Appellees' Request for an Extension of Time (motion to dismiss)

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

Consolidated case opinion for Rybicki, Delvalle and Crosby v. Illinois State Board of Elections.

LDF Attorneys
Cooperating Attorney
- Leslie J. Winner
Organization
- NAACP Legal and Educational Defense Fund, Inc.
Matter
- Gingles
Case
- Thornburg v. Gingles
U.S. state
- North Carolina
Collection
- Case Files
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 77aef257-d492-ee11-be37-00224827e97b

Cite this item

Case Files, Thornburg v. Gingles Hardbacks, Briefs, and Trial Transcript. Appellees' Request for an Extension of Time (motion to dismiss), 1984. 8d8cb959-d592-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/23c3b66d-93b3-4e11-ab83-bf72c3f3b2f6/appellees-request-for-an-extension-of-time-motion-to-dismiss. Accessed May 22, 2025.

Copied!

    I

,

June 15, 1984

Hon. Alexander
Office of the
Supreme Court
Viashington, D.

RE:

Sterras, CIerk
Clerk
of the United States
c.20543

No. 83-]968, October
Edmisten, et aI. v.

Term, I
Ginq 1es et al.

983

Dear S:.r:

Pursuant to Rule 34 (5) , the appellee herewith
requests an extension of time to and including
Septe.nber 2, 1984, in which to f ile a motion to
dilmrss or affj-rm the appeal taken in this case'
The jurisdictional staternent was filed on June
2, figa and served uPon the aPPeIIee on June 10,
1984, and unless extended the time for filing
such a motion will expire on July 10, 1994.

This request is made necessari' by the fact that
appellee's counsel in North carolina is schedulec
f;i tri-a] on June 18, 1984, and appellee's counsel
in New york has previously scheduleo a vacation
for June 27 through July IO, 1984. In addition,
appellee's counsel contj-nue to spend time in this
.il. challenging a portion of the remedy proposed
by appellants. The additi.onal time is therefore
nlceiiary to permit counsel to confer and then to
draft the motion to dismiss or affirm in this im-
Portant case.

Appe i lant' s cour:se 1 , Kathleen ileenan l"lcGuan and
.:ames iryallace , JT. , have COnSented to this exten-
si-on. Appetiee believes that this extension wilI
nor unduil' deiay this Court' s consioerati-on of the
appeai a,',c that the Court wi-1} be able to act uPon
the appea3- as scon as the new Tern conmences on
October 1, 1981.

SincerelY Yours,

Lani Guin:er
Attornel' for APPeilee

LGi r



Hon. Alexander Stevas, CIerk
June 15, I984

Page Two

cc: Kathleen lleenan l,lcGuan
900 ITth Street, lI.tnl. Suite 1020
Washington, D.C. 20007

James Wa11ace, Jr., Esq.
Deputy Attorney General
N. C. Department of Justice
Post Office Box 629
P,aIeigh, North Carolina 27602

c: -rJS?\ STF:€- 21 2, 2.9-'9lC

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.

Opinion

LDF Attorneys

Cooperating Attorney

Organization

Matter

Case

U.S. state

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in