Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss; Application of the United States for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae; Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae

    ' 't 3't6-{1.

rN THE UNITED STATES DTSTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRTCT OF NORTH CAROLINA

RALEIGH DIVTSION

crvrl AcTroN }ro. 81-803-crv-5

RALPH GINGLES, €t dI.,

Plaintiffs,
VS. ANSWER TO SECOND SUPPLEI4ENT TO

CO}TPLAINT

RUFUS EDMfSTEN, etc., et dl,

Defendants.

FTRST DEFENSE

The complaint, as supplemented, fails to state a claim
upon vhich relief can be granted.

SECOND DEFENSE

The Defendants in the above-captioned action answer the
allegations contained in the second supplement to com.plaint as

follows:

1. The alleqations contained in paragraph 105, to the
effect that the court has jurisdiction over the claims in the
second supplement to complaj-nt pursuant to the same statutes
that give the court jurisdiction over the original compraint,
28 u.s.c. s1331 and s1343 and 42 u.s.c. S1973c, are admitted.
Defendants deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 105.

2- The allegations contained in Paragraph 105 are adnitted.
3. with respect to paragrapli Lo'l , it is admitted that

following an objection by the United States Department of Justice
pursuant to 55 of the Voting Rights Act, the General Assemhly

repealed the october, 1981 apportionment of the North carolina
House of Representatives contained in Chapter 1130 of the Sessj-on

Laws of 1981 and the Ju1y, L981 apportionment of the North Caro-

lina Senate contai-ned in Chapter 821 of the Session Lar.rs of IgB1.

with respect to those allegations contained in paragraph 107

which arrege that the repeal of chapter 1130 and chapter g2I of
the Session Laws of 1981 r,ras brought about h1z, or was in any ltray

intended as a response to, the filing of this action, those arle-
gations are specifically denied.



-2-

4. The allegations contained in Paragraph 108 are admitted.

5. The allegations contained in Paragraph 109 are denied.

6. The allegations contained in Paragraph 110 are d.enied.

7. The allegations contained in Paragraph I11 are admitted.

8. The allegations contained in Paragraph Ll2 are denied.

9. The allegations contained i-n Paragraph 113 are denied.

10. The allegations contained in Paragraph 114 are admitted.

11. The allegations contained in Paragraph 115 are denied.

12. The allegations contained in Paraqraph 116 are denied.

13. The allegations contained in Paragraph 117 are admitted.

L4. The allegations contained in Paragraph 118 are denied.

15. The allegations contained in Paragraph 119 are denied.

16. I^Iith respect to Paragraph 120 , it is admitted that the

Plaintiffsrattempt to base a claim on 52 and 55 of the Voting

Rights Act of 1965r 6rs amended, 42 u.s.c. 51973 and S1973c. To

the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph l2o

differ from the response herein, those allegations are denied.

17. The allegations contained in paragraph 121 are denied.

18. With respect to Paragraph L22, it is admitted that
Plaintiffs' attempt to found a claim for relief on 42 tr.s.c.
51983 to enforce the Thirteenth Amendment, the eoual protection
clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Fifteenth Amend-

ment to the united states constitution and pursuant to 42 u.s.c.
51981. To the extent that the allegations containerl in para-

graph L22 diffei from the r.=por,". herein, those allegations are

denied.

19. The allegations contained in paragraph 123 are denied.

20. The allegations contained in paragraph 124 are denied.
21. The allegations contained in paragraph ]-zs are denied,

22. The allegations contained in paragraph 126 are denied.

23. The allegations contained in paragraph t27 are denied.
24. The allegations contained in paragraph r2g are denied.
25. rt is admitted that follov,ing an objection hy the rJnitecl

States Department of Justice pursuant to 55 of the \roting F.ights

Act, the North Carolina General Assembly repealecl Chapter 894 of



-3-

the sessions Laws of 1981, which rvas the July, r9g1 Apportion-

ment of North Carolina's Congressional districts. With respect

to the allegations contained in Paragraph 129 which a11ege that
the repeal of chapter 894 was brought about by, or r^ras in any

way intended as a response to, the filing of this action, those

allegations are specifically denied

26. The allegations contained in paragraph 130 are denj-ed.

27. The allegations contained in Paragraph 131 are admitted..

28. The allegations contained in paragraph r32 are denied.

29. The allegatj-ons contained in paragraph 133 are denied.

30. The allegations contained in your second paragraph 133

are deni-ed.

31. ft is admitted that Plaintiffs attempt to found their
clai-m for relief on. the Fourteenth .Frnendment and to bring their
action pursuant to 42 u.s.c. 51983 to enforce the Thirteenth

Amendment, the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amend-

ment, and the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitu-
tion, 42 U.S.C. 51981, and 52 and 55 of the Voting Rights Act

of 1965r dS amended, 42 Il.s.c. s1973 and S1973c. All alIega-
tions contained in Paragraph 134 which are inconsistent lrrith the

response herein are deni-ed.

WHEREFORE, Defendants having fu11y ansr.rered each and every

allegation contained in Plaintiffs' Second Supplement to Complaint,

and having set forth their defenses in their earlier pleadings,

pray that this Court deny the rblief requested and dismiss the

Complaint with prejudice.

Respectfully submitted this the 2-b day of tlarch , 1982.

RUFUS L. EDMISTEIq
ATTORNEY GENERAL

Attorney Generalrs Office
North Carolina Department

of Justice
Post Office Box 629
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Telephone: (919) 733-3377

tv Attorney/fteneral
or Legal Afflairs



-4-

Attorney for Defendants

Norma Harrell
Tiare Smiley
Assistant Attorneys General

John Lassiter
Associate Attorney General

.ferris Leonard
KathLeen Keenan
Jerris Leonard & Associates, P.C.
900 17th Street, N.I{.
Suite 1020
l{ashington, D. C. 20006
Telephone: (202) 872-L095



1..

F5-

CERTTFTCATE OF SERVTCE

r hereby certify that r ha.ve this day served the fore-coing

Answer to Second Supplement to Complaint upon Plaintiffs I attorneys
by placing a cotr'4r of said Pleading in the United States post Off ice,
postage prepaid, addressed to:

J. Levonne Chambers
Leslie Winner
Chambers, Ferguson, Watt, Wa11as,

Adl<ins & Ful1er, p.A.
951 South Independence Boulevarcl
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202

Jack Greenberg
James M. Nabrit, III
Napeoleon B. WiLliams, Jr.
I0 Columbus Circle
New York, DIew York 10019

This tne JG day of March , IgA2.