Draft Order to Proceed with Planning, Provide Assistance, and Scheduled Hearings

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

RONALD BRADLEY, et al.,

v .

Plaintiffs,

WILLIAM G. MILLIKEN,
Defendants,

and
DENISE MAGDOWSKI,

Defendants-Intervenors,
and
ALLEN PARK, et al.,

Defendants-Intervenors,
and
KERRY GREEN, et al.,

Defendants-Intervenors,
and
WAYNE COUNTY INTERMEDIATE 
SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al.,

Added Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER REQUIRING THE PANEL TO PROCEED WITH 
FURTHER PLANNING, THE PARTIES TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE, 
________  AND HEARINGS TO GO FORWARD ________

Pursuant to the Orders and Opinions of the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in this cause 
issued June 12, 1973, en banc,

IT IS ORDERED:
1. The panel previously appointed by the District 

Court shall proceed with its studies and planning to develop 
a final plan of desegregation pursuant to the guidelines 
promulgated by the Court of Appeals in Part VIII of its Opinion 
of June 12, 1973-

2. The parties, their agents, employees, successors 
and all others having actual notice of this Order shall cooperate 
fully with the panel in its assigned mission including, but not



limited to, the provision of data and full and part-time 
assistance as requested by the panel. The State defendants 
shall provide and/or withold support, accreditation, funds 
and otherwise take all actions necessary to insure that 
local officials and employees cooperate fully with the panel.
All reasonable costs incurred by the panel shall be borne by 
the State defendants; provided, however, that staff assistance 
or other services provided by any school district, its employees 
or agents, shall be without charge and the costs thereof shall 
be borne by such school district.

3. Within 20 days of the entry of this Order, all 
parties will have the opportunity to file responses, or additional 
responses, with the Court and the panel, to the reports 
previously submitted by the panel and the State Superintendent 
pursuant to the Court’s Order of June 14, 1972.

4. Within 75 days after the entry of this Order, 
the panel shall file a plan of desegregation, including, 
but not limited to, reports on actual pupil assignments and 
all aspects of transportation required. During this period of 
time, all parties are invited to develop any alternative plans 
of metropolitan desegregation to accomplish the complete and 
effective desegregation of the Detroit Public Schools.

5. Twenty-five days after the filing of the plan and 
reports required herein, the parties shall file complete legal 
and practical objections and any alternatives to such plans, 
supporting briefs, and memoranda detailing all proofs 
(including witnesses and demonstrative exhibits) to be offered
at any hearing in this cause.

6. Within 25 days thereafter, the parties will have
the opportunity to file replies to such objections and alternatives 
as are submitted and detailing all proofs (including witnesses 
and demonstrative exhibits) to be offered at any hearing in 
support of such reply; the parties shall also file any objections 
to the admissibility of evidence detailed by other parties. Ten 
days thereafter, the parties may respond to the objections go 

admissibility of any evidence, as well as object to the admissi­
bility of evidence newly detailed.

-  2 -



7. Five days thereafter, hearings on all relevant 
issues raised shall commence following a pre-trial conference
to sharpen the issues and consider the admissibility of evidence.

8. Nothing*herein shall be construed or considered as 
a prejudgment of the appropriate desegregation area for pupil 
and staff assignment or other factors necessary to accomplish 
complete relief for the violation found. This order merely 
sets forth a procedure by which the Court and all of the parties 
may consider the issues in the context of actual plans, alterna­
tives and objections and the relevant and admissible evidence.

9. Any proofs not detailed by memorandum as set forth 
above shall not be received in evidence except as justice,
and the need to permit fair rebuttal, require. In the context of 
the present proceedings, state defendants shall bear the initial 
burden of going forward, followed by the local defendants 
and plaintiffs. During
the course of this hearing, any party against whom relief is 
sought, including school districts which heretofore have 
intervened and school districts which hereafter may become 
parties to this litigation, will be afforded the opportunity 
to offer additional evidence, and to cross-examine available 
witnesses who previously have testified, on any issue raised 
by the pleadings, including amendments thereto, as may be 
relevant and admissible to such pleadings; provided, however, 
that any and all such evidence and cross-examination must be 
detailed in the memorandum as set forth above.

10. Pursuant to the opinion of the Court of Appeals, 
however, consideration of any new organization and governmental 
structure over any desegregation plans ordered will be deferred 
until the legislature has had a reasonable opportunity to act; 
the present organizational and governmental structure shall
be maintained over any desegregation plan ordered except to 
the extent any modifications are required to insure the 
workability of any desegregation plan ordered.

11. To the end that the foregoing schedule can be 
fully met, discovery may proceed against any party on entry 
of this order.



• ■* #
12. This schedule of proceedings is subject to 

alteration pursuant to the order previously filed referring 
this matter to the legislature for its consideration. Pursuant 
to the remand by the Court of Appeals and the order previously 
entered in this cause referring this matter to the legislature, 
this schedule is promulgated to permit expeditious, effective 
and prior action by the legislature and is subject to such 
appropriate action by the legislature.

United States District Judge

- 4 -
T> 3