production, 12. Dr. Thomas Breen (DOE Consultant) c/o State Department of Education, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06106. Dr. Breen 1s not expected to offer opinion testimony as an expert witness. Instead Dr. Breen will offer testimony regarding the racial and ethnic composition of schools and school districts throughout the state. He is also expected to focus on the racial and ethnic composition of the schools in Hartford and those towns which plaintiffs have identified as "suburban" communities for the purpose of this suit. Among other things Dr. Breen is expected to verify the accuracy of the information contained in Exhibits 4(a) and 18(a-x) of defendants' response to plaintiffs’ fourth request for production. He will also verify the accuracy of certain other analysis of the racial and ethnic composition of -11- the school in Hartford and the "suburban" communities which will be disclosed to the plaintiffs in the near future. 13. Mr. Lloyd Calvert (Expert Witness) c/o Office of the Attorney General, 110 Sherman Street, Hartford, Connecticut 06105: Mr. Calvert is the former Superintendent of Schools in West Hartford, Trumbull and Windsor and former Assistant Superintendent of Schools in Hartford. He 1s now serving as educational consultant to the Office of the Attorney General in regard to the Sheff v. O'Neill case. Mr. Calvert's resume is being provided to the plaintiffs as Exhibit 19(c) to defendants’ response to plaintiffs' fourth request for production. Mr. Calvert is expected to testify regarding the racial and ethnic composition of the Hartford public schools and certain trends regarding the racial and ethnic composition of the Hartford public schools in comparison to the 21 school districts which plaintiffs have chosen to designate as suburban school districts. Tables and data which Mr. Calvert will rely on will -12- be disclosed in response to the plaintiffs' earlier production requests as soon as they are in final form. Mr. Calvert will also testify regarding the state's efforts to address the needs of disadvantaged and urban children since the 1920's as evidenced in records of the State Board of Education and his own work and experience. 14. Dr. Thomas E. Steahr, (Expert witness) c/o College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Connecticut, Box U-22, Room 318, 1376 Storrs Road, Storrs, CT 06269-4021. Dr. Steahr is presently serving as a full professor in the Department of Agriculture and Resource Economics of the University of Connecticut. Further details regarding his background and experience can be found in Exhibit 19(e) to the efondantis response to plaintiffs’ fourth request for production. Dr. Steahr is expected to offer testimony regarding demographic patterns and trends in Connecticut generally and in -13- the area which the plaintiffs have defined as the suburban Hartford area in particular. His testimony is expected to focus on the following facts and opinions: l. Based upon an analysis of conius data and vital statistics it appears that the populations of that area which has been defined by the plaintiffs as "suburban Hartford" are becoming more diverse; i.e., individuals from traditionally recognized minority groups are locating in the suburban towns at an increasing rate. 2s The steady increase in the growth of the minority population in the towns which have been identified as suburbs of Hartford runs counter to the notion that people from these minority groups are "trapped" in Hartford because of their race or national origin. 3. There has been a significant change in the composition of the "minority" population in Hartford. The evidence suggests a net out migration of African Americans and a significant increase in the Hispanic or Latino population. -14- 4. Concentrations of people of similar ethnic backgrounds in particular areas or towns is a natural phenomena which can and does occur without government promotion or sponsorship. By The concentration of African American and Hispanic or Latino citizens in Hartford and other urban areas of the state which 1s present today was not clearly foreseeable in the early 1300s given the limited information which was available at that time and the uncertainties of making these kinds of predictions even under the best of circumstances. The testimony and opinions which Dr. Steahr is expected to offer will be grounded on his many years of study and research in the area of demographics and particularly his study of demographic patterns in the State ‘of Connecticut. He will also rely on his analysis of census bureau data and data regarding vital statistics maintained by the State Department of Health Services. Tables and charts which Dr. Steahr has relied on to form his opinions will be provided to the plaintiffs as soon as they are in final form. This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing was mailed FOR THE DEFENDANTS RD “GRAERY. ATT yd AU By: 43 No Vid A R. Whelan - Juris 085112 sistant Attorney General 0 Sherman Street artford, Connecticut 06105 Tel: 566-7173 CERTIFICATION postage prepaid to the following counsel of record on March 16, 1992: John Brittain, Esq. University of Connecticut School of Law 65 Elizabeth Street Hartford, CT 06105 Wilfred Rodriguez, Hispanic Advocacy Project Neighborhood Legal Services 1229 Albany Avenue Bartford, CT 06112 Philip Tegeler, Esq. Martha Stone, Esq. Connecticut Civil Liberties Union 32 Grand Street Hartford, CT 06106 -16- Wesley W. Horton, Esq. Mollier, Horton & Fineberg, P.C. 90 Gillett Street Hartford, CT 06105 Ruben Franco, Esq. Jenny Rivera, Esq. Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund 99 Hudson Street 14th Floor New York, NY 10013 Julius L. Chambers, Esq Marianne Lado, Esq. Ronald Ellis, Esq. NAACP Legal Defense Fund and Educational Fund, Inc. S9 Hudson Street New York, NY 10013 John A. Powell, Esq. Helen Hershkoff, Esq. Adam S. Cohen, Esq. American Civil Liberties Union 132 West 43rd Street Ney York, NY 1 336, (LS JghhiR. Whelan Assistant Attorney General ‘ / ae / [ l/ / -17-