Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's Order Dated December 7, 1977; Affidavit of Rebecca L. Ross

Public Court Documents
January 9, 1978

Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's Order Dated December 7, 1977; Affidavit of Rebecca L. Ross preview

6 pages

  • Case Files, Hatcher v. Methodist Hospital - Hardbacks. Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's Order Dated December 7, 1977; Affidavit of Rebecca L. Ross, 1978. 6fd11e8b-5484-f111-ab0f-7c1e527d528a. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/cba5a1b1-e09c-4288-8e7c-8884d79ddf5d/opposition-to-motion-for-reconsideration-of-the-courts-order-dated-december-7-1977-affidavit-of-rebecca-l-ross. Accessed October 10, 2026.

    Copied!

     [||f585cf41-7511-4322-985e-9d29278c487c||] Ee 

          

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

HAMMOND DIVISION 

BERNICE TERRY, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

No. H 76-373 Vv. 

METHODIST HOSPITAL OF GARY, 

INC. , et al., 

Defendants. 

  

RICHARD GORDON HATCHER, 

et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

¥ No. H 77-154 

METHODIST HOSPITAL OF GARY, 

INC. , ot al., 

N
a
t
”
 

N
a
?
 
N
t
 

N
t
 

Na
at
? 

ai
t?

 
a
t
 

u
t
 

u
t
 

a
 

a
 

a
i
 

u
l
 

S
u
t
 

u
i
 

u
t
 

a
 

i
l
 

u
t
 

i
?
 

“
n
u
?
 
“
i
t
 

i
?
 

Defendants. 

OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

OF THE COURT'S ORDER DATED 

DECEMBER .7, 1977 
  

Defendant, Joseph Califano, Jdr., Secretary of the 

Department of Health, Education and Welfare, by his under- 

signed attorneys, hereby opposes defendant Methodist Hospital 

of Gary, Inc.'s motion to reconsider this Court's Order 

setting trial in this action for March 13, 1978. The 

grounds for this opposition are that the Secretary would be 

unable to fully participate in trial without additional time 

for discovery and that the investigation team needs the 

additional time to complete its civil rights investigation 

of Broadway Methodist and Gary Methodist Hospital. 

   



  

In support of this Opposition, the Court is respectfully 

referred to the affidavit of Rebecca L. Ross, attached 

herewith. 

Respectfully submitted, 

  

    

  
G 00m Poles [ale 

BARBA ALLEN BABCOCK 

Assistant Attorney General 

        

    

  

FRED W. GRADY 

Assistant United States Attorney 

Ros 
BARBARA B. O'MALLEY 

  

  

REBECCA IL. ROSS 

Lon, J (Bh 
ANN F. COHEN 

Attorneys for Defendants 
Attorneys, Department of Justice 
Washington, D.C. 20530 
Tel: (202) 739-2230 

  

OF COUNSEL: 

Jeffrey Champagne 
Department of Health, Et 

Education and Welfare 5 

Marvin G. Garvin 
Regional Attorney - = 

Edward L. Koven - 
Assistant Regional Attorney ue 
Department of Health, Education 

and Welfare 
200 South Wacken Drive 
13th Floor 
Chicago, Illinois 

   



  

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

HAMMOND DIVISION 

BERNICE TERRY, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

Vv. No. H 76-373 

METHODIST HOSPITAL OF GARY, 

INC., ef als, 

Defendants. 

  

RICHARD GORDON HATCHER, 

et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

Vv. No. H 77-154 

METHODIST HOSPITAL OF GARY, 

INC., et al., 

N
a
t
”
 

N
e
”
 

S
a
 

N
a
”
 

N
a
’
 

S
a
 

S
n
 

a
”
 

u
t
?
 

S
a
?
 

s
t
 

a
 

a
?
 

P
o
u
t
?
 

N
u
 

N
a
i
 

N
a
t
 

u
t
?
 

N
u
t
 

N
a
t
’
 
S
t
 

m
a
?
 

u
t
”
 

Defendants. 

AFFIDAVIT OF REBECCA L. ROSS 
  

I, Rebecca L. Ross, declare that: 

1. I am an attorney with the Department of Justice and 

I represent Joseph Califano, Jr., Secretary of the Department 

of Health, Education and Welfare in the above-captioned 

cases. 

2. On January 5, 1978, I received defendant Methodist 

Hospital of Gary, Inc.'s Motion for Reconsideration of the 

Court's Order Dated December 7, 1977. 

3. As stated in defendant Califano's original Motion 

for Reconsideration of December 5, 1977 Trial date, filed 

with this Court on September 30, 1977, defendant Califano 

requested an extension of time so that the administrative 

review, now underway, may be completed. 

 



  

4. The investigative team has been diligently and ex- 

peditiously working on the complex task of gathering and 

analyzing data. Much of this data has been submitted in a 

form which does not readily fit into a computer system and 

therefore requires a great deal of time to decipher. 

5. In order to complete its civil rights review of 

Broadway and Gary Methodist Hospital the investigative team 

will need, at a minimum, the time afforded it in this Court's 

December 7, 1977 Order. It is anticipated that the civil 

rights review as to Broadway and Gary Methodist Hospital 

will be completed by trial date. 

6. Defendant Califano will need the additional time 

allowed by this Court in its December 7, 1977 Order to 

complete discovery. 

7. After the parties received the December 7, 1977 

Order, a discovery schedule was arranged among all the 

parties based upon the March 13, 1978 trial date and the 

February 20, 1978 pretrial date. 

8. Any change in that schedule at the present time 

would prejudice defendant Califano's ability to participate 

in the trial. 

9. As the revised schedule now stands, counsel for 

defendant Califano have been diligently pursuing their 

discovery in this case. There has been no delay in pursuit 

of this discovery process. 

10. The Stipulation signed by all parties in this 

action and approved by this Court December 7, 1977 was in no 

way conditioned upon a December 5, 1977 trial date. The 

contents and effect of that stipulation, as stated in paragraph 

l of the Stipulation, are to remain effective "until this 

 



  

Court has entered a final judgment  ., . . or until a final 

decision is reached in the highest Court of Appeals to which 

such a judgment is appealed, whichever date is later." 

ll. As discussed in the Joint Motion for Continuance 

of National Causes of Action filed this date, counsel for 

defendant Califano and plaintiffs have entered into settle- 

ment negotiations on the national causes of action. Extensive 

discussions have occurred and necessarily must continue to 

take place. 

12. Although counsel for defendant Methodist Hospital 

of Gary, Inc. has alleged monetary damages resulting from 

the delay of this trial, it was upon the request of the 

hospital's attorneys that the two applications for federal 

financial assistance for the two additional facilitites were 

treated together. Mr. Sayers has been informed that HEW 

would individually review the applications to facilitate 

implementation of the Gary plan. No such request has been 

made. 

13. Defendant Califano also believes that bifurcation 

will expedite the resolution of the allegations against 

Methodist Hospital of Gary, Inc. due to the "enormity of 

ordering and structuring any remedial relief" as stated in 

this Court's December 7, 1977 Order. Defendant Califano 

believes the results of the pending civil rights investigation 

will aid the Court in resolution of these issues. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing 

is true and correct. 

  

buco 3 Gloss Qo 8.1778 
REBECCA L. ROSS 

Counsel for Defendant 

Department of Health, Education 
and Welfare 

Dated: January 8, 1978 

 



  

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
  

I hereby certify that copies of the Opposition to 

Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's Order dated 

December 7, 1977 have been served this Gy day of January, 

1978 to: 

by hand-delivery: 

Ms. Beth J. Lief 

10 Columbus Circle 

Suite 2030 

New York, New York 10019 

Mr. Julian Allen, Jr. 

2009 Broadway 

Gary, Indiana 46407 

Mr. Bruce Sayers 

Hodges, Davis, Greenberg, 

Compton & Savers 

5525 Broadway 
Gary, Indiana 46401 

and by first class mail: 

Ms. Marilyn G. Rose 

Ms. Christine B. Hickman 

1757 N Street, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20036 

Michael Schaefer 

Assistant Attorney General 
of Indiana 

219 State House 

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 

Goleesn (Boss 
  

REBECCA L. ROSS [||f585cf41-7511-4322-985e-9d29278c487c||] 

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

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.