Trial dates change for lawsuits facing 'U'

Detroit judges have pushed back the trial dates for both lawsuits challenging the University's use of race in admissions at the request of legal counsels on both sides.

The University's attorneys and the plaintiffs' legal team asked for additional time to complete the pre-trial discovery phase for both lawsuits, citing that the discovery of large amounts of information has warranted the push backs.

Originally, the trials were scheduled to take place mid-summer. The lawsuit against the College of Literature, Science and the Arts, brought on by two white applicants Oct. 14, 1997, has been rescheduled for September or October. The Law School suit, filed Dec. 3, 1997 on behalf of one white applicant, is scheduled for late August.

"As the case nears the end of discovery - the period for gathering all the facts and opinions that either side will use to prove its case - it is not unusual to have a status conference with the judge to see if the original schedule sill makes sense," University spokesperson Julie Peterson said, adding that the discovery process has taken longer than the judges expected.

"It's a minor scheduling issue," said Terry Pell, the lead attorney for the Center for Individual Rights, the Washington, D.C.-based law firm that filed the suits on the plaintiffs' behalves.

Pell said the added time will be helpful to the lawyers because "it frees up everybody's schedules."

The judge makes the final decision about an appropriate trial date, Pell said.

Judges give adequate time "to permit the parties time to develop the issues," he said. "The court is not inclined to rush."

Pell added that changes in trial dates are common because the courts cannot always predict how much time legal counsels will need to gain accurate and convincing information.

"Both parties informed Judge (Patrick) Duggan that they believed more time was necessary to prepare the undergraduate case for trial," Peterson said. The University lawyers "asked Judge (Bernard) Friedman for a similar extension."

The rescheduling moves the opening of the trials from the University's summer session to the fall semester, when most students will be back on campus after summer break.

"These trials are going to take a lot of hard work whenever they are," Peterson said, adding that in terms of impact on staff and administrators she did not think the later date would not make a difference.

Peterson said the LSA case, although filed first, is going to trial later because "different judges run their trial calendars differently."

Miranda Massie, the lawyer representing a group of students who have tried unsuccessfully to intervene in the Law School lawsuit, speculated that since the LSA case involves a larger scope of students, it requires more preparation time.

She also said the extra time in both cases allows the facts to develop fully.

"From our perspective the more time there is for full development before the trial the better because the full truth and the full facts are on the side of affirmative action," Massie said. "However, we are certain that the University will not put into the record absolutely necessary evidence of inequality in education and of bias in the admissions process as a whole," she added.

Massie said she and the team of lawyers working on the LSA intervention are trying to speed up appeals to intervene made on behalf of two groups to the Sixth Circuit Court in Cincinnati, Ohio. The parties wishing to intervene are appealing Duggan's and Friedman's decision to deny them intervention status, which would give them the same rights as the defendants and plaintiffs.

"We are attempting to expedite our appeal, to speed it up, to ensure that our participation is meaningful, to ensure trial processes are duplicated as little as possible," Massie said.

02-22-99