Defendant-Intervenor's Answer to Emergency Motion
Public Court Documents
3 pages
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 December 06, 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 -