Defendant-Intervenor's Answer to Emergency Motion

3 pages

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

No date.

Impact area
- Education
Topic
- School Desegregation
LDF Attorney
- Norman J. Chachkin
Cooperating Attorneys
Organizations
Matter
- Milliken v. Bradley
Case
- Milliken v. Bradley
U.S. state
- Michigan
Collection
- Case Files
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 3ba1e0ca-53e9-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0

Cite this item

Case Files, Milliken Hardbacks. Defendant-Intervenor's Answer to Emergency Motion, 3ba1e0ca-53e9-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/c245aa96-791f-4d65-bf62-4fc35e55a6e3/defendant-intervenors-answer-to-emergency-motion. Accessed April 08, 2025.

Copied!

    NO. 72-8002
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE SCHOOL 
DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF DETROIT, 
a school district of the first class,

Appellant,

vs.
RONALD BRADLEY, et al,

4

Appellees.
/

ANSWER OF DETROIT FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, 
DEFENDANT-INTERVENOR, IN OPPOSITION, FOR . 
PREMATURITY, TO EMERGENCY MOTION OF DETROIT 

' BOARD OF EDUCATION TO COMPEL STATE DEFENDANTS 
TO FUND 180 DAY SCHOOL YEAR.________________

NOW COMES Intervening Defendant, DETROIT FEDERATION 

OF TEACHERS, LOCAL 231, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, AFL- 

CIO, and in answer and opposition to pending Emergency Motion 

of Detroit Board of Education to compel certain state officials 

to provide funds to keep the Detroit Public Schools operating 

for a full 180-day school year, says as follows:

1) Answering paragraph 1 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein.

2) Answering paragraph 2 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein.

3) Answering paragraph 3 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein.



/

4) Answering paragraph 4 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein.

5) Answering paragraph 5 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein.

6) Answering paragraph 6 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein on information 

and belief, except that Intervening Defendant Federation denies 

the conclusions that the Detroit Board cannot keep the schools

open through February, 1973.
7) Answering paragraph 7 of said Motion, Intervening

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein qn information 

and belief.

8) No answer is required.

9) Answering paragraph 9 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein.

10) Answering paragraph 10 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits only that the recited recommendations of

Dr. Wolfe were made and that the Board Resolution pursuant 

thereto was adopted but denies the conclusions that the Detroit 

Board cannot or should not continue the school year without

the proposed mid-semester closing.

11) Answering paragraph 11 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant neither admits nor denies the allegations in the first 

sentence, for lack of information. The Federation denies the 

allegations in the second sentence as inaccurate conclusions of

fact and law.
12) Answering paragraph 12 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein.



T

13) Answering paragraph 13 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant neither admits nor denies the allegations contained 

therein, not having sufficient information thereof.

14) Answering paragraph 14 of said Motion, Intervening 

Defendant admits the allegations contained therein.

15) No answer is required.

16) Answering paragraph 16 of said Motion, Inter

vening Defendant admits the allegations contained therein.

17) No answer is required.

WHEREFORE, we pray that said Motion be denied, on 

account of prematurity, or in the alternative, that it be held 

in abeyance.

Respectfully submitted,

ROTHE, MARSTON, MAZEY, SACHS, 
O'CONNELL, NUNN & FREID, P.C.

By: ____________ _______ _________
Theodore Sachs

Attorneys for Intervening Defendant, 
Detroit Federation of Teachers 

1000 Farmer Street 
Detroit, Michigan 48226 
Telephone: 965-3464

Dated:

- 3 -

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Defendant-Intervenor's Answer to Emergency Motion

Impact area

Topic

LDF Attorney

Cooperating Attorneys

Organizations

Matter

Case

U.S. state

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in