Griffin v. Dugger Brief in Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari

    (

STATE OF ALABA].,IA )
COUNTY OF }IONTGOI.IERY)

AFFIDAVIT

OF

VANZETTA PENt{ DURAi{T

Before o€, the undersigned l{otary publlc, tlrsonally
appeared vANzETTA PENN DURANT, rho being knorn to ae, lnd rho

by me first being duly suorn on her oath, deposes rnd says as

follows:

t'1y name is Vanzetta Penn Durant; my resl-
dence address is 321 t{orth Anton Drive,
l,lontgomery, Alabama 36105; I am in the

solo practice of law with offices at llont-

gomery, A'labama. I have been actively
engaged 'in the practice of law in the state
of A'abama s'i nce 19i5. I am a member of

!he Bar in good standing of the State of
7)
Alabana and the State of New york, and I

have been admitted to practice before the

.,nited States Cistrict Court for the

Northern Distri ct of Alabama, the Unjted

States District Court for the Hiddle

Distrj ct of A'abama, the Uni ted States Dis-

trict Court for the Southern District of

New York, the Un i ted St ates Court of

Appeals for the Second C'ircuit, and the

United States Court of Appeals for the

4il'I



(

E leventh Clrcu it. A substanti al portlon of

my practice has conststed of the greprra-

tion for tri rl and trial of clvi I rights
cases and ln cases lnvolvlng the lltlgatlon
of the constitutional rl ghts Df

individua'ls. j...'

The successful preparation and trl|tt
Iof c ases of th i s nat ure necessrrtrl,

invo'lved the inspection, copyi ng, exanlna-

tion, !oalysis and evaluation of r
substanti al number of documents tnd

transcripts of prior proceedings. The

customary fees ch arged for thi s type of

work in Federal Courts in the State of

A'abama range from approximately $60 per

hour to over $100 per hour.

I am of the opinion that during my

fxperience as a private practitioner, I

have developed a degree of skill in the re-

presentatjon of clients in 1itigation
involving constitutional law issues, and

that my skill and experjence facil'i tated my

representation of the Petitioners in this

case and contr i buted to the success of

their Petitions.
The Petjtioners and I generally agreed

-2-



that I rould be compensated pursuant to 4?

U.S.C. Section 1988. The petitioners xere
indigent at the time therr petitions rere
fi led and rere granted leave by this Court
to file in Forma pauperrs. The petitioners

have not paid any fees or costs in thls
case. To that extent, the fee arrangenent

between the pet i t i oners and me can Se

deemed to have been conti ngent.

I h ave not prev i ous ly represented

either Petitioner nor have I had any

professjonal relationship with them other
than as their attorney in this case. As a

result of my representat.ion, petitioner
Bozeman's conviction was vacated, and the

obvious stigma of a criminar conviction was

thereby removed. Moreover, in asmuch as pe-

,ltioner Bozeman h,as a parolee, the
restraints upon her daily act.i vities, her

aSSoCjatiCns, her travel, and the exerCiSe

of other cjvil rights were removed. peti_

tioner hilder,s conviction was not vacated

as a result of my representation, however,

thi s Court,s 0rder and Memorandum 0pinion
are tantamount to a reversal of her convic_
tion, thereby raising a substantial Iikeli-

I,!'
I

- 3-



hood that she too ri ll be free of the
stigma lmposed by r crininal convrctron and

the resu lting restraints on her dai ly
activities, her associations, her travel,
and her exercise of other civil rights.

In securing relief in these cases, the
following services were performed by ne:

04/osl83

04/06/83

04/2s/83

0s/0s/83

06/0r/83

06/08/03

06/29/83

07/01/83
77

07 /'05l83

07/07/83

07/20/83

07 /26/ 83

08/ 08/ 83

Te'lephone conf erence wj th Ms. Guinier
Telephone conference wi th Ms. Guinier
Te'lephone conf erence wi th l{s. Guinier
Telephone conf erence w.i th l,is. Guinier
Telephone conference wi th Ms. Guinier
Telephone conference with Ms. Guinjer
Review of documents and available files
Telephone conference with Ms. Guinier

]elephone conference with United StatesDistrict Clerk,s 0ffice and with Ms. g.o*,re i ssues; rev j ew of documents; p.epa.a_tion of Motio! to Appear pro Hic'Vite;telephone conference with Ms. Guiniei'
Research of issues; organization of f i le
Telephone conference wjth Ms. Guinier;telephone conference with Mr. Copetuni
( Law C lerk ) ; revi ew of documents

Research of issues; review of documents

Ielephone conference with Ms. Guinier;
te lephone conference wi th Mr. Mi I lei(L.w Clerk)

,'al

.1

.2

.2

.2

E

i.1
.1

1.5

2.5

1.0

1.5

-4-

.5



09/02/83

09 / 08/ 83

09/le/83

09/22/83

0s/30/83

10/03/83

t0/04/83

10/06/83

lt/08/83

t2 /01 / 83

12/0?/83

i2/15,,33 ))

\2/?3, i3

0l/03/34

01/24/84

01/27/84

01/30/84

02/17/84

Rev i ew of Court 0rder denyi ng itot i on toDismiss

I.] qphone conf erence ri th lrlr . Knopf(LDF counsel); letter to llr. xnopi; re-view of 0rder; telephone conferenci ,itt
l{s . Brown re tr an sc i. i pts

Telephone conference with ils. Guinler; let_ter to I'ls. Guin i er re 0rder

Telephone conf erence w.ith i|s. 6uinler . -,

Tg'lephone conference with Ms. Guinier tnd 
;

with ilr. Miller; review of pleadingi anJmemoranda

.3

.5

.5

.4

Preparation of llotions to produce; tele_phone conf erence with l,ls. Guiniei' l.O

Iglephone conf erence wi th 1,1r. ili I ler redisposition on i4otions; telephon. ioniI._
en ce wi t h Ms . Brown .4
Telephone conf erence wj th i,lr. l,1i I ler .l
Letter to Ms. Guinier; telephone conferencewith Mr. M'i I ler re transcriilts .5

Telephone conference wj th Mr. Mj I ler retranscripts .l
Telephone conference with Mr. M.i ller .1

Review of f ile docun:ents; telephone con-ference with fir. MiIler ie date forhearing .4

Letter to Ms. Guinjer ,Z

Telephone conference w.i th Ms. Guinier .4

Telephone conference wjth Ms. Guinier .Z

Telephone conference wi th Ms. Guinier andwith Mr. Miller .5

Telephone conference with Ms. Brown andMs. Guinier

Telephone conference with Ms. Guinier re

1.0

-5-

.3



office
TOTAL SERVI
$80.00 per

EXPENSES

RENDERED - 37.7 at

.5

.5

4.5

6.7

.2

3.4

. .4

.4

.3

4.8

$3,016.00

Summary Judgment |1otion

Telephone conference rith lls. Brorn andwith llr. tliller re amendment

Conference rith tls. Guinier; revier ofpleadings and memoranda

Hearing on Summary Judgment ilotions; con-
ferences rith i{s. Guinier and rith petl-
tioners

Letter to Ms. Guinier .
I

Conference with l,ls. Guinier and with
LDF l{ew York office; review of Judg-
ments and 0rders; te'lephone conf erinces
wi t h I'lrs . Bozeman and I'lrs . t{i lder

Letters to clients
Te'lephone conf erence w'it h Ms . Gu i n i er ;letter to l*1r. Seay

Telephone conferences wi th Ms. Guinier

Prepar at'ion of t'lot j on f or A'lowance ofAttorney's Fees and Costs Petition; tele-
phone conferences with Ms. Gujn.ier, Ms.
Brown, and with United States Clerk's

02/21/84

03/0 t / 84

03/02/84

03/0s/84

04/t3/84

04/16/84

04/ts/84

04/24/84

04/2s/84

CES
hour

))

The following expenses wer
and reasonably incurred 'in
in this case up to and inc
25 April 1984:

Copying - 567 cop'ies at
$0 . 25 per co py

Postage

Long distance telephone cal

TOTAT SERVICES RENDERED AND
EXPENSES

necessari 1y
securing relief
uding

$141.75

44.18

55.09

e

I

$3 ,257 .02

ls

-6-



STATE OF ALABAMA )
COUNTY OF }1OI{TGOIIERY )

.I , the unders i gned VANZETTA PENt{ DURANT,

certify that I have read the above and foregoing llot

Affidavit and know the contents thereof and that the

and thi ngs set forth therei n are true and correct.

v

Sworn to and

day of Apri 1, 1984.

subscri bed before me this the J^5/

;7

-7 -

he reby

ion and

natters