WILLIAMS v. STATE BD. OF ELECTIONS

No. 88 C 2377.

718 F.Supp. 1324 (1989)

Paul L. WILLIAMS, Anthony L. Young, and Miguel Del Valle, Plaintiffs, v. STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.

June 30, 1989.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Michael P. Seng, John Marshall Law School, Chicago, Ill., for Paul L. Williams.

James C. Craven and Donald M. Craven, James C. Craven, P.C., Springfield, Ill., for Paul L. Williams, Anthony L. Young and Miguel Del Valle.

Terry McDonald, Asst. State's Atty., Sup'r Federal Litigation Unit, Chicago, Ill., for Stanley Kusper.

Michael Levinson, Chicago Bd. of Elections, Chicago, Ill., for Chicago Bd. of Election Com'rs.

Roger P. Flahaven, Atty. Gen. of Ill., Chicago, Ill., for State Bd. of Elections, et al.

Barry T. McNamara, D'Ancona & Pflaum, Chicago, Ill., for Paddy H. McNamara.

James J. Stamos, Chicago, Ill., pro se.

Michael J. Hayes, James R. Carroll and Bart T. Murphy, Asst. Attys. Gen., Chicago, Ill., for Daniel P. Ward, Wm. G. Clark and Alan J. Greiman.

Sidney Z. Karasik, Asst. Atty. Gen., Chicago, Ill., for Daniel P. Ward and Wm. G. Clark.

Susan Getzendanner, Eileen A. Kamerick and Charles F. Smith, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Chicago, Ill., for Francis S. Lorenz.

Jerold S. Solovy, Jeffrey D. Colman, Barry Sullivan and Marshall J. Schmitt, Jenner & Block, Chicago, Ill., for Harry G. Comerford.

Dan K. Webb, Paul P. Biebel, Jr., Steven F. Molo, Jennifer G. Brown and Richard Wm. Austin, Winston & Strawn, Chicago, Ill., for Kenneth L. Gillis.

Raymond F. Simons and Joseph A. Spitalli, Simon & Spitalli, Chicago, Ill., for Roger Kiley.

Thomas R. McMillen, Evanston, Ill., for Roger S. Barrett.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

GRADY, Chief Judge.

Defendants have moved for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiffs are unable to satisfy one of the "preconditions" established by the Supreme Court in Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30, 106 S.Ct. 2752, 92 L.Ed.2d 25 (1986), for a vote dilution claim under Section 2 et seq. of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. We grant the motion.

THE FACTS

The plaintiffs in...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases