Correspondence from Lani Guinier to Lazar Palnick, Esq. Re Sherpell v. Humnoke

Correspondence
May 12, 1986

Cite this item

Correspondence from Lani Guinier to Lazar Palnick, Esq. Re Sherpell v. Humnoke preview

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

Matter
- Lani Guinier Correspondence
Case
- Lani Guinier Correspondence
U.S. state
- General
Collection
- Legal Department General
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 97bd46d0-e992-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873

Cite this item

Legal Department General, Lani Guinier Correspondence. Correspondence from Lani Guinier to Lazar Palnick, Esq. Re Sherpell v. Humnoke, 1986. 97bd46d0-e992-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/f0c964f6-e85d-4a27-aaf1-86c1b3b25e70/correspondence-from-lani-guinier-to-lazar-palnick-esq-re-sherpell-v-humnoke. Accessed November 03, 2025.

Copied!

    Lesa,EDrenseH' NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EOUCATIONAL FUND, INC.

99 Hudson Street, New York, N.Y. 10013o(212) 21$'1900

May L2, 1986

Lazar Palnick, Esq.
c,/o John W. Walker, P.A.
L723 Broadway
Little Rock, AR 72206

Re: Sherpell v. Humnoke

Dear Lazarz

In view of our recent discussions regarding moving in
the district court to re-open the remedy hearing to offer
additional evidence of the Section 2 factors and perhaps, as
well, to challenge the efficacy of a remedy that retains one
at large seat, you may want to look at a district court
opinion from Texas, Political CiviI Voters Organization v.
Citv of TerrelI, 555 F. Supp. 338 (N.D. Texas 1983). The
discussion at p. 348 is particularly helpful of how plaintiffs
proved racially polarized voting even though there was only
one polling place.

Letrs talk soon.

Sincerely yours,

c,/r,^-P;/**
c. Lani Guinier / d

CLGlmgw

Contributions are deduttible lm U.S. ineome tarpurposes

The NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCAIIoNAL FUND is not part ol the National Association lor the Arlvancement ol Colored People although il
was lounrled by it and shares its commitment to equal rights. LDF has had lor over 25 years a separate Board, program, stafl, ollice and budget.

Copyright notice

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.

Correspondence from Lani Guinier to Lazar Palnick, Esq. Re Sherpell v. Humnoke

Matter

Case

U.S. state

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in