From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cromartie v. Hunt

United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Eastern Division
Apr 3, 1998
34 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (E.D.N.C. 1998)

Opinion

No. Civ. 4:96-CV104-BO(3).

April 3, 1998.

Robinson O. Everett, Durham, NC, Martin B. McGee, Williams, Boger, Grady, Davis Tuttle, Concord, NC, for Martin Cromartie, plaintiffs.

Edwin M. Speas, Jr., N.C. Dept. of Justice, Special Litigation Section, Raleigh, NC, Tiare Bowe Smiley, State Attorney General's Office, NC Department of Justice, Raleigh, NC, for defendants.

Janie Allison Sitton, Attorney, Voting Section, Civil Rights Div., Washington, DC, for United States of America, amicus.

Adam Stein, Ferguson, Stein, Wallas, Adkins, Gresham Sumter, Chapel Hill, NC, for Alfred Smallwood, intervenor-defendant.


ORDER AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION


THIS MATTER is before the Court of Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction, Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, and Defendants' motion for summary judgment.

Following a hearing on Tuesday, March 31, 1998, the Court took these motions under advisement and now issues the following ruling:

1) Finding that the Twelfth Congressional District under the 1997 North Carolina congressional redistricting plan is unconstitutional, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment as to the Twelfth Congressional District.
2) Based upon the Court's finding that the Twelfth Congressional District is unconstitutional, it is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction and Plaintiffs' request for a permanent injunction as contained in its complaint are GRANTED. Defendants are hereby ENJOINED from conducting any primary or general election for congressional offices under the redistricting plan enacted as 1997 N.C. Session Laws, Chapter 11.
3) It is further ORDERED that the parties file a written submission no later than Wednesday, April 8, 1998, addressing the following issues:
a) An appropriate time period within which the North Carolina General Assembly may be allowed the opportunity to correct the constitutional defects in the 1997 plan, in default of which the Court would undertake the task.
b) A proposed election schedule to follow redistricting which provides for a primary election process culminating in a general congressional election to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 1998.

This order and permanent injunction are entered by a majority of the three-judge panel. Circuit Judge Sam J. Ervin, III, dissents. Memoranda with reference to this order will be issued as soon as possible.


Summaries of

Cromartie v. Hunt

United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Eastern Division
Apr 3, 1998
34 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (E.D.N.C. 1998)
Case details for

Cromartie v. Hunt

Case Details

Full title:Martin CROMARTIE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. James B. HUNT, Jr., in his…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Eastern Division

Date published: Apr 3, 1998

Citations

34 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (E.D.N.C. 1998)

Citing Cases

Hunt v. Cromartie

But it is inappropriate when the evidence is susceptible of different interpretations or inferences by the…

Harris v. McCrory

' Ex. 126, Tab 3, “97 House/Senate Plan A”.) The plan was yet again challenged in court, and in Cromartie v.…