Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Disclose Expert Witnesses Pursuant to Practice Book Section 220 (D)
Public Court Documents
November 28, 1990

7 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Sheff v. O'Neill Hardbacks. Plaintiffs' Second Identification of Expert Witnesses Pursuant to Practice Book 220 (D), 1991. d361308f-a246-f011-8779-7c1e5267c7b6. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/c45d52dc-4f21-4241-af6a-d492aaf80c12/plaintiffs-second-identification-of-expert-witnesses-pursuant-to-practice-book-220-d. Accessed July 29, 2025.
Copied!
Cv89-0360977S MILO SHEFF, et al. - SUPERIOR COURT Plaintiffs : Vv. : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF : HARTFORD/NEW BRITAIN WILLIAM A. O'NEILL, et al. : AT HARTFORD Defendants : Maych 18,1991 PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND IDENTIFICATION OF EXPERT WITNESSES PURSUANT TO PRACTICE BOOK §220 (D) Pursuant to Practice Book §220(D), as modified by this Court's Order of October 31, 1990 and the parties’ Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Disclose Expert Witnesses filed December 3, 1990, the plaintiffs herein disclose their second list of expert witnesses anticipated to testify at trial, in response to Defendants’ First Set of Interrogatories. In addition, plaintiffs have identified other possible witnesses who may testify at the trial in this action, but whose analyses are not sufficiently complete to respond to defendants’ interrogatory or to confirm whether plaintiffs expect to call such witnesses. As set out in the parties’ Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Disclose Expert Witnesses filed December 3, 1990, such additional expert witnesses may be identified in sixty days or thereafter. Interrogatory 18. Please specify the name and address of each and every person the plaintiffs expect to call as an expert witness at trial. For each such person please provide the following: a. The date on which that person is expected to complete the review, analysis, or consideration necessary to formulate the opinions which that person will be called upon to offer at trial; b. The subject matter upon which that person is expected to testify; and c. The substance of the facts and opinions to which that person is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. RESPONSE: Experts whom the plaintiffs expect to call at trial are listed below, pursuant to Practice Book Section 220(D), as modified by the Court: Charles V. Willie, Ph.D., Harvard University, Graduate School of Education, Monroe C. Gutman Library, Cambridge, MA 02138. Dr. Willie is expected to testify about the restructuring of educational attendance patterns and/or districts to eliminate racial isolation and to enhance the quality of education, especially for nonwhite school children concentrated in racially and economically impacted areas. Dr. Willie is expected to analyze the effects of segregated education upon the learning ability of white and nonwhite school children. He is also expected to propose educational plans to insure educational and racial equity. Dr. Catherine E. Walsh, University of Massachusetts, 250 Stuart Street, Boston, MA 02116. Dr. Walsh is expected to testify regarding the linguistic and sociocultural issues involved in the racial and economic isolation of Puerto Rican and other Latino students. Dr. Walsh is expected to testify about the structure, instructional orientation, content and physical location of bilingual education. She is expected to generally testify regarding curriculum restructuring, school-based management, educational grouping of Puerto Rican students to promote integration while providing for the students’ needs, and the relationship between language and literacy development and academic achievement for Puerto Rican students. Dr. Walsh is also expected to testify as to remedial plans in the remedial portion of this case. Dr. Walsh's testimony will be based upon her review of the available surveys and theoretical works regarding the functioning of bilingual programs and segregated and desegregated school systems, and on her own experience and her investigations into the functioning of the schools, school systems and bilingual programs of the Greater Hartford Area and other places and on the results of investigations made by other expert witnesses in this case. Yale Rabin, 9 Farrar Street, Cambridge, MA 02138. Professor Rabin is expected to testify regarding actions of state and local officials that have contributed to the development of segregated housing patterns in the Hartford region. Specifically, Professor Rabin is expected to testify as to the state's role in the location of subsidized low income family housing in the Hartford area; the current and historical racial consequences of those decisions; the effects of state transportation policies, including highway construction, on residential segregation; the effects of the state’s failure to adequately monitor and enforce affirmative marketing requirements; the effects of state administration and regulation of rental assistance programs; and the state's en- couragement of local barriers to the development of affordable housing, including municipal veto laws, residency preferences, and exclusionary zoning. Professor Rabin is also expected to present historical analysis of the development of racial and economic segregation in the Hartford region, and to summarize the studies and reports presented to the state during the past 40 years indicating the growth of racial and economic segregation, the role of government action in contributing to segregation, and the opportunities open to the state to remedy the problem. In his testimony, the materials upon which Professor Rabin is expected to rely include his published work, U.S. Census data; published and unpublished reports by state agencies, including but not limited to the Department of Housing and its predecessors, the Office of Policy and Management, the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, the Department of Transportation, the Connecticut General Assembly, and reports or testimony regarding housing, land use and transportation submitted to the state by private organizations. Professor Rabin is expected to complete his review by June 1, 1991. Ruth Price, 196 Glengarry Road, Fairfield, CT 06430. Ms. Price 1s expected to testify regarding actions of state and local officials that have contributed to the development of segregated housing patterns in the Hartford region. Specifically, Ms. Price is expected . to testify as to the state's role in the location of subsidized low income family housing in the Hartford area and the types of subsidized housing located in each town; the income and racial characteristics of residents in such housing; the history of state transportation policies, including highway construction, as they affect the residential segregation; the state's failure to adequately monitor and enforce affirmative marketing requirements; the state’s administration and regulation of rental assis- tance programs; and the state’s encouragement of local barriers to the development of affordable housing, including municipal veto laws, residency preferences, and exclusionary zoning. Ms. Price will also review and summarize the studies and reports prepared by or presented to the state during the past 40 years indicating the growth of racial and economic segregation, the role of government action in contributing to segregation, and the opportunities open to the state to remedy the problem. In her testimony, Ms. Price is expected to rely on United States census data and published and unpublished reports by state agencies, including but not limited to the Department of Housing and its predecessors, the Office of Policy and Management, the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, the Department of Transportation, the Connecticut General Assembly, and reports or testimony regarding housing, land use and transportation sub- mitted to the state by private organizations. Ms. Price is expected to complete her review by June 1, 1991. In addition to the areas of testimony set out above, plaintiffs’ experts are also expected to interpret and comment on the testimony and research of other experts, including both plaintiffs’ and defendants’ experts. With respect to documents listed herein, plaintiffs have included some of the primary sources upon which these experts base their opinions, but have not provided a comprehensive list of all documents reviewed or relied on. If any other additional areas of testimony are identified for the foregoing experts or other documents upon which they primarily rely are identified, plaintiffs will identify such testimony and documents in a timely fashion, pursuant to the parties’ Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Disclose Expert Witnesses filed December 3, 1990. Wesley W. Horton Moller, Horton, & Fineberg 90 Gillett Street Hartford, CT 06105 Julius L. Chambers Marianne Lado Ron Ellis NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. 99 Hudson Street New York, NY 10013 Respectfully Submitted, ww. JPY TER Philip D. Tegeler Martha Stone Connecticut Civil Liberties Union Foundation 32 Grand Street Hartford, C7 06106 Wilfred Rodriguez Hispanic Advocacy Project Neighborhood Legal Services 1229 Albany Avenue Hartford, CT 06112 John Brittain University of Connecticut School of Law 65 Elizabeth Street Hartford, C7 06105 - Bi Helen Hershkoff Jenny Rivera John A. Powell Puerto Rican Legal Defense Adam Cohen and Education Fund American Civil Liberties 99 Hudson Street Union Foundation New York, NY 10013 132 West 43rd Street New York, NY 10036 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that one copy of the foregoing has been mailed postage prepaid by certified mail to John R. Whelan and Diane W. Whitney, Assistant Attorney Generals, MacKenzie Hall, 110 Sherman Street, Hartford, CT 06105 this yr day of March, a a 1991. Philip D. Tegeler