Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
J osftM'73
UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT~blfTI:JE
;; I
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEW
YORI<'.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
73C 1529
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTIONNO.____
)
)
v.
COMPLAINTFOR INJUNCTION
PURSUANTTO FAIR HOUSING
ACT OF 1968. 42 U.S.C.
3601, et seq.
_____________
Defendants.
The United
of America alleges:
This is an action
1.
3613 seeking
Title
States
28 U.S.C.
3.
brought
to remedy violations
2.
)
)
Rights
1345 and 42
Defendant
u.s.c.
and elsewhere.
stockholder
of this
14,000
Defendant
action
in the Eastern
District
numerous apartment
dwelling
units
Defendant
Management Inc.
The defendants
policies
and practices
of
buildings,
Management Inc.
business
under
which is a New
transact
3601,
3613.
doing business
at least
Housing Act,
to 42 U.S.C.
of the Fair
York corporation,
totalling
pursuant
of Trump
of Trump
for the
4.
The apartment
buildings
are dwellings
within
managed
the meaning
3602(b).
The defendants,
and employees,
of race
of the Fair
dwellings
of dwellings
with respect
of the Fair
different
to the rental
804(c)
804(d)
because
of Section
of dwellings
limitation
and color
of the Fair
804(b)
3604(b),
which
of
3604(c).
(d) Representing
in fact
3604(a).
to be made statements
to the rental
based on race
804(a)
and conditions
of dwellings
in violation
a preference,
inspection
because
with respect
and color
build-
and negotiate
of Section
terms
42 U.S.C.
apartment
with persons
in violation
and color,
Section
persons
(b) Requiring
nation
against
of their
to rent
and color,
indicate
of their
ways, by:
the rental
of race
the actions
have discriminated
(a) Refusing
of race
through
in the operation
among other
for
and complexes
that
to persons
dwellings
and rental
so available,
of the Fair
because
of race
2 -
are
of Section
3604(d).
for
u.s.c.
6.
ceding
The defendants'
paragraph
conduct
and practice
by the defendants
to the full
secured
by Title
(b) A denial
of 1968, 42
raises
VIII
u.s.c.
an issue
and successors
with
those
denial
importance.
that
their
in active
the Court
employees,
concert
against
color,
with respect
any person
religion
to any right
on
or national
secured
by
3601
~~
(b) Failing
affirmative
their
tices.
past
steps
or refusing
to correct
discriminatory
Plaintiff
to take
further
- 3 -
adequate
the effects
policies
prays
of
and pracfor
such
enter
agents,
and partici-
from:
of race,
the Fair
Housing Act
public
prays
(a) Discriminating
the basis
Housing
of rights
3601 ~~,which
of general
any of them,
origin,
of persons
the defendants,
and all
of
of the Fair
of the Fair
WHEREFORE
the plaintiff
an Order enjoining
enjoyment
3601 ~~;and
to groups
by Title
of resistance
VIII
granted
in the pre-
constitutes:
(a) A pattern
rights
pation
described
additional
may require,
bursements
relief
as the interests
together
of this
with
of justice
the costs
and dis-
action.
ELLIOT L. RICHARDSON
Attorney
General
/Uq'tJL
..tf;,it,~
ROBERTA. MORSE
United
States
Attorney
FRANKE. SCHWELB
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
SUMM~NS
IN A CIVIL.
ACTION
OCT29 1973
..,.~- ..,
FOR THE
1:[;;_
J::AS.'l'EfilLD.!8-TRICT __QF...NEILY.ORK.
CIVIL
ACTION FILE
NO ... --
2
Plaintiff
SUMMONS
v.
rn
C.)
Defendants
To the above named Defendant
Attorney
plaintiff's attorney
for
the
Eastern
, whose address is
District
225 Cadman
of
New York,
Plaza
East,
Brooklyn,
New York,
11201,
20
of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgement by default
will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
'~~~; !/!/:;,
Date:
October
Note:-This
15, 1973
[Seal of Court]
U.S.
I N S TR U ~ T
roN
A N D P R O C E S S R EC O R D
INSTRUCTIONS:
See "INSTRUCTIOi,J FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS
BY TIIE U.S. MARSHAL" on the reverse of the last (No. 5) copy of th.is
fonn. Please type or print legibly, insuring readability of all copies.
Do not detach any copies.
PLAINTIFF
COURT NUMBER
TYPE
DEFENDANT
FRED C. TRUMP e
NAME OF INDIVIDUAL.
Summo
COMPANY,
o:W~
-c -/ s-~ 7
CORPORATION,
FRED C. TRUMP
ADDRESS
AT
SEND NOTICE OF SERVICE COPY TO NAME AND ADDRESS
r-----------------------------------A. Brachtl,
AUSA
Courthouse
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
New York
11201
BELOW:
Henry
L __________________________________
NO.
OTAL
1
oFI
I CHECK
IF APPLICABLE:
u. s.
...
..,..
I SHOWIN THESPACEBELOW
AND TO THELEFT
I ANY SPECIAL
.INSTRUCTIONS
OR OTHER
I INFORMATION
PERTINENT
TO SERVING
THE
I WRITDESCRIBED
ABOVE.
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
TELEPHONE
NUMBER
DATE
10
LOCATION
D
NAME
OF SUBOFFICE
OF DIST. TO SERVE
I hereby certify and return that, after diligent Investigation, I am unable to locate the Individual, company, corporation, etc.,
named above within th.isJudicial District.
A person of suitable age and
AND TITLE OF INDIVIDUAL SERVED (I/ not hown above)
ADDRESS
S,6JC)
DATE(S) OF ENDEAVOR (Ue Remarks
if neces.tO"lf)
REMARKS
1. CLERKOF YHECOURT
$ -
U.S.
1 NSTRUCT,
MARSHALS
.JN
AND
INSTRUCTIONS:
See "INSTRUCTIONS FOL
SERVICt.-
PROCESS
RECORD
..RVICE OF PROCESS
BY TIIE U.S. MARSHAL" on the reverse of the last (No. ff) copy of this
form. Please type or print legibly, insuring readability of all copies.
Do not detach any copies.
PLAINTIFF
UNITED STATE
RICA
DEFENDANT
Sl:R.VE
AT
ADDRESS
,------------------------------------
Henry A. Bracht!,
u. s.
AUSA
East
11201
J INFORMATIONPERTINENT
TO SERVINGTHE
_______
INSTRUCTIONS:
TELEPHONE
OTAL
1
oFI
IF APPLICABLE:
L------------------------------------~l_WR_IT_D_S_~_IB_~_~_O_VE_.
SPECIAL
J CHECK
Courthouse
NO.
LOCATION
NUMBER
DATE
OF SUB-OFFICE
OF DIST. TO SERVE
I hereby certify and return that I have personally served, have legal evidence of service, or have executed as shown in
"REMARKS," the writ described on the individual, company, corporation, etc., at the address shown above or on the individual,
company, corporation, etc., at the address inserted below.
DI
NAME
hereby certify and return that, after diligent investigation, I am unable to locate the ihdividual, company, corporation, etc.,
named above within this Judicial District.
A person of suitable age and
AND TITLE OF INDIVIDUAL SERVED If not ,hown abooe)
discretion then abiding In the
ADDRESS
$
DATE(S) OF ENDEAVOR
TIME
.'ftM
PM
REMARKS
1. CLERKOF THECOURT
.3.oo
o/
$dt.&o
u. s.
MARSHALS SER1,,,,CE
AND
INSTRUCTfON
PROCESS
RECORD
INSTRUCTIONS:
See "INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS
BY THE U.S. MARSHAL" on the reverse of the last (No. 5) copy of this
form. Please type or print legibly, insuring readability of all copies.
Do not detach any copies.
COURT NUMBER
PLAINTIFF
7s-'3-/S,;;;i...9
FRED,. c. TRUMP, et
~
SERVE
NAME OF INDIVIDUAL,
TYPE OF WRIT
DEFENDANT
al.
COMPANY,
Summons
CORPORATION,
&
Comolai nt
TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC.
ADDRESS (Street
2SSttl&Wf:cit;P~iii;'11~a&1ny8iiy,
Na Y.
(s,113- #oo)
I<
~E~~ ~021.::E_O~
~E~~C= ,::O_!'~
~~~M3f~D _!,~D~~~ ~E~O!'.:._
__ -~ !~7
ni:=.::
~f::
:em~~
0
AT
,-
__
Henry A. Brachtl,
AUSA
u. s. Courthouse
225 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn,
New York 11201
NO. I
ITOTAL
10F1
L------------------------------------~I_WR_IT_D_~_a_,e_m_ABO_VE_.
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
Defendant
Fred C. Trump is Chairman of the Bd. of Directors,
Donald Trump is president
of the above named corporation.
TELEPHONE
and
NUMBER
DATE
/0
- /,:::s- ..
rv( I hereby certify and return that I have personally served, have legal evidence of service, or have executed as shown in
~ "REMARKS," the writ
described on the individual, company, corporation, etc., at the address shown above or on the individual,
company, corporation, etc., at the address inserted belmv.
'
hereby certify and return that, after diligent investigation, I am unable to locate the individual, company, corporation, etc.,
above
Judicial District.
D Inamed
within this
DATE(S) OF ENDEAVOR
(Use llemarb if
neca:laf'!I)
TIME
AM
PM
REMARKS
<
1. CLERKOF THECOURT
NO\/2 1913
"'1'" 'IL
..
.f\
,1.i.
t ..
'"-r.n.....-~
.'........
-.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
NOTICE OF
APPEARANCE
Plaintiff,
Civil Action File
No. 73 C 1529
and
Defendants.
sIR
PLEASE
TAKE NOTICE,
Donald Trump,
and Trump
entitled
action,
Management,
and demand
hereby
havebeen
that copies
Fred
appear
retained
of all papers
C. Trump,
in the above
as .attorneys
in this action
be
stated
below.
I
Yourizl', etc.
//
'1
'
v.:
,.Jc;_.'?
... . ,;_)ic
...
d..._.,/l~~,L
I11
'I
I
Nov7
_. --------~
1973
..
'
STIPULATION
Plaintiff,
and
Defendants,
IT IS HEREBY
the United States
Attorney
Dated:
Bacon,
AND AGREED,
District
by and between
of New York,
to the complaint
November
STIPULATED
attorney
or otherwise
is extended
move with
to and including
26, 1973.
Robert A. Morse
United States Attorney
Eastern
District of New York
5'c>
o;f!..DER.7>
~
ge1>ot:.L fJ<.::
#Fu.,
df=!-~
J,
S,
D.
T-
role' I::
C/--
Elt:EO
U. S. DISTRICT
COURT
E.D.N.Y
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK*
TIMEA.M
...........
- ............
,v ... ..
P.M
.........
~ .._..,
.............
.
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff,
NOV
151973
)
)
v.
)
)
FRED C. TRUMP,DONALD
)
TRUMPand TRUMPMANAGEMENT
)
INC.,
)
PLAINTIFF'S FIRST
INTERROGATORIES
TO
DEFENDANTS
____________
Defendants.
TO THE DEFENDANTS
, FRED C. TRUMP,DONALD
TRUMP,ANDTRUMP
MANAGEMENT
INC.:
Plaintiff
Interrogatory
requests
separately
oath,
in accordance
Civil
Procedure.
rogatory
that
papers
the defendants
and fully,
in writing
If the information
in documents,
of the defendants,
Interrogatory
requested
papers
by attaching
copies
documents,
papers
contained
and specifying
by any Inter-
and answer
the Interrogatory
Interrogatory
or records
the location
in the
of such documents or
to
In
by identify-
copy or photograph.
Rules of
ing those
or records,
and under
or records
the alternative,
answer each
is contained
custody
that
to Plaintiff
papers
to inspect,
These Interrogatories
able
to the defendants,
officers
call
their
of defendant
employees
matter
information
is known or available
another
officer,
answers
all
or agent,
into
information
1. Please
persons
direct
state
or indirect,
please
to
officer,
include
to
in your
employee
employee or agent
to each answer:
and address
of all
ownership
to as nT.M.I."]
respect
is available
which officer,
with respect
and the
If some of the
referred
information
specify
information
with
to a particular
employee or agent,
avail-
and agents,
and other
and please
provided
information
the subject
employee or agent,
for all
interest,
[hereinafter
they acquired
such
interest.
2. Please
of T.M.I.
state
the corporation.
Please
3. Please
in T.M.I.,
directly
state
as described
or indirectly
the date
4. Please
and address
specify
whether
duties
state
any person
of each officer
of
duties.
with an interest
with
If so, please
such supervisory
duties
identify
and explain
performed.
whether
in T.M.I.,
indirect,
real
in any other
of incorporation
each officer's
managed by T.M.I.
or persons
those
and place
estate
- 2 -
direct
or
management or
promotion
estate
company.
interest
apartment
If so,
and its
please
identify
location.
owns an
interest,
at each
said
please
apartment
apartment
indicate
Please
ment building
number of units
complex that
5.
the total
state
or real
in whole or in part,
and with respect
A.
are occupied
by Negro~/
development
by T.M.I.
to each,
The date
state
the apartment
persons.
of each apart-
owned and/or
at anytime
please
at each said
since
managed,
January
the following
1, 1968
information:
or development
two-bedrooms,
C.
and three-bedrooms
by Negroes
as of January
time.
other
indicate
in each building;
in each building
1, 1968, January
by name, address
Please
one-bedrooms,
Please
the date
1, 1969
identify
and dates
occupied
each
of occupancy;
the first
Negro
moved into
each building;
E.
units
Please
set
forth
for rental,
by size,~/
~/ In each Interrogatory
requesting
information
concerning Negroes,
please also indicate
the same information
for Puerto Ricans.
**/ For example, one-bedrooms, two-bedrooms, etc.
- 3 -
January
1973;
F.
Please
state
month, by race,
availability
making inquiry
of an apartment
state
G.
Please
state
for
the
If
available,
written
please
In any event,
the figures
of every prospective
for
of time.
or approximations.
the basis
1,
applications
Whether a formal,
required
also
estimates
the
between January
who submitted
during
figures
concerning
per
provided;
application
tenant
and,
is
if so,
whether
any exceptions
general
policy.
If exceptions
state
frequently
If any applicant
out submittJng
past
address
three
name. race,
the rental
applications
a formal
years,!_/
address
application
indicate
apartments
Please
exceptions.
as a tenant
with-
in the
the tenant's
of the apartment.
for
of every
to make these
written
please
are made
how
surrounding
state
are retained
used throughout
of time between
how long
on file.
copies
answers
H.
to do so, please
of such application
to these
Interrogatories;
of time required
applications.
affected
Please
state
education,
other
factors
deciding
for an applicant
family
whether
status,
to accept
to these
state
exceptions
what qualifications
exceptions.
as a tenant
in the past
three
name, race,
address
an applicant.
are made,
address
If any applicant
without
years,
in
meeting
please
these
indicate
has been
requirements
the tenant's
surrounding
of the apartment;
Please
state
whether
credit
account
to make these
J.
or any
of every person
the rental
into
qualifications
accepted
standing,
children,
or reject
how frequently
have
to be accepted
credit
If exceptions
please
applications;
in terms of income,
age,
have
of individual
indicate
of tenant
what factors
affect
or presently
I.
forms to your
on every prospective
any exceptions
are made
- 5 -
tenant
or background
in the past
and,
three
if so, whether
to this
general
obtaining
please
policy.
credit
state
exceptions
If exceptions
or background
how frequently
to
to make these
exceptions.
been accepted
as a tenant
indicate
Please
credit
reporting
time since
without
a credit
obtained
in the past
the tenant's
name,:mce,
the circumstances
ment.
If any applicant
surrounding
state
whether
please
state
or in writing,
types
are required
of reports
contents
of any
on all
different
the
have
the reports
whether
the same
applicants,
and under what,
types
indicate
whether
of reports
a waiting
so, please
state
whether
there
the buildings
or if there
each apartment
of the apart-
services
whether
maintained
T.M.I.
and
or required;
Please
for all
its
of the reports,
if anY, circumstances
list
address
the services
K.
years,
Also,
are requested
three
the rental
the general
or back-
January
been used.
has
building
- 6 -
is
are selected.
is one central
managed anq/or
is a separate
list
waiting
managed and/or
If
waiting
bwned by
list
for
owned by T.M.I.
Please
describe
met before
waiting
the conditions
an applicant's
list,
new tenants
Please
state
requested
building
list.)
list
an apartment
while
that
(if
utilizes
list
attach
1, 1970, including
and date
of application
In the alternative,
sentatives
these
- 7 -
for
and address
of
but
list.
lists
used since
of each prospective
of the plaintiff
state
a waiting
documents without
no
January
please
applicable)
a waiting
(If
above separately
ten tenants
who has
exceptions.
is maintained,
each apartment
the last
they are
of every person
list
the information
If exceptions
to make these
waiting
all
how frequently
the authority
on the list
whether
Please
is updated
exceptions
to individuals
central
state
are selected
or whether
address
the list
number of persons
list
how often
which must be
race
tenant.
to allow repre-
to inspect
and copy
Procedure.
L.
Please
state
whether
is required
of every
so, whether
any exceptions
policy.
prospective
If exceptions
frequently
If any applicant
address
a security
please
indicate
apartment.
Please
required
of application
to the formal
Please
state
state
indicate
this
exceptions.
withthree
name, race,
the rental
address
of the
is required
the time
it may be submitted
the monthly
whether
so,
rental
subsequent
rates
in these
1968, and, Jf
of every
in the past
surrounding
and whether
one,
or decreases
are made
application;
Please
efficiencies,
how
as a tenant
deposit
or whether
general
to make these
indicate
if
indicate
the tenant's
M.
and,
out submitting
deposit
tenant
years,
deposit
a security
there
rental
apartments.
the reasons
information
for
since
for
January
1,
such changes.
Please
managed by T.M.I.;
N.
Please
describe
used to publicize
utilized,
please
vacant
indicate
advertisements
- 8 -
or formerly
If advertising
newspaper
in since
that
is
T.M.I.
January,
1968,
whether
papers
advertisements
audiences,
if so, please
the approximate
and whether
identify
frequency
T.M.I.
Negro or Puerto
housing
a fair
referrals
is or was ever
rent
available
logo.
present-tenant
referrals
please
explain
the rental
1968.
If any exceptions
or ever
please
indicate
whether
means utilized
If neither
to
advertising,
nor
used since
state
generally
the circumstances
advertising
If present-tenant
the exclusive
apartments.
such exceptions,
newspaper
now contains
contained
this
of all
advertising
Rican
January
procedures
the nature
of all
address
1,
for
who is authorized
to make or allow
such
exceptions;
O.
Please
indicate
job title,
job location,
supervisor
and details
Please
to accept
describe
of T.M.I.
in detail
referred
- 9 -
T.M.I.
immediate
and/or
since
or other
known address,
of employment,
of the duties
applications
last
January
consider
and/or
1, 1968;
the supervision
personnel
to in Interrogatory
that
maintain
No. 5 (0)
and whether
to maintain
racial
records
these
or use racial
persons
codes for
any purpose.
6.
With respect
and/or
managed,
please
state:
A.
in whole or in part,
Whether there
policy
to refuse
for tenancy
of their
state
it
agents
Please
the policy,
to,
January
the nature
including
because
If so, please
please
state
of the change,
state
(It
any steps
taken
to
to resident
managers,
rental
personnel.
the name, race
and last
known address
job location,
duties.
origin.
in detail
1, 1968, including
of persons
was maintained,
instructions
and other
Please
applications
was maintained;
state
employees_ of T.M.I.
of their
or national
implement
since
color
or to dissuade
was made.
limited
owned
classes
If such a policy
the reasons
of all
to accept,
whether
building
from certain
race,
B.
7.
to each apartment
dates
is unnecessary
of time,
to duplicate
in response
any infor-
to Interrogatory
5 (0)).
8.
Please
or ethnic
state
whether
or to consider
- 10 -
have
or members of any
race
or national
origin
are considered,
circumstances
please
surrounding
a change in this
including
Please
and Puerto
state
10.
of all
rental
records
in detail
records
since
or control
lists.
of the plaintiff
documents without
Rules
and date
Please
please
state
and location
1, 1969, in
applications
January
Please
to allow
five
if any
if so,
tenant
years,
population
apartment
presently
number,
living,
in any apartment
of less
if the individual
- 11 -
state
1, 1968, and,
indicate
daily
for
correspondence,
Procedures?
since
in the past
please
the nature
therein,
of each black
owned and/or
each tenant,
and indicate
January
and reason
provide
of occupancy
years,
to inspect
of Civil
circumstances
11.
for a position
the date,
three
including
taken
of the Federal
records
in the past
of action
representatives
of these
in detail
of each black
describe
custody
telephone
ever been
T.M.I.
tenancy,
pertinent
change.
Please
defendants
all
explain
whose application
or national
Has there
the reason(s)
policy.
for this
If race
in detail
If so, please
Rican individual
the disposition
state
this
policy?
the reasons
9.
to employment.
by T.M.I.
than 10%.
For
on a waiting
if so,
list
prior
to being
leased
an apartment,
and
list.
12.
Please
describe
in detail
if any,
housing
opportunity
Department
of Justice
13.
person
Please
who has,
T.M.I.,
after
racial
discrimination
by any agent
interest
in T.M.I.,
January
1, 1960.
of every
oral
If so, please
representing
complaint
to this
Interrogatory,
incident
including,
suggesting
to or about T.M.I.
having
Complaints
by
an ownership
of T.M.I.,
since
and
the details
of the complaint,
to
address
who dealt
of the matter.
give all
made directly
an ownership
of the
the
With respect
details
of each such
limited
to T.M.I.
interest
to:
or
in T.M.I.;
or written,
of
please
having
of every
to any person
sentatives
and race
state
T.M.I.
Complaints
States
1972.
or by any representatives
person(s)
B.
by the United
in employment or housing
A.
contacted
of or any person
complainant,
steps,
to promote e.qual
to the knowledge
T.M:I.,
race
being
made a complaint,'!:_/
regarding
has taken
in October,
state
what positive
managed by
"complaint"
refers
to any information
or alleging
actual or possible
discrimination.
- 12 -
T.M.I.
or by any person
with an ownership
interest
in T.M.I.;
C.
local
Complaints
organizations,
Please
in whole or in part
and/or
give all
necessarily
having
having
B.
been
(as that
concerning
agents?
word
discriminatory
If so, please
including,
but not
to:
whose application
later
or its
managed
initially
made a complaint
Interrogatory)
to the
by T.M.I.
limited
A.
any persons
after
housing
etc.
owned and/or
by T.M.I.
details
or fair
to any building
after
practices
A.C.L.U.,
whether
rights
N.A.A.C.P.,
indicate
as tenants
rejected
civil
including,
Urban League,
accepted
or
14.
state
for
The dates
acceptance
and address
tenancy
of original
and the date
T.M.I.
of each person
was originally
rejected;
application,
tenancy
rejection,
commenced;
C.
personnel
involved;
D.
The reason(s)
the application
was originally
The reason(s)
the application
was subsequently
denied;
E.
approved.
15.
Please
state
of each person
interviewed
to this
Please
case.
and occupation
state
of any person
separately
not interview
- 13 -
in relation
by
race
with
respect
to interview,
to any facts
pertinent
case.
16.
If the answers
to any of these
Interrogatories
and occupation
of any person,
or information
requested
Interrogatory.
Please
must be served
service
race
please
take notice
that
of the foregoing
days after
interrogatories.
Respectfully
ROBERTMORSE
United States Attorney
thirty
submitted,
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
fAJ.,~d. ,di~k~L::ie,
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
CERTIFICATEOF SERVICE
I hereby certify
of the foregoing
fendants
Plaintiff's
were placed
postage-prepaid,
that
Interrogatories
addressed
first-class
to:
ELY E S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
to Demail,
* NOV26 1973 *
TIMEA.M............................
,.....
P.M
....................
.
-againstSTIPULATION
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP,
and TRUMP MANAGEMENT, INC.,
civil
Action
File
No. 73 C 1529
Defendants.
-
United
attorney
States
for
attorneys
which
be,
the
for
to
and
same
for
plaintiff,
the
answer
the
Attorney
and
defendants,
or
otherwise
hereby
the
is
Eastern
Saxe,
that
Bacon,
the
move with
extended
District
to
Bolan
defendants'
respect
and
of New York,
&
Manley,
time
to
the
including
within
complaint
December
3,
1973.
Dated:
::;~~;{~
-
us~
STIPULATION
'i..\).&\n
Action
an\r;IS
(' ~ L,:
\)t.!,.,
. N~
File
73 C 1529
\~l~
,\t.i\1,,
"':,..
Defendants.
: )i>,
IT IS HEREBY
the United States
Attorney
or otherwise
hereby
is extended
of America,
answer
STIPULATED
AND AGREED,
District
of New York,
Bolan
/V6v;"'N:?(.C
u.s.1D.1J:1 .-
Robert A. Morse
United States Attorney
Eastern
District of New York
Attorney for the United States
of America
~efJiZIY;;;;;;;
~
which to
10th, 1973.
., SO ORDERED
Datedt ~~t:t.-r/<-}
attorney
& Manley,
time within
to the complaint
December
by and between
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORTOF
DEFENDANTSMOTIONTO
DISMISS OR FOR A MORE
DEFINITE STATEMENT
in support
complaint
more definite
for
radio,
iscriminated
in renting
action
and
a defendant.
to dismiss
a claim
was all
received
whatever,
the first
of the 15th,
15th while
to hear
ever,
the
or for a
I heard
about
it
to
the Governmert
of my knowledge,
of our apartments,
inasmuch
communication
the subject
listening
I have never,
to the best
in the ~enting
regarding
that
me, my father,
our apartments,
or shown bias
he news report
morning
of October
against
nyone in my organization
In fact,
to state
I was shocked
an action
overnment
also
and says:
statement.
he news on car
point
Inc.,
of our motion
failure
On the morning
o that
deposes
in the above-entitled
as bringing
duly sworn,
matter
as I had not
from the
of the actio~
the
Later
next
day,
Daily
that
on the front
News, there
charged
with
in renting
Government
stories
itself.
I have always
.maintained
but
the
anyone
tried
to rent
respect
the community
result
charges
that
apartments.
not
is unfair
many calls
community
a date,
As is
leaders
year,
has never
expressing
in the
discriminated
answer
they
out in the
before
is no one
location,
charges
not
against
we had received
to have a trial
the national
of surprise
their
be charged
with
community
wire
or
services,
from tenants
have the
same ratio
as a whole.
and
that
lies.
our
The
of minority
Our organization
'$
hit
and letters
our apartments
as exists
substantial
there
apartment
We cannot
stories
fact
tenants
unwarranted
and unjust.
should
that
our tenants,
set
affidavit,
in the press
organization
is
is equal
we have suffered
When these
received
there
of the Government's
name mentioned.
notification
even answer
buildings
of not only
and reputation.
formal
no
We have always
still
the 17th
to see to it
made public,
alleged,
an employee's
Again,
served,
we had been
as a whole.
single
that
were finally
and admiration
As a direct
and unfounded
and the
stating
our apartments.
opportunity
news repo~ts
were headline
bias
day on television
Ws~
-against-
AFFIDAVIT
FRED
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - *
STATE OF N~W YORK~
ss.:
I am a partner
Manley,
attorneys
for
and am familiar
the
the
relief
complaint
can be granted
Government
has failed
upon which
a cause
certain
that
Rules
of Civil
dismiss
relief
the
or for
~rocedure,
complaint
alleged
factual
allegations
of their
ed on the
the
failure
to have been
to support
suit
United
front
page
16,
the
1973,
Charges
to
upon which
statement.
The
in the complaint
and it
a motion
to state
in the DaUy
States
a claim
to no relief.
appears
Under Federd
may be made to
a claim
complaint
violated
action,
of our motion
be granted
12(b),
Rule
for
On October
that
could
Bolan &
herein.
one fact
The Governoent's
statutes
ing
even
be entitled
can be
filing
to state
to allege
will
Bacon,
above-entitled
a more definite
of action
they
of Saxe,
ln support
failure
and says:
deposes
and circumstances
affidavit
for
firm
in the
facts
I make this
dismiss
in the
defendants
with
sworn,
duly
verbatim
upon which
recites
with
the
110
complaint.
the
Government
News with
Bias.
banner
Similar
announced
hmdlines
headlines
They attempted
the
sia tappear
to bring
unlawful
case.
they
did,
they
to coerce
nothing
more.
The request
by the Government
facts
exist
upon which it
definite,
certain
so that
they
The Federal
and specific
Rules
statement
is the
of a cause
of Civil
Procedure
evident
this
"fishing"
do not
a sufficiently
be served
and prepare
provide
for
for
Rule 12(e)
full,
upon defendant
trial.
such a motion
method of obtaining
of action,
is a
exist.
that
Procedure
that
was
and
These facts
do not
answer
proper
action
upon
is merely
case.
complaint
their
of Civil
its
I request
may prepare
served
Government
knows they
In the alternative,
This
If
making a settlement
makes it
the
this
the charges.
interrogatories
can base
to support
into
for
and that
to settle
in the complaint.
the defendants
form of harassment
for
has no facts
would be stated
brought
defendants
a fuller
of the Federal
Rules
states:
"
if a pleading
to which a responsive
pleading
is permitted
is so vague or ambiguous
that a party cannot reasonably
be required
to
frame a responsive
pleading
he may move for a
more definite
statement
before interposing
his
responsive
pleading.
The motion shall point
out the defects
complained
of and the details
desired-,
11
As has been set
hereto
clearly
answer
the charges
of these
shows,
charges
Division
piece
of paper
as a court
discriminatory
alleged
therein
It
of process.
a lawsuit.
use as a press
practices
to properly
an abuse
document.
are unable
attached
statement
be required.
represents
for
the defendants
should
This case
Rights
forth
release,
contains
not
against
blacks
It
The Civil
slapped
and only
one fact
together
secondarily
concerning
the
It
tices
were directed.
or months,
year.
but believe
or not,
largest
such a paper,
it
to the defendants.
the filing
of this
the litigation
the Civil
in the next
been a surrender
that
and the
substitution
under
an efficient
to community
maintenance
present
of the
type
decree
and future
service
rights
terminate
dictated
life
have resulted
the capitulation
Department
would have
on all
of the
levels
for
many
interests
of our
entitled
to the
-- who are
we offer
by
of the defendants,
organization
to quickly
of the Welfare
of the
after
Such a capitulation
pressure
because
conduct
one announcing
corporation.
of
with costs
would undoubtedly
--
substantially
tenants
-- not
subservience
tote
Department.
When it
"capitulation"
no case,
became apparent
an amazing
t~e Civil
Ri~hts
of :'Lnterrogatorles,
per month,
availability
to Def.
This
any
litigant
dismissed,
a "consent"
release
persons
into
Divisiont
the management
Welfare
of days
the language
Division's
document
prac-
even designate
If a private
the defendants
by entering
press
field.
Rights
threadbare
of the defendants
years.
does not
would be summarily
approached
Rights
tributed
it
to copy verbatim
in its
The Civil
They immediately
for
it
no statement
is one of the
filed
the statute,
it
It
building
p,
thing
Division
asking
by race,
F');
occurred.
Realiz:tng
served
such question
us with
, ." (Pltf's
this
that
it
fifteen
concerning
first
the
interrogatories
reporting
had
pages
as the "number of
making inquiries
of an apartment
4, 5,
that
company
rates
for
apartments.
in these
the reasons
servlce
efficiencies,
Indicate
decreases
so,
of their
for
since
such changes.
January
State
managed by 'l'.M.I.
"Indicate
last
location,
dates
of the duties
and/or
of' every
consider
act
The reading
in effect,
as to whether
against
front
8,M);
job title,
supervisor
on rental
applications
since
of Particulars
had ever
words,
after
us to find
to it.
in advance
which is atta~hed
had a disagreement
having
smeared us on the
s charges
the Government
urge that
these
of their
are totally
defendants
unf.ounded.
to compromise
. _,,...
.,
,10'.I
/1 ~~.v.
/ .
L ,,A./:ti' .k'..-1,
~-
,
SCf1W1,:ii'11r,i1?)-1:1 te ol New'(ork,_,
' .i;:,hc, a 72220
.No.. 31-88 York County_.,./
Quai,11.ect
Marcb3_0.:i.~
;;.~::S
~~ornrniss1on
there
their
the
could
even
practices.
apartments
reprisal.
\t
complaint,
the opportunity
do not
and that
the
The complaint,
the defendants
v~
or given
Government
out whether
of the charges
in the renting
Government
Janual'.\Y
I respectfully
discriminate
to accept
is now asking
to show that
job
and details
questioned
and
of the Bill
asks
anyone.
Government
force
"(p.
for
o).
1, 1968 (p,9,
hereto
person
and/or
information
known address,
immediate
or
1968, and, if
1,
this
of employment,
the monthly
there
rates
"State
J);
one,
whether
rental
(p.5,
rights
was all
for
by
geared
fear
of
toi
NEVI
YORK
TUESD,"-;Y, OCTOBER
15, l'.iJ
II
n -r
,:
/\ //
~,.
,,/J,
.. -,
&')('
'
!~i
:J
I .r1,-,rfl.ord .ilcr11~.-?,1
~A.0 -~'"""'
:.r:i
'
-'--J~>t.J J.4,..;...,.
ur .h
.. ..,..,:.,.... -
,r-,,,
.ou1s rn \,,,1ry:
I
I
:J
1
e.tion, a major 01.vr:ercn<l man~f::;tockholder and
corpora.fo j,:
of rnal estate her~.
lbuard chairman, w~re also
i:orporation,
which ownsrnan\ed
. Department's civil-rights diviSekin0 an injunction to haltlsion, termed the suit the secondj
a!le;ed ct/;;crirninatory practlses,,major rental discrimination acthe Government contended that tion begun by the department!
Trump Management had .re- in the last two years.
i
fused to ri;nt or negotiate rantThe first involved S:mmel Ji
1
0
als "because of race and colon. Lefrak, one of the country s
It also charged that the comColumn2
pany had required . different Continued on
rental terms and conditions be- ; .._____
cause of race and that it had
misrepresented ,to blacks 'that
apartments were not available. i
At the corporation's main of. 1
fice, 600 Avenue Z in Brooklyn, .
Danald Trump, president, de- '
nied the charges.
1
, "They are absolutely ridicu1ous/' he said. 0 \Ve never have
discriminated, and we never
wou.ld. There have been a num
ber of local a.ctions against u~.
'======
\'
.,:
,I
)
)
", \~ITTtl;f
ti f@~;ffi\1~11-~ri,,,
U $ ~1Mil~IEFi~~EJ~siiJ~Charges~ ias iiri Rf:;tbig
,.
r<
.....
f0
;.
'
.9
f?i1~\r~-~~-
a ~KH~~diW_
By ROBERT KAPPSTATTER
'
Charging discrimination against blacks, the U.S. Department of. Justice. filed
a civil suit yesterday against th_eTrump Management Corp., which owns and operates
more than 14,000 apartments in Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island.
The suit chnrges specifically
thnt the firm refused to rent or
negotiate
renting
units
with
blacks;, th:it it required different
rental terms and condilions because o! race, and that it misrepresented to blacks that apartn1ents were not avail:ible. The
suit asks Brookl_>-n:F'edera) Court
to order the alleged discriinination ended.
..
Named as 'defendants .in the
nit, beside. the firm, "ere Donaid Trump, president and his
fatlu:r Fred, the principal .. stockholder and chairman of the
board. The Trumpa, who own and
operate 39 apartment buildin1<s,
most of them. in Coney Island,
Jam.:iica Estate3 end For~st
Hills, were charged ,vith violating the Fair Housing Act of:196S.
Second Such Action
J
)
{
~
i
.)
===========--
{'
~
>
.-1
.
'1
I
';r
I
,.
"
rn
DIST,UCT
DISTRICT
t:zw YORK
OF
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
. '}
v.
,;
) ~\
FRED C. TRUNP, DONALD
)
TRUMPand TRUMPMANAGEMENT
)
INC.,
PLAINTIFF'S FIRST
INTERROGATORIES
TO
DEFENDANTS
)
)
)
Defendants.
requests
separately
oath,
in accordance
Civil
Procedure.
.rogatory
that
papers
and fully,
Interrogatory
in documents,
documents
the alternative,
requested
papers
copies
or papers
ing those
documents,
papers
contained
and specifying.
and under
Rules
in the
and answer
or
the Interrogatory
Interrogatory
or records
the location
of
by any Intcr-
to
In
by identify-
'-.
each
of such documents
and by indicati!.1g
copy or photograph.
answer
or records
by attaching
to your answers
or records,
in writing
If the information
of the defendants,
which those
the defendants
is contained
custody
that
to Plaintiff
papers
to inspect,
-r 1 ,,"
...
,.
officers
..,
,.i..,~-,.,,,)-i"-
..,.,.
""'i
..,
v L~ '"
.;..
of defcncant
t-,
.,
.-_,ti
..,. "- .)
--
[cJ~-
"'
.:_111 info::::::.:ition
Trt!I::p ~-!anagc~cnt:
avail-
with respect
Inc.,
to --
the
subject
information
employee
matter
or agent,
officer,
answers
all
or agent,
and other
information
1. Please
state
is available
please
include
which officer,
employee
and address
of all
ownership
in your
to each answer:
11
to
employee or agent
to as "T .M.I.
officer,
'
referred
with_respect
or indirect,
If some of the
to a particular
f.nforination
specify
information
persons
inquire.
employee or agent,
and please
provided
which they
is known or available
another
direct
into
interest,
[her_einafter
they acquired
such
interest.
2. Please
state
the date
corporation.
Please
3. Please
in T.M.I.,
directly
--
state
as described
o~ indirectly
'
the person
in detail
and place
and address
specify
whether
of incorporation
of each officer
each officer's
any person
of
duties.
with an interest
managed by T .M. I.
I so,
please
identify
'
or persons
those
4. Please
duties
state
with
such supervisory
and explain
performed.
wheth_er any person
or management interest
in T.M.r:,owns
indirect,
real
in any other
duties
estate
f
- 2 -
with
an ownership
any interest,
development,
.direct
or
management or
pro~otion
co~pany.
estate
interest
apartment
and its
complex
or which
interest,
said
If so,
identify
location.
in which an interest
apartment
complex
Please
state
or in part,
and.with
respect
opened
B.
development
by T.M.I.
at anytime
please
state
the apartment
as of January
of the present
other
each building;
E.
units
managed,
January
1, 1968
information:
or development
one-bedrooms,
Please
in each building;
in each building
1, 1968,
time,
by name, address
January
Please
1, 1969
identify
and dates
occ.upied
each
of occupancy;
..
D., Please
--tenant,
since
the.following
and three:..bedrooms
individual
said
of each apart-
owned and/or
by Negroes
at each
occupancy;
two-bedrooms,
andas
at each
by Negro !!._/persons.
occupied
estate
The date
for
number of units
to each,
A.
\\.
are
or real
in whole
owns an
I . ..,
that
ment building
total
such person
complex
5.
the
of any other
In the case
r
please
apartment
please
indicate
than
the
date
an employee
the
first
of T.M.I.,
Negro
moved into
set
forth
for
rental,
by size,
::!:_I
!!._/ In eacninterrogatory
requesting
information
concerning
please also indicate
the same information
for
::!:_IFor example~ one-bedrooms,
two-bedrooms,
etc.
/J -
con:n,
on-
bct~c~n
J, 1959 and
Janu~ry
Novecber
1,
1973;
F.
Please
month,
state
by race,
availability
making
of an apartment
an apartment
exact
figures
provide
please
state
of every
written
prospective
If
available,
please
In any event,
G. Whether a formal,
required
time.
or approximations.
the basis
the
applications.for
estimates
state
1,
who submitted
during
the
between January
( Pl;:3-se also
i
number of people
concerning
per
provided;
application
tenant
and,
is
if
so,
whether
any exceptions
general
policy.
If exceptions
state
frequently
'
and the name,
person
race,
If any applicant
out submitting
past
--name,
address
three
race,
the rental
applicat:i.ons
a formal
years;'!:_/
address
indicate
with-
in the
the tenant's
of the.apartment.
Please.state
for apartments
are reta:i.ned
I
- 4 -
exceptions.
as a tenant
of every
to m~ke these
written.application
please
are made
how
used throughout
of time between
surrounding
how long
on file.
If you arc
copies
a~tach
answers
of
to these
to do so, please
such application
of time required
for
applications.
affected
Please
the processing
Please
of individual
indicate
applications;
what qualifications
for an applicant
as a tenant
of income,
credit
status,
children,
in terms
education,
other
factors
deciding
If
family
whether
exceptions
please
exceptio~s
and job
to accept
to these
state
accepted
as a tenant
three
name, race,
address
'
the rental
years
account
an applicant.
are
made,
who.has
address
the authority.
If any applicant
without
meeting
please
these
indicate
has been
requirements
the
tenant's
surrounding
of the apartment;
Please
are
person
years,
in
exceptions.
in the past
checks
or any
to make these
J.
standing,
qualifications
of every
have
to be accepted
into
or reject
how frequently
title
your
of tenant
age,
to
the p'rocessing
or presently
I.
forms
Interrogatories;
H.
for
willing
state
whether
credit
on every
'
.any exceptions
prospective
are made
I
- 5 -
tenant
or background
in the
and,
past
if
three
so, _wll.ether
Please
dcscrib<.::
met before
waiting
the
conclitions
an applicant's
list,
new tenants
the
list
Please
are selected
state
be
on the
is
nwnber of persons
cust
na~c goes
how often
which
updated
list
the
bn
whether
---------
all
f.:r.'orr,.
the waiting
i ,
list
or whether
except~ons
to individuals
state
the authority
list
the information
requested
building
list.)'
list
the last
while
that
please
utilizes
no
state
for
a waiting
a waiting
list
(If
above separately
ten tenants(if
an apartment
ex~eptions.
is maintained,
each apartment
Please
they are
to make these
waiting
If exceptions
how frequently
central
of
but
list.
lists
used since
January
1, 1970, including
the name, address,
race
'
and date of application
of each prospective
tenant.
In the alternative,
'the plaintiff
sentatives
.,..
these
doctuuents without
to allow
to inspect
repre-
and copy
'.
Rule 34 of the Federal
Rules
I
of Civil
Procedure.
L.
Please
state
whether
is required
of every
so, whether
any exceptions
policy.
exceptions
If
frequently
they
a security
prospective
deposit
tenant
and,
general
indicate
if
- ------
how
are made
of every
;\
person
If any applicant
out submitting
years,
a security
please
and the
deposit
indicate
Please
required
of application
M.
Please
state
indicate
three
name, race,
the rental
it
address
of the
is required
the
it may be s_ubmitted
the monthly
whether
1968, and,
if
state
information
so,
rental
time
subsequent
rates
in these
this
past
and whether
one,
or decreases
with-
application;
Please
efficiencies,
tenant's
indicate
or whether
to the formal
in the
surrounding
exceptions.
as a tenant
deposit
the
circumstances
apartment.
to make these
there
rental
the
apartments.
reasons
for
for
for
since
such
1,
January
changes.
Please
managed, by T.M.I.;
N.
used
Please
describe
to pub_licize
utilfzed,
pie'ase
,,_
vacant
indicate
or formerly
If advertising
advertiseriients
ir.i since
is
T .M. I.
Januaiy,
1968,
- 8 -
"~:,.
. -7
-":- :".
, ....
_. -- .
-.,,-'
'-"' _....
<~- - .
'
whether
papers
advertisements
audiences,
if
so,
the approximate
please
Negro or Puerto
identify
frequency
Rican
each such-newspaper,
all
newspaper
advertising
and whether
contained
T .M. I.
a fair
referrals
are
adverti,sing
housing
l~go.
i;
l
,,
If present-tenant
please
is or was ever
rertt
available
the exclusive
apartments.
present-tenant
referrals
please
explain
the
1968.
If any exceptions
procedures
to
advertising,
used since
to the normal
state
generally
circumstances
of each person
whether
means utilized
If neither
rental
the
indi.cate
nor
or ever
,.
this
them,
no,;.r contains
rental
January
procedures
the nature
of all
address
who is authorized
1,
for
and employment
po!ition
to make or allow
such
exceptions; '
O.
job
Please.indicate
title,
Job location,
supervisor
authority
on rental
P.
Please
of T.M.I.
over
persons
'-.
to accept
describe
referred
- 9
,,
known address,
in detail
T.M.I.
immediate
of every
and/or
since
or other
last
of employment,
of the duties
applications
officers
the
dates
and details
--act
person
consider
who
and/or
Janua_ry 1, 1968;
th~ supervision
personnel
to in Interrogatory
that
maintain
No. 5 (0)
/
and whether
they
to maintain
racial
have ever
instructed
records
these
or use racial
I
t
persons
codes
i
!!
for
!i.
any purpose.
6.
With respect
f:
owned
state:
A. Whether there
policy
to refuse
tenancy
of their
state
race,
to accept,
color
or to dissuade
classes
or national
such a policy
whether
it
limited
agents
7.
to,
Please
employees
January
state
including
please
please
state
of the change,
taken
to
to resident
the.name,
race
employed
job location,
(It
so,
_managers,
rental
personnel.
of T.M.I.
duties.
the nature
in detail
1, 1968, including
state
because
If
was maintained,
instructions
and other
of persons
origin.
the policy,
applications
was main.tained;
If
Please
B.
"implement
mation
,,.,/
was made.
since
from certain
the reasons
of all
~
1
1/
for
of time,
each employee
listed,
of employment
and details
to duplicate
any infor-
is unnecessary
known address
for
dates
and last
in response
to Interrogatory
5 (0)).
8.
Please
state
ever
had a policy
not
racial
or ethnic
group,
- 10 -
consider
have
or members of any
race
or national
origin
I
(
t
are
considered,
circu.11stances
a change
please
surrounding
in this
including
Please
and Puerto
for
this
If race
in detail
policy.
If so,
state
Rican
state
this
policy?
the reasons
9.
to employment.
all
pertinent
Has there
please
explain
c~ange.
-----~
individual
or national
of each black
who h~s-applied
for a position
\
of any kind with
the
T.M.I.
disposition
the reason(s)
of all
years,
for
T.M.I.
describe
telephone
logs
in detail
records
custody
records
please
state
the rejection.
rental
tenancy,
and indicate
Please
defendants
three
whose application
10.
in the past
since
or control
of action
January
including
taken
and waiting
the nature
1, 1969,
in
applications
therein,
lists.
and location
for
correspondence,
daily
to allow
representatives
of these
documents
of the Federal
records
without
Rules
an Order
of Civil
have been-destroyed
the date,
circumstances
-1-1.
and date
Please
and which
each tenant,
please
1, 1968,
five
tenant
years,
indicate
if
. ,.-
~~,
....--~---~,--~-
if
so,
in any apartment
of less
the individual
11'
and,
if any
apartment
number,
.
presently
living,
state
destruction.
in the past
under Rule 34
Please
for'such
of each black
owned and/or
of the Court
Janu~ry
and reason
buildings
Procedures?
since
provide
of occupancy
to inspect
than
by T.H.I.
10%.
For
/
on a waiting
if
so,
for
list
prior
how long
to being
leased
the tenant's
an apartment,
and
list.
Please
12.
if
any,
describe
in detalil
housing
opportunity
after
what positive
ha's taken
bei1z
steps,
to promote
ci,ntacted
equal
by the.United
States
Deparfment
of Justice
13.
person
Please
who has,
T.M.I.,
state
to the knowledge
made a complaint,~/
regarding
racial
and race
of every
oral
discrimination
T. M. I. , by any agent
1972.
in Octo~~r,
or written,
to or about
in employment
of or any person
having
of
T.M.I.
or housing
by
an o,mership
interest
in T.M.I.,
1, 1960.
, January
race
of every
whom it
or by any representatives
If so,
please
compl.:.inant,
person(s)
complaint
to this
Interrogatory,
incident
including,
A.
and
the details
of the complaint,
to
give
all
made directly
having
an ownership
of the
details
limited
the
respect
of each such
to:
to T.M.I. or
interest
in T.}i.I.;
of the matter.
Complaints
sentatives
address
who dealt
please
to any person
B.
T.M.I.
Complaints
since
state
.
representing
of T.M.I.,
managed by
"complaint"
refers
to any information
or,alleging
actual or possible
discrimination.
12! .~
/
or by any person
T.H.I.
with
an o~-mership
interest
in T .N. I.;
C.
local
Complaints
agency
Commission
state
or to any local
organizations,
civil
includi1l'g,
Human Rights
rights
.1:fut.not
or
or fair
limited
housing
to the
Urban League,
14.
Please
N.A.A.C.P.,
indicate
A.C.L.U.,
whether
etc.
any persons
have ever
accepted
as tenants
to any building
owned and/or
in whole
or in part
by T.M.I.
having
rejected
and/or
is
used
in the
after
having
preceding
after
Interrogatory)
managed
initially
made a complaint
been
been
(as
that
concerning
word
discriminatory
rental
give
practices
all
by T.M.I.
details
necessarily
whose app'lication
later
If
so,
please
including,
but
not
to:
B.
agents?
limited
A.'
or its
for
The dates
acceptance
and address
tenancy
of original
and the
date
T.M.I.
of each person
was originally
rejected;
application,
tenancy
rejection,
commenced;
C.
personnel
involved;
D.
The reason(s)
the application
was originally
The reason(s)
the applicatio:n
was subsequently
denied,_;
E.
appro1J.ed.
15.
Ylease
state
of each person
~nterviewed
to this
~lease
case.
and occupation
race
and occupation
state
of a_ny persoA
separately
not
the name,
interview
irCrelation
address,
race
by
- 13 -
,..--.,..-._.......,~ Y--:.,.,,...":'",,....._,'"'."r"..~:':.~r.
..~~;~~:~..,'7.'c:"7.--:-:--:.;':':-:~.:~--:---:-.:-""-:'~--_;,:r~~T,?"''v:--:-~':-."'?~-"..-,,,,-_...,~
..._.--,--,...,..~.,
......
-"' ........
~-. -,:--:,,-<';__.,..,..._...,"".""-:-.,-.-,........J~.""":"'~-..,:-:-o--f
with
respect
to any facts
If
the answers
to any bf these
.?
1 our
Interrogatories
representatives,
please
of any person,
or information
requested
Interrogatory.
Please
must be served
service
pertinent
case.
16.
state
to interview,
take
notice
that
of the foregoing
within
days after
interrogatories.
Respectfully
ROBERTNORSE
United States Attorney
thirty
submitted,
SCH\lELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
FRANK E.
d ,,J~~~L--ie
~oce-
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
....-
'
I
'\
: :'
. -.. .
..
'
"..
.;.,...J;...:..,.,...;;_7\~;.,.i:c:\,.>L-.
.
.
'
0
'
.-..-..y..
,.
-"",~.._-,.-~._~
.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby
of the foregoing
fendants
certify
Plaintiff's
were placed
postage-prepaid,
that
Interrogatories
addressed
first-class
to Demail,
to:
Errs
.1oL~::~efu,J(_~
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
-'
,,..
- '
.
----...--.....
.~-
SUMMONS
tN A CIVIL
ACTION
FOR THE
\
UNITED
STATES
CIVIL
ACTION
FILE
No ...---
OP AMERICA,
Plaintiff
Silltli.'i!ONS
v.,.
FRED C. TRUMP , DONALD TRUMP
and TRUMP M..l\J.'IAGEM.ENT, INC. ,
,Defendants
States
Attorney
piaintiff's attorney
for
the
Eastern
District
225
Cadman
ROBERT A .. HOR~E,
of
New York,
Plaza
East,
Brooklyn,
United
New York,
11201,
;_. ,..! \ .. ::
20
of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail 'to do so, judgement by default
mil be ta.ken against you for _the relief demanded in the complaint.
A
Q.,,.c-1'~?/
'
October
/J
1'5,
/,l".
f~
[3eal of Cou::-tJ
197 3
i.
I
UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURTFOR THE
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEW YOR..l(
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
)
)
)
)
)
.)
)
)
.)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
'.FRED C. TRUMP, DONALDTRUMP
. and TRUMP MANAGEMENT INC. ,
------
COHPLAINTFOR INJUNCTION
PURSUANT
TO FAIR HOUSING
_______________
Defendants.
.)
;.
J; .
,! ,'./
The United
1.
!l
This
3613 seeking
Title
VIII
States
is
an action
to remedy
of the
of America
brought
violations
Civil
alleges:
Rights
of the
Act
u.s.c.'
to 42
pursuant
Fair
Housin~
of 1968,, 42
Act,
u.s.c.
3601,
action
under
i.
2.
28
u.s.c~
This
Court
has
u.s.c.
1345 and 42
. --3;;- Defendant
jurisdiction
Tr.imp
ManagementInc.,
doing
}lew York,
manages
and operates
totalling
at
and elsewhere.
stockholder
business
in
Fred
and Chairman
Inc.
Defendant
Management
Inc.
The defendants
transact
business
policies
and pr2ctices
in
C. Trump is
Donald
Fred
a New
of
buildings,
principal
of Directors
Trump is
is
District
apartment
units
of . the Board
Management
which
the Eastern
numerous
14,000 dwelling
Defendant
3613.
York corporation,
least
of this
of Trurrm.
president
.
of
Trumn
for
the
'
Tr...unp
... ~
i.
'
4.
The apart,.ient
by T,::-urapHanagement
of 42 U.S.c.
5.
agents
because
ings,
The defendants'/
of race
'I
i:r.eaning
the
Refusing
against
of their
persons
apartment
build-
to rent
dwellings
of dwellings
and negotiate
~vith persons
in violation
because
of Sect~on
804(a)
of the Fair
Requiring
respect
of race
of tbei:;:-
by:
and color,
(b)
actions
have\ discriminated
ways,
the rental
with
th~ough the
among other
of race
~,
with.in
3602(b).
(a)
are dfvellings
Inc.
and employees,
for
and complexes
buildings
different
to the rental
and color,
in violation
because
of Section
S04(b)
. of the Fair
(c)
to the rental
Section
to be made statements
of dwellings
preference;--limitation
based
on race
and color
3604(b).
which
of
42 U.S.C. 3604(c).
(d) Representing
and color
inspection
in fact
804(d)
3604(d).
that
to persons
dwellings
and rental
so available,
of the Fair
because
of race
for
are
of Section
4i U.S.C.
. .
----~~
----~-
\
6.
ceding
The defendants
paragraph
conduct
described
in the pre-
constitutes:
'
A pattern
(a)
and practice'of
by the defendants
rights\secuied
-Act
to the full
42 U.S.C.
granted
3601 et~;
'
(b) A denial
enjoyment
to groups
of general
WHEREFOREthe plaintiff
1-.
It
.I
an Order enjoining
and successors
which denial
public
prays
the defendants,
and all
of rights
of persons
by Title
an issue
Housing
and
of
by Title
of 1968,
resistance.
those
importance.
that
their
in active
the Court
employees,
concert
agents,
and partici._'
pation.
with
'
(a) D':i.scriminating
of race.
the basis.
. :
enter
-'"-;"':--:.:--.
----"'
.origin,
the Fair
respect
affirmative
tices.:
col~r;
steps
past
to any right
or refusing
further
- -
....-------
secured
by
42 U.S.C.-3601
to take
to correct
on
o:i:::nationa;L
-----
~-
discriminatory
Plaintiff
any person
religion
(b) Failing
their
against
adequate
the effects
policies
prays
of
and p~acfor
such
,I
- 3
---. ----------.-
\
additional
relief
&s th 9 interests
of justice
may rfquire,
bu~sements
together
of this
,~ith
the
costs
end
dis-
accion.
/
,,,., .,
t' . ;'
\
i~_A
~ t".'~
:
\
:>-:Y,.,.
r7. ;
~
l...
J. ..
~~.~~_.....
ELLIOT L. RICHARDSON
Attorney
General
,(
a
a
.
!
1f /
P
{.-7;__.//
(!_
.
-~
r "./.
--;t/:STANLEY POTTINGER
Jssistant
I~.
. ,j
'
Attorney
.V / - ,,/l
i.
.~
lfL-
/l.r,.
/.r"'{t...-/
Gener~f
:..
.
I
.FRAN'r<:.
E. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
.'
........ ~.
. fA~1t-JJ
/Ja_();l~f~R.
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
,,.
ROBERT A. HORSE
United S.tates At:;~
IJ
.
. .
q(Z/~#
/KtJ--41
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil
Rights Division
Department
of
Justice
LED
I
IN CLERK'SOFFICE
J. S. DISTRICT
COURTE.D.N.
- DEC121973
MOTION 1l:MDISMISS
UNITED STATES
I) "'
OF AMERICA,
S I R S
PLEASE
before
United
States
United
States
Courthouse,
,Ju{hJllf j
day of B
for failure
definite
seem
as counsel
to state
statement
a claim
Fsd.sy
New York,
!l(;}llolPlil,
can be heard
the
"Ir/ ;f,._
on thfU..J. --
of that day or as
dismissing
can be granted
relief
is based
sworn
and proceedings
the complain
or for a more
the affidavits
.,f
of Donald
had herein.
Yours,
TO:
New York,
for an order
and further
7 , in
at Room
in the forenoon
will move
in the premises.
This motion
Trump
Judge
#Al/ f
CllbfJ
tW :Pl.AZ
11
District
iiibL',
soon thereafter
TAKE NOTICE,
etc.,
BY~12
3 9 East 68th Street
New York, New York
(212) 4 72 1400
10021
I'
-ag:<tinst-
No.
- - - - - Defendants
Action File
73 C 1529
-x
in the above
entitled
cause
hereby
separately
and severally
pursuant
_provisions
of Rule 12(e)
of the Federal
Rules
Procedure
for
the plaintiff
with
respect
the District
Courts
be ordered
to furnish
to matters
of the following
1.
paragraph
state
(c)
of the United
That with
respect
supporting
the Fair
(a)
in the Complaint
that
statement
herein
to the allegations
their
Housing
plaintiff
conclusion
Jlct of 1968,
in t~e following
in each
building
that
42 U.S.C.
the parties
(a)
the
time,
addresses
and agents
3604(a),
(b),
alleged
to have
for
the defendants;
and locations
at which the
alleged
to the alleged
giving
discrimination
to
defendants
of the apartmett
discrimination
occurred;
(c)
in
be required
the exact
contained
respects:
(b)
States
a more definite
and (d)
of Civil
particulars:
the facts
violated
alleged
to the
exact
occurred.
discrimination;
dates,
that
the alleged
2.
in paragraph
be required
contained
That with
respect
to the allegations
the facts
in paragraph
(a)
that
supporting
have carried
the plaintiff
the allegations
contained
respects:
and agents
alleged
to
for
the defendants;
(b)
the exact
addresses
apartment
building
discrimination
(c)
the parties
(d)
the
time,
alleged
Dated:
and locations
of the
occurred;
to the alleged
giving
exact
discrimination
discrimination;
dates,
that
the
occurred.
-against-
Action
File
73 C 1529
MEMORANDUM
OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF
DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
GOVERNMENT'S COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE
TO STATE A CLAIM OR FOR A MORE
DEFINITE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO
FRCP RULE 12
Preliminary
The Government
served
a summons
answer
has
yet
six
paragraphs,
Fair
Housing
upon
which
simply
been
for
of
1968,
even
of
a year,
in
nor
upon
but
might
the
one
address
not
one
to
committed
the
violations.
no answer
can
be given
is
is
the
is
to have
the
one
alleged
for
the
no facts
name who is
It
that
contains
There
there
where
No
to
absolutely
employee's
and
which
alleged
complaint
1973,
defendants.
be granted.
statutes
the
15,
pursuant
states
occurred,
that
the
an injunction
lations
have
October
The complaint,
injunction
Nowhere
about
complaint
asks
Act
the
on or
made.
a recitation
violated.
not
and
Statement
these
defendants
been
date,
vioalleged
reasons
are
making
this
ment
is
motion
obviously
consent
decree
were
served
upon
ally
news
extremely
they
tions
to
charges
of
Donald
a sample
questionable
how the
with
do not
the
operate
and
have
even
it
facts
undue
complaint
nation-
sent
to
decree.
when
(See
Government
the
with
religions
It
is
can
enter
is
apparent
alleged
into
viola-
is
the
the
are
filled
to
The buildings
same
communities
any
especially
with
tenants
whatever
to
racial
or
as a rule
are
percentages
in which
company
city,
No attempt
according
made.
the
management
of
The buildings
roughly
as
many areas
tenants
lines
a large
nationalities.
prospective
filled
in
and Queens.
religious
of
these
races
and
buildings
located.
An examination
discloses
no facts
void
and
publicized
consent
what
are
buildings
many races
screen
are
and
defendants.
defendants
know upon
sign
unfair
summons
media
They
attorneys
defendants
the
the
The Govern-
occurred.
Brooklyn
of
before
Trump.)
the
through
against
The defendants
and
them
even
complaint.
have
defendants,
the
agreement
that
fact,
of
defendants'
the
by harassing
In
affidavit
dismiss
seeking
publicity.
any
to
of
that
to
any
the
of
Government
support
information
their
the
complaint
has
complaint.
which
would
immediately
no facts
It
enable
and knows
is
of
completely
the
defendants
to
supply
an answer
or
to
properly
respond.
Issues
There
are
(1)
Whether
the
for
failure
to
Civil
Procedure
relief
might
statement
of
Civil
two
issues
Government's
state
12(b)-(6)
should
Procedure
and
12(e).
(2)
of
to
to
Court.
be dismissed
Federal
action
whether
pursuant
this
should
pursuant
because
be required
Rule
to
complaint
a claim
be granted,
presented
upon
Rules
which
a more
definite
Federal
Rules
of
POINT I.
MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE
TO STATE A CLAIM SHOULD BE GRANTED
The Governm~nt
which
a judgment
complaint
of
Civil
not
been
be dismissed.
Procedure,
Rule
adequately
stated
ing
In
and
legal
the
the
to
and
12{b) (6),
in
allegations
state
are
where
the
a claim
therefore
Pursuant
Government's
Federal
the
claim
it
complaint
nothing
the
to
complaint
Rules
has
should
there
more
upon
are
than
be
no
"sweep-
conclusions."
In Pauling
107
failed
be rendered
should
dismissed.
facts
might
has
u. s.
D. c.
App.
U.S.
835,
not
accept
v.
5 L. Ed.
372,
McElroy,C.A.
cert.
2d 60,
"sweeping
denied
the
legal
allegations."
In
the
has
not
even
attempted
to
make
but
has
relied
upon
Law alleged
pal
was
adopted
of
Omaha
{8 Cir.
restating
to
in
Court
have
held
that
in
instant
case
these
factual
the
been
McCleneghan
1962),
278 F.2d
81 S. Ct.
conclusions
factual
Housing
1960,
298 F.2d
sections
the
the
Union
61, 364
they
would
form
of
Government
allegations
of
violated.
v.
252,
the
Fair
The princiStock
Yards
Co.
659:
See
283 F.
1971,
Supp.
also
Stewart
842,
Blackburn
443 F.2d
Gas Co.,
121;
D.C.
Ga.
v.
v.
Atlanta
1972,
ment
that
of
their
they
338 F.
this
courts
and
When the
complaint
broad
1969,
statements
Thurston
48 F.R.D.
405 F.2d
v.
134,
871,
a civil
the
Court
rights
Natural
Southern
6th
1039.
state
even
really
valid
nothing
but
is
against
insufficient.
a series
of
should
be
Institute,
Nelson,
fact
state-
claim
complaint
Computer
one
a bald
held
v.
Barloga,
given
a liberal
the
rules
contemplate
C.A.
D.C.N.Y.
9th
by any
factual
statements
allegation
of
constituting
the
legal
conclusion
claim
for
relief.
have
1968,
and
supra.
similarly
conspiracy
is
been
is
insufficient
In
held
only
courts,
in
support
kind
unsupported
rejected
Stewart
that
a statement
state
pleadings
statement
this
Supp.
to
federal
usually
without
277 F.
failed
the
of
Barloga,
Court
conspiracy
that
in
allegations
Huey v.
1967,
"although
some factual
General
supra,
that
construction
claim.
Havelone,
Ill.
a complaint
stating
the
insufficient.
D.C.
held.that
claim,
are
of
v.
have
Setab
Jackson
C.A.
of
the
1968,
872.
In Huey v.
864,
type
contains
conclusory
dismissed.
the
is
Neb.
University,
to
allegations
some
D.C.
Supp.
failure
may have
defendants
Fish
Gas Co.
The Government's
in support
Havelone,
as
v.
a general
of
the
facts
an allegation
of
to
constitute
We are
the
presented
Government's
should
here
with
allegations
and
no facts
therefore
to
support
the
complaint
be dismissed.
POINT II.
AMORE DEFINITE
The courts
motions
when
for
the
permit
a more
broad
the
Engineering
sketchy
ing
action
of
the
at
for
Co.,
there
is
complaint
the
plaintiff's
conduct
D.C.
can help
not
1949,
8 F.R.D.
pleading
stage
and
620.
vague
and
in
respond-
defendant
the
thereby
among
Cope v.
extremely
formulate
will
expedition
misconduct.
no way in which
12(e)
be granted
of
are
Rule
complaint
a fishing
herein
issues
limit
in
the
the
scope
discovery.
The Government's
does
Pa.
that
should
plaintiff's
evidence
allegations
and
to
of
to
held
statement
allegations
records
The
consistently
definite
Government
defendant's
Fuyn
have
STATEMENT IS REQUIRED
even
include
complaint
dates
of
is
the
so general
alleged
that
it
violations.
CONCLUSION
The
In
summary,
complaint
should
claim.
to
support
the
be dismissed
The Government
its
statute
complaint.
has
provided
and
for
case
law is
clear.
failure
to state
no facts
whatsoever
If
very
least,
ment
pursuant
should
dants
when
the
Government
defendants'
to
reply
no facts
to
are
motion
Federal
be imposed.
to
It
or
Rules
is
these
for
of
facts,
then
a more
definite
Civil
impossible
a complaint
couched
at
state-
Procedure
to
require
in
vague
the
12(e)
the
defen-
allegations
stated.
WHEREFORE, the
dismissed
has
a more
Government's
definite
complaint
statement
Respectfully
should
be
required.
submitted,
Of counsel
Roy M. Cohn
J.
s.D1SlmCi
<..;OURIf:.i). r...
"' .
-------------
Civ. Action
File
No. 73 C 1529
-against-
COUNTERCLAIM
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP and
TRUMP MANAGEMENT,INC.,
Defendants.
-
statement
ing
the
On October
containing
suit
mation
false
1973,
the
New York
and misleading
Times
published
information
concern-
herein.
2.
News to
16,
On October
publish
which
under
it
16,
banner
1973,
plaintiff
headlines
knew to be
false
Defendants
have
untrue
unfair
caused
a story
the
containing
and misleading
and
Daily
infor-
damaging
to
defendants.
3.
the
plaintiff's
tions
media
prior
tiff
knew the
to
and
any
information
sustained
formal
damages
statements
action
which
it
on its
to
as
the
a result
communica-
part.
released
of
The plain-
to be
false
and
misleading.
WHEREFORE, defendants
order
granting
amount
with
and
of
such
the
defendants
One Hundred
further
costs
and
pray
judgment
Million
Dollars
that
on their
this
Court
enter
counterclaim
in
($100,000,000.00),
an
the
together
may require
'
. )
;_
.
-.
.! ~t r
* JANS
1974
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
)
)
_____________
Defendants.
)
)
SIRS:
PLEASE TAKENOTICE that
America will
Neaher,
move this
District
Cadman Plaza
day of January
that
before
East,
Brooklyn,
1.
United
States
the Honorable
States
defendants'
of
Edward R.
Courthouse,
Rule 12(b)(6)
225
9, on the
in the forenoon
as counsel
can be heard,
counterclaim
pursuant
on the grounds
of
for
to
that:
of the counterclaim;
2.
which relief
that
Court,
an Order dismissing
matter
plaintiff,
this
fails
to state
for other
and proper.
a claim upon
and further
relief
Dated:
January 4, 1974
Brooklyn, New York
Yours,
etc.
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
Assist
t United States
Attorney
Brooklyn, New York
ff1;t:S,~UJ~f~
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Elyse
hereby
certify
S. Goldweber,
that
I have served
an attorney
States
to Defendants'
More Definite
Statement
to Dismiss
defendants'
Motion to Dismiss,
prepaid,
States
Motion for
of Plaintiff's
Motion
States
in Response
Notice
counter-
and in Support
the Counterclaim
to dismiss
in Opposition
to their
attorney
to the Affidavits
by mailing
at the following
address:
Roy M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan & Manley
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
This,
1974.
Efsts.
dwwE{f;!dlVJ!~
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
MEMORANDUM
OF THE UNITED STATES IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANTS'MOTIONTO DISMISS, MOTIONFOR MORE
DEFINITE STATEMENT
AND IN SUPPORTOF
PI..AINTIFF'S MOTIONTO DISMISS
THE COUNTERCI..AIM
HENRYA. BRACHTL
Assistant
United States
Attorney
Department of Justice
Brooklyn, New York 11201
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED C. TRUMP,DONALD
TRUMP
ANDTRUMPMANAGEMENT
INC.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM
OF THE UNITEDSTATES IN OPPOSITIONTO
DEFENDANTS'MOTIONTO DISMISS, MOTIONFOR MORE
DEFINITE STATEMENT
ANDIN SUPPORTOF
Pl.AINTIFF'S MOTIONTO DISMISS
THE COUNTERCI.AIM
INTRODUCTORY
STATEMENT
The United
pursuant
housing.
States
to 42 U.S.C.
The operative
initiated
3613 ~/ alleging
paragraphs
this
action
racial
on October
15, 1973,
discrimination
in
of the Complaint
allege
that:
different
terms and conditions
rental
of dwellings
because
in violation
of Section 804(b)
Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3604(b).
(c)
Making and causing to be made statements
with respect
to the rental
of dwellings which indicate
a preference,
limitation
and discrimination
based on
race and color in violation
of Section 804(c) of the
Fair Housing Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3604(c).
(d) Representing
to persons because of race
and color that dwellings
are not available
for
inspection
and rental when such dwellings
are in
fact so available,
in violation
of Section 804(d)
of the Fair Housing Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3604(d)."
ceding
described
in the pre-
(a) A pattern
and practice
of resistance
by the defendants
to the full enjoyment of rights
secured by Title VIII of the Fair Housing Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 3601 et~.;
and
(b) A denial to groups of persons of rights
granted by Title VIII of the Fair Housing Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 3601 et~.,
which denial raises
an issue of general public importance."
- 2 -
The defendants
alternative,
for
Complaint
able
fails
have
to state
be a counterclaim
which
that
charges
filed
misleading
the Daily
have
damages
information
also
an "amorphous"
plaintiff
News concerning
filed
no facts
dollars
conveyed
this
to en-
because
to
States
in the
is
grounded
to support
complaint,
the
what. purports
counterclaim
in the
too vague
having
that
and is
Defendants'
plaintiff
and,
alleging
of action
dollars.
on the proposition
and having
a cause
seeks
to dismiss
statement,
Defendants
in the
Motions
a more definite
them to respond.
dants
filed
its
damaged defen-
of the
false
and
lawsuit.
DISCUSSION
I.
Motion
to Dismiss
Defendants
allege
therefore
facts
claim
to support
be dismissed
relief
can be granted.
to the
requirements
that
the
its
general
for
Complaint
allegations,
failure
Plaintiff
of F.R.C.P.
in this
to state
submits
8(a)
*'
Affidavit
of
and counterclaim,
action
and that
a claim
that
and is
the
does not
it
should
upon which
Complaint
conforms
sufficient.
Rules of Civil
a particular
allegation
is one of fact,
is no requirement
that
facts,'
sufficient
or 'facts
2A Moore's
Gibson,
Federal
the pleading
here,
another
a motion
as to whether
There
or 'ultimate
In Conley v.
case of racial
identical
federal
a cause of action.'"
1813,
"[the]
or law ...
'facts,"
to constitute
Practice
filed
evidence
state
in which defendants
filed
Procedure
in principle
the Complaint
discrimination
to that
as follows:
The respondents
also argue that the complaint
failed to set forth specific
facts to support its
general allegations
of discrimination
and that its
dismissal
is therefore
proper.
The decisive
answer
to this is that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
do not require a claimant to set out in detail
the
facts upon which he bases his claim.
To the contrary,
all the Rules require is "a short and plain
statement
of the claim" that will give the defendant
fair notice of what the plaintiff's
claim is and
the grounds upon which it rests.
The illustrative
forms appended to the Rules plainly demonstrate
this.
Such simplified
"notice pleading"
is made possible
by the liberal
opportunity
for discovery and the
other pretrial
procedures established
by the Rules
to disclose
more precisely
the basis of both claim
and defense and to define more narrowly the disputed facts and issues.
The Complaint
a racially
in this
discriminatory
case alleges
policy
that
the defendants
in the operation
- 4 -
of their
pursue
apartment
buildings.
places,
basic
While omitting
etc.,
outline
concise,
ants'
it clearly
advises
of the charges
and direct"~/
noncompliance
complaints
by alleging,
matter,
by the Attorney
General
to which similar
uniformly
denied.
See e.g.,
(D. Colo.
1972); United
States
rel'd
P.H.E.O.H.
Rptr.
Para.
aff'd
of the nature
categories
of the defend-
It is identical,
in
to a number of other
brought
motions
United States
and
5, in "simple,
Housing Act.
of evidentiary
States
in paragraph
372(1),
details
the defendants
terms of nonpleading
housing
evidentiary
pursuant
to dismiss
v. Luebke,
v. Black Jack,
Civil
fair
to 42 U.S.C.
have been
345 F. Supp. 179
1973), ~.
~'
42 L.W. 3195 (Oct. 9, 1973.); United States
Associates,
324 F. Supp. 287 (N.D. Ga. 1971). ~/
den.
---
v. Northside
U.S.
Realty
**/ The Courts have reached the same result in the following unreported
cases:
United States v. Raymond, Civil Action No. 73-119-CIV-T-H (M.D.
Fla. Sept. 5, 1973); United States v. City of Parma, Civil Action No. C73-439 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 5, 1973); United States v. Robbins, Civil Action
No. 73-848 CIV-JE (S.D. Fla. June 22, 1973); United States v. Watson
Civil Action No. 73-97 (M.D. La. May 15, 1973); United States v. Pelzer
Realty Company, Inc., Civil Action No. 3284-N (M.D. Ala. July 16, 1971);
United States v. Davis, Civil Action No. 6451-71 (S.D. Ala. May 18, 1971);
United States v. A.B. Smythe, Inc., Civil Action No. C-69-885 (N.D. Ohio
Nov. 24, 1970); United States v. Goldberg, Civil Action No. 70-1223-CIVCF (S.D. Fla. Oct. 19, 1970); United States v. PMCDevelopment Co., Inc.
Civil Action No. 13578 (N.D. Ga., July 28, 1970); United States v. Palm
(continued on next page)
- 5 -
cases.
States
Louis,
Workers,
United
v. Georgia
United
States
v. International
Brotherhood
States
v. Building
and Construction
Trades
Council
In Conley v. Gibson,
supra,
"
in appraising
the sufficiency.of
the complaint we follow, of course, the
accepted rule that a complaint should not
be dismissed for failure
to state a claim
unless it appears beyond doubt that the
plaintiff
can prove no set of facts in
support of his claim which would entitle
him to relief."
355 U.S. at 45-46.
See also
2A Moore's Federal
Practice
112.08,
p. 2271-2274 and
(continued
from previous page)
Beach Listing Bureau, Inc., Civil Action No. 70-379-CIV-CF (S.D. Fla.
May 5, 1970); United States v. Miller,
Civil Action No. 70-40 (D. Md.
April 27, 1970); United States v. H.G. Smithy, Civil Action No. 21470
(D. Md. April 17, 1970); United States v. Management Clearing,
Inc.,
Civil Action No. 70-23-PHX.
(CAM) (D. Ariz. April 8, 1970).
Copies of the Complaints and Orders
been attached
to this memorandum.
- 6 -
have
cases
there
admitting
collected.~/
A Rule 12(b)(6)
the validity
contests
plaintiff's
to dismiss,
favorable
and existence
right
the complaint
of the claim
to recover
under
United
supra,
In United
Action
13,616
the Court,
as stated,
v. Georgia
States
5, 1973),
of
but
On motion
in the light
States
summarizing
the effect
the law
is to be construed
to the plaintiff."
after
motion'has
most
Power Company,
the foregoing
Rptr.
Para.
authorities,
added
that:
"It is especially
in civil rights
disputes
that
we ought to be wary of disposing
of the case on
pretrial
motions and courts do in fact have a
predilection
for allowing civil
rights
cases to
proceed until a comprehensive
record is available to either
support or negate the facts alleged."
Sisters
of Prov. of St. Mary of Woods v. City of
Evanston,
335 F. Supp. 396, 399 (N.D. Ill.
1971).
Consistent
authorized
dwellings
conditions
with
the allegations
to adduce proof
on the basis
with
respect
that
of race,
of the complaint,
defendants
have refused
have required
to the rental
different
of dwellings
race,
made discriminatory
statements
relating
ings
on account
of race
plaintiff
to rent
terms and
on the basis
to the rental
that
is
dwellings
of
of dwellwere
unavailable
for
rental
Defendants
can hardly
controvert
proves
allegations,
then
its
to have violated
entitled
42 U.S.C.
to relief.
Georgia
support
and suits
defendants'
be liberally
testing
Court
Cf. United
at 541,
Council
will
States
Louis,
be
v.
543; United
of St.
do not
the
in this
cases
States
supra,
the
v. McElroy,
sustained
on the grounds
explicitly
demonstrably
stated
the plaintiffs
that:
- 8 -
of a suit
lacked
of defendants'
which are
all
from the
Cir.
here,
of complaints
pleadings
were dismissed,
the dismissal
that
kinds
be
involving
to those
in substantially
absent
should
out of cases
in several
of gEneral
complaints
case
different
to dismiss
was recognized
even remotely
in principle
entirely
in which
arise
identical
the motions
on considerations
of Appeals
complaint
authorities
involve
construed
In Pauling
Court
supra,
by defendants
virtually
Even so,
were denied,
In those
that
authorities
and issues.
rested
cited
While plaintiff's
complaints
at 452.
the proposition
dismissed.
if plaintiff
301 F. Supp.
Trades
so available.
that
will
through
Conley v. Gibson,
The authorities
cases
3604(a)
and Construction
271 F. Supp.
the proposition
the defendants
v. Building
were in fact
of them.
that
instant
1955),
to enjoin
standing.
result
case.
the
nuclear
The
to
recognized
that
of race
policies
complaint
claim
any injury
resulting
explicitly
requires
was compelled
general
liberal
conclusions
case,
of fact
...
cast
to rent
pertaining
be characterized
a motion
to dis-
in the form of
however,
have refused
to rely
we allege,
to blacks
among
on
to defendants'
as a "legal
conclusion".
v. Setab
Computer Insti-
on Thurston
which alleged
fraud
that
supra.*/
Defendants
tuting
defendants
48 F.R.D.
legal
In the present
- a statement
Conley v. Gibson,
~,
"sweeping
allegations."
things,
by way of dictum
fraud
from that
that
shall
to dismiss
rules
That case
by the defendants
fraud.
involved
but failed
in such cases,
"the
be stated
particularity,"
with
the action,
of pleading
circumstances
even though
described
a pro~
it
in this
to allege
F.R.CIV.P.
constithe Court,
recognized
the
memorandum.
But it
is well
for racial
1963),
said
suit
by the Attorney
States
v. ~'
no more specific
in this
subject
General
to Rule 9(b).
on Conley v. Gibson,
complaint
complaint
a civil
in United
in relying
discrimination
nation
that
discrimination
As the Court
Cir.
settled
supra,
than
to sustain
the housing
a voting
discrimi-
case:
defendants'
Finally,
position
that
not survive
conspiracy
defendants
a general
a motion
is alleged,
particularity
cite
duct with
as intentional
to a civil
irrespective
unnecessary
complaint
effect
to plead
no
with
acts,
Huey v. Barloga,
alleges
established
violates
housing
that
the Fair
con-
Housing
of motivation.~/
~/ Huey v. Barloga,
277 F. Supp. 864 (N.D. Ill.
Havelone, 283 F. Supp. 842 (D. Neb. 1968).
~/
more, will
and overt
action
is well
the pro-
however,
in conspiracy.
The present
discriminatory
case,
wrongdoing
and it
for
is unsound.
without
In the present
is therefore
not conspiracy,
a racially
of conspiracy,
to dismiss.~/
and it
decision
a group of decisions
discrimination,
Act,
to the Thurston
allegation
such items
analogy
1971);
Stewart
v.
United States v. Pelzer Realty Co., 484 F. 2d 438 (5th Cir. 1973);
United States v. Real Estate Dev. Corp., 347 F. Supp. 776 (N.D.
Miss. 1972) and see Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).
- 10 -
We believe
the
at
that
authorities
issue
relied
in this
should
II.
Housing
specific
stands
complaints
in suits
facts
volved
that
for
none of
any proposition
such as that
in this
by the Attorney
statutes,
case
General
the motion
under
to dismiss
that
is based,
alleged
through
"is
..
the
a more definite
~[12.18,
in Michael
motions
pleading
into
evidentiary
frivolous
suits
statement
will
Della
kind
shape,"
facts
disposed
that
3604.
Plaintiff
detail
on which
not
Court
Equipment
ostensibly
are
often
can easily
the
of by a motion
- 11 -
than
claim,
Engine
for
designed
to "get
a waste
of time,
Federal
Co.,
this
380 F. 2d 351,
through
want
a motion
2A Moore's
v. Fairchild
for
motion
of Rule 8 and
of the
of Appeals
should
defendants'
be granted."
be elicited
sub-
which
requirements
Co.,
were in-
rather
of the nature
Vecchia
As the
Clark
12(e)
meets
party
v.
and dates
at unintelligibility
opposing
1968).
requests
to evidentiary
Rule
the pleading
of this
better
amounts
to strike
p. 2389,
Statement
of 42 U.S.C.
discovery.
If
buildings
violations
designed
notifies
Practice
such information
of detail
fairly
Motion
Statement
as to the persons,
in the
be obtained
since
Since
sustained
Defendants'
for
demonstrates
be denied.
Motion
mits
foregoing
on by defendants
case.
the
171
Circuit
352 (2d Cir.
the plaintiff's
especially
discovery
summary judgement.
and
It
statement
Wis.
is not
1972).
racial
complaints
discrimination
by the Attorney
General
to which motions
cation
or evidentiary
States
v. Bob Lawrence
United
States
C-372(1),
United
holding
United
States
P.H.E.O.H.
States
Ohio 1973).
v. City
*'
Rptr.
Inc.,
v. City
Para.
of Parma,
said
fair
statement
of these
motions
of
housing
to 42 U.S.
3613,
have been
have been
additional
were unnecessary.
Realty
As the Court
in terms
pursuant
that
in-
a more definite
All
40 (E.D.
in cases
number of other
in each instance
Realty,
held
identical,
brought
for
allegations
v. Northside
is
to a
of grounds.
the Court
55 F.R.D.
the complaint
action
matter,
denied,
Ga. 1971);
that
in this
on a wide variety
a more definite
have repeatedly
of evidentiary
respect
for
Nixa v. Hayes,
courts
The Complaint
non-pleading
of a Motion
evidence.
Accordingly,
evidence.
filed
function
to discover
volving
with
the
clarifi-
See e.g.,
United
Associates,
of Black
13,561
P.H.E.O.H.
Jack,
Civil
Action
No. 71-
in Lawrence,
para.
13,616
(N.D.
supra:
- 12 -
We conclude further
that the complaint,
couched as it is in the very language of the
statute,
provides
adequate notice of the claim
made by plaintiff
and is not subject
to a
motion for more definite
statement.
Any
additional
information
to which defendant
is
entitled
may be obtained
by use of the discovery procedures
provided by the Federal Rules.
United States v. Bob Lawrence Realty,
Inc.,
supra, 313 F. Supp. at 873.
(emphasis added)
Likewise
to 42 U.S.C.
2000e-6,
substantially
motions
outline
the
(which
identical
for
complaints
in employment
of the charges
Division,
426 F. 2d 539,
832 (1970);
at 543-44;
Workers,
United
United
Local
States
States
No. 683,
and practice
holding
the defendants
by alleging
Cir.
270 F. Supp.
have denied
the Government's
States
Power Co.,
233,
and basic
of noncompliance
1970),
International
pursuant
provision
of the nature
United
v. Georgia
v.
that
categories
details.
543 (10th
brought
statement,
advised
cases
has a pattern
to 42 U.S.C.
a more definite
clearly
discrimination
v. Gustin-Bacon
~-
den.
supra,
Brotherhood
235 (S.D.
with
400 U.S.
301 F. Supp.
of Electrical
Ohio 1967);
(continued
from previous
page)
Civil Action No. 71-H-279 (S.D. Tex. April 30, 1971); United States v.
Chirico,
Civil Action No. 70-1851 (E.D. Pa., August 12, 1970); United
States v. Gilman, Civil Action No. 70-Civil
1967 (S.D. N.Y. July 28,
1970); United States v. PMC Development Co., Inc.,
Civil Action No.
13578 (N.D. Ga. July 28, 1970); United States v. Palm Beach Realty
Listing
Bureau, Inc.,
Civil Action No. 70-379-CIV-CF (S.D. Fla.,
May 5, 1970); United States v. Arco Inc.,
Civil Action No. 70-29
(W.D. Tenn. March 20, 1970).
Copies
been attached
of the complaints
and orders
to this memorandum.
- 13 -
have
United
States
v. Building
and Construction
judge
definite
statement
equivalent
is well
to set
for
voting
of St.
United
States
motion
464 (S.D.
discrimination
case was
fraud).
settled
that
out in detail
"Rule 12(e)
the facts
Co. v. American
N.Y. 1966);
the
Electric
4 Moore's
is whether
the complaint
Acoustica
Associates
v. Powertron
241, case
to claim
that
have refused
to rent
his
sented
availability
their
12.18,
Corp.,
Defendants
on account
on account
of race,
answered."
4 F.R.
things,
of race
462,
pp. 2395-96.
are hardly
among other
claim,
Michigan
41 F.R.D.
of being
Ultrasonic
alleging,
apartments
Practice
is "capable
Power Co.,
Federal
The test
12e.
v.
for a more
Louis,
discrimination)
by granting
that
Council
See also,
1963) (voting
discretion
on theory
to suit
It
pleader
abused
Cir.
Trades
Serv.
2d
in a position
that
defendants
is incomprehensible
to
them.
The defendant
affidavit.
that
they~/
His counsel,
will
discrimination
be entitled
to no relief"
-14
refers
"we".
and,
"it
in his
appears
further,
to the Government
certain
that:
in the plural,
"these
defendants
do not discriminate
in the
renting
of their apartments
and that the
Government's
charges are totally
unfounded."
Being so connnitted
the Complaint,
under oath,
instead
of engaging
motions
tories
the defendants
v. Savage Laboratories,
shadow boxing"
are prone.
26 F.R.D.
1960).
- 15 -
answer
in the "barristerial
statement
can surely
to which
Lincoln
141, 142-143
Labora-
(D. Del.
III.
Defendants'
Counterclaim
Defendants'
pleaded
defendants
alleges
purported
seek dismissal
in substance
that
pecuniary
libel
with
Court's
States
"depends
waived
its
immunity
must be unequivocally
584 (1941);
States
United
v. Clark,
It
information
seeks
face,
it
abuse
jurisdiction
appears
to suit
to be a claim
to suit,
8 Peters.
relief
United
v. King,
436,
Either
con-
way, the
be dismissed
damages for
against
cannot
States
395 U.S.
libel,
the United
be implied
v. Sherwood,
1, 4 (1969);
- 16 -
could
expressed."
States
for
way possible,
it
should
for
2680(h).
to grant
the suit,
and it
28 U.S.C.
by causing
about
of process.
of the claim,
is not subject
wholly
or abuse of process.
This
even though
slander,
false
as alleging
States
to the Court
cryptically
damage.
On its
be construed
as the United
plaintiff
or slander.
and in conjunction
ceivably
been presented
to publish
amount of $100,000,000.
damages for
which is rather
counterclaim,
United
has
but
312 U.S.
Despite
the express
claim contain
"a short
requirement
and plain
jurisdiction
Tort
United
Act expressly
against
I n sum,
torts
II
of its
Administration,
United
provides
the United
of process,
States,
. ."
28
that
States
libel
the United
agents
u.s.c.
it
shall
on "[a]ny
[or]
slander
States
acting
1346(b).
1968);
Court has
"
act or omission
the scope of
jurisdiction
Claims
of actions
out of abuse
28 U.S.C.
2680(h).
1964).
of
Wessly v. General
the
is not liable
of Labor,
against
or loss
claim arising
U.S. Department
1346(b} and
within
not confer
Compensation,
28 U.S.C.
or wrongful
this
of actions
counterclaim
is plain:
for injury
his employment
Claims Act,
property
a counter-
claim.
that
defendants'
The reason
of defendants'
statement
depends,"
no such statement.
no jurisdiction
of Rule 8(a)
1972);
DiSilvestro
Teplitsky
Services
See also,
Baca v.
Smith v.
v. United
v. Bureau of
- 17 -
That defendants'
here,instead
alleged
claim
of as an independent
action,
of the Federal
Rules
of Civil
"[t]hese
shall
not be construed
rules
now fixed
against
Moreover,
for
defamation
this
tained
statutory
States
consent."
been given
to claims,
Rule 13(d)
provides
to enlarge
that
the sovereign
were cognizable
*I
credits
States
for damages
in this
nor a compulsory
3 Moore's
324 F. Supp.
expressly
counterclaims
unless
Federal
Associates,
is immaterial.
against
which asserts
the United
as a counterclaim
II
a permissive
against
to assert
or abuse of process
counterclaim
neither
Procedure
even if a claim
counterclaim
pulsory
off,
States
is asserted
of a com-
of recoupment
counterclaim
it has given
Practice,
United
Court,
specific
2d ed.
313~28;
States
v. Northside
No consent
or counterclaims,
such as this.~
United
Realty
has
**I
defendants'
purbut significant
signed "by at least
required
by Rule 11,
continued
next
page)
*
This is not the first
has sought
to strike
for seeking
United
to bring
States
motions
its
Trumps, Northside
Although
a large
real
against
the United
practices
Realty
before
Associates,
and its
States
In
More temperate
Ed Isakson,
a substantial
company
the courts.
statement
estate
Inc.,
made essentially
housing
the defendants
to dismiss
than $100,000
time that
back flamboyantly
v. Northside
than the
a similar
press
release
was issued,
(footnote
continued from previous page)
F.R.C.P That salutary
Rule declares,
and received
in pertinent
considerable
part:
The signature
of an attorney
constitutes
a certificate
by him that he has read the pleading;
that to his
knowledge, information,
and belief
there is good
ground to support it; and that it is not interposed
for delay.
If a pleading is not signed or is
signed with intent to defeat the purpose of this
rule, it may be stricken
as sham and false and
the action may proceed as though the pleading had
not been served.
See American Automobile Ass'n. v. Rothman, 104 F. Supp. 655 (E.D. N.Y.
1952); American Automobile Ass'n. v. Rothman, 101 F. Supp. 193 (E.D.
N.Y. 1951); and United States to Use of and for Benefit of Foster
Wheeler Corporation v. American Surety Co. of New York, 25 F. Supp.
225 (E.D. N.Y. 1938).
- 19 -
play,-
*I Northside's
was limited
addressed
counterclaim
to abuse of process.~
to the Complaint,
comprehensively
Despite
claims,
brief,
so that
issue
pattern
***/
**I
presented
as well
in this
case,
differences
and practice
equal housing
opportunity
grounds
two counter-
related
in this
with prejudice
defendants
have engaged in a
in housing
to a group of persons.42
for
the counterclaim
of discrimination
motions
between these
themselves
and
the counterclaim
whether
for libel
defendants'
opinion,
as the additional
can address
namely,
denying
in its
After
no count
reasons
in Northside,~
contained
or have denied
U.S.C.
of the Georgia
3613.
Real Estate
Commission.
**/ Northside's
subordinates,
States.
counterclaim
was against the Attorney General and his
but the Court treated
it as a claim against the United
'!!:!::!!_/
The Court held, in sum, that the claim did not qualify as a
compulsory counterclaim
since it did not arise from the same transaction,nr
as a permissive
counterclaim
because the suit was really one
against the United States to which the sovereign had not consented.
United States v. Faneca, 332 F. 2d 872, 875 (5th Cir. 1964).
- 20 -
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing
that
defendants'
ment be denied
reasons,
Motions
and that
to Dismiss
defendants'
plaintiff
respectfully
requests
State-
be dismissed
with
prejudice.
Plaintiff
this
has prepared
a proposed
Memorandum.
Respectfully
Assistant
States
Attorney
Department of Justice
Brooklyn, New York 11201
submitted,
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
z'L-~
xl, ~d~~
ELYSt~. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
to
..
I, Elyse
herepy
CERTU"ICATEOF SERVICE
S. Goldweber,
certify
that
an attorney
I have served
State~
in Opposition
to Defendants'
More Definite
Statement
to Dismiss
defendants'
Motion
to Dismiss,
postage
prepaid,
States
Motion for
of Plaintiff's
Motion
States
in Response
to the Affidavits
to their
attorney
by mailing
at the following
address:
Roy M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan & Manley
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
This,
the
!+th
of January,
,i
Notice
counter-
and in Support
the Counterclaim
the plaintiff,
to dismiss
claim,
for
1974.
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department
Washington,
of Justice
D. Co
20530
""'
.,... ,,.
...:..
"
~ "'
ill
J.
c:. ,1,\:
fiL ..
* JANB 1974 *
CIVIL ACTIONNO. 73 C 1529
TIMA.111
...........................
,..
P.M.......
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED C. TRUMP,DONALD
TRUMP
ANDTRUMPMANAGEMENT
INC.,
Defendants.
UNREPORTED
ORDERSCITED IN THE
MEMORANDUM
OF THE UNITEDSTATESIN OPPOSITIONTO
DEFENDANTS'
MOTIONTO DISMISS, MOTIONFOR MORE
DEFINITE STATEMENT
ANDIN SUPPORTOF
PLAINTIFF'S NOTIONTO DISMISS
THE COUNTERCLAIM
I
!
I
I
l
I
@I
.. ..
\
'
....
..
TABLEOF CONTENTS
'
Civil
Civil
Action No.
Civil
Civil
Civil
Civil
Action No.
Inc.,
Civil
States
v. Miller,
Civil
'
United StAte$
v. Margurette
(S.D. Tex. April 30, 1971)
Jones,
Civil
Civil
Action No.
1967 (S.D.
United Sta~
v. Exclusive Mutual Exchange,
C-70-969 {N.D. Ohio Nov. 8, 1971)
United States v. Chirico,
August 12, 1970)
Civil
Civil
Action
United
1970)
Action No.
27,
I
!
..
Civil
et al.,
Long, Civil
Civil
_./.
- 2 -
'I
,i
I!
ii
:
I
!(
l
Il
.:..
UNITEDSTATES OF .Af.lERICA,
vs.
GEORGEN. RAYNOND,
-..ti ..r
,,
t D -..
~,
' ..
l,"Oo
.. If'I(;,' .u"'
'-t.u'
)
)
)
)
)
)
),
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
I!
,,
,~, 10 ,..,
r,
l1rvt.; ,
,., OF
SEp .
L.o,(
b 1973
~'Ar1~1
No.,73-119-Civ-T-H
________
_______
Defendant.
,
.I
FINDINGS
The United
States
Fair
VIII
of Title
Housing Act),
alleges
persons
that
conditions,
42 u.s.c.A.
of race
of race
and color;
limitation,
Complaint
stitutes
based
a pattern
enjoyment
to groups
,I importance.
!I
that
and practice
of rights
Housing Act,
and discrimination
alleges
secured
of persons
which denial
The Complaint
unavailable
of dwellings
which indicate
further
the Defendant's
of resistance
of rights
seeks
terms,
on persons
with
respect
a preference,
on race
by the Fair
raises
to
imposed different
of dwellings
vio-
of rental
on
the
for alleged
Rights
3601,
action
3613 against
made dwellings
and color;
this
relief
of the Civil
and privileges
to the rental
denial
to 42 U.S.C.A.
the Defendant
because
because
of America filed
lations
and color.
conduct
The
con-
to the full
an issue
injunctive
by the Fair
of general
public
and affirnative
1t
!1
I
relief.
The Unit~d
States
alsornoved
for a preliminary
in-
!!
I! junction.
'I
I,
On April
II
il
\I
11
\'
\
a motion
to
dfsmiss
the Complaint,
definite
or in the alternative,
statement.
Both of Defendant's
for~ ,a 'mote'
motions
have been
denied.
On July
Injunction
. testL~ony
counsel
and documentary
for both
Rules
of Civil
of Fact
5, 1973, Plaintiff's
of La'tv:
Findings
FINDINGS OF FACT
approximately
50 apartment
He previously
Florene
The Defendant
additional
the
of
Procedure
1.
Florida.
has considered
Pursuant
'
' t
The.Court
evidence,
parties.
and Conclusions
apartment
rental
units
in St.
in St.
Petersburg,
approximately
Petersburg,
20
including
~he
Apartments.
2.
3.
Bureau of Investiga-
persons.
tion,
United
vestigation
racially
Fair
of allegations
discriminatory
Agents
admi;ted
ii,1
11
I!
1:
,,
'i
Ii
that
of his
a racially
buildings,
My policy
is not
of the
of the purpose
interview;d,
by Special
.Mr. Raymond
policy
in the opera-
as follows:
to rent mv apartments
to
black people.
If I rented to black people I
would lose the :white tenants
in my npartmant
house.
In addition,
with my plan to sell this
apartment house [loco.tcd at 516 10th Avenue
South,] if I had rented to black Rcople, I
feet as it l woulu. have lost. 1/3 of my investment in this particular
property.
q
.,
'
to being
discrimina;o~
apartment
an in-
in violation
I,
,,
practices
statement
conducted
He consented
a signed
pursuing
of Justice,
housing
investigation.
and furnished
Department
I. of this
tion
States
the Federal
-2-
in any of these
tenants
has been.
If a black
pGrson wanted
to rent
~n apartmant
in one of
these
anartmcnts
I would refuse
to rent it
, in.:1::,much as l i:-,ould not "brcn.k the color
line."
4.
(Emphasis
and Gail
August
Apartments,
Sorenson,
l,
On July
at the Florene
added)
1971,
'
a white
through
to Bradford
couple,
period,
July
31, 1972.
outside
Sorenson
apartment
son whether
or not having
had anything
to do with
in front
of the building.
Apartments)
and that
her that
and told
his
female
them shortly
it was because
the apartment
the presence
would decrease
response.
apartment.
of selling
affirmative
Mr. Sorenson
in their
Bureau
this
the apartment
premises
left
in
to the Federal
ap.artment
because
!j
statement
to his
evicted
Mrs. Sorenson
evicting
II
returned
guests.
thereafter.
signed
in the apartment
eviction,
guests
of Investigation,
wife
Ii
two black
In his
Sorenson
apartment.
Upon being
the affirmative.
Mr.
the Sorensons
their
the value
said
building
of the black
he
(Florene
females
of the property.
they
on the
Finally,
11
,,
Ii
Ji
tnat
another
tenant
hnd complained
11
Ii
rcg,'lrding
the presence
Once outside
as soon as possible.
"
II
he wanted
at th~ir
I
I
two
at the garage.
that
On May 4, 1972,
the Sorensons
Sorenson
}Ir.
for a one-year
'I
#4
apartment
of the black
females.
to him
I
i
I
I
i
!
11
Ii
",;jl
:1
11
i- ,'
>d f
... l
, \
I ~
; !
,4
5.
the apartment
Apartments
to rent
a vacant
to "colored
people"
if "colored
statement
'
the Sorcnsons
tenant
apartment
at the Florene
told
moved into
to the Federal
telling
and subsequently
people"
'an 'eviction
if he was going
In . his
sent
him that
the apartment.
Bureau of Investigation,
her that
to co lo.red people."
to rent
..
''
CONCLUSIONS
OF I.AW
1.
28 u.s.c.
the meaning
The Defendant's
4Z U.S.C.A.
tion
against
nation
their
"
guests
Hunting
Park,
304 F.Supp.
of race
because
within
discrimina-
or color.
of the race
prohibited.
Discrimi-
or color
Cf. Sullivan
of
Little
v.
Walker v.
Pointer,
To prevail
on the merits,
the Defendant
the United
States
must
has either:
i:n a "pattern
(a)engaged
because
is therefore
Inc.,
are dwellings
persons
56, 57-61
4.
show that
white
under
3602(b).
"any person"
against
action
3613.
apartments
of 42 u.s.c.A.
3.
of this
or practice"
of resistance
to equal housing
opportunity;
to the full
11
.I
11
I!
enjoyment
or
II
ii
(b) denied
11
of the right
and "such
i'
42
denial
u,.s.c.A.
the right
raises
to equal housing
an issue
3613; U.S. v.
of general
public
import.::mce.
Inc.,
474 F.2d
11
.1
l
I!
!: 115, 122-123
(5th Cir.
j; 216-218
Cir.
U.S. v. Hunter,
1973);
ii
(4th
opport~nity
1972).
ii
":j
liII
!J
fl
f ,1.
Ci
t 1
l'I
W .ii
5.
the full
enjoyment
the United
instance
term
To prove a "pattern
of the right
States
'resistancet.
violative
conn9t~s,
of the right
an in~entional,
granted
'
1972).
practice.
347 F.Supp.
1971);
policy
of a white
(Finding
pursuant
or attitude,
tenants
corroborated
ciples
With ~egard
of equity
injunctive
restriction
dictate
relief
or practice
was not'.accidental
(however impetuous
(due to the admitted
of any black
should
Inc.,
(5th Cir.
while
including
the element
that
I
,,
1973).
v. Hunter,
-s-
no
459
the evidence
claim as al lcged
of "pattern
to gr~nt
the plaintiff
U.S.
Cf. U.S. v.
to protect
of which he complains."
1972).
whether
prin-
than necessary
the Government's
"r'e]stablished
in considering
ii
:1
a pattern
by the absence
to establish
because
act
to the remedy,
that
a court
greater
a,1
in the past).
6.
it
of a discriminatory
The incident
that
policy
own deliberate
. or
F.2d 221,
admissions
conduct.
of
DevelopmentCorp.,
of discriminatory
admissions
Tenth Corp.,.437
1972).
to that
or repeated
of a pattern
tenant
as the
U.S. v. Hunter,
are evidence
extrajudicial
(Findings
guests
policy
the Defendant's
or accidental
Extrajutlicial
discriminatory
to
opportunity,
regular,
by the Act."
a racially
. I:
to equal housing
II
of resi::;ta.nce
of conduct
violation
or practice"
or practice,"
instance,
is suffici2nt
in the Cor.:1plaint,
the proof
do,;:;
Ii
I. not justify
l maliciously
a finding
and re~eatedly
Act or that
his present
his
Peachtree
Tenth Cor2.,
Defendant
is the proprietor
scale
notes
that
applicant
contrite
he would freely
without
Together
these
junctive
decree
restriction
factors
greater
Accordingly,
II
,
,:
clusions
I!
Ii
ii
Ii
,,
,,
injunction
to the circumstances
in Peachtree
present
here.
I,
'II
I;
,,
as required
by the
at 126.
in framing
the in-
to protect
no
the plaintiff
!!.:... v. Hunter,
suura.
follows
to the foregoing
of Law, it
Tenth Co10.,
Findings.of
ORDERED,ADJUDGEDANDDECREEDby this
pending
further
Fact
and Con-
is hereby
Court
the Defendant,
that,
George N.
I
I
';
'
II
Ii
to atiy
:i
.!
units
suora,
.' .
at the
at 228-231.
Pursuant
H
'.l
"impose[s]
the Court
testimony
rent
Inc.,
moderation
Cor-o.,
PRELIMINARYINJUNCTION
11
11
or color
than necessary
a preliminary
the facts
it
Further,
in his
of which he complains."
is amply suited
I .. features
dictate
West Peachtree
v.
and willingly
to race
so that
supra
regard
offices
of numerous
Development
1972).
declaration
19_71).
with
staff
v. Real Estate
U.S.
West
owner of a large
Cf. U.S.
Act.
business
with a supporting
Defendant's
hearing
of a small
in management.
Tenth CorE.',~supra;
with
43 7 F. 2d 221,
v.
Cf. U.S.
policy.
by the
a contumacious
to help
347 F.Supp.
guaranteed
portends
discriminatory
apartment'complex
assist'q.nts
Dafendanb has
rights
attitude
to
own home.
that
denied
ndhcrcnce
in his
or conclusion
-6-
li
li .
!1
I
p
,Raymond,
and his
in active
concert
1.
agents,
or participation
Failing
successors,
a~d.all
persons
enjoined
from:
employees,
or refusing
to rent
an apartment
to any
11
I
!
person
because
unavailable
of race
or color
to any person
2.
'
of services
of race
of rental
of ah apartment,
in connection
printing,
tisement,
with
respect
indicates
any preference,
or publishing,
any notice,
to the rental
..
or color,
Representing
such apartment
adopt
is in fact
or adver-
..
that
based
for
to rental
be rented
shall
past
inspection
or color
or rental
affirmative
discriminatory
applicants,
without
of race
the Defendant
the following
ten
post
because
when
available.
of his
Within
permanently
I such notice
I!
to be
is not available
effects
1.
will
statement,
to any person
and implement
the
visible
or ca~sing
or~discrimination
IT IS FURTHER
ORDEREDthat
shall
of an apartment,
limitation,
or an intention
an apartment
correct
therewith,
or discrimination;
4.
with
or in the
'
or published,
that
in the terms,
or color;
m~de, printed,
limitation,
or color;
any person
or facilities
3. t Making,
on race
of. race
against
or privileges
provision
becau~e
because
DiscrL~inating
condit.ions,
regard
be posted
or notices,
forth-
program
to
practices:
Decree,
Defendant
at places
stating
that
to race
or color.
at each of his
shall
Defendant's
several
clearly
apartments
At least
one
apartment
complexes.
I,
,,
2.
,.
ii!1
l!,.
The Defendant
of his
employees,
Decree
and with
if
$hall
any, with
forthwit~
respect
fully
instruct
to the provisions
all
of
.
this
,I
I.
respect
to their
obligations
i:
!l
"
II
11
II
-7-
I
i
j
I
, t ..
~r
ii,,
) ,.,,
.t,,ij
"
,i lM
J:l,,;)t
thereund~t'.
Upon
'!
1,
I'
,,1.
hirini,;
this
a new employee,
Decree
1 requirements
contained
3.
or other
estate
promote
rentals
association,
that
or color.
..
a firm,
for
of this
a period
for
preceding
Decree,
shall
file
or person
are rented
(a)
act
to
as
such firm
be notified
regard
to race
with
race
this
(90)
days after
intervals
the entry
Court,
containing
the
thereafter,
of this
Decree,
of each person
who has,
and
within
the
days:
(90)
made written
application
for
the rental
of an
and/or
(b)
the purpose
visited
1.
the premises
of inspecting
These reports
whether
shall
as a prospective
an available
apartment.
additionally
tenant
contain:
of an apartment
was
of an apartment
was
to such person;
2.
whether
3.
the
manage or
shall
without
ninety
following
a report
observed
apartment;
accepted
or otherwise
and at three-month
of two years
ninety
offered
to all
company,
the Defendant,
corporation,
apartments
the Plaintiff,
the visually
for
of
the Defendant
for
subject
association,
agency,
IT IS FURTHERORDEREDthat
entry
he is
the.' cont~nts
is engaged by Defendant
referral
company,
that
of apartments
by Defendant
explain
him that
person
agent,
shall
herein.
In the event
corporation,
a real
Defendant
the dates
actions
II
'I
Ii
j1
1!
For a period
decree,
the Defendant
of two years
shall
maintain
1'
11
I',I
Ii
11
I
I
,
ll
I
-8-
following
.
'
the
and retain
entry
of this
l.
'
"
ii
1:
' ..
li
,,
1,
,1
i'
,I
:1
I'
1J
1,
records
which
are. the source
,
II tion pertinent
to Defendant's
Ii
I!I Representatives
I
ii
ll
reasonable
11
II endeavor
Ii
of the
pertinent
times,
the inspection
Plaintiff
provided,
II
including
of the terms'and
objective
of the Defendant
requirements
of this
inadequate
additional
to notify
evidence
from
action
all
for
of modification
Decree
Defendant's
the Court
hereof
whether
at the trial
to Rule 65(a)(2),
the hearing
previously
shall
in the event
the
an efficient
and
compliance
with
Federal
on the application
held may be treated
counsel
in writing
for both
within
ten
(10)
wishes
to present
of this
cause,
or whether,
Rules of Civil
Procedure,
injunction
of the general
issues.
J..,1-
of September,
this
51' ....._day
1973.
United
II
ll
I
'
li
!l.,
lj
!!
lj
ll
-9-
11
parties
either
'.
directed
pursuant
of this
to facilitate
method of determining
the Plaintiff
the purpose
IT IS FURTHERORDEREDthat
are
inspect
to the Defendant
jurisdiction
particularly
prove
the statute
that
to
of such records.
purposes,
same should
to the Co~rt.
be permitted
any inconvenience
'
to report
shall
however,
or contain,
oblig~tion
records
to minimize
1
11
of,
States
District
Judge
r;l , r
f" ! t
,-
.--~--
'
f'OPPT
I'"'\
if
:.....,
onrnSEP 5
4 .il r~'73
CLH
~ r ~ i ..~.~:i=~~;?~7
HOflitiC:i'tkl,l!j: R,r;r Or Ori,O
1 ~'.~~-
u:iITED
STA'rES
OP )',"IBRIC}\,
)
)
Plaintiff
)
)
v.
NO.
C 73-..139
}
)
CI':'Y
()F Pl\ p7
, (")f'I"
1 ,
---------Battisti,
C.,T.
This
on behalf
reiief
of
use
an action
United
the
against
Provisio~s
42
is
violations
contained
et
corporation
in ~itle
established
the
general
defendart,
policy
sidirg
within
a federally
of the
have
offered
ar.d,
effectively
federally
1The effect
eate
accommodations
further,
Lil.od:
assisted
of the
from beirg
t:1,.: virtu:111:
as
purported
from re-
(under
which
it
blac':-:s
236
would
of black
to
irtcnrat.:::d
r::tcially
built
of
Section
designed
acts,
to
its
construction
in the
is
de r v dw? 11
.I
of
substance,
percentage
procedures
above-described
Act,
in
blacks
the
a fair
nossi'.)ilit:/
housinq
with
12 USC l 715Z-1)
adopted
ut"J
...
development
to
Rights
a municipal
alleges,
prevented
Act,
Housing
law.
excluding
apartment
f;eneral
injunctive
Civil
accordance
boundaries,
Housirg
Fair
of Parma,
complairt
substantiBlly
assisted
T~ational
ter.ur.ts
perp0t
its
the
of the
Ohio
ir
Attorrey
A..1nerica seeking
of
City
under
acting
of
by the
VIII
se_g_., by the
The r.overrme:rt's
that
.. of
States
alleqed
3601
brouaht
purely
City.
alleged,
is
to
makeup of .the
or
accc~rt
sin1ilc1rlywork
n:ice;
to
resi<lcrts
of
racially
Motives;
and
irtarfere
a~d prosnectivc
asc;istirr.
I' riqhts
fair
cor~stitutes
complaiPt
of
States
rights
t!1e
that
th is
has
failed
Defendant
has
pursuant
to
Court
to
lacks
cnjonnent
Fair
actual
of
of
from
t'r-teir
opportunities.
conduct
resistarce
t1:e
l)y
racial
housirg
tleFendaPt's
of
require
the
Goverrmert
argument
General
that
to
!Iousirrr
full
Act
ar.d
pursuant
municipalities
"persons"
to
or
aaail"st
is
and
r,,ore
definite.
its
motior
subject
political
to
for
subdivisiors
such
a suit
on the
that
the
relief
the
...
grounds
Goverrl"'.ent
car. he qranted.
separate
various
42 USC 3611
which
which
strike
not
tl1e f;overnrrent's
F.~.Civ.P.
=ias filed
bott0P1S
it
12(b)
upon
to
make others
Defendart
dismiss
jurisdiction
defendar.t
ve,
and
Rule
a claim
alterrati
cor.:tplairt
movcd.,to
state
In the
3613
a:.:,ili ty
housinq
that
securer'l.
for
assisted
arcl
or::ictice
of
Purely
r1:!1ite
Corstitution.
co~plairt,
the
fe~crally
char"~s
Prospective
arcl
non-discrirniratory
a Dc1ttcrr
er.joyrert
ri0:1t
of
to
housirq
The
d,:elliros
ir.tearatcd
sporsors
persons
to
deny
notions
alleaatiors
to
ir.
its
to disniss,
first,
suit
Attorney
by the
reasor
of
on
that
a state
may bE=:.brouoht.
are
not
42 USC
provides:
"Hhenever
th} l'.ttorney
r.eneral
has reasonable
al"y persol"'
or group of percause to believe
sons is enqaged
in 3 patterr
or nractice
o~
resistance
to the full
enjoymert
of any riahts
by this
subchapter,
or that
an? group
granted
of persors
has been denied
ar.y of the rights
by this
suhchapter
and sue', dcrial
granted
raises
an issue
of general
public
i~~ortarce,
I
I
-2-
I
l
he ~ay
brirn
a civil
action
in any annror;pi t-~(1 States
District
Court by
witJ1 it a conpl~irt
settirn
forth
nriatc'
filir0
such prcverti
ve
t:1e facts
ard requestirq
an anplicatior
for a nerrelief,
includirn
mar.ent or tA~norary
irjurctior,
restrairirCT
order,
or other o-rc:er a0airst
t 1 1e persor
or
persons
res,orsible
for such patterr
or
nractice
or ~enial
of ricrhts,
as he d~ens
r.cccssary
to irsure
the full er.j,oyr,ent
of
the rinhts
crrarted
by this
suhchar>ter."
Ir
reliarce
us
support
on the
~---~~'
taken
amenable
to
suit
or equitable
two cases
of Keroscha,
Both
cases
1983
history
peculiar
ar.y
regard
to
statutes,
after
City
is
the
issue
however,
initial
of~oscha,
11,
ir
if
only
urges
one passed
statutory
corstruction
not
of
lecrislative
giver.
to Section
nearly
these
viewed.
case
other
not
declaratory
In neither
of Section
are
are
l-'!orroe and
..
to
"persons"
that
be so broadly
cors.truction
therefore,
not
v.
cases
accordincrly,
on explicit
apply
These
questior.
the
great
'Torroe
are
even
statute.
er..:tmert
ir
1973).
and,
may rot
was to
particularly
the
here
olaces
Court
Defendant
predicated
the
"persons"
involved
to that
that
(Jure
statute,
souaht.
and were
suggestion
Suprene
muricipalities
that
exclusively
Section
defendant
42 USC 1983;
under
resolve
City
that
of
relief
the
4Rlg
establish
meaning
position,
of
u.s.L.N.
41
the
its
holdincrs
toget~er
within
of
civil
1983
in
rights
hundred
one
1983.
was there
years
:ior:roe
dispositive
and
of whether
~}
.p ,.::c:c ~l"r,-:;
Klux Act of ~pril
.-:,v, oririp
20,
1871,
1]
1y r1r,:r::t:.ed
17 ftat.
13.
i:t':i
:ection
1 o~ the
'."lunicipalitics
Housirrr
.:,ct.
a construct
its
'!:'his
Court
of
Sect ior.
ion
particular
O\!r
Ir
"?ersor"
11 Act,
'"-r(?rsors"
e,re
is
3613
t!Bt
issu0
rri.ust resolve
3<-i11 P 11ich
~etcr~irir.rr
the
cor,text
the
Sectior.
of
the
Fa.ir
adoptir.~
by
orop<Jrly
cor,,norts
or
of
th
'li
cortext.
ir. the
it
urdAr
of
mearinn
Sectior
ex,:,ress
c'ut;
of
to
eFf-:ct
reach
of
3613
t'1~
courts
Fair
the
to
the
word
Housir,o
cor,strue
the
j la.rauar:c
so
as
t;ritet~
----------Statr:s
:rn.ar.ifestircr
to
be
however,
Act
deal
housing
1968
its
practices
and
access
to
decent
Fair
Housirq
for
In
the
should
be
read
Griffin
v.
of
provide,
broadly
in
OLD.
States
niss.
the
Civil
lesiglation
so
other
full
ard
it
United
ur.der
fulfill
US 88
'Peal
1972),
the
lire"t-
States."
in
that
light
of
civil
construction
their
(1971);
!:state
is
underlying
and
465 F.2d
v.
fair
constitutional
purpose,
Pi~ley,
-4-
clear,
and
r::epurpose
the
to
403
Mayers!
of
Irdeed
within
hGre
order
Breckenridqe,
is
construction
or.e
were
It
blacks
expansive
as. the
542
discrirriiratory
that
statutory
clearlt
er.joyiro
throughout
this
United
776
"to
such
(1969):
(~bane);
347 F.Supp.
of
caner
statutes
1972)
is
cited
VIII
housirg.
housing
established
395 US 298
desirable
FS 534,
enact
hlockir.cr
fro~
310
let.
prevalent
t:onnress.
rmricinalitics
Title
was to
mirorities
light
ricrhts
See
were
Act
fair
Housirq
purpose
which
in
stated
passed
those
and
heer
w'.1et!1er
Fa:j.r
with
ratioral
explicitly
ations,
Cor.oress
broadly
racial
the
when
of
t:as
tl-ie other
by the
of
nssoc.,
----
history
or
way
intcrt
t'1e
'
covered
that
Rights
as to
-ore
to
?rucldrri
v . ~.:1::>ricfl
~re le0isL1tive
(lq,t')).
meapt
riive
~;urposes,
Daniel~630
(D.C.
Develo'J
wor<l "perso~"
Paul,
Cir.
.. Corn.,
must
be
I.
construed
in the
ir
such
coverage
a manrcr
of the
Defer.dart,
is
exnrc:?ssly
withir
the
irtcrdc<l
Fair
that
by 42 use ~3G02(d)
dcfirition
arc
there
exclu<le
irc1t1:,~
rJ-(
1
~:.;
of the
term
mentioned
Cororess
~-;r~
!'):"'
"persor. .,
nousir0
Fair
specifically
forth,
.."
loopholes
as the
4~ cs~ ~3C~~(d)
the~.
"''Pcrsor'
rot
set
sirnular
J\ct.
ar9ucs
nunicipalities
to
foreclose
nousirg
ho.1ever,
defined
as to
r:iust huve
nrovi~es:
ir<t ..,.:_-~-~~=~s,
cornoratior.:~'.,
~)<'1".:-t:'"':~-.:;-:i:c;,
::-: S')::
-:: .::;,
la~or ornari~atiors,
leaal
renrese~tati~cs,
mutual
cn~rarirs,
joint-stoc~
cornari~s,
trusts,
unircnrporated
oraari3atiors,
trustees,
trustees
ir b2r.r:rU'r1tcy, r-:?c"=ivers
and fiduciaries."
The Govern:inr.>nt argues
in
Section
private
corporatiors,
arquendo,
it
uperson"
as set
al 1-incl
"person"
terr;i
forth
it
3602(d),
of
"persor."
should
t'herein,
and not
'includes'
is
could
Section
be linitcd
v.
1960)
United
States~-
1957).
This
is
Accordingly,
is
a "nersrn,"
it
.dthir:
___________
:I
the
have
what
is
1:->
Gertz,
held
of
..
,_
__
and not
14,
662,
_____
word
(5th
20
a city
666
Cir.
(9th
or municipality
42 USC ~3613
..,
term
here.
that
r1e,1rirrr
"The
249 F.2d
case
the
enuinerated
erume:cation.
P.2d
he
Instead
"iPcl ude"
4')4
to
of
so stated.
that
such
of ertities
only
the
is
meant
indicates
to
so
of
enumeration
easily
ner:-ni<1an,
plainly
to be read
definition
a terM of enlarge:"ert,
usually
i'.rqosy
quoting
meant
only
l\ssurni:riq,
not
the
express
to
not
3602(d)
cor st rued
be
is
t~at
had
limitation."
Cir.
clear
to the
"corporution"
as well.
corporation"
Conr;ress
If
ones
in Section
to be limited
language
11
t:1e term
to ercompass
public
noretheless
usi ve.
Section
the
is
be read
hut
the
that
broadly,
in
should
3602(d)
that
_____
and
is
anen-
Lack,rnanna,
43G F.2d
United
F.Supp.
318
108
(2d
States
v.
P.H.!";.O.I!.
Cir.
1<)70),
Ci
of
--=--
Rptr.
Para.
nefen<lant
su:Jject
nust
to
not
of
suit
t:L!
beiro
dwell in0s,
real
~state
a matter
contained
other
or
in
!1and,
law,
the
in
be deemed
Fair
charge
practices
ur0es
fallir.g
o~ Section
in
the
to
have
l',ct. 3
tl:e
thir,
3617
the
to
violated
The
the
co::i9lairt
reli0f
si rce
sale
or
of
it
any
of
..
it
is
rental
dwe llir.os,
ir
carrot,
the
as
?ro'd:Jition
Government,
with
f:ectior.
is
opportunities
allegations
of
-----
that
financir.r;
<leferdant
,.;1
it
for
42 US(; 5 3606,
Housing
squarely
housinq
a clair
access
services,
that
and
violations
providing
if
Goverr.raert's
state
in
(1971);
F. Sm:>p.
even
the
De fer.dan
or
US 1010
"
that
cUscrimiration
rr.air.tains
clearly
with
,d th
bro}:erage
of
J\ct.
401
~~o. }(')72).
(F..D.
to
aff'd.,
1970},
-----
secor~ly
42 USC ~3G05,
Jack
failure
r:ou~ing
n.Y.
den.,
42 USC ~3613,
for
charged
(h'.n.
cert.
13,561
urder
Fair
694
Black
arquGs
be <lisnissc~
ur.der
669,
its
on the
co:'lplaint
discri~inatory
361),1 ( a)
as
well
as
Act.
3)
In support
of this
contertion,
defendant
has cited
to the
by various
Government
and concrressioral
Court
several
remarks
nacle either
in the course
of corcrressior.al
he arir.c:s
figures
on tho l'-.ct, or in the course
of debate
on t:1e floor
of
to the ]\ct' s :.,as sage.
'!'.:_.s_.114
Cor:r.:cess ir1..r:1cdiat 2ly nrior
Cong. ~cc. 2275,
227'.J, :!2'3~-:~~'.":3, 252?
('"\:,nnr::s
of 20riator
'
"'
+~
,
m
,
"o ,r.c,:1
' 1 c, s era ....
.. or .,.,
,Jroo.-;:1-?
arc ' ,;(C?ru.
....or ,.,cyc.1.r.ns"
1:1ese
ret-:3.r,s::s
~ay be generally
c~aracteri~cd
as attenpts
at settira
fort~
underthe purposes
of the rair
::ousina
!1.ct ar.d the nolicies
lyir9
it.
~hey focus,
as is natural,
on t~c need to pass
legislation
proscribing
discri~iration
in the housina
sector
itself.
They do not indicate,
ho..;ever,
what the impact
of
the legislation
was to be on mur.icipalities,
r.or do they seerr.
to conte'.71plato:
the problens
presented
by this
suit.
1
,.
-o -
T.:hilr:- lt
~ovcrnment's
comnlaint
.:it:1 rafusir.0
the
to
so limited.
, ~ut
Section
also
I, :~,:-y
relicrior.,
all
it
a d..:ellirrr
"appears
it,
made
dwellinos
United
all
and
P.H.E.O.H.
grounds
v. Youritas
Para.
of its
of
as
are
13,582
added.)
sectior.
catch-
or de-emphasized.
could
have
of deriying
unlawful."
F.Supp.
----1973).
invokes
This
or
This
effect
C'J.D. Calif.
further
reasops,
color,
therefore
Co.,
to
u~availa~le
race,
the
not
unlawful
Congress
have
clearly
racial
discounted
Constr.
co~plaint.
it
for
{~mphasis
11
which
The Government
support
hecause
to be as broad
practices
Rptr.
makes
grounds,
are
~ake
be easily
on prohibited
States
only
to
oriqir.
may not
3'104(a)
awellincr
al"'y p1:rson
or r.ational
it
"a
urla~ful
to
phraseoloa~
Indeed
not
snecifically
or. racial
in Section
3604(a)
of t1ie
deferdant
d\:ellir.gs
or rer.t .
~3k0s
ci1arge
or rent
contaired
to sell
''refuse
do not
sell
prohihitio:r.s
i;; true
42 USC 3617
~akes
it
in
unlawful
"to
coerce,
intimidate,
person
in the
exercise
of his
havino
aided
exercise
3604,
or enjoyment
3605,
broadly
or
worded,
now received
threaten,
or erjoyment
or encouraged
treatnent
defendant's
conduct
granted
endless
by the
complaint,
in barring
with
a~y oth~r
title."
and seemingly
The Gover:rment's
that
of
of any right
3606 of this
little
or interf~r~
or on account
person
in scope,
has
3603,
althouoh
until
however,
the
in the
by Sections
42 USC 3617,
courts.
any
fairly
construction
alleges
of
4}
!.'; would seem, ho'.vever,
that Judge Meredith,
in passi!'g
on the sufficiency
of a co!T1nl2tirt comnarable
to the one her.~
i~.several
resnects,
relied
oartially
on 42 USC
at issue
!i3617 in '.;ustair.iro
the cornnlaint.
S0e 1Jnih?1 St;=it,~s v. ,...;t:
-- ..-----......---- ..-- __
of Black J. ~k, supr_~.
,,.
..,
I
fech rally
actual
.
hons inr
assisted
and propsectivc
to assist
persors
opportunities.
in excrcisirg
clear
tt-i at
relief.
See
Je!"kins
t~e
the
admitted
complaint,
purposes
light
the
sunra,
mird,
dismiss
it
would
this
car
t'"lat
and the
ir
of
housirn .
to equal
fall
housina
within
395
oft~~
the
arnbit
could
421-422
complaint
must
~avoruble
3q5 US at
be ertirely
n.
the
be
relief
of
ertitle
facts
hin
45-.1fi
~!oreover,
to be taken
sufficiency
liberally
A21~
as
of t~e
corstrucd
With these
for
..
to
(1052);
(1960).
are
not
unless
to t~1e plaintiff.
inappropriate
co~p:i.ain t surmnarily.
should
!)ro_ve no state
of evaluatinn
?::09t
for
3513 US 41,
US 411,
complairt
a comr,lairt
a clai~
state
all~gatiors
allegations
for
vie-wed
to
that
nL=dr.ti ff
:::_. }~cr<e_ith~,
rnaterial
right
assisted
riq~t
seer.is to
established
f~ilure
o-: its
in suriport
federally
their
allegation
is well
for
is
of
~vit!-1 the
1617.
It
it
sponsors
This
of Section
irterfered
this
ard
JerJ:irs
rules
Court
in
to
Pai:-k Hones
See Kennedv
This
-8-
'
..
of
:nad:
of
r>rov . of
Supr.
:rad:,
39(;,
, .Judge
St.
309
~!arovitz
I!
F.2d
467
1208,
rary
of
Hoo,1s v.
Ci'J.D.
Ill.
l'J71).
so
correctly
(2th
1214
City
Cir.
of
IT' the
r:vanston,
335 F.
last-cited
case,
pa'le
at
said,
Siste_rs
1()7~);
39 0 :
It is especially
ir. ci vi 1 rio:1ts
disnutes
that
v:e ou0ht: tr 1)e r..,:ary o~ disposir-roi:
the case on pretrial
motions.and
courts
do
in fact
have a predi liction
for allouinr:r
civil
ria:1ts
cases
to proceed
urtil
a conpreh(~nsive
rec0rd
is available
to eit!1er
the facts
alleged."
support
or negate
11
I
I
AccordiPaly,
defen0ant
s motion
to
dismiss
the
..
Govern~ent's
co~olaint
alternative,
moved
four,
to
five,
strike
seven,
is
to
statement
as to
ten
of
the
are
denied.
ten
Defendant
in
of
their
the
of'paragraoh
~aragraphs
complai!1
IT IS
strike
and
a portion
denied.
t.
These
the
paragraphs
Government's
comolaint,
and
six,
motior.s
seven,
for
a more
eight,
art:'! without
definite
nine,
rneri t,
and
and
so onnr.PED.
~
--
-~
I
1;
-9-
'
/l . /~:.e.c
-'c:7<~.
d'_
~~
FranY
II
in
entirety
nine,
five,
has,
. Battisti
ef
Judqe
..
...
""
COURT
MIDDLEDIS~RICT OF LOUISIANA
YuNUTE ENTRYa
MAY15, 1973
WEST, J.
UNITED
STATES O? A.V.i.ERICl1.
CIVIL ACTION
VER&'US
NUMBER 73-97
"'**'"t*
Thie matter
for
no oral
statement.
a more dofi11ite
that
is before
A rcvie,.-1 of
&rgument in required
on thio
motion
motion.
Sinco all
seek
through
fendunta
the
this
of tho statute
could
proper
on its
face,
i.i,volvod,
is
be,
in fact,
Ul'ld
it
G. Watson,
Sr.
Su1:.1ptc1. B. D~Nio,
III,
i.i:: hereby
Esq.
I:.:.;;q.
defendants
DEHIED.
and since
procechu:-cs,
in language
the court
Pouglc:io M. Gonzales,
Gillio
couched
does,
IT IS ORDEREDthat
statement
us.o of discovery
and since
of tho complaint
of the claim
more pror.,orly
the
through
complaint,
languago
motion
similar
concludes
provide
that
udequato
to that
the
notice
-
motion fo;i: a more definite
.
...
~.
I
I
RE:
civil
United
]'.ct.ion
States
72-H-993
of Americu.
vs.
The Jim
Tucker
Company,
Inc .
....
..
9/22/72
In view
of
Meire Definite
shall
notify
answer having
been filcd1
Defendant
s r-1otion for
Stntcrn:Emt
iE denied.
Fed. R. c:i:~.ll 12 (c) Clerk
counsel.
COB
,,.
,
..
JUL16 1971
NORTHERNDIVISION
Plaintiff,
vs.
PELZER. RE.U...TY cc:'1PANY,
BY~~~~~~~-~~
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
IUC.,
ET JAL,
Defendants.
DEPUTY CLERK
__--
ORDER
....,
The Defendants,
Thrones,
submitte~.
it
motions
Pelzer
to disrniss,
Realty
filed
Upon consideration
is ORDERED that
said
motions
Company,
herein
on f.Iay 7, 1971,
of tho motions
be,
and the
and the
are
'T!c
tl1e .
1C -
day of July,
United
..
1971.
Gtatos
District
now
complaint,
denied.
DOl-lE this
G..
Judge
213 U:.
DATE:
'!O:
36602
. .
-f:t::-
/'
. .
c.
Mr. Henry
36601
'
RE:
6451-71
ADM. HO._____
VS.
CR. NO.___
H. MELVILLE DAVIS,
JR.,
ET AL .,
********************~***********~***********************************
You are advised
that
19 71
, the following
case by
Judge
18
-------
on the
action
d~y
__.
.,.
I
..'
\
,. '
,,,
J'
on 2/3/71 and
by defendants
--
,.,
MAY
-...------
- - "--
__ P_I_T_Tlv,_1A_N
________
o~
--
-~
..
MOBIL_E, AUBAMf\
on 2/3/71
_.........._,_.,,...,~.
.
:..,
!.
. I.!
. . ..
; ',,'
1 ..
...
,j
~'--
.:
'
..
...
'!
I
;;
...
A.
n.
~-"......
,.:~ ,:.1
..
'!
-~J
~"!
,...,
:..,,
1-l
..:,
.~...
"'i~.}
'
~;
:.:.
',
.
I r..
i
' ..
'
.. ,..,
.....
'~
,...>
....
,,......
"'
1,,.7;
:;
~'I
t'l
(J
:j. ~
Irene
; ::~
I',::}
.
~~;
'
"r:
JUDGE
. I
I
tt
..
! .
l
I
cause o: action
was instituted
by t~e
VIII
the Civil
of
Rights
Act of 1968,
A.B.
42
Comrany
Smythe
u.s.c.
and
j .
-~
~,;)
0
~:
;~
c,
Defendants
.~'f: ~e
!
.,~36 01 -_ ~.I,:
,_ ;"I'he
.dc~cndants,
\:) r;:;
ORDErt
t;
Title
)
.)
: I I !
under
o-.- .... ,,
..,
~~N.J.0..'i
AND
; t
This
, '
'
.)
DIS'i'RIC?
i . '
..: , '.' I ; : ;
LA.'1BR0S,
c 69-ass
.. :.........
ar.d
INC ,
'..
- -
al.,
.
I. I i .1 ,
: ;ti#
(1
\..~
f. #
et:.
..
....,, ..;:))
"
I i
IRENE MICHAEL,
'"':
Plaintift;:,
.
.:
:i
I I.
co:{?.;xy,
sxY?HE
)
)
v. !:
..:,.:-
-~..
I
,, .
i [' .
.I
l'
i: :.,
. I
4}
'
' '
i
. I
.'
.,
UNI?ED STATES OF
..,.:
,c r;.
- , ,..l
: ,. :
: t
..
Jl
' i.
:;/
"~
.. ,:~;
'"-""'
'
, ....
It
. . . .,-,,.,
:=-,
0
,,.,-
...........
......
:
.I
;I I
Michael,
is
in its
denied
'\"'"
,r
Two basic
;i
~ntireiy.
issues
, py
are raised
, I
'
theAct
complaint
single
i'
.
'
family house
'
.or
or rente~
e:<c;.1pt
;
alleged~~
'
I
I
I I
of the exemption
sold
.'
becauze
:'.
the
are
'
If
rr,ot.ion
'
'
the~defcnoants'
t.o dismiss.
The
motion
the co.riplaint.
~rovidcd
to any
an owner under
by
42
.:
u.s.c.
Two, 'whether'.
.
is unconstitutional
iiI . j
:.
'~
as a violation
issue
a=ises
I,
specific
effective
effective
in'certain
date
fo=.all
sta;as.
3601. {'c)
A.~endmcnt.
..
u.s.c.
of the First
~he first
not 42
I;
1ts orovisions
but becomes
' I "'
'
~tis
Upo~;~~actmcnt,
.1
applica-:
!'
blo
to dwellings(l)
I l
-------.
l .
I,
assistance
or arc
----------------11
l.
Undc:: the Act, a c1.:.,clli~g is defi:1cd as II any bui laing,
l!
structu=c,
o= ?O=ti0~ ~~c=co~ which is occupied ~s, or
ti
designed
o=in~c~d~d ~o::- occ~?~ricy 1 as, a residence by one
ll
0
....
.::
~
'
:
"',..
c.
,,
V
C
...
a~
\,'"Ii'
c'n.
'
O.::.::
"'"'",.,
r;
;-:
().....
0
._\.!
... -......u
......-.._-..;..:,, "
..:>..
C....""'
._....,t...;......L.:"" """
!;
snlc o~ lci:.sc :o:.: t:1~ c..;:i;st::uctio:-. or loc=-tion thereon
of .:i.;l:
scch building,
.~~=~c:u:c, o~ portio~ the~cof."
49 u.s.c.
-
th
-u1l
&,...,
'
~,
r.
53602 {~).
....,.;:;,
It
,I
11
:,J
I .,.
I
I I
'.
'.'
'
.!
..
:I
. II '.: ,
. fi:
,.,
of fcdcrul
c:.:Ghip.
1
1
II, 31, l9GO, ii ap~lios to
I
.' .I
,;
, .
I. :
cxcmi,tion5.;
is
for
42
u.s.c.
.i:2
. .
i ' !
any 1 si~gle-f~~ily
to
owner
11
I manner
if
! :
agent,'.o.r_
or rented
an ownar.
by
31, 1969,
sold
the Act
o.r rented
:, ,i
or rcntcd [with)
the.use.in
of any real
servic~s
or scrvi~cs.
I
the busi:-.css
of selling
, .
or rentingdwclli::.gs;
..
iI l'
..
c~ployee or.agent
of any iuch broker,
: :i .:
roan, or perso.1 i 11 42 U.S.C. -~_3603 (b) (1) (A).
'
cst~te
6r of s_uch facilities
or o~.a~y
...
an
by
s~lcsrnan;
'
in
person
sold
Dccc~bcr
o~ re~tal
; i
i :
sales-
agent,
''
.a..-.ily
!,
house
for
the year
of 1969.
Particularly,
they
contend
. .
thut
for
; i
within
yc~r
th~
that
the
of ~969,
the':
sale
i .
;
the assistance:
~
a real
excwpticn
since
.
fer~
1969,
the
est~tc
for
or agent
of real
estate.men
'l'he
Court
is
need
implicitly
. .
~ot reach
! .
.~
I
December
aid
the
I I
...o"' ....i....-t
.. '
prior
cxciuaed
J
.
i !
with
..
. I
'
..
sp~cifica:.::..y
is
time after
.,of
.
the period
o:: rental
..
i .
house
,,
b~oker
includJa
is
They claim
'
~ale
house.
single-family
31,
Agent
of a real
in the ~ct
brokcr~r
cstat~
'
included
; i
. i ;
!I
One of thcsccxcmption5
house
is sole
suc:i:house
~
,Il
of t~e~alcs
I broker,
I of any
After
for two
dw~llings,.cxccpt
3,GOO(u),(2).
house
other
applies
u.s.c.
all
any singlc~f~~ily
.
u.s.c.
42
..
I 1
'
''
.. ,
'
; I ;
t.:....,n
......i.;;;.,
the validity
of the
~
.f!
., ). '
a.e
...
cr.aant...:>
i .
I
contention.
..
The Gcve:nmc~t
that
allog~~
'
the
I :
....
.....
'
J,
houses
1,
11
in the
subdiv!sic~
subcivisio~.
v~c~~t
I .,
la~c
&~d with
?h.o.Court
house
finds
nor to a:su~division
'
..
!I
.,
that
.i'
ii
t~ all
rc~pect
'
the
the cxc~~tio~
.I
o: 1969 is no~!
as an entity.
....-
I
I
I
I
I
i
II
t
. t,.I: .
,i
,
.,
,,
.
I
,,
.
.
.
..
11
,, I
I
..
'
a claim
'st'.1t60
relief
for
"
:l
..
a11cs-i:!d exemption,.
has still
'
'
I. 'l'hu.:;,
I
,,I
Io
''
the
il.gainst
Govc!:nrnc:r!:
I
i
de foncl;,n t3 ,
thc.
0
As for
of 42 U.S.C.
tutional.
I,...
the
second
[360~(~),
iszuc~
thatis
the
finds
that
thecourt
The section
reads
co~stitution~li~Yi
is consti-
it
as frillows:
of
..........:o ....
p.._e.._ .._C,l cc t 1.;. i,.....J..,.
,,,J..'-'-""'~
1
or discri~i~&~ion
~~s0d nn race,
colo~, religion,
or natio~~l
o=i~in,
o~ an in~cn~io~
~o ~ake ~~Y sue~
~""','\-a c....\..:cJ.-'-~':;;:
,I..,...,..~
~"""'..-::1."'--..;.......,s
a-,:
.._,,.;..'-..- ~'-"
Le..~!.:,;
linitation,
prefere~cc,
or discri~ination.~
..
is not void
This
II
,
,
is not viola~ivc
arc
denied
othe~
contentions
vn.gl.:.encss.
Amen<l~cnt.
in regard
to thei~
..
also'withcut
"iccordingly,
for
~he'.defenda~ts'
motion
of the First
,!
'.
section
'
the ~otion
to
., :
.!'dismiss
the
co:nplaint
!.s
i.'1
1
I
.1
.
..
~;
-I
'..
I
j:
I
i:_;-
1:
t 'iI
I
'
..
t
'
t
..
'
..
'.
.
I
..
,,
\
l
J
'
I
11
3 '-'l FH'70
UCTiu
..
)
)
"'-
..
, , "'\...
;L;_tJ
c'\ ..
'-,,.:
..-'"'I-"'
b/U
..
SO DI"..,..
.f'
.
.._)J. n1~
.
........1,.
o! t.t.:o spst>tocnt
l:Lorida.
'l"ho dcfcr..dont
011
thrco
. -
.."'""..._......
....
.
...
....,.
to dit;t:1!.00
in Eolly;1ood"
the: co~plo.int
gi:'cunds.
. '
2.
erentcd;
.:
d
...
end
:li
fnUuro
to otato
cnn
b3
..
in the cor,.plaint
r:uicicnt
facto
to
'
'
~. i'
..
,.
for 6u.,...
"l".!lt')' Judsr.;;.-.mt
'
...
---
:l
,I
.i
coc;>ld.nt,
........
'
rMo ..
ooc,---...
.t:
; ,t'\.
.~ I
' J,....,.,...,.,
NOVE, 1970
tJ..
ucy
or Octobar,
"' ..
. ...
'.
1970.
~lVIL. HIGi-rr::::;
________
___-,
..
..
........
II
:)!f>T:lIC'.r COUD.T
1--~01~'r11~I{li
1:i:/f~ :rc~r 01_.-r::;_~o::c!i\
1
/'i.TU.It,.'.'. f:IVI.SIUH
,...-"".
UOC}(fTED
OF
"It
-----ORDER
The de fenc:ant:s
d ,..,.r.Jn{tc('!"'t
,._,J..) ......
...... <>
0
'"
.....
,0.-1'"l*'
....
This
behalf
this
~-...
t,2
States
u.s.c.
by virtue
court
co:npl:,1.int it
is ellcgcd
pcnclin.; before
unclcr Title
360.1,
of 28
!.
VIII
General
on
of the Civil
Jurisdiction
:ea.
court:.
this
by the /ittorncy
brour;ht
more
r~u
.r. tr e
pu
-~ "'"~t t o n,,u11;.1 12 o;i.:
1
1
""
'"'f,..i
"-"-L ..~--,
Procedure:.,
a. ouit
is
of tho United
nurl to
of Civil
Fc<lc1:al Rulco
rtir:hts
'-J
exists
in
u.s.c. 1345.
In paraeraph
10 of the
in part:
The dzfcnd,mts
follow n policy nnd practice
of rncial
c!iscri:":".in.n.tion a{;ainst Fe::;rocs
with respect
to the snle of lots in the
pro 1'.X.!rties described
in the prccccding
paragraphs.
A readir13
iS Stated
that
6Ufficient
tO pDSS defcnclSnt:B
the alle~ations
respond.
Conley
are clear
pre-Act
ir,1,.utE::rinl,
'
i~:ipertincnt:,
to strike.
LT.C.
Accor<lingl},
all
v.
'j"he issues
41 (1957);
and Uriitcrl
~:t;itcs
r,nd rcquir,
.
533 (?!.D. Ga. 1969).
Dotibns
1n.a.tter" subject
333 U.S.
683,
to n notio
t.1otion
nrc
ucrit.
\:!:' 11-::c<:
Ir,
..:
.
.. ~
.:,-
, . ' .. ,. ; , ..
'.,.
r,11r
7-;,-:-~-.../ .-:---~ .
"
F--:-.. .. . . ,
.:.,,J' .. ~.
, :/.-:,
tld'
. I
'tta t provided
705 (lW,3).
by l:r:'fcnd.nnts'
no (1iScJz::;ion bcyn:,d
l urtl.t>r,
is not "rcduncnnt,
c!iscii::d.nD.tion
f:c~ent Ir~-:tit'!!:.,
rn iscd
nn<l
to
or vcondclous
defendants'
J.10ti.On to dis:zdSS
defendants
alleged
a claio
cnou[)i to enable
shows that
' : . ., ,..1
....
.'
lfl?O
,, '
. ,,
I
I
hrlcf.
for
Follcwing
defendants
gc.tions.
snst:cr
their
within
Dit:covei. 1 is not
dili 0 cntly
four
is
the
l:(>
such "pr~ccdurcs
discovery
plaintiff
be com:nenccd prompt
months after
So ordered
this
/s/ Albert
s alle ...
L1rther procccd.ing.f.
dclny
chull
procedure
propar
y,
clelay and
"
1970.
J. Henderson.
Jr.
.1:e , --;-;:-1.
. :~,l ~t r. /;;-s \ "i,~w ;, -.;...;..,-1--,-0-,
u,,<i
",.I, ,.,.,.t-
Jll ~o
for the iforthem
1 iGtrict
of~ Gcorr:;:l. 1.
1,..._ ..............
t....\ t..,.._.
....
\,,,4,,1,.,.
...
: .....
..
..
J ...' : i_
-'
'
t . , ' \: ... t
iJ, ..
',":.;:
.. , .
"'
..
,.,
,.
( .:; .t..q,-yIc..,,,
.. ,\.. h.'
...
t,.! ,.!
Jn1n
,,...
l.,.,L
..
rr
l
.
.. t.. .. '
i .
.. .,~.;.,
l.
...
'
; __
.-, Defendant.
..~:"'... .
I
I.
'
..
.:__ .
... ..l
~
~
o:ront
----
..
')
.,
' .,i
,.
... .. ~;::. ..
...
........ :-....~~~;i
. . .. .. . : ... : ,... .
...
).
..
........
..,,,.,,..J....
l tr,11-~c
\
.. ,...
..'
.
.!
'.
.....
... '
V!t
:.)
.....
'
...... ,..
Court on
.
;'..
. :. . . ...
~ '
st
10':CO
~.::
.,.>_:_:.:':,-.-~
defcr:tl.:1nt
.. .......
...
:.
..
:.
'
- ,. : .,.
.J'
--~~.
.. ....
;
.
,:
__
,.,..
-.,..
,~~..: .._..\
.
strike
certain
cilrcru;1y
for
:, ..
..._..~..r.,;.;
-~
h~arinr;
t.ho Court
has
,...
.t.1,..
ic
- d"'"""r"'"'l.1
....-1
'
thia
tha cocplnint
st'!..!:.!icd
to
thereof,
port:iona
ln preparation
......
..
., .
'
...... """'
....
...
"':.. ... ......
. -~...
-- _...
.......;._ . .
'I
II
..
:*
a-re hereby
by
The 1ncte:ri.:1l
.,.Lf
,..j " f!C~c""'-"
-~
V -.,
- .J
...
~L
._
..
c~enic-cl.
florica,
. JiOir!::
't
this
- ....... .
.x-.
. -
...
.. ,. "
,,.;."
..-..
- -..,.
cc:
..
.~
-~
,,.
r
I. ~,.
.,-, i
__ t
...............
:-."\,
. .:
. --~----
....
~ _. '.,
t
l
,~
'\ ' "
...,.,_ii~~)
..,_...,r..,_
-.,__ 'C
-
G"~'r,-:r..
_,.,h..., J.'! H { f- r, 1,,-.11 ~ ..r .. ,, { '"'C
..hrd ~ L<!:0:"!.'.':1<l,
F~q-..1:i.)~c,
..... ""'""'"'
;:
~! . ...:-<h~.yof
. . ..
-~/
1w
-,
........
.,\.,...,_
. .,
- .......
,.
...
. ,.,
.-
,......
,
'.
"
I"
. .
..
.'
'
'
~ ....
---
.. -.
:f
"
.J
..
\
.
.,
,\
....
IN THE u:n:TED STATES DISTRICT
..
Defendants.
'
t'.."'.
.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
..
This matter
:;:J
Pl
,:?
..
...
,
:..:....,
'
ORDER
..
,,....., .,
..
-i
~ z.:.;
.
.
.-.~.
.. - "':.-
.~...
came on fora
of the
-.....:
c . ........
NO., 70-ltO
..
,...._,
.
... _:-:;
CIVIL ACTION
_,,:,
).
hearing
dcfcridants
on April
to dismiss
10 1
the
comp1ainto
The United
:,.
e.cticn
under
on
commenced
this
the
. Fair_ Housing
...
'
Pennbrooke
, Marylando
after
Act of 1968,
.January
..
States
Tcrrl:.ce,
an apartment
The. operative
allegat!cns
portions
of jurisdiction
.
compl~~
in Su.itland,
of the complaint,
and coverage,
read
as
.,
follo~,,s:
11
,i
The defendants
follow a policy and practice
of racial
discrimination
against Negroes
with respect to the renting of apart~cnts,
Pursuant to this rcJcially discriminntory
policy; defendants have refused to~makc
.,. apartments
available
to Negroes and have
made statements
with respect to the rental
..
..\
\ .
'
'
....
..
#
"'
.,\.
,. ('
. :\-'
'
-.
Th~ defendants
~ovcd to dismiss
the action
on the
.t
. grounds
that
the complaint
.1 .
Section
,_ provides
cause
,
42 U.S.Co 36130
persons
section
qas re~sonable
Gener_al, when he
to belie~e
This
or
practice
of resistance
rights
by the Act,
granted
forth
the
to the full
facts
may file
and requesting
as he deems Qecessary
The defendants
contended,
Fcder9.l
"shoi:
failed
and plain
Procedure,
relief
..;;.
in additlon,
that
the
of Rule 8(a)(2),
which provides
of the claim.,"
statement
"setting
such preventive
Rules of Civil
'
a complaint
.. ..
'
_complaint
_enjoyment of any
for
state
could be granted.
..
-:-
..,.
.\
'
...
2
'
.'
.,
.'
\
..
.. .
i
\l
.. \.
....
Upon due consideration,
the
.complaint states
a claim upon which relief
may be granted,
\
f1
. compl~es with 42 u.s ..c . 3613, and. is sufficient
to resist
..
to dismiss.
a motion
The factual
details
allegations
-defendants
the
,'.
broad
underlying
by means of pretrial
available
discovery,
to
Rules
26-37,
is denied
.l
.. .April,
1970 ..
. -..;
.
c:,
..
,'
~
. -,-L
1,- day of
j,
..
. ...
' ..
-----
United
..
States
Di~trict
Agreed as to form:
I '
"i(
(
.!' ~;
..
MIRilll"l R. EISENSTEIN
Attorney
I
I/').//I
I
for Plaintiff
'I, , \
---------
11ELSON D2C1G:Li3Aill1
Attorney
for
..
Defendants
,
..
;.a.
~~.
,..
'\
'
.......
xn
"
. >
UNITED STl.TES
01? h.Vi.EP.IC1\I
....
)
)
)
Plaintiff
v.
Action
No.
21470
et al.,
COMP}\J.:,i:lI.
H. G. SMITi-IY
Civil
}
)
Defendants
ORDER
This
on all
and
Comparly,
Victor
severance.
hearing
and Lydia
b'
:..i
~--
Company to dismiss
be
and
it
hereby
and
is
the
the
defend.ants
of
the
in
and
alternative
and
it
for
sumrnary
Sidney
j1Jdgment
it
Victor
f
a severan'.cc
be
a.nd Lydia
the
l
II
a full
it
now therefore
is
o,
for
motion
Rothstein
be and
a11d they
Carone,
hereby
'
and
,i
H. G. Smitl1y
smmnary
judgment-
of
to
it
the
Chillum
dismiss
hereby
or
is
Hcig:'1tS
in
the
denied,
is
Company,
..
for
is
Victor
rmm.mary
Armstrong
briefed,
alternative
the
Le\ds
of defenc12;.nt
motion
denied,
court,
1970,
H. G. Smithy
_ __;..1~_.
r_r:._'I
_1_c...._,197
FUR'l'.i.P-;;RORDERED that
corporate
fully
been
17!
c1nd for
action
and Hrs.
open
.;
.O.z. day
on April
dismisc
of
in
ORDERED that
a hearing
Carone,
held
thi!.
for
having
The motions
Court
to
motion
on the
having
the
car:1e on
motions
defendants'
judgment,
by
mai :.er
and
motions
and Mrs.
urc
denied,
tJK~ motions
of IL G. Smithy
"-
Lewis
and
of
Lewis Armstrong
Armstrong
it
for
is
c1efenc1b.nts
to di.cm.ins
and
...
l
:
t'
l in
the
al tcrnr,t.ivc
.c'ie1Jied without
motions
its
for
for
prejudice
.._
to said
r;ummary judgment
discovery,
and it
wh,;n the
1970,
to
renew
plaintiff
hus
defendants
shall
their
cor.-iplctcd
iG
I:'URTHER ORD23R.:CD
that
May 18,
defendant.a
hE::r.c-.b.yare
to answer
all
have
until
the complaint.
kJ.J)o~~f y
h1A
r-r~
1rl'i
'
JUDGE
....,.
,,../
vs.
._
0
MANAGEr{i:i::NT
CLEARING., INC ,
a corporation.,
__
RD ....
ER_
.
Defendant.
The defendant's
argument
tion
u.s.c.
42
that
of legislative
,
Motion to Dismiss
based on the
3613 is an unconstitutional
'
authority.,
that
{CAM)
delega-
juris---
diction
facts
because
the coo.plaint
or circumstances
to file
authorized
suit
and that
fully
heard
vised
in the matter,
argument
th~ complaint
___'0~--
having
been
fully
ad-
day of April.,
States
1970.
District
...,JI
is
I!
to
fails
United
t.to,-,u-ew
General
...-,-.
oi!l
DATEDthis
--
or show any
can be granted.,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
that
.is denied.
t-o allege
state
in oral
fails
Judge
.,.
}lit,.'{2 lt 1~I I
ClvtL
HlGBTS
7,../ '<'..
/ _ -()"J(ji
-..)_.;
c. s.
White-Spunner,
Jr., P. o. Drawer E, Mobile, Ala.
Mr. Henry c. Hagen, Housing section, Civil Ric;htn Division
U.. s. Dept. of Justice,
Washington, D. c.
Mr. William L. Irons, 1300 City National Bank Building,
Birmingham, Ala.. 35203
..
,,.
'J!O: Mr.
: '.
36601
f.
l'
I .
RE:
61+51-71
ADM. NO._____
VS.
CR. NO.____
ET AL.,
*********************:***********~*************************"''**~******
You
19 71
a.re
that
advised
, the following
case by Judge
on the
action
MAY
~
-..--------~
~- ..._ - _....._.,.,,...
...
18
-------
dn.y 01'
was taken
PITTMAN
-------------
in the above-entitled
by defendants
. '
.. ,
\
on 2/3/71
I '
and
on 2/3/71
~ -..., .. ---.....-.-
..........
~-:
..
'
,,-,
-:
--
___
..
4 __
..
_____
'.
.... . .
,. ..I
'
V ..
-~
---
.:. ....
.. :
;
.'
.,
'
I..
~:
,:.:
..
. .
.
:.-..~ .: .:; .. : . . .
.: .
. ..
. . .. .. ......
. ... .... -
. ~-
.:
.;
.. :
.....
...
~-;
:-
"
of
'
GIT.,P.,:-...,
. .,L,h.l.....
l:C
Attorneys
'
for
...,..,
._,
De!cnda~ts
Street
22 West First
r.c-q~
GlI .,J.11:.L\.'v)
-,.,...l'"'
..
.
:- .. - ~ .
Ho1.1nt Vernon,
N'. Y.
10550
: By:-David C. Gilberg,
Esq.
..
For tl1c F:Lr,~
''
..
.
..
.-
..
....- . !....
: ..
....
...
.. . CROA
KE, D. J.
... . . . ...
....
-~
. '
-~.
.. ..
..
....
'
..
..
.;
..
b1the
..
. :-- .- -
.....- .:.-.....
~--
... -- .. :.:.: ~
. --. -------------.
---
. .
....
.
. __.....-;-~-. .
...
- -
Gerier~l
Attorney
e I
. .of: the
Uriltcd
Stc1tcs
pu:csu~nt
.'
:-------
. .
---
. . . . . .. .. . .
. ...
. . -......___;. -. .'Jt - .--. _;.. . . ....
.
'
.. ..
.:
.to
81),
Title
VIII
of the Civil
...
--- -
. ..
r-:,.l- .seq. ,
..
.
...
. ..
. ., ..
. ...
....
" '.~
. 'r,.
. f ..
: t .
. ..
.
'
....
..
,"
.i.
.
,,
) .
.. '
'
..
.'
..
.- ..
~ .:-:. .. ~
South~~n District
"II
...
l =~..-......
-y
J:'.lJ.1,,,l,-'u,'tl:.
C'"'\~-('
L)J.~.l.;J
Attorney
,'
:.-:t\)_'.\?
/}-_
.
Ul'I1 I1Tl',o
:.
.
'
~-!.
___
"'':-~.-.
... ....;_ .
...
---..
i. :-::::.",
Defendants.
.::
::._..
. -------------------------------~--x:
...
70-Ci.v.1967
---;:-;'.
; :
Plaintiff,
.. f
-A- ----"'-----~-
,'
'
'
..
'r
...
.;
'
... " ..
'
'.
..
,.
,.
".t'. ,~
'
!' :
. '
'.
...
:.)
'
.."'
'
: :
..
..
.
'
.
..
---
"-
..
I.
(: :
.......
...
-.
.>J
..-~---~dizcrimlnntlon
.I
1 .
of
..
..
.. :
..
lfuito
.net ion
. .
"' ~
' Defendants
Alvin
on t11iB motion,
and thnt
. "'.....
.. . .
~
."
'.
..
.. .... ~.
.
..
.: ...
. .. :. :
813. effective
:
in
...
fec1crc!l
..
..
..
- : ;... -
.
.. ,,,,., ...-, .. -~
,.
'...r. .
i~
' .. ' .
'"..
. ..
.:
I.
..
~ t
..
Y.
,c
..
..
. .. .....
... .
:
. -. ....
.
...
.,,.......
.
:.
"
;:..
: -: .... i
orderfor
n
.
of 3613
Law
be required
reason.:1bly
..
-.
I
. ,.
.. .
plen<l:i.n~s chall
the
Procedure
no mo.r:e:t'han
. .. .
...
contnin
...2 ..
-... ..
.
'*t'
of Civil
.
,,;,
......
<
...
..........
-.
,_ .
..
..
..
":'"".:, ...-:-,:--.~-:-~.":
--.,
'
.. .. ... ...
.~.
.. .
.
'
... ::-.--~:-:
....
............
ii
.'1
1
..
,i
..
,;
c
'
.
.
.i,
. ~.
..
:'
.'.' ..
io
J .
l
.~ -...
.-
to prcpa1e
thnt
. .
...
~ ..
: I:
the provisions
It .
...
. ... .
.'
on the ground
provides
.
. . .......
..
of the comp1aint
so vague
..
sh~mld ~ot
..
I ..
. . a_ responsive pleadinz . . .
.
. ;..::-,..r~ule 8 (~) of the Fc<lcrnl Rules
.. ~.
.;
ns specifically
:. dc.fcndnnts
. : -r, ...:-:.
~:--...
.
compl.:!lnt
the
---
..
. ~ L
.
.
.
.
.
'
.
:
.
.....
...,.
../-:../ :}>-~
. . ~. ..;
Eisen,
VIII,
. >=:.dthe1.,.conclusions
. !
..
to cou1ply with
"....
. :
.nny fncts
!
. : I
.....
,j"'
llealth
Title
' I. I
Procedure~ seeking an
stntcf!)ent
. fails
..
commencing
..
,90-284,
. . ..
by them
The co~plnint
;\
pursuant
of Civil
of the Public
____
:
.. -..............
. that ".
.~1-.
---
I.
more d~finitc
..l
..
to .the r~ntal
. ..
by t!"le clcfenclnnts.
..
. . '.:.l1
.
on Hdy 1/i, 1970 .nnd no answer has
New York.
filed
,;,r.g
.
Federal Rules
..
. .
Yor1kcrs' New Yor!,;;, llnd 2-4 Windsor
Plains,
filed
- . ;
bring
.,
...... .
' .
rc~pcct
vith
in buil<lin3s
....~.....:.:..
... ~ -
'
.. - :.
t .
by dcfcncl;;.nt:;
this
,,. .
.. .:.
. I
"
.? Terrace.,
t :...~
..
. ..
,.
rncinl
nt
..
opc1rtr.:1cnts
I. ..:
..
..
. \
ij
'
.1.
' .
c ho r t "n U p l a in it at c:~~'.~~cc\~:."
.~l:n~"'.. l
. 1.'. :. 11
11
-:--:::~r~
-:-~--.=~-~?\c__~~~~::
~1:-~o cnt:i. tlcd
---;---7-.
.
.:-.-_s.-~
_.__
....
.-.
r~
\.:
....
:
S tn tc:ncn t Of
definite
~ ~~~~~~:!1~' l:___-
to.
Ii.cf
j~C
'.
pbin tiff
<I
A mo2:c -- -------.-:-::-- .
u.
inst,rat
in the
r..:,;
' ..
ns r~qUC3t,cd
C cfoi,;,,
c.:i.sc, is required
by
\,
..>f:. ;~:.:: .
.
.: ....
-.. . .
tha.t a party
cc1nnot reasonably
.: -
. .
.!
to frame
,, ... ;;.
.n responsive
pleading
A rca<lin3
th2 co1:1plaint
of
'...
.. -
The action
"poi,:cy
...
..
"
...
;
..
c.rwo reveals
.:ir~ neither
...
vogue
discrimination
I!
In pnrairaph
an::1 practice"
.. ..
t:i1crcin
brouzht
.._.... .
'i'
..
in this
.. l .
....
by dcfcnd~nts.
'
"',.
.. '
-:anu_p_f.iEfiEc".of raci6.1
.>.......to-cnj-c>i.n-~c:"poiicy
.....
contnined
..
.. . 1
, . \
: ..
. -.... ...
be required
. :.
.. . ..
......
. .
or ambiguous
. . .:
::. -
.,.
:: .. :. : ... ' . .
'. ...
< .,,.:
.......
..
-. -:
!'
. by dcfcnclznts
.,
..
of the co.:};_)lnint:
lr
allczcd
is
Si.!ch
.j
to inclu,Jc:
.
1) Hnkinz
...,.
..
not be r~ntcd
will
. ...
I
thnt
opar.tments
.. ... 'It.
t .
to Neorocs
p
1
2f RcprC6Cnt1.n;;
..
.nrc.
: ...
. ..
'
..
. . .
. "tinnvtdlable
for
~.
...... ... -
.'
. .
. .
...
. ..
. ,....and
. ' ......
...
apartments
uhcn in fact
rental
..
..
. , ...
,,.
-,--..
..
..
..,
...
.
..
'
't
:"*
..
to1"7'1G
.. 3 -
..
..
..
/,
- -~...
....
:-:;:..:.:.::::.:.
:~.:.:
:-r
-...............
.
"
...
..
... .
iJ
. . .
'.
.,
.,
.,
.,....
'-. ..
.
i,
11
..
.
..
..
.....
c".,
..,
. rt
..
\.
.r
'
..
::. ..
:.
..
..
'
I :
..
,.
.- .
.
.
.
..
....
'
.........
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...... .. ..
....
.
....
- . .
' ............~.... .. .....
;: .
't i. ..
.. ...
,
'.
,
'I
.. . . ....
..
...
. ..,,
availnblc;
..,.
nre
.i
..,
I
...
..
..
'X.i1is Cou;:1..-r-11-.cl'"'.,
'
~ s Dlnin 1 )'
l, i), 1t
tl1c "'O
\. :: 1r)1..:int
L y
"-
..
>
'
.f .~_!1__~g_1~_f:>_;~;:;i=_ty
__.\:"J_t_h_J:}).c~_r~~quJ.rc;1:;;n
t:3 __0 f _}iulc~. 8 (li).=.~_1_1::1.:.
..,.---.-----,.
----...~~~ ~[-~~~~~~~=.::
:_.;_
C . p ~{t cn.tly . tili f I ci. ~n t On' -1 ts - f ~~ e:;_:_.
l f"'i; So~.11',f"
hc:-fu r the l: ---~~.
~ -
---
"' ...... -
l .
i ...:
.. -.:.,..-~_,.,._:
'""
-"'
"-'"*
""'
"'
---
., ..
.-.-----
noted
notfons
that
for
in the
A<l8irnl
:._.:./
---~
~-~
..:.(S.D.ii.
Y. 1969);
.. .
.. ..
.
.
M.:ic1)::>:1~1c1
v.
. .. >_ ;. . ~-(S. D. N. Y. 19 5 7)
.....:"". .
. ,..
....
':'
" .
"''
.... ...
... ...........
~
~:-.
their
...
. 1
-. ... . Def:ei1dants
'
'.
.# :
. c.vJ.-tlentinr;r
. .
.. ..support
. ...~..
. .
. .
..
. ..
. . .....
. .
..
.
in sup?ort
"...
i.. ; ..~
. .-... !
...
of this
proposi
. ..
..
short
...
,:nc.1 plain
..
,,,.
..
..
' : .....
.
to adopt
rcf'-:scd
shall
..
..
..
.. '
( . J:
'!-.
'
the
..
...
ii
;.
. ... . -:, .
~
...
. '.
~:-.,
-,
of
...- 4. ~ .
"'..
:.
.. I
~
..
,
~ ~
,.'. ..
.....
.. ..
..
...', .
.. ...
:,
.. .::,
(
"
..
r.tntcU1ent
of the rcqu:b:c~ents
'..
.
..
this
and to contnie.
by deend2.nts
'..
,:"
..
: .
in
.
,.
.. .
.
h.:1ve. consistently
co10:ts
..
.... . .
t~on
as bcin 6 in dcrog~tion
.
section
..
,,.:..
.;
..
of
&
-~r.
~.: .. . ..
..
......
'
..
t.
'
..-~--~.- ..
of
11
.,
"
P.roce<lt.ire <1.ndrequ.il:c
of Civil
-.
to be plc~_dc<l
.
facts
..._!he
.
-:.;. .;.. . ~
..
-~
1957);
"'
....
. s
..
the. ar~mc~tt
Rules
.:~ .
t}ic provisions
thnt
~,.
_.,.::. Ru_1C 8 of the Federal
i.
159 ....
.. I.
advnnc~
..
i:1otion,
Rights
...
..
. . .
~-# ..
......
832
Ast~;~;21 F.R.D.
301 F. Supp.
-... ,
'..,a!'-1 ..
:.,. :.
.......
H~~anellC?_,
t~f:
_,. ...,.,
:,:.,.
...
1)'
which
S~tisfics
CD.SC. clearly
pt'Cscnt
...... ~ J';c!3ler v.
.....L~:(;:-.<-"-.
-
of the claim,
. ..
.j~. :~...:: : : : . .
=.i./
.,
. =_
...._.....)
ere
,.
t _.:.
.. _.! . the CO,nplaint
.
co~rts
! t
..!.;:.:~-~:....
federal
. ..
in the
plea.dings
arc not
since
,"
..
::..t_.
...
:_:
;::: ~~~r;quir~<l
.,.
. ~
'I
.:.j.
:
..
'.
.
:
..
favored
..! .. . ,-.
.
"'-
..
.. . ....
I
:q ... ...
.,
:
'
.....
...
..
. ..
..
...
In ~1tcc recent cn~cG,
; "plc~adcr is cnt.i tlc<l to relief."
t . .
--~:7-~:-
~ :-.-..---o-t--l-1c-,-~---f-c-J:-c-t-_
.J._l_d_i_~-.
t-r_i_c:_t:_c_O_U_
rt~..1;~~c .~ c3'c~
~t~cl;
si.~;i
I;:~.~
-.---=-.t
:
...
..
.....-.-.,t-----~----
..---.--:
i:
-.. a1~r,ura0nts
. .
.
!
,,
..
........ .. .
..
'
and sustained
:,
under
com?lc:d.nts.
...
~~ :-.-~
VIII
'l'itle.
..
; .
which nrc nearly
idcntic.11 to the one :tt1 this case.
s .
. .
Bob
. ,!l_nitcd St.:-:.tcs v. LLmrre:.ncc Rcnl ty co.. 'Inc. , ct al.
.
; ~ .:..... ~-: : ~
.
..
:; . .:':...-. (it; D. Ga. 1970, civ:i.l act:ioa fr 13li68); Uni tcd Stn tcs v.
... .I
::i:.:
::".:.
f>.
. ... .
... .""'...- .-
..
. . . ..
. ..... . .
.,
'
.;
......4
'
..
..
----
:~ .
. . . . . ..
.-.
...
. civil
..
iction
. =_.:
... }lO$C
Nil ler,
......
. -..
! ... .. .. ..
Stn tes
v. 'Joscnh
I
kcccntly,
..
.
v.
c1nd
c1ction
!) 70 ..~0)
Court of Appca.ls
. ..
nlVl510n,
. .......
Gu S t 1n-~cCOn
ct nl.
..
.
.
....
. .
11'.2d
10th Cir.
pr0vision
in 'fitle
Rights
Act
. ... I . .
:. . 4.
a nimilnr
.. ,
Uni tcd
...
. ..-. . .
'
----
...
'
..
.. ..
i
!; 70-379);
1970~
'
\
--~.
.. . ,,:..... ... in Unl tc<l States
..
'
..
.._
(S.D.Flo..
f
--
.. t
..
" :.. .
'
.......
~-...
. .,.
'"
..
...: _.
. of 196!1 1 govcr11in3.
. .
it
did
<lisc:ri1:1ination
not
held
in em?loyraent,
to plead
General
'
matter.
As stated by the Court:
- .. .. .
..,
...
.
. ..
.
;
.
..
~--.
."By
construin
as a
0 Section 2000(c)(G)(c1)
. . . 1 .
.:. .
. ~-
:. tr5.nl cout't: interpreted,
is to reins ta tc a
>. type.of net plcaciin3 w~dch ,;as cradic.:ited
. -~- --:"':~:--~-~--:.-:-::--- ..~-:-_by the current
fcdcrc1l ruleG.
Rule B of
(. .~:
. .. . ' ~- : the Fcdcr~l
Rules of Civil Procedure
w;1s
~ . ..
.:.~.:~....._".:~:.....
...originally
designed to circur:.vent the r.1:irnss
'
:
. ...,:::_ cnur,cd by the Code plead in~ J=cqu:.i.re,!1~nt
.: of plcadin.3
fn.cts, .c.on.stitut5.ni
a c~t1sc of
..
ectlon.
J\r, l):::ofc::::so.!'."Eoorc
1)05.nts out, the
.
1. rcq1.1lrc~:12n t th.:1t f l!c t~s be pl ended
is illusory
... llp_~l
unsound;
and results
in n battle
over
.
I
evidentinry
...
.,
i
i
-- .. - i
'
.1
...
...--........_ ... ......
_.
'
..
"'
...
~~
. ... . ... -
! .. .
...
,:
,
........
!'!
..t,..
..
l,.
.
.
'.
...s...
-. '
. '
,
. ,, .. ...
......
- ...
.. ... . . . -.......
..
..
..
.,
..
.J
~
.f
i,.
'~'
..
'
c_t:fl',:
JI
.i
'.
I
'~
.1
.!
'
-~,
.. 1
. . .
..
._..
..
.'t
. i.r
'
..
{
;,
. ....
~
..
.... ,
'
: t
. , ',
.,
..
..
,.
~
.. . .....,. ,,-
...
entirety.
--t... *
..... : . ,,...._'\,!....
-. .....
..
.. -
':"'-
';,
...
....
t
1
1.
...-.... .
':'~~
.~
lDatcci: Hew York, H. Y.
-...
July. 23., 1970
.
.-
. -~.
..I
...
..
..
.'...
~.
"
J!
.,. ..
: ..
-.
...
'!
.:
....
...
~:
.. .
,.
~..
. .. ~[
....
... .
,
.......
"~.
...
'
t
(
..:
.. .._
....
....
"
.. .
...
.. .
/1
It
..:'..
...___
_,....
....
-...-..
;
-~---
I'
<
...,:
..
.I:
.. 6 ...
'.
.. - -...... ~.......
.... _,
'
..
. ..... ,.
.. .
"
..
....
..
. .. : ..
..
."...
..
.. - '
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
- .. ..
'"'.":.
...-....
. ...
...
..f'.
......
..
._
..
.
.
_____
..
.11,,
..
...
.
l: ___,.._
..
..:
~...
..
....... .
...
::_~~:
..
..
.. " .
'
.-'
i
...
..
il
.
.. .
..
--
..
.,_.
...
1,.
so ORDERED.
'
..
.. . ..
. ..
.
..
..
'
tt
....
C.:,,. .
..
....
..
. ..
.... .
OFt'ICC
V.,OAILE\'THOt-.1AS
OF THI'.
CLl:RK
Houston, Texas
May l.J., 1971
cu:m<
United
Re: CA 71-H-279
Stutes
vs Margurette
Jones,
et al
Mr. Anthony
J. P. Farris/
United States Attorney
Houston., Texas
Messrs.Vinson.,Elkins,Searls
& Sml+.h
First
City National
Ban_k Bldg
77002
Houston.,
Texas
Gentlemen:
Judge Carl O. Bue, Jr. has entered
in the above
case:
.-- ,
----- order
------~----------- -------------------~--~1i-30-71:
11
the following
,. '
.
i.,
V. Bailey
.
By
tlt.iuJZ.U-A-t
d!1.t..=-e-~
Albert
- '
'-.,.--
.........
... -.'""~-r:;'""'--~.--:--
,.,.,..
.......
,w--. .... --""""'
.. -.. --
--
ro~
'
~-'"?'.:':"\'"'7'"'"'""'.'"
....',.._~,,...
..... -~ ~-
Thomas, Clerk
Deputy
E. Anderson
,.
........~ -~-
.:,,.-.-..11,::-i.
-,-,.,.,-,---,7"'"'7" .. , ."':,,~:.-:,~, ..- ... ~ o.s- ~ ..........
.,..... ..,.._
...... --
..
..
'
... -
..... .
~, . J
'\..,;..
\
. .. .
..
Plaintiff
. . ..
......
~ ."
. .. :
: v.
..
....
..
. .. a. ....
.
.
"
Defendant
... .." _,...
.,;..
.r*'
i
. . . . . .....
; ...
;_-~-::_;._:>
!t.
"'
.':.
. ...,.. ~
. .. .. ..
. . . . ..
-..
-..
.
.'
:
'-:-.
..:
:;.-.
America
. ..
!'.
"!'
:.
. ... ...
..
.
.. . : .. ..
..
..
,~.
~,
..
....
l
. ,,:
..
.. .
"'
.!f
'
...
August
.
,1,.l
.}
'
.
1970
under
brousht
the Civil
Rights
Act
United
States
of
.bythe
to enjoin
racial
follows
a policy
et.seq.,
discrimination
The. cor:1olaint
..
states
furthering
segrcga
of
in the rental
i
iI
t..
defendant .
that
..
tion
and
in housing
and
.I
refused
...
to make availc1ble
dwellings
ancl negotia
for
tc
sale or rental
of housing to Negroes on account of
--c::-thei>. race.
.It also alleges
that defendant
has made stateto the
mcnts
.cf!:cct-
..........
to Ncqrocs
.
in
at
a
..
least
.one
white
mo~.-ccafini'tc
re!:idcntin.l
area.
statcr:1cnt
to ncsot:i
:-i.tc
pr('. r c~:c:llc(:
}>c. nnmco,.
cli!~cr.blin~to:r.y
enti
I .: ,
I ti. : i .
f. ic<l.
-=llH
1 tnc
<1ct.:6
:(lc:C\lrrcd,
under
Fcd.R.Civ.P.
the
l..
..
f
rf
...
!
r.
.
~;pc:cJ....:i.c
occ,1!:.1on:;
nnd
'
Defendant
.. .
. \
h(! id
..
'
'
..
.....
.-
3601.,
of"housing.
.the
":-~
- - - has
...
..
':. : ...
is a suit
u.s.c.
1-960, 42
...
NO. 70-1851
.: ...
'
..
.
. . ...
-..
. . ........
....
...
,ti
This
sale
:~
~ ..
.
. ... .
;"
..
of
: ..
...
._FULt ..:t-1\.M,J.
..
. .
.
.
":
..
ESTATE
..
'
.
CIVIL l1CTIOrl
SIDD7\LL ~AL
CONPAHY,
OF PENl~SYLV}\NIA
IGNATIUS J. CHIRICO,
doing business
as
.....
..
'l
J ~l~
\
.~
\'
,..,.
:.-
propc'.rt.i.c:~
rci.:tl
wrir::)
,
~uc.1
i:~volvc:d
.i
..
91:antsd
unlc::.s
,.
~cfcnc!.xn
the
.
cpmplaint
is
~;o tmintcdli<Jiblc
that
the
.. ...
'
t" cunnot
fr.:nnc a rc.r.ponsivc
to it.
pleading
l\s
"
..
..
-long
as
the
claims,
"'.
co:nplain
the
.
'
v.
prohibit
of
the
F.<1crle
Rc;:idinq
i9G~).
. .I
which
nature
on statutes
of
j70 F.2d
.
based
notice
5.s sufficient.
it
Pcl>lication,-Inc.,
..
t give~
Complaints
discrimination
agains~
: I
:-~c.mcral
class
citizens
need
of discrimination
..
t.."'1e general
allege
only
!1as been
way in which
followed
,.
he has
States
Bui ldinq
V.
. I
such
dcfcndunt
by the
discri:ninatio:...
Uni tc:.:i
I'
fostered
'
. .!I
such
that
I
. _pattern
: _.. ~nd
of
'
!.
Trades
CO\l:1C
United
St2tes
5.1
.,,
:f
ll
:.:~-- St;
,
;-
"\
Lciuis,
271
F.Supp.
447
(E.D.H;.
19.66);
v.
: .a.~
,.
233
Ohio
(S.D.
1967)
~Ooo: et
u.s.c.
(discrimination
~
seq.);
employment
in
United
States
v.
under
Grav,
.
42
39 U.S. L. W.
..
.. ..
. 20~7-
fileci-" July
(D_.C.R.I.
(lisc:rimination
"".
.. _thr(?ugh
~
t
relied
14,
1970).
on by the
Specific
of
.. .. .
..
discovery.
instances
'
. .
. -...-
'
',
~
: .
..
.
.~.
..- . .
...
...
....
. .
!. . '
.
..-...
..
..
. - .:,
ly.
...
..
,j
......
'\
.I.
('
..
"I.
l,..
. ~ ..,
0 R
....
>
'
i
f
...
....
..
-.
---~
..
d
I
- --
...
41
~ '.
-:-' . :.. ,. !
.. :. :
...
............
- ..
.
...~
":.
'
....
.... .....
I !.
;
'
"
. ..
..
.:.
...
.;
--'
'
..
.
,
..
'
:".
.
.
--
-----
-...
..
--
....
..
:
'
..
....-..
.-.
.:'
'
-----.--.
.
.. .... .-~ ----------
...-....
. ....}'-;..
..
.!
. ,_
...
'
.-
'" ... ~
..
..
..
"
..
..
....
.
....
...
'.
.....
>
....
..
..
--
J.
.....
.
.
'!"
i.1
. ..
.
..
<x.
\-__
JJ~/S=
l.S
state~ent
~-
.. ..
..
,it
1970,
... . ..
,.. .,
!
I
"!:
';
is DENIED.
.. .
.....
motion
defendant's
,,,,,,,..,...-
,..
day of August,
l }.
..
'
I ~i....
'.
'.
. ._:ORDEREDthat
. ..-:'
'I
-..
t
3.
'
()
.,.
O!.. OHIO
l.:A!''l'E,Cl DJV1:;ro:i
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff
v.
.)
)
)
)
)
)
EXCLUSIVBMULTIPLE i:xcn1~
';cm,
ot al.,
Defendants
C 70-969
1;0.
- - E- R
0 RD
LAMDROS,D.lSTRIC'l' JUDGE
Upon comdderation,
a ruore definite
statcr1ent
Court
in
Inc.,
313 F.Supp.
sir-.il~r
the
case
of
is
untt("!d
----
870
cfoniod.
l'~s stnted
n:.D.Ga. '1970)
by
for
the
----~ P.:~:=tlty,
v.
state~
d.efendnnt~
Doh LnJ:rr::nc~
wit..'1 rcn:.).ect
to
motion:
(Tl he co:--,plaint,
cot::.chcd
...........
u.,ge
oC:
+-h,,.
l ~'';;J
""'.,.,
4
"""~ , ...... r.t--tu'-e
,
...
~
\OP
as
T"Y(-\1J..
.- ..... ....
of
it
is in the vorv
1
"',
JV,-l,~r:-...
1r
1 CA
.......
C
.. ..,nrn1
........ <,\..~
.,\~ ..............
"""
.::nd :tz not subj Get
~
;;;,>
,,
IT
IS
so
o~mi::R!!D.
r;Tio~:ash.
-::-Jm:i5ro~Unitcd
States
tistrict
Juago
----------
DATED:
.,
l:
r-
,,
'J
llHlTED
..
l!ES'i'E:~:-:1n~::'fRlCT
~.
.)
~.::,,
.
..) .,
v.
.....
....
.i':1""'
..
:-,,..
~
ct
. ARCO, INC.>
--~
~-~~1
....
-~:
J ., .
i
. .'
' ' ..~1'.
. ..""'"':'
' ."
I .,
: ....)
.)
)
. .. )
. )
al
Defendants
-..
..~
Ji
)I :
-<;4~
J; -
I ,( .
..._. . . CI-VILACTION
.....,~....,.,.... .
.Jl..h, t\.
rr-,
J..::..i.)
. !. .
i ''
iNO. C- 70-29
v . )
I'
.,
~"'~
..
~
. I
. I~
'I
ORDER
...- ...
action
/~'-;~
.....
.,.
-~
..-~
.....,_;.
..
:...
. .,::..,.
. :'.;/:.
Title
Rithts
.
.; Code,
~ f;eg.,
3601,
Realty
and Cornette
. ment of
Rule
,..
Realty>
the
12 (c)
..The .relevant
moved for
Rules
of the
to
. . .
na:l.r's
~or:1pany >
'
a r~ore. definite
so<Clo:npltdnt,
state-
pursuan~
I Procedure.
:
-
of Civil
of plai~ti~f
par.:i.grr.ph
-: .. -..i ., ..
have
Federal
H.
. ..
Stntes
. -.. .
Inc.
1
!
.
d/b/ a Edw.:ird Dc!vis Realty
Davis,
allc~ati.ons
of the
I .
Robert
defendants
Cor::ipany, Edward
'1
'
pursuant
,: .:.,,
'
....
:~ .
, ....
1.
hY. the United States
br~~ght
r--
.,..
.":MJ:t,
r.:, .-.7.-,
.. :~... .,...
Y !~. ~
..''" ..
\.
In this
to
~..
.... '
Compl\11.nt alleges:
..
....
- 1>ursuant
to a policy
ar..d :>ractic0,
the
defc:adm1ts
have for profit
induced
~nd attempted
to induce
theo,mers
of certain
dwellings,
hy 'White persons,
loca tcd in the Cherokee
occupied
Heig~t& $ubd :i.vision in Nemph , TcnncssEe,
to sell
#thos~
dwellings
by representations
regErding
the.
entry c:.ncl prospective
entry of Negroes into the
neighl)orhocd.
This conduct
of tlle dcf:encl~mts is
______
_.:._J.11
violation
of Section
SO!,(e) of the Civil
Rights.
..
......
defcndnnts
"ft
u.
tl 1c (ct
1 .t'E~s,
...allegedly
er . fl]
.ll.
..
induc~d
.
- _,. '
dwellings.
>
Notions,
p
def cndants
..
-..:.-_
,.
.._~\
ment 1nc.1.c~1-l.nt::
Court
3604(c) .
~ :
1.ace!:,
..., ,1 p.-t1.L1.CU.><,l.
.... ,.. ;,,..... C).;.C:u!i,S
~ :,.""' t-r....
c,l'h
1 ,.....tlo
con <-"
.. l.((.,c,.
. ..
C:"
:"\.r:
:CC..,
...
,.
or itt~mptcd
to induce
to sell
ci1cir
..
h
cf1_
t'l""
''"
,.
o-.._,c.,i"'..~
.-;15 .....
;!,, ....,.n..,:-,.
,..1~..,,
._
-.i:t:"(<I\.
....
.,,j
. 1
'.
'J'he .Hotion!;
ci/1,/~l-,J~-,.
) ....~, ). t <'
t J
'
(. 4
, .. .,
'..
.~.
pany,
.. ..
~
'.
.,
are ovcn.iuled.
'\!
. .
...-
'nns\1cr:.:: to
s,11:.ill [5.lc
))cf cri'clont,i;;
. ..,
Jnc.,
''
1970.
.!
l. t}-~
the Co:npls.int
..
..
...
So ORDERED
. :...;..:.....
.-"'-' ...
"
._..,
'
'
- ....
\.
.;
. - -....
.,.
.. ,,..-..,~
..;.,-
.::.. . .;.
..-.
..
.
.;
~~-
. . .' .
,
.......
-
,:.
-~
.: .
...
...
.,..:
. .. . .. .
- ...-
.....
..
...
.
.. ..
C.
.
...:...
-~
~=
l ,
. .."',~
...
. -.........
: . -
..'
. ... '
-i
....
.
..
....
'
...
# :..:.
:--,
~:
:.~
..... ::.:"'
;;
.;
.,-.;;,,,,.;.,. :,
.: ..
..-.
....
.... . .......
.
..
__.... ;.
.~
..
...
...
..
'
_.
. .. ,,.
..
:, .
..,. . ...
:-
_4
..,
'-~
.
..
....
' '.
.
. .-,,.' ......
.
...
..
.
.t
....
..,.;
t,
: ,/......
....::~
.. ~-
. . .,:
. -.-.._--...
. ....
. --:
.,_ ..
... ~.....
--.....
'
'
.......
......
,.,.,
..
IN rm::l'
[ED s ,,,TES DISTI:ICT COURT
FOR THI:: 1\l1RTH-E:Ri~DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALIASDIVISION
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA
vs.
This matter
for
a more definite
Complaint
plaintiff
is before
The pleading
filed
under
discrimination
After
Court
statement.
3601 !~.,alleging
by both
ER
reviewing
in support
of their
concludes
as follows:
Rights
is the
Act, 42
u.s.c.
in housing.
the Complaint
parties
in question
motions
respective
positions,
cited
the
,)
With respect
plaintiff
the
to the motions
has provided
sufficient
statement,
to the defendants
I
The Complaint,
itself,
meets
Procedure
United
the requirements
States
defendant
the facts
defendants'
motions
Entered
'.\;,_,:
1'
'
- ...... ,
,,.
/'. '.,l
,,
\
.....,
'j
,,,
: ..
Rules
Inc.,
313 F.Supp.
statement.
870, 873
ample opportunity
of plaintiff's
case fellowing
..,.
,J
'
l!, f \ ..,
-.
:.
,.
, /
-- ''
,I
,)
of this.Court's
--7--
conclusions,
statement
day of September,
--
of Civil
Rules provide
.r:~,
j , ,
of the statute
of the issue.
In consequence
'
to a motion
The Federal
to discover
the language
of the Federal
joinder
paraphrasing
above,
is deni0d.
1973
for
th~
... ..
.,.
IN
THE DISTRIC'l'
STA'l'ES
Civil
UNITED
No.
i.ctio:1
OF A.~lERICA,
STATES
,,.
,,... ,
.~'!.,,
71-1262
~. ! -;~ )
1.-,;,_
}
) .
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
. -versus-
}
)
)
J.
and
c.
LO~;G, individc.ally
as Executor
for the
EST.A'l'B O? FR.t~~K J.
and
'l'HE \'l0h.7r-I
E R
)
)
SOT'l'ILZ,
AGENCY,
0 RD
partnership,
Defendants.
n:rtter
This
-:
'
) }
. ('
\i
~.-j
for
a More
is. the
within
the
tr.e court
Stateme:1t.
Definite
Civil
Co:anlai.
nt
..:-
Act
Rights
After
by both
cited
it
the
is
parties
that
defenda:1ts
in g2nc;:-al
of
terr.is,
acquaint
lations
chargee.
474
169,
(:7,t.h cjr.
of
upon
The
the
in
and
the
filed
defendants'
pleading
in que::;tion
Complaint
support
of
plaintiff
1SS5),
and the
their
cir.
l9c.6};
posi tior;s,
notice
enable
th-2 l;msuagc
the
wit:1
authoriti~s
them
complaint
plaintiff's
pa:::-t follows
ccfE::1dants
to
character
meets. both.the
36]3,
the
Lo fr,1:r.e
couched
of
the
'
statute,
of
the
vio-
requirements
s::.~ite::: v. Pru:--0,
----M--------------
to
.is
u:dted
''
of
in ho1.:.sing.
sufficient
Govern."tlE:nt s claims
in
VIII
n-~spective
provided
Although
Title
discrin1.ination
the
Such a pleading
175 {4tt
under
alleging
1968,
pleading.
it.d0:~.::;
361 F.2d
..-;:>laintiff
reviewing
concluded
a respo.isive
before
;,.,-.......
(,. C./.,
I'
Mot.io!'l
in
st.::tutc
353
:,'. ;,.:;
u:;d,:::: wl,jc:-,
.. .
1
!
,[
l.t
t1
1. e d L
was
States
v.
Gustin
Bacon,
United
States
v.
Lynd,
30~ F.2d
the
opportunity
fendants
to
..
for
s. case
tiff.
the
respond
of the
entry
~39
(5th
818
Cir.
of this
Order.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
ample
facts
of plainthe
of time
in which
is concluded
Complaint
Moreover,
ancf be'causa
two extensions
to the
1970):
1962).
the
jo""iri'der of ...issue
it
Cir.
provide
to discover
pleading
41 (1957).
(10th
Procedure
civil
secured
responsive
should
days
of
355 U.S.
426 F.2d
defendants
already
their
defendants
fifteen
the
following
have
frame
Rules
Federal
Gibson,
v.
United
since
.--"".,.,..
Conley
Sec,
in this
de-
that
the
case
within
/~-
Aiken,
South
March 31,
Carolina
1972.
..
\~
-.> ~\
... >'''
'
:-I
,..,~;:.;;
----""-,,"'",,:7
..., ... ./}'
-27-rn /'/-,
-....-~
/ r ,;
/j
.L~-/
_;,-;~11:r:
:."i.r
/)>.4r>_~5"
1
/7/~.Ltl;~::
<!:.l/V
7-/.
.
i.!::~t
.. r:rT.:.7,
..,.v/ t-:....
,.,....)
...
-
l
ruling
that w.:i.s found
L, contained
in the:
conclus::on
p;icon,
.102 F.,Supp.
759 {D.Kan.
Distric':
Court was reversed
on
The
only
197 O)
- 2 -
COURjOU.THERN
.DISTR!.CIOF,TE.KAS
FILED
. .
'
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT
OF TEXAS
JUL2 71973
HOUSTON DIVISION
Y.BAflEY.THOr,JAS,.
CLERK
flli DJ~E.U.1:Y.;
Cf:-..!),/u:wffJ
tlk"
)
)
)
}
)
)
)
)
)
v.
TUCKER COMPANY, INC.,
THE JIM
Defendant.
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 72-H-993
0 RD
Sununary
conflicts,
and
facts,
the
judgment
be aenied.
654,
8 L.Ed.2d
Broadcasting
123
defendant's
Since
even
taken
more
v.
(5th
Cir.
vigorous
threat
the
of
to
United
Great
that
it
in
a pattern
has
not
the
there
458,
future
is
Tea
clear
the
States
v.
law
in mid
w.
in
actions
of
1972,
will
be
being
On this
which
the
of discrimination.
Program
severe
co.,
that
violated
no showing
violatior;ts
United
82 s.ct.
practices
with
is
369 U.S.
y. Columbia
employee-agents.
defendant,
an injunction.
future
to
judgment
Pacific
non-discriminatory
in
material
favorable
Poller
or practice
Opportunity
legal
y. Diebold,
The record
is
non-complying
rec'urrent
and
to
summary
7 L.Ed.2d
Atlantic
as
most
for
(1962);
464,
1968).
an Equal
light
States
993
u.s.
368
Harvey
the
of
issues
a motion
82 s.ct.
defendant,
against
concludes
site
176,
resolution
genuine
in
See,~-,
by engagi~g
the
are
a motion,
implementing
alleges
a favored
inferences
position
past
not
there
System,
(1962);
388 F.2d
the
the
opposing
must
486
where
viewing
party
is
ER
record,
a substantial
is
the
prerequi-
T.
Grant
co.,
345 U.S.
629,.633
(1953);
United
States
y. Oregon
State
\
By
;1 t,
/:1Hl
lltY.l tf.J"-L-
Medical
Society,
343 U.S.
326,
333
Hunter,
459
205
Cir.
1972).
F.2d
Accepting,
of
law,
it
is
defendant
w.
- -T.
but
that
co.,
supra,
not
also
to
materials
and
exist
as
as
the
it
defendant's
by the
three
is
denied.
In
being
light
of
agents
his
for
unless
Interrogatory
to
somewhat
tardy
the
the
issues
For
plaintiff's
grants
motion
granted.
17 appearing
the
this
Strike
to
is
Produce
g::r::::inted.
For
the
same
De ,:umen-::s
'
1.s
gr ante d/ /
DONE
interviews
permission
to
to
Interrogatories
~ be
...:>
to
s Mo;ln/
to compel
,plaintiff's
at ~ouston,
Texasi;::1~;;;;;?
Carl,..o.
United
to
releva{t.'
/f
'1
Bue,
States
be
conduct
answers
/1/1 not 1. y
C.1:er k w1.
(j
not
compel
reason,
'
days)
Affidavits
will
of
defendant
court
well
demonstrated
that
The answers
to
do
denied.
to
to
plain-
as
(a couple
assurances
and
reasons,
defendant
plaintiff's
defendant
these
is
Motion
law,
the
practices
filing
with
the
genuine
defendant's
associated
obeys
is
The affidavits
past
the
respect
to
Judgment
no prejudice
6 is
16 and
Sununary
the
1309.
favorable
that
relief.
at
an injunction
do so.
alleged
upon
with
Mr. Tucker
Court
to
97 L.Ed.
that
v.
expectation.
position
inferences
this
one"
reasonable
633,
agents
injunctive
still
interviews,
8,
that
affidavits,
conducted
7,
for
plaintiff's
of
.,such
that
material
M')tion
There
with
ensure
States
proposition
a heavy
no such
to
to
is
at
United
defendant's
defendant's
support
facts
need
is
contends
appears
to
"burden
and
submitted
tiff,
to
the
only
ensure
the
345 U.S.
violations
necessary,
but
the
there
disputes
past
deciding,
that
to, show
Grant
both
not
clear
The plaintiff
to
(4th
(1952);
Motion
7ounse
(I
73
Jr.
District
Judge
NOTir;"F: UI'
FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRIC'I'
OF TEXAS
-uousrmr-ti
:r
UNITED
STATES
OF AMERICA
v.
No.
THE JIM
TUCKER cm-IPAI\"YI
i!
72-H-993
li
INC.
l
'\
at
pre-trial
I
l
, on
August
31
before
United
States
Magistrate
515 Rusk, Houston,
Texas
11 a .m.
Date
August
, 19
, 19 73 at Houston,
Texas
room 12628,
Ronald J. Blask,
73
V.
By
BAILEY
I
'1'
THOt,ll\S
__
5f20!
__
c)!2r,~,uu
~z~~
Rona
O 'Quinn
.1
Deputy Clerk.
'
To
Mr.
Mr.
Mr;
P. Goldberg
James R. Gough y'
John A. Bailey
Norman
''L
\'
..
i ... , t
-,
",.CJ
..
I
i
. "!
,.'. 11... mo
, 1--.
-,..o, ..,
1c,~
~;ill
.J
3. Ju:::y L0_
In"'."'r.,,_.,
.....-. '-.
amendments,
:siill be completed
i.s not
4. E~timated
,_.{.
---
(:i ......
ori or before
be filed
5. Other
~ .:,
~ c 1-~..,
r u- .-.,
<'- .1-rn~
r-~
duration
on or before
ret;uested.
of trial:
in8truction3:
t.
Pre-Trial
Order, }'T:;:moranda of Lm,1 and other rr2tri.2.l
material
ac s~e~ified
in Judge 3u2;s Pro~edures
are to ~e filed with the
c1er1.:, not: les.3 than 3 business
day; ':Jefore tr
1.
7.
oiclock
for Do:ket
on
of th5Tc.n~0
cm thG
Deputy C r!(.
<lod,2
Cell
and Trial
Judge Jue at
The po.:::ition
by contacting
the
befor2
t can b2 as~ertained
....
"
Settlement
neeotiationJ
are
ere not
presently
in progress.
If tb.a case is settled,
ancl- such annou-;_;;m2nt
is made prior to
settlemGnt
i:,anerJ will b2 su!Jmitted
to Judge 3ue b2fore
th,2
trial,
trial
<la
OR counsel
will
a~pear
in court
on the dat2 of trial
to dictate
the term3 of the oettlem2nt
into the re~ord and the
ceae will
diami3
at that time, the court retaining
jurisdiction for the sole purpose of enfor~ing
settlement.
A NOTIFICATION
j
appearance
on th2 schedu
d trial
NOT obviate
the
necessity
of
~~ta.
PREP.APj\TION OF
CASE ?OP. TRH~L ?OLLG:!IHG PRETRIAL HEARING 17 IS ENCLOSED.
3RHJG THIS
Pretricl
con
nee held
H. Lingo
~ttorney
for Plaintiff
ttorncy
for D2fendsnt
Platter,
U.S.
Magistrate
--
').
I
..
f
IN 'l'HE UNITED STA'i'ES DISTRICT
I
f
i
COURT
PROCEDURES
BUE, JR.
TO BE FOLL0';,'1ED BY COUNSEL
IN PREPARATION
I.
IN GENERAL
The paramount
a just
in
result.
such
a problem
create
with
the
court
for
of a case
guidelines
a result.
and
trial
following
The
achieving
in the
goal
counsel
opposing
one
or
more
in
any
case,
of
in
to assist
these
they
well
counsel
to accomplish
designed
are
If
is
procedures
will
be discussed
advance
of
the
trial
Well prepared
expeditious
if
appeal,
conserve
the
of
the
to
expedite
one
becomes
necessary.
real
The
the
ability
fully,
of
a just
of a lawyer,
faiflY
fairest
complete
expense
to
and
result
juries,
the
and
forth
as an advocate,
the
evidence
record
for
must
witnesses
administration
clear
below
without
most
latvyers
--
of
advance
set
and
present
courts
an efficient
trial
The.procedures
the. reaching
the
-the most
issues.
case
create
and rainiroize
time
about
prcp2\r<=::d counsel
and
by ro3.J-:ing the
way the
client's
well
clearly
parties.
justice
bring
and
tha
of
any
trials
verdicts.
fully
most
and
date.
exposition
are
designed
impeding
to
present
and effectively:
',,
in
his
II.
PROCEDURES 'l'O BB l\CCO:!PLISi-ED
~~:'7~.\~...---Z-:.~::e:::,~~_;.;."':,;:,:_"'W'="
1.
of
In
party's
each
three
business
fixed
by the
so that
with
court
this
th.::, court
the
case
the
case
would
The
Points
trial
ties.
It
issues
of
The court
law
set
evidence
admissibility
of
The Pre-Trial
Order
Order
will
evidence,
issues.
the
filed
be
-at
least
---"-
the
issues
three
------.--~
- . ---
for
and rule
contain
the
the
the
the
(b)
Specification
{c)
stipulated
(d}
J'acts
in dispute.
(e)
J1 grecd
trial
follo~ving
requirements
case.
(f)
iisputed
appli.cabl~
propo~ition5
proposi
tion.s
authori-
of
of issues.
Pacts
..,..
court.
the
legal
questions
before
to
along
during
suppo::-ting
on such
tailored
clerk
of
to arise
objections
generally
the
benefit
the
with
along
with
bu!:>iness
davs before
------- ~---------~------------~
anticipated
the
rature
it
feels
case~
(a)
Pre-Trial
to argue
court
the
,&:
1. J..
dovetail
the
in
is
with
m2moranda
be prepared
of
time
acquainted
should
be
le:ist
fully
counsel
should
at
complied
parties
and
should
clerk
by the
out
support
some other
be
Such
in
raised
review
will
can
t:ried.
reasonably
be
tho
unless
clerks
of the
narrow
also
the
ba
lav
must be strictly
Pre-Trial
Orel.er will
---------------------
should
should
individual
to
of
with
trial,
in clarifying
of evidence
although
law
cases,
nU"1,\orarda
trial.
the
the
be helpful
the
rule
upon conclusion
2.
with
This
is
In non~jury
Order.
b<J filed
the
and
which
must
before
court.
memoranda
detailed
position
da.ys
'
of law.
~flaw.
,.
conunence!:.".
matters,
of
the
3.
with
(g)
(h)
List
of witnesses
(except rebuttal
witn0sses)
concise
but corml0tc
smr.mar1,
of the substance
k
1
each witness'
testimony.
(i)
List
(j)
Estimate
clerk
with
Findings
These
adducad
at
porting
each
should
be set
cases
the
the
trial
Findings
directly
cases
each
jury
along
with
This
court
formulated
and submitted
this
to
court
in non-jury
thoroug11ly
the
case
cases
will
aft.c:... the
h~vc been
and jury
heard
law
and the
be regularly
jury
sup-
prepare
Jury
issues
charges
that
have
the
by
charge
a duty
jury.
is
to
and Conclusions
jury
cases
in the
made n part
-J-
by connsel
jury
are
as possible
upon by the
applicable.
be included
a proper
Findings
in
a Memorandu:n
where
Counsel
prepared
evidence
and
with
to be resolved
jury.
Proposed
ready
and file
Order
should
insure
for
caseo
of the
court.
as
based
Such
record
and ruled
proof
the
authorities
authorities;
to the
that
if
Conclusion
Pre-Trial
the
to
and professionally
applicable:
of counsel
insure
each
fact
a duty
of LaH
The legal
supporting
ultimate
has
and Conclusions
will
to the
all
and file
prepare
counsel
Proposed.Interrogatories
so as to cover
o-F Fact
it.
under
with
will
can be amended,
Conclusion
out
trial.
counsel
order
requires
clerl::. 'concurrently
to the
each
Pre-Trial
Proposed
for
required
and Conclusions
In jury
the
of time
Prooos.ed
concurrently
of exhibits.
In non-jury
the
and
of
on
proposals
in the
to the
'.
ch:1rg~
...
4.
The court
cotmsel
8.t a mutually
if
a conference
such
th,:;re will
initiated
by the
call
fully
the
of
expense
parties
well
ahead
be
or_ objects."'must
such
the
fi::st
days
exhibits
before
at
busin~ss
the~ trial
the
cas2
and
the
in order
n\ 1.111.r~11.z a
be
. .
to
of the
court,
the
and expert
witnesses
so that
their
not be available.
the
befm:2
received
and
trial.
those
starts.
in the
p:.:i.rtics.
should
trial
r:1arked
be offered
will
i tern of
of the
nl?-rn}:::i2_red and
to the
jury.
th~y will
if
chte,
discussions
and effort
doctors
date
taken
can.be
time
with
th,:! trial
conference
of trial
notify
of the
to
pre-trial
and the
should
of time
depositions
the
conferences
couns2l
settlement
date
counsel
Counsel
All
the
p::-ior
with
the
All
and conserve
and their
5.
between
case.
for
or advantageous
be no contact
before
exhaus'cec1
time
necessary
court
the
available
convenient
is
norreally,
docket
rcgul~rly
io
At
trial
evidence
in
least
as
b_1:,sine~~
three
to which
exhibits
start::;.
obi,r.::~tion.._
are
made will
be nu..."tlbere.d, mark8d
be notified
,rill
supporting
legal
on the
.rule
mences,
objections
authorities
is
to
comply
the
of counsel
of any party
obliga.tion
with
party
procedure
this
or p~rtics
for
in writing
\:here
of such
admissibility
and objections
It
oth~r
of the
and tenc12red,
court
acco.npanied
by
appropriate.
exhibits
will
before
The court
v1ill
the
trial
com-
in the
record.
be preserved
who wishes
b'y' tendering
examination
and the
to offer
exhibits
such exhibits
nnd app~oval
to the
or obj~ctions
as
the
indica
court
prcncntcd
tcd
abc,-ve.
,,1ill
pursue
Cl:my
nt
In
the
absence
th:;; introduction
to
these
of unusual
of exhibits
circu:znstanc~1s,
'.1hicb arc
guidelines,.
,,,
-4-
not
..
7.
'
If
summarized,
court
at
his
necessity
for
lines
portion
portions
inclusively)
trial,
and
trial
with
the
court
of
rule
inclusively)
(unless
unavoidably
promptly
objections
deposition
(citing
authority
on the
or
the
starts
his
note
the
r~nd
and
lines
develops
supporting
will
be
trial
the,
will
counsel
to
counsel
antl
a deposition
using
or
pages
be:i:0::2
dciys
is
opposing
(citing
Opposing
such
notify
busin:~ss
thereafter).
to
will
intention,
thre8
least
any deposition
of
counsel
of
the
n portion
pages
before
ohjections
the
day
before
and
of
tt
ths
commences.
8.
All
trials
will
commence
at
a.m.
10:00
unless
li
counsel
r
are
to
notified
contrary.
the
will
recess
The noon
run
normally
f
j
from
12:30
p.m.
will
norm~lly
to
2:00
recess
p.m.
about
In a multi-day
4:45
p.m.
trial,
Counsel
the
should
court
bear
in
I
mind
these
arrange
to
hours
for
permit
will
the
to
and
has
be handled
as
9.
This
cases.
business
the
to
th~
days
iurv
to
prior
that
and
recess
h3 has
Ccse,
require
the
been
matter
including
t
'
appropriate.
voir
dire
examination
guestions
These
not
unless
justice
where
proposed
the
In
of
the
oc:inel.
be on time
will
witn2ss,
app2aro
warrant,
conducts
to
Th2 court
interests
may submit
to
parties
a missing
failed
court
Counsel
.Eropcund0d
call
of a bench
issuance
notify
accordingly.
witnasses
counsel
subpoenaed
court,
of
will
commencern~mt
in
be
of
the
in
writinq
submitted
jury
to
be
thr2e
trinl
for
the
court
con-
'
sideration
by
the
court
and,
,,,here
appropriate,
will
~make
,, arc
a ,,
every
effort
thought
to
to
ask
such
questions
La relevant.
-5-
of
the
prospective
jurors
to
10.
move their
only
infor~ation
to
they
~fuich is
the
called
relevant
trial,
.I
If
counsel
in
the
equipment
proper
advance,
Court
counsel
vish
the
order
sLurts
.Evcr:7
witnesses
in the
the
wl tness
to the
the
case
and
M~rohal
room as
in which
or
needed,
courtroom
clerk
thay
b::
tvill
the
and
case,
and
Clerk
promptly
13.
lf
\'Jith
answer
any
above
procedures,
court
well
all
court
or
the
trial
co~mences
such
equipment
hearing
the
law
counsel
every
of
is held,
will
cler:ks
at
As arms
courtesy
writtc:u
the
of
a case,
frequently
request
the
the
such
cooperation
telephone
relative
comrnunications
of
coL~rt
and complete
all
once
calls
to
their
received.
other
m::?.tters arise
counsel
in advance
~-
jury,
the
handling
im,.'11.ediately :return
who will
th3y are
once
to
b~fore
procedural
and
be extended
attornE:ys
case
possible.
to be in contact
will
viewbo:x or other
and a pre-trial
Deputy
the
be 2dvised
should
wherever
personnel
by
issues
trial
t~o
a blac1;:board,
of
arrange:uents
is activated
require
presentation
Administrative
120
it
promptly
to the
the
require
will
clerk
courtroom
so that
in
case
fro~
from
forth
the
elicit
of witnesses
setting
vhen
11.
the
If
witnesses
a list
supply
the
to
testimony.
surJ:1.on th3
should
before
by counsel
ba made
of
..
should
Bailiff
be in a position
rcspr::!cti vc portions
effort
...
~o
shaJl
Couns2l
for
of the
-6-
which
,.
are
not
cmrered
in th~
/,,.-.,
,-!if1
co~f
fr
with
the
CERTIPICATEOF SERVICE
...
I, Elyse
here~y certify
S. Goldweber,
an attorney
I have served
that
State$
in Opposition
to Defendants'
More Definite
Statement
to Dismiss
defendants'
Motion to Dismiss,
postage
prepaid,
States
Motion for
of Plaintiff's
Motion
States
in Response
Notice
counter-
and in Support
the Counterclaim
the plaintiff,
to dismiss
claim,
for
to their
attorney
to the Affidavits
by mailing
at the following
address:
Roy M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan & Manley
39 East 68th Street
the 4th
of January,
10021
1974.
.ELYSE
tl.:!,~,-
d ,/J<--f/tu~;_,.Jj1-.a,z
S. GOLD';lEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil
Rights Divis ion
Department
Washington,
of Justice
D. Co 20530
,(.
r- IL.EL,
m CLERK'Somc::
s. DISTRICT
COURTLO ru.
* JANS 1974'k
Plaintiff,
. v.
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALDTRUMP
and TRUMPMANAGEMENT
INC.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM
OF THE UNITED STATES IN RESPONSE
TO THE AFFI,OAVITS OF DONALDTRUMPAND ROY COHN
HENRYA. BRACHTL
Assistant
United States
Attorney
Department of Justice
Brooklyn, New York 11201
FRANKE.
SCHWELB
f'
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED C. TRUMP,DONALD
TRUMP
ANDTRUMPMANAGEMENT
INC.,
MEMORANDUM
OF THE UNITEDSTATES IN RESPONSE
TO THE AFFIDAVITSOF DONALD
TRUMPANDROY COHN
HENRYA. BRACHTL
Assistant
United States
Attorney
U.S. Department of Justice
Brooklyn, New York 11201
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
MEMORANDUM
OF THE UNITED STATES IN RESPONSE
TO THE AFFIDAVITS OF DONALDTRUMPAND ROY COHN
Ostensibly
have filed
the affidavits
in support
the action
to dismiss
pending
motions,
defendants
attorney.
hereinbefore
and for
of their
filed,
a more definite
the counterclaim.
the Court,
based
are defendants'
motions
to dis-
statement
and plaintiff's
Since
before
and
such motions
are all
r.
addressed
exclusively
elaboration,
that
to the pleadings,and
and since
there
is no
before
announced
its
filing
inference
is reasonable
suggestion
conference
filing
of the affidavits
was extrajudicial.
accuse
the United
and its
it
appropriate,in
before
I.
spite
In an affidavit
of extrasensory
a brief
oath,
characterized
perception,
among other
the
the purpose
these
the
of the
affidavits
we think
to the issues
directly
response.~/
of the Complaint
by what must be remarkable
which enable
seeks
defendants
of misconduct,
irrelevancy
at least
Baselessness
that
papers
no purpose
at a major hotel,
Since
counsel
of their
Alleged
and since
if not compelling
States
serve
The counterclaim
in damages,
at a press
no factual
in defendants'
the affidavits
the Court.
require
things,
the affidant
counsel,
to read
powers
the
that:
- 2 -
that
[the
Government]
will
he is personally
state
of mind.
to it
that
provisions
forbids
gations
familiar
He claims
counsel
counsel
States
plaintiff
nature*/,
and that
parties
the
which
that
for
the alle-
the United
in the complaint,
to defendants.
all
certitude
evidence
interrogatories
to swear
violated
of Procedure,
by counsel
inquiry
certainty
were fabricated
most superficial
facts
Rules
but
malicious
deliberately
stated
basis
is baseless,
counsel's
sufficient
a pleading
propounded
evidentiary
opposing
from signing
in the complaint
is that
the complaint
to know with
and subsequently
ofthis
with
The sole
States
for facts
do not exist
(emphasis added)
to the affiant
not be pleaded
- including
Even the
that
in a complaint
plaintiffs
- may
- 3 -
..
conduct
discovery
responsible
reason
after
litigant
filing
conducts
or authority
discovery,
to suggest
rogatories
to his
infirm.*/
Simple interrogatories
defendants
still
affiant
that
crimination
together
vided
implies
that
persons
affidavit
it
is apparent
were readily
by him prior
*I See, e.g.
(1958),
a trial
to filing
that
case
of recent
of different
of inter-
which
acts
to the
of dis-
Trump complexes
of discrimination
pro-
with knowledge
ascertainable
in
is in any respect
to plaintiff,
evidence
facts
is no basis
number**/
and organizations
Any
propounding
its
has evidence
additional
kind.
and there
addressed
States
substantial
of this
a party's
at a substantial
Accordingly,
~/
that
by other
~/
adversary
the United
with
an action
directly
of pertinent
contrary
by the affiant
facts.
to counsel's
the affidavit.~/
been increased
by further
as discovery
proceeds.
investigation
and
- 4 -
II.
Alleged
Coercion
Mr. Cohn's
bring
this
"unlawful
case"
terminate
of Defendants
affidavit
Rights
lawful
Division."
or unlawful,
decree
by counsel
is attached
responded,
counsel
recites
for
Division
face,
the letter
It relates
[equal
It
with
The letter
*I
that
proposed
relief
unmistakably
"alternative
counsel
See Ex. 1.
makes it
to plaintiff
regarding
clear
following
clear
that
- 5 -
responding
a possible
Jr.,
in suits
plaintiff
never
by
of the
On its
under
no ultimatum
42 U.S.C.
was intended.
appropriate
is ready
to
consent
Chief
office.
to accomplish
It explicitly
that
due or
a communication
Attorney's
may be given
for plaintiff
dictated
to which defendants
customary
steps"
for defendants.
also
States
Decree
of pressure,
opportunity]
that
counsel
it was sent
to settle
false.
The letter,
of the United
housing
states
*I
to
to quickly
a Consent
The allegation
from counsel
that
into
for defendants
defendants
Civil
the defendants
is completely
hereto:-
of attempting
by entering
A copy of a letter
an inquiry
the Government
approaching
the litigation
undue,
accuses
by'immediately
by the Civil
to Settle
consideration.
invites
counterproposals.
to delay
the litigation,*/
opportunity
position,
and it
bilities
III.
promptly
under
but seeks
is consistent
42 U.S.C.
"Capitulation
suit
of the defendants
with
is a press
qualify
statements
to rent
to seek to require
general
true,
rental
hereto
!I
criteria
documents,
v. Life
Realty
responsi-
it
the real
pur-
the capitulation
of the Welfare
as claiming
to welfare
Department
.....
for
who do not
of the United
the Trumps,
is apparent
is trying
These
States
to waive their
of the allegation
Civil
plaintiff
in our buildings."
including
especially
that
recipients"
for persons
Inc.,
that
landlords,
pertinent
States
that
plaintiff's
General's
"announcing
suggest
is still
release
otherwise
housing
Department"
affidavit
defendants
This
the Attorney
to force
equal
3613.
to the Welfare
At page 3 of his
pose of this
to achieve
This
is not
in United
.'f::!!.I
- 6 -
to pleadings,
can so easily
where
be
No proposal
ants at all
about welfare
defendants'
accusations
with Life
Realty
Co.,
recipients.
about
asked
the United
In fact,
States
the letter
for defendants'
expressed
interest
recipients
to provide
to plaintiff
in a consent
decree,
for
negotiated
at the request
as their
counsel
him with
to present
decree
in Life
and
a copy.
counsel
to defendants'
contains
the Life
the decree
*I A copy of this
in the curious
Realty
as a model for
Realty
the contrary,
office
basis
decree
to defendants
Attorney's
to defendants
is the consent
to defend-
no mention
of welfare
at all.!/
The consent
proposed
this
from counsel
dated
by plaintiff
this
case,
Co. to rent
standard
requires
Co.--even
letter
is attached
position
of having
hereto.
sworn,
it
had been
to persons
rental
defendants
if
on welfare
qualifications.
to rent
to all
On
applicants
1.
2.
that it
signing
welfare
this
into
suit to
Trump
- 7 -
equally,
regardless
the basis
parties
also
its
that
of the rental
and approved
a welfare
officers,
as well
the attribution
inconsistent
ascribed
this
case
to us,
previously
by the Court.
brought
as against
decree
States,
suit
for
Realty
the suit
345 F. Supp.
of this
woman who is
the United
Co.,
purpose
et al.,
against
persons
against
the United
with
the other
evil
but also
lacks
to the United
on
by the
States
and
alleging
on welfare.
States.
malign
or of any other
a black
against
Life
funds,*/
negotiated
In fact,
discriminated
found no basis
Boyd v. United
of an applicant's
standards
recipient
the consent
The Court
only
of the source
States
Accordingly,
is not
any support
whatever
in the record
of
case.
- 8 -
IV.
Notice
to Defendants
The affidavit
to hear
that
any "formal
action,
and because
release,
"the
surprise
first
based
unlike
defendants
record.
it
the Complaint
was filed
*I
of the Department
record
to the press.
Equal housing
benefit
to anybody if
so that
prospective
beneficiaries
.,~7See
Ex. 3.
news of
notified.
the United
That
steps
A simple
public
held
adverpress
no facts
about
to the press
of public
interest,
of the Public
and
Information
to disclose
matters
opportunity
would provide
little
it were taken
secretly,
to assure
could never
- 9 -
States
of their
was released
one of general
of Justice
practical
being
Office
the suit
and that
or otherwise.
after
that
motivations"
appear
Mr.
occurred.
defendants,
intuitively
of this
was filed.
on no investigation,
without
matter
to make it
were discussed,
the complaint
conference
he was "shocked"
the subject
I head about
chosen
we note that,
that
because
about
the date
to the press
different
First,
saries
whatever"
it was released
no press
of the 15th,"
was a complete
is quite
suit
connnunication
the morning
Trump's
this
learn
of public
of them
Even if
released
true,
defendants'
rights
with
required,
Rights
of courtesy,
followed
torted
before
the events
facts
This
suit
Shortly
phoned both
agents
for
than
10:30 A.M.,
by the media,
was filed.
for
practice
when suit
States
no such
of the
as a matter
and this
The defendants
shortly
of Durban
after
procedure
have seriously
was filed
was
dis-
by omitting
and Tosti,
and defendant
filed.
in advance
the press
of suits,
them,
notice
See United
the general
Departmental
had been
well
pre-suit
Even though
report
civil
affidavits.
was filed
suit
require
was
were
some other
1972).
defendants
case.
the defendants,
the
is
which occurred
Mr. Durban
that
case
the media
thereafter,
each
it
to notify
from their
Unlike
defendants.
in the present
critical
1973.
prospective
suit
were notified
however,
Division
news of the
the defendants
42 U.S.C.
to or negotiations
notice
that
statutes,*/
Civil
allegations
This
Judith
attorneys
Donald
was accomplished
of any dissemination
release
was not
issued
no awareness
15,
no later
of the news
until
after
the
of the
suit
when
to him.
*/E.g.
42 U.S.C. 2000c-(6)
(employment discrimination
(school desegregation);
42 U.S.C.
suits by private
parties).
- 10 -
2000e-5(a)
Mr. Trump's
call
at all,
except
communication'
"formal"
affidavit
fails
by the artful
in denying
communication
notice
to mention
Ms. Wolf's
as he must - that
he received
"informal"
that
notice
the presentation
mention
of an event
transaction
what he chooses
of this
incident
changed
effect
that
no
admits
to characterize
call.
by affidavit
which completely
"no formal
By claiming
of the suit.
was received,
telephone
We submit
without
the character
of misleading
as
any
of the
it.
CONCLUSION
Were it
not
in the affidavits
for
submitted
now before
discussion
conclusively
for the United
changes
submitted
basis
defendants
for
ever
We believe,
establishes
States
will
get around
of impropriety
which is so remote
on behalf
the suit
intimations
by defendants,
the Court.
counsel
tial
the extraordinary
that
of the
the foregoing
the propriety
of the conduct
of the sworn
of defendants.
The existence
be demonstrated
to a serious
discovery.
- 11 -
effort
of substan-
beyond peradventure
to elicit
of
the facts
if
by
If
in this
the entire
case,
it
is
controversy
to establish
made serious
but baseless
could
easily
allegations,
defendants
and their
the insubstantiality
by them.
Respectfully
States
orney
Brooklyn, New York
to the issues
submitted,
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D.C. 20530
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
'Department
of Justice
Washington, D.C.
20530
counsel
of which
EXHIBIT 1
NDV7 1973
T. 11-7-73
JSP:FES:ESG:cmk
DJ 175-52-28
Mr. Michael Rosen
Saxe, nacon, Bollan and Manley
3'l Ett~ t 68th
Stt~!'!t
Re:
New York
10021
their
1. Instructing
responsibilities
t-"'
Ar...~..........
t,,t.-.. ~,vHJ<o,n
"".~.~ "t """"'l'r~
': ,...., 1
2.
leasea, brochures
relating to renting of apartment,
an appropriate fair housing statement, auch as the slogan
and logotype approved by HUD;
and uniform
7.
Periodically
\
.,r
\
'
ractalfdentification
to make an appropriate
evaluation
affirmative
action program.
J. STANLEY
PO'ITINGD.
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
By:
ELYSE S. GOLDVr1EBEll
Attomey
Housing Section
cct
Porter
Assistant United States
Mr. jira
Attorney
..
...
,-,'
"1,
) .
EXHIBIT 2
UNITEDSTATESDISTRICT COURT
EASTERN
DISTRICT OF NEWYORK
,,
'RA!.i'::-ro
F. 700827
-7-----
if
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA
I
..
Plaintiff
........
;,
'
COHSENTORDER
-against-
;'"
Civil
Action
. Uo. 70 C 964
.
<
I.
..
(Leasing),
- ~- _____
:r -- - -- this
-
I.(~~.
---
Court
"A" hereto,
;cand.
and authority
1 ,---
on Attachment
.'
The Apartment
Leasing
Corporation
the buildings
..to
submits
the jurisdiction
warraiitsto-thecour"t-t;hatrt
to, carry
of Americ~
of
o"f those
paragI'aph.,
i;-ro~:."Pn~1...
~-r't~i~orcter
d~I:~~e~--~
t:~_:
{i;:-~~~b.je.c"t-to
iiab{~1
tempt for
~;~~y~~t-;~~h
fail~~;-to
to be a party-defenrant
consents
II.
that
uel- J. Lefrak,
-~it~out
IT IS SO ORDERED.
the following
individuals:
Sam-
to the allegations
in Attachment
personal
capacities,
respect
with
"A" hereto,
III.
1/
action,
Accordingly,
against
them in their
Leasing,
to this
-LeasirJ
IT IS FURTHERORDERED,ADJUDGED ANDDEC:IBED,
the complaini
agai.nst
p;~visio;~:~--S~id
with prejudice
to the buildings.set
predating
this
employees,
as,
forth
Order.
IT IS FURTHERORDERED,that
their-agents,
dismissed
Life
successors.::/,
Realty,
Inc.,
and all
I
I
"'l1Y
c1,
C\""'h
.._,. {\...~i-.
.1.
'. .r,
:J~l/~~
C.l,,lJi
I.
I
C'-f.J..,,
,-,.
"
. .:.,.
"1 ',
_;,
,.~."-~ci,,.,.,..,nt11 " 11
.Lt
J.id;..
..
4 '
in
r:,,-,-
11
,._1
U '--'- ~'-.'t~t.J.1.t.:.,
1 -,
... -fja i..,
bon"c ..,
L., .._
.. ~-t ....
...
.to~
1
.l.:~~t:
.,.1.~,J.c.
t ) _..,
,~ '.'.. " ' ', c .
~.~'~.::-'-"::\:.::.~
1:-lO,lct.:01..:d
~1,.,;
.:.
.L
1.,,
-h~,,
._..,
1 ,. V
...
lt:,1
1 --1""cn,1,r,-',ru.1\,..L:...... ..... Lu
( .., "' )
_)V
ct,.,,n-,,-1
in~
,
#{ 1,..;
., J .:._4 ,,.1.
'l.)C
l..~
m1r
....
Lt.::
d !:I y
...
- l'
, .!..J.....i
~,.,. ..!.
~ 0 '
s 1-' ,Lr
~.
vO
(.!
l~
\,
!
I.
those
1r~ active
ar~ pe~SI1ent~
concert
or participation
.
/.
.
1
1....
-..
.
. ~~ '
In order
of tenants,
inga listed
to assure
and to encourage
integration
. \
r .t
..
because
origin,,.
inspecin
nondiscriminatory
"An hereto,
on Attachment
-- -
L~.__;.._-.
---
from:
i}
,
I
.
. B. Making unavailable
or denying any
dwellln~ to any person on account o( race,
color, religion
or national
origin.
IV~
ment
"A"I
to the buildings
.
A. . Representing
to any person,
pt.race,
color, religion
or national
' -that any dwelling is unavailable
for
. . tion or rental.
when such dwelling is
.: .: fact available; ., and
"
\...
I
assign-
of the build-
Life Realty,
Inc.
will
:._
__-- --------~-__..:..
- -,:.:....
__
-=Maintain a date and time-punch
~-.-... -. clock. -in its . rental
office
in Brooklyn , and
.
..
=
'
- .. :stamp every
application
which is submitted
with the
:-together with a $25.00 deposit,
.
-.:--a:a.te--an:d-ti-meof
filin
.
.,.
. --.. . .. . .. . . - :- .. "
-- ... -- ..
. .:s;:>.A
-' .
-'------
-.
.. --- ---., ... B . On Wednesday ..of each week, compile a list
of apartments for which Life
Realty, Inc. is rerital agent, believed.:iobe available
for rent, including
the size;
rent, (s~ecifying
whether utilities
are
included),
the a.ddress of the building,
and the probable date when a new tenant
may .take occupancy;
.
..
-"'t
>
::~-~'
...
..
C. Display such list
of available
apartments
at all times after it is compiled in a prominent place in its Brooklyn
office,
and include on the current weekly
list all apartments available
for rent; 1 _
D. Eliminate from said list a.part. ments for which incumbent tenants have
:_reserved orally or in writing since its
listing,
or for which application
with a
$25.00 deposit has been received,
by
striking
such apartment from the list.
Wl;lenever application
is made for any
iapartment appearing upon the list,
the
application
shall be recorded with .the n_ame
and race of the applicant
as provided for
in paragraph E. below, and date and time
of filing
in a dally log, as more fully
set forth below.
! .
'
...
E.
used in the remainder of thls Order, the terms 11Dc'!fendant" or "D~fcndr,nts 11, or the named defcnda.nts,
include
employees, agents,
successors,
ns~igns, and all thoEe actl:1g in concert
or participation
wlth any of ther.1.
~/
As
- 2 -
:--..... _....
:--..- .--..-.-.
J.
,
fendants'
agents, unless race has
been voluntarily
furnished by the
applicant
on a form such as the11 one
B 11;
attached hereto as Attachment
i
.
...
....
. I
:\
2.
The building,
the apartment
. applied
for, the date and time of
filing,
whether the applicant
was
- accepted or rejected
and, if the
applicant
was rejected,
the reason
therefor.
Accept applications
only for specific
available
units in the Brooklyn buildings
appearing on Attachment "A" hereto, and will
not take applications
which fail to specify
a particular
unit;
F.
. .- .
G. Within thirty
(30) days of the
_____ _.____
. , ___entry .of .this Order, mail to every tenant
. - -
in the buildings
listed
on Attachment "An
~.:-. hereto the fi'rst--list
of available
apartments. to be published pursuant to para- --graph B. above, together with a statement
--- . -that such apartments are available
on a
-- . first-come,
first-served
basis (provided
that the applicant
meets the qualificatj9~s
set forth in Part 7. of this Order), and
that similar lists
may thereafter
be viewed
at Life Realty,
Inc. offices
at 1790 Flatbush Avenue, Br:>oklyn, New York.
V.
The,defendants
will:
ED THROUGH
THIS OFFICE SHALLBE
AVAILABLEWITHOU'fREGARDTO RACE,
COLOR, RELIGION OR NATIONALORI.GIN"
applicants
for ape.rtments:
indicate
l.
All a.pplicants '\rill
upon their applications:
address, age,
sex, maritai
status and name
of spouse, relative
or other
person who will live in the
ape.rtment;
(a)
Home
- 3 -
'--.
),:&-.... - .. ~
I.
'
..
'
...
.. ~.
, ~.
. . ( c)
'
'I
'
'
.: . in which any or all adult appll-;___~--__ :.:.,.:.._:~.~ants maintain either a check. -- --:- - ~~ ~::-.-::-:-;-:;---=1ng
account or savings account;
~~.
---,.--
'.
.. -------
-r.
----r
: .. '*' .. ~
____ ;...
. - - . . . :.-. .
.. "':
..
'.
1.
:".
~.:,',-"'
:-
Former residence
and
prospective
occupants;
.
.
of all
-------------
______
._:-
h
:.:.._:_~
...
~ ..............
..
-.. .. -~-..:::;;.:i~
- 2. ~The information furnished
pur: :' :suant to paragraphs
(a) through (d)
.-:;;,.
.above, will re verified
by defenc.~nts
and' if it proves accurate,
an appro. pria te indication
will be made on the
applica tirm or on an accompanying
. f'orm as to whether verifica.ti.on
has
:!'
bean made;
..I
..
3. If the applic.ant is rejected,
..~ :...
:
the reasons for the rejection
shall
be entered upon the application
and
the applicant
will be informed within
five days thereafter
of the fact of
his rejection;
...
..
,
'
'
..
:=~
_
--- . ---...landlord(d)
~
4. If the information
furnished
by the applicant
has been verified
by defendants,
and if he has been a
satisfactory
tenant at his prior
residence,
and if his net income
per week, after deduction of the
obligations
listed
in v. C. 1. (b)
of this Order on a weekly basis,
proves to be equal to at least 90%
of the monthly rental of the apart.ment for which he has applied,
no
further
investigation
sha.11 be conducted, and the applicant
shall be
accepted or rejected
on the basis
of informatlon
already available.
No applicant
shall be rejected
for
failure
to ha.ve a checking or sa.vings
account at a conunercial bank., if said
failure
was truthfully
stated by the
in his application;
applicant
5. If any item
the applicc1.nt cannot
or if he has proved
isfactory
tenant nt
dence, or if his net
- . li -
furnished
by
be 1crif'Jc:d,
to be an unsathis prior
resi-
weckJy 5 n:'.'.0::10
i~_....
.
"'-~
'
'
....
i,,l.... -~-.
/'
/"'
A. ,Within thirty
VI.
this
Order,
Life
the buildings
Purdue,
Realty,
Inc.
-- -.the-defendants-shall
carry
fn said
-.'
--
-~
...
. -.. t
... - .~.
Cornell,
and Clarkson
---
-l
----~--_
--
--
in
Terrace,
"C", and
described
-.
Order
--
--... --
.. ______
.B. Beginning
of
Princeton,
as Attach,"Ilent
\,
-- - -
--
i_
Attachment
reference;--".'"-
1 _
~-_....-"
. .
by
will
hereto
Northwestern
~--
Syracuse,
notice
..
,/
I.....
---
--
.,
--
)",.-
.,
-.
..,_
(30) days
. t:':.
--.-.
in its
posted
of this
Brooklyn
Order,
office
apartm_nts
kno~m to be available
than those
if'y
the price,
eluded
size,
in the rent,
be available
List"
in any building
to be
date.
rental,
no less
This special
and whether
those
on Attach-
A. hereof),
named in paragraph
for occupancy
main-
i:i-rl
Inc.
a weekly "special
on Wednesday.morning
.
Life Realty,
than four
list
will
utilities
specare in-
will
for o~cupancy.
C. The special
list
described
in paragraph
,,.
B. above shall
$25.00
deposit
to tenants
be available
untll
5:00
5:00
list
shall
special
described
in Part
application
P .M. of each
1970.
by written
by lease
be incorporated
IV.,
paraera:phs
- 5 -
exclusively
named in paragraph
as determined
January
Friday,
with a
into
date,
A.
shall
to Aue;u.st 1..,
the a.pa.rtments
the general
B. a.nd C. of this
on .. the
list
Ordt:r.
I !/
1
,.!.)
&..
.,:
. ..D
Tenants
buildings
in the aforementioned
fr
~egular
list
~t least
four
seven
on either
weeks prior
the specia
under Part V
.I
lease obliga
and permitted
without
any penalty*
cept in relation
to projected
or
sacrifice
.
of security
deposit,
ex
!
to liability
vacated.
E.
The provisions
posting
shall
pursuant
--.- -~~--~-!l~r.e;~.~or--~~~~~
-~!~~r-,
c.s~)_
--~~~~\~-~ -~-f~th~
shall
have transferred
to other
n~me~ buil~in~i
pursuant hereto,
buildings
..
(
. .. VII.
The defendants
A.
will,
beginning
:. :..,_.
t:".,...
ten (10)
<:,;
days after
the entry
records:
..
of this
maintain
the following
. ..
'. f.-
1.
The log of applications
J.escribed in Part IV. above, such
log to designate tenants transferring pursuant to Part VI.
hereof;
2. All applications,.whether
aicepted or rejected,
with accomchecks and leases.
panying credit
Defendants will keep these records
available
for periodic
inspection
by the plaintiff's
representatives
for two years from the entry of
this Order.
'
B. .No less
data:
indicating
and therea.fter
than three
of th.ts Order,
months intervals
ceived,
Order,
at three-
the defendants
for plaintiff,
reports
will
pre-
including
numbar of applice.tions
The total
the bu11dings
whether
-.,ms a.cccptcd
if
rejected,
ma.y fulfill
the reason
their
obligations
- 6 -
re-
tmder this
or rejected
Defendants
pcuo~~raph by
and,
1
-(
'. -
.;_
forwarding
to the plaintif.f
of this
shall
Order.
'
In addition
mail to counsel
.....
,:
Order.
to Chief,
States
special
list
All notices
to the foregoing,
a_s defined
and reports
..
Housing Section,
Department
VIII.
Civil
of Justice,
Rights
" .
Division,
except
arises
o{
B.
United
.I
c. -
D.
IT IS FURTHER
ORDERED,that
complaint
VI.
be addressed'
Washington,
future
20530.
whenever a.ny
of this
that
there
Order,
exists
"
IV.
of each r~port
in Part
shall
as part
to Part
for plaintiff,
,,
a copy o~ each
this
intervals
copies
this
at the prescribed
t~2.Go~ernment
- ........
---------- --~-
shall
furnish
of
the defendants
--
and a brief
.t
description
of the nature
including
respect
..
the defendant
date notice
thereof,
is
of the complaint,
!ng with
after,
and substance
is
to investigate
determined
was made.
of such complaint
such complaint,
by defendants
to be valid,
to advise
tbe conditions
to the complaint;
plaint
vise
is determined
plaint,to
this
by defendants
be invalid,
before
threatening
pers;
to correct
if
the com-
to be invalid,
to ad-.
for determining
ants
'or,
the
the comapply
to
any other
there
There-
have fifteen
shall
received
a situation
that
the effectiveness
of this
wi thou:t the
be by telephone
aftei
consulting
with this
...
I -
If
has arisen
decree~
notice
filing
orally
Order.
ancl. that
,_
. ~t :
parties
by telephone.,
exists.
shall
If the Court
decide
determines
whether
that
exists,
plaintiff
may proceed
without
necessity
an emergency
an emergency
to move for
immediate
(15) days'
notice
in fact
relief
prov.ided
.ti
lI
IX.
ered,
Two years
or thereafter,
the defendants
this
decree
is ent-
\I
Order.
this
objection
---
within
shall
missed without
a hearing
,-:.
.x....
Order- shall
their
No costs
to interpose
or fu~~her
dis-
pri?r.
against
any
of Motion,
in-curred
be assessed
agreement
fails
be dissolved
--~---------=
States
thirty
the injunction
--------.
----
If the United
the defendants
steps
of this
in light
of
d'escribed
in
..
this
between
the parties
XI.
cction
Dated:
ell
~o~
to this
The Court
extrinsic
agreement
Order .
shall
retain
jurisdiction
of this
purposes.
Brooklyn,
January
New York,
~r ,
1971.
!3&~
.~
. :..
'
Without
any adjudication
- 8 .
of the merits,
sence of liability,
..
to the entry
the under&igned
apply for
and
cj nt
r.
..
. ,.. ,'MA~
LEONARD
Assistant
Attorney General
Civil Rights Division.
U
Department of Justice
EDWARD
R. NEARER
United States Attorney
_Ea~~;tofN~w
for:~~~-~~~-,~-=ROBE.RT~.
M~o=Rs=E::.----------
Chief AssistaP\_U
-----
. S. Attorney
... ._....-._ .
1~
'j
. ~,--.J.?.
-.----.-----
,-4
...
li,RANK E. SCH:WEr.s--
t
t
~~
MIRIAM
J?rL~
R. E1SEWSTE1
Attorney,
Department
l:". _:.
of Justice
~JJL-~~
t.
~TASTER--------
Rn;HARD
At torney,
Department
of Justice
.....
A~
~.
~/~Z,
?!/!_?'cL-'2-;tc,1!
$7d'(ei.!.!)~7e"_A_J
__
1,___
ANDERSON
& ALLEGAERT
Attorneys
for Life Realty,
,_.,
.,
,. ..
'
'
, .
... : .
:, ...
J_ l . :
.. "
"\
Inc.
0:1?
1:,{1/1/.~,,/},,./ ~ J::C.~~.iflww<-,
&
. GOLDSTEIN,
GURFEIN,
SHM!ES
i~ c>Q,----.._
HYDE
A]t13>rneys fodr;1ment
Leasing
0
J?.~za, ..~.a;__
__fr..:
LEO}fARD
SCHOl?FW\N
l::..~----Pre~id~nt,
11,ite Re~lty, Inc.
co_rporation
of America
/l,,._-1'--
/'t-.,
/)
r.-:/
..__:..}'_'...,.z..1.'7,'1-'\
.-:::.:&,tl1:,f/Ji,:,---
IRWIN SCHOFF'MAN/
President,
Apartment
Leasing
Corporation
- ,9 -
of America
OWUER
;ADDRESSES
IN BROOKLYN,rIEWYORK
Amherst Leasing co p.
Annapolis Leasing
orp.
Arcadia Leasing Corp.
Atlantis
Leasing Corp.
...
. --::
... -..--- - -
Leasing
l~asing
Leasing
Gorp.
Corp.
Corp.
~.
-,..
:,
..
Life
2401 Nostrand
Company
\-
Corp.3900
Management Corp.
Avenue
Kings Highway
2021 East
41st
Street
(
I
'
Oxford.Leasing
Corp.
410 Avenue X
2611 East 13th Street
2411 East 3rd Stree,t
450 Rockaway Parkway
Rakfel
Ra.kfel
Rakfel
Regent
2044
205
2064
1035
Realty Corp.
Realty Corp.
Realty Corp.
Leasing Co.
Stanford
Syracuse
Leasing
Leasing
Corp.
Corp.
Wc3t
Gardens,
Point
WcrL~n~~
\1
"' L<.1.J"-
.1.
Wctherole
Avenue
Avenue
Avenue
Avenue
1625 Rocka,.-w,yPark'.rn.y
1115 Willmohr
Street
Tri Bulldings
'l ri Buildings
Virginia
Nostrand
Nostrand
Nostrand
Clarkson
Inc.
3502 Kings
Hig}1wo.y
Lear;ine; Co]~p.
Ic~s~r~
.1 <:.,..- .L.a.1
Holrtin~
Wlr.conr..;j.n Leasing
~Ol'')
v
!
Corp.
Co.
I
1,
ATTACHMEMT ":a"
TO ALLAPPLICANTS:
1
In order
an acco~dance
I
,. ..
to promote nondiscrimination
-------------
~,. _ Faflure
-
---""
.' ,
..
..
I
.
11
White
Black
-Other
...
.....-~-
"
;..
..
~"""
I1
IF YOUCHOOSETO DO SO.
..
in housing
'(Please
affect
.
Print)-NAME
"'.
your
.j
ATrACHHENT
"C"
. JANUARY1,
Dear Tenant:
"' t-
..
'
...
. We would like to offer you on a limlted
basis the
:f'ollowing opportunity.
If you desire
to move to other of
our buildings
in Brooklyn,
we will allow you to move without
any penalty
except for property
damage to your present
'.
apartment.
In addition,
if you are accepted
for another
apartment,
we will credit
you towards the first
month's
rent of the new apartment
to the extent of one month's rent
or your present
apartment.
In other words, you will not
have to pay the first
month's rent on the new apartment,
except to the extent that the new rent is higher than your
present
rent.
However, if the new apartment
rental
is less
than the rent you are now paying,
~ou will rece5.ve the
difference
bet .-reen the old monthly rent and the new rent
- ror -the first. month~ in cash,. as. well as your first
month's
rent free.
__ ... . . ~ --------
I
I
1.
1
,
1
Very truly
yours,
Af,IERICA.
EXHIBIT A
-------------------~----------~-x
UNI'l'EDSTA'_fESOF AMERICA,
CIVIL ACTIONNO. 70 C 95~
Plaintiff,
-against-
AMENDMENT
TO CONSENT
1971
ORDEH OF ,I/dWARY--2<f:
Defendants.
---~-~~-------------------------x
Upon the report
of the parties
4.
the
If the
tenant
the Consent
is hereby
information
at his
Order
equal
,of
. ~--".
to at least
payment
authorized
vestigation
basis
and. if
1n V, c,
for
his
o~
1 (b) of
~roves
tobe
rental
of r~nt
shall
be guaranteed
enforceable
contract
by a duly
.
/
governmerit agency, no further
inshall
shall
by
deduction
on a weekly basis,
by a legally
cant
furniched
residence>
listed
the apartment
or his
amended so that
prior
the obligations
this
entered
..
Decree,
and if
ants,
case
December 6, 1971,
be:
applicant
~ -rend
...
hereto,
dated
bc'conducted,
be accepted
of information
or rejected
already
on the
available
'
.! I
No appllcant
chall
be rejected
to have a ch6ckinG
..
commercial
fully
bank,
or cavings
if
said
failure
account
failure
by the applicant
stated
for
at a
appli-
cation;
Dated:
Brooklyn,
New York
December 22, 1971.
Jack Weinstein
United Sta'ces
The parties,
by their
attorneys,
of this
For the
Plaintiff:
i)istrict
conbent
Judc;e
to the
Order .
~or
the
Defendants:
Attorneys
.HODER'l' A MORSE
States
Attorney
'Eastern District
of New York
for
Defendants
United
By:
EDWARDBRODSKY
A Member
.--of.the Firm
FHANK g.
SCH\foLh
liENRY A. BHACil'l'L
Assistant
United
Eastern District
HICHAHD L.
States Attorney
of New York
MAS'l'i~H
i/
Attorney,
Civil Rights
Department of Justice
Division
,1,
'l
'
'
entry
.,.,
..
EXHIBI'l'
Section
604-4.0
--
Adminlstr~tive
Code
of
Lnc City
(2)
The commissioner
shall
not be dec::med
to have assumed the duties
of a tenant
under lease
because
he has entered
into a contract
to muke
rental
payments.
,
......---
'-..
, I
---
EXHIBIT C
NOTICE TO WELFARE RECIPr32?TS
Before
in a Lefrak
you fill
building,
out an epplication
please
cons idcr
the
for an apartment
follc-:,ing:
TO OR GREATERTHAN90% OF THE
MONTHLY
RENTALFO!l THE APARTMENT
FOR WHICH HE APPLIES,
OR
THE APPLICANT SECURES
A
PRIVATE
GUARA:t-.1TOR
ACCEPTA:3LE TO LEFRAK
OR
THE APPLICAl\i"T'S PAY}~NT OF RJ~:-:T
SHALL BE Gl1~RA~1TEED
BY A LEGALLY
J
AUTHORIZEDGOVERNNENT
AGENCY.
This means, for example, that if you
apply for an apartment which rents for $175 per
month, your application
cannot be seriously
con~
sidered unless you receive at least $155 per week
in benefits.
If an apartment rents for $200 per
rnon_th, you must receive at }.east $180 pc:c week 1.r...
benefits
in order ~o be seriously
considered.
EXHIBIT 3
FOR IMMEDIATE
RELEASE
MONDAY,
OCTOBER
15, 1973
The Department
of Justice
filed
a civil
suit
today
charging
that
cori'trols
more
than
area
with discriminating
an
.
apartment
management
New York
City
metropolitan
in the operation
of their
Attorney
Donald
buildings.
General
in U.S.
Named
stockholder
firm
District
and board
black
persons
'
L.
Richardson
Court
as defendants
were
chairn1an,
said
in Brooklyn,
Trump
Fred
the housing
New York.
Management,
C.
discrimination
Trump,
Inc.,
its principal
Trump.
The defendants
principally
in Brooklyn
The suit
1968 by refusing
rental
Elliot
against
in the
terms
apartments
said
to rent
and requiring
39 apartment
buildings,
the defendant~
and negotiate
because
have
violated
rentals
of race,
the Fair
with blacks,
Housing
Act of
requiring
and misrepresenting
different
that
not available.
The suit
racial
son1e
and Queens.
and conditions
are
practising
asked
for
discrimination
them
to correct
a court
order
enjoining
in the operation
the effects
of their
conduct.
.(OVER)
the defendants
of their
alleged
from
apartment
discriminatory
buildings
- 2 -
. ;
A~sistant
Righ~s
rental
Attorney
Division,
said
discrimination
Life Realty
Company,
and Puerto
Rican
Mr. Pottinger
Pottinger,
1
Department
involving
about
was resolved
occupancy
10,000
rental
by a -consent
at previously
head
of the Civil
s second
major
area~
units
decree
controlled
by
all-white
buildings
rose
referred
substantially,
said.
He also
,i
suit,
J. Stanley
The first
General
said
the Trump
case
City Conunission
allegations
by Operation
made
was
on Human
Open City,
Rights
v.hich is affiliated
Departm<;!nt
in part
on
League.
l)(IJ.1tr::1.111
. i
I,
hereby
claim,
Elyse
certify
of Motion
CERTIPICATEOF SERVICE
S. Goldweber,
I have served
that
of the United
a copy of the
State~
to Defendants'
More Definite
Statement
copy,
prepaid,
defendants'
Notice
counter-
to Dismiss,
States
Motion
of Plaintiff's
for
Motion
in Response
postage
the plaintiff,
and in Support
the Counterclaim
for
to dismiss
attached
in Opposition
to Dismiss
an attorney
to their
to the Affidavits
defendants
attorney
at
by mailing
the following
address:
Roy M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon) Bolan & Manley
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
This,
the
4th
day
of J anua'.':.".,, :97.+.
~.t-(?.r_..,.;
:.1.-.(
{?d/ll {Jj)/{{_a-,z
r..LYSE u.
,...::,t,R
7
vl.;1..v,;
...
Attorney,
Hcusing Section
Civil Rights Division
Departmens
~f Justice
Washington,
J.C.
20530
II
~
.-tt..C..CJ
1N ctrn:csOfl 1c.1:
u. S. o:STRlCTCOL;RTt.'D.N.Y.
--------------------------------x
TIMEA.M........................
.
STIPULIAM.ION
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP,
and TRUMP MANAGEMENT, INC.,
Civil
Action
File
No. 73 C 1529
Defendants.
--------------------------------x
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between
the
United
attorney
for
attorneys
the
for
to
January
Dated:
Attorney
the
complaint
motion
to
States
25,
plaintiff,
the
defendants,
and
for
dismiss
for
a more
defendants'
the
and
Eastern
Saxe,
that
District
Bacon,
Bolan
defendants'
definite
&
motion
statement
counterclaim
of
is
and
hereby
New York,
Manley,
to
dismiss
Government's
adjourned
1974.
~xx~~ix
United
States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
Attorney
for Plaintiff
By
By'-~{,
WI
/I
./
/i
,1-,,,l.vt->f/:;;,<
,,./o
----------------------------x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.~
73 C 1529
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALDTRUMP
and TRUMPMANAGEMENT
INC. ,
Defendants.
Frc
----------------------------x
fN CLERK'
O
u.s.DISTRICTs.amcrr
* JAN2a1974*
COURT
E.D.N.V;.
rJMf <lM
P.M..
...........
~ .............
""'-
AND
COUN5E'LLORS
AT LAW
Attorneys
for
Defendants
------------------------------x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
73
1529
------------------------------x
DEFENDANTS REPLY MEMORANDUM
OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS
MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIM
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The defendants
complaint
for
definite
All
abuse
ment
these
of
to
unfair
the
and
state
Federal
pleading
to
a cause
have
were
pressure
moved
filed
taken
dismiss
of
the
action
a compulsory
in
order
rules
and
on defendants
to
to
government's
or
for
a more
counterclaim.
prevent
a trend
a clear
by the
settle
with
govern-
them
by
publicity.
served
and T.V.
were
to
actions
exert
In
were
failure
statement,
of
have
the
with
instant
the
is
accused
October
16,
bias
renting"(Daily
1973,
even
and
reported
banner
landlord
in
summons
newscasters
carrying
case,
the
headlines
of
p.l),
News,
"U.S.
the
complaint,
case
newspapers
that
a "major
in
suit
against
16,
radio
the
bias
October
defendants
the
and
proclaiming
anti-black
and
before
the
1973).
city"(N.Y.
Trump
Times,
charges
The government's
affidavits
submitted
to mask
their
to
the
true
intent
the
facts
is
premature
purpose
is
whatever
purpose
by defendant
was to
public
memorandum
of
stated
the
to
some wrong
critical.
by holding
the
as well
charges
and especially
that
claim
they
that
had
as
the
against
merely
and there
government
has
analagous
but
that
one
all
to
line
filed
that
not
defendants
into
is
the
to
unreported
one
case
motions.
this
to
facts
an indictment
case
put
that
in
unproven
won the
the
burden
they
lack.
a criminal
with
case;
cases.
An analysis
their
The cases
-2-
argument
break
on the
but
factual
The
defendants
The situation
arson
its
one
this.
action
to
throughout
not
permits
investigators
supports
citizens
Trump buildings,
and
contains
which
a defendant
hire
in
not
hypo-
the
unfounded
had
guilty
utterly
residing
were
no case
attempted
of
alert
are
a complaint.
in
charging
defendant
to
no
real
defendants
was to
government
The government
cites
are
defendants
is
tenants
them
the
allegation
supply
benefit
only
conference
purpose
The complaint
to
It's
that
a news
The defendants
of New York,
that
there
that
settlement.
The government's
of
claiming
The practical
complaint.
the
attempts
releases,
since
pressure
to
attorneys
public.
doubtful
in
obviously
news
the
extremely
response
and his
these
benefit
in
which
and
the
memorandum
of
each
in
down into
contains
then
disprove
is
requiring
charge.
of
opinion
opposition
two major
law
shows
to
groups.
The
first
in
their
in
the
are
those
complaint
instant
decisions
and
they
are
listed
in
as
the
cases
absent
second
is
major
reached
as
fit
separately.
cited
table
..
from
complaint
either
of
the
contains
court
them.
A case
government's
facts
by the
regards
into
supplied
group
no discussion
do not
discussed
government
totally
The
there
which
the
are
may be
cases
"unreported
which
which
so no conclusions
a few
which
action.
in
are
in
of
There
these
by case
contents
and
groups
analysis
in
the
"follows:
States
v.
Fla.
Sept.
United
N.Y.,
States
v. Gilman,
July
28,1970.
United
1970).
States
v.
United
August
States
v.
12, 1970)
United
March
States
v.
20, 1970).
Raymond,
Civil
5, 1973}.
Miller,
No.
73-119
CIV-T-H
Civil
Action
No.
Civil
Action
No.70-40(D.Md.
Chirico,
Arco,
Action
Civil
Inc.,
Action
Civil
70-Civil
No.
Action
1967(S.D.
70-1851
No.
April
(E.D.
70-29(W.D.
IN TEE DECISION
United
States
v.
May 15, 19 7 3) .
Watson,
No.
United
States
v.
No. 3284-N
(M.D.
Pelzer
Realty
Ala.
July
16,
United
States
May 18, 1971).
Davis,
v.
United
(S.D.
States
v. Goldberf,
Fla.
Oct.
19, 1970
United
13578
States
v.
(N.D. Ga.,
Civil
Action
Civil
Company,
1971).
Action
Civil
Inc.,
No.
Action
73-97
27,
Pa.
Tenn.,
{M.D. La.,
Civil
Action
6451-7l(S.D.
Ala.
No.70-1223-CIV-CF
PMC Development
July
28, 1970.
-3-
Co.,
Inc.,
Civil
Action
No.
United
States
v.
No. 70-379-CIV-C
United
States
Md. April
17,
Palm Beach
{S.D. Fla.
Listing
May 5,
v. H. G. Smithy,
1970).
Bureau,
1970).
Civil
Inc.,
Action
No.
United
States
v. Management
Clearing,
Inc.,
70-23-PHX
(CAM) (D. Ariz.
April
8, 1970).
United
(S.D.
States
v.
Tex. April
Margurette
30, 1971).
United
States
v. Exclusive
C-70-969
(N.D. Ohio Nov.
United
States
C.A.-3-7243-E
United
April
8,
Jones,
Civil
Mutual
1971).
Action
Exchange,
J.C.
Long,
Civil
Civil
Action
No.
{D.
Action
No.
Civil
Action
21470
Civil
States
v.
3, 1972).
Civil
No.
71-H-279
Action
Action
71-1262
No.
No.
(D.S.C.
City of Parma,
5 , 19 7 3)
Civil
Action
No.
C-73-439
The motions
in this
case were based on the defendant's
argument
that
municipalities
or political
subdivisions
are
not persons
against
whom a suit
may be brought
and in addition,
facts
are apparently
presented
in the complaint.
United
States
v.
( S . D F 1 a , June
given
Robbins,
Civil
2 2 , 19 7 3) .
United
States
v.A.B.
(N.D. Ohio Nov. 24,
The motion
to
the unconstitutionality
violated.
United
States
v.
(S. D. Tex. Sept.
to
This
dismiss
was
or
Smythe,
1970).
dismiss
Jim
2 7,
of
was
Inc.,
Action
not
included
Civil
was based
the statute
Tucker
Co.,
19 72) .
No.
Civil
-4-
in
Action
CIV-JE
the
Orders
No.
C-69-885
on exemptions
alleged
to
Action
a motion
for summary judgment
for a more definite
statement.
IN SUMMARY
73-848
and
have been
No.72-H-993
not
for
a motion
In
it
is
seen
in
addition
done
in
the
decisions
that
to
the
the
in which
government
a mere
instant
there
is
supplied
recitation
of
some discussion,
facts
the
in
the
statutes
complaint
as
they
have
case.
POINT I
GOVERNMENT'S COMPLAINT
SHOULD BE DISMISSED
The government's
In opposition
to
this,
the
Gibson,
355 U.S.41(1957),
portion
quoted
have
been
in
cited
he bases
his
of what
it
rests,"
to
claim,
the
government's
the
set
but
that
plaintiff's
( 4 7-4 8) [emphasis
The government
defendants
to
get
if
what
dates,
fair
around
is
the
places,
of
is
etc."
fact
is
evidentiary
failed
to
state
any
a recent
State
of
Colorado,
said
citing
to
would
and
that
well
motions.
that
the
entirely
they
facts
would
upon
"fair
grounds
failed
grounds
which
which
to
although
give
they
details
must
since
attempt
it
is
alright
such
as names,
conclude
that
they
have
v.
Supreme
F.2d
993,
totally
whatsoever.
case,
(10 Cir.
Conly,
-5-
Coopersmith
1972)
not
notice
upon
by claiming
"evidentiary
detail
their
the
v.
direction
facts
Conly
could
require
The government
every
In
detail
is
the
of
said
supplied]
court's
lacking
it
has
notice
support
in
claim
cited
especially
court
out
be dismissed.
memorandum,
in
supra,
has
decision,
by defendants
a claimant
should
government
the
the
In Conly,
require
complaint
4~
Court
the
court
"alle
ations
of conclusions
or of
are not sufficient
when no facts
are a
by way of the statement
o'f the claim."
supplied)
.
In Burak
the
complaint
was
v.
Sprague
(E.D.
dismissed,
the
Pa.
1971)
court
335 F.
Supp.
347,
stating:
The complaint
fails
to state
a claim on
which relief
can be granted;
it fails
to
set forth
facts;
it sets
forth
only a series
of conclusionary
charges
devoid
of factual
content
lacking
legal
significance.
The
complaint
is dismissed."
A complaint
in
and
to
merely
not
enough.
1970),
a case
state
vague
Nishiyama
49 FRD 288.
(C.A.2d,
like
1971)
and
v.
of
City
in
civil
must
v.
442,
set
forth
conclusionary
North
Shemtob
448 F.2d
Administration
this
America
of New York
City
are
(C.D.
Hammill
v.
facts,
allegations
Rockwell
Shearson
Israel
some
Co.
&
Rent
Calif.
Rehabilitation
&
(S.D.N.Y.1965)
28 F.Supp.
908.
Even
more
than
plaintiff's
statement,
(E.D.
1972)
Woods v.
that
it
police
City
is
power,
dismiss
Sisters
of
the
of
unsupported
will
Jones
to
of
determination
the
Saint
has
and
-6-
not
the
based
presented
so the
very
any
real
the
court
right
is
v.
805.
Mary of
infringed
factual
Bales(N.D.Ga.
F.2d
of which
nothing
Scott
v.
335 F.Supp.396,
balance
is
by any
be granted.
Providence
Evanston,
allegations
a claim
(C.A.5th,1973)480
The government
these
where
58 FRD 131),
aff'd
important
presented.
support
to
Wis.1973)
58 FRD 453,
In
cases
conclusions,
a motion
Larson,
rights
noted
against
on facts
facts
possibility
to
of
abuse
has
to
substantiate
a reality.
it,
substance,
abuse
become
and
newspaper
the
court
protection
The complaint
as
if
reports
in
in
an attempt
are
Sisters
of
lacks
gave
released,
Providence
facts
it
this
is
the
exact
sought
to
provide
against.
POINT II
DEFENDANTS' ~OTION FOR A MORE
DEFINITE STATEMENT SHOULD
BE GRANTED
The defendants
around
which
government
motion
has
can
to
the
statement
The cases
to
this
motion
sufficient
this,
is
not
Jenn
not
where
information
pleading.
The
thus,
if
granted,
Air
defendants'
then
Products
a more
Co.,
v.
283 F.Supp.591.
by the
involve
sufficient
and
E.D.Pa.1968,
cited
all
facts
supply
required.
Inc.,
to
a responsive
complaint
is
Ventilator,
entitled
frame
failed
dismissing
definite
Penn
they
are
government
in
opposition
the
courts
situations
where
they
no facts.
found
found
POINT III
DEFENDANTS'COUNTERCLAIM
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED
The government
by releasing
untrue
Federal
state
the
before
Rules
to
the
they
of
press
served
Civil
as a counterclaim
opposing
party.
has
severely
statements
the
which
defendant.
Procedure
any
damaged
claim
Defendantscounterclaim.
-7-
defendant
it
knew to
Rule
13(a)
requires
which
the
a pleading
the
pleader
be
of
the
to
has
against
The government,
by the
institution
defendants'
18 of
of
this
compulsory
the
action,
has
counterclaims,
government's
subjected
as
it
itself
admits
to
on page
memorandum.
CONCLUSION
The government
of
their
failure
a more
definite
cases
cited
their
argument.
defendants
to
are
state
statement
by the
complaint
any
It
is
facts
should
government
should
in
their
evidentiary
fail
because
complaint
be required.
completely
mere
be dismissed
and
The unreported
to
detail
support
that
the
requesting.
Respectfully
submitted,
-8-
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALD
TRUMPand TRUMPMANAGE- )
)
MENT, INC.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
1'.t.r::
/UL
.. .. .'
P.!l ... .. '
NOTICE OF MOTIONTO
COMPELDEFENDANTS
TO
ANSWER
PLAINTIFF'S
INTERROGATORIES
____________
SIRS:
will
R. Neaher,
move this
District
Court,
of that
East,
Brooklyn,
States
~. """
Courthouse,
9,
in the
as counsel
can
--
inte;:igga.t,aries
'"'
propounded
"'"""""'"N!"'''";d<,
and served
is made pursuant
grounds
are set
other
Edward
therefor
supporting
of
plaintiff's
about
States
the Honorable
__________
be heard,
~
before
United
plaintiff,
memorandum.
and further
relief
forth
This motion
and the
with particularity
Plaintiff
that
on or
this
further
prays
in plaintiff's
for such
and proper.
Dated:
To:
10021
Yours,
etc.
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
. BRACHTL
Assi
ant United States
Attorney
Department of Justice
Brooklyn, New York 11201
~ff's~Gsa~~~~L
Attorney, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
"
II.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I,
plaintiff,
Elyse
S. Goldweber,
hereby
of the foregoing
certify
Notice
to Answer Plaintiff's
by mailing
a copy,
at the following
an attorney
that
I have served
the
the
a copy
postage
prepaid,
on the defendants
to their
attorney
address:
Roy M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York
This,
for
&
Manley
10021
1974.
~d
M,LJ' i'-&G
ELY~
GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
"'
) ss
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA )
Elyse
S. Goldweber,
being
duly sworn,
deposes
and
says:
1.
Rights
I am an attorney
Division,
United
States
Department
for plaintiff
Civil
Action
a set
interrogatories,
copies
thereof
States
and
v. Fred
No. 73 C 1529.
to be mailed
of interrogatories
Defendants
as evidenced
Civil
of Justice,
in United
for defendants
attached
to their
presently
have received
by the fact
motions
to
copies
that
on
of these
they have
and counterclaim
now
pending.
3.
I telephoned
Shulman, Esq.,
4.
of several
effort
defendants'
from his
handling
on January
On January
telephone
to discuss
this
failure
no response,
of Saxe,
firm,
Bacon,
to respond
interrogatories.
the attorneys
would return
received
to me
lawsuit
2, 1974.
4, 1974, Mr. Shulman returned
calls
the unanswered
interrogatories
any answers
me that
the last
to him in an
pursuant
to
the defendants
or objections
to the interrogatories
in the alternative,
ruled
until
their
motions
to dismiss,
statement,
were
on.
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
Subscribed
before
and sworn to
me this
,~.
/~
/~
1974.
7::7.
or
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Elyse
hereby
certify
Affidavit
S. Goldweber,
that
in Support
I have served
To Answer Plaintiff's
dants
by mailing
Interrogatories
a copy, postage
prepaid,
the 21st
address:
Roy M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York
This,
of Plaintiff's
dants
at the following
an attorney
day of January,
& Manley
10021
1974.
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
attorney
JAN24 1974
-------------------------------------x
\-'..,, .......
""'
Civil
Plaintiff,
f,
Action
No. 73 C 1529
-------------------------------------x
MEMORANDUM
IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S
MOTIONTO COMPELDEFENDANTSTO ANSWER
PLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES
Of Counsel:
HENRYA. BRACHTL
Assistant
u. s. Attorney
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington,
D. c. 20530
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
u. s. Department of Justice
Washington,
n. c. 20530
EDWARDJOHN BOYDV
United States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
Attorney
for Plaintiff
225 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn,
New York 11201
MEMORANDUM
IN SUPPORTOF PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONTO COMPEL
DEFENDANTS
TO ANSWERPLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES
HENRYA. BRACHTL
Assistant
United States
Attorney
U.S. Department of
Justice
Brooklyn, New York
11201
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington 1 D. C. 20530
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
MEMORANDUM
IN SUPPORTOF PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONTO COMPEL
DEFENDANTS
TO ANSWERPLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES
INTRODUCTION
On
pursuant
3601 et~apartment
that
October
to Title
(Fair
complexes
the defendants
of the Civil
States
Rights
the defendants,
in unlawful
this
action,
instituted
who operate
The Complaint
racially
alleges
discriminatory
housing
practices
practice
and that
of resistance
by the Fair
secured
such conduct
to the full
enjoyment
by the Act,
importance.
which denial
See 42 U.S.C.
in the alternative,
the Complaint
fails
raises
filed
seeking
filed
a claim
them to respond.
before
the purported
against
alleging
dollars.
that
can be granted
have also
States
On January
to defendants'
7,
motions
These motions
are
the court.
a set
of interrogatories.
having
been received
served
On January
in the interim,
the United
States,
defendants
pursuant
to respond
to plaintiff's
that
public
the United
counterclaim.
Ms. Goldweber
of rights
to dismiss
Defendants
a memorandum in opposition
Motions
to be a counterclaim
filed
secured
of general
statement,
1974, plaintiff
or
3613.
to state
what purports
of the rights
an issue
a pattern
to a group of persons
constitutes
telephoned
4, 1974, no answers
Elyse
Jeffrey
the defendants
on defendants,
Goldweber,
Shulman,
or objections
an attorney
an attorney
to discuss
defendants'
of filing
for
for the
failure
had no intention
- 2 -
by mail,
any
answers
their
or objections
pending
received
to the interrogatories
motions.
any response
to its
protective
order
this
for an order
Court
gatories
As of January
until
interrogatories,
a ruling
has not
and no motion
Accordingly,
plaintiff
defendants
to answer
compelling
on
for a
has moved
the interro-
promptly.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff's
the breadth
tory
16 interrogatories
practices,
having
to ascertain
knowledge
determining
relief
objections
to these
if
defendants'
as well
plaintiff
an attack
The interrogatories
may rely
the defendants
as answers,
and if
defend
to defend
in
finds
each
interrogatories
the Court
also
we do not here
to these
in
and affirmative
response
is prepared
of persons
plaintiff
on which defendants
Since
discrimina-
and location
of any injunctive
interrogatories,
against
to determine
unlawful
and to assist
be awarded.
of the action.
interrogatory
timely,
facts
any information
defense
objections
the identity
of pertinent
However,
allegedly
seek to elicit
their
are designed
includes
such objections
each interrogatory
which it
has propounded.
We observe
that
defendants
- 3 -
court
for a
protective
order,
to plaintiff's
by Rule 33(a)
that
of the Fed.R.Civ.P.,
failure
interrogatories
F.R.Civ.P.
to excuse
within
In this
the
connection,
Rule 37(c)
to respond
.
may not be excused on the ground
that the discovery
sought is objectionable unless the party failing
to act
has applied for a protective
order as
provided by Rule 26(c).
Defendants
can they,
have identified
no provision
to interrogatories,
Instead,
until
no protective
in order
presently
that
suggests that
further
should
be remedied
address
themselves
in prior
of pending
unilateral
promptly
under
and defendants
issues
- 4 -
to
prove
"willful-
does not
to its
the Rules
disregard
when
While plaintiff
to the factual
motions.
to impose sanctions
the availability
nor
of a response
to obtain sanctions.
seek sanctions
we believe
that
Rules,
the Rules.
the Court
the filing
disregarded
authorizes
order
stay
the disposition
of the Federal
interrogatories,
of a sterner
remedy
be required
case.
to
As stated
disclose
all
interrogatory,
discoverable
evidence
in response
defendants
to an appropriate
be required
to do the
same.
For the foregoing
Court grant
plaintiff's
reasons,
motion
plaintiff
requests
to compel answers
that
the
to plaintiff's
interrogatories.
Respectfully
submitted,
FRANKE. SCHWELB
States
ey
Department of Justice
Brooklyn, New York 11201
E~
1o!~ef:s.~
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I,
hereby
Elyse
certify
S. Goldweber,
that
I have served
Memorandum in Support
by mailing
a copy,
the following
an attorney
the plaintiff,
of Plaintiff's
postage
for
prepaid,
attorney
at
address:
Roy M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan & Manley
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
This,
the 21st
day of January,
1974.
~i/'- J Mk~L*-
ELY S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
JDP:HAB:sm
F.#730959
- IN Gli:"'~ S Ur I i,~E
n:~;rn~cr
cc,,IF r E t1. ~J.Y~
---------------------------------~X
/\.
Plaintiff,
0 R D E R
-against-
Civil
Action
No.
73 C 1529
Defendants.
-----------------------------------x
This
1974
on
plaint
(1)
cause
the
for
(2)
counterclaim
motion
motion
failure
statement,
(1)
can
be granted
and
cannot
reasonably
pleading,
subject
(3)
answers
forth
the
that
matter
of
justice
to
is
to
it
complaint
is
and
it
is
or
before
is
plaintiff
ruary
28,
February
relief
ambiguous
that
defen-
frame
a responsive
of
counterclaim
by requiring
terms
the
and
defendants'
and
conditions
for
motion
a more
for
definite
set
an order
statement
defendants'
counterclaim
defendants
answer
plaintiff
answer
such
and
1974;
8,
upon
1974;
which
is
dis-
further
ORDERED, that
defendants
appear-
further
ORDERED, that
on or
it
upon
jurisdiction
alleged
definite
plaintiff's
and
Court
defendants'
ORDERED, that
it
(3)
to
lacks
com-
is
the
and
the
defendants'
be required
on the
dismissing
missed;
or
25,
a more
dismiss
a claim
be served
ORDERED, that
denied;
for
and
so vague
interrogatories
below,
dismiss
interrogatories,
defendants'
will
to
states
not
this
or
jurisdiction
complaint
(2)
that
of
on January
to
a claim
motion
answers
ing
dants
state
want
be heard
defendants
plaintiff's
compel
that
of
to
for
to
came on to
should
and
on or
is
further
-1-
is
before
complaint
further
interrogatories
interrogatories
it
it
the
be served
February
on or
8,
before
1974,
Feb-
by
ORDERED, that
interrogatories
of
defendants
November
7,
answer
1973
on or
plaintiff's
before
April
1,
1974.
Dated:
Brooklyn,
,,/ ~anttary
New York
, 1974
~~
District
Ju ge
O;
V
AFFIDAVITOF MAILING
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, ss:
-------------,
day of_ ________________________ , I deposited in Mail Chute Drop for mailing in the
U.S. Courthouse, Cadman Plaza East, Borough of Brooklyn, County of Kings, City and
State of New York, a __________________________________________________________ _
of which the annexed is a true copy, contained in a securely enclosed postpaid wrapper
directed to the person hereinafter
AFFIDAVITOF PERSONAL
SERVICES
ST ATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, ss:
___________
,IQ.!:ULI:.IJLtl'I'_EJ_L
__________, being duly sworn, says that he is employed in
the office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern
of Settlement
and signature
O_r_de.r.._wi_tb___N_o_t_i_ce/m
the office of Saxe-41
__
_BaC_O.I1_,
___Bolan____&__Manl..e_J1'.""-_Es.q
s.
attorney for _clei_e_l)gj;l_Ilt_s
_____ herein, located at J9 __Ea__s._t
__6 8-th__st_r_ee_t__,_
______
Borough of --~anhattan__
-----------------------------,
--~dil_
~trl\J
STELLAB. MAGl'ER
r~
ibaid
Civ.
,. '" },3
(,,.....
' .......
1529
1'
Plaintiff,
ANSWER
-againstFRED C. TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP
and TRUMP MANAGEMENT, INC.,
Defendants.
-
Defendants,
for
an injunction,
1.
a belief
II
for
and
as
their
answer
to
the
complaint
state:
as to
the
or
allegations
information
contained
sufficient
in
to
paragraphs
"l",
form
11
2 11 an
411
2.
"5"
and
11
Deny each
6 11 of
the
and every
plaintiff's
other
and
together
further
relief
contained
in
paragraphs
complaint.
WHEREFORE, defendants
be dismissed,
allegation
with
demand
costs
as
this
'\
that
plaintiff's
and disbursements,
Court
Attorneys
for Defendants
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
complaint
and such
r-:
! t r::..
l~J
C'. ~
; .
u. S. DlSLrcr
C.\'J:.' ..
FEB 8 1974
73 Civ.
Plaintiff,
1529
T!f,1E~..r.i ......... .
P.r.t.............
Defendants
rogatory
separately
accordance
with
If
the
in
documents,
Rule
such
cating
the
deemed
responsive.
in which
to
the
subject
and
answer
that
In
answer
is
papers
inspect,
These
the
in
or
those
or
interrogatories
matter
its
into
in
of
Civil
your
of
and
plaintiffs,
by attaching
documents
and by indior
papers
may answer
specifying
and making
contained
the
answers
you
Procedure.
is
documents,
the
that
fapers
or
the
location
same
are
records
of
available
to
photograph.
call
employees
which
oath,
interrogatory
alternative,
records
under
custody
those
copy
plaintiff,
the
to which
contained
inter-
interrogatory
to
the
each
Rules
or papers
by identifying
documents,
to
by any
answer
and
Federal
records
interrogatory
the
defendant
the
or
documents
interrogatory
plaintiff
in writing
requested
indicate
of
that
fully
33 of
papers
copies
able
and
information
you may so
the
request
they
for
all
information
or
agents,
with
inquire.
If
availrespect
some of
the
to
information
agent
and
agent,
to
is
known
other
agent
available
information
please
each
or
include
employee
or
provided
is
in
your
agent
and
information
1.
Please
allegations
stated
a particular
available
to
answers
all
please
with
provide
in
to
all
another
the
each
information
paragraph
"FIFTH"
employee
which
to
or
known
employee
or
answer:
which
in
or
information
specify
respect
employee
your
supports
your
complaint
for
an
injunction.
(a)
and
locations
for
the
of
date
of
was
taken
to
investigation,
defendants
and
had
manner
to
the
the
you,
in what
of
interrogatory
those
learned
of
way it
or
action
and
the
is
or
responsib
the
violation
informant
and
investigation
results
of
alleged
was
dates
allegedly
complainant
what
and/or
this
you
complaint,
knowledge
to
and
name of
complaint
verify
answer
in what
the
the
your
violations
and
particularly
the
in
alleged
violation
giving
or
Include
said
that
involved
in
action
each
such
of
the
alleged
violation.
which
of
2.
Please
supports
your
the
complaint
and
the
informant
and
said
that
in
each
such
the
date
was
taken
action
or
of
the
alleged
contained
your
answer
alleged
and
particularly
of
the
to
upon
the
your
in
paragraph
this
in what
possession
"SIXTH"
verify
the
and
had
interrogatory
those
manner
name of
complaint
to
you,
complaint,
in what
knowledge
allegedly
you
the
learned
corrplainant
what
and
action
the
way it
is
and/or
was
of
of
or
or
results
alleged
involved
violation.
in
and
the
investigation,
defendants
to
violations
violation,
giving
investigation
of
the
violation,
in
of
for
information
an injunction.
Include
locations
responsible
all
allegations
for
(a)
dates
give
undersigned
within
2
a copy
thirty
of
such
days
answer
after
must
service
be
of
the
foregoing
interrogatories.
Respectfully
submitted,
BOLAN & MANLEY
Attorneys
1or Defendants
Office
and P. 0. Address
39 East
68th Street
New York,
New York 10021
rlLt:.1- ..
fU ClERifS Gffl(, .
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK
.;.s. oisrmcrco;J,ff
E.n.rt 1.
* FEB28 t974 *
-----------~--------------~--~x
:
-~gainst-
10
73 C 1529
F. C. TRUMP, D. TRUMPand
TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC.,
JtME.
A.M....,.,.....- ............
.....
P.M
......
Defendants
-----------------------------xunited
States courthouse
Brooklyn, New York
11
12
13
14
15
Before:
HONORABLE
EDWARDR. NEAHER, u.s.o.J.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
BURTONH. SULZER
OFFICIAL COURTREPORTER
APPEARANCES:
2
3
EDWARD
J. BOYDV, ESQ.,
Acting United States Attorney
Eastern District
of New York
for the
BY:
5
Assistant
United
States
Attorney.
6
7
FRANKE.
SCHWELD, ESQ.,
Civil
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
. . . . . .
Rights
3
2
3
o.
States
F.c.
against
Inc.
several
be Mr. Cohen's
I would like
Schweld,
the Civil
to which we'll
to first
Rights
and Attorney
11
Section
introduce
Elyse
13
calendar
14
case:
15
the complaint,
16
definite
this
first,
there
of the Department
also
Rights
Division.
there
of Justice
are three
is the defendant's
concerning
this
motion to dismis
or in the alternative,
for a more
statement.
There is,
secondly,
the plaintiff's
18
19
there
20
ant.1s counterclaim.
is the plaintiff's
With respect
21
of
of the Housing
to the matters
morning,
get to that
Goldweber,
of the Civil
of
morning will
this
we
matter
Division
With respect
17
but before
10
12
be addressed
motion,
Trump,
22
those
several
23
arguments
24
in the alternative
25
as we think
motion
to counsel
matters,
with respect
to dismiss
the defend-
corollary
to
and, thirdly,
a necessary
motion
on
address
to dismiss,
the
or
statement,
to that
argument,
and
our argument
2
answers
in support
At the conclusion
a few remarks
of
have to be affirmative
this
government
batterycf
rr.ry very
all
a big gun,
by myself
I am afraid
I will
talent
motions,
to
from the
but I will
do
~~,
Mr.
recognize
you as
too.
You are very kind,
it was so.
I guess
Judge Neaher,
15
at the beginning.
the best
16
is start
17
18
to start
19
which is a defendant,
20
Donald Trump,
21
ment,
22
23
area,
by telling
having
and Frederick
one day
-- well. I ought
Company,
and his
Trump
son,
management companies
in this
in the country.
been served
to do here
and I suppose
thing
One fine
24
25
that
with respect
legal
on all
COURT: Well,
MR.~}:
13
counterclaim.
and negative
distinguished
have
of our application
defendant's
the
I will
best.
'l'HE
11
argument
to make in support
14
of that
MR. COIDI::
!.: Your Honor,
12
to compel
to interrogatories.
10
of our motion
fall,
papers
without
or any such
formality,
all
radio
pursuant
ment of Justice
people
policies.
of a sudden
and heard
themselves
to a press
release
in Washington
The next
the
facts
day,
front
for
adopting
the bulldog
11
someplace
that
of the Daily
the court
to read,
thereafter
said
discriminatory
editions
some time
is
-- as
all
I noticed
over,
10
12
all
-- not up here
blasted
on the
papers
in some papers
13
it
14
a phone call
15
simultaneously
16
17
18
claim
19
to your
20
thing
and I guess
finally
was all
submitted
turned
up
about.
to your Hono
to make
which I will
the release
of this
now, really,
with
press
is not actionable
reference
by
to our counter
release.
I tell
as to how this
it
whole
started.
I know that
21
22
Southern
23
things
24
being
25
is,
District
to say about
handed
the Eastern
District
and the
out in the
idea
first
concedes
of these
instance,
that
have had
press
releases
but the
fact
press
Honor.
release
to the papers
that
to yo
no matter
damage is never
headlines.
10
something
that
is never
going to catch
When these
motions
12
13
14
release
15
papers
16
17
18
do business
19
20
which is that
21
front
22
conference
these
in which we tried
had distributed
and we acquainted
we were filing
in Court
of the media
its
the charges
the thousands
24
25
of people
foundation.
be,
them his
and
position
over the
In any event,
in court.
the complaint
things
who
tenants
years
the
which he felt
and his
have before
press
them with
which is a denial
else,
to contact
in recent
initial
we had a somewhat
originally,
the
undone because
were filed,
reserved
press
up with
going to,
1 suppose
case,
going to be completely
11
23
enough to attach
in this
I have ever
1 suppose
case
seen.
my practice
office
matters
inal
rights
government
cases,
and I frankly
case before
urges
First
you a motion
it
stitute
totally
apply
to this
this
to set
a cause
of action.
ll
we
12
Honor should
disagree,
13
alternative,
dismiss
14
file
15
so that
16
able
17
are
it with
charged
This complaint
pages
is a very
to con-
the complaint.
If you
your Honor,
leave
in the
to the government
allegations
are on notice
as to exactly
specifically
sufficient
some factual
the defendants
on the grounds
we ask that
with
a complaint
18
facts
It
detail
type of case.
complaint
forth
10
of course
as to the complaint.
to dismiss
fails
of crim-
of all
and trial
in it
what proscribed
with having
conduct
committed.
to all
short
The only
these
front
20
stated
21
22
therein,
there
23
language
of Title
24
that
25
enjoinable
it
violation
facts
is a verbaim
42, 3602(b)
is a violation
document.
they
19
in the complaint
recitation
of the statuto
of the Fair
to discriminate
Housing Act,
because
and
of race,
color
or creed,
are
pursued
Fair
injunctive
if
by a landlord,
Housing
relief
short
discriminatory
this
There
and that
is proscribed
government
of the
very
complaint.
They don't
such projects
blacks
10
1973,
11
able
12
apartment
because
13
was given
to a subsequent
14
that1
John Jones,
applied
16
it,
I said,
I don't
17
name and it
18
saying
19
one specific
20
being
21
sets
indicted
I said,
with
the
23
could
then
24
bill
25
grant
if
case,
something
it
of particulars,
It's
crazy
like
in to me and I read
you.
It
has yo
language
And there
section
isn't
being
charge
in a criminal
existed
same apartme
indictment."
which is
a situation
an
akin to a defendant
a defendant
come forward
and
or something
statutory
statutory
in the
17,
whole complaint.
verbatim
Now, I realize
22
the
applicant,
not discriminate.
act.
qualified
forth
you should
fully
15
such-and-
or on January
race,whereas
in this
a year.
Trump Organization,
otherwise
of his
in this
even give
such-and-such,
being
for
by the
may apply
allegation
They don't
operated
by the
Court.
policies
a relief
government
for
the Court
as I described.
happened,
case
Judge Neaher.
would
In this
After
th's
complaint
was filed
and I don't
motion
isn't
complaint
is filed
and said,
we don't
didn't
we didn't
10
remember whether
or after
and we set
you haven't
into:
0ont
12
taken
care
of.
13
taken
care
of,
14
atories
and tell
15
to find
out whether
16
17
the answers,
18
amplify
19
fact
20
in this
21
And then
they
about.
given
that's
will
we
be
or not we discriminated,
to furnis
them with
be in a position
and tell
us whether
motion before
or not in
23
24
25
disagreement
think
the first
front
page
or not.
to
to it
22
that
you
us one
on that,
We
going to be
it
worry:
serve
this
you haven't
the charge
is all
us to go out and
the complaint
after
11
really
up a rumpus about
and we don't
because
made the
we
and it
in any event,
-- but,
discriminate
location,
it was before
too material
to dismiss-
interrogatorie.
them because
there
thing
will
it
be much
we do is
10
or rules
give
up;
rogatories
that
to go into
it
they
of the complaint,
should
facts,
Now, this
some facts
once that
served
on us to find
ll
for their
12
read
13
of proceeding.
14
15
interviewed
16
this
case.
17
race
and occupation
18
19
in the future
action
and all
out whether
there
Maybe it
of that.
race
state
about
thing
and occupation
separately
of any person
can just
picture
myself
22
sayiing,
I d
23
24
or Jew?
25
that
like
type
state
of each person
in relation
to
by
to intervie
case.
21
of this
this
I ever
Please
they
is my ignorance
of inter
is any basis
in my life.
Well,
is cleared
to the stage
particulars
it,
and then
16 pages of interrogatories
10
20
and if
furnish
your Honor
this
sufficient
and further
after
calling
while
up some witness
to talk
to you about
or white
or Catholic,
and I
thia.
and
, By the
Protestant
and then turning
or something
like
that.
11
That's
2
what this
They say,
for example,
and address
of eaeh black
charge
in hiring
housing
to him, he said,
"Please
and Puerto
for a position
its
three
11
have thought
it
12
body to say,
'what
He said,
13
is.
Well,
-- it
me to answer
highly
improper
doesn't
of Trump
is a fair
I couldn't
tell
because
I would
it,
yo
is your race1
1 don't
14
religion
15
ences
if
16
job,
17
daft
ask race.
18
of these
19
or Puerto
20
Jew,
21
in the world
22
concerning
23
like
that
24
jobs
in ar organization.
He said,
Rican or white
and he said,
or
people
are,
And I haven't
and I wouldn't
race
people
this
the name
on the part
When I called
if
state
Rican individual
years.
management personnel
proceeding.
like.
employment discrimination
10
25
reads
do that.
We
or Catholic,
Protestant
or
thi
a person's
raoe or religion
on employment applications
Now, when it
or something
when we give out
--
12
to know things
like,
and since
decreases
rates
January
14,000 units
of the actual
concerning
January
practices,
here.
and increases
14,000 units,
of an apartment
11
to say to a person,
12
15
a number of blacks
16
visibly.
17
18
not there
19
the place.
20
canvass
21
many blacks
22
there,
23
or non-Puerto
24
25
"What's
thing
renting
your race
an apartment
or religion?
and findout
who live
-- there
are definitely
in there,
that
and looked
we know
at some of
purpose
all
We
14,000 of these
live
there
and I suppose
units
and find
and
out how
in
Ricans
live
live
there
Ricans.
between
dream of permitting
14
them
the availability
The next
about
10
13
in rental
of the thing
seems to be
that
the Trumps
discriminato
13
pol:i::ies
2
blacks,
we represent
these
to support
tell
doing,
note
every
person
in a proper
units
that
-- but if
area
to the Court,
they
a complaint
who live
discriminatory
race
11
claim
12
13
those
14
tion
15
what happened.
witness
to about
complaint,
10
it,
it
statutory
action
and say'in
or on this
application
is not a fact
that
us at least
language,
charge
That's
all
a barebones
tnat
submit
followed
19
tories
telling
20
own investigation,
21
in many instances,
impossible,
22
country
24
rogatories
25
point,
we are
complaint,
heels
without
by 16 pages
going
like
one fact
of interroga-
and conduct
expensive
our
and,
asklt)ur
in abeyance,
situa-
in it,
So we therefore
in
we ask.
18
23
building
and here's
concept
you do something
of
which they
or in this
17
on its
or
by us so that
we discriminated,
I would respectfully
16
we interview,
which advises
not
and in so
units
proof
of every
I talk
in
practices
number of
that
all
considerable
and if we ever
to ask leave
get
inter
to this
to make a motion
to
14
strike
some of these,
this
dismissal
plead
complaint
is not warranted,
at least
total
cites
a complaint
justify
like
could
actually
think
insofar
as this
they cite
complaint
I'm sure,
is concerned,
knowing,
the expertise
11
Division,
they
12
were nice
13
table
14
gone through
15
16
and I don't
supports
There are,
18
a complaint
you don't
19
tiary
20
boredom that
21
a bill
22
The defendant
23
government
24
25
tell
detail.
cases.
think
says,
says,
forth
don't
find
this.
which say in
every
eviden-
to the point
like
with
I have
-- don't
somethings
of particulars
and they
lack.
have to set
argument
Rights
for us a list
a complaint
of course,
Civil
fingertips
the general
of
is a motion
you in a. criminal
know anything.
cas.
us with a pile,
of the unreported
these
I don't
a reported
of their
of contents
this.
say
is of significance
10
17
that
our evidence.
a happy balance
and says,
specifics
for
case.
The
And
well,
here
15
to meet.
them all
cite
iarity,
don't
somethingi
done,
favor.
your evidence
this
Connelly
and all
of that.
everything
and I think
feel
It says you
someone is supposed
that
case
cuts
go to these
to have
most heavily
unreported
11
talk
12
myself
13
14
start
15
obvious
16
of detail.They
17
so I just
18
19
papers
in our
cases.
Just
to
I will
just
take
them forth
case,
don't
in their
set
have to piece
forth
It
They
is
was a wealth
the actual
together
in
memorandum.
complaint
from the
20
Okay. They
have to tell
Then they
have to tell
which cuts
10
21
this
was a small
situation.
22
less
than 40 apartments
23
we have in this
24
lord
publicly
announced
25
rent
a place
to a black.
case.
your Honor,
first
and admitted,
Forget
I think,
not 14,000,
about
such as
is the land-
1 will
it.
of all,
never
And,
16
furthermore,
2
friends
their
place.
impropriety
of theirs,
lease
they promptly
was terminated
I can understand
and fact
They go then
6
7
against
Ohio,
Township refused
entertained
told
the white
a charge
that
that
to this
like
that
should
Palmer case,
to go forward
10
a specifically
11
with Federal
12
bring
about
13
area.
The issue
14
should
15
16
ity
enumerated
which was
funds,
of blacks
there
be blocked
was whether
or not then
project,
this
might
a community or
this
housing
project
town-
so charged
the
to be done
that
into
in
that
a housing
poject
on the grounds
an influx
I think,
charge
with
housing
in its
was a specific
there
family
some black
17
18
single
19
apply.
family
exemption
In the Goldberg
20
the government
did just
22
case:
forth
23
in which claimed
set
followed
25
whether
your Honor,
what it
a list
were being
,,;1,~;1;;,
lots.
denied
or didn't
di~rimina~or.(.f;actices
and \~umerated
lots
was whether
law applied
a schedule,
,.,,,11,li
24
to this
case,
21
they
the issue
The jssue
to people
of properties
have been
there
was
because
of
17
race,
2
and they
set
forth
As you go through
that
defendants,
statute
really,
and then
file
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
its
proof
is,
page).
it.
the
and
the burden--
is a shifting
of a charge
against
on next
photostat
and shift
to establish
innocence
fin
of interrogatories
proceedings,
I don't
you just
a list
to its
11
15
whole thing,
have to be in a complaint
14
this
10
13
involved.
12
a list
of the
in preliminary
which has never
18
td
I don't
fairness,
should
not to be willing
specifics
candor
stand
for,
in this
practice
Court
13
14
15
16
17
18
21
22
23
24
25
in conformity
in the United
that
--
point,
we ask
this
complaint
States.
I have covered
on that,
the
as your Honor
we would allagree
dealt
disposition
about
with after
how this
we all
complaint
be handled.
I had a little
representative
we will
case.
is probably
should
motion
there
as I know, in every
do want to be heard
might gather,
in this
to dismiss
and, as far
interrogatories,
certainly
us some factual
to do so, at this
19
20
District,
and District
12
the Government
to give
case
Having failed
11
the Government
in this
play,
can occasion
10
in the name of
conversation
with
of the Government,
and I don't
think
motion:t:o .dismiss
our oounter-clailll.
a hundred million
dollars,
--
sum.
They say it
is 90 percentlogic,
or something,
than
19
anything
2
this,
on that.
that's
The basis
bringing
soaet.hi.Jl(J that
of the
saying
things,
first
11
an attorney
12
of all,
If
contends
what they
that
15
willing
it
in
is
process.
what we are really
say,
things,
they say,
is defective
in that
it.
sign
have me on that.
they do,
I would be willing
be right
to sign
about
and I would be
that,
that
not timely,
18
after
19
20
an answer,
if
to sign a pleadin,
it.
17
21
that
that
our pleading
of record
14
16
the action
10
13
is that
here's
is --
suit
like
thera factually
was unauthorised;
the action
The Government
to dispute
cases
thatbecomes
something
it
like
is
this
is disposed
necessary,
of,
and after
is filed
by us.
But it
22
have something
23
meaning that
24
the proceedings,
25
in with point
it must be asserted
and I don't
three.
at an early
If the fact
counter-claim
is there
stage
of
two fits
should
be
20
made at a later
time,
we would be agreeable
to a
severance
without
prejudice
on their
part
to -- when
we renew it,
to raise
whatever
objections
they want.
which is a basic
objection,
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
its
consent,
17
18
19
say that
which it
of course,
probably
are going
to advise
that:they
intend,
as a matter
in the interest
because
verdict
froa
their
roar
actions
the apirit
forward
of fairness,
was an action
case,
that
they say
that
the Federal
So I know in
duties,
injury
namely,
abusive
process,
in this
case,
24
slander
and abusive
25
I am looking
we would be entitled
Tort Claims Act,
officials
are exclusions
libel,
in
from the
slander
and
our counter-claim
to amount to a contention
the permissive
if
even
which results
process
because
by the Governaent
Federal
23
proper.
now prevails,
there
22
to give it,
in this
21
aorning
Honor or a jury
within
20
they
as any damage
that,
play,
insofar
of fair
hopefully
-- I am
to fear
of fairness
Absent
hopeful,
15
16
and they
of libel,
and therefore,
features
not proscrib
of the Federal
21
Tort
2
3
stage,
gander,
that
the Federal
injury,
and injury,
first
view it
and in a pleading
We say in a pleading
stage,
is sufficient
under
and it
cannot
would be libel,
that
slander
10
reputation,
11
12
require
13
sued.
other
the
than by libel
consent
However,
are right
ness
16
agreeable
17
when, as and if
18
of their
19
opportunity
part
20
all
21
degree
22
complaint,
23
to ba sued in this
of this
to a severance
issue,
as to that,
we are perfectly
and as to a renewa
on their
rights,
to consult
be an Attorney
of perll&Dence,
unlike
as to whether
the
think
that's
all
to be
in this
case,
and with an
with what I guess
General
with some
this
action.
24
and things
15
of us hope will
process.
and damage to
and alander,
by the Act,
if they
in the raising
or abusift
It
the lack of
be determined
25
way.
by the Government.
what is sauce
our counter-claim
14
that
consent
I would like
with me and I
to say on these
motions.
22
!l
td/2
11
the matter
of the complaint.
to proceed
I take
Firstly,
a civil
States
15, 1973,
in racially
I would like
action
filed
its
complaint
and alleged
discriminatory
10
rental
11
Housing Act.
of their
12
that
The defendants,
argwaent
14
the Government's
15
16
The United
correctly,
its
that
allegations
18
the coflainta
19
relief
20
defendants
have refused.
21
on account
of their
22
required
23
to the rental.
of those
24
person's
and color.
race
on October
have engaged
with respect
in violation
their
court
it
to the
of the Fair
I understand
contends
contained
to dismiss
fails
to state
to the contrary,
in paragraph
atate
a claim
by alleging,
firstly,
specifically
can be granted
The United
the defendants
because
is
can be granted.
States
17
action
action
different
in this
and if
13
this
action.
conduct
apartments,
your Honor.
to remark that
me hear on
it
25
Now, let
to rent
race
terms
that
and conditions
dwellings
of
upon which
that
apartments
and color,
five
the
to persons
they have
with respect
on account
of a
statements
with
23
respect
2
they
for
to the rental
of these
their
have represented
rental,
when,
dwellingsr
dwellings
in fact,
and that
were unavailable
such dwellings
were availabl.
We claim
in paragraph
six of the
complaint,
that
this
conduct
constitutes
both
pattern
or practic
of racial
discrimination
in violation
of the Fair
Housing
and a denial
Act,
to groups
of persons
of
rights
secured
Housing
Act.
of a motion
to disniss,
plaintiff's
allegations
in the complaint
admitted
are deemed
10
thing
that
is contested,
is
11
plaintiff's
right
to recover
under
the
law.
12
Obviously,
if
the United
States
can prove
13
at trialr
among other
things,
that
the defendants
14
have refused
to rent
apartments
to persons
on account
15
of race
and color,
then
the United
entitled
to both
affirmative
pursuant
to 42
States
will
be
16
and injunctive
relief,
17
use
3613.
18
Now, Mr. ~.
has said
that
the other
cases
19
that
we have cited
five
and six,
in our brief,
specifically
pages
20
have all
pleaded
I respectfully
disagree
with
complaint
evidentiary
matter.
21
him since
22
that
under
the Fair
Housing
in the
23
General,
. 24
same Section
25
of the Government,
signed
by the
same
24
people,
and all
allegations.
Also,
for
discussed,
brief,
they
this,
couched
the Fair
the requirements
10
because
11
nature
12
it
the
a complaint
one is
Act,
is
has been
to on page five
go on to say that
Housing
it
where this
referred
as this
in the very
sufficient
apprises
claim
Accordingly,
the United
of
language
because
it
meets
Rules,
the defendants
of plaintiff's
of the
such as
clearly
and
cases
which are
similar,
of the
upon which
rests.
13
14
urges
that
15
denied.
defendant's
motion
States
to dismiss,
16
17
motion.
18
this
19
is a civil
20
is,
21
GoVernment,
22
of conduct,
which,
23
violation
of fundamental
24
certainly
imply perjorative
25
defendants
it
get
complaint,
is an action
if
true,
were concerned,
of your
do arise
with
as you point
out,
would be
the purport
that
action
respectfully
action,
the
by the United
States
a somewhat
serious
would be clearly
national
policy,
inferences,
and the
like.
this
fact
course
in
which
so far
as the
25
I have looked
at your paragraph
five
and I
realise
pleadiD9
is to the defendant,
the law.
making stateaents
deal
that
permitted
with
it?
in civil
form of
thatin
essence
actions
with
faaed
to rent
ll
follows
12
sufficiency
13
place
or material,
14
other
averaents,
and I notice,
Rule 8, that
for the
of a pleading,
as I see it,
under
purpose
motions
now pending
16
of other
17
repect
l8
by the plaintiff,
19
20
enactaent
to interrogatories
of this
that
before
served
asking
it,
the
of time and
like
all
matter.
I bring
that
of testing
be considered
in a material
The reason
Role 9, which
of averment
shall
and
rentals,
such a complaint,
There is no allegation,
of time or place,
in effect,
and so forth,
10
15
notice
up is
because
tbe court,
with
on the defendants
for information,
dating
back
Act.
21
HS GOLDDBER: Right.
22
in this
pleading,
is no statement
23
ti.me or place
24
a defendant
25
go back to 1968,
causes
pleaded.
perhaps
of action
to challenge
of
interrogatories
with the
that
26
Por example,
2
undoubtedly
be able
doubt,
cited
it
type situations
workers,
who felt
10
by their
union.
while
charge
believes
to prove
despite
I assume that
these
in a capricious
it
the Government
or will
of authority
difficult
to assimilate
themselves
discriminated
the case
allegations,
13
14
opinions,
such as preventing
15
apartaent
house or dealing
16
permitting
colored
17
particular
building,
18
them that
19
let
make it
the exact
of others
possible
21
either,
22
coming before
23
by the Securities
24
25
affiraative
appendix
with a situation
to visit
white
of not
people
for a defendant
so charged,
them in a reasonable
this
question
manner.
not capriciously
injunctive
at the complaint,
agencies
you seek,
relief,
no defendant
in a
definitionabout
with
Court,
of
of one
that
the construction
have a certain
to deal
because
against
forth
is reminiscent
people
find
band of negro
I am raising
20
that
to Connolly-Gibson
a small
12
us say,
case
which involved
11
this
certainly
I do bave some
allegations,
the array
way and
that
in which,
could
case prough
seeking
the
is to say,
when you look
complain
about
it
27
because
it
being
Securities
and this,
tells
charged
with,
in effect,
Exchange Act,
as I say,
Mr. Cohn's
without
to say that
ogatories
12
location
13
made
no time liait,
so I do think
a defendant,
17
18
to inform
19
say,
20
criminal,
21
criminal
that
23
and
area, which,
peraons
to
than
litigant,
manner -- and as I
although
we know there
who conspire
riqhts,
others
were
here,
the private
sues in this
That includes
is presented
versus
particular
statutes,
of statements
litigant
someone it
and looking
that
22
25
your
of the complaint
a problem
doesn't
of civil
by interr-
practice.
whether
sues in this
is an answer
particulars
or what nature
or what particular
16
think
of building,
I am wondering
it
is not altoget
job is to resist
on the basis
15
out is that
that
these
of his
when part
sets
the
definitely,
11
24
pointing
I am not certain
basis.
interrogatories
14
specifically,
I aa
coaplaint
10
having violate
But all
what he is
not
are
to deprive
criminally,
example.
invading
in his file
a psychiatrist's
-- you just
saw that
office
in the
er
28
paper
yesterday.
cases
you cite,
in an area
dealing
but fourteen
7
8
9
10
13
spread
definition
initial
into
broad,
undefined
defendant
20
21
22
23
24
25
flung,
wide-
in the Government's
proper
basis,
interrogatories
and issues
might
more readily
focus.
picture,
this
is a very
of a pattern,
1 can't
is saying
apartments,
in the way of a
and the
to respond
to that.
happ
17
19
sharper
a far
something
so that
apartments,
be conveyed
should
the problems
that
pleading,
15
18
thousand
many of these
do not perceive
organisation;
14
16
I feel
with a landlord
11
12
justice
you feel
to the complaint
there
ought
of action,
required
-- so that
facts
type of situation
depiciton
-- and
-- but something
at so-and-so
causes
terms
evidentiary
says beginning
located
th.at in this
to be a more definitive
in buildin
I don't
know whether
the proof
of more definitively
could
stated
that
be dealt
claims
that
would be
with in
appear
in
29
this
document.
As I say,
I would be perfectly
willing
to supply
SEC production,
to illustrate
you with
the latest
what
this
about
the
sort
lays
it
so clearly
in that
case,
what they
MS. GOLDWEBER:Well,
your Honor,
in this
case,
10
11
12
13
14
15
I respectfully
have a bit
I think,
of all,
affidavits
18
19
discriminatory
dants,
22
23
Court,
isn't
it?
on the part
knowledge,
have
there
was any
It
is conclusions
that
is all
opposed
charges
way, rather
that
been able
if
conclusory,
to conclusions;
they
to answer
in an
in a negative
Donald
unfounded.
they
denying
that,
way.
but I seem
then
they would
and that's
all
24
25
this
counsel,
conduct
to their
are totally
20
21
with
interpretation
16
17
first
of a different
with
your interrogatories,
of dealing,
let
successful
30
.,
object
to interrogatories
don't
scope of information,
time-wise,
say that
of discovery,
confronted
at the complaint
10
know whether
those
of limitations
of time,
occurs
will,
racial
discrimintation,
13
prior
to the effective
14
bring
in evidence
and,
when
16
of prior
conduct,
17
so forth;
such as this?
based on things
date
to prove
on issues
happened
but we can
value
and design,
and
that.
question.
19
We are getting
the area
into
20
of course,
I understand
21
enable
22
the other
23
to the discovery
of evidence,
24
order
a claim
to call
the probative
of intent
That is a different
to support
that
of the Act,
18
parties
a statute
to
I understand
parties
look
for example,
a claim
15
limiting
to me, doesn't
12
25
of your compaint?
11
than
to interrogatories,
in terms
that
chronologically,
Courts
with objections,
a broader
are necessarily
if they
that
of evidence,
discovery
is designed
to produce
-- call
information,
as well
or defense
and,
upon
even leading
as evidence,
against
I am sure
to
in
a claim.
you understand
31
that.
Whan you are talkin9
thousand
complex,
-- and again,
where it
fourteen
which prohibit
example,
I am not passing
interrogatory
that,
inquiries
I don't
on it
but I believe
require
11
of any particular
12
understandin41.
directed
believe
in this
10
in its
are certain
to race,
-- Iva.a suprised
case,
I will
be frank
it would be against
in an employment situation
person.
your Honor.
laws
for
to say
the law to
as to the race
I believe
so.
That is my
13
14
apartment
about a large,
about that,
15
THE
16
17
Commission requires
18
employees,
19
22
23
24
25
to keep a racial
census because
Title
7.
20
21
I believe,
it has helped
of over 1S or 20
each eaployer
enactment
exaaple,
of that
Act, as I recall
trying
demands that
for a job.
the Federal
the
But, for
it.
since
I understand
that
supremacy
but there
32 I
Opportunity
Commission?
were adopted.
10
colleague,
or eight
ll
THE COURT: It
12
13
15
appears
16
before
17
point
18
some attempt
19
20
that
that
me.
22
23
24
25
mean to interrupt
my
seven
is
that
sir.
the interests
at definition
this
that
these
that
rather
case
things
to
can be served
than
simply
by
a charge
complaint.
interrogatories,
information,
objection
such as
issues
long ago?
I am simply mentioning
out again
21
recent.
to read
re9ulations
ago, at least.
years
that
to
'64.
14
of the
pursuant
8
9
under regulations
Title
Act -- is this
here.
In response
to the
that
there
they could
file
still
detailed
entertin
with their
defendan
answers
to
33
these
interrogatories,
defend
Honor felt
well
to answer that
then we will
enough,
across
are in control
units,
ti.ae
that
and if your
the country
against
a lot
of many units,
ten,
11
complaint,
12
allege
13
the cOlllplaints
to this,
twelve
tacts
is that
16
the complaint,
17
interrogatories.
18
have held
19
has proven
20
ordered
21
employment relief
22
affirmative
and we inquire
Well,
that
and none of
relief,
relief
at issue
about
it
to give
has
to also
get
to the housing
interrogatories,
tha
ready
cases
as an incident
in
in the
there
Housing case,
We are certainly
here today
employment relief
employment relief,
a Pair
of our witnesses,
it did not
in the complaint,
we allege
we ask for
25
thousand
as I said before
to,
15
with
who
have.
The fact
served
complaint
specific
filed
of defendants
of thoae complaints,
and in all
24
it
23
to
interrogatory.
10
14
interrogatory,
t.hentheclefendants
The fact
be prepared
to obtain.
and willing,
if we are
or depositions
are taken
evidence
34
that
2
we don't
object
affidavits
denying
complaint,
and their
which requests
and persons
Fair
motion
10
utilised
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
because
that
11
to apprise
of what is happeninq.
I believe
to the defendants,
to
it,
that
involved
Housing Act,
they
motion
specific
in the
statement
as to the names,
alleged
violations
statements
for.
(Continued
deny the
facts,
is just
can just
these
on next page.)
should
dates
of the
that
not be
Js
THE COURT: Well,
2
3
are demanding
I think,
4
5
6
7
in terms of specifity,
exhaustive
there
like
that
followed
is no time period,
me is that
you
by a fairly
interrogatory
is on the part
lligbt
to seek.
what concerns
this
demand for
Govermaent,
and that
get a complaint
interrogatories
I understand that
answers
by the
of the Governaent,
to
8
9
determine
such an
request
as to whether
would
10
be justified,
at least
in the first
instance,
without
ll
for was
12
truly
relevant
to the issues
that
were going to be
13
litigated.
14
that
one thing
15
the Court's
purpose
is served
as well
if the defendants
denial
to the complaint
either
a motion
16
knew he filed
a denial,
general
17
with
this
Coiart,
for
18
protective
order
to give
them further
time to object
19
20
their
answers or objectiOlls,
thing
that
and then
each specific
21
is contained
in that
interrogatory,
so we
22
would understand
exactly
what everyone
was objecting
23
to,
and it wouldn't
be just
sort
of a vast
array
of
24
things,
25
what interroga-
36
tories
the defendants
United
States
specific
don't
would be able
interrogatorY
purpose
unnecessary
in and will
here
of the rule
focussing
to give
endorse
are.
without
12
opportunity
to object
13
might think
should
14
effect,
15
that
16
within
an
believ
I would be inclin
of interrogatories
to serve
seeking
to anything
about
those
that
to,
and I would,
to dismiss
the complaint
that
you will
have
they
in
with
an opportunity
17
could
and
I heartily
opportunity
be objected
understanding,
the
and papers
principle.
depriving
that
of the claim.
a set
definition,
put together
something
like
that?
19
them?
file
21
it
take
to file
them.
them?
I would think
if we write
them.
23
25
the defendants
11
24
that
that
Government
and the
to defend
on pleadings
upon the
22
to try
was to try
10
20
was relevant
18
feel
we could
them informally
37
them in twenty
days.
ia not intended
you,
this
to obtain
covered
paragraph
11
work or discovery
12
goes on.
on that
16
your Honor.
17
interrogatories
18
to try
19
definite
22
well.
24
25
COHN:
as a starter.
prejadice
cast
to define
further
to dimd.ss
interrogato
as time
complaint
the
fair
dispositio,
file
in effect,
in the
fora
of a Bill
some of these
things.
include
statement
motion,
Obviously,
interrogatories,
willing,
to
That would
Within
extend
Yes.
of Particula
them.ore
of that
as
yes.
With respect
23
THE COURT:
21
us say,
let
basis.
MR.
15
attempt
of aatters,
13
20
without
draft
a preliminary
that
of the complaint,
be, of course,
out to
to be an exhaustive
but rather
I think
10
14
I am fe)iating
in two weeks?
to the Government's
I would,
a reasonable
assuming
period
that
deaand
for
Government
of time to the
is
38
defendants
to object,
becauae,
been operating
5
6
any interrogatory
within
10
11
In other
selection
14
17
18
19
time,
Now, let
you can't
to the extent
would be answered
to,
so that
there
interrogatories
to,
that
will
you don't
that
to you,
a problem
raising,
that
revelations,
you feel
you
and that
I believe
them.
it
to
something
that.
to atate
then be faced
the right
make a
have to answer
may consider
ha
be
be aade to answer
There is also
20
woaldn't
me pointout
answer.
to inspect
possible,
words,
an attempt
be the rule,
here as to
in progress.
of those
as to others,
15
16
that,
12
13
delay
they have
operates.
not objected
a reasonable
a complete
8
9
on a misun.derstan4i.ng
I would expect
apparently,
resources,
and I take
it
since
the Government
that
21
22
25
somewhat limited.
23
24
are
interrogatories,
compile
all
that
this
if defendants
information,
offer
didn't
we would,
in the
want to
at their
39
convenience
2
3
4
5
CODlein,
and inspect
and I think
on the matter.
fixing
it
their
I think
we all
is a very fair
we will
and consider
10
interrogatories
11
long to answer?
take
I don't
that
a firm date
13
15
to you that
A certain
16
interro,atories,
17
this
18
covers,
19
will
20
against
complaint
and all
period
provide
we don't
24
25
that
things
out?
for that.
they answer the
better
then shortly
think
want how
idea what
of time this
interrogatories
may that
you don't
work those
of time after
of that,
compleint
thereafter
we can,
we
and move
we ought to answer.
do to a formal
answer to the
be deferred?
23
-- what periods
'!'hey will
so we have a little
answer those
those,
will
by your Honor,
by which we serve
on the Government.
out?
12
22
on an order
time limits?
'!'HE COURT: Could you work that
21
get your
disposition
to agree
Should we try
14
documents.
include
you answer
your counter-claim,
because
I am
40
going
to dismiss
it.
of which is,
still
It certainly
the framework
10
11
12
13
14
15
18
19
fits
of the
Tort
it
would,
to be sued within
Act,
as
and paper,
say,
and diverting
to be the real
the interests
discretionary,
it
is his
is,
and if
the
of
time
here
of the
importance
sides,
to both
of
the Governae
and it
is not
is imposed by law.
If your clients
20
It
the framework
mindful
General
it
--
2680.
of claim,
yourself
is very
involved
-- the Attorney
with n
issues
"!'he Court
consent
under
type
think
conduct.
Clai.Jlls Act --
would require
consented
Mr. Cohn, it
it,
party
least
in my judgment,
squarely,
Federal
are simply
not the
of tortuous
an accepted
that
there
in ray .judgment,
16
17
no matter
the counter-claim.
counter-claim,
7
8
in that
include
duty
are violating
to take
action.
the law,
On the other
it
is,
hand,
21
if you believe
they
are not,
it
22
23
something
about
it.
I am giving
24
is your duty to do
you that
opportunity.
it
very much.
I think
25
we all
understand
the purport
of your Honor's
views,
an
41
we will
2
try
and submit
to draft
it
an order
coYering
all
these
things
to your Honor.
THE COURT:
Fine.
Is there
that
aaytbi.ng
has
here?
one question
with respect
to the dismissal
Do you wish
of the counter-claim.
an order?
7
-THE COURT:
Whatever
order
you submit
could
include
that.
If you wish it
separately,
I see it
as sort
of an anomalous
document,
10
it
of walked into
sort
court,
it
an answer,
wasn't
it
11
was a counter-claim.
12
do probably
is just
omit
13
it
from an answer,
have to do anything.
14
15
would be appropriately
amended,
and because
the counter
16
claim
cannot
be asserted.
except
in a pleading,
and,
hen e,
17
the pleading
contains
no --
18
21
22
23
24
25
It drops
serve
best
a proper
he can.
the questions
want to call
that
called
entirely,
But he will
in preliminary
them that,
the point.
and he will
opportunity
interrogatories,
to frame
if you
the
caaplaint
Do you understand?
that
so
is
42
2
3
aubmi t a short
and just
submit
we agree
on a total
signing
on the motion
I think
10
or something,.._
we are looking
--
one order?
for another
11
12
13
I would believe
14
we have discussed
15
separate
order
that-the
here
this
claim
stands
19
understanding
20
probably
21
ou~ press
22
23
United
24
Assistant
25
private
order
release
here.
that
here
what
If you wish a
on the counter-claim,
is immaterial
together,
the counter
dismissed.
18
press
ought to encompass
morning.
16
17
order
order
it?
form order
to the dismissal.
your Honor.
with respect
could
get agreement
releases
to this
and try
this
--
that
case
Cohn, having
States
-- and I think
Attorney
we have an
we will
they stop
puttin
in court?
served
as a
you were an
the Government,
unlike
informed
43
the document
they
I have to agree
that
issued
I think
and under
the Oircumstaneea,
it
is just
that
7
8
9
10
On the other
fair
trial
out anything
involved
in this
14
15
16
17
18
will
about
press,
to a fair
trial
be no press
SCBWELD:
a definite
release.
Wait a minute.
I think
statement.
He said
your Honor;
when a complaint
this
it
is usually
is drawn,
was extremely
20
21
MR. COHN:
24
the public.
released
but I think,
to the
as your
chaste.
we are going
comes out
have to apologize.
I indicate
23
the motion
your Honor is
in a case,
in court
issues
to me by a
Honor said,
the rights
of the
25
not be putting
acq\lilinted
press
as
and consequently,
4:Jipair or prejudice
19
22
is such a thing
case.
MR. COHN:
MR.
as free
which will
defendants
nod there
there
of these
13
hand,
as well
11
12
Is that
to try
this
fair?
is fair.
is not a limitation
upon
44
2
3
to a determination.
any press
of these
(Discussion
10
11
12
13
14
17
the record.)
further
is a judgment
it will
As to the judgment
released,
will
I don't
press
release
hundred
definitely
that
doll.ar
wanted mentioned
that
to start
Honor,
again
counter-claim,
that
it
that
the Jlld.ge
people
in this
they
was dismissed.
mentioned
these
and do business
information
this
has been
I am not going to
they won't.
million
in the
to the preas.
the public
or not.
be given
know whether
press
right?
15
16
is that
releases,
7
8
off
on any
proceedings?
releases
have to rent,
coaununi ty.
If., they
your
are
18
going
to start
parading
around,
stating
that
the
19
counter-claim
is dismissed
or something,
I am 9oiog
20
to have to start
with
the fact
that
21
given
us leave
to
file
interrogatories
against
the
22
complaint,
23
this
24
Unfortunately
25
because
they are so
45
large
and well
known, they
For all
become objects
of newsworthy
interest.
But I do think
concerned,
matter
occurred
they
and that
10
between
that
it
so far
as the
understands
and I assume
confidently
it
we won't
will
they
await
are going
12
14
and inquiries
15
18
19
it
out,
22
it,
THE
25
take
~are
what has
blessed
day,
as
communiques
must be in context,
of the press,
if your fellows
and attention
of the office
would perhaps
at the
I think,
a response.
thing,
upstair
to the prosecution
and let
resolve
everything
23
24
that
the
interest
20
21
your tiae
of the business
is
now that
would apply
now.
your Honor.
16
17
fine,
of the continuing
as a public
right
capitols.
11
of course,
that
opposing
13
point,
has announced
it
think
Government
at this
is in litigation,
is here
the press
ferret
the problem..
I would appreciate
the orders
and sign
same tiae.
come in,
of them.
One thing
I would remind
you of,
and in this
I wi l
46
District
2
a local
rule,
made, it
District,
where objections
too,
we have
to interrogatories
ia the responsibility
of the lawyers
are
to first
try
and iron
out their
differences,
the Court,
District,
so much larger
District,
and with so
competence,
they make
up in quality
in quantity.
But that
won't
10
to try
and discuss
the
12
matter
13
MR. COHN:
As long
as they
promise
not to talk'
14
about
a consent
decree,
we will
have a meeting.
15
to litigate
16
Honor.
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the case,
your
)
)
Plaintiff,
111CLERK':,Urfic-~
01.:::rnir:i LOJi\l .D. N.Y.
MAR6 1974
Tllv.t /!,
:;,
v.
FRED C. TRUMP, et al.,
_____________
Defendants.
The United
undersigned
States
attorney
by the defendants
the allegations
answers
and sets
claim.
also
The evidence
supports
through
black
to white
in paragraphs
to the subject
paragraph
of
5 and
who have
matter
of the
5 of the complaint
their
agents
of race
or employees
have made
in the following
ways
of defendants,
of rental
on it
elements
on account
(A) Several
available;
served
6.
unavailable
agents
by its
The defendants
contained
which supports
paragraph
herein,
relevant
Answer to Interrogatory
apartments
forth
by providing
of information
plaintiff
the interrogatories
of discrimination
6 of the complaint
knowledge
of America,
persons
on account
persons;
black
have quoted
persons
and statements
of the defendant:swith
of race,
when apartments
the defendants
to certain
respect
that
were,
apartin fact,
different
from those
by
terms
quoted
a preference
on account
of dwellof race.
1f
The following
individuals
have provided
information
with regard
to the above:
Fontainebleau
Apartments
8855 Bay Parkway
Brooklyn, New York
160 units
On July
1.
Plaza
Street,
Brooklyn,
at the Fontainebleau.
Fici,
told
rental.
Salzman,awhite
that
ments.
after
Brooklyn,
immediately
to be Ken
applications
for
she could
(10
an apartment
believed
to accept
tester
black,
to obtain
The superintendent,
Muriel
directly
Davis,
rent
either
apart-
"!:._/
Beachaven Apartments
Sheepshead Bay
Brooklyn, New York
1200 units
2.
On July
agent,
apartments
(2401 Nostrand
in response
believed
East
69th Street,
Brooklyn,
to an advertisement
were available
Avenue,
white,
a black
at Beachaven.
tester
New York),
came
of a vacancy.
him that
Later
from
The
no one-bedroom
on July
31, 1972,
(131
apartment
at this
be rented
immediately.
agent
told
him could
with relevant
information
to this lawsui4 set
answers to defendants'
interrogatories
were
S. Goldweber, a Departmental
attorney,
unless
- 2 -
.,
3.
In December,
Second Street,
advised
Brooklyn,
by an agent
a one-bedroom
rudely.
identifying
were available
Human Rights
as Mr. Rosenberg
a white
tester
a complaint
was offered
with
agent
that
no
to tenancy.
Brooklyn,
a rental
that
who dealt
by said
Kirschenbaum,
(2681 West
telephonically
was told
for rental.
filed
Phyllis
Ms. Best,
was available
black,
being
himself
the following
Ms. Best
Best,
apartment
1972, Beverly
application
New York)
apartment.
4.
ployee
On March 10,
1973, Muriel
himself
Later
by the rental
a one-bedroom
Mr. Ziselman
racially
superiors,
(150 Fifth
he had no one-bedroom
apartment
also
and that
rental
there
to Phyllis
at Beachaven
no one-bedroom
apart-
Spiro,
white,
an employee
available
would be available
acknowledged
discriminatory
that
an em-
agent
at Beachaven volunteered
black,
Commission,
as Paul Ziselman
Silberberg,
as of April
to Ms. Spiro
policy
- 3 -
that
time,
1, 1973.
he followed
at the direction
at the Beachaven.
at that
few "colored"
of his
tenants
Lawrence Gardens
3301-3315-3223 Nostrand
Brooklyn, New York
160 units
5.
On March 10,
agent
Mr. Limani
that
for rental.
at Lawrence
there
Later
the rental
agent
an employee
was also
at this
black,
Commission,
were no one-bedroom
that
Avenue
apartments
white,
told
by
himself
as
available
an employee
one-bedroom
of
apartments
by
complex.
Shorehaven Apartments
1483-93 Shore Parkway
Brooklyn, New York
1100 units
6.
Street,
Brooklyn,
Shorehaven,
available,
tially
believed
she should
Trump buildings,
all-white,
try
black,
by the rental
that
to obtain
similarly
Patio
Gardens
Ms. Davis
had recently
at the
no apartments
were
an apartment
encouraged
there
at Patio
to apply
at any
to be substan-
is substantially
to apply
(10 Plaza
agent
encouraged
judge
Davis,
to be Mr. Sarnell,
Mr. Sarnell
a black
but that
Gardens.
other
On July
integrated,
and
by relating
that
become a tenant.
Highlander
Hall
164-20 Highlander Avenue
Jamaica, New York
165 units
7.
On April
land.Avenue,
Jamaica,
in response
to a newspaper
apartments
himself
(164-20
were available.
as Mr. Zelle~
Gandy, black,
told
advertisement
indicating
The superintendent,
Ms. Gandy that
- 4 -
there
that
Highcomplex
studio
who identified
were no vacancies
1J
that
..
in the newspaper
had
been rented.
On April
(170-25
Highland
Avenue,
about
that
apartments
On April
agent
indicated
in the building
tester
Jamaica,
renting
from
a studio
he had three
and offered
a white
apartment.
vacant
studio
a complaint
with
admitted
to
tenancy.
Kendall Hall Apartments
41-10 Bowne Street
Flushing,
New York
165 units
8.
On February
New York),
applied
for an apart-
The super-
intendent,
who identified
that
there
February
himself
white,
an application
(134-54
told
the Bunns
available.
Maple Avenue,
On
Flushing,
as Mr. Spitrey,
a complaint
with
the
ad-
to tenancy.
Westminster
Apartment
405 Westminster
Road
Brooklyn, New York
165 units
9.
tisement
On February
of a vacancy,
26, 1972,
in response
to
a newspaper
Hoyt,
adverblack,
..
(11728 Wilshire
Blvd.,
Los Angeles,
California)
himself
two-bedroom
were available
apartments
as the superintendent,
an application
to rent
a complaint
was told
for rental.
wife,
a two-bedroom
with
that
no
On March 19,
who is white,
apartment
by Mr.
was offered
at this
complex.
admitted
to tenancy.
*
In addition
to the foregoing,
is aware of seven
practices
by the defendants
complaints
of alleged
filed
with
discriminatory
plaintiff
additional
(a) During
Bolling,
(77-79
at that
admitted.
that
Robert
Ms. Bolling
130th Avenue,
no vacancies
ments,
at the
blacks
filed
an
were not
a complaint
with
(Interviewed
(b) In early
agent
complex because
to residency.
New York,
Columbia Street,
by the rental
Apartments
apartment
being
seven complainants
To date,
black,
Shorehaven
Commission.
by Special
Agents
J. Hayes).
Jamaica,
at the still
- 6 -
filed
there
Wilshire
were
Apart-
a complaint
with
(Interviewed
an apartment,
by Special
which
Agents Edward
complainants
by plaintiff:
was
was
was
*
(B) 1. Defendants'
Mrs. Williams
Inc.
have instructed
dall
Hall,
Woodside,
paper
a former
to every
"colored"
comptroller,
application
renter.
address
that
Hyman,
at Ken-
50th Street
a separate
submitted
On this
Mr. Stuart
sheet
of
by a prospective
separate
sheet
to write
"C" in order
the prospective
tenant
of paper,
was "colored."
last
33-24 Parsons
New York,
have advised
counsel~/
Blvd.,
Whitestone,
for plaintiff
S. Goldweber
- 7 -
to
that
known
they were
..
employed in a general
Apartments
during
was purchased
rental
the fall
capacity
of 1973.
time.
The Schefflins
and other
to rent
rental
agents,
to blacks.
appears
defendants
(C)
that
blacks
that
being
working
The following
have indicated
a racial
code
to as ''No. 9."
by the
persons
follow
of apartments,
decision
on the subjective
and
Trump Management
objective
in the renting
rental
and discouraged
was discharged
the defendant
based
that
of the Department
that
at the
referred
Mr. Schefflin
after
sunrrner
They advised
by representatives
Inc.
integrated
advised
including
the late
was in effect,
It
This building
at the Briarwick
rental
but often
criteria
makes rental
impression
of the
agent:
1. Guido Lara:
that
Agents R. Patrick
2. Vikentije
Brooklyn,
Apartments.
(Interviewed
at this
F. Kaminski).
- 8 -
Mr.
by Special
Brooklyn,
Shore
'
Apartments.
were no black
Shore Apartments.
Agents
R. Patrick
tenants
(Interviewed
F. Kaminski).
3. Walter
Brooklyn,
Rohr:
observation
by Departmental
Gardens
(Interviewed
Scigalski
to plaintiff
a "pattern
by Special
denial
raising
an issue
Plaintiff
seeks
that
disclosure
been disclosed)
of informants
Attorney
that
United
discrimination
with
have engaged
in
in housing
and
public
of "informers,"
of discrimination
the free
flow of information
v. Northside
- 9 -
has
of the identities
Realty
Except
to the~
Associate$,~//....;po
Wirtz v. Continental
1964).
as
on the ground
disclosure
such
importance."
and that
States
avail-
to a group of persons,
presently
is irrelevant
General.
A.
interferes
Robert
defendants
opportunity
of the identities
such information
of "general
objects
S. Goldweber,
the information
of racial
housing
interviews
40% black.
Agents
to the effect
equal
Gardens.
C. Satchwell).
constitutes
or practice"
have denied
Elyse
is approximately
and Jeffrey
The foregoing
and tenant
attorney,
*
able
Avenue,
From visual
Patio
(580 Flatbush
insofar
Finance
as
disclosure
so much of these
interrogatories
action
took to verify
plaintiff
plaintiff
further
as seeks
objects
to inquire
the complaint,
to
into
what
on the grounds
that:
cause
United
1.
The Attorney
exists
to bring
States
1168 (5th
Cir.
General's
the action
v. Northside
1973);
United
determination
Cir.
is not judicially
Realty
States
Associates,
reasonable
reviewable;
474 F. 2d 1164,
1973).
which alleged
that
in substance
defendants'
that
cause.
- 10 -
the action
spurious
counter-
was brought
. .. ......
A F F I DAV I T
CITY OF WASHINGTON )
) ss
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA)
I, Elyse
S. Goldweber,
being
duly sworn,
deposes
and
says:
1.
Rights
I am an attorney
Division,
of the counsel
et al.,
Civil
2.
prepared
United
in the Housing
States
for plaintiff
Action
in United
of Justice,
States
Civil
and one
v. Fred C. Trump,
No. 73 C 1529.
I am informed
and signed
Department
Section,
of the facts
Plaintiff's
of this
Answers to Defendants'
First
Interrogatories.
3.
Those answers
my information,
knowledge
are true
and correct
to the best
and belief.
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
Subscribed and sworn
to before me this ~rt
day of February,
1974.
My commission
expires:
of
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby
of the foregoing
dants'
First
first-class
certify
that
Plaintiff's
Interrogatories
mail,
postage
on February~~'
1974,
copies
to Defen-
in the United
addressed
to:
[{i,rsJ
~w
ELYS~.
GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
States
11
il
,,
;
:1
n
,!
,1
'.!
i
JDP:HAB:ec
F.
#730959
:I
:1
'.!;/
- - - X
;1
,I
ii
ii
Plaintiff,
!!
- against
11
NOTICE TO TAKE
DEPOSITION UPON
ORAL EXAMINATION
!i
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALDTRUMPand
Ii
:1TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC ,
:i:1
Defendants.
-
!!S
!I
Civil Action
No. 73 C 1529
I R S :
ii
take
the
deposition
MANAGEMENT,
INC. as an adverse
by the
times
the
officers,
set
United
Floor,
suant
Notary
tinue
attend
Dated:
forth
to the
Public
Borough
Federal
upon oral
examination,
and at the
hereto,
at
the
of Brooklyn,
Rules
or before
TRUMP
and employees
Attorney,
UNITED STArES
of defendant
party
in the Appendix
States
in the
law to take
agents
plaintiff
of Civil
some other
depositions.
City
The oral
of
Fifth
of New York,
pur-
before
authorized
examination
completed.
and
office
East,
Procedure,
officer
dates
You are
will
by
con-
invited
to
and cross-examine.
Brooklyn,
New York
March JI/ , 1974
Yours,
etc.
EDWARDJOHN BOYDV
United States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
By:
Att
7!:r~
HENR A. BRACHTL
As stant u. S. Attorney
22 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn,
New York 11201
ii,,
q
:1
Ii
ii
',
i
:i
ii
i!
\ITO:
q
,!
!!
!il.
l;
Fred c. Trump
Chairman,
Trump Management Inc.
March 22, 1974
2:15 p.m.
Donald Trump
President,
Trump Management
March 22, 1974
10 a.m.
Inc.
Mr. Stuart
Controller
March 25,
Inc.
Hyman
Trump Management
1974
10 a.m.
Inc.
Ms. Marrazzo
Resident
Manager:
April
18, 1974
Avenue,
Ken Fici
Superintendent:
8855 Bay Parkway,
April
18, 1974
!il(
3901 Nostrand
10 a.m.
Fontainebleau
Brooklyn
2 p.m.
Mr. Levy
Rental
agent:
Beachhaven
Sheepshead
Bay, Brooklyn
April
18, 1974
4 p.m.
Brooklyn
Apartments,
Apartments,
,j
'I1 8.
1
!l
I
:1
li9.
p
:1
n
d
Apartments,
lj
H
lj
ii
Lawrence
4 p.m.
Gardens,
Brooklyn
;I
ii11.
!!
!;
!
Brooklyn
.-
ii
ii12.
'.i
i!
;i
i
,,
Ii 13.
Mr. Zeller
Superintendent:
April
22, 1974
Highlander
2 p.m.
Hall,
Brooklyn
iJ
!l
11
,I
11
;,
Rene Canon
Superintendent:
April
22, 1974
Westminster
4 p.m.
,,i
!I
11
A P P E N D I X
ii
1!
it
I:
I,!
i!
H
'.i
2 -
Apartments,
Brooklyn
;i
Ji
"ll
ii
!I
1'
'ih
1,
,l
JDP:HAB:eh
F.
#730959
ii- - - - - - - - - - - - -
!I
:1UNITED
iiII
STATES
OF AMERICA,
NOTICE TO TAKE
DEPOSITION UPON
ORAL EXAMINATION
Plaintiff,
!I
il"
- against
ii
Civil Action
No. 73 C 1529
jl FRED C.
ii and
>i
lj ________
~e!e~d~n~s:
___
;,
IiS
1,
I R S
;,
iil1
i!aay of March,
,,
!!Attorney,
ll
!!Borough
1974,
at the
"
!!as an adverse
IiFederal
.I
Rules
!jor before
party
of Civil
2:15
take
the
Fifth
Floor,
authorized
22nd
States
in the
plaintiff
UNITED
of FRED c. TRUMP
deposition
before
on the
United
examination,
Procedure,
officer
p.m.
of the
of New York,
upon oral
some other
!1depositions.
East,
City
llsTATES OF AMERICAwill
:!
Office
at
pursuant
a Notary
to the
Public
by law to take
The oral
examination
will
completed.
You are
invited
continue
to attend
from day
and
!I
'!
iiII Dated:
!!
!i
Brooklyn,
New York
March 19, 1974
ii
Yours,
ii
etc.
United States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
Attorney
for Plaintiff
1!
,1
'l
11
ij
11
1!
II
!I
II
'I
;1
d
11
;1
ii
i!
TO:
SAXE, BACON
, BOLAN& MANLEY, ESQS
Attorneys
for Defendants
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
ii
:,
il
il
,I
;t
H
:I
,i
ii
I!
1:
H
JDP:HAB:eh
F. #7 30959
ijUNITED
STATES
DISTRICT
\\-~~Ct
COURT
0
X~-n\CI
cLtRi:..s ~;~ t.\). N:-l
!I
e,OU,,
Db'
~
:1-- - - - - - - - - - - - -\).
~-- - \ \~1A '""
_,
L EASTERN DISTRICT
OF NEW YORK
\1
1
"
ii
!i
iiUNITED
STATES
!II
ii
t-J ri'
OF AMERICA,
\.
Plaintiff,
!I
- against
:j
NOTICE TO TAKE
DEPOSITION
UPON
ORAL EXAMINATION
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
11
'I
:1
I
Defendants.
'i
ii
"
ii
!I - -
'I
'l
ii
S I
R S
!1
ii day
of March,
1974, at the
:i
,.
!I Attorney,
225 Cadman Plaza
at
10:00
Office
of
East,
a.m.
the
Fifth
on the
United
Floor,
22nd
States
in
the
11
;I Borough
of
Brooklyn,
City
:1
of New York,
take
the
plaintiff
deposition
UNITED
of
DONALD
ii TRUMP as
an adverse
party
upon
oral
examination,
pursuant
:1
H
si
to
the
ii Public
or
ii take
ii day
Federal
Rules
before
depositions.
to
day
until
of
Civil
some other
Procedure,
officer
The oral
before
authorized
examination
completed.
You are
will
invited
a Notary
by law to
continue
to
from
attend
!I
cross-examine.
Ii
11
:
ii
1
Dated:
Brooklyn,
March 19,
iiI
New York
197 4
Yours,
[i
ii
etc.,
EDWARDJOHN BOYD V
United
States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
Attorney
for Plaintiff
ii
:II
I
H
ii
{?~
ii
ii
"
,1
,1
By:
----7U_./IA/r..-......
11
RACHTL
u. s. Attorney
Assista
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
New York
11201
11
!I
ii
ii
!!
ii TO:
ii
:J
ii
ii
ii
:1
Ii
!l
ti
SAXE,
BACON,
Attorneys
for Defendants
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York
10021
ESQS.
and
L___L..
\,
...
-
JDP s JfAJh eo
F. 1730959
jt,_L:,.
IN CLERK'SOHiCE
. S. OISTRlCTCOURTE.D.N.Y.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -* X
~
UN.ff.EDS'rATB8 OP J\01tICA,
.r;,pp~ 1974
,-1ME
A.1\1
......... .................
0 ,..,
Plaintif'f,
- against
ST?PULA1':IOJI
civil Action.
No. 73 C 1529
Defendants
..
............. ff
IS DUBY
the aaderaigned
of' defeaclants
tiff
to be ~en
in. accordance
at 4et'en4anta
and times
set
t'ortb
Bzooklyn,
March. lt,
u;poa oral
with not:ieea
1974 are,
Datedt
in
that
examination
dated
request,
the deposition
and served
adjourned
1:be at.tacbed
by plain-
March lt,
to the date
Schedule.
Hw York
1974
BOWARD
JOHN BOYDV
uait;.ed Sta.tea Attorney
sa...-rn
A~rney
Bys
SO ORDERED:
1.
Donald
Trump,
indivi.dually
and as
President,
Trump Management Inc.
March 27, 1974
9 a.m.
2.
3.
Mr. St.uart
Hyaan
controller,
April
Trump Management
10 a.m.
18, 1974
Inc.
4.
5.
Ma. Narrasso
Resident
Maaagar,
April 18, 1974
6.
Ken Pici
7.
Mr. Levy
Superintendent:
Fontainebleau
8855 Bay Parkway, Brookl.yn
April 19, 1974
10 a.m.
Rental a9ent1
aeachhaven
Sheapshead Bay, Brooklyn
April
8.
3901 Nostrand
4 p.m.
19,
1974
Avenue,
Brooklyn
Apartments,
Apartments,
2 p.a.
Rental
A9ent:
Beacbbaven Apartments,
Bay, Brooklyn
19, 1974
4 p.m.
Sb.eepahea4
April
,.
Paul Ziaelman
Rental
agent:
Beachhaven
Apartments,
agents
Shorehaven
22, 1974
4 p.a.
Rene canon
Superintendent:
Adjourned
withOut
wesuinster
date
Apartments,
Hall,
Brooklyn
Brooklyn
Apartments,
Brooklyn
r I LEU
\N CLERK'SOHICE
.
....
u.._c;_DJSTRlCT
COURTE.D.N.Y.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT LUORT
APR231974 -1(
TlMEA.M...........................
..
NEW YORK
p ~,
Plaintiff,
v.
al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM
IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S
MOTIONFOR SANCTIONS
HENRY A. BRACHTL
Assistant
United States
Attorney
Department of Justice
Brooklyn,
New York 11201
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department
of Justice
Washington,
D.C.
20530
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department
of Justice
Washington,
D.C.
20530
)
CIVIL ACTION NO. 73 C 1529
al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM
IN SUPPORTOF PLAINTIFF'S
MOTIONFOR SANCTIONS
)
HENRYA. BRACHTL
Assistant
United States
Attorney
Department of Justice
Brooklyn, New York 11201
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D.C. 20530
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D.C. 20530
INTRODUCTORY
STATEMENT
The United
tions
pursuant
because
States
to Rule
to make discovery
Rules,
a later
by the
Court
objections
generous
efforts
Esq.,
only
over,
Donald
that
defendants
to discontinue
plaintiff's
motions
this
has been
of defendant,
interrogatories
tiff
this
litigation
half
a year
totally
since
were
after
the
the
complaint
was filed,
In spite
as to accomRoy Cohn,
to date.
disclosed
in that
on him.
in its
with
the
Moredeposition
company records
litigation
in compliance
neither
taken
of any orders
served
Federal
to them.
of destroying
frustrated
expeditiously
respect
counsel,
he was unaware
practice
with
De-
and ordered
filed
principal
to by the parties
and have
failure
Court.
by the
discovery
deposition
total
of this
- one set
sanc-
Procedure
and almost
to schedule
of defendants'
Trump, president
appropriate
of Civil
orders
interrogatories,
one abbreviated
space,
the
one agreed
by plaintiff
convenience
Rules
two deadlines
the
to save
very
ignored
for
unexcused,
- to answer
of continuous
modate
continual,
have wholly
Court
37 of the Federal
of defendants'
fendants
to his
began
or since
Accordingly,
attempts
plain-
to conduct
42 U.S.C.
suit
employees
3614,
and,
Defendants'
noncompliance
has included,
among other
very
Order
generous
usually
long
time
press
the merits
enter
to answer,
unless
the Court
without
to matters
obligations
interrogatories
disregard
that
courts
abhor
to preclude
defendants
chance.
Accordingly,
defendants
which are
come into
of this
5, 1974 granting
and we believe
one last
defendants
blithe
Nevertheless,
an Order barring
respect
things,
of February
would be appropriate.
we do not
as to plaintiff's
subject
compliance
defendants
an un-
meaningful
sanctions
forfeitures,
and
from defending
from asserting
the
Court's
of unanswered
as to all
in
to
with
interrogatories
of their
discovery
immediately.
HISTORY OF THE CASE*/
The Complaint
December
12, 1973,
defendants
filed
definite
claim
after
motions
statement.
against
million
Tort
in this
States
than
three
and,
of claims
5, 1974,
on October
stipulated
in the
asserted
seeking
On February
counterclaim
was filed
to dismiss
on the basis
Claims Act.
and their
no fewer
They further
the United
dollars
action
15, 1973.
extensions,
alternative,
a patently
On
for
frivolous
a more
counter-
barred
by the Federal
motions
were denied
was dismissed.
I
On November 7, 1973,
a set
of interrogatories.
nor objected
to within
plaintiff
served
on defendants,
These interrogatories
the
thirty
days prescribed
were neither
answered
in the Federal
by mail,
Rules
has sworn in
true.
of Civil
after
Procedure.
having
the United
sought
States
motions
an agreement
a motion
defendants
interrogatories,
April
1, 1974.
generous
time
four
frame
for
defendants
they
had previously
ignored,
that
the
then
case
would
consented
proceed
interrogatories
were
to propound
February
8, 1974.
in 20 days.
earlier
to agree
to respond
but
implementing
to plaintiff's
months
was reluctant
disposing
an Order
interrogatories
and a half
to answer
were directed
to respond
21, 1974,
Rule 9(f),
after
on or before
the
were directed
Plaintiff
Court,
entered
Defendants
to answer
filed
this
as to when various
to plaintiff
was directed
to Local
to compel defendants
S, 1974,
and answered.
interrogatories
On January
pursuant
and counterclaim~
of the parties
to be propounded
Finally,
compliance
On February
of defendants'
Plaintiff
informal
served
interrogatories.
initial
Instead,
original
on or before
to this
unusually
to interrogatories
nevertheless
expeditiously.
which
in the hope
Unfortunately,
this
Order
defendants'
at
seven
judicial
meets
and,
complied
on February
interrogatories
of defendants'
admissions
the
fully
standards
*/ At his deposition,
own the part of the
with
28,
which
its
1974,
obligations
served
disclosed
buildings,*/
detailed
alleged
as well
of a discriminatory
policy.
for
under
relief
in cases
under
answers
foreto
discrimination
easily
3613.
the
See,
did not
e.g.
United
States
cert.
den.
1973),
to
two blacks
P.H.
v.
U.S.
is
a pattern
13,569
Ala.
1972),
aff'd
per
States
incidents
at
a word
from
v.
Gilman,
found
as
a single
On April
weber,
an attorney
respond
for
to
and were
they
this
motion,
has
plaintiff
their
agents,
been
take
Law Nos.
are
(S.D.
to
defendants'
a protective
by its
inability
counsel,
appropriate
securing
into
any
depositions.
4 -
(pattern
on two
with
any
not
room
informed
her
He stated
1974.
As of
bring
for
After
to
been
to
the
the
its
date
inter-
filed.
its
any
that
interrogatories
them.
has
Gold-
Shuman,
to
the
answers
S.
failure
response
order
to
Elyse
Jeffrey
answering
in May,
for
1972)
based
Shuman
do so some time
received
1972)
and practice);
9(f),
discuss
not
13-15)
interrogatories.
telephoned
has
11,
however,
Rule
Mr.
sell
Reddoch,
Cir.
N.Y.
answering
in
(5th
States,
of
v.
apartments
Local
Cir.
to
a pattern
begin
compounded
their
of
plaintiff's
process
would
difficulty
and
to
to
the
and no motion
tories
sufficient
in
possibly
Plaintiff's
,~.
United
of when they
might
rogatories,
not
States
1 passed,
interrogatories.
were
unsure
to
pursuant
the
United
of
April
(5th
(refusal
2d 897
891
operator
defendants
plaintiff's
defendants
Supp.
response
1974,
for
the
large
in
11,
an attorney
341 F.
467 F.
2d 438
1974)
admissions
building).
defendants
15,
(Conclusions
and
to
484 F.
practice);
curiam
instructions
and practice
of
and
Para.
United
Co.,
(April
Rptr.
(discriminatory
that
Realty
E.O.H.
(S.D.
the
Pelzer
interrogadefendants,
length
extensive
of
time
efforts
by plaintiff
to acconmodate
counsel
depositions
attorneys
arrival
that
available
travelled
was reached
17 through
that
these
eternal
for defendants,
of the 29th.
time.!/
scheduling
that
advised
on
would be
One abbreviated
An attempt
additional
depositions
of defendant
15, on 48 hours
plaintiff
a trip
dates,
on April
to Texas,
subscribing
23 and 24.
plaintiff
to the ditty
too.
After
Mr. Cohn
innnediately
that
for
depositions
to hold depositions
revised
that
22, including
that
had to reschedule
these
reached,
for defendants
being advised
offered
Two Depart-
and a stipulation
notice
for March 22
only for about two hours on the morning of March 28th and
deposition
counsel
agreed
April
who first
for defendants,
agreed
to
''hope beats
*/
Plaintiff's
counsel suggested that progress could be made if only
junior counsel, Ms. Goldweber and Mr. Shuman, participated
in depositions
while Mr. Cohn was unavailable.
Even though the two juniors were classmates, Mr. Cohn declined this offer, but generously advised plaintiff's
senior counsel, Mr. Schwelb, that he could do as he chose.
~/
See Attachment
"A."
- 5 -
however,
citing
imperative
business
the depositions
politan
Life
Ins.
Plaintiff
national
with rights
priority."
also proposes
to conduct
that
this
would be permitted.
responded
to interrogatories
and since
during his
deposition,!/
request
back to
This left
him
discovery
assurances
proper
than a week.
24,
v. Metro-
for April
accorded
scheduled
pursuant
seeking
plaintiff
to
were fulsome
in their
Since defendants
a description
detailed
pursuant
have not
of their
records,
knowledge of these
records
a
to Rule 34.
!!
- 6 -
ARGUMENT
As related
this
in our introduction,
these
suits,
are "pregnant
delays
to which defendants
United
States
(7th Cir.
States
cases,
with
cert.
v. Gustin
given
for
832 (1970).
States
expedition,
we will
It
it
be lucky
is particularly
in the Federal
its
full
to equal
to counsel
this
of
litigation.
see also
Cir.
1970);
that,
of this
like
own choice,
so that
rights
that
and while
directive
current
magnitude
- 7 -
hereafter.
accommodation
the statutory
one that
and substantive
is a
some distant
on defendants'
to have a case
cert.
While we appreciate
of his
with
United
opportunity
this
procedural
the kinds
consistent
in cases
In
opportunity,
which precludes
The right
is obvious
3614.
discrimination
is prepared
schedule
that
den.
is entitled
to counsel's
employment
the United
like
housing
the here
any litigant
42 U.S.C.
to equal
an urgency"
v. Ironworkers
1971),
has decreed
priority
supra,
Congress
of
schedule,
resolved
by 1984.
the procedures
each party
in orderly
outlined
can enjoy
fashion.
Accordingly,
in the light
noncompliance,
the
sanctions
of the record
prescribed
of consistent,
unexcused
in Rule 37 are
particularly
appropriate.
Rule 37{d)
in pertinent
part
of the Federal
Rules
of Civil
Procedure
that
if a party
fails
to serve answers
objections
to interrogatories
submitted
Rule 33, after proper service
the
provides
as examples
any action
authorized
which
or
under
court
the
under
paragraphs
include
- 8 -
These
Order
sanctions
compelling
failed
ground
that
failing
to act
Rule 26(c)."
repeated
eliminated
to the
Federal
sanctions
this
priate
2nd Ed.,
chosen
para.
since
of February
failure
the party
as provided
as a condition
failure
to answer
even if
defendants
determining
4A Moore's
p. 37-95.
consider
precedent
interrogatories.
is "in
by the Court."
might
In deciding
that
these
had not
ignored
- 9 -
by
37.05,
the Court
and
on the
unless
order
of "willfulness"
would be applicable
Order
for
"the
interrogatories,
of "willfulness"
sanction
of severity,
Court's
to the
the
of sanctions
of the
Moreover,
While we do not
least
relevance
interrogatories
is objectionable
than willful,
the only
Practice,
issue
at
has inexcusably
for a protective
imposition
severity
the
has applied
the requirement
Presently,
the
sought
a pre-existing
a party
served
discovery
as other
as here,
subdivision
noncompliance,
described
even without
to properly
order
in this
the
where,
or object
where no protective
described
authorized
discovery,
to answer
to act
are
Sanctions
failure
under
to answer
entry
Cir.
judgment.
1959)
interrogatories);
(6th
Cir.
Sivelle
default
Hesse v. Brunner,
default
judgment
Moore's
Federal
cited
(unconditional
against
to the
as to which
1966);
issues
Music,
Inc.
Bernat
be taken
Inc.,
41 F.R.D.
Cir.
16 (S.D.
failure
to answer
218 F. 2d 728
failure
to answer
Cir.
1967)
interrogatories);
N.Y. 1959)
(conditional
interrogatories);
See 4A
para.
37.05,
p. 37-102
as the proper
and cases
sanction
introduction
of certain
evidence
the opponent
has failed
to make discovery,
Music,
1960);
Inc.,
41 F.R.D.
RR, 14 F.R.D.
certain
as established.
and
272 F. 2d
have imposed
v. Pennsylvania
that
for
for
284 (S.D.
v. Broadcast
the
dismissal
v. Rowley,
to answer
Some courts
inexcusable
Co. v. Aprile,
to answer
2nd Ed.,
a prohibition
Life
failure
failure
Practice,
therein.
included
dismissal
172 F. Supp.
for
Inc.
v. Maloof,
for
involving
default
Mill,
(unconditional
interrogatories);
(unconditional
have
Weiss Noodle
Brookdale
1954)
in cases
interrogatories,
of default
923 (6th
Rule 37(d),
facts,
with
465 (E.D.
respect
McMullen v. Travelers
Life
N.Y. 1966).
- 10 -
Music,
Inc.
relating
16 (S.D.
Pa.
N.Y.
1953),
to such
Ins.
v. Broadcast
Co.,
Music,
It
appears
unconditionally
compliance
from the
their
we think
defendants'
answer
opportunity
for
having
brief
more draconian
We believe
if
and depositions
be litigated
taken
plaintiff
an ironclad
immediately,
unilateral
judgment
in the
to defendants
compliance
defenses
interrogatories
further
case.
any further
Nevertheless,
their
non-
to strike
has no objection
striking
for
in this
without
to come into
forfeited
before
are
answered
dealy,
the
immediately,
case
can still
on the merits.
While
of the
of defendants
to respond.
without
have
the authority
default
opportunity
the
litigants
on the merits
that
has
plaintiff
measures
that
than
and enter
play,
that
to litigate
the Court
defendants
of fair
another
rather
rights
no more sustained
Accordingly,
interest
foregoing
does not
assurance
we believe
sterner
that
unconditional
disregard
that
promptly
and finally.
full
and complete
held
to be in default.
discovery~;
seek a forfeiture,
defendants
will
under
remedy,
that
suggests
by defendants
Defendants
failing
- 11 -
should
that,
but
make discovery
the availability
of the Rules
with
presently
the Rules
further
should
be dealt
be required
they
should
to make
be
We wish to observe,
tions
now, that
any objection,
their
in connection
failure
to make timely
to plaintiff's
interrogatories
quoted
at p.
..
party
with
defendants'
objection,
waived
were substantively
9,
supra.
or indeed
their
well
As the court
obliga-
taken,
said
in
in which the
case,
The passing of the forty-five
day period without any objection
being made to the questions
set
forth in the interrogatories
clearly
must be considered a waiver by the defendants
of any objections they might have had.
Cephus v. Busch, 47
F.R.D. 371 (E.D. Pa. 1969).
Regardless
of how
outrageous
or how embarrassing
the questions
may be, the defendants
have long since lost
their opportunity
to object to the questions.
If they feel that the questions
are unfair
they
have no one to blame but themselves
for being
required
to answer them now. If discovery
rules
are to have "any effect
or meaning, the failure
to serve such objections
within the time prescribed***
should be considered
a waiver of
such objections."
Bohlin v. Brass Rail, Inc.,
20 F.R.D. 224 (S.D. N.Y. 1957).
The plaintiffs'
patience
in agreeing to wait for answers beyond
the forty-five
day period cannot be considered
of the time for filing
as a stay or an extension
objections.
Sturdevant
v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.,
32 F.R.D. 426 (W.D. Mo. 1963).
- 12 -
right
CONCLUSION
For
for
the
sanctions
foregoing
be granted,
opportunity
described
in
(1)
fully
(2)
making
reasons,
plaintiff
with
defendants
the
the
event
the
answer
the
allegations
that
compliance
of
prepare
as
the
future
to
for
future
fully
and
the
to
suggest
if
immediate
discovery
ensures
provided
the
compliance
by
agents
deposition;
with
take
defendants
.
the
motion
and
an assurance
cooperation.
discrimination
that,
their
for
fail
and
its
interrogatories;
and
Court
that
being
come into
all
available
defendants
We further
schedule
full
be stricken
to
themselves
providing
of
In
motion
answering
promptly
(3)
the
prays
the
these
be precluded
defendants
controversy,
which
compliance
both
with
- 13 -
steps,
from
come into
the
Court
permits
each
the
we ask
expedition
set
that
contesting
prompt
party
to
provisions
of 42
u.s.c.
attorney
will
3614.
on either
The schedule
side*/
then be required
will
then be clear,
to withdraw or delegate
Respectfully
cf
fl
)/\.41~
NRY A.
Assista
United States
Attorney
Department of Justice
Brooklyn, New York 11201
and any
schedule
accordingly.
Submitted
j;
1 1
,1/J
-7-. -fJ~rr:,ll,
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
:'.-1l<2-"...J.~.Jvcuhlll.
ATTACHMENT A
rJ
HAB:ec
1.730;)i5:)
April
BY HAND
S<:t~J:~}
i
J3r!c;o11,
39
~~~t
63th
Rey
M.
Re:
Schuman,
prf'c'.ncc
of ,':
Esqs.
Street
Ne:w York
New York,
Atti.i~
16, 1974
Cohn,
10021
Esq.
United
States
v. Fred C. Trump,
U.S.D.C.,
E.D.N.Y.
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
et
al.
designated
off ice rs, agents
and employees
the above ltction
for depositions
on April
17,
18, 19 and 22, 1974,
notwithstanding
your written
stipulation,
by I1r.
u'1an~ so ordered
by the Court. on April
l, 1974,
ar::: the oral
r:n:,resentation
of Mr. Cohn of your firm to
GO'.lc,rma{_,n:t counsel
on Eetrch 2 9, 197 4.
To avoid obviously
fnti
e:>:pcnditurc,
we have cancelled
our request
for a
st:1Do-srrap!113r to record
the depositions
on those dates.
previously
in
We regret,
too, that
defendant
has chosen to
vicL~tc
the Court's
ori.10.r of February
5, 1974 which ordered
I
d~ cada.nts
to ans"11er plaintiff
s interrogatories
on or
b0
Ap~il 1, 1974.
s2~ctions
\'Jill,
agains~
of
course,
apply
for
appropriate
defendants.
Very truly
yours,
United
.
By:
~_i7
tctw.:u:-d R. Ncaher
District
Judge
22S Cadman Plaza
East
nro0:;;,.1yn, !Yew York
11201
'J.'h{~.r:onorable
UnitBd
Stat0~
Attorney
-----i,,// ././
~;1RY
cc:
Statca
A.
IlRACHTL
\~foc~
C"
H~Cl ~1 collR1 .0. N..
u.S. D\S1R\C
i(
\9,~
NEWYORK
1< l\~R'l,J
~
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA, )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED C. TRUMP,et.
al.,
Defendants.
......
.
1\Mt f.\..M
.............;
..
{)\I
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 73 C 1529
MOTIONAD NOTICEor
MOTIONFOR SANCTIONS
____________
SIRS:
PLEASETAXENOTICEthat
America, will move this
Heaher, District
plaintiff,
Court, before
United States
Brooklyn,
Courthouse,
in the forenoon
as counsel
can be heard,
and precluding
defendants
from contesting
plaintiff's
contention
defendants
and practice
mination
within
has raised
alo within
u.s.c.
the meaning of 42
an issue
of discri-
to groups of persons,
of general
interrogatories
that
public
heretofore
defendants
answers to all
propounded to them
by plaintiff
within
this
Order;
and
Court's
which
importance,
(1) File
225
of
of
(2) Provide
and adhere
availability
for depositiorsof
and their
agents
deposition;
(3) File
to a firm schedule
heretofore
proceed
by this
Procedure
Rules of Civil
Court in relation
Procedure;
with particularity
Dated:
To:
they
to discovery
in
thereto.
to Rule 37 of the Federal
in plaintiff's
affidavit
that
Rules of Civil
for
further
noticed
and
accordance
forth
the defendants
will
of
therefor
are set
supporting
of Elyse Goldweber.
and further
relief
memorandum
Plaintiff
that
this
and proper.
April / ft", 19 74
Brooklyn, New York
10021
Yours,
etc.
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
BRACHTL
Assist
States
Attorney
Department of Justice
Brooklyn, New York 11201
:}~~..,,J aed+~l,-<~.
ELY S. GOLDWEBER
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
. _.,,,.
AFFIDAVIT
CITY OF WASHINGTON )
) ss
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA )
Elyse
S. Goldweber,
being
duly sworn,
deposes
and
says:
1.
Rights
I am an attorney
Division,
United
States
for plaintiff
Civil
Action
I have prepared
contained
my knowledge
and belief.
Subscribed
and sworn to
before me this n;'"""CL
day
of April 1974.
My Commission expires:
in United
therein.
of Justice,
States
and
v. Fred
No. 73-C-1529.
the factual
Memorandl.lltlfor Sanctions
of the facts
Department
Civil
statement
is true
in plainknowledge
to the best
of
Fl f ED
umce
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTUE()~Nj,Jf,;;;Z!s
IStRler COURTf.D. N.
MAY
8 1974
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK*
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
JIMEA.M.................................
.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
P.M.....
-.,,unu,OUoh
PIAINTIFF'S REQUESTFOR
PRODUCTIONOF DOCUMENTS
_______________
Defendants.
Plaintiff
hereby
Federal
Rules
permit
plaintiff
listed
and described
It
of Civil
is
Street,
shall
Inspection,
by or under
Department
the
A to this
1974,
and that
offices
at
and copying
copying
shall
10:00 a.m.
Inc.,
at
production
documents
remain
of an attorney
available
will
until
be performed
of the United
Respectfully
as
and records,
of Justice.
FRA~.
Inc.
be completed.
and photographing
York
the
of Trump Management
can reasonably
supervision
request.
the aforesaid
shall
and
and records
production
produce
documents
Trump Management
as such other
the documents
such inspection
defendants
the aforesaid
New York,
to inspect
and that
that
of defendant
to Rule 34 of the
Brooklyn,
necessary
that
in Attachment
requested
continue
pursuant
Procedure,
to inspect
commence on the
main office
requests,
submitted,
xi. LV~
sCRwEtB
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER
Attorneys,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D.C.
20530
States
ATTACHMENT
A
LI ST OF DOCUMENTS
AND RECORDSSOUGHTTO BE
PRODUCED
FOR INSPECTIONAND COPYING
All
deeds,
cancy lists,
contracts,
correspondence,
cancelled
checks,
W-2 forms,
and other
written
records,
possession,
custody,
association,
said
application
memoranda,
journals,
books,
or control
ledger
sheets,
or other
accounts,
lists,
and writings
in the
or any firm,
business
entity
which contain,
va-
waiting
of the defendant,
forms,
receipts,
documents,
company, corporation,
defendant
January
leases,
of
constitute,
information
since
1, 1968:
1.
residential
lots
by or through
and all
said
other
defendant
of all
apartment
dwellings
buildings,
of time since
managed
January
A.
The address
available
for rental
any period
B.
available
January
and apartment
by or through
of time since
The size
January
and rental
for rental
defendant
for
1, 1968;
range
of all
dwellings
of time since
1, 1968;
of convenience,
the word "defendant"
as used
in the remainder of this Request, shall include defendant Trump
Management Inc. or any firm, association,
company, corporation,
or other business
entity of said defendant,
or any agent, or
employee of said defendant,
and shall include Fred Trump and
Donald Trump.
1,
C.
rental
3.
The dates
since
each apartment
January
inquiry
of each prospective
regarding
B.
tenant
The preferences
dwelling
size,
race,
of
who has
of a dwelling;
expressed
a particular
date
and date
tenant
the rental
regarding
for
1, 1968.
A.
inquired
was available
by the prospective
apartment
of occupancy,
building,
and/or
rental
rate;
C.
tenant
The information
in satisfaction
criteria
by each prospective
of the qualifications
to be met by prospective
D.
The results
landlord,
prospective
E.
employment,
background
whether
and
tenants;
of any credit,
or personal
made in deciding
tenant
provided
checks
to accept
prior-
or verifications
or reject
each
tenant;
dealt;
F.
application
G.
H.
of the prospective
The address
dwelling
whom processed
tenant;
and apartment
an application
the prospective
to rent
the
number of each
tenant;
tenant
a dwelling,
submitted
and if not,
not;
I.
occupancy
of tenants
of former
tenants;
race,
and the
- 2 -
and dates
forwarding
of
addresses
why
If the prospective
J.
as a tenant,
K.
the reason
If there
the prospective
for his
tenant's
and
at the time of
any memoranda
the applicant's
name
list.
The qualifications
account
rejection;
application
whether
were no vacancies
4.
tenant
or criteria
in deciding
whether
to accept
The credit,
employment,
taken
into
or reject
applicants;
B.
or personal
background
made in deciding
checks
whether
prior-landlord,
or verifications
to accept
or reject
appli-
cants;
C.
The policy
regarding
the rental
D.
to black
or agents
persons;
E.
rental
to refer
prospective
documents
organizations,
and standards
the rental
of dwellings
estate
applicants
to the defendant
of dwellings
to black
persons.
memoranda of oral
or other
or employees
written
of said
or agencies
to be followed
to any real
or other
instructions,
correspondence,
to agents
persons;
to the defendants
given
agency,
the rental
All written
instructions,
regarding
to black
and
company,
5.
given
The instructions
regarding
of the defendant
of dwellings
The instructions
employees
persons,
or practice
defendant
concerning
by such persons
- 3 -
records
or
or to other
the procedures
with
respect
to
the rental
of dwellings
to any person,
to be accorded
black
prospective
including
prospective
tenants
black
tenants
of dwellings
persons,
of dwellings,
since
January
1,
1968.
6.
race
All
between
referenced
Act,
or papers
or concerning
said
tenants
7.
papers,
documents
All
since
or communications
papers,
All
and other
trade
of apartments
for
previously
and other
documents
to the Fair
or nondiscrimination
in rentals.
placed
by said
defendant
brochures,
by or through
said
or
Housing
in news-
radio,
rent
to
1, 1968.
publications,
publications
or its
agreements
advertisements
magazines,
any reference
or to discrimination
8.
defendant
January
correspondence,
containing
television,
the availability
defendant
since
January
1968.
9.
All
cancelled
records,
checks
and other
address,
race,
or other
employee
January
position
Copies
documents
rights
and date
which contain
of employment
W-2 forms,
the name,
of any rental
at any time
agents
since
of all
EE0-1 reports
furnished
to the Equal
reflecting
the race
or national
and of all
origin
of defen-
employees.
11.
City
documents
contracts,
Employment Opportunity
dant's
reports,
1, 1968.
10.
other
payroll
All
Commission
correspondence
on Human Rights
responsibilities,
other
between
or with
defendants
any other
civil
of Justice.
1,
12.
formal
correspondence,
and informal,
in housing
produced
gation
All
reflecting
by defendants
irrespective
and irrespective
documents,
or alleging
or any of them,
of the merit
racial
such documents
or lack
of the formality
complaint.
- 5 -
discrimination
of merit
to be
of the alle-
or informality
of the
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I,
Elyse
S. Goldweber,
hereby
certify
that
Request
for
Production
mailing
a copy,
following
an attorney
I have served
prepaid,
the plaintiff,
a copy of the
of Documents
postage
for
foregoing
on the defendants
to their
attorney
by
at the
address:
Roy M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan and Manley
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
This
the
L..t:..L)
IN Cl H~KsOHICE
JDP:HAB:sm
F.#730959
u.s.01snucrcournE.o.N.Y.
1C MAY3 0 1974
------------------------------------x
JIMA.M.................................
.
P.M.u
..............................
.
Plaintiff,
NOTICE TO TAKE
DEPOSITION UPON
ORAL EXAMINATION
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
Defendants.
------------------------------------x
SIRS:
take
the
MANAGEMENT,INC.
as
by the
agents
times
the
officers,
set
forth
United
Floor,
States
in
suant
to
the
the
Notary
Public
law
take
to
tinue
attend
Dated:
in
from
and
deposition
an adverse
the
and
Federal
of
to
day
defendant
upon
employees
and
hereto,
Brooklyn,
of
The oral
until
City
Civil
some other
depositions.
day
UNITED STATES
examination,
at
at
the
the
dates
office
East,
officer
Fifth
pur-
before
authorized
examination
You are
will
and
of
of New York,
Procedure,
completed.
TRUMP
oral
Rules
or before
of
party
Appendix
Attorney,
Borough
plaintiff
by
con-
invited
cross-examine.
Brooklyn,
New York
May 30, 1974
Yours,
etc.,
DAVID G. TRAGER
United
States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
Attorney
for Plaintiff
By:
BRACHTL
Assis
nt u. s. Attorney
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
New York
-1-
to
TO:
SAXE, BACON, BOLAN & MANLEY
Attorneys
for Defendants
39 East
68th Street
New York, New York
10021
1.
Ms. Marrazzo
Resident
Manager
3901 Nostrand
Avenue
Brooklyn,
New York
June 18, 1974 - 10:00
A P P E N D I X
a.m.
2.
3.
Mr. Levy
Rental
Agent
Beachaven
Apartments
Sheepshead
Bay
Brooklyn,
New York
June 18, 1974 - 4:00
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
p.m.
a.m.
Mr. Limani
Superintendent
Lawrence
Gardens
Brooklyn,
New York
June 19, 1974 - 2:00
p.m.
p.m.
Mr. Zeller
Superintendent
Highlander
Hall
Brooklyn,
New York
June 20, 1974 - 10:00
a.m.
Rene Canon
Superintendent
Westminster
Apartments
Brooklyn,
New York
June 20, 1974 - 2:00
p.m.
p.m.
Ff LED
IN
IN ClH!K'Smnc
STRICT COURT DO$tcmHj1crcournE.D.N.Y.
UNITED STATES
EASTERN DISTRI
JUN5 1974
OF NEW YORK1(
TIMEA.M.................................
.
P.M.................................
.
)
)
Plainti
CIVIL
ON No.
)
V
73 C 1529
DEFENDANTS'
RST ANSWER
TO INTERROGATORIES
Defendants.
)
)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
The de
plainti
, state
by the
s, answering
as follows:
The sole
1.
shareholder
hereinafter
referred
to
quired
interest
on June
such
2.
T.M.I.
on April
22,
Estates,
New York,
Parkway,
Jamaica
J.
Tosti,
of
printed
3.
Trump were
before
is
lyn,
24,
is
in
Donald
is
Jamaica
cer
are
C. Trump.
Queens
8814 Mid
New York,
each
Fred
Inc.,
ac-
1969.
C. Trump,
Estates,
propounde
Trump Management
"T.M.I.",
President;
County,
New
Trump,
ca
8814 Midland
Vice-President;
tates,
set
in
'
Parkway,
Matthew
New York,
standard
is
Secretar
New York
cor-
byThe supervisory
in
conducted
City,
approximately
hood.
Fred
explained
trial
in
was incorporated
1969;
4 ~Starex
as
duties
interrogatories
roles
de
1 in
by
of
C. Trump and
their
res
a moderate-income
New York,
The Trumps
units
in
examinations
plaintiff.
6,000
ctive
Donald
housing
located
a low-income
no managerial
East
ally
control
consisting
New York
integrated
over
in
this
section
neighborcomplex.
of
The renting
process
been
rented
to
high
percentage
has
date.
of
to
of
October
Elyse
Washington,
11,
S.
72,
and
Goldweber
at
Department
of
Jus
With
nection
with
formation
Annexed
8.
Defendants
or members
who were
Street,
Stuart
Hyman.
all
of
emp
ees.
of
Tosti,
d to
the
are
dated
Tosti
to
United
March
Miss
States
15,
1973.
maintained
by Stuart
are
their
rental
in
con-
remaining
in-
Hyman and
11
in
in
effect
any po
cy
icants.
never
located
had
a policy
or ethnic
not
to
employ
group.
and
in
lications
T.M.I.
New York,
orally
the
had
I.
under
the
office
of
at
tenants
2611 West
supervision
of
lable.
posted
offices.
in
never
leases
e defendants
scrimination
cks.
available.
12.
any
Department
from
of
non-white
any racial
No information
contained
have
have
11.
superintendents
J.
However,
compiled
as Exhibit
Brooklyn,
ive
Donald
no records
The executed
accepted
Second
the
memorandum
5 O.,
No information
10.
to
communications:
Matthew
D.C.,
ainst
7.
9.
an extremely
supp
Drumm., at
from
not
e plai
discriminated
negroes
F.
Washington,
being
that
lowing
Thomas
The defendants
6.
are
is
have
previously
Section
to
apartments
be rented
Housing
race
to
has
D.C.,
the
regard
the
would
a subsequent
ce,
requested
be furnished
which
of
the
expe
by the
attention
tice
is
apartments
Justice
the
and
it
information
Department
letter
begun
However,
5.
the
just
that
renting.
the
H.U.D.
Defendants
T.M.I.
Detailed
examinations
before
Trump.
have
absolutely
responses
trial
housing
told
does
to
Fred
poster
the
ct
not
allow
s ques
C. Trump
13.
will
This
be supp
14.
15.
DATED:
information
the
plai
fas
s was answered
No information
New York,
May 15,
to
being
detail
compi
soon
in
by Stuart
as
sible.
the
examination
Hyman
be-
availab
SAXE, BACON, BOLAN & MANLEY
Attorneys
for defendants
Office
Post Office
ss:
39 East 68
Street
New York, New York 10021
New York
19 74
s.
Terr
P. Taylor
J.
Brown
Bennett
H. Culbrehda
A. Countil
A. Cambell
H. Rodrigues
L. Cordero
C. Echavarria
J. Williams
F. Lorenzo
J. Maldonado
0.
Curtis
D. Alvarez
M. Perez
Jr.
M. Adams
A. Hampton
M. Perez
Sr.
A. Alphonzo
V. Matos
L. Perez
R. Robinson
M. Matos
w. Martinez
L. Bidal
V. Gregaria
s.
A. Andersen
w. Reyes
A. Diaz
H. Solar
Monurle
s.
Diaz
R. Garcia
T. Logan
E. Aquino
C. Pradera
A. Clemens
R. Nieves
A. Fuentes
C. Roles
M. Marquez
R. Garcia
E. Iglesia
R. Delgado
V. Rodiguez
E. Mosely
J. Rivera
M. Wilson
Perez
F. Alvarado
R. Joyner
J. Alicea
G. Rosado
G. Lara
H. Dolphin
C. Gouzalez
Salastro
D. Banks
P. Alvelo
Perez
H. Witherspoon
R. Cardona
Kastro
J.
J.
Pablulla
F. Santiago
J. Medina
Y. Augiston
H. Dunlap
M. Tilghman
D. Lugo
A. Green
L. Vega
J. Herlero
R. Urena
D. Reyes
J.
J. Garcia
C. Flores
J.
A. Serapio
J.
0.
Vasquez
Nunez
Jenkins
J Raso
I.
Pedro Matos
Garcon
Grullion
Brownhill
H. Quel
J. McLean
R. Munog
L. Hurlston
A. Escalante
J.
w. Parma
M. Hunt
w. Spruill
s.
V. Jerome
R. Bullock
A. Magana
N. Nelson
T. Leach
w. Sanders
R. Yocono
R. Condon
A. Clanton
R. Rodrigues
C. Litvak
J. Wyatt
J.
J. Rosado
Jose
Luis De Jesus
C. Comrie
I.
Butler
Boston
Betancourt
Sandiego
l..
ADUTIESS
UXIT1':U
REPJ,Y
STATl-:S
A:SD
1.""ITIALS
JUa'EH.
A:SD
TO
of 31nsfirc
A'I TORNEY
'I'O
XUMIJl-;R
UNITED
STATES
EASTERN
ATTORNEY
DISTRICT
OF NEW
FEDERAL
IlUILDING
BROOICLYN,
N. Y. 11201
YORI(
FJJ r:-
IN Cl f;:~ .L. 0
(J,S, DI
, .,, 5 Off/(;
STn,c1Cni,rr ED. NY
BY HAND
June
Saxe,
Bacon,
Bolan
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York
Attention:
Scott
Re:
Dear
13,
1974
JUN141974
& Manley
10021
Manley,
Esq.
United
States
v. Fred C. Trump, et
U.S.D.C.,
E.D.N~-~
Civil
Action
N~~ 1529~
al.
Sirs:
To: Saxe,
Bacon,
et al.
June
2 -
13,
1974
RY
Assis ant
f:s/
yours,
u. s.
Attorney
~LG~
..
To: Saxe,
Copy:
Bacon,
et
al.
3 -
June
13,
1974
F ILE!:J
1N CiEi:K,.: ry-~"'F
0':i.'.?,.TLS iJIS'IEIC':'
li~:I'I:CD
--, ~ ~'1,--.-,
..
r,rsn-,rcr,
..Lt-.. l or
,.
..__,c~~.,,..1~1\......
.._. u
.1
...
COG:~':i:
v._ U.t-\.1\.
,,--,-,
-1'
J...,yJ
-----------------------------------
JUN2 5 1974
TiME
AM.............
FPLD TRG:P,
P.M..............
Civil
-a9a::.nst-
Act~on
~o.
73 C 1529
.:t al.
Dt"'fE'ndant.
-- -- -- ____,..______
~.~---- ---- -- ---_,
_-- -
......
~~
United
East~rn
Stat~s
District
Court
District
of ~Pw York
l.Jni t.t:<.l Ste.tes
Court
IiousA
Brooklyn,
ilew York
11701
3,
:'lay
17:00
H01JORJ,BLr.:
United
l\. P
VLK:2rJ'.:'
Stat~s
L i'. R l,.
lI0nry A.
Assistant
_._J
l,.
1974
3oon
CJ\'l'OGGIO
MagistratA
C ::C~S ;
:;Jrachtl,
United
Esq.
States
Attorney
Alic0
Goldw0bPr,
~sq.
D0partrrw n t of J-us tic(
IlanlE>y,
:Csq.
Scott
Attorney
for D0 fendant,
FrPd
C. 7runp,
Pt.
al.
Tl<AiJSCRIDED 3Y:
~ast0rn
Transcription
Service
?
T
to
ri?cord
casP
.Oonald
'l'rump,
t,
I.JI:'f8ndan
sanctions
failurP
to
for
Uni.b'Ci
answer
r:. Schw~ll,
attorney
havf'
b,"',c"n sraced
i'lanag~mf'nt,
nda.nt
for
i.t
s :>cti..on,
Housing
by
And
for
the
hour
two
statute
pro vi
t~1i.s t:..tlr',
we nmr
::Tr. ;,1a.nL;,y
cf
c>.nc ':ff'
Ad,
. Scott
shall
undPr
dr.>lay was
not
by
vihicn.
institutPd
sha.11
proct
0rc.
assign
undtr
tlF'
all
promptly.
any
has
court
Jlonor
2.
of
the
:Jo;,
.00fm
insti.tutE"-d,
i.n \frii ch
361?
S~ction
casr:- to
Your
plaintiff.
the
that
shm1,
Alric;ht,
w2r,g hPrP
is
'Ianl1:y.
d:, 1
s cmploy':'('<S
s in
procPe~i.ng
Fran;-:
Di.vi.si.on,
d,.,.,fc:,.ndant,
Scott
C.l.'l'OGGIO:
~:!.il.GIS':'F.A'.i.'E CATOGGIO:
the
Xir.
and
s. Goldwe,b,~r,
r"'cord
Gov~rnment'
Inc.
Ci v::..l Rights
appr>arnanc"'
t!:v?
no\.! l?:00
is
a tl::o hour
th0
._.
d0fr,ndant's
th?
?11.GISTR\'l'i.;
th2.t
f"'
r-L"',;,JLJ::Y:Scott.
1.fr)
aft;:,,r
PrPd
fi.rs t narir"
t_....
right,
vs.
ti.
Justi..ci:~.
your
Statris
s Gold,.-t.'"'b1:=r, Alic"'
ti.1~
of
'l'rurnp
an .. going
WP
interrogatoriPs.
States,
for
Uni.t'?d
and
th~.:, dcf
anu
D0partnv.:1nt
the
plain
a.ga.inst
th('
of
Trump,
no
l:.lri~~ht,
CATOGGIO;
IL:'\GISTRA':'~
or
3Cl3
:-1~::iar.:.n':Jat
of
th~s'
3.
,?arli2st
pract.:.cabl
:>
c-:atr,,
f3o that
ti:~d.
priori.
ty
'11.h'? court
only
not
by
proLably
u~ing
hPr~
on in,
or
r:iattt2r
is
0:zifor,2
tion.
_;o,,,,, I want
Is
re
second
any
not
lling
at
least
long
r:r--, I wi.11
crin,in2.l
as
:nsi.st
r..:sn t
~~s
Court.
failur;?
on thr
comply
on th
s?rvQd
of
on proir:.rit
disposi.-
to
thP
ct que-s ti.on.
th'.:' Cov2rmr.:"'nt
wi. th
Li'fort."", thi.s
dPf?nd;rnt
th,.,
cor:;r, up .. or
is
for
d':'"n211d to
counsPl
d~fentlant's
So from
.r::--i :_f
:{OU
a motion
to
('<.
I i.ndi catfcJ
to
this
any phase
.. do you ,,:ant
1"
1:),:,
casf',
Glse.
'
bf'
L.1'~in
attorney.
thr>
Cl1Ct:.
sanctions
ir:.mos"'
to
tr1i.s
has
by
anythi.ng
to
ask
casn
but
c2_s~, to
th.:
countenancn
as
to
this
court,
t:ir-
will
cas~
anc~ causE'
dr:.f"'nc.an+.' s
t:10
ans'::''r
ntr'rrosa.torv
plai.ntiff's
uy thP
counsel.
led
in
on .Iov.:-
fi. l<''d in
thi.s
court
r 15,
this
1973.
court
interrrn.:ratorh~s.
was
25,
before
but
trw
pl2.i.ntiff,
On January
a raotion
to
this
uoti.o~
Im6.
lP& on April
an app~arance
Ja.nuary
by
73,
thf'
74,
Govrnr::""nt,
1974,
th~r~
c01::p.?1 answers
to
was
to
thosi~
.:..m!:JOSe sa!'l.cti.on
1974.
Judg0
(!n2udibl0),
I t~ink
I v.;ron't ...
It
was,
Your
Honor.
it
was
4.
But
that
gatori.as
tl1at
any
of
they
filed
ti1~ 8Xc2ption
th,~y
would
have
rath,~r
sticky,
fend.ant
s . oh,
the
papers,
In
a. conw::~rsation
fact
homt::work
in
duct:>d five,
heVP
rn;? ask
and
I do b0liev':"
I had
that
with
Lr.
case,
:11? said
and
on that.
yes,
for
thf'
d?-
also
<lf'posi tions.
who
Coht;n,
doi.ng
his
we havr.- pro
Is
c:1.::\positions.
Goldweber?
i,J,::,11,
GOLD\.'i:lti~R:
i;e
not
is
bEen
Tlv2r,? is
yesterday
this
;uss
what
of
l1im with
thatli.ad
havP
onr- qU'."St::..on.
I chc1rg,~d
,:1iss
would
;Jow,
when
0xc?pt::.ons
in terrogatori<?s
tak.ing
for
And
bE-en answPr'd
any
thP
schE,dul~
1.
fil0d
thc1.t correct
ynt
not
to
the? intPrro-
not
(inaudibli:~).
let
hold
April
to many of
madE:' questions
a.nd
in
on th(;
haV('
i.ntf~rrogatori.es,
tlh~
that
on or b~for0
thPy
Jow.,
h0ard
wa.s dircctpcl
be answerPd
should
Govs?rnmc":nt says
thE'
to
it
datE' . alright,
I won't
triE>d
tiii.GIS?R.11.TE
to
I would
sch!:ldule-
CATOGGIO:
Did
bf:'
l.::.ke to
you havE
fi.v(
depositions?
VP
i'1AGIC'.iT:A':'B
CATOGGIO:
It
i!a.s
is
i.t
s~ven
deposi.tion.s.
or
fivr?
Vf'
ry
5.
tryin<J
circumstances,
honor.
Your
but
l\lri.9!1t,
;:i;J,GIS'.i..'.J,ATE CA'l.'OGGIO:
you ha.Vt"'
them.
:USS
GOLDKEJ3I::R:
them.
',J,;:, had
r,~.AGIS'l'R}\Tl:': Cl1.TOGGIO:
J-;.lright,
v,-h,::,r]
are
thP
dc::>positions?
the
ot:h,~r
~nss
GOLCMLBER: '1i'ell,
four
a_re bei.ng
we
intention
to
i'lISS
HR.
thf>m?
file
Alri.gh t,
Your
~ronor,
:'11-\GIS'l'PJ\'l'E CATOGGIO:
were
,,.;ords,
in
all
Cl',TOGGIO:
ER2\Cl:'l'L:
tlR.
:..ns tances
1:1i:?
i1ISS
may
intPrj~ct
that
thP
depositions
';'Jer0 they?
In
othPr
wcin:> complPtcd?
GOLm:z1mF~:
indicates
clerk?
Go ahe-2.d.
compl<?ted.
that
GOLDlfLi.3;.i;R:
J:S:iss Goldw@b?.r
( inaudiJJ
A.A.GIS'l'R.;;.'.1.'E C.l\.TOGGIO:
i. t
beliPVf'
Ili\GIS'.i.'R.l\.':.:'E CA'l'OGGIO:
IHSS
is
BRl\CII'.:'L:
tlAGIS'IFA'l'E
now,
Yes.
GOLrniEBER;
BRACIITL:
ER.
one witn~ss,
led.
Lil-;.GIS'.i:'FJ,'i':t:: Ci,'l'OGGIO:
your
hav,:
she
10) .
l1as ..
7hos@ doposi
1.!X\.GISTP~A'.r:::.:Cii':..'OGGIO:
ti.ens
w~,r~ compL?ted.
iJ
They
U~HDLrJTIFI;..u;
w0r0
I stand
corr0ct~d.
g':-tting
I think
SCff,1LLL:
t.
Alri.gh
1-11-\CIS'lRh'l'l~ CA'I'OGGIO:
dR.
filed.
We'.:'
LJO'.v',
wr1 11.
sa.y tha.t
should
.
Your
111:~GIS'l'.zfa'.1.T.:
CA'l'OGGIO;
Ei:C
scm-;rr.:LL:
il~{.
scmJ.i::;LL:
tting
That
sorn'? a<lv,"'ntures,
thosP
the
But
(inaudible)
name?
we
depositions
likes
d g0t
of
which
a lot
of
.
d..i;.GISTHATE
li kt? 2.dv2nturP.
But
1ou
hav~
Those,
:ass
GOLD,i:SBLR;
lJ:.GI:::;'II~:TL
,.:f> c:.rP n~xt?
Llrn:,
,J,11,
Ci.'l'OGGIO;
the
pos:. tions.
fi.vc,
y:>s s:.r.
YPS
nothinq
Slr.
Alriq}1t,
CATOGGIO:
do you
t1v=r1;, is
n(!':'O r.10rr
:.s
d;,posi
tha.t
tons?
\iherc
I:ow
n.any?
aproxi.rnab,~ly
for
po,3i tions
nin;::, other
unc_1,:-r
t10
p<2orl.-
who ...
or: ~.:inal
noti er.
JfovJ:v,-r,
7.
I hav:"
no
r::--
long,'r
,:ork.
fer
t.hi.s
Yes.
Lc,GIS'ITU:.'I'1~ CA'l'OGGIO:
;,::rss
tac tea. ilr.
at
about
Colin
11.:.s re-1ucst,
I di~: not
at
GOLD\JEBLR:
th
2. t:
&.
.L
fer
to
, I
I tJ2.ntf:d
for
?.nd tl,?n
s cas~,
H.ovint_?.
on tl1,:! <JU.'"st::.on of
..Jo11, can
ti1t 0 Sc
t could
. I don't
....
rrnrp08'.:
Ilr.
:ie.n
l. S
+_c
sh.::d
oth:'."r c:.'cposi.t::.ons.
try
any
IJo
any
:i: :1op," so,
,mtir:,
d?r,,osition
.i''11 nov; .
Our
you
2d,
:.ti.on2l
I 2on't
g::-t
con-
Cov, ....rnr~"n
tlv~
Yes,
to
first
frlt
oplc,
riotic,:::
courti?sy
notice,
when
arranging
and a.s
ti ,:,c'
Also,
t-.hin0
first.
Your
for
LOnor,
(inaudiL
on tlF?
1,,,}
..
ha.d a coupl~-" of
Mr.
Colin
ar
t~1ing:.;
want0-:;. to
n:.:/ control.
i..;,..0 y0r.cl
L,~ ll>:!r~,
but
a ~12.lf comm.:.tr~,,:.:nt to
and
try
bE?for0,
it
g!v0
th:::> 1:-ar..dc.b.? of
prefer0nc2
t:ic- court
authority
I ,?racticFd
ah,'ays
you
ar@ too
that
cases
to
la.1.,1 for
.. Judgi:
you
It
pref?.r,:,ncr.
judicial
si.ncP
i\nd
s a. hard
say,
court
the
Irving
1~aufr:1an ...
busy,
say
so.
hav",
so.
too
.busy,
am mPrely
i,,iAGIST1vs::.:;
r1P.. :f2\~JLLY;
you
~fe is
in
Gt.
~:0
a dozf"n
~,Ir. Colin
on thi:-> tl:'.'l>"phone.
:1obody
a real
1:-andate
la.wyE' rs,
handlP
saying
it
J'tr.
that
ser-ims
it
ll,
a :1alf
Col.:.n
r-0n:.ind
Louis
thf'r?
Mr.
Kaufr.1an,
cannot
,Jf'll,
yes t?day,
gav0
ng th2.t
the
Colin
CATOGGIO:
:11\GIS',;.'I',.l\.'i'i:: Cl\TOGGIO:
\'7f>rt..,,
Irving
I am not
saying
forgPtti
U3':>c:i to
If
c1.nyon":' ,vie1
for
t!1ing
'.Jf,11,
is
m':':n tion~C
that
is
Louis
to
gi.ve: it
if
St.
ca.s:,,.
as
'\;.:"11,
has
in
this
statut(
th?
is
~'1('
of
could
s:.,':?ms
..
S!=)l?f'lS
us
it
that
trying
to
rPach
him.
.
9Pt
I
')
..
.,
of
th~
for
always
is
2.na ,1e
pap,:,rs
this
and
i.1E'rE,
poi.nt
hGrf:
is
as ths
Government
s,,,cond
rung- with
i.npossi.01.>
irposec.,
at
and
is.
us.
~E,sides
case
the
havP
aksed
been
Dut,
would we would
days
to
rnf'nts,
ing
to
orally
comp
that
tl1e
,,rho didn't
tions
to
(inaudiblE)
to
major
1.d.tnssscis
thr.- five'
tP
fortl1
like
prepare
!lave, already
plea.s~?
An.cl
:..nthis
sam':' qu?sti.ons
to
a few
tl1t~ answers
v,c couldn
were
wer""'
th> in ti::"rrogatorL~s,
in
put
mr-c~1ani.c2.lly
1':',ajor wi tnesst"'S
v9ry
Th~
and
was pur,"!lly
on t:1e
ti v0s
forrr
asked
cc.SP is
Can I finish
just
is
i!l ti-:rroga
d~posed.
also
Colin
thE"
that
;1r.
that
fa':.posed.
fact
vr::ry bri<>fly.
t~12.t t!1is
five
to
the
t m":'cl:anically
int?rro<;F:ltoriic:s
and
already
at
t()stify
in.
thi.s
anc.~ th(~
complet<?ly
ba.ttl,
TiE'
tim"'
the
just
anx:.ous,
Uot
tiH? dPposi.
th~: wi tnessPs
bE'en
we arc
that
he adt::ay
ma.IC' any
l.'Ell,
0(!"-n an awful
has
these
days,
witnesses.
po~sibly
intrrrogatory
hand.li?
conff~rri.ng
t:d.s
wPrf"
stab:"-
both
th~
ten
rEspond-
witn(-l'ss,~s
sar1E' ti.mf'.(i.naudible)
t:iat
Trump
thE
Organization,
same
r1ufstions
interrogatories.
who
that
had
wer"
2lready
wri.ttPn
b ?Pn
0
d,'."post?d to
on pap1.,.,r in
thr,,
ans1'1f'r
10.
;lAGIS'l'RlVl'E
to
make
swers
a gu,:=,ss,
to
obviat~
I would
th> need
iiiss
say
for
to
if
that
you
you
ask
got
i.n an-
you probably
int1:rrogatories,
the
,I,.:>11, if
Ch'l'OGGIO;
taki.ng
allow
would
furth<:c~r d?posi
that
as
me
tions.
:1r.
..li ty,
a possib:.
Goldweb~r?
I ...
way I could
answi,rs
that.
answer
to
th
I dent
int?rrogatori.es
tlAGIS'I'RP;l'L:
is
th0rc
no possibl~
know what
kimi
of
CA'l10GGI0:
Yr,s,
we 11
that
is
2.
questi.on.
1'1C
thE> nan,'.,s of
tht?
p.:>ople
know rr,ally
don't
wi?r(', .
., U\.GI~3T.E.ATL CA'i'CGGIO:
Y~~s
On~ other
to
:r1ak~.
7hesr
what
interrogatoriPs
point
wer~
I vould
s~rved
like
3ix
rnontis
s ai r3
ago.
rl.AGIS'I1I;.1"'..'1
i::: Cl\'l'OGGIO;
I know that.
that
forP.
You know.
it?
Is
:;rss
GOLU:r:.:.:dL::~:
Piv,"' and
011 ,
I was
Or is
it?
onr:-ha_lf.
I
m-'vr,r
c..,.
any
qood
a_t I1at:1
11.
~.
sor:-:f of
information,
th"
rDally
l,n~ you
rough.
r:rss
t::c, ndants
.:..nt?rrogc.>tori
at
all
GOLrnmB.t:m:
~lastic
\Je 11,
ar.e . ar~
PS
on thf"m?
1 t:-iat
the'
objection
u""~GIS'I'I::.A'
....
'E Cl.l 1 0GGIO:
v:::--11, that
Und< r th0
I an g
i.s
a good,
rulr
old
th--
33,
t:Lons
to,
toc"th~r
st
now.
of
practical
t21a.t i.s
0:1,
the
the
party
(inaufi0l~)
s~~rvc
a copy
in
of
tl1irty
of
to
L,otJ1 partiPs.
old
t:1J:,
th0
dl"fEndant
r,;,a1 s-erv"'
f:i.v;:. days
aftc-'r
t::1a.t d<:'
ndan t.
large
th~
timP
t,
Alri
servic0
is
that
had
au6its
hav~
rE:..i.s::c"'.
it
court
sum,"1.ons
of
may allow
ght
PXCFptions.
giv,:'
us
cas0.
beFn s~rv~a
shall
i.f
with-
a.ny,
aft~r
a
:~::-~ct.~pttha.t
00ject:..ons
tho
this
int0rrogatori:--.s.
answ.:1n:: or
both,
in
st" rvi.c;-::i or
for
sown
int~rrogatories
long:->:r timt-,.
~fter
i r oL j n cti om, 2t
!nterrogatori.0s
'I'h<"'y
Uv~ st?rvic""'
of
a noti.c,,
C~ID~JTIFISD:
of
~ays
t?n
nov; I
,,Ovi,
servic0
~!thin
,-.:ithin
forty-
cor1pl2_.: n t upon
a short~r
2.uthor.i
ty
or
to
rm-
l\nd
12
..
in
a cas?
that
c;-1aracb?r,
poss
ly
th0
and
if
to,
to .. and
in
in
ordPr
sp0ct
to
some of
dillies.
namn,
and
1,\1.::ll, that's
enter,?d
in
a.lri.ght.
or
Your
date
they
suppos,~
they
hav~; plcdgt:'c
i.ng at
to
tlw
first
know thE
:Jational
City
Bank?
su.bsb:rntial
could
1,,?
th::>y allow
i.n top
int~ri.".st
loa.n
th2.t
th,..,.ir
which
se.::m
state
r'."-
th"'
rnar..2.g0ment,
r:ianagemPnt,
Inc.
or
I know.
. or
th,
assc-ts,
suppos21d,
J\ncJ.
in
and.
look
you 1..1ant
th"'
First
i.n thP
First
interrogatories
for
has
I arr. just
PV'"',ry stockholder
':'hese
1:i.nd
company
int':'rrogator:?s.
ar,e
so
somt" possibili.ties.
Your
GOLD',JEBER:
typehandled
with
.bank or
1':ISS
such
th0
Ci. ty
that
:"'la.stic
a. family
some of
:Jational
Lroad
La w~ll
CATOGGIO: I know,
a Lank
of
racP
rsons
oh,
It's
acquirC:-c.
th,-::,re is
would
Honor.
l'L"IS'.I'F:ATE
the
it
tori.:~s
all
indir,:~ct,
corporation,
on-"', :nloa.s?
Or hav
I don't
oLjections,
sornE' regard
of
a guf:'SS
V"'ntur0
I think
first
address
dirPct
to
t..~.c~se int~rroga
'.1.ak,;; the
rac,~
h~ar
fairness,
Gov,::,rnr:-1{"ntw~rc
t1?
real
rnig~t
court
:Sut anyway,
I ':muld
of
interr:st,
if
they
did
Eonor.
VJ&: rn~an
and
th2.t
interrogatory
have
bcmk
loans,
it
a.
is
13.
me-ri?ly
a s-::ntenct':.
wanted
to
.3ay that
gi.v2
you
will
b sat~sfiPd
days
nr.
you
from
Is
that
you
it
is
'..1.aV{"'
some
your
ki.no. of
I
';]ell,
1onday.
Instead
Your
Eon or.
1.,:,t's
t~m da.ys
of
wi.th:i.n
that
answt.,.rs ..
1
E?.1.GIS'IIU~'.':C CJ,.'1
0GGIO;
'I'ha_t
it.
with
proposal
riqh t.,
lil:..:JLEY:
just
a substantial
say
fror:;
tPn
today.
0E'th:.r?
HR.
Fi\.i:./LEY:
ten
Y?s,
days
from
That
would
l.londay
..:;e fi.n,s.
would
i-IAGIS'i'lL"\TI:
15th
they
i1anl~y,
will
JlR.
days
if
hopPfully
:rov;,
Okay.
ten
'de 11,
then
answ::'r,
alright.
1
;_ll"\GISTHA'.i..
1:.: CA'l'OGGIO:
of
January
...
CATOGGIO:
no of
llay.
15th
'i.'h0
of
makei. t
t,ouldn'
l,ia.y.
it?
T~v" 16 tl1 of
i:1.hGIS'IT.lt-::::':CCA'l'OGGI O:
guaranteed
you will
:ray.
'l'h.,::. 16th
hav~., answ,::rs
to
of
tlv~sc:
::.u.y,
int'rroga-
tori,.::,s?
I~I:.
IITULEY:
~lA.GISTJ~\'I:E
tho
Y".'S sir.
CI~'l'OGGIO
Is
that
alris:;.t
for
Governm.:mt?
r,:rss GOLD,)I:1:n:R:
possible
e1at
ther0
could~~
Your
donor,
sorr~
~ind
would
of
thP
it
conciitional
14.
se.nctions
imposed,
uut
it
would
...:e lifted
;1.:~,GISTR.l::.T.E CA.TOCGIO;
I could
could
not
as
only
or
soon
,I3
rPco1ru'.'"'nd
s a.net.ions
cysr,lf.
_uss
GOLDl7Li:.r::I~:
. L:\GIS'I'fJ\TE
thf-
point
to
answers
to
the
gott8n
to
to
intcrrogatori~"s,
think,
is
the
point,
Your
Honor?
or
to
W('
j,avF
int0rro9atoriPs?
CATOGGIO:
;.L\GIS':'fJ'\Tl~
the
Y,:>s.
thr." dF f ..~nda.n t,
punish
that
undr'rstc.nd
Cl\.'l'OGGIO:
,fl.at
Is
..;o,
t~at
11,
'J?
not
y~t.
and
h2tv~nt
tlir:y
,,
',,l1a.t t:h~Y
it
r,ss"c,.
arr:
-:>xactly
say::.ng
::.s,
corr..:ctly,
JES,
ti.ons
until
th,~ 16tJ-. of
would
in to
corn?
Fc.y,
pla:;7.
You
I
opl~
thnn
they
do run
can
t into
don't
know rour
slack
pto,riods
Coli.n
S<'"t-.
2.:- 1
into
not
::ut
cJoins
cm: not
to
I1ak2
E~fficulti0s
!n
. i.t
Wt') ha.vi:.
:Ln a pe:r.iod
and
just
then
you
gotto:n
w:1ic-:inth
g.::-t
:.:r.
a.r:'
15
..
ur: to
tl1-:'ir
of ~ueks
or ~n
2onth
'..:h?' 1 Gt:.1 of
right.
th~
~Jout
cf
or
and
so :..twill
2.
counl2
a~2y.
~1-
r,a:r!JE i.n
clrar
a~positions.
dcposit:.ons
1;ork
advanc~
:.olc~ :furtI1r r
you
until
r:;o t:1rough
nanag,~r2
cknt
\JOUld
a lot
of
so thr;:,y
t-',-,+......1 ... U-
victiLs,
t:.v~- al lf
s"d
v.i.ct.::..,r,.s c'.talt
1:;i
th.
stc>.tur'.'
such
not
\lOUld
;.;i.:: of
thc:t,
adr:iss:.on
thr:y
sa.J would
it'?
,:o,
in~ivi<luall;,
~ut
not
asa.:.n3t
Ilr.
Truup
t~~y ...
Jr
30n
(i.naudib
16
..
t.
,.J';."11,
the
anythins
that
1=up<>rvisor1
agency.
of
:1ucsti..on
tl-.ir::y
or
70 to
sa1.
on
an adn~ssion
as
us0
~1av,'!, to
You
h2.ve
thi?l':1 in
I s2.y h0r"?
shall
1:ana.g ..'.'."rial.
:,;_::_. BIJ\Cll'IL:
1:AGIS':i.'10\TE
not
C2\'IOGGIO:
':'ll
no,
t::..v:? capacity.
her0
i.s . ..
dAGIS'l'lli"\'I'i:.:
ti10
rna::1 i.s
c'12.rgr
i.n
CLTOGGI O:
of
e, housr
ar~
,,;R
I:uL::- 4 3, Your
ilonor,
I::J,GIS'l'R.l\'ZI:
contract
for
thF
peop
and
talkirvr
v1ho run
1-,:..
ha.ppr'nP<l
'.l:run\),
tlv~y
tl1ey
a.c:rnts
und<:'r
th?,
landlord?
during
indi ca.ti?d
e.idn' t haw'
thr> a.sh
CA'I'OGGIO:
Your
thins.r
out
~)Uts
b1r
llonor,
an interestiws
ck:.posi tions.
c~.uring
r:mch control
thc.::.r dt"posi
a.t all
ov,-r
ti.ans
that
the'
appli-
17
.cati.ons.
.
And all
t(mant,
and
a nunw2r
of
that
h0lo
Pstatt?
who will
f'air
thf':' duty
of
is
Ilousi.ng
Act
that
anyon2.
of
thcir
if
orga.nize.ti.o:-i
ate
'i"Jith
and
any
the.t
hav~
a.:)uild:Ln0
or
Th-~f
cannot
d' lagate
undt.r
of
th>2y an'
thn
Fair
of
as
would
Act
for
to
o.llPged
chanqf'
discrir:infor
th'?
ar"
talk.i.ng
T.Jn2.mc'
r-..ousi.ng
tha.t.
p?.:ttf'rn.
vhat
cove
a large
he le. accountable
b"'
patt0rn
if
we
a.ction
tlw
Superior.
rrousing
who wor~ed
conti.nw:1
would
i:r--spond,7:at
p~rsons
could
tl1a.t
a real
th-2 Fa:i.r
.bc, liai;lP
would is
in
with
duty
would
r-::ally
was
L2.wsuits
comply
th0
kind
a b.:ndant
an own':"r of
,"'\nc. t!1 at
no one
who ~ncamP
to
-.~rnployees
naught
that
llousi.n9
th,:>i.r
tus
to
control
Lecomr
their
company,
to
this
Is
thc,t
2.;)out?
liaJ)l(:.
~~caus~
'1'11:'."' City,
the
City
thGr2
'11 1:'lc
was just
City
::.rousing
a r~c~nt
iTousing
Authority
cas~
i\uthori.ty,
:lou know,
of
Otaro
ancl
vs.
th::_i' held
res pons:..-
woule
bl(-1.
:11\CIS'l.2.l\'l'l:
Ci\'l'OGGIO:
Th0 ~al~
so
call0d,
1 r,u.
:::,.ayor . .
.Jr 11,
;\utll.or:,
is
ty
part
of
th,..,
ot's
tl"lP
h,:, hac
to
sup0rvise
could
to
ar,,
prol.:ie..bly
of
want
lia;:.; l"
l,c
to...
L~d
a~e1uat~ly.
I...a,v,
,lousing
tc
a duty
aiOUS:.ng
cy.
i'layor
if
ty
broad"r
pr:.ncipal
ar;.y oth0r.
Co you We,nt to
do now.
on th':'
for0
you
wait
to
s::>e what
a~y DorP
approach
d::-pos.:..tions?
would
That
alri.ght,
0(:'
;:JUt
;IA.GISTl,1\'l'E
A.lr::.gh t,
CA'l'OGGIO:
v,,T
r:ms
t r..,ak<:
a .schf'dul:".
:n s::.;GCLD.iL:l.lLH:
that,
you
I don't
..~xtr0rrn? ly
fror,1 th~
plan
casP
to
want
:!Jusy,
court,
,':'nough
of
sornt"'
Si 0 '2,
consist,>nt
ons
th"'
would
lik~~
a. schpdul
lens
w.!.th
the
prot
this
har3hly,
.s:.na
T.H"
..Ir.
tlHm
ah~ad
,}A
of
wi
tr.
his
a.r!"' to
to
would
hav,?
oth."'r
Mr.
case,
Colin
i.f h,...,.had
1 t'1at
Colin
timi2
but
so
and
is
a schPcl.ule
rf'3ponsibi.l.i
obli.ga.tions.
ty
in
Such
si.}:ty
t.his
as
da.ys.
19.
Ano. then
t1v~y could
from
tirP:::> of
the
.Another
sixty
ot:iPr
any
to
days
knov.' their
1:r.
at
busy,
Do :you have
ilISS
CATOGGIO:
GOLrnn::.!i3:CR:
now,
let's
his
bt:en
too
ow:-r.
ther'?
see,
to
was
be dcposeJ.
You
di.d
havl;'> such
forr~.
rIAGI.S'l'RATE
s,
to
take
people
Jc,nd
Y..?s.
Cl'l-'IOGGIO:
':.:'~1a.tis
iUSE> GOLrn::C.iJER:
oh
thP
of
i.nsp-::ction
t11,:, cast".
could
I
handy?
H1\GISTRN1'I:
a sche,du?
v,i tnesscs
i::1en 'Avr..ry-
conti.nuo
attornr".\y
a list
that
r,:;,cord
i.n
come across
our
interrogatori.es.
th('-n he another
I did
the
oL li.gations
IIAGIS'l'PJ\'l':C
of
the" interrogatoriE"s
corrplet;,
suppl.?m.:>ntal
Colin
dr>posi.ti.ons
r?C!"'iving
one would
if
take
lw,r:'! i.t
is
<JO through
has
this
help
Yt?S,
that
was it.
on the
that
whi
Would
CATOGIO:
right
ri.g:1t,
Ii.st.
top.
Fi.n?.
Donald
you?
J:iow.
Alright,
'l1 rump,
has
taken?
l'faGIS':i:'iv\'IL
:USS
CAI'OGGIG:
GOLD\:i.:B:Sll:
GOLD~LDER:
'I'rump,
tak\?ll?
Yt'S.
EISS
F'r:1d
Yes.
Stewart
Hyrnan?
20
..
iI,"\.GIS':;.'Iv\Ti: CNEOGGIO:
IlIS:J
:uss
wer12
take.n,
Cl'..TOGGIO:
GOL0~h:~13LR:
Pr::,dwald?
Yes.
GOLD;n..:::;:n::R:
A,\GIS'fltl\'l'E
Sophi.
i1s.
.:Jcn0. of
Bare-tzo
(phonE>tic)
tlit rest
of
th!?m
i1onor.
Your
1u~GISTF.Z'i.'1J.:; CATOGGIO:
:Cut
that
i.s only
four
taken?
; 1I S S GOLDiiEBB R:
on this
who wasn't
t:1e 'frumps
them,
Cl,.'l'OGGIO:
GOLD',JI.:BEF:
produc11::id
e.nd it
was
fth,
list.
:IAGIS'l:'RNl'E
IHSS
We 11 ,
',Jho
was
It
WcLS
a. !?rs.
i. t was
111.~r r.,ecausE'
he?
Buckley.
And
ol':'as:;..er for
alright.
~{2\GIS'rRA'i'E CA'l'OGGIO:
;ias
S~H'
of
a rnanagr:.r
th0irs?
:1ISS
a.n a S~'!'ction
o.fter
GO:i:..UJt:Bi:E:
Ilanager.
wt?rt
thf'ly
havt:
tlle
HR.
li.st
of
any
of
tlwsP
}rnm-1
Alright.
CATOGGIO:
bf:'fore
d1'1..1LEY.
Do you
what
r:':'vir?w~d th(,
tht~y
calli::\d
appli.c2.tions
.~o , Your
anythi.nry
fH'"Ople?
:Jr.
tlanley.
you?
:.IAGIS'IT.11.TI: CATOGGIO:
:1anlr 0y?
was
sW)m:.ttC'd.
:li:..GIG'l'.l(,il,'l'I:;
Do you
ShP
She
Honor.
Can
aLout
it
you
show
to
the
avail2J)ili.t~l
:1r.
~:R.
\,uold
ar(J
(incrnc:iilJl,::')
still
:Dut if
wor:king
they
say
very
for
much,
people
the
who of
thi.rt.oen
of
th"'
of
1,
1974.
tlic
April
cr,:ploy
of
ll}:.
did
I say?
thesa
of
l),? I
p~opl~
I think.
wor%inc-r for
wI10 P"ma.in:":'d
tl:v:,.y would
wr:1.s about
to
lE'.
.pf'ople
thPSf'
All
I-:onor.
Organization,
Alrig:1t.
r:Zi.GISTRA'l'I:: CATOGGIO:
Your
sure.
th,::, lrurnp
Or<;c.nization,
avai.lab
too
I aD not
ar;::,n' t
tlH' 'iru:rip
~iot
M.\~ILEY;
li.st
t:1r
that
~ilio of
th!:' GovF'rnrn,;,nt
nurrt.0,::>r five
ta};:i.ng
forrn
part
th~sc
of
peoplA
'~'rui:,p Orga.nizations.
:IA.JLI~Y:
".i:,,s,
Point
Your
dmm
tlw
One.
of
through
stipulati.on
ar@ still
under
By that
I r10an
IIonor.
7~n da7s?
1 Ot!1?
l\.lr:.r;~1t,
13th.
I :rill
qi.v-: it
?:,.lri ..gh t?
. You
/ .7
Your
r1y30lf,
. U.CIS'I'R.i.,.'i:'L
CATC>GCIO:
Ponor.
1':is s ...
Goldw.,~b(lr.
:-Jracli t 2.n6 .
"'r,"
I clon' t think
''Lt\.
Your
ifonor.
'
a:or ,'....
r.
r.:
;:;c:r~J"11,
!'.;..i.
to
that
;;_r.
~racllt,
.."~
! ...
:donor.
ano
~
s e,
;::_copy
to
,....,(.
v;a.nt
to
CO')".J
.!,. -
11'
Or.f ot:F'r
..L~.,....J
I just
:JL.
C/,TOGCIO:
1:a:~:' cl-"'ar
thi:ng,
]o no.
that.
con~unicate
w~th
th0
lGb-1,
ycu
Cov~rnmnnt
11,
Y1 s,
1
Your
~ionor.
It
I will
t.
tJF'
''dOn I t
this
t11at
w:.11
C0
court
i.n
So,
and
not.
nitrly
on
/ 3
...
l:1
or mann"'r.
, .sh
SOTIV'
Alr:.gl1 t.
thos~.> ansi,!'' rs
try
\.coulC
to
r( 0 sponsi
bi? sor,:.:v,1hat
to
V('
qu;,-stions.
rli1.GIS'lFJ.'l'}.:;
tor1
is
too
C7.TCGGI0:
i. ts
i. t dF f""ats
cor~pli.cat,?c:.,
:.f an intErroga-
.7011,
own purpose.
LI[;s
are 1:xc~pti.cnally
i.~:..GIS'l'l\J/l'E
pared
terrogatory,
not
interrogatory
the
of
r:acl1 in-
l,?ns
good
it
is.
Own or
,mything
~ls0
you
Dut
9:vc
,:i th
have
I do think
t:iat
us meaningful
(inaudiblr:)
to
s0nt
troublf,
I don't
is ... what
that
i.f
want
i::.1:Rl\.CI:iTL:
. IJ{.
PVfln
ha.vr-
Z,,.lright,
any
t11ing
t11<1
I or:\-
s whf:n
involwC:.
::.s,
:lost
thc:,v
tlv:"rn ..
CA'i'OGGIO:
:i.nb~rrogatoriPs,
thc.t
think
r':'c:.lly.
compli.catPc'.,
conc,::>rnc"d in
i.nformat:ion
I don't
l"i(ll,
out
so
I think
i.n 1rdnd is
th,:,- 1:'ost
obvious
an o~ligation
th..-y
answ<?rs
think
I :iav,:,
with?
=tr. r1anl'y
as
to
thr
That
ones,
long
to
do to
:.nfon-:-tion
I an d~pending
onf'
on
..
...
t}1e fact.s
and ..
I
32 I don
duty
to
knov;,
i ...
und,Pr
;:mt llatl
rules,
t,'lC
somethings,
tlH,,Y be2n
tiwy
to
and
find
IL1.GIS'IRATE
to
imprPss
ri:.ust
up a r~cord
let
that
w:-if'r(~ they
of
thE'
th("
all
and
to
nr.
thc.t
make
to
the
for
thE ordfr
int.f~rrogc1.tories
of
Your
thf'y
arf'
bui ldi.ng
troubl(.>.
just
Gov~rnm~nt,
rr:quiring
Don't
to~~
t\:o
and
poi.nts
first
subjrct
th~
by Apri 1 1st,
d~positions
thci
and
taken
w~rr
to
2.ns':,fr
stipulated
orders
of
court.
t:J..
Governrtf:\nts'
rPport
Yes.
slicond-round
und,:,,r thos,:i
your
thf'y
:1onor,
at.GILJ'I'l-;1'\TE Cl\TOGGIO:
of
Col.in
let's
c.1o is
an: tr:/inc::r
SCII\JELL:
both
schedule
know
happen.
I wish
all,
to
1:lE"ll,
Yt>s.
and b"."cause
thing
Eh.
that
~avC" an obli.gati.on
the1:1 out.
on .,Ir. .Manley
n:ov,? this
I hav-: 1 a
accJpta}::;.11? .. whi.ch
CNl'OGGIO:
:JoK,
t :{now if
ordPrs,
circumstancr:.s,
rcicr-1(?St th2.t
and
and
to
af
I \Ii.sh
to
cond:. ti.ona.l
r'.?cori1nrnd2_tions
to
the
t..11,'.'sc>.me rf'sul
rc,i.t3rat?
sanctions
Court,
th2
would
that
ts
/. 5
..you
for
r<?(Juest
a r.:><:JUlation
sanctions
that
such
conci.tionl?cl
bf~ granted.
,Je 11 I ..
Secondly,
CATOGGIO:
El\.GISTL"\'J.'E
v,hat
:.{OU
a lawyer
to
court
w:io fi.nd.s
w:.Hrn lie is
time
be r:w.ybc.
too
self
1,,,112.tis
~;ood
for
and
onn
of
is
ask
plcc:'.sed
&iffi.cul
sc.nct:.on
impos:,"
h:.rrself
busy busier
]_,::,to
11oocl for
Jr,otion,
t:1a.t
to
at
t
on
a
ht~ wa.nts
than
f.::..nc.s hi.m-
take
today
it
thr> othr.:>r.
'.i..'h'f>otlv-r
t:.is
WI".'woul.J
counsP l's
to
SClE'TLI..:
:.;:?"
too
the:. t at
The
costs
a l::.ttl;~
busy.
including
hi.msPlf
im<l
Im.
a.te
.i.t is
t{,:,,11,
.:tf'rn,
which
,muld
is
2.pprop-
LP
costs
thos::~
sui:..ir1i.t
Honor,
Your
the'
rr-c::arE-
affi.davi.ts
to
this
J'~oti.on.
,.J:"ll,tha.t
cult
on,"'.
If
i nts:-rro0ator:.-:1s,
liet's
t1F if
tit<"
our
trcujl,::-s
not
dcfos
Ct'
the
c. d.if
s producl"'
ndant'
wi.11
is
;,Jc a lot
.:.ssu"".
answ,'-'rs
l.Pss
.le .vant
.:_
tha.n
a.nsw1:>rs.
..
de
?6
want
to
mOVE'' the
alr.:.gh t,
th~n
thoughts
to
touching
thi.s
to
9::.V(
.:. t
dr.
'/'/P
~iow, if
ca.sf'.
vli.11
Colin,
ca~0.
go to
work
and
anyon0
can
T}V'Y
C;:--..nyou
on it.
around.
It
c~'
can't
Honor.
;,lri
t~12.t
offi
do that?
Your
~'"S,
On your
fool
c.on I t conply
th0y
fin?.
i:_rl:t,
it.
ruch,
Your
Honor.
Thank
you,
Your
Honor.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Transcribnd
by ZastPrn
~ranscription
Junf
? 4,
S0rvic0
19 7 4
~"-.
1~
! -
EASTERNDISTRICT OF
JUL 12 1974
NEWYORK
UNITED STATESOF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff,
)
,,1
Tif;'.:A.:l. ............
PJ.1..............
v.
)
)
)
)
)
NOTICE TO TAKEDEPOSITIONS
UPONORALEXAMINATION
_____________
Defendants.
To:
July
take notice
that
the depositions
Inc.,
United
of the agents
hereto
and employees
forth
of Brooklyn,
oral
examination
Civil
Procedure,
ister
oaths
tinue
of Civil
East,
Procedure,
of the United
Fifth
Floor,
authorized
The oral
attached
States
in the Borough
These depositions
an officer
take
of Trump Management,
will
pursuant
will
Attorney,
of America,
be upon
Rules of
by law to admin-
examination
will
con-
completed.
to Rule 30(b)(l)
Documents designated
of the Federal
Rules
in Appendix B attached
hereto
are being
taking
of this
subpoenaed
9rt:.J
of July,
DAVIDG. TRAGER
States
by deponents
at the
deposition.
Dated this
United
to be produced
Attorney
1974.
L~t~:.J
DONNA
GOLTfu
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG
Attorneys,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
APPENDIXA
To Notice
To:
to Take Depositions
1.
Tuesday,
July 30, 1974,
9:00 a.m.
2.
Ms. Margueritte
Marrazzo
res . 2457 Grogg Street
Brooklyn, New York
emp. Trump Management, Inc.
2611 West 2nd Street
Brooklyn, New York
Tuesday
July 30, 1974
12:30 p.m.
3.
Tuesday,
July 30, 1974
3:00 p.m.
Superintendent
Fountainbleu
Apartments
8855 Bay Parkway
Brooklyn, New York
4.
Wednesday,
July 31, 1974
9:00 a.m.
5.
Wednesday,
July 31, 1974
12:30 p.m.
Rental Agent
Shorehaven Apartments
8850 19th Avenue
Brooklyn, New York
6.
Wednesday
July 31, 1974
3:00 p.m.
7.
Thursday,
August 1, 1974
9:00 a.m.
8.
Thursday,
August 1, 1974
1:00 p.m.
9.
Thursday,
August 1, 1974
3:00 p.m.
10.
Friday,
August 2, 1974
10:00 a.m.
11.
Friday,
August 2, 1974
1:00 p.m.
APPENDIXB
To Notice
To:
to Take Depositions
set
agents
to be brought
forth
and employees
subpoenaed
of Trump Management,
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Skender Fici
Guido Lara
Louis Sarnell
James T. Green
Daniel Borth
Walter Rohr
Joseph Zecher
Milan Mitijevick
Raymond E. Travis
1.
All completed
payment of deposits
leases,
applications
in the possession,
deposition:
and records
of
or control
of
custody
the deponent.
2.
All records,
of documentation
deponent
tact
of any prospective
sought
at an apartment
3.
other
deponent
lists
or other
custody
or control
of the
and dates
of con-
or any individual
All written
writings
waiting
in the possession,
which contain
applied,
cards,
who has
concerning
residing
in the possession,
which contain
forms
instructions,
correspondence,
custody
advice
forms or
or control
or stated
of the
or
suggested
apartments
buildings.
policies
or practices
or the processing
with respect
of applications
to the rental
of
at the defendants'
CERTIFICATEOF SERVICE
I, Donna Goldstein,
certifies
that
I have served
to Take Depositions
by mailing
following
an attorney
a copy,
for plaintiff,
prepaid,
hereby
Notice
on the defendants
to their
attorney
at the
address:
c;Tb
/
day of July,
1974.
~~~~
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
NPG:jfb
DJ 175-52-28
Bacon,
Bolan 6, Manley
39 E. 68 Street
New York, New York 10023
Re:
c.
Trump, et al.
to Magistrate
that
1.
'
Catoggio's
order of
forth below the remainder
for us to complete
of this lawsuit
Depositions:
a. Ms. Carol Falcone
b. Mr. Thomas Wiranda
c. Mr. Louis San1e 11, Supt. , Shorehaven
(deposition
previously postponed)
d. Al Weber, Superintendent:
Edgarton Hall
e. Mr. Henry Neher,
The Belcrest
Supt.
Apts.
Nauti1us,J\pts.
Supt,.
.. 2 ..
We are planning to notice these depositions
for
August 22-23, 1974. If this date is unacceptable to you;
please contact us by Wednesday August 14, 1974; otherwise,
notices shall be sent out accordingly.
2o
of Documents
ao Current
following buildings:
tenant
lo
Chelsea Itall
2.
3.
Nautilus Hall
Ocean Terrace
4.
Lincoln Shore
applications
and leases
for the
area.
We propose that this production take place at
your office on Monday, August 26, 1974. If this date is
inconv-enient to you, please provide us with an alternative
with the discovery deadline
date that is not inconsistent
by Magistrate
Catoggio.
We are also sending under separate
for the following documents relating
to the
defendants'
apartment buildings in Norfolk.
(Hague, Pembroke, Oceanaire and two smaller
Current tenant applications
lm.ployee payroll records
Waiting-lists
Rejected applications
!I
See paragraph
defendants operate
set
cover a request
operations of
Virginia,*/
buildings):
and leases
Sincerely,
J. STANLEY
POTTINGER
Assistant
Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
By:
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG
Attorney
Housing Section
cc:
The Honorable
Vincent
A. Catoggio
14,
II
II _
iij,
ilii
h
I"
1l
i
JDP:HAB:ec
F. #730959
I UNITED
NOTICE TO TAKE
DEPOSITION UPON
ORAL EXAMINATION
STATES OF AMERICA'
Plaintiff,
'I
I.!
~I'
- against
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
IN~J~
f: 0
!11
1,
__
:e:e:d:n:s
~ __X*
S I R S
AUG2 1974
TIMEAM
...................
P.M..............
.
jJ
~
.......,.,....,..,..,._.,..,l'u
!I
Iiof
August,
I the
at
1974,
Borough
of
at
Room 290,
Brooklyn,
City
4: 00 P .M.
on the
Cadman
225
Plaza
of New York,
8th
day
East,
the
in
plaintiff
11 in
the
above-entitled
llCAROL R.
jl
11 suant
to
action
FALCONE as
the
will
a witness
Federal
Rules
take
upon
of
the
oral
Civil
deposition
of
examination,
Procedure,
pur-
before
the
li
j! Honorable
Vincent
A. Catoggio,
United
States
Magistrate,
or
before
some other
I depositions.
I
I to
day
until
officer
authorized
by law
The oral
examination
will
completed.
You are
invited
i
II
.
,11 cross-examine
I!Dated:
Brooklyn,
to
continue
to
attend
take
from
day
and
ii
!1'
August
2,
New York
1974
Yours,
etc.,
!f
!I
ii,,
11
ii
DAVID G. TRAGER
United
States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
Attorney
for Plaintiff
ii
!l
11
11
Ir
1!
11
iiL
11
Ii
II
,
I
I TO:
I SAXE, BACON, BOLAN & MANLEY, ESQS.
! Attorneys
for Defendants
, 39 East
68th Street
1
:INew York, New York 10021
II
ii
'I
ii11
<)
l
"
I
I
!1
11
I
ii
!1
JDP:HAB:ec
F. #730959
11,
11
!I - - - - - - - - - - - - ii
ii UNITED
STATES
!I
- against
II
,-
. ) I\
AUG2 1974
..
Y,
NOTICE TO TAKE
DEPOSITION UPON
ORAL EXAMINATION
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
""--'L
-' !
Plaintiff,
11
'( ~
TIMEA.M.,
p .........
...,-~~
...,......
.
.M....~~~-------...........
OF AMERICA,
I'
11
and
Defendants.
11
,,
J!
ii
v,,
U.S.u
11
S I R S
:I
ii of
August,
!I Jamaica,
at
1974,
at
Room 409,
Borough
of
Queens,
10:00
90-04
City
A.M.
161st
on the
9th
Street,
of New York,
day
in
the
plaintiff
'I
in
!I
the
above-entitled
THOMAS MIRANDA as
!1
I suant
to
'
the
I Notary
Public,
ii law
take
!,
ii
to
action
a witness
Federal
or
and
of
take
oral
Civil
the
of
examination,
officer
The oral
purbefore
authorized
examination
You are
completed.
deposition
Procedure,
some other
depositions.
!I
upon
Rules
before
will
invited
will
by
continu
to
attend
cross-examine.
ii Dated:
11
Brooklyn,
August
2,
New York
1974
11
!I
'I
Yours,
etc.,
!1
i!
:I
ii
ilii
il:!
DAVID G. TRAGER
United
States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
Attorney
for Plaintiff
II
!I
11
ii~~~.
ii Attorneys
:1
II
ii
'I.
!
!I
",I
e
I
'I
n
'I
ij
I'
"ii
!1
ii
Ii
ii
I<
;1
i'
11
JDP:HAB:ec
F. #730959
IIUNITED
II EASTERN DISTRICT
!I
!l -
'I
IIUNITED
NOTICE TO TAKE
DEPOSITION UPON
ORAL EXAMINATION
STATES OF AMERICA,
11
H
Plaintiff,
!i
- against
!I
a
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
ll
Defendants.
1-
!I
II
;1
I'
il
ii S I R S :
11
11
q
I
ii of
August,
1974,
liii Attorney,
ii
Iii Borough
of
at
the
Plaza
Brooklyn,
City
l
i
11
:I
il
to
the
Federal
Public,
take
ii day
an adverse
or
before
day
until
of
some
of
the
other
oral
in
the
DONALD
examination,
pursuant
before
a Notary
authorized
examination
You are
day
UNITED
of
Procedure,
9th
States
plaintiff
deposition
officer
completed.
on the
United
New York,
upon
Civil
P.M.
Room G-80,
the
The oral
depositions.
to
of
party
Rules
3:00
East,
take
JI
ll TRUMP as
Office
225 Cadman
at
will
by law
continue
invited
to
to
from
attend
and
ll,, cross-examine.
H
11
,l
Brooklyn,
August
2,
:l Dated:
!i
/j
New York
1974
l!
Yours,
i!
etc.
II
H
;1
DAVID G. TRAGER
United
States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
Attorney
for Plaintiff
:I
!jij
H
!j
ii
:1
1l
:1
!l
By:,,..,.-
/
ii
/'"
'
/
"
fl
d
'.I
il
!l
ll
BACON, BOLAN
&
MANLEY, ESQS .
i!!j Attorneys
for Defendants
Ii 39 East 68th Street
ll New York,
;I
!!
.,
1 y'"~
'
,--.>
,..-
'
J~
S
OR
.. , -.Assistant
U. 1... Attorney
Chief,
Civil
Division
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
New York
11201
:1
!l ~~~E,
V( )
.r
New York
10021
,,
;I
!I .
I'
!I
:1
!a
ii
F"ILED
I;
n
!I
ii,.
JDP:HAB:ec
F. #730959
\I
d
II EASTERN
'I
ll!
11
li
-~MEA.M................................
..
.P.M
......
NOTICE TO TAKE
DEPOSITION UPON
ORAL EXAMINATION
,I
ii
AUG2 1974
u .........................
!I
Plaintiff,
;l.,
Ii:1
- against
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
:1
Ii
d
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP and
ii
II TRUMP MANAGEMENT
' INC . '
q
11
Defendants.
ii
q
ii - -
11
!I
S I R S
H
;1
"ii
Ii
at
10:00
A.M.
on the
12th
day
ll!: of August,
!I 900
:i:i
:i in
,1
Ellison
the
ii PAUL
l!
L1
to
,I from
ii
H
;\ and
,,
take
day
11
the
to
Office
action
a witness
or
Rules
before
until
the
will
of
United
New York,
upon
take
oral
Civil
the
the
plaintiff
examination,
of
pur-
before
authorized
examination
You are
Attorne
deposition
officer
The oral
completed.
States
Procedure,
some other
depositions.
day
of
in Westbury,
Federal
Public,
to
11
the
Avenue,
ZISELMAN as
Notary
ii law
at
above-entitled
ii suant
ii
1974,
invited
will
by
continu
to
attend
cross-examine.
ii Dated:
d
ii
Brooklyn,
August
2,
New York
1974
Ii
:(
d
,I
Yours,
\I
etc.,
;I
DAVID G. TRAGER
United
States
Attorney
Eastern
District
of New York
Attorney
for Plaintiff
ORTE,
R.
Assistant
U. s. Attorney
Chief,
Civil
Division
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
New York
11201
!i,,
1:
11
'I
ii
Ii
'I
!I
iiTO:
Ii
11 SAXE
, BACON, BOLAN
IiAttorneys
&
MANLEY, ESQS.
for Defendants
:I
39
East
68th
Street
d
!J New York,
New York
10021
:1
,J
!l
I'!"IL ~
1,v_CUilK'_:;.
$ Orfll;f
1
U,S, 015(fllC .
. cnw~,Eo
,N,Y.
;;~!1.:
*
------------------------------------xTIME
Plaintiff,
- against
NOTICE OF MOTION
------------------------------------x
MISS:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE,
ROY M COHN, the
affidavits
hereto
all
and upon
undersigned
will
that
and
the
upon
statements
proceedings
move this
the
Court
annexed
attached
heretofore
on the
the
Federal
and
State
day,
or
finding
Court,
of
as
New York,
soon
of
at
16th
day
Justice,
guilty
and
desist
order
any
all
other
agents
said
parties
implied
including,
to
threats
but
as
cease
upon
not
and
any
of
the
desist
potential
limited
to,
of
Civil
Rights
of
the
DONNA F.
u.
S.
from
making
witnesses
former
- 1 -
employees
any
in
City
of
for
of
and
the
for
GOLDSTEIN and
ordering
express
this
of
that
an order
court,
Government,
1974,
Division
contempt
said
,kk
forenoon
the
the
Kings,
may be heard,
the
exhibits
of August,
i4M
County
in
counsel
against
of
E.,
of
herein,
c;
o'clock
GOLDSTEIN, Esq.,
a cease
and
10:00
thereafter
DONNA F.
Department
Cadman Plaza
as
had
...-
in
affidavit
the
or
proceeding,
the
defendant,
Respectfully,
SAXE, BACON, BOLAN& MANLEY
Attorneys
for Defendant
(
'
I
I
I
---------------------------------------x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Civil
Action
73 C 1529
Plaintiff,
- against
No.
AFFIDAVIT
---------------------------------------x
STATE OF NEW YORK)
)
COUNTY OF NEW YORK)
ss.:
I am senior
MANLEY, attorneys
&
affidavit
Department
in
support
2.
The
was
Rights
Division,
was
in
charge
her
duties
of
duly
sworn,
deposes
and
partner
in
firm
SAXE, BACON,
for
defendants,
defendants'
investigation
initiated
by Miss
with
the
said
of
this
but
and
case
Elyse
for
make
the
Goldweber
Justice.
At all
investigation,
diligence,
of
this
motion.
of
Department
of
the
the
says:
of
the
times
Miss
observed
Justice
Civil
that
Goldweber
legal
and
she
pursued
ethical
strictures.
3.
weber
was
At
replaced
with
her
been
conducted
into
a gestapo-like
defendants
berated
some
entry
them
by one
upon
within
contacted
with
time
the
during
DONNA F.
scene,
the
the
GOLDSTEIN,
the
threats
Miss
Esq.
investigation,
boundaries
of
interrogation.
them
investigation,
legal
Former
complain
that
of
jail
accusations
and
- 1 -
Commencing
which
propriety,
employees
to
Miss
Gold-
had
turned
of
the
Goldstein
that
had
they
were
"lying"
and
had
the
defendants.
what
happened
been
have
action
affidavit
of
obtained
by this
Court.
Carol
Ziselman,
Miss
the
formerly
of
these
prospective
to
interfere
passing
the
of
entry
should
only
about
Civil
the
corporation,
contact
our
offices
contacting
and
and
proper
12,
1974,
the
by the
of
Mr.
Miss
for
the
rights
and
of
continues
this
defendant
and
Donald
case.
with
Student
Trump,
of
Goldstein
Paula
Goldstein,by-
the
production
of
defendant.)
with,
Division
by
Exhibits
and
conduct
upon
Rights
a clerk
affidavit
Paul
Miss
conduct
I the
as
disregard
interfered
and
that
of
has
offices
When informed
after
June
the
agents
descended
the
into
defendants'
records.
orderly
literally
representatives
demanding
the
On or
counsel,
abuse
witnesses
with,
4.
rental
as
defendant;
statements
of
Exhibit
2 we attach
witnessed
harassment,
as
for
describing
a course
employed
by the
working
witnesses
indicate
formerly
as
while
these
(We attach
employed
employed
Goldstein's
and
as Exhibit
formerly
4 we attach
government
some of
R. Falcone,
Inc.;
Miranda,
of
been
Trump Management,
3 and
by the
Statements
requiring
Thomas
"taped"
persisted
in
United
States
Attorney
officer
of
defendants'
and
they
Interns
her
their
associates
demands,
for
the
and
Eastern
11'1
District
of
New York
defendants'
Exhibit
offices.
offices
Miss
we able
(See
to
attached
get
them
letter
of
to
leave
Scott
the
E. Manley,
5.)
Goldstein
(50)
were
boxes
5.
In order
and
her
of
be as
associates,
defendants'
and were
Goldstein
to
completely
that
this
helpful
as
we provided
files,
which
open
to
investigation
2 -
possible
them
were
them.
would
to
with
over
conveyed
We were
take
Miss
to
fifty
our
informed
only
a very
by
I
11
''
"short
II two
period"
to
three
I,thereby
I
when
weeks
that
and
the
disrupting
her
case
its
made
blast,
the
spent
files
functioning
defendant
of
in
of our
from
our
offices,,
firm's
legal
her
sentative
I have
the
tactics
of
that
the
there
to
is
lend
the
been
recent
informed
by granted
day
before
of
here
having
is
and
was made.
accomplished
to
build
verisimilitude
a
to
activities
past
employees
are
completely
United
of
by representatives
of
of Miss
badgering
the
out
States
in
all
July,
of
Goldstein,
the
defendant,
and
submit
character
for
a repre-
the
defendants'
Government.
request
respects.
i'
;f
and
artistic
11
to
no case
now attempting
WHEREFORE, I respectfully
Sworn
conduct
charge
charge
motion
is
this
well-publicized
legal
and
from
complaint.
threatening
II that
be drawn
plaintiff
means
7.
when
a serious
unsupported
to
allegation
such
by illegal
'I
and
our
was none
a publicity
associates
defendants'
the
The conclusion
of
there
Having
she
work.
correctness
fact
examining
completely
6.
in
me this
1974
Ii
3 -
that
the
.b
x11-18rr
j_
'
'
'""
~
...
'
'
~.
"'-'
-i:~~~
, '{I!i ~
1 j._t..,
'1 ) (/
~1~~~111-'J,
~~
WILLIAM PREIS!
.. N?. 8431925
O~al,f1ed on Queens Counfy
,
'
'
TO
WHOM
IT MAY
CONCERN:
\~ -:;;z_,&-,
~ =Miranda
Sworn to before me th is
22nd day of July 1974
~.)
County of Kings
State of New Yor~
~~f~
...--W,!IIAlA'
pR!1~ -Nohl,v Public, State of New Yorlc
No. 8431925
xttt g;T
correct
N.Y.
~1J\Y CO}JCFRN:
I, Paul.eZiselman~(\hereby
statements
of my own free
make the
will:
following
true
and
I was formerly
employed by Trump Management on a parttime basis as a rental
agent at Beach Haven Apartments,
2611 W.
2nd Street,
Brooklyn,
New York.
During my period of employment
I personally
never discriminated
against
any prospective
tenants
regardless
of race, color or creed.
Additionally,
I have never been instructed
by any
superior
of the Trump Office,
nor was it ever suggested
or
stated
to me in any way, manner or form to follow a racially
discriminatory
rental
policy while I was employed by this
company.
In fact,
during such employment I rented many apartments to minorities,
including
blacks.
Despite the above mentioned,
I was visited
by a
representative
of the Justice
Department who stated
that an
"FBI Agent" would be back to continue
the interrogation.
These
statements
were made in a threatening
manner and I strongly resent
and object to it.
I was especially
harassed
and intimidated
by a Donna Goldstein
and in my opinion,
her unethical
conduct
in itself
should be a matter of investigation.
WIT ESSED:
r;
tl '-Ll;({__,
PA
N.Y.
f>f'l-.,} L A
I,
statements
correct.
fy
1--Ziscelman
of my own free
hereby
make
will,
which
the
are
following
true
and
I was formerly
employed
by Trump Management
on a part-time
basis
as a rental
agent
at Beach Haven
Apartments,
2611 W. 2nd Street,
Brooklyn,
New York.
During my employment
under no circumstances
did I ever
discriminate,
nor was I ever told
to discriminate
by
any superior
of Trump Management
against
any person
regardless
of race,
color
or creedliring
the rental
of an apartment.
/
~,
~~=~~,;
P1~vu.~
Ex1-+113;
r If
"'2. :
'"'t_E
t f"L 11{'1'
NEW
JOHN
GODFREY
,:OCERS
SAXE;
H. BACON
Q009l9:l3l
YORI(.
~12)
NEW
':(ORK
100'.;?l
472-MOO
THo!-{ .<,sA.
C1919li>5Z)
BoI.hN
co,.m:,;i:t.
RO'f
M.COHN
SCOTT
E. MANl.i?:Y
MlCHAEL
FIOS.E:N
DANIS:I.
J. ORISCOl.l..
HAROl.!:l
SCHWARTZ
.MELVYN RUBlN
,.H:.Fl'"Ri::Y A. SHUMAN
,.
LORIN
OUCKNAN
June
13r
.J.974
BY. HANO
HenryA. 'Bracthl,
Assistant
UoS. Attorney
Donna F. Goldstein,
Attorney-Civil
Rights
. .Division
. .
United
States . I)apartment::. of \Justice
Fede:ialBuilding
. Brook_lyn,
Dear Mr.,
.N~w York
Bract.bl:
:t am in receipt
of your letter.
datea. t:odc).y which was wa.:Lt-.
ing .for me at my off ice .upon ray retui:n f:coro the C"ohe'n v,
Cohen trial
this
afternoon.
ctt 5:00 ppm.
i'1e :stand .ready to let you begin inspect:i.n.g
o.na. copying
'.i'.'(:.C.m:cdr::
Miss .Goidstein
and
place
at my offices
f+I
f3rt
_.
we are re~dy
both
old and
I agreed
instend
_,
~ <....J, ~ ..
to provide
you with ove:c 1,000
files
Friday
on
current
ter:.an.
of ~t'rmnp. J.:ecaus2. '.i::r:urnp cc.1nnot.
-2-
function
at all with all of its current
leases
and files
out of
its off ices,
we will have to worJ:: out a schedule
whereby as soon
as you have completed
inspecti:,1,g and copying this very substanto
tial
amount of material
that this material
will be returned
the ~CrUJ.11p
office
and.additional
material
will
.be r5ent to ou.:i:
offices
for your inspectionG
With. regard
r;:o the depositions
o:c further
Tx:urnp pe:r.sonnel
ten.:.. .
. atively
scheduled
to begin
on J'l1ne 18, I. al:i:e.ady have advised,
the Government
that this date is .impossible
as both Mr .. Cohn
still
be on tr:Li:11.before Justice.Gomez
in the
and myself.will
Supreme Court of the State
of Ne,,v York in Cohen v. Cohen and _
Judge Gomez absolutely
refuses.to
haa:r.any
application
for
. even a half-day
adjournment
i11 that
case .... I will
supply
you
with alternate
dates.as
quickly as possible
and I am sure we
. can come to an ~greeable
solut:.ion
't1hich will
neitheJ:delay
.the matter
unnecessarily
for.y,n.,-norprejud::Lce
the.rights
of
the defendants
by denying thern the right
to counsel
:Ln these
proc<:e,di~gs.
. I would. respectfa:dly
s~1.9ge.st that
is complet.e.1~{
unfa:i..r on your part to set 'fo:r;th ul timatumr; . in the way of
3: 00 deadlines
to respond
or else in.. vievi of the f:act that
you are comple-~ely
aware of both Mr. Cohn. and myself
bei~1g
on trial.
before
Judge Gomez f1:om 9: 00 to 6 ~ 30 daily..
We
are completely
ready to coopera-te
in c1isco\rery;
all we :J:equire. is a lil::.tle time in which to assembl0
matter
in vie'il
. of. our extremely
hea,ry present
litigatior;.
Gchednle
.
A
'
Finally.,
I sincerely
wish that. at: least
fr-om th:i.s point
for-.
ward,
that we could attempt
t.o cooperate
botter
in a.11 of
these
matter.so.
If your goal ir3 to. expedite
discovery
e.nd to
prepare
for a fair triat
for both.sides
as is ours" I think
that.this
end would be better
serve.cl by coope:r.at:i.on and ob.servation
of the basic
courter:i-:1.es normally
extena.ed bet.ween .
. private
counsel
in litigaticn
instev.d of (!ontinu.EJJ. threats
.-b]- the Government
and its tre;:::ting
th0 rulf~s of oivil
pro-.
cedure
as some kind of undevir.:rU.i1.g Bible which cannot. bend
i::;:s timetables
fo:r even a few h.r,11:i::sto p:coii1ot.e the end.s .. (Jf:
. '.j us t;ice ;,
Ver:y tculy
SEB/a.p
cc:
Hong Ec1ward R. Ne"'he:c
unt:ed Stat8s
District
.Judge
United
States
Courthouse
225 CacL-n2:.n Plaza
B:::1st
Brooklyn,
..
Honorable
Vincent
Catoggio
United
States
Magistrate
United
.States
Cc.n:1.rl::lto U..'.'~e
Eastern
District
225 Cadman Plaza
of N2w YoTk
East
__yours,
J::J L ~
LJ
-,,,.:-
/,\I CJf
L;:.
11ffci~18tf!1E,,_:rD_
. . /V.y
AUG5
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK
D .
797
4
TIME
A.M
P.t.1..
..........
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
_________
on its
Defendants.
The United
States
of America,
own behalf
and on behalf
Goldstein,
to defendants'
judication
of contempt
desist
11
order
1.
against
conduct
representative
interviews
2.
improper
The United
including
alleges
and
as follows:
allegation
or by any other
Thomas Miranda,
alleges
with
the
Paul Ziselman,
witness
that
allegations
the testimony
said
or other
of this
That expedited
of prospective
of
and other
witnesses,
constitute
an
Court.
States
discovery
of misconduct
allegations
of threats
and consequently
WHEREFORE
the United
attorney;
an ad-
and a "cease
in connection
prospective
States
and scurrilous,
the allegations
seeking
case.
1.
Donna F.
States
R. Falcone,
to influence
are false
States,
denies
or any other
conduct,
devices
attorney
by Donna F. Goldstein
of Carol
in this
said
responding
attorney,
of Motion"
the United
of the United
Paula Ziselman,
person
''Notice
States
plaintiff,
of its
against
The United
of improper
prays
as follows:
by the United
States
to
and its
2.
That depositions
supervised
That a full
Honorable
defendants'
said
discovery
evidentiary
hearing
be
be held before
Notice
4.
gations
during
by a master;
3.
this
taken
of Motion;
That following
of misconduct
the evidentiary
by the United
as scandalous,
in accordance
the Federal
Rules of Civil
Procedure,
and desist
order
hearing,
States
be stricken
for in
the alle-
and its
attorney
be in all
of
for con-
respects
denied;
and
That following
5.
Court determine
cesses
and,
this
whether
evidentiary
there
hearing,this
Honorable
disciplinary
pro-
or
other
Order.
The United
relief
States
as the interests
the costs
further
prays
of justice
and disbursements
may require,
of this
~Js"~
Deputy
with
proceeding.
Respectfully
JAMES PORTER
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
together
submitted,
Assistant
Attorney
General
FRANKE. SCHWELB,Chief
NCRMAN
P. GOLDBERG,Attorney
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
)
CIVIL ACTION NO. 73 C 1529 (EN)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
)
v.
______________
Defendants.
In accordance
with
instructions
Catoggio,
United
America,
submits
action.
obligation
action
its
of defense
in accordance
States
the
Magistrate,
report
with
States
of
in this
made reference
as the Court
3614,
Vincent
to the
to expedite
and rebuked
defense
the
counsel
done so.
DELAYSAND DIFFICULTIES
Depositions
Prior
substantial
defense
United
of discovery
Catoggio
as well
42 U.S.C.
DISCOVERYIN PROCESS
A.
plaintiff,
on the status
counsel
of the Honorable
to the hearing
difficulties
counsel's
of May 3, 1974,
in taking
continuous
plaintiff
any depositions
cancellations
encountered
because
and rescheduling.
of
This
activity
resources
resulted
in a substantial
of counsel
for plaintiff,
plaintiff's
memorandum in support
dated
April
sition
were outstanding
plaintiff
agreed
year.
Abbreviated
were finally
Thereafter,
of its
plaintiff
until
in detail
for
notices
in
sanctions,
of depo-
hearing,
defendants
but
had answered
and incomplete
provided
motion
Several
these
propounded
as described
to postpone
the interrogatories
waste
answers
to these
interrogatories
to reschedule
depositions,
as
follows:
1.
for
the plaintiff,
Mr. Scott
noticing
replacing
Manley in order
depositions
to propose
2.
~/
Goldweber,
him that
telephoned
the plaintiff
1974.~/
dates
within
occasions
the next
These depositions
were noticed
- 2 -
to discuss
no alternative
to
with an oppor-
was
In deference
alternative
to advise
Ms. Elyse
a new attorney
few days.
telephoned
the contemplated
dates
on the two
occasions
he was reached,
On
and failed
on the third
that
the government
as noticed,
since
delivery
intended
to
no alternative
received
of defense
an inquiry
they conflicted
to suggest
cotmsel
inspection
by cotmsel
2, and that
dates
the following
periodically
described
for plaintiff,
of depositions
visited
below.
week.*/
the offices
dates
that
firm
no later
be later
week in July.
Ms. Goldstein
depositions
than July
these
alternative
of the records
dates
sent a special
letter
back in response
call.
to call
telephoned
from defense
cotmsel
firm dates
*!
that
by July
3,
he still
of depositions.
This letter
included a list of those employees scheduled to
depose who were no longer employed by the defendants.
This information, which plaintiff
had been attempting to secure for many
months, was to be given to the plaintiff
no later than May 13,
1974, at the direction
of Magistrate
Catoggio at the May 3
hearing.
- 3 -
however,
to call
back on July
8 with
recommended dates.
7.
matter,
thereafter.
defense
counsel
agents
On July
back on July
9, plaintiff
of the scheduling
were served
8.
On July
that
to be taken
on July
agents
on July
these
depositions
B.
Inspection
30-31 only,
since
at any other
plaintiff
that
!/
would have
schedule
could not
Yielding
The first
advised
to these
of eight
attempt
to take
Records
requested
forward
he knew nothing
served
and filed
of Doc\Dilents on defense
Elyse Goldweber
deponents.
for Production
telephonically
his
on
2, 1974.
depositions
time.
30 - August
scheduled
that
of eleven
the eleven
him to attend
time strictures,
notice
Mr. Goldberg
permit
served
of depositions
Subpoenas
8, or for
Manley,
that
counsel
an associate
plaintiff's
a Rule 34
former
of Mr. Cohn,
attorney
about
it.
Roy Cohn.~/
saying
See Appendix A.
- 4 -
Ms.
about
the scheduling
inspection,
stated
and requested
two occasions
or indicate
that
Management,
dance with
any objection
the records
him another
or date,
would be permitted
arrived
attorneys
the notice
present
expressed
Defendants
also
the United
at the offices
Brooklyn,
inspection.
surprise
- 5 -
to the
or any limitation
for
See Appendix B.
these
on what
to inspect.
at 10:00 a.m.
of records
repre-
inspection,
and employees
forward
site
the proposed
At no time during
to the records
any alternative
States
about
as noticed.
at the designated
the United
reminded
would travel
records
no objection
inspection.
conversations
available
Ms. Goldstein
Ms. Goldstein
of the plaintiff
inspection
records
he knew nothing
that
telephonically
1974, to inspect
suggest
that
of one of their
of depositions,
filed
the course
States
and
of Trump
New York,
in accor-
at their
arrival.
Mr. Stuart
Hyman, controller
Assistant
office.
attorneys,
The other
United States
Norman Goldberg
Goldstein,
law clerks
Phillips
minutes,
Mr. Hymanaskettthe
that
defendants'
that
and that
placed
a call
remained
approximately
remaining
that
he had not
until
and returned
to reach
banging on doors,
Ms. Goldstein
not present
then left
Attorney's
overreaching,
or other
office.
office
by defendants
- 6 -
was no
conduct
by
of representatives
Attorney's
Contrary
there
improper
Attorney's
to have
representatives
counsel.
to the allegations
He further
he contacted
Plaintiff's
ten
was scheduled.
any records
in
representatives
and stated
inspection
his office
a records
counsel
Ms. Goldstein
office.
into
his
and Donna
office,
After
into
Attorney's
Attorney,
placed
or their
to
counsel
of the plaintiff.
On June
telephoned
for
12, 1974,
Ms. Goldstein
the Eastern
expressed
his
him that
tion
to begin,
apply
to the
37(d)
of the Federal
tions
between
if
first
Request.
Attorney
time,
He claimed
that
Ms. Goldstein
either
informed
formally
or
a records
appropriate
of Civil
sanctions
Procedure.
on Friday,
June
at
to
Rule
some negotia-
to begin
14, 1974,
but
under
After
was authorized
inspec-
inspect-
the
law offices
counsel.
the morning
of June
them a letter
the offices
representatives
14, Mr. Fanelli,
Trump offices
with
five
to be allowed
and to totally
Letter
the
States
for
plaintiff
records
Mr. Manley
plaintiff
Rules
When plaintiff's
files
for
earlier.
defendants
once again
a.m.
of the United
counsel,
ing defendants'
of defense
objections
as noticed,
Court
office
to Plaintiff's
these
and that
the
11:30
objections
no objections
informally,
at
District
he had conrrnunicated
demanding
at approximately
Court.)
of June
14 denying
their
June
for
the veracity
13,
these
offices
to Mr. Manley,
their
banging
daily
business
1974,
of these
all
at
upon the
on the
through
on
handed
conduct
12, as "descending
plaintiff
- 7 -
at
characterized
to swarm haphazardly
disrupt
Counsel
a clerk
on June
stormtroopers
to this
arrived
doors
the Trump
routine."
(See
responded
rhetorical
and
by a brief
flourishes.
letter
From Thursday,
records
inspection,
exclusively
was then
2-1/2
June
counsel
with
On Tuesday
days of records
inspection,
records
the
following
day,
June
that
records
at
On June
a.m.,
plaintiff's
broken
Washington
result
19.
However,
of these
almost
18,
1974,
informed
counsel
for
Mr. Fanelli
after
for
inspection
did give
and Friday,
on
assurances
June
20 and
a.m.
the records
the automobile
lost
June
on Thursday
counsel
On June
of the
Mr. Fanelli
At 11:30
were inspected
21.
neither
as agreed.
that
communicated
20, however,
Records
June
10:00
the completion
afternoon,
would be available
21, beginning
until
plaintiff
since
available.
that
1974,
for
Mr. Fanelli
the plaintiff
10:00
13,
records
a.m.,
informed
the
on Thursday
afternoon,
19 and 20 alone,
plaintiff's
of their
June
records
until
for
had
2:00 p.m.- *I
two counsel
time
at
from
no purpose
as a
cancellations.
arrived
on Thursday afternoon,
the driver
of
the automobile,
Mr. Simon Wiss, recounted
to plaintiff's
counsel
the many errands
he had to run for Trump Management by auto that
morning, and extolled
the virtues
and dependability
of the automobile carrying
the records.
- 8 -
On Friday,
records
26,
could
1974.
not
back
26,
ing
days,
Not
only
27,
for
to
and
interruptions
1974,
28,
plaintiff
1974.
were
but
travel
not
occurred.
details.
to
We believe,
may be relatively
amount
of
the
While
it
is
less,
quite
of May 3.
defense
petty
out
of
harassment,
of
in
about
papers
that
are
foundation
with
view
this
while
counsel
seems
the
United
fact.
- 9 -
on
thirteen
over
saved
with
each
has
for
work-
seven
had
to
been
days.
these
foregoing
individually
to waste
United
States.
us harassment
none
Catoggids
repeated
effcrts
inspection,
States
the
item
the
Magistrate
records
the
in
of
Court
impact
it
keeping
defendants'
without
total
and money
Moreover,
counsel
the
D. C. and
*
the
that
of
a little
been
June
inspection
a period
have
belabor
records
for
additional
Wednesday,
to Washington,
during
could
that
until
the
available
however,
minor,
time
complete
money
reluctant
indicated
inspection
Thus,
made
Fanelli
returned
to
*
We are
Mr.
for
New York
records
time
21,
be available
Counsel
travelled
June
June
the
tried
to
a large
the
Jirections
to
deal
with
allegations
in
"by-pass"
counsel
'II.
Defendants'
Answers
Plaintiff's
pounded
more
on November,
than
Court
First
six
finally
slightly
more
than
1974{t~ut
tiff
still
As noted
goes
waiting
below,
to
the
While
a renewed
the
heart
Rule
this
answer
of
week
ten
for
That
(letter
weeks
since
defendants
objected
two Orders
that
to
Scott
that
promise
of
at
for
this
consisted
least
of
three
would
Manley
be forth-
of May 16,
was made,
complete
their
have
failed
defendants
to
defendants
responses
from
pro-
plain-
answers.
to
provide
case.
memorandum
37 motion
or
submission
to
were
Interrogatories,
In response
information
the
after
the
indicated
defendants
answered
1974,
two pages.*/
than
not
response.
following
more
is
to
defendants
by the
Interrogatories
to
and were
On May 16,
their
interrogatories,
coming
1973,
defendants
submitted
Plaintiff's
Interrogatories
months.
directing
to
is
not
dealing
*I
with
intended
to
be a substitute
the
deficiencies
of
for
defendants'
The unusual
brevity
and incompleteness
of these
responses
may
be explained,
in part,
by the fact
that
on May 15, 1974, one day
before
the interrogatories
were due, defendant
Donald Trump called
former
Departmental
attorney
Goldweber
and indicated
that he had
only recently
heard
about his obligation
to answer
the interrogatories
and wanted
to know if there
were any penalties
for filing
untimely
answers.
Ms. Goldweber
referred
Mr. Trump to his counsel.
~/
See Appendix C.
- 10 -
responses
'to
tion
file
to Interrogatories,
such a motion
and while
in the future,
of some of defendants'
Court's
we wish
we believe
responses
should
to reserve
that
our right
a brief
be brought
examina-
to the
attention.
(a)
Interrogatory
information
for
by defendants.
complex
The information
sought
of the
response,
defendants
force
received
Plaintiff
has no record
the other,
which
In eight
time
is purported
months,
racial
approximate
characterized
1972,
defendants
to their
occupancy
form,
the racial
and their
almost
superintendents
information
since
super-
two years
had the
and to
in at
The
con-
least
Donald Trump
- 11 -
of ever
to be a
merely
have surely
particularly
been
to write
provide
was furnished
as of October,
to
had in fact
to plaintiff
intendents
which
documents
document
a list
In
furnished
dated
tains
a racial
to two documents
owned or managed
includes
to have previously
to plaintiff.
of basic
of each building.
referred
One of those
furnished
having
tenant
claimed
plaintiff.
16 items
each apartment
breakdown
defendants
5, requests
ago.
in an affidavit
December 11,
made no attempt
to do so.
of this
this
kind
kind.
is,
ment Corporation,
tion
(E.D.
Pa.
(b)
Electric
In response
the
Answers.
locate
other
Develop-
Corp.,
1972).
such informa-
City
of Philadelphia
205 F. Supp.
to Interrogatory
race,
for
defendants
That
employees
Estate
of
831
1962).
of employment
Trump,
have
in cases
v. Real
superintendents.
States
have an obligation
v. Westinghouse
they
information
important
347 F. Supp.
from their
but
Statistical
of course,
See United
Defendants
1973,
them for
requested
title,
initial
job
attached
Exhibit,
of the
job
7, which
Exhibit
however,
of black
defendants
interview
location
and
employee
of
1 to their
contains
only
and Puerto
- facts
requests
the
last
Rican
insufficient
to
information
was provided.*/
~/
Plaintiff
has subsequently
secured some of this information
during
the inspection
of defendants'
records.
The identities
of former
employees,
of course,
constitute
critical
information.
See United
States
v. Youritan
Construction
Corp., 370 F. Supp. 643 (N.D. Calif.
1973), and cases there cited,
holding
that proof of discriminatory
instructions
to employees meets the Attorney
General's
burden of
proof.
- 12 -
about
racial
gatory
secured
apartments
ing to complain
tory
B.
Failure
furnish
about
certain
there
still
exist.
(Dep. p. 33).
these
records
may also
answer
those
applicants
records
requested
that
to rejected
with
and that
respect
p. 99),
so that
calling
if not
applicants.
to either
records
that
retaining
may
some of
the Interrogator-
defendants'
information
destroyed,
by their
- 13 -
On
on deposition,
stated
since
on
defendants
for
During the
served
some of these
interrogatories
was impaired,
to Defendants
policy
these
(Id.,
by defendants.
was no particular
were propounded
(Interroga-
Applications
relating
defendant
who
or threaten-
policies
Interrogatories
or destroying
ies
racial
Rejected
information
complaining
first
(Interro-
of tenants
been provided
plaintiff
11),
discrimination
after
to Produce
November 7, 1973,
(Interrogatory
identities
In Plaintiff's
that
tenants
capacity
to
as to rejected
own conduct.
'taking
of this
of assurance
including
deposition,
that
those
During
requests
for
provided
with
troller
there
his
clients
pertaining
the June
1974 records
all
relevant
applicants.
(Id.,
inspection
of rejected
destroying
stating
that
it
taxes
credulity
day that
these
the
applications
closely
testified
reviewed,
have not
28,
a year
their
of
between
to have
1974,
the
(Hyman Dep. p.
agents
rejected
was
supposed
- and June
through
repeated
Hyman, comp-
that
are
99-100).
the meaning
to suggest
defendants
pp.
plaintiff
"effective
Whatever
a measure
records,
and after
applications,
applications.*/
1974 - the
defendants,
provide
Hyman's memorandum,
cations
to rejected
of Trump Management,
March 28,
however,
would preserve
the production
were no rejected
stopped
a single
that
73)
appli-
applica-
tion.~/
Defendants
claim
that
Gilbert,
~/
there
office
See Appendix
for
seven
applications.
years,
Minerva
D.
~/
On July 3, 1974, we sent a letter
to Mr. Manley reiterating
our
concern that none of the rejected
applications
had been produced and
requesting
that the defendants
furnish
us with an explanation
for
the reproduction
of these documents prior
to this hearing
but no
explanation
has been forthcoming.
- 14 -
responsibility
for
approving
during
the depositions
recall
ever
having
Each of the
July
six
taken
rejected
tions
a single
superintendents*/
that
to bring
certain
deposits
in the
The six
documents
including
nrecords
custody
or control
with
produced
the others
no such records
Mr. Travis,
the past
five
described
first
hired
instructed
submitted
marked
that
years,
as having
also
been supplied
with
the
"refunded."
he has never
early
(Raymond Travis),
Apartments
*I
deposition
rejected,
- 15 -
for
which he
when he was
tesitfied
that
he was
when a deposit
A number of these
had an application
of
existed.
applicant
in his
them
of the deponent."
application.
While
directing
a book of receipts
to each
on
accepted
of the payment
records
Mr. Travis
a receipt
taken
whose deposi-
at Wedgewood Hall
produced
as superintendent.
to give
these
superintendent
they
subpoenas
were
superintendents
served
st3ting
tenancy.
had an application
were also
possession,
for
even though
application
testified
she cannot
whose depositions
stated
from anyone,
applications,
30 and 31 that
on July
rejected
30 and 31 likewise
applications
or rejecting
receipts
Mr. Travis
he later
Rohr,
is
are
stated
explained
Mr. Daniel
'that-"refunded"
signifies
Ms. Gilbert.
In Mr. Travis'
an apartment
complex
at
such
least
six
plaintiff's
of only
"refunded"
Accordingly,
but
that
receipt
book alone,
approximately
receipts
interrogatories
mation.
exist
applications
which
94 units,
since
is used
there
the date
is apparent
information
about
that
rejected
for
were
of service
it
by
such
of
infor-
applications
to plaintiff.
CONCLUSION
While
the hearing
stantial
some progress
before
with
their
a harassing
of this
case,
and disruptive
scurrilous
charges
counsel,*/
there
has been
of discovery
involves
while
nature.
assembled
defendants
other
by defendants
sufficient
to warrant
consideration
material
to
critical
has been of
from the
against
resistance
in sub-
in relation
conduct
Even aside
following
remain
responsibilities
to the disposition
conduct
Catoggio,
Magistrate
noncompliance
discovery.
false
and
one of plaintiff's
to the orderly
of a new motion
for
sanctions
after
present
discovery
proceedings
have been
completed.
Respectfully
JAJ.'1ESPORTER
Assistant
United States
Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
submitted,
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
I""
~.-I~~
DONNAF. GOL'fisTEIN
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
APPENDIXA
T. 5-6-74
IAY6
JSP:FES:ESG:c:mk
DJ 175-52-28
M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan and Manley
Roy
Action
Dear Roy:
Please
Request
find enclosed
for Production
two copies
of Plaintiff's
oi vocuments.
Sincerely,
J. ST,\11'1...EY
POTTINGER
Assistant
Attonley General
Civil Rights Division
I
l
I
cc:
..
Records
Chrono
Goldweber
Trial File
Rold
By:
ELYSE S., COILVEBER
Attorney
Housing Section
1974
I. -
APPENDIX B
.I
T. 5/28/74
.JSP:IXi:mlp
D.J.175-52 ..28
MAY2 81974
United
. Civil
10021
States
Action
v. Fred C. Trump.
No. 73 C 1529
et al
of May 28.
Request
for Production
of Docu1J'ents, i!t"h.etluled t.t) commence on
June 12 1 1,711. Also, lase note the accached
proposed
dcposit:.h:ms of the azents and
schedule
for continuing
acheduled.for
'!'!7...:.
..,K. :"t! for your cooperation
in t.hia matter.
look forward t:o hearing from you soon t:o confiTID the
attached discovery schedule.
Sincerely
J. S~~EY
~POT'tlNGER
By:
cc:
Records
/
Chrono
Ms. Goldstei
Trial.File
Henry Brachtl
DONNA
GOLDSTEIN
Attorney
Housing Section
APPENDIX
C
,,, :
.<:! .
...... ,.,,
f'.'
'
'
NEW
JOHN
GOOF"RCY
ROGERS
SAXE
H. BACON
yoru<.'NEW
L-.: .
(1909!9!:>ll
(212)
472
YORK
10021
'
fe\, ).,
' (ll
THOMASA. BOLAN
1400
(191919621
DOCKr.~~SDEL
ROY
M. COHlo
SCOTT
E. MANLEY
MICHAEL
(AOMl'!'1'0
ILLINO!S
AND INO!ANA)
ROSEN
OANIEL
MAY2:;, bt4
..J. ORISCOLL
HAROLO
May 16,
SCHWARTZ
MELVYN
RUBIN
..JEF"FREY
LORIN
- ' c:..
'
A. SHUMAN
DUCKM
AN
United States
Civil Action
of Justice
v. Fred C. Tru~p,
No. 73 C 1529
et
al.
yours,
SEM/ew
cc:
Scott
- E.
Manley
..
..
'
APPENDIX
D.
'
-----------
......
..
.
- - . . --.....
."""!
.,,.
.
~
.,
......
- - - ....-
-- --~,,--- ..._ -.
..._
:""'.
---'.--:
I
n,
I :
. j,
i:'
,..
.--.........
~ '
-----... .. ,
... -
. : ....
..
--- ~-.......
....-- "
.\
- -~-..-----
- ....-- .. - -::_
-.l-: .:..
l''
__
- ....
.,
- .... - . -~--
-. '
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify
the
following
that
I have on this
documents,
postage
date
mailed
prepaid,
copies
to:
10021
1.
2.
Supporting
3.
Order
4.
5.
Plaintiff's
6.
affidavits
to Show Cause
(proposed)
States
Interrogatories
to Deferrlants
to the Court
_,,
August ,S,
1974
Plaintiff
of
'
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR 'IJ!EIL E D
p.Jf>~,-~\';;:
t)f"?"I- ~E
,~
~t
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
AUG6 1974
T:M2.UL ....... , ....
P.r.t.............
_______________
Defendants.
The United
davit
having
applied
ing is scheduled
mine motions
attorneys
and it
States
before
involving
in this
further
which alleged
by one of the
misconduct
is denied;
discovery
is necessary
so that
this
that
the nature
justifies
judicial
with 42 U.S.C.
3614; and it
of the respective
supervision
parties'
of depositions
a hear-
expedited
in accordance
motion;
misconduct
that
that
appearing
pending
appearing
Court on August
alleged
action,
and it
Court by affi-
appearing
and appropriate,
determined
this
to this
further
allegations
relating
considered
to the
the pertinent
submissions,
NOW, THEREFORE,upon the affidavit
and for good and sufficient
reason,
IT IS HEREBYORDEREDthat
there
be,
Brooklyn,
in the chambers
New York,
soon thereafter
of this
on August ~,
as counsel
of FRANKE. SCHWELB
defendants
show cause,
if any
may be heard,
l ~ Oo f..M., or as
why
(1) defendants
should
answer plaintiff's
to the pending
service
interrogatories
motion within
thereof;
should
supervision
with
five
to
respect
days of
and
not be required
with
respect
not be conducted
to this
under
the
of the Court.
IT IS FURTHERORDEREDthat
service
upon counsel
for
defendants
than
() .. ,,
shall
~U.<l.+"
be done by
~ ~ no later
I 00 P. ~
'J
this
shall
constitute
service.
IT IS SO ORDEREDthis
S-i;t_
day of August,
1974.
~12.-~
United
States
District
Judge
'
.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK
)
)
)
)
)
v.
)
)
)
MEMORANDUM
OF THE UNITED STATES IN
SUPPORTOF THE ENTRYOF AN ORDER
TO SHOWCAUSE
)
)
)
_______________
Defendants.
On or about
seeking
July
26, 1974,
an adjudication
Department
including
order
that
Ms. Goldstein
influence
of contempt
of Justice
and desist"
attorney
against
among other
the testimony
defendants
States
to this
case,
a hearing
In five
threatened
witnesses
on this
allege
and sought
supported
Chief
Section,
Division,
Department
of Justice,
and every
allegation
of improper
conduct.
that
to
case.
on August
of Frank E. Schwelb,
affidavits
in this
matter
a response
of the Housing
of Motion
and a "cease
things,
has filed
a Notice
Donna F. Goldstein,
States.
of prospective
have requested
The United
assigned
counsel
filed
against
the United
of defense
has,
defendants
The
16, 1974.
by affidavits
Civil
Rights
denying
In preparation
each
of the
hearing
on August
depositions
against
16, 1974,
of several
Ms. Goldstein,
as well
have also
to determine
the pertinent
by plaintiff's
has applied
motion within
by an officer
discretion
against
one of its
counsel,
of mis-
the United
States
to
respect
days of service
to take
these
Rules
defendants
States
Donna F. Goldstein.
on August
and,
Procedure
vests
the
for responding
They seek
16, 1974.
the depositions
charges
of Civil
case,
the United
do so unless
not be super-
to shorten
on for hearing
and cannot
defendants
of the Court.
In this
accusations
about
with
five
should
of the Federal
to Interrogatories.
mation
Brief
and
Rule 33(b)
entitled
the
incident
not be required
matter
for
In addition,
interrogatories
Court with
on counsel
of any alleged
should
answer plaintiff's
A.
Donald Trump.
(1) defendants
vised
the
been served
attorneys.
to the pending
has noticed
as of defendant
details
for an Order
thereof;
States
of the affiants
interrogatories
conduct
the United
against
to bring
The United
States
the
is
of several
persons
and to otherwise
prepare
for
their
identities
- 2 -
are disclosed.
the hearing,
Defense
counsel
of the persons
had signed
order
for
fully
the hearing
brief
Should
thrust
counsel
have unduly
Plaintiff
contends,
which
statute
of plaintiff's
Miranda
that
the
requires.
counsel
at
least
--
the
that
if
3614.
Goldweber
occasions
testify
Magistrate
with
- 3 -
and
of
that
plaintiff's
are
42 U.S.C.
know-
be forthcoming.
of prospective
allegations
witnesses.
false
and have
of the case
The affidavits
of two
he should
he is aware.
testimony
consideration
Elyse
time,
by an Officer
is
In
interrogatories
cannot
motion
the
behavior
to advance
in a short
response
some
Ms. Goldstein's
entitled
expedited
from defendants
of which
however,
that
answered
only
pleading.
Plaintiff's
Be Supervised
influenced
defendants'
her.
of defendants'
of preventing
the
disclose
against
why an immediate
The Depositions
this Court.
effect
is
that
Goldstein's
and assure
is no reason
with
plaintiff
case
indicated
of attorney
submission
protected,
The basic
the
for
of the purported
there
B.
statements
are
ledge
are
to prepare
rights
affidavit
deponents
expressed
to the
Cattogio
discovery
fear
discriminatory
has found
the
procedures.
--
Thomas
of reprisal
practices
defendants
With the
unlawful
issue
herein
tactics
vis-a-vis
sworn testimony
be given
source.
Accordingly,
an officer
of this
1915; Fisher
Freeman,
Elec.
Cir.
witnesses,
without
Court.
61 F.R.D.
308 (S.D.
~-
denied
JAMES PORTER
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
it
is
side
that
or pressure
be conducted
Federal
Practice
447 (S.D.
Co.,
their
from any
before
28.02,
N.Y. 1973);
see also
has used
imperative
should
N.Y. 1965);
355 U.S.
either
interference
4 Moore's
Coop. v. Iowa-Illinois
1957),
whether
the depositions
v. Harris,
38 F.R.D.
being
First
p.
Shapiro
v.
Iowa Hydro
871 (1957).
SP.TilRNER
-Deputy Assistant
Attorney
General
FRANKE. SCHWELB,Chief
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG,Attorney
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
)
)
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529 (EN)
)
)
v.
)
)
PLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES
TO THE DEFENDANTS
_____________
)
Defendants.
To Counsel
for
the Defendants:
The following
pursuant
interrogatories
are addressed
in writing,
under oath,
Rules of Civil
by the Court.
The United
within
States
five
of service.
Please
state
known or believed
or any of their
information
officers,
with respect
by Donna Goldstein,
the United
2.
States
interrogatory,
by the defendants
to have any
engaged in
representative
to each person
please
identified
provide
to
of each person
misconduct
or by any other
in connection
With respect
to the preceding
information:
Esquire,
to the
be shortened
or employees
to any alleged
of
is applying
for defendants,
agents,
copies
the time to be
by counsel
Procedure
separately
and to serve
for plaintiff
to you
case.
in response
the following
of
of the alleged
by a representative
of the United
misconduct
States
alleged
by such person;
(b) The time and date upon which such misconduct
took place;
of all
persons
about
the incident;
(d) The means and date
tion
dants
was brought
or their
(e) A full
wrongful
the United
to the attention
counsel;
description
conduct
of the defen-
and
of the alleged
by the representative
of
States.
JAMES PORTER
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
FRANKE. SCHWELB,Chief
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG,Attorney
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
'i
:
!
;!
! '
i
'
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
AFFIDAVIT OF
PERSONAL SERVICE
Plaintiff,
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
. 11'r::-r,
I
(,
't""
,,,.,. ! "
u.S, 0 ;; 1\.1'-
- - - - - - - -x
STATE OF NEW YORK
AUG7 1974
ss. :
COUNTY OF KINGS
JOHN HUNTER, being
I am employed
Attorney
for
the
Eastern
On August
served
related
an Order
at
to
documents,
and Manley,
68th
6,
1974,
Street,
of
documents
with
Phyllis
of
at
dated
Order
and
Goldman,
a signed
receipt
United
Noon,
Saxe,
copies
of
5,
No. 24-4!502158
Qualified in Kings County
Commiuion Expires M.,rch 30, 19
7j
/'
1974,
Bacon,
and
Bolan
located
by leaving
said
a secretary
therefore.
JOHN HUNTER
EVELYNSOMMER
'Notny l'ublic, St ..t of New York
States
I personally
New York,
~~~=10
says:
New York.
cfizu (t;6"
Sworn to before
me this
6th day of August,
1974.
and
defendantsherein,
New York,
said
the
August
of
for
deposes
of
12:00
offices
attorneys
copy
receiving
Office
Show Cause
certified
and
the
sworn,
District
on the
Esgs.,
39 East
in
duly
in
related
said
office,
EASTERNDISTRICT OF
!\J
U.S. DLS
NEWYORK
AUG191974
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED C. TRUMP, ET AL.,
Defendants.
To:
TIME/UL ............
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
take notice
that
the United
United
of the present
of Trump Management,
time schedule
Inc.,
attached
States
Attorney,
will
Federal
be upon oral
Rules
of Civil
by law to administer
examination
Also,
of Civil
will
Procedure,
and former
agents
will
take
and employees
forth
East,
Procedure,
oaths
of America,
on the
examination
continue
pursuant
States
hereto
pursuant
before
and take
to Rule 30 of the
an officer
Documents designated
Floor,
These deposi-
testimony.
to Rule 30(b)(l)
Fifth
of
authorized
The oral
completed.
of the Federal
Rules
in Appendix B attached
hereto
are being
the taking
of this
DJ.ted this
subpoenaed
to be produced
deposition.
rt
I.('
of August,
by deponents
1974.
0
r
D0{7;'J;ii;;lotz4~
.-1
DAVIDG. TRAGER
United States Attorney
at
NORMANP.'GOLDBERG
Attorneys,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
APPENDIXA
1.
2.
3.
4.
Mr. Al Weber
Superintendent
Edgerton Hall
178-10 Wexford Terrace
Jamaica, New York
5.
..<\partments
6.
Mr. W. Volz
Superintendent
Winston Hall
178-60 Wexford Terrace
Jamaica, New York
7.
APPENDIXB
The documents~/
from the following
Inc.,
set
forth
agents
to be brought
and employees
subpoenaed
of Trump Management,
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Louis Sarnell
Al Weber
Henry Neher
W. Volz
John Raymond
1.
All completed
payment of deposits
leases,
applications
in the possession,
deposition:
and records
of
or control
of
custody
the deponent.
2.
All records,
of documentation
deponent
tact
the names,
of any prospective
sought
at an apartment
3.
deponent
suggested
apartments
tenant
or other
custody
or control
of the
and dates
of con-
addresses
or any individual
or made inquiry
building
which contain
custody
instructions,
or practices
or the processing
with respect
of applications
residing
forms or
or control
advice
forms
who has
concerning
correspondence,
in the possession,
policies
lists
to apply
All written
writings
waiting
in the possession,
which contain
applied,
other
cards,
or stated
of the
or
to the rental
of
at the defendants'
buildings.
~/ Documents previously
made available
to the government pursuant to the May 6, 1974, Request for Production
of Documents
need not be reproduced here.
...
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Donna Goldstein,
that
certify
I have served
to Take Depositions
by mailing
following
a copy,
an attorney
for plaintiff,
prepaid,
hereby
Notice
on the defendants
to their
attorney
address:
IS
ck:
day of August,
1974.
DONNAGOLDS~ N
Attorney,
Ho sing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
at the
~I;
\,,J
u. s.
IN THE UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT~QR THE
A.UG20 1974
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK
TU~::fd1,t..
?.!.L ............
.
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTFOR
PRODUCTION
OF DOCUMENTS
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
Plaintiff
Federal
hereby
Rules of Civil
and permit
records
plaintiff
listed
and described
requested
Vincent
that
A. Catoggio
the aforesaid
Norfolk,
Virginia
continue
at such other
records,
available
and that
until
be completed,
defendants
produce
deadline
shall
request.
set by
on August 8, 1974,
production
and
it
is
commence on
and that
to inspect
to Rule 34 of the
in Attachment
necessary
that
pursuant
Procedure,
to inspect
In accordance
Magistrate
requests,
the aforesaid
offices
production
such inspection
shall
of Trump Management,
the documents
Street,
documents
Inc.
and
and records
shall
remain
and copying
can reasonably
as
Inspection,
copying
and photographing
of an attorney
will
be performed
of the United
of Justice.
Respectfully
HENRYA. BRACHTL
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Eastern District
of N.Y.
225 Cadman Plaza
Brooklyn, New York
submitted,
DONNAF. GOLDSTEIN
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG
Attorneys,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
States
Attachment
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
AND RECORDS
SOUGHTTO BE PRODUCEDFOR
INSPECTION AND COPYING
The records
for the
following
and documents
apartment
by Trump Management,
listed
buildings
managed
Inc.:
1.
Norfolk,
Virginia
2.
Pembroke
Apartments,
Norfolk,
Virginia
3.
Norfolk,
Virginia
4.
Any other
apartment
buildings
owned and/or
in Norfolk,
Virginia.
A.
Tenant
files
containing
leases,
receipts
of payments,
relating
to the tenancy
of all
individuals
complex since
January
1, 1969.
apartment
B.
jected
All
correspondence
applications
for
C.
All waiting
containing
interest
lists
or other
or any other
tenancy
applications,
documents
residing
at the
since
January
1, 1969.
forms of documentation
who have expressed
at the apartment
complex since
an
January
1,
1969.
D.
All written
structions,
documents
persons,
instructions,
correspondence,
to agents
organizations,
and standards
memoranda of oral
or other
or employees
of said
or agencies
to be followed
written
records
defendant
concerning
by such persons
inor
or to other
the procedures
with
respect
to
the rental
of dwellings
and the
lings,
treatment
black
All
or papers,
Housing
correspondence,
formal
tenants
of dwellings
documents
of merit
persons,
of dwelsince
or informality
cancelled
All
records,
payroll
address,
race,
position
or other
since
G.
and other
employee
January
All
documents
and date
memoranda and
of the merit
reports,
of the
contracts,
which
racial
by the
such
or lack
formality
W-2 forms,
contain
of employment
employed
Fair
in
or any of them,
and irrespective
complaint.
to the
or alleging
irrespective
of the
checks
documents,
reflecting
allegation
documents
or nondiscrimination
by defendants
to be produced
and other
correspondence,
in housing
of the
F.
agreements
and informal,
discrimination
deposits
tenants
or to discrimination
including
papers,
since
black
prospective
prospective
or communications
Act,
rentals,
agents
including
1, 1969.
E.
time
to be accorded
including
January
to any person,
the name,
of any rental
defendants
at any
1, 1968.
receipt
books
or other
January
1, 1969,
which
contain
for
the rental
of apartments.
- 2 -
documents
records
maintained
of payment
of
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Norman P. Goldberg,
hereby
certify
that
I have served
Request
for Production
mailing
a copy,
following
an attorney
postage
to their
attorney
at the
address:
Roy M. Cohn, Esq.
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan and Manley
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
This
the
----
day of August,
by
1974.
CY\
--- ~ ~ ~~~
N~.
GOLDBERG)
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
FJ LED
!f,J Cl :::~s
orIICE
tc
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK
AUG201974
TIMEA.1\1...............................
.
v.
FRED C. TRUMP, et al.,
Defendants.
Plaintiff
Federal
hereby
Rules of Civil
P.M.................................
.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
requests,
pursuant
Procedure,
permit
plaintiff
listed
and described
in Attachment
In accordance
with
Magistrate
quested
to inspect
that
Vincent
that
records
and copying
by or under
Department
shall
A to this
the discovery
and
and records
request.
deadline
on August 8, 1974,
production
shall
set by
it
is re
commence on the
39 E. 68 Street,
remain
can reasonably
Inspection,
produce
defendants
A. Catoggio
the aforesaid
to Rule 34 of the
copying
the supervision
available
of
until
such inspection
be completed.
and photographing
of an attorney
will
be performed
of the United
States
of Justice.
Respectfully
HENRYA. BRACHTL
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Eastern District,
N.Y.
225 Cadman Plaza
Brooklyn, N.Y.
submitted,
DO~ F. GOLDSTEIN
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG
Attorneys,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
Attachment
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
ANDRECORDS
SOUGHTTO BE PRODUCED
FOR
INSPECTIONAND COPYING
1.
tenancy,
Current
leases,
defendants
tenant
or their
agents,
buildings
2.
records
Chelsea
b.
Nautilus
c.
Ocean Terrace
d.
Lincoln
since
applications
the tenant
of payments,
or their
tenants
for
and the
or any other
agents
which
at the following
Shore Apartments
books or other
of payment of deposits
maintained
situated
receipts
of present
a.
Receipt
between
by the defendants
to the tenancy
apartment
containing
correspondence
documents maintained
relate
files
January
of apartments,
area
listed
buildings
in Attachment
B.
;.;:;::.::--:- _;::::.;:.::-::c-:
=::\;\,...:.... -- ~"':'."'.:::-'., ~"X":.;';"."::i.1::t
;..nv;1ESS
NAf.TE OP .hl!JLDING
Brooklyn,
Paul
Ho:-; Cl
?C::
__.v
..J'1 i\V
'
e.nl;e
8700. ~-i
Brookl:rn,
Ne,.; York
Nnut:llus
Guido La:13.
Ray
Hall
405 testmin&ter
Road
Brooklyn,
~e~ York
Renee
Gardens
1,;estminster
Brooklyn,
!:ev:
3323 Nos~rand
Broo:{lyn,
Sea Isle
11-,
Towers
Shore
Fontainebleau
'I'r\:l 'l is
Corman
Ray Lar.12.ni
, 3315 Nostrand
Lincoln
Al Caudc.iJ.
. li .
Gene Hn.y.nond
Wedc;c~wood Hall
Laurence
Avenue
Yo::'k
Avenue
lJew Yor;c
Flnnegrin
----Frank
:3903 Nostrand
Avenue
Brooklyn,
'"' Yo2k
3280-3310
Brooklyn,
Nost:rand
Avenue
Jim Gardner
Ne;,1 York
Apts.
Victor
Apts.
Skender
Walter
Rohr
F.ohr
Besv.
Fici
Flatbush
Patio
#1
59)Flatbush
Brooklyn,
Flatbush
Patio
#2
Walter
Joe Heid
8SOJ-2Clt1J
i\ vt:ri'-At:~
John
Brooklyn,
Ne:w York
Park
Fiesta
1230 :i.vetr,.-:.::.:Y
Broo\clyn, Ne-;\ Yorl:
Hall
Ocean Ter:::,ace
La\,rence
JWUJ..
Nei: York
Tmvers
t ,'i venue
O,..,c:
uO.);;
fl.pts.
Avenue
Ne~ York
, John Ro'saC.o
S .
Brooklyn,
New '.:'ork
Sec.
Sec.
Pln:y.
l
2
29~0
3000
Occa~
Oeea.n
Giol"d.2.no
P&rk~ny,
Pur!ni:1y
ncaJ.
Bkln.,
N.Y. Joe
Bkln.,
N. Y. Joe
73
J.~
St ..
Zecher.
Zecher
..
Kil~CS
COUlTi'Y PEO~'?ri'l'IES
- F!,GS
---~----...-----------------------
2795 Shore
Par:c:~y,
Nine
Nixon
Cou1,t,
Nine
Mu:::--dock comt,
H. y.
13100",{lyn,
1
Broo:clyn,
~:e,
.. Yor/
.Brooklyn,
N. Y.
Bl'OOl{lyn_,
NeH York
49 Murdoc:< Ccurt,
3rool<lyn,
New York
67-;..~
~'
Avenue
l.J,
.Broo!dyn,
West S"creet,
:srool{lyn,
3::1ooklyn,
2612
2662
west St:ree; t,
Ne~ York
New York
Abe Ros('rbE
( Rental
New York
2681+ \Jest
Street,
2681 West
2nd
Street,
B::-ook1yn,
N. Y.
2661 1:est
2nd
St!'eet,
Brooklyn,
".T \r
..H -
2631 West
2nd
Street,
Brooklyn,
~Iev: Yorl-:::
\','est
2nd
Street,
Brooklyn,
N.Y.
2611
621
2612
Avenue
r,
L.,'
B::.-'oo!cl:,'n, !le"t-1York
Brockl)'n,
2632 West
2nd
Street,
New York
Br0oklyn,
N.'Y.
Brookl:,,'11,
N.Y.
Brooklyn,
-N. Y.
2682 West
BrookJl.yn,
NeY.
2nd
74
..
i,r~<::;~:. '
street,
'
..
l 1j
3..., I'l'- 1 7""
,_
..J
A..,_
\A.
'
11;"
' l)
i'ollo;:inr;
~l. ,\."c:1
tee
I
,. .,
<I..
."1t
the
;~dd:',.:3~;cn:
N.Y.
N. Y.
N.Y.
'
}~:..')O>:l:tn,
r1. ...
..:
Brco:l:/n,
N.Y.
z,:~J~.:~
Crop~.c::.'
I\:.;(}
~!056 Cropsey
;\ ve.
2058 cropEey
:'\ve.,
2061; Cropsey
/1ve.
2071.J. Cropsey
Ave.
l'.:)r'76
t:.v
Cropsey
Ave.,
13:...ootl:.'n,
11.Y.
2078
Ave.,
Brooklyn,
\!
Cropse~r
'
'
oo::l:.n,
, Brookl:;n,
'
.....
i.T
'
1;. y.
B1~00>:~.::n, ?<Cy.
Lou Sa1~nel1
* (Rental
Agent)
. . ...
V
'
8331-20th
P.venue,
Broo:-:lyn,
8841-20th
;..venue,
8851-20th
Avenue,
Broo!:lyn,
8361-20th
A v2rn.:;.e, Brockly:1,
1:e;,~ York
8869-20th
Avenue,
Broo!clyn,
Ne~: Yo:--i~
8871-20th
Avenue,
Brootdyn,
New YC!:'l-:
889J.-20th
J:.venue,
Brooklyn,
New York
2040-20th
Lane,
Brooklyn,
Nev;
2Qi;h-20th
Lane,
Brooklyn,
New Yor:<:
2049-20th
Lane,
Brooklyn,
New York
2050-20th
Lane,
Brooklyn,
New York
:: C \:
Yo1 l-:
!Jc,\ York
York
1483 Shore
Park,1ay, Brooklyn,
N. y
llt85 Shore
Pa:r!nmy, Brooklyn,
N. Y.
11+87 Shore
I.,ar1~,lay, Brooklyn,
N.Y.
Brooklyn,
N.Y.
Brooklyn,
N.Y.
11~93 Shore
Parkway,
Brooklyn,
N.Y.
Brooklyn,
r~ x
2070-20th
Lane,
2072-20th
Lane, Broolclyn,
20711-2oth Lane,
2076-20th
Brooklyn,
Brooklyn,
Lane, Brooklyn,
'15
New
York
Nc1,,1Yo:ck
Nev;
York
New York
, ;~ ?TJ.1: Tft L
.. __
,,,.
---- ---
'} .....
; ";" p
' . ~ - ~ ..' ._'
..i.. ,...
.t.,<J: t, C .
J:1:;~t:ic:-1,
i"lL' .I..
t '
!-. ::.~1.-~e
1~:
~~-~) .:'.
J; "'::~r)cl
.~.\~e.
.::-,c Dle1.
}..VP.
El
Di1:r
r:-:.::
,: Yo : ~c
F 1 u s n :: n ;~ ,
l~_1--;-2{)
:1!~~:1:~,;_r~C
t~\e.
Ja~r:c.~
:;~c:~, :~c
.:!.'0:"i~
j J1 - l. ) ;.'0 :: n ,.~ S ,.,".-..:,
I<('l.t1f.:>j
:nr, :~._\\' ~_:~C'I
1
(i 7 -
.Jtt!E~liCCt,
\.-01~;-::
:~ ::.-;
...
~'
}.:-ith.:
'
i ,.; ,
~..
: (_;~r.}
id..lshll"e
1f::2-
!-f;.;.ll
f C'Y':..l1\=~-
rac e
\e.: Yo.,,\.
.\.,?z
j'.)
.Jamai.:.:a,
:ilns ton
11'"{(~
-GJ
He,11
,-'(e~.~
r- ()
rd
l?.
W. VoJz
Te::,~~"!:~c
J:::"'..:r.tajcc:., ::.::.-.:~!or}~
. "-..,__:; \
,,.rs.'"
... "'""::"- ..
,;.
2:2 _,."r
~ ") 1~c.'.":;.,_;
I{i <; fJ!L(i :1(i, - >>~
~,:'l C ..~{
65 :: r~:;'" n !:',
I_::,:: t
:' ..
!.., :
'I
--
"'
,......, ,r
' .......
..t '
l"\~~(:~~r:~._,:-!UJ '::c
'.1 ... .
B~ r r.,'..
i.,
21;~~ ~':,;.1
.,' '
f..~ 1 :-:~ . ;! ~i ,
S1:e.
:~:~ ::tJ;.~J...
..)
Hall
'\
l ~ _,
...
~
:.
t.,1
..
. .. .
""/
NEW
JOHN
GODFREY
ROGERS
ROY
472
YORK
10021
THOMAS
-1400
(1919-1962)
E. MANLEY
MICHAEL
I EL
HAROLD
MELVYN
JEFFREY
LORIN
(212)
(1909-19531
NEW
A.
BOLAN
COUNSEL
M. COHN
SCOTT
DAN
SAXE
H. BACON
YORK,
(ADMITTED
ILLINOIS
AND INDIANA)
August
ROSEN
J.
20,
1974
Fl LED
DRISCOLL
IN ClEP.K'SOFFICE
SCHWARTZ
RUBIN
U. S. DISTRICI COURTE.D.N.Y.
A. SHUMAN
DUCKMAN
Judge
U.S.
v.
P.M.................................
.
Trump
- Civil
Rights
Case
Cattagio:
Following
the helpful
conference
with Your Honor,
and your direction
that
discovery
and depositions
be completed
by September
1, 1974, the Government
has done the following:
former
1.
Noticed
employees.
2.
of
seven
more
TIMEA.M.................................
.
for
depositions
production
of
of
employees
large
and
quantities
records.
3.
In plaintiff's
letter
of August
12, 1974, for
the first
time since
the filing
of the complaint
in the fall
of 1973, it has now attempted
to enlarge
it by indirection
to
all
units
operated
by the defendants
in Norfolk,
Virginia
and
surrounding
areas
- and demanding
production
of extensive
records
down south
from these
buildings
nowhae before
cited
in this
case - in the complaint
or in the answers
to interrogatories
and bill
of particulars
furnished
by the Government
at
the specific
order
of Judge Neaher,
who found the complaint
far too general,
and directed
specification
of locations,
dates,
details,
etc.
of the charges
of discrimination.
A ten page response
to Judge Neaher's
order
filed
by the Government on February
28, 1974, listing
said locations
and dates
in
detail
- at no point
mentioned
directly
or indirectly
any units
outside
the Eastern
District,
or specifically,
any units
in
Virginia.
To attempt
on the eve of conclusion
of discovery
Hon. Vincent
Page Two
Cattagio
in a priority
case to suddenly ring in locations
never before
alleged
despite
Judge Neahen's order seven months ago to name
locations,
is improper and unfair.
To expedite
this matter,
and even though plaintiff
has already
deposed 13 of our officers,
employees,
maintenance
men, etc. - and even though the new seven depositions
sought
include
those of former employees,
and those whose statements
could not legally
bind us - we are willing
to and hereby agree
to all seven depositions;
and to have them completed
before
September 1, 1974.
As to the records,
even though the new
demands happen to include
a series
of records
we already
produced and others which are not relevant
- again to expedite,
we hereby agree to the production
of all requested
records
also before September 1, 1974.
The only item with which we are completely
unwilling
to comply is the production
of records
and information
about
some units
in Virginia
and elsewhere
in the country outside
the Eastern
District,
for the grounds previously
stated.
To
document this in detail:
The complaint
was filed
October 15,
1973.
We moved to dismiss
or to make more definite
and certain
on the grounds it told us nothing.
On January
25, 1974, Judge
Heahen heard argument.
The minutes containing
his comments and
rulings
are attached
to this letter
as "A" for Your Honor's
convenience.
We particularly
refer
Your Honor to pages 25 28, wherein Judge Heahen indicates
that "location
of buildings"
must be specified
(p.27) and pointed
out the defendant's
difficulty in meeting these charges because of the number of units
involved
"in New York" (p. 28).
The Government's
furnishing
of
locations
and details
pursuant
to these directions
of Judge
Neahen came on February
28, 1974, and are also attached
to
this letter
(as "C") along with our demand {"B").
At no point
in the ten pages is a single
location
outside
the Eastern
District
mentioned
- and now, only days before conclusion
of discovery,
they seek for the first
time to ring in units
far away
from this District,
which would result
in considerable
delay
and prejudice
to the defendants
in this priority
case.
We agree to all seven new depositions,
and to produce
all requested
records
for all locations
set forth in the Government's
response
to Judge Neahen's
order.
We ask Your Honor to
exclude the attempt
to expand this case to never before cited
Hon.
Page
Vincent
Three
buildings
Cattagio
in
other
areas
of
the
country.
Respectfully
I
'1
l ,, / 1
11.//rv
1 \.j) , 'L;,!(._
,
'
!. -..
Roy M. Cohn
RMC:sb
cc:
Donna
Civil
Donald
Goldstein
Rights
Division
Trump
yours,
;3.:luifco
~hdcs :!(l.eparmentof Wusticc
ADDRESS
REPLY
TO
UXlTED
STATJ<:S ATI'ORNEY
IS'ITIALS
AXD
NUMDEU
UNITED
JDP:HAB:sm
File
No.
730959
STATES
EASTERN
DISTIUCT
FEDERAL
ATTORYEY
OP NEW
YORK
BUILDING
BROOKLYN,N.Y.11201
August
20,
IN CLU~CS UHICE
U.S. DISTl<lCICOllRl ED. r..:.Y.
iC SEP5 1974
Honorable
Vincent
A. Catoggio
Magistrate,
u. s. District
Court
Eastern
District
of New York
U. s. Courthouse
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
New York
11201
Re:
D/J
Dear
United
States
v.
Civil
Action
No.
Ref.:
JSP:DFG
175-52-28
Magistrate
FILED
197 4
JIMEA.M.................................
.
P.M.................................
.
Fred c. Trump,
73 C 1529
et
al.
Catoggio:
On August
13, 1974, the plaintiff
in the above styled
lawsuit
noticed
a Request
for Production
of Documents
under Rule
34 of the Federal
Rules of Civil
Procedure.
This records
inspection was to commence at apartment
buildings
owned by the defendants
in Norfolk,
Virginia,
on August
29th in accordance
with
the discovery
deadline
which you directed
at the August
8th meeting
in your office.
he intends
to comI have been informed
by Mr. Cohn that
municate
to you by letter
defendants'
objections
to any production
of documents
dealing
with apartments
outside
of New York City.
We believe
that
the complaint
and related
case law show that
plaintiff
is entitled
to such discovery.
Therefore,
it is respectfully
requested
that
a decision
on this
issue
not be made until
plaintiff
submits
a brief
supporting
its position.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
Very
truly
in
this
matter.
yours,
J. STANLEY POTTINGER
Assistant
Attorney
General
Civil
Rights
Division
By:/}~ f.~
DONNA F.
Attorney,
GOLDSTEIN
Housing
Section-/
~~
~ff.
q},acm'7/,
f!iJ,olwrv
gc~
3()
NEW
EAST
YORK,
6ffr"
NEW
STHEET
YORK
.
100 2 l
THO>fAS
JOHN
GODFREY
ROGERS
SAXE
H. SACON
ROY M. COHM
SCOTT
E, MANLEY
MICHAEL
DANIEL
A.
BOI.AN
COUNSEL
(1919196'?)
(ADMITTEO
ILUNOIS
ANO INOL~NA)
J, DRISCOLL
SCHWARTZ
MELVYN
RUBIN
LORIN
472-1400
ROSEN
HAROL.0
JEFFREY
(212.'i
11909195~)
,,/
A, SHUMAN
DUCKMAN
\
\
Hay
""
l~~~;::;:.-_:::::::
..
:L6 ,
Re:
United States
v. Fred C~ Trump, et
Civil Action No. 73 c 1529
al.
Enclosed please
find a copy of defendants'
answers to plaintiff's
interrogatories.
It is my understanding
from speaking with Miss Goldweber that you are
to work
taking her place on this case since she has left
in New York.
As you will
this
information
as soon
Very truly
SEM/ew
cc;
Hon. Vincent
United
States
Scr:,tt
Catoggio
Magistrate
Eastern
District
of 'New York
United States
Court..~ouse
225 Cadrnan Plaza East
Brooklyn,
N<2:w
York. 11201
yours,
E ~ Manley
same.
"
"'
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED C. TRUMP, et al.,
Defendants.
The United
undersigned
First
States
attorney
Interrogatories.
all
some additional
investigation
by defendants
be further
its
states
herein,
while
available
based on records
recently
as expeditiously
supplemented
by its
Answers to Defendants'
that,
presently
and on information
Answers will
plaintiff
supplements
information
PIAINTIFF'S SUPPLEMENTAL
ANSWERSTO DEFENDANTS'
INTERROGATORIES
Plaintiff
Answers include
,,. 1974
of America,
hereby
these
to it,
made available
furnished
by the
as possible.
The
and assembled.
Supplemental Answers to
Interrogatories
1 and 2
The following
fendants
through
unavailable
their
on account
1.
agents
(a)
outside
with
Virginia,
the following
that
de-
constitutes
ways:
evidence
in by the defendants
of
in their
evidence
in the following
engaged
Head of Tidewater
Norfolk,
or employees
information
policy
of buildings
constitutes
of race
The following
a discriminatory
operation
information
W. James (white)
provided
account:
a Departmental
representative
,,.
In or about July
Jones
(black)
denied
informed
an apartment
Norfolk.
In early
James that
to the complex.
went into
alone
manager,
the office
that
no apartments
and indicated
that
an apartment
on August 3, 1971.
could
submit
might become
Morgan indicated
if
immediately
ment.
Morgan stated
in about
the apartment
question
about
Morgan stated
residing
(b)
that
immediately.
there
an apart-
they could
composition
was one black
the
would be
In response
the racial
that
renting
an apartment
that
she so chose.
went into
office
available
an apartment
were available
an application
the
Morgan stated
Jones
Mrs. Jones
available
in
rent
to a
of the complex,
officer
in the complex.
In June 1973, Mr. Richard
furnished
the Norfolk
office
following
information
of alleged
- 2 -
Foard
(black)
,.
Foard,
Station
in Norfolk,
stated
that
in mid June,
1973,
in Norfolk
apply
Foard stated
for a two-bedroom
that
he decided
to apply
at that
in July
time.
about
that
office,
at that
crimination
for a reasonable
told
that
tests
conducted
at various
summarize all
indicate
so that
plaintiff
buildings
In the interest
of the "tests"
he would
with
by the League to
at the respective
were conducted.
an application
practice
is practiced
from
he had just
several
the racial
by defendants.
draw their
learning
information
the tests
after
male,
have to return
determine
there
at Ocean Air
At the rental
to return
2.
a white
an apartment
price.
apartment.
to
that
operated
racial
buildings
disat which
of fairness,
interested
parties
we
may
own conclusions.
(a)
Belcrest
Hall
166-05 Highland
Jamaica
Ms. Stephanie
Hall
Bush, a black
employee of
about renting
Mr. H. Neher,
- 3 -
on July
a one-bedroom
the superintendent,
advised
Bush that
a one-bedroom
rented
Neher suggested
Kraham Realty
Co.~/
that
at
until
Bush contact
her
an apartment.
Ms. Susan Bernstein,
of the Urban League,
at the Belcrest
ment,
told
$250.00,
available
(b)
that
for an apartment
rented
the apartment
on September
Bush left
the apartment
and that
employee
time after
Bernstein,
for
would be
1.
Saxony Hall
87-15 165 Street
Queens, New York
On July
Hall
applied
a short
the building.
a white
to inquire
ment.
renting
about renting
a one-bedroom
Kurt Marscheider
apartabout
by him that
~/ Kraham
brought by
difference
"steering"
- 4 -
subject of a complaint
on Human Rights alleging
based on race, and the
areas based on race.
Ms. Bernstein
short
time after
Bush left
apartment.
shown a one-bedroom
business
the building
about renting
Bernstein
apartment,
was
given
to call
back in
would
would be available.
bedroom apartment.
woman who stated
The woman advised
vacancies
about renting
Bush spoke with
a onea
there
were no
for
six months.
Ms. Bernstein
time after
Bush left
the building.
spoke with
the superintendent,
only a studio
other
first.
she was
by her that
a one-bedroom
tenant
of that
She stated,
in her building
however,
that
would have to
- 5 -
available.
as soon as the
deceased
"empties"
be filled
that
would be available
that
was immediately
Bernstein
of the recently
apartment
Bernstein
apartment
a short
because
the
there
building,
that
were being
the apartment
handled
rented
(d)
rentals
by another
in her
Trump agent
across
the street,
could be
expensive
price.
Edgerton Hall
178-10 Wexford Terrace
Queens, New York
On July
Edgerton
Hall
one-bedroom
to inquire
apartment
about renting
that
that
the superintendent
there
so that
she could
check on vacancies.
morning,
at about
day advised
superintendent
was out.
9:30 a.m.,
at about
her that
Bush
her that
bedroom apartment
not be available
2:30 p.m.,
The superintendent
and that
- 6 -
at which time
rented
another
the middle
stated
that
The superintendent
he had just
until
the
Bush returned
The
the preceding
afternoon
were no
periodically
returned
was advertised
Bush spoke to a
and that
of the superintendent
following
that
a oneone would
of August.
he had a vacant
...
two-bedroom
apartment.
went to Edgerton
apartment.
following
there
Bernstein
and a four-room
the
available.
apartment
her that
one-bedroom
returned
identified
Weber advised
studio,
was a vacant
day at about
her
Ms. Bernstein
superintendent
(e)
the superintendent
Hall
that
the apartment
would be
Winston Hall
178-60 Wexford Terrace
Queens, New York
On July
Winston Hall
bedroom apartment
that
July
about renting
- 7 -
her that
vacancies.
a one-
there
on
were
Ms. Bernstein
short
time after
about renting
a one-bedroom
that
himself
he had just
an available
to a
apartment
at $195-200
then showed
to her.
The Highlander
164-20 Highland Avenue
Queens, New York
On July
Highlander
bedroom apartment
about
that
a studio
renting
for a studio
was told
available
that
At the building,
man who told
apartment
or one-bedroom
and that
and asked
apartment.
January
or February.
- 8 -
her that
was vacant.
were no vacancies
a one-
until
showing
a studio
available
apartment
as the superintendent
The superintendent
the studio
(f)
apartment.
apartment
that
innnediately
to inquire
completed
one-bedroom
She
was
there
or one-bedroom
to become available
..
,-
Ms. Bernstein
shortly
after
Bernstein
was told
that
there
apartment
available
Bernstein
was told
at the present
occur
(g)
and
time,
there
were no vacancies
but that
vacancies
usually
in September.
Sussex Hall
166-05 Highland Avenue
Queens, New York
On July
Hall
the building.
to inquire
apartment.
about
renting
Mr. Pajumae,
who advised
3-room apartment
Pajumae advised
application
a one-bedroom
the superintendent,
her that
was available
Bush that
and that
only a junior
she could
fill
out an
her application
in about
had been
approved.
Ms. Bernstein
after
to rent
a one-bedroom
advised
her that
shortly
the building.
Bush asked
apartment
a one-bedroom
- 9 -
was available
at
....
(h)
Coronet Hall
172-70 Highland Avenue
Queens, New York
On July
the Coronet
bedroom apartment
about renting
that
renting
who advised
was presently
vacant
a one-
her that
and that
a studio
a one-bedroom
on August 1.
Ms. Bernstein
after
Bush left
advised
vacant
that
a studio
and that
Bernstein
apartment
a one-bedroom
shortly
was
was presently
would be available
shortly.
(i)
Wexford Hall
86-75 Midland Parkway
Queens, New York
On July
Hall
to inquire
ment that
was advertised
about renting
a one-bedroom
the superintendent
he had available
for rent
who advised
a 3-room
apartment
apartment
- 10 -
apart-
Both apartments
Ms. Bernstein
time after
Bush left
intendent
rent
advised
the building.
her that
a 3-room apartment
he had available
for
Wilshire Hall
182-30 Wexford Terrace
Queens, New York
12, 1974, after
a non-rental
against
non-white
(who takes
rental
absence)
agent's
Consalro,
the possibility
the rental
in the newspaper
already
rented
that
or
by the
agent,
in the
to discuss
a one-bedroom
advised
apartment
Bush
available
explained
is
Consalro
dis-
applicants
Mr. Consalro
the apartment
with
that
applications
of renting
at the Wilshire.
$295.00.
dealing
at the Wilshire
superintendent
Mr. Joseph
first
crimination
that
The super-
On July
that
a short
for
indicated
been rented.
- 11 -
floor
but
advertised
and had
Ms. Bernstein
on
July
about
renting
advised
a one-bedroom
her that
available
for
apartment.
Consalro
he had a one-bedroom
apartment
to inquire
about
advertised
a non-rental
a one-bedroom
but that
the superintendent
non-rental
her that
the superintendent
employee
told
her that
on August
Bush that
there
have to return
agent,
was a vacancy,
- 12 -
This
to blacks
Bush returned
as Ann.
Mr. Graham.
day
is practiced
day between
that
out.
misrepresentations
on another
there
discrimination
2, 1974 at about
was
was
later
was still
are available.
to a woman identified
her that
Bush returned
that
were vacancies,
that
apartment
she would
the hours
the
of
On August
departed
2, 1974,
shortly
that
there
but that
apartment.
was a vacant
the hours
to speak with
after
He advised
Gilbert,
that
wanted
applications
this
father,
employee
of defendants,
1973 at the
all-white
the previous
building,
superintendent.
including
Minerva
of the applicants
whose
to the central
was provided.
that
he should
instead
that
a sham lease
applicants.
after
of another
have told
One black
that
his
- 13 -
he overheard
building,
a black
applicant
father,
his
while
no apartment
was demonstrated
and that
of forwarding
was admitted
told
lease,
office,
On one occasion
the superintendent
black
of a vacancy
Mr. Graham.
agent,
a virtually
were no vacancies,
superintendent,
on another
staff,
tell
application.
apartment,
unknown,
there
one-bedroom
a former
then
of his
information
identity
her
were submitted
Mrs. Gilbert
that
in late
Apartments,
the death
of 10:00 a.m.
Connan,
was superintendent
Westminster
in
the renting
Mr. Peter
3.
went to
a woman residing
day between
Ms. Bush
Ms. Bernstein
after
by the offer
only
was available
the actual
existence
of an apartment
..>
to the black
at least
applicant's
three
but defendants
4.
white
applications
of blacks
to them.
The defendants
made false,
friend.
misleading
have,
The affidavits
with
their
filed
The affidavits
with
the spurious
Statements
nonexistence
(d)
attack
in connection
on the
consciousness
S.
tactics
tenants
their
to adduce
of guilt
On August
during
evidence
subleasee
was black.
as Attachment
thereon.
of the
on the part
foregoing
a letter
their
to show
of defendant's.
Laitman,
vacated
to the
wrote
the right
discovery
outlined
report
and guilt
at 3901 Nostrand
apartment,
and
of records.
in plaintiff's
proposes
integrity
to the supposed
Plaintiff
in
thereto;
for plaintiff;
relating
Disruptive
Court
including:
as outlined
filed
proceeding,
in connection
memorandum response
(b)
(c)
this
statements,
counterclaim;
plaintiff's
throughout
and reckless
(a)
Connan submitted
apartment
A copy of this
that
because
letter
hereto
A.
I
k~~ (.,eL;t~-,._/
-14-
Donna Go~in
AttorJIBY
Department of Justice
Washington,
D.C.
_,
AFFIDAVIT
CITY OF WASHINGTON
)
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA )
ss
I, Donna Goldstein,
1.
I am an attorney
Division,
United
counsel
Civil
for
sworn,
in the Housing
Department
in United
I am informed
are
knowledge
duly
deoose
Section,
of Justice,
States
and say:
Civil
of the
Supplementary
true
and correct
facts
of this
Answers
to the best
case.
The fore-
to Defendants'
and belief.
My Commission expires:j1
(),~
7 'L,0Ld._,, :/
{/.
Interro-
of my information,
Attorney,
ousing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
Subscribed
lj
this
Rights
No. 73 C 1529.
Plaintiff's
gatories
States
plaintiff
Action
2.
going
being
,:J~If 7 7
..
-"
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby
certify
of the foregoing
Defendants'
mail,
postage
that
Plaintiff's
Interrogatories
prepaid,
1974, copies
on September S,
Supplementary
were placed
addressed
Answers to
in the United
to counsel
States
11
~~d,h,,,:,,;
DONNAGO~jfmN
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C.
20530
,:,;
l''
ATTACHMENT
A
' ..
, ,
\_,.,
F I L E D
EASTERNDISTRICT OF
IN CJ}!('S orm:E
U.S. DISTRICTCOU:{i LD. ~J.Y
NEWYORK
UNITED STATESOF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
.kt
'i
&it
I1l:.~r:
11
V'.
______________
Defendants.
SIRS
PLEASE TAKENOTICE that
America,
will
R. Neaher,
move this
District
Court,
forenoon
can be heard,
Brooklyn,
of October,
of that
before
United
States
the matters
on July
that
contained
by fact
in the
as counsel
grounds
Edward
Courthouse,
filed
of
States
the Honorable
plaintiff,
defendants'
are unsupported
'
The grounds
with particularity
in the attached
further
prays
deems just
for this
Application
in plaintiff's
affidavit
are set
supporting
memorandum and
of Frank E. Schwelb.
further
relief
forth
Plaintiff
that
this
Court
and proper.
Respectfully
f~
JAMES PORTER, Chief
HENRYA. BRACHTL,Attorney
United States Attorney's
Office for the Eastern
District
Civil Division
submitted,
Cs~
FRANKE. SCHWELB,Chief
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG,Attorney
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. c.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED c. TRUMP, ET AL.,
Defendants.
)
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA }
AFFIDAVIT
WASHINGTON
ss
FRANKE. SCHWELB,being
1.
I am the Chief
Rights
Division,
charge
of the above-styled
I make this
an early
hearing
against
motion
abuse
of its
this
Court
denying
and says:
of the Civil
in supervisory
of the United
of our request
motion
for
affidavits
Court
Section
on behalf
in support
an Order be entered
and supporting
2.
litigation
affidavit
States
deposes
of Justice,and
be had on defendants'
the United
a hearing
sworn,
of the Housing
Department
States.
duly
said
motion,
be stricken,
sanctions
that
after
that
the
and that
as may be appropriate
that
for
the
any
processes.
On or about
a Notice
one of plaintiff's
July
2~ 1974, defendants
of Motion praying
counsel
in this
that
action,
filed
with
Donna Goldstein,
be adjudged
in
contempt
of this
against
Court
prospective
be ordered
conduct.
to cease
former
Ziselman.
defense
R. Falcone
Also attached
of events
present,
the United
and by the
employees,
to the motion
the best
supported
signed
Paul
but un-
and Paula
is an affidavit
to describe
of my knowledge,
by
in which he purports
at which,to
States
unlawful
of two former
counsel,
and threats
and desist
of defendants,
sworn statements
coercion
and that
of Carol
employees
alleged
witnesses,
The Notice
the affidavits
for
by
a number
he was not
by him.
3.
On or about
response,together
allegation
expedited
5, 1974, plaintiff
affidavits,
denying
and requesting
filed
discovery
on the motion.
On August
8, 1974,
this
be conducted
defendants'
Magistrate
discovery
directed
that
in preparation
charges.
Catoggio
Court
This
supervise
Court
the
for
also
taking
a hearing
directed
of certain
depositions.
5.
direction,
for
hearing
discovery
to resolve
that
with
of misconduct
and an early
4.
August
On August
counsel
the purpose
depositions.
8, 1974,
in accordance
met -informally
of scheduling
At that
the
meeting,
with
taking
defense
- 2 -
with
Magistrate
the Court's
Catoggio
of the proposed
counsel
withdrew
his
request
for a hearing
Ms. Goldstein
As a result
of this
remain on file,
counsel's
affidavits
is accused
action,
in which,
to being
Subsequently,
plaintiff
against
revived
conduct.
Ms. Goldstein
caprice.
6.
depositions
noticed
nature
and my conviction
that
of her principal
to plaintiff,
defense
for deposition
on August 26,
since
more routine
for that
assigned
to this
case.
of
of the charges
Without notice
7.
the taking
against
false,
accusers
counsel
Ms. Goldstein,
I had planned
personally.
produced
Mr. Miranda
depositions
As a result,
my presence.
the deposition
I did take
of Mr. Miranda
the deposition
of
I am satisfied
that
set
forth
and that
regard
I have full
against
of Ms. Goldstein
conduct
case.
memorandum,
Ms. Goldstein
at least,
with reckless
were readily
available
confidence
professionalism
in this
in our attached
the allegations
false,
defense
among other
of unprofessional
the charges
subject
to withdraw
- 3 -
disto
in the integrity
are
and
of her
8.
I believe
declining
that
to withdraw
hanging
defense
these
charges
that
to carry
head,
case.
withdrawn,
on the evidence.
necessarily
as a possible
permanent
In addition,
I
can only
responsibilities
Accordingly,
the charges
in connection
should
either
be
or evaluated
by this
Court based
on this
matter
be unpleasant
my
it
is preferable
to be false
them unfairly
with prejudice,
in
with this
action
leaves
reputation.
the continued
counsel's
to warrant
any challenge
to the prospect
and scurrilous
since
of allowing
would
she has in
to her integrity,
charges
I believe
career
indefinitely.
9.
that
For reasons
defendants
set
forth
tactics
a strong
against
of the case.
order
to facilitate
trial,
we request
Ms. Goldstein's
that
this
matter
adverse
case
inference
Accordingly,
and in
participation
in the
be scheduled
for hearing
- 4 -
in this
relief
10.
No previous
here
requested.
application
FRANKE. SCHWELB
6;/<L
#~~~_,
,~~
=
to before me this
day of September,
;2tJ
1974.
the
FI LE)
IN CLERK'SOFFICE
--~~-~--~---~------------~-----------x
U.S. DISTRICTCOURTE.D.N.Y
SIP 241974
. .
' "I:
'
....-._ . . ~
_
...
~
PJ,L ....
AMERICA,
Civil
Plaintiff,
~against-
.
.pefenq.anti;.
DAVID G. TRAGER
, Attorney
\.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED C. TRUMP, et al.,
Defendants.
On July
seeking
Goldstein,
a Department
and a "cease
In affidavits
that
filed
of defense
have threatened
improper
of this
spection
counsel
accused
together
order
their
against
against
to this
the United
including
was alleged
themselves
by three
of improper
trial
of the United
in an unprofessional
to conduct
of the defendants.
to
by other
in the forthcoming
representatives
of attempting
liti-
States.
and other
allegation
Donna F.
of Motion,
testimony
of conducting
Court a ''Notice
assigned
Notice
witnesses
with affidavits
this
in the process
at the offices
a response,
attorney
with Defendant's
Ms. Goldstein
also
manner while
denying
and desist"
with
of contempt
of Justice
prospective
case.
filed
an adjudication
means to influence
States~
MEMORANDUM
OF UNITED STATES IN
SUPPORTOF ITS APPLICATIONTO
DENYDEFENDANTS'MOTIONFOR
CONTEMPT
WITH PREJUDICE2 FOR AN
EARLYHEARING
2 ANDTO STRIKE
of Motion"
gation,
a records
The United
States
of plaintiff's
conduct
as false
infiled
counsel,
and
scurrilous
and requested
on the issue.
request
On August
for expedited
directed
that
scheduled
expedited
8, 1974, this
discovery
Magistrate
Catoggio
withdrew
to the hearing
the proposed
their
refused
allegations
with
hearing
plaintiff's
this
issue
the taking
plaintiff
and
of the
the underlying
that
which will
with prejudice.
pleadings
and leave
until
burdens
which contain
lie
dormant
contained
therein
interfere,
but
the
on Ms. Goldstein's
depositions
that
in the file,
this
- 2 -
continue
to
at any time at
or withdrawal
practically
preparation
at the forthcoming
discovery
charges,
also
with plaintiff's
and effectively
of
defendants
removed by adjudication
The accusations
impose unwarranted
taken
pleadings,
there
as psychologically,
meeting,
on the contempt
the charges
caprice,
remain
by Ms. Goldstein.
8, 1974, Magistrate
At that
for a hearing
of misconduct
believes
on August
accusers
supervise
discovery.
request
to withdraw
cordingly
Court granted
in connection
Catoggio
scheduling
fully
and an early
depositions.
Subsequent
defense
discovery
trial.
to participate
Plaintiff
of Ms. Goldstein's
Court
as well
schedule
has acprincipal
a hearing
on the
merits
of defendants'
deny defendants'
this
matter
motions
be resolved
is established,
misconduct
are false
fendants
on the merits
case,
it will
then that
be,
that
asks that
fact
of
and malicious
is admissible
against
of defendants'
presented,
If it
the allegations
with reckless
as an indication
if truthfully
Plaintiff
hearing
of the truth,
their
promptly,
as we believe
disregard
that
of that
is weak.
de-
consciousness
See .pp. 17-18, infra.
DISCUSSION
I.
THE FACTS
A.
conduct
Ms. Goldstein
allegations
of un-
*I
or
of defendants.
Two other persons, Mr. & Mrs. Paul Ziselman, submitted affidavits,
but neither of the affidavits
in our opinion contained
allegations
of unprofessional
misconduct against Ms. Goldstein.
We do wish, however, to preserve our right to call them to testify
at any hearing on this matter if we believe that such action is
necessary to resolve this controversy.
- 3 -
They allege
in separate
affidavits
and harassed
them in an effort
their
employer,
former
been subjected
that
truth
on deposition,
in the record,
counsel
seriously
saw fit
counsel
never
met,
or her until
inflammatory
charges
any inquiry
into their
truth
Ms. Carol
Falcone
(1)
In her affidavit
Ms. Goldstein
the testimony
combined with
other
of July
While
attesting
on depositions
communicated
another
is,
attorney
at least,
conduct
with him
of such
without
unusual.
in unprofessional
to the
by Mr. Miranda
The filing
against
or falsity
at fault.
testified
depositions.
evidence
allegations.
Ms. Goldstein
or otherwise
by counsel
had engaged
their
own affidavit
witnesses
spoke,
has yet
by plaintiff,
made against
each of these
against
While neither
threatened
them to testify
discredits
to file
of the allegations
to induce
to cross-examination
Ms. Goldstein
already
that
charged
that
in a number of
- 4 -
significant
Falcone
that
ways.
withdrew
or substantially
the "softened"
a full
In the deposition
of Ms. Falcone's
and adversary
cross-examination
deposition),
a comparison
is instructive
preliminary
at this
1.
accused
Deposition
never
in fact,
jail.
that
Ms. Goldstein
~at
the penalty
Ms. Falcone
directly
harassed
I would
threaten
construed
this
*I
jail."
testified
accused
and
in-
that
Ms. Falcone
for perjury
avoided
that
her of
to have
did testify
she knew
in the
on
- Ms. Falcone
the hearing
and deposition!/
and withholding
for perjury
and while
testimony.
- ''Ms. Goldstein
Ms. Goldstein
must await
to enable
me of lying
be held
While even
(which we carefully
of Ms. Falcone's
formation
lying
charges
of her affidavit
Affidavit
be shown to be false,
juncture
appraisal
however, Ms.
at Ms. Goldstein.
will
airing
followed,
modified
leveled
accusations
that
context
of perjury
and a threat
Ms. Goldstein
perjury
will
Ms. Falcone
the penalties
filing
testify
that
with
of
interview
had mentioned
that
Ms. Goldstein
imprisonment,
threatened
will
reckless
of the truth.
legitimately
-"[Ms.
Goldstein]
accused
Ms. Goldstein
its
purchase
- Ms. Falcone
never
and stated
that
was illegally
the fact
accused
acknowledged
remarked
that
that
her of obtaining
in an illegal
Ms. Goldstein
manner.
during
Ms. Falcone
funds
She stated
the interview
Ms. Falcone
else,
that
having
obtained
illegally
me of not
it was not."
Deposition
about
the
Affidavit
that
the subject
disregard
2.
testified
of an affidavit
Ms. Falcone
that
to jail.
mentioned.
also
ended amicably.
to be sent
testify
was never
as an accusation
- 6 -
inferred
earned
from this,
charged
with
her business.
3.
Affidavit
Goldstein,
of the Justice
Department
and~
employer,
referred
later
Rights
Division
another
attorney
former
by a Ms. Donna
Rights
suit
Trump Management."
in the affidavit
on
of business
against
my
She also
to her interrogators
in the plural.
Deposition
- Ms. Falcone
Ms. Goldstein
and that
Falcone
interviewed
no other
attorney
of arranging
an interview.
The foregoing
description
is not intended
the matter.
given
We believe,
against
establish
are true
Ms. Goldstein.
that
had called
basis
that
for
At the hearing
the entire
on two separate
or necessarily
and that
attorney
however,
on the insubstantial
the suit
Ms.
under oath*/
to be exhaustive
only
was present.
another
days beforehand
testimony,
that
her about
her several
Ms. Falcone's
light
testified
affidavit
this
dispositive
discussion
the serious
directed
should
occasions,
of
does shed
charges
on our motion,
in
made
we expect
to
at Ms. Goldstein
be stricken
as sham
~/ On deposition,
Ms. F8lcone was unwilling
to answer, clearly
and
unambiguously,
whether or not she knew she was under oath when she
signed the affidavit.
- 7 -
and false.
We will
drawn against
(2)
also
defendants
states
accusation
Ms. Goldstein
be
in his
affidavit
in which he
the following:
stated
to help her
and winning
into
On deposition,
that
described
jail.
to rely
on Miranda's
both parties
ability
Miranda's
of his
ago,
in an affidavit
The nature
submitted
role
recent
allegation.
He acknow-
were friendly,
but he
have at different
to tell
the truth
in this
litigation
charges
attorney
of Justice
litigation.
this
on the job.
litigation,
be thrown
In this
the validity
'lie'
'"
dealings
to explain
I did not
'I will
if
in her ambitions
her case,
her as "tough"
necessary
that
in order
assess
of misconduct
is contained
cooperate
sought
inferences
"[Goldstein]
ledged
the appropriate
The principal
against
ask that
Elyse
against
of plaintiff's
and substance
- 8 -
is
in order
to
preparation
of that
by Ms. Goldweber
and it
Ms. Goldstein.
Goldweber,
and assigned
times
interview
in connection
case,
of this
are described
with
these
proceedings.
According
information
to the effect
criminatory
practices.
concerned
that
part
He also
indicated
Subsequent
in response
to their
mation provided
was notified
by letter
that
that
since
this
year,
he was considered
interview,
Mr. Miranda,
about defendants'
in this
if
damaging information
to the
retracting
his
as
furnished
Mr. Miranda
A copy of that
affidavit.
reinterviewed
in several
provided
practices.
the statements
plaintiff,
of discovery,
expressing
direction
attorneys,
interview,
to be an important
action,
discriminatory
effectively
Ms. Goldstein
while
dis-
he was deeply
becoming a witness
ever,
that
interrogatories,
to Ms. Goldweber's
litigation
engaged in racially
is attached
Miranda,
to that
obligations
defendants,
letter
defendants
he had furnished
of Justice.
of its
that
he might be physically
to Ms. Goldweber,
witness
months.
additional
in this
During
apprehension
about
information
and executed
how-
an affidavit
he had previously
and accusing
Mr.
Ms. Goldstein
furnished
to
of improper
conduct.
In his
had furnished
recent
deposition,
to plaintiff
any information
- 9 -
unfavorable
denied
that
he
to defendants'
position
in this
litigation
despite
defense
counsel
In this
was in charge
of the said
to the contrary
connection
veracity.
affidavits
states
that
investigation,
it
by
is note-
Ms. Goldweber's
"At all
times
that
she
./
her duties
with diligence,
but observed
legal
and ethical
strictures."
The positions
counsel
are,
initially
of course,
told
irreconcilable.
are false,
designed
whether
assessment
to induce false
of the credibility
statements
Procedtres,
would ordinarily
that
were lying.
counsel
interviewed
never
The determination
turns
largely
of
on an
to the signing
assume that
United States
in his affidavit
of the witnesses.
relating
practices
testimony.
discriminatory
threats
if Mr. Miranda
Obviously,
defense
counsel
the truth
As previously
Mr. Miranda,
- 10 -
of pleadings,
had reason
and that
stated,
Rules
one
to believe
counsel
for the
however,
defense
was filed.
which defense
excerpt
counsel
of defendant
Q.
of paper in order
the prospective
A.
tenant
That is such.!.
lie,
to flag
to attach
produced
Dep. p. 37)
- 11 -
we hired
that
person?
was a black
1:!_
that
Mr. Miranda,
B.
In his
asserts
affidavit
of July
counsel
that
On or about June 12, 1974, Miss Goldstein
~-passing
counsel,
literally
Rights
with representatives
Division
demanding entry
descended
into
and Student
the offices
Trump, officer
of the defendants'
and production
of defendants'
of
Interns
of Mr. Donald
corporation,
records.
(emphasis
added) */
His affidavit
ignored
that
further
requests
defendants
representatives
the United
States
asserts
to contact
that
the offices
were unsuccessful
to leave
Attorney
Ms. Goldstein
their
of defense
in getting
offices
until
!/
and
plaintiff's
defendants
contacted
District.
The affidavit
also refers
to a letter
addressed to Assistant
United States Attorney Henry Brachtl from Mr. Scott Manley, cocounsel for defendants,
which accuses plaintiff's
representatives
of "descending
upon the Trump offices
with five storm troopers
banging on the doors and demanding to be allowed to swarm
haphazardly
through all the Trump files and to totally
disrupt
their daily business routine."
- 12 -
These allegations
against
other
virtually
against
representatives
no resemblance
Ms. Goldstein,
of plaintiff,
The fact
that
the offices
neither
counsel
of defendants
part,
or accessible
its
States
position
opportunity
again
documentary
proof,the
the proposed
Cohn.
has previously
to the
on these
to set
forth
actual
records
following
records
may, in
but it
briefly,
we take
together
sequence
served
pursuant
attached
was mailed
of
the
involving
of June 12th.
of Documents on
by Ms. Goldweber,
in its
with supporting
of the events
and filed
defense
'
A third
at the
(See letter
by Ms. Goldweber
at
described
allegations,
inspection
for Production
and signed
was present
of the charges,
morning.
them.
of the United
Discovery
up to that
to inspect
the inaccuracies
on the
by telephone
arrived
leading
as
bear
took place
for defendants
counsel
explain
in fact,
to what actually
as well
telephone
was sent
conversation
- 13 -
counsel
to defense
Roy
counsel
'
as Appendix A).
to defense
to his
a Rule 34
counsel
request
Scott
Another
Manley
inspection.
that
plaintiff
was planning
offices.
the records
any objection
Moreover,
inspection,
suggest
Initially,
Trump Management,
met solely
States
met with
Attorney.
the other
Norman P. Goldberg
was unaware of
records
could
the
no objection
to the records
site
or date,
at the offices
who expreksed
scheduled
until
records
minutes
and
surprise
at
later,
Mr. Hyman
including
inspection
of
Assistant
and informed
he contacted
- 14 -
of
Hyman, controller
of plaintiff,
or
to inspect.
representatives
time
Mr. Stuart
Ten to fifteen
be produced
at the designated
arrived
did
or indicate
would be permitted
representatives
12 at
conversations
any alternative
on what plaintiff
visit.
Mr. Manley
on June
these
filed
B.)
telephone
records
plaintiff's
as Appendix
to the inspection
defendants
Plaintiff's
United
attached
and place.
any limitation
to inspect
the
1974, addressed
of two additional
At no time during
defendants
about
defendants'
that
of May 28,
by Ms. Goldstein,
in the course
conversations
he knew nothing
(See letter
that
attorneys
them that
and that
defense
he
no
counsel.
Ms. Goldstein
telephone
States
attempted,
and left
without
a message
Attorney's
office.
success,
to reach
Plaintiff's
and returned
Mr. Manley by
representatives
to the United
then
States
left
Attorney's
office.
About one hour later,
at the office
first
of the United
time that
stated
that
objections
spection
After
and that,
to proceed,
attached
is apparent
documentation,
counsel
in its
to a properly
and letter
efforts
that
if defendants
plaintiff
of defense
counsel,
there
improper
conduct
or other
representatives.
No calls
by defendants
of representatives
brief
counsel
of the plaintiff.
- 15 -
motion.
counsel.
discussion,
and the
Moreover,
records
contrary
was no banging
in-
the inspection
of defense
defense
pursuant
to the affidavit
on doors,
by any of plaintiff's
or their
the
to allow
defendants'
request.
had been
an appropriate
agreed
to inspect
no such objection
would file
defendants
that
Mr. Manley
noticed
overreaching
had previously
plaintiff
Ms. Goldstein
to the inspection.
office
Attorney
responded
some negotiations,
to begin
States
he had objection
these
transmitted
complaining
States
about
Attorney's
the conduct
We are prepared
to call
events
II.
of plaintiff
in order
to refute
that
there
is additional
of Civil
on this
matter
defendants'
charges.
THE IAW
While defendants'
grounds
at the hearing
are
insubstantial
authority
Procedure
to support
it,
of pleadings
on the
there
Rules
which are
Rule 11 states:
The signature
of an attorney
constitutes
a certificate
by him that he has read
the pleading;
that to the best of his
knowledge, information,
and belief
there is good ground to support it;
and that it is not interposed
for delay.
If a pleading is not signed or itis
signed with intent
to defeat the purpose
of this rule, it may be stricken
as
sham and false and the action may
proceed as though the pleading had not
been served.
For a willful
violation
of this rule an attorney
may be subjected
to appropriate
disciplinary
action.
Similar action may be taken if scandalous
or indecent matter is inserted.
That Rule is to be construed
on the attorney
filing
contained
the documents
that
there
in the pleadings.
as imposing
1961).
an affirmative
that
is good ground
to support
Freeman v. Kirby,
The evidence
Counsel
- 16 -
obligation
suggests
that
who disregard
the
27 F.R.D.
this
this
Rule
are to be held
Benefit
"strictly
of Foster
225 (E.D.N.Y.
provide
accountable."
Wheeler
1938).
Corp.
v. American
The sanctions
and false
but also
United
for
provided
States
Surety,
25 F. Supp.
in the Rule
of a pleading
such disciplinary
for the
found to be sham
or other
action
as
may be appropriate.
*
If the Court
allegations
of unprofessional
finds,
those
plaintiff
pleadings
draw appropriate
Professor
hearing,
conduct
that
against
such allegations
inferences
of their
against
cases
this
cousel
Court
but that
defendants
on the merits.
Wigmore
[A] party's
falsehood
or other
fraud in the preparation
and
presentation
of his cause, his
fabrication
or suppression
of
evidence by bribery
or spoliation,
and all similar
conduct,
is
receivable
against
him as an
indication
of his consciousness
that his case is a weak or
unfounded one; and from that
consciousness
may be inferred
the fact itself
of the cause's
lack of truth or merit.
The
- 17 -
defendants'
plaintiff's
containing
unfavorable
after
will
it
at
To
are
inference
thus does not apply
itself
necessarily
to any specific
fact in the cause, but operates,
indefinitely
though strongly,
against
the whole mass of alleged facts
constituting
his cause.
Wigmore Q!l
Evidence, 278 (3rd Ed. 1940) ~/
That principle
set
See e.g.
forth,in
been consistently
Holt v. United
Andrews v. United
States,
that
plaintiff's
which disrupted
defendants
the Court,
an inference
States
followed
272 F.2d
Wilson v. United
as well,
we submit
as to the weakness
162
by federal
(9th Cir.
1946).
made spurious
plaintiff's
States,
1959)
Accordingly,
claims
against
preparation
that
of its
the propriety
of the defendants'
appropriate.
CONCLUSION
this
matter
be set
reasons,
we respectfully
in advance
request
of the trial,
-18-
if
that
the defendants'
motion be dismissed
and that
appropriate
with prejudice
sanctions
as
be ordered
as
and proper.
Respectfully
submitted,
FRANKE. SCHWELB,Chief
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG,Attorney
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C.
___
APPENDI:{ A
__..,,,,_,
T. 5-6-74
. f~r
t-,AYc
~p :rv~
'-'"""""
.. '-~~,..
/. "'"""'\.l C""t'I"
.t::,
J ......
c-
.Jo
DJ 175 ...52...20
Roy H ..
Cohn, EGq.
Re:
United Bto.tco
Civil
Ai:.'.tion
v. Fi:Qd C. TrurJp,
no. 73 C iS2'J
---------------------
,.._
...--, .......
Dear Roy:
Il
il
Sincerely,
J. sr,\~-itr:Y r~o~rr11;cEI{
Assi.st;in.t:
Ci ,,,.Ll
~
cc:
'
Records
Chrono
Gol& ...~cber
1.'rial File
Hold
By:
Atto:::T1.e:{ Cr.~nc!_
"fi' .t c-,t,1"'
APPE~:-~)D:
--,--~.,
....~.
..,.,._
,,.,
5/1),")
/7!
J.
L. t,
r"'. r,,.,...
t.J' J ...
!'
J "n.
,i ~,
2P
tl.~.AY
\.}
".J,...
10-;i
11
1.)J t
..
Re:
~~
---~
..
:--
In response
1971,, please
ind
for
Pro<lucti.;"';i
u-'l1.l'""'
"\:...
.l-2
I
""Ch"{1'tlr:.
1.,'"J
,....
l~
"-"
0
/.":"o I 'J-;('.""c
! - - ., , .."'> .... 1.,,,
, ,w.. - .,_. l.;.,,,.
.
t."l'r.c~,.....:;
....,..,.,...,,;}.
u ,...,,...-,)q0,~"'"
;.,
t"
- t...:.y 1
11
Cc)r
CO""'tl.'..-,,i..,,
r~,r,<>
tl-in
"e.,'c,
nd
"{,-...,,..
,....,-:
A.
,.
&.f..V
.. 1~.,
t ....H ...\!J...
.... M..:::.;,.
&I.Lt_,.)
(,,-,.
;:~7r,
,,,, .,
1o
,..., .. ,.,...
ii,
J...o.,t,,..;;,.
i. -
.1{..1L,
.. ,'._,.,...,,~-
1--
.. . ;::_
..
"""'""loy
"''""' o'"J ... ,,.._
.... 1.,,,
<" ,.,,.,,,nt-..., T"''""''""'~,
..,,...
r.o,'.>'"l
t'
4J..UJ - ..r:i""
....,..._.,,.,
...,."'.""'~"'....
*"-....l n'"t { ",.._T,!111
be forchcornir, 0 .. Thcnc <l.:.q:-oaitic1;1s b::id be::cn previously
Dchcdule:d. for April 13 ... April 22, 1971:-.
~,,.J.J ..
,t..,4,...,J
1...,
-'-'-.;.
'
cc:
I
.1
Sincerely,.
Reco:r.ds
Chrono
tC~~~..
GJLDS1'EIH
/Atto:.:-r,~~y
,..,,,_ <"
4 ,..,_.,
~t~o (' ""-~,
...,...t..
.......
~.-
U'ri1
'b f "'""
i ...,., ....".;,,,....
,.
T "(~
1'
c.1,
t.-
t::. ~
IN CLERK'S01 HCE
\1\{b1STRICT
COURTE.D.N.Y.
-.;, -,,
ICA,
'I
T'1
1. ,.al
r'i"'.+'.
.1.-'--'-,
)
)
v.
s-crFL1,fEtuAL
LJ C. 'rltlJI:--:F),
et
ANSWE'F.S TO
)
)
)
)
al. ,
_________________
Defen:fants.
)'
Th2 United
its
und~rsignEJ
0efEnda,:i-ts'
States
attornc~
of America,
hereb~
,1efendants
1n
n!tS_
,. r.....
Tbc
supp1.0raen~s
11n_
a~Ta1.
1___
,:.',~_
o-.....
acco,~nt_
._
"'""
; 1""..
"
_
...
.
1,rr. Carlos
a.
Answ0rs
to
to
1 an~ 2
er c711r,lovees
have
'
.
u,_f ra~cc..c'.
i,...
_
....,,. ,
ZPli.cr,
~ 1
i.1--:
those
appl~ca~t
was ~lack.
su
Drive,
fendants,
1n adcli+-ion,
1"";y b lachs
of:cic'::: tha1
Mr. Zeller
~inten<lents
,-a.
"! ,,-,,tn
v,.t. t. f::; w ~ .;
t1.~at
apart-
...r,.,.)"1,
_ ~ __ ,.
Sl:. Harbor
of
to
,:vidence
constitutes
i'';.nc1
~11..usia,
,artous
its
by
Ansi:1ers
orma.......
ion
followinr,
t:1:rough
ol: paper
herein,
Inte;rogatarics.
Ffrst
Supplcr,1ental
Interrogatories
"I
plaintiff
in Queens
al
o ad7
,
1.1ser a
Mr. Zeller
state(
ed that
.' p::1.ony
.,
t~at
'.')!"ally
~.rc1 to
cnt
an apartment.
ire1
Mr. Carlos
Zeller,the
th~
rent
did
so for
Sa~v~r
stated
t~at
to blac',
persons,
rcj2c~cd
for
s.
'Jse('
forcer
approximctely
Sarvr-r
and
tr.at
~r.
s:i.~.,
of their
~Rec.
a racial
co~e was
process
to
tre
Jac1, For;ler,
York,
two
t~at
'l.fr,icr: app1:Lcat.=.ons
~~e;1
1n 1"73.
t}1c reason
was on acco~n~
is2J
also
:~r.
,
nonths
i~
on one
tEnancy
o1=ficc
c.
superintendent,
three
central
to assist
Trump
Fnz1er
:in-Forn
were:
sub:.n:Ltt06
C) Occa11
a~ isc~
at
=~at
t
rrnt
a -1J()Ut"~ t
.t
an
so as to discouragr
..,
th~
l,,
ql' i r Cr.
(l)
On on occasion,
in,:"icatcc
a.pr
of
applicant.
r~)
\L.
-,
,
i'il1:""anc:a
J -
..
-4.Li..::Lan
l""!',
.., ....
''
ap ltcant
was as~0ciat2d
with
'_&ir
a lo~
,,
rto
c}ants
1-S
applicants
0irectly
to
'f
ccnt::.:-al office
in
'1('/':
L ./
! _)
a~1tl1c~:~iz::::J to
and
rlications
of:'.:"ic"!
to
('
t1 e
plicant,,
SE
l adviscr:
that
.:i
s in.
the
According
c0tu1t2 d ir,
e\: aluat
1Pcome
sufficient
was
Iroo~lyn,
~as
ility
of tlac~
appli~a~~s
to Heusel,
a wlfe!s
incornr
C j_
ing
to
a former
meet
r~ntal
a cor;p le'
.l.,
or: - Ln P 111,,
l" ..\..ov,,
,.;
.
I ,
.__,.
..
.dt:
"'~i
financial
t}e
agent
~mploye!
hy
that
at the
man indicatef
11"'
c 1_ 11n;
,.,
',
. - - (:.
.. l.
_J.(.,.'
was no~
+-
" - -
rtn.a-;:-1,
ilt~
~-_1J
t2,1a1,ts
arc
s
th~
~est
tenants.
r1.nan al
() stat.
d t'r.:a!:
~,
\_;'
},.J ac 1<s.
cat
A .,.,
l.!. a1,J
Tyriens far~
at
l0ast
~1ac~
alsc
t-o
two
0
...
1 '1-
" u .U,;:;;ci,
Scaste
Av~.,
oc:asio8S
Statr
+-1
...,1
Apa~t~cnts.
apolicant~
statcc'
L'.l,.
nazi,
he
from
a.t-
Oi.1
z.
~~nt
t' a'- a c
d,:,s
was
a rental
are~t
at ~ysens
1J ..-
,...1.
.l cl. - .
Ace
at
r,-.
c1.1r1~r:n~ 1.~.1.a"c~
.. ~rnarit:s
"- 5Cl1S
a co~e
was pla~cf
on rcata]
app1lcatiails.
nth
to
the
~ein
office.
White
states
that
2~a~c~s
the
appl
ation
as a dc,o:-rnan
Gom2z state(
that
tl;cr2
,:ere ro vacaG~
tha~
es
apartments
a doorman
2v:::n
he
thot,f:h
r. rent ..
the
,,
l.'c.i3
tol '
f- (
"' )
..
(.' ti.J
.I
r-
,.... r"\
. ..~1\.. :rJ_r-;q_
'
an
~; ~ .. !
"-r
5:
1 .-
3.5
-'
',:..
()
...,
......
L,
f-,,..
"I .
, ...
,i_ ./
a' 1.c
ruximatel.v
tir.
;j1
~)i'.'
a~,ou~
Liebowitz
_;:.
e ..
r. J__0.. ~
.., ,
Jec2
12:00
.,
,.
o.
r.-
,('-1
respon?~~
._-_
d~ r- .,.._
.. .c
1.,....n c-~~..:
, .,,,.
~or a one-
la-:::er,
nothing,
to
e callc
e WllshirP
rental
office
and
c;
...
W'-le,;
'l
. 0 ,.(1
~~own theo
(i"'ef
Eights
a com-
~ae
ts
at
t~e
apart0cnt
was not
O """'
l.--
t~Eter
ilCt
yet
tol< t~at
was subGcquentl}
ava:Llal le
for
occupancy.
apRrtments
were
ar
Conmtiss ion
amJ
;10-
Irown
~~cured
ler
present
apar~-
2.
United
Pursuant
States
to the agreement
in open court
the following
list
on October
in connection
Miriam Abrams
Casper Aloi
Cosmo Aloi
Ames
Corinthia
Anderson
Lola Anderson
Carmen Baceret
Jose R. Barros
Peter
Baybak
Victor
Baybak
Susan Bernstein
Beverly
Best
Vikentije
Besu
Luiz Betencourt
Kalman Biczo
Theodore Bogart
Harriette
Bolling
Carl Bonekoskey
Rene Bouchard
Gerard
Breitner
Donald Brofman
Mae F. Brown
Maxine Brown
William
V. Buffa
those
persons
of this action:
Shirley
of the
made by counsel
Bush
-11-
Joseph
Calcaterra
Doreen
Cameron
Alfred
Cardilli
Regis
Cardillo
Martin
Celnick
Lawrence
Michael
Cheng
Andrew
Ruth
Ceraula
Cirelli
Clarke
William
Clay
William
Cloonan
Nafi
Coker
Peter
Connan
Ismail
Dahbali
Henrietta
Marie
Davis
Glen
G.
Oscar
John
Day
G. Deagustini
DeMark
Edward
Charles
John
Davis
Dier
Duryea
Egeland
Rufus
Ensley
Selma
Epstein
Janice
Evans
Carol
Falcone
Diane
Falcone
Victor
Falcone
Theresa
Farina
Skender
Fici
-12-
Elizabeth
DiFiore
Max Fischer
Richard
Jack
Foard
Fogler
Marva
Forde
Linda
K. Friedman
Anita
Furman
Edwardo
Mary
Galdames
Gallager
Annette
Gandy
Edgar
Gelar
Rhoda
Glasser
L.
Goldberg
Monique
Dina
Golden
Goldfarb
Morris
Goldfarb
Adolfo
Gomez
Benny
Gonzales
James
Gordon
Patrick
Dennis
Green
Max Greenbaum
Hyla
Greenberg
Frank
W. Greene
Allan
Gross
Mabel
Gruber
Josephine
Gugliotta
Ernestine
Guzman
-13-
Virginia
Lucy
Hallero
Hanna
Herbert
Mr.
Heller
Mrs.
&
Ricky
Donald
Herman
Robert
Heusel
Sara
Helms
Heyman
Mr.
Mrs.
&
Alfred
Hoyt
Ann Hurley
Stuart
Hyman
Clara
Jacobs
Gustav
Jaeckh
Carolina
Kanguat
George
Sim Johnston
Charles
Jonap
Ellis
W. Jones
Margaret
Rose
Jones
M. Jones
Nettie
Kerstein
Harry
Mr.
Kreitzer
and
Mrs.
Kenneth
Guido
Lara
Henry
Lawson
Adelfa
Leal
Joan
Jivi
Laitman
Legeno
Anthony
F.
Licari
Ray LiMani
Nicholas
Luttendodt
-14-
Dora Mabunda
John Mare
Charles
W. Martin
Mary Massa
Gary M. McCaskill
Peter
Menza
Youn Minn
Thomas Miranda
Charles
Mitchell
Geraldine
Mitchell
Esther
Monasch
Lillian
Morales
Robert
Morrison
John Mosby
Sheila
Moskowitz
Alan Newman
Gertrude
Olin
Wilma Parker
Robert
L. Patterson
Yolanda Perez
Julius
Reinheimer
Thomas Randazzo
Joseph
Reed
Frank Regina
Julius
Gertrude
Walter
Reinheimer
Robinson
Rohr
Chauncey Roles
Abraham Rosenberg
-15-
Robert
Rosenblaum
Erruna Rossinsky
Albert
Rossland
Andrew
Rossner
Muriel
Salzman
Louis
Sarnell
Ruth
Sarver
Dominic
Scaglione
Mr.
Mrs.
and
Helen
Harry
Schnitman
Marcia
Schwartz
Charles
Sedita
Louis
Sforza
Martin
Shaechter
Sarah
Shah
Pearl
Shaw
Muriel
Otis
Silberberg
Simpson
Gloria
Herb
Schefflin
V. Sloley
Smith
Phyllis
Frank
Jeanette
Simone
Spiro
Stern
Strauss
Taha
Meilech
Teitelbaum
Matthew
Tosti
Anthony
Tringo
-16-
L.
Warkol
Olga Wusits
J. Hugh Watkins
Edward Watson
Arlene Weiler
James Gordon White
Robert H. White
Bill
Wiedmann
Pauline M. Williams
Helen Wrenne
Abraham Wybinow
Stephen Zaffarano
Mr. and Mrs. Paula Ziselman
~ubmitted,
Frank E
chwelb
Norman
. Goldberg
Donna F. Goldstein
Attorneys,
Civil
Rights
Division
U.S. Department
of Justice
Washington,
D.C. 20530
,_ OF WA.:iil
f ,:'-'-.'.
>J.l.
)
)
cs
,
, Pnitc,'
StatAs
,,.--.. , .. r,
\ ..J . /. '
,..
j~
.-
tiff's
Ci V t1 I: )_;(1 t s
D-~part;nent
of
i ~.Tis tu i1
Tus t ice
'('';
.;_ \J ~'
1
1 anrl
.:.:c:..i:~-'::-(
t1 1J{1r;-1tt,
-:e. ~o~:'."~ :-.-!e
tl:
/,0.,(,, 0 e ::OV"' n~~ E ;A 1 <:I l;
1
I){'
' . \.)
1:::-
r', e r orr
~1.,
S'3::~~c,
Coi.rn,
r:a,20-rt,
t:~q1.1i:....::
:Iar)le)'
I?:ol_.;u
'..cor ' ~,
Ci"Jil
.,I_
21
~-::L[-:htrj .Ji,r:rt;l(Jr:
D~partffic~~
Wa
tan,
c[
Tcstic
0 .. -~
2C.: ..~~
20530
Reply to the
Division Indicated
175-5
-~-3
SEP171974
llonorablc
\d:;-;rard R. Neah,:?r
Ui:dtcd StJtcs
Ji:..:.trict
Court
~astern
District
ot New York
t
C8.dman PLr:a
Brooklyn,
i:JcH York
lli.01
R2:
02dr
Judg~
tnitcd
Civil
St3.tes
v. Fred:,;.
Trump,
Action
No. 73 C 15:~9
et
al.
Ncuhcr:
On September
11, 1974, we received
i copy of a l2tt8r
sent by Mr. Roy Cohn to Magiatr~te
Catoggio
in which he state
that
the above-captioned
:.;uit be placed
th3.t he has ri-2t,UCJi::
on the trial
cc.1len<lar.
our responding
letter
to liagh tr ate
(:z1toggio
(:1 copy o:.: which is enclosr~d)
iudicD.tcs,
we believe
there are imt;>orta:.1t matters
remaining
outstanding
,vhich
to be settled
bciore
thiG cas2 i set ;or trial.
For example,
deiendants
have rn~de objections
to plaint
J:'s ,\ugust 13th Rec;uz:st .:or Production
o::: Documents.
1'he
parti21., arc now iwliting
a determination
by :Magistrate
Cntoggio
~"'-S to
the permissibility
of this rec,ues
discovr:ry.
Mor2ovcr,
we intend,
in the very near Iuture,
to ile d motion to Strike
Affidavits
defendants'
July ~6th Notice of Motion and Supporting
which se
<liLJciplin~ry
action
against
plaintiff's
counsel
;or
alleged
mif;conduct.
i'..s you mdy rec:i.11, on .:rngu3t /J, 197l~,
after
the hearing
on plaintiif's
Order to Show ~use, th0
part
s met with Judge
toggio.
~t that
time the dc~endauts
ckci(k:d to withdra;1
thLir contempt
motion
from the
ndar,
but rciuscd
to agree to a full
withdrawal
with prejudice.
PL1intL.c
l
;:, th::t ullowing
this aot::..on i:o re.-ini1.1 in il:0
pr"'t:2n t :: tat2 o:L limbo only ::;crve:c: to j:urt:.1cr c:: oud the lr' ;;;ucj
in thi
la~suit.
rt additionally
unduly prejudice~
the rcpu12 couni. el with chargct;
tatio11
oc one o~~ plninti
,vhich we :n:c
prepared
to prov8 are totally
~ithout
f0unCation.
'fhe Un:~u~d Stc::ted ar~:nts ar;. 2.::1rly and cxeditious
tr:L.11
case in keeping
with the requirements
of 4Z U.S.G.
3613.
Ln fact,
this la~suit
could hnve ~lre3dy
0Gen tried
had it not been ior the continued
delays
and dilatory
tect
s
occ~sioned
by the d cnd2nts
and cheir
counsel.
However, we
do not believe
th~t with these
outstanding
issues
Ll~ill
unrei:::olveC::, this
ca~~e is now r,2.:1.dy to
~:;,::t .'.:or trial.
l'hL:r2iore,
~e rc~pcctfully
urge that
this
case not be placed
on the
trial
calendar
until
the resolution
o; these
open matters.
in
thi8
Respectfully
yours,
sistant
Civil
"y ,
Attorney
General
TI.ights Division
'Y\u~ G,)8-t"o
'-<V
NOm-L:\N P.
;'
GOLDBERG
i:orncy
Housing
cc:
rl.
~utoggio
Section
,,
SEPi 31974
; - t:.
JSP:FES:DFG:car
DJ 175-52-28
0. S. D:STlfCl COURTE.D.N.Y.
I
J
Re:
t...,
l~JCLERK'SOFFICE
Court
NO\/G/1974
,,
deadline.
Indeed, if plaintiff's
September third response is
deemed to be untimely because it comes after the discovery
deadline,
defendants would succeed in defeating
what would
otherwise he permissible
discovery by making informal objections
at the eleventh hour.
.!
your8,
STANLEY POTTINGER .
Assistant
Civil
Attorney General
Rights Division
. By;
DONNA.F.GOLDSTEIN
Attorney
Housing Section
cc:
'
20530
JSP:F ....
S:DFG:c.:J.r
DJ 175-5 <.8
Honor<.:j,ble Vinc:i~1 t A. Catoggio
Hagistr.:1t2,
Unit,;:,d Stat~s
Di trict
.~as t0rn District
of lk:w York
L~-5 Cadman Pl.:1:2:d. A~a~t
New York
11201
Brooklyn,
,,'"'
;,;,...,,,.,
c..-
Re:
Dear
Judge
_:ourt
United
St.::1t8S v. Fred C. Trump,
No. 73 C: 15:.9
Civil
Action
"
~
J. S. D:Sl :. ci COL11'ZTE.D.N.Y.
NO\/c;;l 1974
,:.:t al.
Catoggio:
On August
:'O, .:1fter b:::i~1g informed
by th::: United
St.::1t2s
a o
ice that Mr. ,::ohn had obj Qcted by lettt.:r
to our
,Attorney'
we delivered
r~~u~st
to inspect
records
in Norfolk,
Virginia,
a letter
to you which advised
that we intended
to respor ....
d
on Sept2mbE!r 3,
fully
to these
obj ectiocs.
You may recall
that
I advised
your Honor by telephone
chat I was 011 that
<l3te
miiling,
by special
d~livery,
plah1tiff's
response.
During
that
the mnttE:r
that
convi2rsation,
it was my impression
remained
ope~ for determLnation.
Despite
Hr. Cohn's
asscrtioa
that
the issue
is now
11
ilacademic,
w2 b2lieve
that Plainti
's outstanding
Requ::st
13, 1974,
for Production
of UocumeL1t:.:, noticed
on August
remains
ctctivc
and survives
the September
first
discovery
..
".
de:3.dlinl.:.
J.:nd,.,ed, if plainciU:'
s September third re::;pon 2 J.f:i
deemed to be unt
ly becau3e it comes ofter
the discovery
de line,
dcfcndnnts
would Gucce
in defeating
what would
be
rmia~ible
discovery
~y making infonnal
cbj2ctions
otherwise
at the eleventh
hour.
Mr. Cohn also ind ic::ites thu t he has :1sked Jud
Ncc1hcr
to fix an early
trial
date.
have, as yet,
received
no
noc1.ce .i.:rom the defend.:-:Jnt:;,
either
forn':11 or in.Eorm'1.l,
that
they have resucstcd
that th
case be put on the trial
calcnd~r.
However,
Y.vewill be contacting
Juc1
Neaher to advi,~:c him that
we believe
there are certain
mJtters
remaining
outst~nding
in
this
lawsuit
vihich need t.:o be ~;cttl
before
thic:: action
set lor trial.
Thase include
our reque~t
to in3pect
records
in
Norfolk,
Virginia,
and
ct forthcomit1g
motion
;vhich
to file
to have defendants'
July :6 notice
of Motion
supporting
idavits,
which seek to have plaintiff's
held in contempt
of court,
stricken
from the record.
Re3pectfully
yours,
J. STANLEY POTTH~G~:!l
Assistant
torney
General
Civil
Hy:
Right8
Division
~.~u.~-,~
DONNA F. LebLDSTE:CN
,\.ttorney
Housing Section
cc:
Honorable
2dwar<l R. Neaher
Koy M. Cohn, 'Zsl,uire
we intend
2nd
counsel
NEW
JOHN
GODFREY
ROGERS
ROY
(212)
(1901H9531
NEW
472
YORK
10021
THOMAS
- 1400
(19191962)
A. BOLAN
COUNSEL
M. COHN
SCOTT
MICHAEL
DANIEL
HAROLD
MELVYN
JEFFREY
LORIN
SAXE
H. BACON
YORK,
E. MAN
LEY
(ADMITTED ILL!NOIS
ANO INOIANA)
September
ROSEN
5, 1974
J. DRISCOLL
SCHWARTZ
RUSIN
A- SHUMAN
DUCKMAN
United States
Civil Action
1S
....,.
Court
v. Fred C. Trump,
No. 73 c 15'29
et al.
Catoggio:
P.
you wish
1 t fo:r
tl
ier
than
truly
VI
United
Ji,. CAjrOGGIO
tes
strict
M~.gis:tra:t.e
20530
SEP 3 1974
JSP:F'ES:DFG:car
DJ 175-52-28
Honorable Vincent A. Catoggio
Magistrate,
United States
Di~,trict
Court
Eastern District
of New York
Z25 Cadman Pla~a East
Brooklyn,
New York 11201
Re:
Dear Judge
et al.
CAtoggio:
~~.
~
- 2 rather
than relying
on discovery.
As plaintiff's
answers to
interrogatories
and its forthcoming
supplemented
answers will
indicate,
the United States has a substantial
amount of evidence, quite independent
of discovery,
indicating
discriminatory housing practices.
Before filing
a Complaint under 42
U.S.C. 3601 et seq. the Attorney General must have "reasonable
cause 11 to believe
that the defendants
have engaged in a pattern
or practice
of di::;crirnination.
If defendants
believe
that
such reasonable
cause does not exist,
the appropriate
remedy
would have been a motion for summary judgment which would have
tested
the credibility
of their oft-repeated
generali~ations.
Defendants having failed
so to move, each party is entitled
to discovery,
both to discover
additional
evidence and to
prepare to meet its adversary's
case.
Considering
that the
Trumps control
in excess of 12,000 units,
our discovery
has
been modest in comparison
t:o what occurs,
for example, in the
typical
~ntitrust
case.
To support the allegation
that the United States
is not
entitled
to information
with respect
to buildings
outside
of
New York City, defendants
represent:
that Judge Neaher found
plaintiff's
Complaint too general.
In fact,
on January 25,
1974, Judge Neaher denied defendants'
motion for a more definite
statement
and directed
the defendants
to seek its specifications
through interrogatories.
It is also alleged
that plaintiff
has heretofore
made no mention of buildings
outside
New York.
This too is incorrect
and we respectfully
direct
your Honor's
attention
to paragraph
3 of the Complaint which states
that
the defendants
own and operate apartment buildings
in "New
York City and elsewhere 11 (emphasis added) and to page 29 of
the Deposition
of Donald Trump, where plaintiff
attempted
to
obtain information
about these very buildings
now in dispute.
Mr. Cohn at that time objected
to the pursuit
of the issue,
11
based on his :rreading
of the Complaint contrary
to its terms.
Even if our attempt to inspect
Norfolk records were a
fishing
expedition,"
that would not be controlling,
for "no
longer may the time-honored
cry 0 fishing
expedition
serve
to preclude
a party from inquiring
into the facts underlying
his opponent's
case."
Hickman v. Taylor,
329 U.S. 495, 507
11
- 3 -
(194/).
In any event, this is no fishing
expedition.
Our
forthcoming
supplemental
answers to interrogatories
will disclose alleged
discrimin1.tion
at Trump's Norfolk properties.
We will not burden your Honor with citations
for the
incontestable
proposition
that the discovery
rules are to be
liberally
applied,
and that discovery
extends not only to
matters
that are odmissible
in evidence but also to those that
may lead to the discovery
of admisfdble
evidence.
The Complaint
alleges
that defendants
have engaged in a ilpattern
and
practice
of discrimination."
if defendants
were to introduce
evidence,
for example, that their Norfolk operation
is fully
integrated,
that it affirmatively
advertises
to attract
blacks
into a white area, etc.,
that evidence would surely be receivable.
For that reason alone, plaintiff
is entitled
to discovery to prepare for it.
Conversely,
if plaintiff's
discovery
in fact discloses
discriminatory
practices
at apartments
outside
New York City,
that evidence would be admissible
toward proving such a
i'pattern
or practice."
In the debates on the 1964 Civil
Rights i\ct, Senator Humphrey remarked that:
11
- 4 -
By:
:;,
/J 't.l--x4L.I;(
DONNAGO STEIN
Attorney
Housing Section
cc:
-~.
'
-4<...J
u.s.
}.;t..
COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT
OF NEW YORK
NOV7 1974
3
4
---------------------------------x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
-against6
FRED
c.
TRUMP, et
73-C-1529
..
.
al.,
Defendants.
8
9
..
TIME/\.M........ :
P.t.1
..........
---------------------------------x
10
11
United
States
Courthouse
Brooklyn,
New York
12
October
24,
1974
13
B e f
o r e :
14
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
DANIEL D. SIMON
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
1
2
Appearances:
3
4
5
6
7
FRANKE.
SCHWELB, ESQ.
-andNORMANGOLDBERG, ESQ.
Assistant
U.S. Attorneys
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of New York
MR. SCHWELB:
2
your
MR. COHN:
we are
witnesses
but
I would
ing
to
ready
Before
we hope
ask
to
like
But we
MR. SCHWELB:
as you know,
11
tories.
12
Court
15
or
that
these
nor
would
MR. COHN:
16
affidavits
MR. SCHWELB:
19
MR. COHN:
third
one
is
22
Honor,
as you know,
23
and matter
24
affidavits
25
Riahts
of
which
Division,
mornina's
hear-
date.
relation
answer
to
that,
some interroaa
here
the
in
open
interroaatories
me on the
are
telephone
he cares
simple.
attached
on Friday
to
call.
The witnesses
to
are
these
two we propose
very
papers.
Just
a few opening
matter
accusea
call.
arose
remarks,
Mr.Cohn,
of
your
when rather
my colleagues
Brachtel,
to
Dan Bronfman.
mv colleage,
Mr.
today,
witnesses.
a man named
this
factly
in
Cohn to
very
three
The Zisselmans?
There
MR. SCHWELB:
21
is
we have
18
And the
Honor,
witnesses
It
are
Honor.
answered
he tell
who the
this
us another
be the
not
remarks,
be here
a representation
would
He has
Thursday
whose
Mr.
there
of
your
Your
opening
couldn't
give
ready,
we asked
I -further
to
And he gave
13
14
are
that
conclusion
Honor
his
however,
call
the
your
10
he makes
ao forward,
to
20
remarks,
Honor
17
staqina
in
casua
filed
the
some
Civil
a gestapo
ly
raid
on the
claimed
attorney,
which
themselves,
and
from
terrible
Trump
that
Miss
had
11
ness.
bypassing
we wiretapped
that
the
they
and
witnesses
tapping,
counsel.
a young
criminal
to
and wire
He
and
promisina
unethical
about
conduct
perjurinq
or
talking
to
Trump
offices
and we knew
were
lyinq
and
all
people,
kinds
of
things.
And unlike
this
in
threats
wiretaps
10
and
Dona Goldstein,
engaged
included
that
office
as
a minor
the
matter,
We determined
12
13
Court
in
14
make up its
15
any merit
pounded
18
to
19
interrogatories.
Honor
22
Catoggio
to
23
formed
24
to
25
Mr.
will
about
said
out
the
qreatest
the
facts
so that
whether
recallthat
qet
these
of
seriour-
before
the
treat
the
Court
could
charges
had
and
this
the
depositions
I don't
--
we immediately
Court
an immediate
And then
lay
and
took
witnesses.
--
with
to
interrogatories
We also
posed
but
we do not
them.
show cause
21
counsel
hearing
own mindaas
to
17
20
to
an evidenciary
Your
16
defense
and
Maaistrate
this
withdraw
before
vour
an order
to
a couple
we went
he withdraw
he wouldn't
response
of
know if
siqned
of
has
Catoggio
it.
those
the
pro-
Maaistrate
Honor
entire
pro-
been
suggested
thing.
He would
And
4ust
in-
drop
it
charges
is
Miss
from
the
hanging
not
over
acceptable
fairly
treated.
in
professional
life
one
11
to
ness
which
13
from
his
14
by the
15
and
16
something
17
present,
18
was represented
19
a matter
20
that
count
21
calls
the
Goldstein
24
of thesetwo
25
trasts
to
that
that
the
to
me as
to be so unover
her
remainder
head
of
her
use
trooper
affidavit
and
I think
Goldstein
that
hear-
this
happen
like
of
to
the
the
about
show as
phrase,
raids
that
re-
land.
alleqation
and
was
that
to
qestapo
never-never
circumstances.
establis
anythinq
a number
letter
Mr. Manley
Wisdom's
and
busi
~1r. Brachtel,
be able
discovery
disclose
the
affidavit
Cohn or
Judge
raid
we can
and
Mr.
troopers
respect
extraordinary
an evidenciary
storm
Manley,
atmosphere
witnesses
the
and we will
storm
personally,
for
his
didn't
fact,
eery
in
neither
there
about
attorneys
for
to
proof,
which
and
Tha
today.
of Miss
at
And with
23
it
Mr.
by documentary
22
indefinitely.
a cloud
I ask
had
colleague,
testimony
our
--
respect
Mr.Cohn
of
the
heard.
have
Now, with
12
leave
acceptable
want
life
being
and want
not
of
I do not
So now therefore
ing
would
Goldstein
us or
want
without
that
supervisor.
I do not
her
But
Miss
to
Goldstein's
10
calendar.
acrainst
the
of
Miss
depositions
oross
con-
Mrs.
Falcone
attorneys
her,
and
Miss
Goldstein.
inferences.
intimidated
Miss
is
accused
her
we hear
what
ing
Mr.
12
what
it
Schwelb,
it
THE COURT:
Well,
Of course
I have
mitted
which
were
dating
Mr.
I hate
to
said
on
that
Trump
interrupt
but
hearing
witnesses
say
without
say
tell
your
it,
one,
based
she
I am outlining
I assume
MR. SCHWELB:
17
18
was only
.havHonor
is
14
16
two
abused
an evidenciary
they
MR. SCHWELB:
proof.
is
the
before
it
example,
Honor,
13
15
said
of
that
affidavit,
conclusions
for
If
11
of
says
her
she
affidavit,
summation?
why don't
in
deposition
Your
10
affidavit
her
MR. COHN:
this
her
A lot
Goldstein
on her
In her
6
7
in
shorten
you
All
he is
he says
read
my proof,
the
your
outlining
affidavit
Hono.
his
already
are
summing
up?
right,
your
Honor,
to
Miranda
sub
I will
it.
Now, with
19
20
to
state
21
from
Mr.
22
Trump
--
23
the
24
that
25
she
that
proof
what
he testified
Trump
to
respect
and
said
be involved
much of
he didn't
was trying
to
Mr.
on deposition
he didn't
with
his
like
compel
I just
want
his
lousy
testimony
about
him to
was
Miss
wanted
that
--
he ran
that
case,
to
is
and
the
Goldstein
be involved
that
effect
was
in
Donal
that
a case
didn't
want
byes.
--
conclusion
performed.
Mrs.
Miss
of
the
to
kind
of
wasn't
had
these
12
this
13
casionally
14
they
case
to
example
filed
contempt
bearing.
21
if
you
feel
22
at
the
end
of
--
with
him at
that
that
of
good
I am sorry
that
reaction
kind
we have
and
become
circumstances
my eyes
we had
in
the
she
is
not
you have
thing.
That
accustomed
which
in
have
astonishment
a hundred
by defense
Excuse
motion
I will
it
of
qive
is
oc-
that
the
in
dollar
this
me.
Your
Honor,
does
before
your
Honor
today?
you
think
it
really
an opportunity,
to
case
this
has
Mr.
bea
a direct
Schwelb,
sum up in
these
we go any
further
matters
case.
MR. SCHWELB:
24
THE COURT:
that
million
counsel
necessary,
23
realize
kind
this
20
25
the
Honor,
MR. COHN:
19
and cake
be shown
saying
events
counterclaim
on the
had
intimidations
will
--
pleasant
happening.
For
17
be shown
terrible
made me rub
are
15
will
said
we discovered.
Now, your
11
witnesses
coffee
it
who is
all
it
conduct
somebody
with.
these
Falcone
And I think
18
of
Goldstein
16
be involved
Now, both
10
to
All
right.
Now, before
you have
some witnesses
available
I
here
and
are
ready
Is
this
the
sidered
draw
to
put
it
still
matter
them
your
position
these
we completely
felt,
Mr.
thoughts
11
motion
12
was
on this,
13
have
14
place
15
worked
16
qoing
to
press
--
17
going
to
press
our
over
and
it
and
23
willinq
24
out
25
course
you
pursue
open
have
to
you
completely
to
get
is
to
have
would
it
con-
with-
to
not
all
battle
they
would
at
facts
our
motion
renew
prejudice
it
it
at
the
saying
trial
We are
off
a future
rights
not
and
dispose
of
the
of
case.
perfectly
the
calendar
time
which
of
not
he
calendar,
way to
positon.
marked
we were
point.
by
the
on the
get
and we were
this
be the
it
things
usually
--
the
takes
words,
off
put
pre-trial
actual
resolved
the
still
the
these
we all
fifth
I thought
then
motion
at
what
and
be marked
that
he had
that
do is
over,
our
Catoggio
it
I think
In other
is
suggested
we would
as
is
motion
on to
That
prejudice
trial,
disappear.
that
never
what
trial
that
he felt
should
when the
the
request
and
to
or
before
probably
doing,
that
out
that
after
And Judge
21
are
Honor.
Schwelb,
that
a way of
your
is
until
indicated
that
you
The magistrate
10
20
or
magistrate
that
withdraw
including
would
Cohn,
charges?
MR. COHN:
19
Mr.
basis
made by the
the
18
desire,
on a litigated
suggestion
on.
either
with
of
party.
THE COURT:
2
3
4
5
6
Schwelb
sees
good
reason
this
young
appeared
8
9
10
as
have
motion
13
fact
14
rather
And I must
say
that
because
held
iqregious
is
the
in
of
the
there
charges
contempt,
the
way Mr.
some
were
and
affidavits
is
to
have
froro what
would
perhaps
conduct.
not
quite
as
simple
or
a sort
of
Damacles
And under
to
12
not
basis
a cloud
someone.
is
attorney
So it
over
that
evidently
be a rather
the
as
letting
over
circumstances
it
hang
thehead
:hink
of
we will
go forward.
11
MR. COHN:
Your
is
complete
made in
facts
on the
17
it
motion
on an evidenciary
19
depositions
20
Falcone
I wanted
ready
to
Let
say
disclosed
until
her
the
As a matter
increasing
in
of
volume
22
MR. SCHWELB:
23
thing
24
that
25
he was interviewed
they
Trump,
Sr.,
for
say
your
Mr.
ANd that
that
Honor
in
is
Cohn had
of
those
Mr.
go forwar
conclusion
that
never
the
met Mrs.
known about
testified
that
to
ten
facts.
Trump
have
five
to
was taken.
I am aware
could
prepared
hearing.
here
deposition
THE COURT:
and
me just
that
21
that
that
diminishing.
perfectly
of what
say
faith.
become
We are
18
I miqht
good
of
MR. SCHWELB:
Mr.
Honor,
supportive
than
15
16
it.
on the
Well,
--
the
only
Mr. Miranda
he was a liar.
minutes
by
was
And
Don Trump
10
and not
at
I have
your
your
first
Cohn.
your
rather
I would
right,
I think
I have
what
why don't
it
is
Mr.
witnesses
do,
and
I know the
The substance
11
charge
12
interrogatories
13
charges
14
I believe,
was made in
specific
16
the
17
tactics
18
were
19
of
you call
Cohn's
motion
date
then
which
is
in
this
Honor
of
case
and
to make those
were
furnished
1974.
came into
a new turn
conduct
constitute
motion
a serious
Goldstein
took
All
the
that
location
Miss
on it
and
read
motion
and
I would
themselves.
has
or February
investigation
pursued
the
thereafter
And from
of
Court
by your
to
to make.
for
complaint
in January
case.
this
the
as
speak
of
directed
At sometime
15
no answer
the
papers.
toward
an abuse
of
in which
witnesses
the
process
Court.
First
first
all
have
10
essentially
witness.
MR. COHN:
DON
is
Honor.
20
That
Honor.
MR. SCHWELB:
'22
bv Mr.
21
all
witness
we would
GOLDSTEIN,
dulv
sworn
called
by the
call
as
Deputy
t\That is
Miss
a witness
Clerk
23
DEPUTY CLERK:
24
THE WITNESS:
Dona Goldstein.
25
MR. SCHWELB:
I think
your
it
is
is
Goldstein.
havinq
testified
full
been
as
follo
that
he
name?
understood
s~
Goldstein-direct
2
is
calling
her
as
an adverse
THE COURT:
the
motion
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR.
I suppose
Miss
Department
In what
I am employed
Rights
13
Goldstein
For
to
you employed?
Washington.
section
ployed
in
in
the
how long
Housing
the
of
Housing
a period
Section
16
So thatwould
18
Correct.
19
And did
December
the
Justice
Depart
Section
of
the
Civil
of the
will
of time
have
you been
Civil
Rights
Division?
em-
be two years.
make it
December,
1972,
is
that
right?
a case
involving
the
there
come a time
Trump Manaqement
21
Yes.
22
When were
23
May,
25
be adverse
Division.
This
R2 fl924
are
Justice,
particular
20
where
of
15
17
would
ment?
11
14
it
COHN:
12
witness.
obviously.
10
11
you assicmed
to
the
Trump case?
1974.
(Continued
on next
page.}
assigned
12
Goldstein-direct
TlR2
DDS:QM
Before
2
3
stance
of
another
the
lady
work
named
that
you were
Elyse
That
In effect
that
time
is
you
May of
10
Mr.
11
12
Yes.
13
All
Trump case
weber
but
20
21
22
23
24
25
the
been
sub-
handled
by
took
over
for
Miss
Goldweber,
is
to
in
and myself
took
over.
Goldberg?
any
connection
with
the
that?
because
connection.
I worked
in
I was aware
No official
the
of
time
Goldberg
No direct
worked
18
19
do
to
the
1974?
right,
before
15
17
that
riqht?
Yes.
all,
assigned
work
correct.
16
the
Goldweber?
14
had
same office
the
case.
it
with
connection
that
Miss
Miss
Goldweber
Gold-
from
time?
A
Yes.
You had
a general
A general
idea.
But would
it
specifics
A
very
much?
That
is
correct.
idea
be fair
of what
to
say
it
was
you were
about?
not
into
13
Goldstein-direct
After
2
3
1974
case?
did
you were
familiarize
you
Yes.
And did
by the
the
crimination
10
11
Trumps
yourself
you
Section
with
of
respect
I was
complaint
units
familiar
I knew the
Ye;.
Did there
--
case
file
had
the
filed
charginq
practicing
dis-
prior
of
been
in
was
and
specifics
May of
Division
Brooklyn
the
in
legal
Riahts
in
with
case
a complaint
discrimination
to
and
the
that
Civil
the
Queens?
to
the
filed
that.
complaint.
about
Octobe
1973?
14
15
16
Judge
17
of
18
propounded
19
Yes.
And those
the
20
Neaher
had
Civil
come a time
directed
Rights
by the
the
Division,
when you
Government,
to
learned
the
answer
that
Housing
certain
Section
interrogatorie
defendants?
of
interrogatories
21
specification
22
where,
and what
location,
23
alleged
by the
Government
24
place?
25
the
to
with
discover
practicing
with
knew the
12
13
Housing
assigned
various
Are
you
items
under
that
familiar
of
-that
what
these
with
charge
called
the
including
circumstances
discriminatory
that?
for
it
when,
was
acts
took
Goldstein-direct
by the
defendant,
rogatories
filed
Riqhts
10
tories
13
16
17
18
Yes.
When did
the
course
them
when
25
propoun
the
answers
Court's
order
to
the
by the
inter
Civil
familiar
thereto?
Prior
withthe
to
May,
interroga-
1974,
or
there
Is
that
for
that
I read
them
personally
prior
to
involved
in
May and
the
case
of
I read
again.
the
the
it
fair
to
interrogatories
purpose
which
of
they
putting
were
the
being
the
the
I am sorry,
but
MR. COHN:
Would
asking
that
her
for
that
are
we would
vour
and
understanding
the
defendants
in
could
answers
given
on notice
this
as
were
to
complaint?
you restate
you read
was
the
that.
question
please?
read.)
question
trouble
that
charged
MR. SCIIWELB:
of
say
propounded
(Record
21
24
the
you become
answers
I became
20
23
with
to
I believe
19
22
interroqatories
after?
14
15
familiar
pursuant
l\
and
11
12
the
Section?
with
yes.
Were you
4
5
I was familiar
14
the
Your
the
I object
following
reason:
witness
these
refer
Honor,
the
to
in
to
the
answers,
case
until
form
I think
may be having
final
the
is
is
the
only
the
end
that
he
thing
of
the
ed
Goldstein-direct
case;
time.
of
not
or was this
If
he is
two alternatives
the
But
that
to identify
referring
to
whic
it
would
Of course
that
anticipates
my next
did
you have
those
Yes I did.
Also,
15
16
interrogatories
17
the
understandinq
Mr.
Cohn,
I didn't
answer
Your
over
the
the
--
Withdrawn.
is
recollection
and
case
answers
that
thereto
you
had
before
read
you
both
took
the
over
case?
18
19
1974,
21
22
}\
Yes.
()
And after
you
looked
at
Yes.
Well,
purpose
of
as
the
case
aqain,
what
was your
understanding
and
responses
My understanding
in
any
was assiqned
them
interrogatories
tories,
in
interrogatories.
Q
24
difficulty
question?
14
25
question
at
be objectionable.
13
23
his
available
BY MR. COHN:
11
20
we had
few questions.
12
that
phrase
MR. COHN:
10
he would
those
proof
15
case,
is
is
the
of
to
that.
--
the
the
to
vou
in Mav,
riqht?
purpose
as
to
the
thereto?
of
interrogatories
the
interroga
asked
for
Goldstein-direct
the
known to
answered.
the
specific
the
of
discrimination
plaintiff
at
And I believe
the
that
time
that
is
the
purpose
certain
And following
depositions
took
the
filing
of
place,
is
That
And during
what
MR. COHN:
lH th drawn.
12
is
Those
13
weren't
14
sitions.
15
Division
16
employees,
17
of
18
depositions
19
they?
were
and effect
of
that
the
interrogatories
correct?
correct.
period
depositions
In other
of
of
time.
various
and
were
taking
21
tell
you the
22
was present
23
July.
time
did
those
deposi
prior
All
us the
Mr.
defendants
the
by your
office,
noticed
the
by
were
period
of
no depo-
Civil
defendant
number
Cohn,
I believe
to my becoming
exact
some depositions
of
taken
Riqhts
and various
taken
over
a period
time
over
which
these
that
some depositions
taken?
Well,
and
all
noticed
a considerable
were
the
were
officers
were
words,
The depositions
20
25
were
tions
11
24
which
interrogatories
the
10
occurred
interroqatories.
acts
16
period
took
time
that
some depositions
right,
that
of
involved
let's
were
taken
take
in
these
the
were
I believe
that.
during
case.
taken.
during
You were
June
and
I can'
I
June
present
July,
is
at
that
right?
Yes.
Miss
of
incidents
terrogatories?
the
alleged
the
10
exact
11
you.
of
noes
That
answers
--
number
at
the
If
as
to
form.
14
does
he mean
it
is
15
admission
16
mean?
of
18
Rights
19
under
20
acts
21
in
Section
your
as of
the
Trump
the
of
the
at
I can
tell
an
it
discrimination"
what
judicial
does
on by the
specific
what
an
extra
or
put
of
over
read
with
of
12 citing
I do not
were
in-
they
a fourteen
he
civil
instances
claim
to
be
year
perioa
office.
interroqatories
24
to
I may interpose
policy,
direction
THE WITNESS:
22
if
I mean numbers
discrimination
twelv
familiar
look
an admission
Honor's
answers
By "incidents
1 through
about
I haven't
that
I could
discriminatory
MR. COHN:
17
the
Frankly
there
riqht?
I am not
moment.
an examination
were
in
about
correct.
so that
of
way,
forth
seem
may be
a result
hy the
set
that
recently
13
25
as
discrimination
12
23
Goldstein,
incidents
8
9
17
Goldstein-direct
believe
that
that
is
how
answered.
answers
that
you
submitted
{in-
1
2
Goldstein-direct
BY MR. COHN:
()
~ow,
after
you
these
instances
will
period
examined
der.ositions
find
in
in
some
them
tion
15
plaint
16
the
17
be given
19
20
the
over
to
there
to
you we
a fourteen-year
apartment
that
with
I suggest
twelve
listened
come a time
interrogatories
and
thousand
that
there
units,
the
when you
testimony
at
the
was no case?
a fact?
is
not
a fact,
Mr.
Cohn.
That.
is
not
any-
it.
Did you
but
for
events
complaint
conclude
that
was
that
concerning
were
filed
specifics
conduct
to
were
was called
18
they
fourteen
That
14
did
discrimination,
you concluded
near
13
Golnstein,
answers
a minute
thing
the
of
Is
11
Miss
reviewed
10
12
18
of
not
his
Honor's
Cohn,
Please,
Miss
inthe
month
after
direction
that
I think
new investiga-
charged
place
charges
No, Mr.
events
taking
and
the
an entirely
were
you
comboth
that
we
made?
are
misconstruinq
our
-Q
21
MR. SCHWELB:
22
MR. COHN:
23
MR. SCHWELB:
24
structed
25
questions.
to
allow
Goldstein.
Will
I think
this
Your
you
allow
the
answer
Honor,
witness
her
answer.
was no.
could
to
to
answer
Mr.
his
Cohn be
in-
very
probi
THE COURT:
record,
Mr.
Well,
Simon,
(Record
is
the
last
All
riqht,
that
didn't
you
state
of
two questions
the
and
answers.
read.)
THE COURT:
is
the
answer.
BY MR. COHN:
Miss
vestigation
of
Goldstein,
the
No.
10
Sometime
following
11
No, what
we did
12
MR. COHN:
13
chance
14
quately.
to
15
tion
and
17
No,
he
if
I say
did
you
tell
that
19
to
20
not
she
wanted
do so.
to
21
to
I would
interrupt
Goldstein
23
cohn
24
in.the
is
is
in
nature
Now, so
to
of
far
answer
Honor,
her
the
Well,
the
entitled
I haven't
appreciate
THE COURT:
22
Your
in
role
lawyer
you initiate
explain
her
1974?
your
feels
~e the
MR. SCHWELB:
18
May,
ma'am,
up if
if
a new in-
--
get
But
initiate
Trumps?
25
what
the
16
19
Goldstein-direct
I suppose
of
conduct
is
ade-
no I accept
me,
and
of
that
direct
but
has
Cohn being
an adversary
his
it
his
a new investiga-
answer
middle
have
covered
excuse
Mr.
will
that.
I thir.k
the
right
instructed
answers.
since
Miss
witness,
examination
Mr.
as
a cross-examination.
we really
have
a statement
from
Miss
Goldstein-direct
Goldstein
case.
that
And as
she
was necessary.
didn't
conduct
question
investigation.
10
explain
11
BY MR. COHN:
12
or
Is
to
have
16
number
17
invalid
it
that
this
consider
that
there
was no
last
answer
was no
that
a new investiqatio
correct?
Well,
be was did
what
I understand
I initiate
My answer
that
but
he didn't
Well,
let
me draw
Did you
to
conclude
an altogether
was no.
give
upon
Mr. Cohn's
new
to
me a chance.
your
words
now that
them.
14
15
not
I understand
THE WITNESS:
the
18
invalid?
20
complex
21
apartment
conclude
that
interrogatories
propounded
of
twelve
the
alleged
and mistaken
A
19
22
did
Right?
13
she
20
Did
onthe
complex
Q
23
that
of
that
one
they
of
there
25
an attorney
is
one
problem.
about
his
vour
there
trying
Now one
work
furnished
of
Court
this
discrimination
of
to
instances
no longer
answers
were
Section?
incident
the
of
a number
one
24
by order
part
I conclude
I understood
the
instances
I had understood
--
in
instances
be part
to
were
of
be part
a
of
an
owned.
was a mistake?
to
be helpful
doesn't
product.
here
ordinarily
And that
but
exami
is
what
the
witness
I suggest
examiner
so much,
an end.
your
I understand
some point
at
that
that
is
Honor,
she
we have
to
is
have
an adversar
an end
and
now.
I think
THE COURT:
if
with
Mr.
Mr.
great
Cohn,
Schwelb
did
respect,
would
not
talk
we would
have
to
have
say
am
perplexed.
May I explain
MR. COHN:
10
make
an offer
of
13
her
her
14
with
the
connection
15
into
what
16
with
respect
case,
the
issues
mind
with
case,
it
seems
20
an offer
of
21
I am going
22
think
it
23
this,
there
24
fond
that
25
answers
proof,
--
will
to
and
take
seem
as
Well,
twelve
interroqatories
from
familiarity
we are
now qoinq
lawyer's
mattes
litigation.
have
any
relevance
to
motion.
your
counsel
long
eliciting
oriqinal
me to
whatever
if
your
strictly
of
to
by your
came a time
these
May I
Honor?
to me that
conduct
do not
framed
the
regard
the
MR. COHN:
19
I didn't
I certainly
They
17
but
to
your
~roof?
THE COURT:
12
18
doing.
MR. COHN:
11
is
but
21
Goldstein-direct
to
Honor,
your
in
Honor
bears
get
where
when the
instances
were
with
nature
might
they
the
of
wish,
the
me I do ~ot
I am going,
Civil
out
the
Rights
supplied
window,
is
Section
in
that
the
Goldstein-direct
there
ally
found
own,
and
of
witnesses,
not
of
specificity
was no case,
wrong
at
conduct
of
involving
10
to
this
if
12
that
as not
13
and
scandalous.
14
he is
not
proper
THE COURT:
15
a lawyer's
16
to
17
thing.
the
18
Court,
19
charges
20
the
21
taking
22
certainly
23
that
24
of
taking
of
had
of
this
or
didn't
that
when we would
it.
think
to
that
get
the
in
the
course
forth
with
inflarnatory
to
in
connection
of
we were
going
of
the
be reserved
merits
it
as
made
explain
some-
certain
with
for
examination
the
improper
view
about
preparation
down to
strike
statements
was all
merits
sub-
and
I merely
case
was to
strike
I move to
an attempt
or
depositions,
a course
new case
I move to
course
conduct
depositions
pertained
set
you understand,
that
I thought
date
as
in
upon
even
intimidatinq
are
Honor,
remarks,
Well,
set
actu-
motion.
prove
specific
of
didn't
an entirely
to
you k.now,
I thought
Trumps
which
Your
argument,
the
And that
contempt
able
they
agents,
build
acts
MR. SCHWELB:
cases
Goldstein
specifics.
the
certain
which
Miss
trying
committed
ject
in
undercover
these
11
25
point
usinq
in
that
buildinqs
that
and
that
and
22
either
the
records.
into
I
anything
case.
for
of
a future
the
case.
Goldstein-direct
What we are
2
3
merits
I understand
so forth.
are
with
the
incidents
we are
now.
10
R3 fls
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of
the
charges
desire
I think
until
to
which
to
MR. COHN:
considering
made
your
respect
going
really
what
All
this
probe
into
we know what
did
nowhere
right,
(Continued
here
aaainst
to
formed
get
23
or
the
did
basis
because
your
on next
for
And
motivation
and
real
take
your
I am lost
Honor.
paqe.)
the
witness.
the
not
are
facts
place,
motion,
right
THE COURT:
of
a collateral
I understood
hearing
MR. COllN:
4
5
Honor
in
what
looks
of
the
course
allegations
are.
Your
Honor,
that
is
11
out
12
proper
13
which
14
are
15
fore
16
specifics
the
when
and
tactics
set
in
set
forth
your
in
the
Honor.
19
lectionof
20
the
regular
21
that
had
22
something
24
making
25
I don
,-our
my affidavit
it
spells
out
just
motivation,
of
at.
There
complaint
of
totally
a pre-trial
im-
period
-this
be very
was
examples
motion
glad
to
be-
turn
to
I would
that
events
here
is
framework
of
the
have
was
to
the
that
a consid-
case.
that
progress
have
My recol-
occurred
of
the
within
litigation
begun.
to
all
If
of
supportinq
that
Now whether
23
papers
Well,
demonstration
the
all.
now.
THE COURT:
erable
misconduct.
specificity
And I would
right
18
some
natu
of
original
of
the
six
on a series
guise
with
at
term
this
embarked
forth
be in
I am getting
felt
the
and
the
what
they
that
I think
usinq
exactly
window
was
in
to
charges
in
one
motion
came a time
17
No problem
this
10
this
on some
up paragraphs
support
24
Goldstein-direct
TlR3
1
DDS:MM
2
litigation
be determined.
the
t know,
that
statements
when we have
It
to
has
merit
may be thatyou
the
a full
Court
exposi
at
or
not
is
would
be
some point,
tior.
of what
th
facts
plaint.
are
is
score.
are
with
respect
to
What weare
allegations
something
plan
quite
to get
respect
of
specifics
12
paragraph
Honor,
15
ing
16
ducting
this
17
of the
rights
18
witnesses,
the
manner
and is
your
terms
Miss
defendants,
turn
to
on that
further
it
would
to get
down to
in your
affidavit
our
Goldstein
which
totallv
but
investigation
of the
it,
And that
your
Goldstein
in general
in which
And I will
19
some
in
in my affidavit,
complaint
has
cancer
been
con-
we say
is
of the
perspective
improper
pre-trial
specifics
right
violative
procedure.
this
minute
Honor.
THE
21
22
state
what
you said
as I see
some proof
we ought
that
here,
com-
to my way of thinking,
to Miss
11
of the
witnesses.
know exactly
seem to me that
20
the
down to
certainly
14
with
collateral,
10
13
allegations
made aqainst
is with
these
the
concerned
Now, I don't
8
9
25
Goldstein-direct
COURT:
All
right.
BY MR. COHN:
23
24
Yes,
25
named Stephanie
Rush?
I do.
Stephanie
Bush in as an undercover
agent
into
Trump buildings
No.
--
No,
Did
sent
into
her
identity
in
in
other
I did
in
10
agent."
If
11
a tester
for
12
name of
as
the
Stephanie
16
I believe
17
Does
she
work
18
Yes,
she
does.
after
it
was
the
for
events
MR. COHN:
23
THE COURT: It
24
MR. COHN:
Miss
the
been
concealing
terrr
Miss
"undercover
Bush
she
is
Group.
for
the
Miss
Fair
Housing
Group
Bush?
in August
the
of
Urban
Oh,
no,
I think
I believe
form
it
that
thebasis
for
this
your
came before.
came before?
Oh yes.
Bush,
which
1974.
Leaoue?
Am I mistaken?
22
that
to
Housing
you meet
THE COURT:
think
had
Bush?
When did
25
Bush
agent
know about
motion.
to
Fair
15
21
Stephanie
an unde~cover
you want
Yes.
occurred
that
I object
20
aqt.
1974?
14
19
1974
two months
you discover
July,
of
not.
MR.-SCHWELB:
by the
July
words
Trump buildings
13
26
Goldstein-direct
Specifically
according
your
Honor,
to my infcrmati6n,
I
was
Goldstein-direct
contacted
Section,
That
at
at
Urban
according
Miss
the
Bush
In
set
bringing
of
it
on her
July,
1974.
one word
10
propounded
11
he didnt
about
of
in
testing
the
Rights
June
of
1974.
campaign
factors
there
motivating
the
motion.
MR. SCHWELB:
Civil
my information,
was one
this
by the
about
of
fact
League
to
beginninq
the
27
Miss
If
your
Bush
in
interrogatories
Honor
Mr.
please,
Cohn's
with
there
is
motion.
respect
to
not
We
that
and
12
mention
it
MR. COHN:
and
Your
Honor,
13
cludable.
14
gations
where
I was not
15
name of
every
witness
16
every
tactic
17
Mr.
19
motion
20
told
21
it
22
else
23
fit.
25
Schwelb
to
Miss
is
I do not
to
if
had
the
set
has
has
forth
been
to
do with
is
alle-
the
done
or
preclude
that
remedy
on a
is
surprise
I should
it
is.
if
pass
to
But
on to
hav
he savs
something
do whatever
call
Miss
pre-
done.
the
think
it
general
knwo what
Interrogatories
to
think
to
him an opportunitv
that
that.
a motion
it
willing
MR. SCHW~LB:
information
--
in
to
Goldstein
I don't
preclude
give
enough
whom this
reference
I am perfectly
and
is
preclude
I do not
required
to
says
him today,
is
there
which
Now, with
18
24
I think
I move to
for
Goldstein's
he sees
all
the
conduc.
He didn't
as
be able
of
Trump buildings,
Mr.
list
that.
a witness
at
to
the
Miss
the
Bush will
trial
determine
testing
a month
in
full
by a black
and
probably
from
detail
they
weren't
now and
what
and white
be calle
the
tester
very
you wil
results
were
from
favorable
to
Trump.
MR. COHN:
8
9
28
Goldstein-direct
to
the
basics
here.
10
a complaint
here
11
advised
12
Goldstein's
13
covering
not
14
covering
events
15
pre-trial
of
the
of
events
that
of
been
19
and
20
process,
21
ever
22
day
23
saying
and doing
24
to
original
25
ficity
one
serious
given
in
doing
to
they
want
the
this
are.
case
based
complaint
occurred
ri~ht
are
directed
in
which
can
the
to
the
place.
as
we have
meet
and
go out
in
depositiona
agents,
or
how-
around
day
somebody
into
have
complaint
we were
while
after
sent
trap
but
we regard
testing
to
we be
takinq
actually
them,
trying
charges
was
what
upon
on Miss
inthe
But
told
it
down
new investigatio
matter.
or
that
we trying
which
and
something
Honor
this
things
denominate
Trump buildings
your
gets
complaint
undercover
to
that
a completely
and
it
have
are
charged
specificity
start
Honor,
direction
allegedly
is
18
the
or
original
extremely
Honor's
specifics
on the
17
to
on your
the
your
Are we trying
fashioning
That
16
You see,
entitled
afte
no relevancy
and
the
to
speci-
have,
think
by the
of my affidavit,
it
a Government
an existing
and
a framework
and
they
it
is
totally
purport
agents
11
as
to
that
issues
and
are
out
MR. SCHWELB:
low key
14
were
presentation.
amended
to
15
It
16
THE COURT:
has
17
asking
18
I started
off
19
somethinq
20
I find
nothing
a question
this
by
on the
motion
was
happened
THE COURT:
lying
--
to
Mr.
dated
July
Cohn'
interrooatori
testimony.
charqes.
provoked
after
MR. COHN:
order,
August
given
undercover
from
the
in
23
to
answer
happening
THE COURT:
a Court
additional
has
of
and
been
I appreciate
do with
part
a pre-trial
are
this
22
of
have
wasn't
MR. COHN:
it
conduct
sayina
21
prove
tha
buildinqs,
our
Perhaps
which
--
they
the
to
improper
Honor,
But
disclose
totally
under
their
where
Your
six
defendants
of
and
and
specifics
the
covered
one
middle
drawn
subjecting
in
is
the
when
and
by paragraphs
it
in
complaint
are
a tactic
improper
attorney
of
as
motion
totally
who they
13
25
this
and
going
12
improper
of
constitutes
10
24
29
Goldstein-direct
for
so much debate.
a recollection
the
26,
motion
of
and
now
I am goinq
to
1974.
Yes.
So it
No,
did
she
weeks
Well,
happen
after.
just
said
it.
before
this
motion.
her
answer,
as
I understand
it,
it
that
we should
what
other
these
this
this
way --
I think
to
events
MR. COHN:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
10
Miss
11
cover
did
12
buildings
13
this
9,
would
it
to
1974,
key witnesses
I don't
I have
named
be the
on here.
that
rule
Goldstein
a tester
on July
Mr.
I will
motion
that
be concentrating
witnesses
pertain
occurred
all
But
prior
know
unless
to
making
irrelevant.
your
Honqr's
ruling.
your
knowledge
did
an under-
Stephanie
Bush
go around
some weeks
prior
to
as
relevancy
the
to
Trump
making
of
motion.
MR. SCHWELB:
14
15
Objection
to
your
Honor.
16
THE COURT:
A
17
I am aware
18
19
early
20
provided
21
after
July,
the
Stephanie
24
capacity?
events
Well,
that
and
the
do you know or
a
that
that
testing
to
was
testing
information
about
the
Department,
say
you
do you not
conducted
by the
was conducted
in
that
know
testing
believe
was
sometime
occurred.
When do you
Bush
that
my office,
23
League
and
to
22
25
31
Goldstein-direct
going
around
Do you want
to
the
an exact
first
learned
Trump buildings
date?
I don't
of
this
in
have
this
an exac
Goldstein-direct
date.
()
Didn't
Oh,
League.
Mr.
you
speak
I met with
Goldberg
and
to
when did
you
first
I believe
it
was
Yes.
Miss
Goldstein?
10
It
to
the
in
Urban
Haeber
at
Miss
Hoeber.
with
rlfiss
the
Leaque.
Urban
Haeber?
June.
you are
You don't
It
met Miss
15
was before
Trump buildings,
A
13
14
meet
the
sure
have
it
was
any
in
doubt
June,
about
aren't
that,
do you?
11
12
Well,
in
Betty
I met with
you,
someone
Mrs.
32
Miss
wasn't
was before
Bush
started
marching
around
it?
testing,
yes,
definitely,
when
Haeber.
When you
16
Bush
until
17
around
August
18
August,
the
19
June,
had
around
and
fact
told
July,
you
you are
is
you
his
Honor
are
not
not
you didn't
quite
quite
sure
meet
sure
--
but
Bush's
it
Miss
I am sorry
was around
superiors
back
in
you not?
20
MR. SCID1ELB:
21
MR. COHN:
22
23
I met
24
Who is
25
I don't
Betty
Betty
He is
I will
misouoting
withdraw
Miss
Bush's
Haeber
then,
the
the
testimony.
question.
superiors
in
June?
yes.
Hoeber?
know what
her
title
is,
but
Betty
Hoeber
is
the
director
of
of
the
New York
Urban
of
agents
around
she
might
send
mation
and
10
listed
inour
their
12
cated
that
she
13
agents
of
ours
with
Betty
with
League
clients
were
Hoeber
might
in
was
her?
had
Hoeber
Miss
an arm
the
sending
Haeber
provided
a number
stated
us with
of
that
the
some infer
people
we have
in
testing.
the
case
They
and
indi-
weren't
any way.
that
interested
do some more
yes
I don't
Mrs.
or
Hoeber
to
have
the
testing?
no?
believe
I asked
Miss
Hoeber
to
do the
to
you is
testing.
THE COURT:
18
19
far
20
allegations
21
tion
22
so?
to
say
that
supplied
of
I was
some of
the
by the
TFtE WITNESS:
24
THE COURT:
case
originally.
just
the
about
information
complaint
23
25
is
Trump buildings?
I discuss
Miss
16
which
interroqatories.
11
14
Center
League.
The Urban
17
Open Housing
some testers.
15
to
Did
the
4
5
33
Goldstein-direct
were
New York
In
Well,
But did
the
Urban
ori.ginal
I realize
you
learn
ask
involved
predicated
it
in
the
on informa
League?
Is
that
complaint?
you were
that
at
not
in
any
time
the
that
which
the
in June,
you or Mrs.
It's
of fair
housing
information
Yes.
12
for
the
part
13
project
14
was doing
15
on having,
16
but
17
I believe,
that
at
on a regular
your
of discussing
in New York,
I believe
Section
that
20
ready
21
acts
which
22
case
was as of June,
23
stage?
A
any different
about
answers
you claim
I met with
that
but
the
Mrs.
Hoeber
may not
it
Mrs.
been
was during
Miss
Roeber
inwords
of the
interrogatories
conference
with
her,
1974,
in the
depositional,
know whether
the
discovery
or in substanc
Court
setting
in tris
normal
planning
possibly.
committed
the
Center
were
that
not
another
my meetinq
were
I don't
Roeber
to discuss
they
have
to an order
to
representatives
Open Housing
a conference
and it
pursuant
than
--
you tell
19
furnished
it
project,
Did
with
basis.
Trump,
about
--
we talked
18
I believe
another
meeting
groups
purpose
the
recall.
In fact
11
25
had supplied
Hoeber?
I don't
24
group
10
League
BY MR. COHN:
Urban
THE WITNESS:
4
5
34
Goldstein-direct
case,
forth
and that
the
the
pre-trial
depositional
stage
had al-
of
stage
litigation.
is
I will
I don't
Haeber
that
rogatories
case,
that
10
R4 fls
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we had
I stated
that
were
and
she
take
anything.
I have
recall
may have
I may have
--
before
known,
the
Miss
mentioned
first
involved
Haeber,
answers
to
on next
page.)
Miss
possible
to
in
I have
it.
(Continued
is
answers
of whether
the
told
It
I became
no recollection
of
I specifically
interrogatories.
we provided
provided
no recollection
it
answered
I have
35
Goldstein-direct
inter-
this
no idea.
or not
I said
interrogatories
36
dds;pc
tl/4
1
2
3
4
5
fact
that
agent
A
14
15
her
17
information
statement
20
24
25
right
to the
but if
that
I was
at this
point
to Miss Hober
to be sending
buildings
because
you do it
I don't
believe
Well,
that
I don't
I didn't
-- because
we have already
reG'Ollection
presented
time
truck
want your
22
23
around?
of anything
Q
the
to do this.
our case,
around
presented
that
your business
21
agent
18
tester?
The fact
agents
the
16
19
about
asking
12
it
of 1974?
of this
the
undercover
Yes.
A
not
this
sending
10
13
in July
11
around
Did
our case
for me to do the
testing.
any
us?
that
would be a correct
to Miss Hober.
and it
we presented
is
wouldn't
our case
we have already
be appropriate
it
wouldn't
for me to
be appropriate
have said
37
1
if
had a plan
any testing
any testing.
specifically
I wasn't
said
that,
reports
in and about
of this
the middle
around
15
21
22
23
24
25
concerning
around
the truck
the
buildings?
14
20
inf or-
of July
19
in
13
18
they
involved
17
that
That
going to initiate
of Justice
12
16
any testing.
and I said
And having
mation
11
on testing
10
various
Housing Center
the words
(continuing)
involved
Yes, I did.
in this
I received
Is there
herself
at
case?
any difference
information
from the
to -between
the Open
It
organization:
"marching
withdraw
characterization.
11
buildings
A
to the
is that
It is a private
correct?
I have no idea.
Now, just
one last
I guess
it
question
may be.
on this
point:
38
1
3
2
3
To your knowledge,
Bush,went
10
and you
agent,
to these
Trump buildings
I don't
believe
And in fact,
11
-- the impression
12
thing
13
14
that
herself
superintendents
somebody else
16
all
calls
how this
19
mind.
All right.
20
To your knowledge,
22
League based
23
24
25
housing
that
of
But I think
we
I do not see
somebody else's
state
that
last
she came
a conclusion
so.
the
for.
can invade
or Urban League?
for
I think
18
21
me that
operation.
are
as coming from
and a mental
of July,
15
Stephanie
she did.
the impression
MR. SCHWELB: It
17
lady,
at the beginning
she wanted
when this
with
tell
the Urban
connected
of
from
whenever
the open
39
a hearsay
we will
that
identify
themselves
the test
wouldn't
representative
to determine,
10
answer.
concede
Furthermore,
and we will
when testers
11
At the
13
Hober,
14
15
Department
in which this
with
because
and in this
before
case
they
if
they did,
they
a
are trying
--
testing
that.
conversation
was discussed
as to the propriety
in the Justice
of this?
16
Work product.
17
it
19
Now, during
20
following
21
July
22
as the perameter
23
occasion
24
25
February,
26th,
your entry
into
to determine
to make up a list
forth
1974 in answer
has relevance
same period
this
motion,
of time,
under his
certainly,
of former
to
here.
this
with Miss
in June of 1974,
don't
did determine.
18
and
Mr. Cohn
give
conduct
for
stipulate
a building,
as testers
12
we will
calls
be happy to tell
go to test
example
Well,
this
Honor's
to our interrogatories?
ruling
Trump employees
in the information
namely
supplied
whose
to us in
40
1
5
2
3
I am afraid
question.
had already
containing
been furnished
specific
into
the
to the defendants
it
if you
case,
there
interrogatories
incidents
Do you
recall
that?
about
the
original
answers
to
interrogatories?
11
I am talking
12
Right.
13
Yes.
After
later,
14
15
16
months
17
18
MR.
answers
about
to interrogatories.
that?
the
case,
SCHWELB: This
20
of --
of former
is
product.
23
24
to the incidents
I am getting
right
of
to the
that
she spoke
in their
work
incident.
employees
22
21
about
19
25
by the
are confused.
10
I am confused
We conducted
allow
a records
that
question.
inspection
in June of
41
1
6
1974.
Trump employees ,
that
At that
records
present
were produced
inspection
and former,
pursuant
to notice
In June,
Did I turn
from payroll
of records
records
inspection.
1974.
this
that
list
list
No, I
did not.
10
11
12
Pursuant
13
list
14
litigation
15
I requested,
as in the
those
18
the records
19
from that
l received
course
from that
of our conducting
-- made this
request
we request
Now, would it
agents
21
conducted
to be interviewed,
that
some of
we secured
these
be fair
interviews
in charge
to say that
from
of the Justice
Department?
23
24
of paperwork
the FBI
is
that
inspection.
20
there
list
interviews.
22
normal
I asked
certain
People
17
the information
to information
investigation,
16
25
of
involved.
did they
My
conduct
it?
have been -
42
1
7
2
3
4
Mr. Goldberg's
reviewed
and finally
Carol
I believe
I believe
10
A
I don't
19
22
23
Falcone's
evidence
I sent
out.
out.
in that
Mr. Goldberg.
the
that
All
witness
chair
carol
Falcone?
home at 10 o'clock
believe
we both --
One of us did.
fact
is
that
so going
at night,
sometime
before
to show, at Mis
to that
entire
the question
the
24
25
if
list
that?
were sent
20
21
of requests
advised
told
about
16
18
a lady
yes.
A number of anything
14
17
I did,
A nunber
11
15
Falcone?
13
are
12
sent
deputies.
5
6
that
of all
I object
and,
I would object
second,
to
form.
MR. COHN: I will
first
could
you
tell
be glad
us simply,
to withdraw
did you tell
it.
the
43
1
8
FBI to go to interview
knOW"ledge that
to interview
Falcone
former
Cohn.
myself
the FBI to go
or Irr/ colleagues
an investigation
employees.,
told
Falcone?
Either
Carol
or to interview
that
11
13
superfluous
please?
14
he stop
us what the
testify-
is highly
answer is.
get straightforward
16
17
ward,
18
talk
21
interviewed
22
contacted
23
Miss Falcone
Q
Is it,
you wanted
to
to Miss Falcone?
A
24
the
Mr. Cohn.
Now, did you tell
20
25
if he tells
is yes.
of the witness
15
19
The presence
Mr.
ing,
that
certain
10
12
requested
What I believe
Miss Falcone
I contacted
I said
them that
was that
we had already
last
contacte
I had
would be unnecessary
as I understand
after
chronology
answer,
that
of this?
you told
44
9
1
2
her
her,
to do anything?
first
to Miss Falcone?
to reach
and then
or whatever
I object
Other
Locate?
10
11
I interviewed
12
tell
13
unnecessary
them that
I then
I had interviewed
to contact
Before
"get
to."
to"?
and at hours
after
her
contacted
her
Reach?
9 0
that
1
Miss Falcone.
the
and that
it
FBI to
was
as well.
you interviewed
16
Miss Falcone,
FBI agents
clock
did it
at nightl
17
Absolutely
18
At the deposition
not.
hear
about
this,
if you
did?
20
to this
hearing
-- prior
to this
22
23
her uncle,
24
25
..get
Miss Falcone.
21
for you
statement?
the phrase,
We requested
15
19
is not necessary
to the phrase,
than
we have located
Find?
A
14
a fair
Is that
and it
independently
might be,
Miss Falcone?
called
it
That you,
first
of Miss Falcone,
with
referen
hearing.
you knew that
by FBI agents
her mother,
at hours
Absolutely.
MR. SCHWELB:Excuse me . It
calls
for
45
1
10
innumerable
it.
hearsay
answers
6
7
come to your
10
So the
at night,
that
is
15
was anything
16
No, the
17
That's
22
23
is
other
at
Or at any time
than
only
rules
--
that.
to believe
a former
in anything
Trump
Miss
employee?
herself?
information
an answer.
at 10 o'clock
correct.
Falcone
what hours
didn't
right.
14
18
again.
deposition?
13
21
that
12
20
the
You say it
11
19
until
we are straying
and what?
attention
night
I think
to
witnesses
I didn't
give
instructions
on
be approached?
them instructions.
outline
the perameters
of
investigation?
A
24
information
25
organization
I outline
the questions
to be received.
and it
never
to be asked,
The FBI is
a very
professional
that
they
46
1
11
ever
conducted
themselves
And certainly
3
4
instructions
elsewhere,
unprofessionally.
this
it
to the
is not
FBI.
That
as I understand
'lWf
business
to give
is
generally
done
it.
Well the
fact
sent
out
a request
I merely
involving
you contacted
A
contact
17
18
19
in the
our office.
FBI,
specifically?
Yes.
15
16
through
me who the
special
agent
of the
FBI was?
13
14
Miss Falcone,
A
11
12
in
ease?
10
you didn't,
Would this
refresh
your
menory?
recall
whether
Mr. Goldberg
or whether
Miss Falcone.
I personally
made the
made the
contact.
You said
in the
FBI?
20
21
22
no objection,
conducting
contacted,
I will
mention
together
on it.
the
investigation
23
24
THE WITNESS:
25
THE COURT: He is
Mr. Terrence
a special
cox.
agent?
--
I know
and
if he has
47
1
12
this
case,
yes,
agent
in charge
sir.
that
is
correct.
it
or in charge
it,
is that
would be correct.
I don't
10
FBI.
11
Well,
13
I interviewed
14
15
One occasion.
16
17
About a half
12
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of
correct?
of
with
Falcone?
( continued
Miss Falcone.
interview
last?
an hour to 45 minutes.
next
page. )
that
with
Miss
the
Goldstein-direct
About
30 to
About
that.
Where
did
In her
That
6
7
I would
A
Right.
About
10
I believe
Was the
what
were
lunch
the
they
Hero
sell
Hut.
hero
sandwiches
of
the
day was
at
it?
approximately
quarter
What time
16
I would
17
laws
with
Miss
was some.
No.
20
Did you
substance
that
22
think
for
A
at
progress
the
was not
say
you
the
latest
occasion
tell
Miss
while
you
to
very
left
crowded.
there?
about
discuss
12:30.
the
perjury
Falcone
in
words
or
in
--
I withdraw
It
do you
MR. COHN:
work
in
Falcone?
19
23
business
there?
15
25
business,
I arrives
There
24
place?
where
time
21
of
a place
14
18
take
twelve.
12
13
that
assume.
11
45 minutes?
place
is
48
Trump
Yes.
organization
Miss
in
that
question.
Falcone
prior
concerning
years?
her
to
2
3
to
her
that
she
I asked
specific
she
Miss
refresh
say
at
to
that
her
you
can
12
You deny
13
Totally.
14
Now, did
Falcone's
her
18
married.
19
asked
20
21
No.
that
to
that
would
words
specific
question
on a
believe,
that
and would
you
that
there
are
for
up to
five
ask
questions
her
if
I may have
be
found
it
perjury
hard
laws
years?
dealing
with
asked
the
she
was married
--
her
whether
was
personal
she
questions
her
I would
age,
have
her.
Did you
she
worked
for
23
Did you
money
A
to
open
ask
the
Absolutely
25
one
that.
life?
the
concerning
recollection,
hard
suggest
categorically?
you
22
24
you
not.
I asked
occupation.
when
jail
personal
17
did
truth
in
her
the
her
go to
Absolutely
16
full
point
it
use
tell
Miss
one
I found
11
15
the
duties
recollection.
did
you
her
refresh
When you
believe,
which
described
t telling
Falcone
to
wasn
point
she
I believe
10
After
49
Goldstein-direct
the
I hate
her
Trump
if
she
dated
Donald
Trump
Organization?
not.
ask
Hero
to
her
where
she
could
have
Hut?
be repetitious,
but
no.
gotten
2
3
50
Goldstein-direct
I don't
is
the
first
time
think
I asked
Did you
substance
place
telling
that
at
the
there
Trump
is
that
tell
were
office
it
repetitious.
Miss
Falcone
records
of
and
in words
phone
therefore
11
Yes.
By the
the
date
14
Mr. Cohn.
of your
I believe
it
Miss
took
knew what
she
was
never
have
crossed
my
it
was
17
Was it
19
I know it
20
Then
not
July?
named Mr.
August
August
August,
Wait,
I asked
Miranda?
you
to
fix
Falcone.
was Friday,
was Friday,
No,
--
was it
the
19th.
was
I'm
it?
a little
confused
on
that.
July
22
23
would
think
with
it
21
That
I don't
interview
I believe
19th?
way,
16
18
that
mind.
12
15
in
true?
10
13
or
calls
you
No,
it
question.
I think
19th.
Q
named
Thomas
it
My dates
was July.
was July
are
Now, did
19th.
Then
it
was Friday,
wrong.
you have
occasion
to
interview
a man
Miranda?
24
Yes.
25
asked
the
FBI to
locate
Mr. Miranda
3
4
for
No.
already
you?
spoken
We knew where
to
Did you
Yes,
Where
I telephoned
Where
10
At his
11
Can you
12
It
13
same week
call
I telephoned
did
him?
him at
home.
We had
Where was
I?
telephoned?
home.
remember
was most
of July
his
19th.
--
when
what
Midday.
17
this
I believe
So it
16
time
would
of
the
was?
it
was Tuesday
be July
16th
day
you
did
of
the
perhaps.
phone
the
home?
working
knowledge
about
Yes.
20
Where
was he working
21
Well,
he was a superintendent
22
building
23
would
24
to
where
he was
then?
19
25
was.
Mr. Miranda.
you telephone
About
18
Miranda
him?
14
Mr.
him.
15
51
Goldstein-direct
that
be his
he lived
working
in.
This
then?
phone
of
number,
from
what
the
apartment
his
telephone,
I believe
it
be.
Q
Now, was
a meeting
between
you
and Mr.
Miranda
52
Goldstein-direct
set
up?
Yes.
Did you go to his
home?
I did.
Yes,
Anybody
His wife.
How long
About
You were
Correct.
No.
else
present?
6
7
were
you there?
two hours.
there
about
two hours?
10
11
12
13
14
Mr. Miranda
that
you did
for
another
in words
not
interview
or
feel
in
after
substance
you lef?
to
he was giving
you the
15
whole
story?
16
17
18
19
20
21
A
was at
discuss
felt
the
reluctant
to
story.
He told
matter.
But
he was giving
--
speak
No,
I did
with
me.
me he didn't
I never
me a story
not.
He never
want
indicated
that
Mr. Miranda
at
gave
first
to
to him that
was incorrect
me
or
incomplete.
Did you tell
discuss
24
25
first
a different
22
23
the
A
didn't
want
him that
you didn't
have
to
matter?
I indicated
to become
-involved
Mr. Miranda
in
this
--
he told
lawsuit.
me he
That
he
was
frightened.
and
tell
5
6
Did you
3
4
Mr.
friendly
that
have
Miranda
witness
this
to
his
Honor's
witness.
He,
as
I don't
17
witness
18
advise
I understood,
like
you
to
answer
had
said
him of
his
Mr.
was
provided
After
the
that
tion,
but
21
Mr.
Miranda
22
wasn't.
23
stood
man you
not
24
warning.
to
Your
implication
was being
as being
you answer
Miranda
he didn't
I did
Will
finishing
his
subject
my question?
not
to
to
talk
to you?
talk
Honor,
just
that
charged
Just
to be a friendly
wish
this
he was entitled
THE COURT:
No,
us.
thought
in
want
rights?
to be a friendly
information
rights
the
you
considered
MR. SCHWELB:
19
mind
Yes.
I give
I said,
He had
Q
16
I would
instruction.
Did
15
rights
May I finish?
THE COURT:
12
didn't.
his
to you?
from what
First
MR. COHN:
10
14
talk
him of
--
THE WITNESS:
13
advise
question.
11
point
was,
MR. COHN:
25
at
him he didn't
20
53
Goldstein-direct
because
to
you,
a minor
question
with
a crime
question
to
his
to
is
did
you
objecthat
and he
be under-
some Miranda
MR. SCHWELB:
4
5
I'm
to
asking
talk
wish
to
11
if
to
10
I'm
talked
to
not
you had
told
No.
after
to
you
remain
me and
told
I am sorry.
your
mental
that
you
he told
processes.
do not
have
you he didn't
there?
I remained
there
for
a few hours.
me why he did
not
want
Mr.
to
Miranda
get
to
talk
me.
Q
help
15
him he could
16
No.
Did you
17
bring
about
jog
his
memory
I withdraw
a change
go to
use
--
that
in
his
question.
Did you
position
by telling
jail?
the
word
jail
in
talking
to
Mr. Miranda?
19
20
21
22
25
for
wish.
did
that.
Mr. Miranda
you
14
24
you
dn't
13
23
I missed
asking
me now if
12
18
54
Goldstein-direct
in
deal
the
No.
No.
Did you
Department
with?
A
No.
of
tell
Justice
him
threat
to
there
were
that
he was
Mr.
Miranda?
bigger
going
people
to
have
to
MR. SCHWELB:
MR. COHN:
Mr.
Schwelbe
Do you
Yes.
Did you
Yes.
10
When?
11
I belie~
Mr.
13
during
Miranda
later,
that
interview
the
Where
15
At their
home.
16
Was that
in
17
18
was Valley
19
phone
did
believe
them
after
the
same
of
the
interview
Valley
it
is
I would
Paul
and Paula
I interviewed
day.
middle
of
It
that
was
week.
them?
Stream?
on Long
have
to
Island
see
and
their
think
address
it
in
the
of
the
book.
20
Did you
21
interview
that
22
statement
to
at
not
or
about
satisfied
tte.conclusion
with
Mr.
Ziesselman's
you?
No.
24
Did you
more
state
you were
23
furnish
you
I am giving
them?
during
again?
statements.
named
afternoon
14
back
show
Ziesselman
Sometime
Stream.
record
I interviewed
in
week.
his
that
Ziesselman?
12
May I get
May the
back
25
55
Goldstein-direct
information
tell
him that
that
unless
you were
going
he was
to
able
send
to
the
FBI
1
2
agents
back
to
requested,
them
them,
them
to
and
interview
them.
they
10
coming
11
interview
If
try
not
pursuant
to
12
That
was
is
I had
so
that
the
I said
to
them,
or
frightened.
from me for
the
contacted
FBI to
You didn't
threatening
FBI wouldn't
I miss
the
the
come
FBI
They were
same
kind
of
conducted.
context
in which
you
referred
to
correct.
say
it
in what
we might
call
No.
18
And the
your
testimony
Ziesselmans,
would
if
they
so interpreted
be mistaken?
20
Yes.
21
Herbert
22
Do I know a Mr.
I believe
a former
employee
midnight
that
the
Heller?
Bureau
at
a summer
resort
at
No,
did
24
context?
17
25
let
FBI?
15
23
I ha
FBI contact
the
with
them
the
that
was that
touch
already
That
that,
in
a request
I had
Ziesselman
now that
be concerned
19
get
seen
14
16
And that
to
to
to Mr.
Falcone,
by chance,
came,
that
to Miss
I had
know that
I said
them.
I would
that
see
the
I had
as
and
them?
No, what
13
56
Goldstein-direct
which
Heller/
he is
contact.
call
to
Mr.
Heller
he was vacationing?
at
Goldstein-direct
What?
No.
Did anyone
I have
Is
Yes,
Did you
10
I believe
Mr.
FBI requests
that
11
one of
12
don't
13
have
14
15
the
think
any
it
this
the
16
first
ask
outside
Heller
18
have
the
at
scope
no idea
When did
22
I don't
of
the
such
Mr.
yes,
a suggestio?
Heller
for
--
because
yo?
was on
although
I prepared
Is
you
back
minutes
after
the
time
Honor,
I
I don't
motion.
talking
I have
no idea.
the
of
all,
and,
pre-motion
FBI to
that
they
midnight?
first
this
know that
Honor,
to you
affidavit,
he is
ask
MR. SCHWELB:
scope
out,
report
Your
of
what
21
25
call.
name was on it
that
five
THE WITNESS:
your
of
locate
we sent
FBI ever
20
Court,
phone
it.
THE COURT:
24
such
FBI to
one
19
23
of
Heller's
MR. SCHWELB:
17
knowledge?
you heard
the
of
Did the
Mr.
to your
absolutely.
recollection
called
call?
no knowledge
was on the
had
else
57
this
secondly,
is
I
about.
or
after
contact
Mr.
motion?
Heller?
I have
There
I object
Further
is
to
something
before
the
that
as outside
the
I think
your
Honor
has
ruled
that
if
it
happened
MR. COHN:
afterwards
I would
like
THE WITNESS:
in charge
Mr.
of this
Herbert
to
is
find
irrelevant.
out
when it
In the
requests.
13
sit
witness
14
contact
on the
Mr.
tell
Heller
20
in June.
21
August.
It
It
his
a knowledge
me your
best
recollection
that
know.
as you
the
FBI to
been
have
in March.
been
in
Yes.
MR. SCHWELB: Your Honor,
four
witnesses
that
I have
Mr.
John
this
know
may have
may have
September.
the
It
It
23
think
I don't
in.
of
of FBI
I don't
I prepared.
scope
of the
you know.
22
24
--
have
I don't
list
may have
might
operation
--
was on the
FBI list
the
(Continuing)
which
locate
I too
MR. SCHWELB: If
19
FBI to
person
Heller.
Well
16
Mr.
as the
know.
stand
Herbert
18
the
explain
dim past
12
17
recollection,
you ask
to
I don't
15
did
I am trying
FBI operation
11
case,
best
know.
Heller?
I don't
When to your
25
it
happened.
10
58
Goldstein-direct
been
been
in
no idea.
Brofman?
is
he talked
outside
about
the
that
Goldstein-direct
we asked
particularly
this
had.
world,
the
lady
I don't
to
that
believe
is
if
he does
Well,
antecedent
MR. COHN:
10
secret.
I can
11
an offer
of
12
phone
13
by Miss
14
or
calls
it
proof.
is
all
he
around
the
in
this
something
you
motion?
have
to
the
made by people
ask
form
is
her.
of
It
no
or
basis
called
or
is
a statement
on the
who were
associates,
THE COURT:
16
the
17
couldn't
18
responsible
FBI this
I would
wouldn't
possibly
for
20
suggest
21
knows
22
FBI is
23
of
that
anything
the
better
Except
person
than
any of
an investigative
Justice
and
it
THE COURT:
Department
say
if
be helpful
tell.
MR. COHN:
19
the
is
he does.
What I have
Goldstein,or
against
that
go and meander
to your
state
charges
He said
now,
I will
I very
of
either
FBI agents,
called
visited
15
24
the
he had.
he can
THE COURT:
about.
know all
think
although
25
interrogatories
wanted
young
in
59
for
this,
that
this
It
under
it
your
as your
us in
is
witness
my judgment.
HOnor,
Honor
courtroom
not
programs
happens
by
vicariously
FBI does,in
operates
of Justice.
not
called
This
the
--
were
here.
She is
arm.
Well,
they
the
I would
well
--
the
Department
given
to be part
to
of
it-
MR. COHN:
60
Goldstein-direct
didn't
Of course.
recognize
thank
the
goodness,
after
as
10
the
11
standards,
12
and
dealing
13
the
defendant,
14
and
decency
15
such
fact
is
your
At various
but
we are
Honor
to whether
person
your
hears
charge
to
the
is
its
director
of
raise
the
not
the
case
during
whether
and
it
might
question
from
to
see
the
witnesse
part
that
be observed
period,
employees
standards
of
in
of
certain
discovery
former
be,
here
on the
the
certain
to
my part
whatever
testimony
employees
are
It's
any obligation
particularly
with
times,
Honor,
going
there
in
many years
that.
MR. COHN:
for
the
of
ethicality
course
of
an investigation.
MR. SCHWELB:
16
FBI to
contact
We will
17
the
these
18
charge
19
he wants
20
and we will
propound
21
and
FBI agent
22
Miss
let
to
the
charge
with
stipulate
people.
If
contempt
them with,
that
he wasnts
or
interrogatories
else
he name them
and
and not
to
whatever
I suggest
be here
we asked
put
identify
it
on
again
if
him
Goldstein.
23
24
people
25
the
THE COURT:
Well,
were
the
employe
that
they
impression
in
I also
assume
of your
were
former
client
--
employees.
these
I have
61
Goldstein-direct
THE WITNESS:
Oh, yes.
MR. SCHWELB:
We don't
agent
without
counsel
THE COURT:
yourself,
Justice
tion
of
tion
work,
you
are
10
as
11
and
12
And they
civil
a crime
the
only
buster.
They
responsibility
16
he has
17
also
18
in
19
do not
such
under
to bring
necessary
trial
think
these
Now, so far
all
criminal
notion
the
as
it
is
they
G-man
Department
has.
this.
Attorney
on the
preparation.
or
FBI for
as
helpful
Don Brofman,
THE WITNESS:
Mr.
Brofman
Yes,
a few weeks
I do.
MR. SCHWELB:
It
25
THE WITNESS:
After
was
do you know
I interviewed
after
the
the
motion.
aid
here.
ago.
24
and
I say,
him?
22
that
forth
So,
are
General's
feels
be brought
call
this
the
investigators
when he
FBI requests
as
investiga
League.
the
should
of
investiga-
is
trained
cases
that
statute
not
Urban
Well,
our
FBI in
tasks
And the
information
the
that
like
Department
of
are
managing
an old-timer
the
popular
investigators
do precisely
15
is
the
THE COURT:
23
It
their
Honor.
as
that
use
although
14
21
aware
cases.
MR. COHN:
20
well
your
course,
makes
13
the
present,
So of
judicially
interview
motion.
I didn't
MR. SCHWELB:
further
examination
THE COURT:
(Witness
All
having
the
been
court,
11
BY MR. COHN:
12
Miss
13
My name
it
is
Carol
I think
courtroom
that
your
17
Yes.
18
Called
19
Yes.
20
Where
is
21
It
located
22
New Hyde
down.
called
by the
as
a witness,
deputy
clerk
of
is
your
full
Balistreri.
name?
When I was with
Falcone.
Now,
the
chief.
follows:
what
16
any
Falcone.
sworn
as
Falcone,
was carol
in
reserve
Miss
duly
testified
DIRECT EXAMINATION
I will
case
right,
Imll
first
10
15
our
B A L I S T R E R I
CAROL
Trump
Honor,
excused.)
MR. COHN:
14
Your
until
63
Goldstein-direct
is
we know
business
the
Hero
that
is
from
some testimony
conducting
a Hero
Does
it
have
24
Yes,
it
does.
25
Is
the
phone
shop.
Hut?
located?
at
253 Jericho
Turnpike
Park.
23
in
a telephone?
listed
with
Information?
in
Yes,
Is
No.
Now, did
it
is.
tehre
any
secret
there
about
MR. COHN:
I will
for
I worked
Yes,
What was
10
I was a clerk.
11
Now, did
named
I did.
the
the
that
Trumps
for
at
question.
any
time?
three
and
a half
of
your
duties?
nature
come a time
year.
a lawye
Donna Goldstein?
I did.
Yes,
14
15
Yes.
16
Before
your
withdraw
general
there
13
17
it?
come a time
12
64
Balistr~ri-direct
attention
here
in
that
somebody
18
Yes.
19
What happened?
20
They came
21
What time?
22
About
9:00
23
Nine
o'clock
24
In the
25
Who was
from
Court
this
Goldstein
did
somewhere
wanted
to my home looking
o'clock.
evening.
that?
when?
morning?
for
And I wasn't
it
come to
to
me.
there.
see
you
MR. SCHWELB:
something
somebody
it
her
5
6
is
not
Miss
Goldstein
Yes.
were
FBI agents
there
her
I didn't
10
said
there
11
night.
12
uncle.
16
what
said
looking
they
FBI,
10:30
speaking
is
or what
she
in what
And I told
this
I
at
to my
based
on
knows?
you told
Miss
Goldstein
met her.
I will
what
she
19
purpose
with
respect
told
Goldstein
truth
thereof.
state
than
witness
Goldstein
what
I am not
for
to
a limited
of mind.
The testimony
rather
THE COURT:
permit,the
Miss
to
MR. SCHWELB:
the
her
there
Honor,
testify
22
I told
my home.
Your
THE COURT:
Miss
you and
me at
MR. SCHWELB:
18
23
for
her
If
object.
between
And someone
told
on
Goldstein?
the
uncle
based
own knowledge?
discussed
from
first
17
21
her
this
I would
whether
one.
is
came to my store
I am interested
20
or
were
her
when you
When she
was two or
They
Honor,
her
something
know exactly
13
15
told
Your
own knowledge
Was this
14
64
Balistreri-direct
that
she
she
told
accepting
it
is
as
a part
Is
it
Do you understand?
24
25
THE COURT:
All
right,
go ahead.
telling
of
Balistreri-direct
Mrs.
Balistreri?
THE WITNESS:
4
5
told
Miss
Goldstein
and
seen
your
uncle
10
you
13
16
at
Twice.
Did you
be
say
answered
had
been
us that
at
your
hous
night?
anything
to
Miss
Goldstein
on how
located?
I told
her
they
should
have
just
called
my
store.
Two gentlemen
spoke
she
to
is
my husband.
not
here
but
also
went
to my store
My husband
said
that
every
day.
she
is
here
MR. SCHWELB:
Miss
19
to
20
Goldstein
the
outside
or
is
22
You said
I told
Is
that
this
it
just
something
something
and
you
that
they
happened
related
you
to
related
world?
THE WITNESS:
21
25
10:30
18
24
at
just
FBI agents
17
23
that
you
Right.
14
15
I think
could
12
Yes.
event
you
11
In any
65
to
her
He said
Miss
to
Miss
Goldstein.
Goldstein?
had
been
looking
for
me.
THE COURT:
FBI man came to
your
store?
Well,
Is
did
that
you
understand
what
you
are
that
saying?
an
Balistreri-direct
THE WITNESS:
didn't
came
tell
me who they
looking
for
THE COURT:
THE WITNESS:
practically
every
10
keep
11
I am here.
saying
they
12
13
are
said
I said,
looking
for
"Well,
about
How long
5 or
10 to
lunch
hour
in
2:00,
did
this
to
Goldstein?
that
I am right
Miss
I am here
me;
they
that's
every
are
here
day.
They
looking
why I came
to
for
me.
speak
to
reason
the
shop
Hero
Was she
20
Definitely
21
Your
before
12:00
to
23
Yes,
before
24
Now, did
duties
with
the
stay?
20 after
The only
little
she
somewhere
19
25
you
17
22
two gentlemen
you."
15
18
He said
Yes.
her,
She said,
14
16
My husband
day?
I told
were.
You told
And I think
two gentlemen.
you.
No,
66
around
that
more
it
was more
recollection
is
around
she
2:00
the
is
than
and
she
left
there.
I remember
and
there
11:00
our
time
busy
is
it
was
time.
a half-hour?
than
it
half
was around
an hour.
from
o'clock?
12:00.
ask
you
Trump Organization?
any
questions
about
your
2
3
Yes,
were
there.
asked
did
All
you about
she
ask
to
she
Briefly
10
said
14
She said
three
and
said
a half
than
that.
18
said
That
22
is
is
Yes.
this
the
When she
Trump Organizatio
duties?
describe
you
I
that's
all
my duties
and
describe?
filed,
did
and
a half
clerical
years
work.
that
is
all
did.
I worked
in
other
I knew more
than
well,
word
there.
perjury
offices
and
during
that.
am sorry,
I did
all
to
for
her
--
she
She said
said
just
That
used
at
didn't
was
about
any point
know mo
it.
during
she
to me
remember,
said
when
I said
the
char
perjury.
23
So I said
24
She said
25
there.
interview?
20
21
did
three
Was the
the
were.
her.
in
years
16
19
for
my duties
did?
I
17
you
for
me to
typed,
13
15
your
what
She said
you
me stop
asked
me what
Who my friends
you worked
them
12
let
describe
Yes,
11
She asked
I worked.
right,
I described
--
did.
how long
you
said
she
How long
67
Balistreri-direct
no,
you
I didn't
know,
she
know.
said,
it
is
one
to
years.
I said
oh,
that's
nice.
You know,
I didn't
five
Balistreri-direct
know what
she
you what
I did
4
5
6
about
there.
Now, you
are
quite
clear
to
five
years?
she
ask
one
Now, did
to
your
employment
Yes.
15
She said
16
Then
20
Trump
yes.
penny
think
or
22
own a place
23
24
25
yes,
Then
friends
any
I did.
her
talking
personal
me how old
I own this
a young
I said
to
since
questions
are
in
you.
if
that
her,
that
is
no,
like
girl
place?
place.
like
Miss
you?
Goldstein,
I am 17 years
and
She said,
could
about
own this
anything,
21
to
do you
I made
in
you
what
I am 28.
I worked
that
That's
of
by Trump?
She said
I said
you
truth?
14
If
the
truth.
She said
19
was
the
13
every
end
was
Yes.
it.
the
That
I am telling
was
being
I said
And that
her
I said
18
out.
told
12
am 28,
bring
you
17
to
What
relation
11
trying
perjury
10
was
68
is
old.
I have
I got
the
money
what
you
are
I just
I said,
wanted
to
saved
place.
from,
trying
you
to
know,
say?
this.
she
asked
me alx>ut
my friends,
who my
were.
Q
I want
you
to
go into
all
the
questions
that
Balistreri-direct
she
asked
want
to
ship
5
6
you about
ask
you
different
did
she
Yes.
friends
ask
Donald
69
of yours.
you about
any personal
She said
I said
were
you single
married.
I wasn't
yes,
She said
11
I said
12
Did he ever
13
I said
no,
he did
14
MR. COHN:
Nothing
15
you ever
did
go out
him?
with
not.
I did
no,
Trump?
him.
for
I worked
yes,
10
ask
you out?
not.
further.
about
a two-minute
recess?
17
THE COURT:
Let's
have
a ten-minute
18
MR. COHN:
What's
your
pleasure
today,
20
your
THE COURT:
go,
22
adjust
the
23
2:00
o'clock.
24
It's
a juvenile
except
recess.
about
time
Honor?
21
25
relation-
there?
I said
19
I do
Trump?
She said
16
But
what
As far
as there
I will
do is
hour
because
lunch
That
will
are
I will
probably
I have
probably
take
hearing.
MR. COHN:
That
would
help
witnesses
me.
a matter
to
have
to
on at
a half-hour.
Balistreri-direct
THE COURT:
lunch
hour
4
5
C A R O L
10
and
at
your
16
word
18
19
20
21
(After
recess.)
previously
been
as
out
so
that
the
over.
called
duly
further
Miss
taken
Yes
And you
Yes.
Didn't
of
this
sworn,
as
a witness,
resumed
the
stand
follows:
the
record,
you
ago,
did
appeared
you
not?
No.
And that
you
testify
at
nobody
you
that
deposition?
the
deposition
that
every
own?
just
helped
signed
But
you write
testified
nobody
MR. COHN:
mind.
the
I did.
and
at
was your
And that
I don't
for
a few weeks
testified
affidavit
that
just
you
Yes,
say
just
I did.
own handwriting
could
Falcone,
24
25
recess.)
deposition
15
23
(Short
testified
14
22
stretched
it
BY MR. SCHWELB:
13
17
be
work
CROSS-EXAMINATION
11
12
So we will
B A L I S T R E R I
having
will
70
if
could
it,
Your
Honor,
it
that
is
it
--
is
in
that
if
going
it
was
that
at
in
all?
your
case
nobody
right?
it
is
to
just
preliminary
be on something
Balistreri-cross
particular
this
1would
question
rather
and
did
Well,
let
me ask
it
MR. COHN:
THE COURT:
Let
write
10
just
it
in
signed
your
Yes.
12
Now, was
13
tion
of
14
that
you wrote
the
is
All
it
interview
that
it
you
asked
answer.
summary,
your
Honor.
what
I am worried
about.
right.
differently.
Did you
~o that
also
with
statement
Yes.
16
affidavit
before
the
18
Yes.
19
You testified
didn't
nobody
in
fact
could
say
you
Yes.
22
And now
MR. COHN:
24
to
talk
25
him say
that
your
Goldstein
rather
given
was
than
at
it
the
the
weren't
was
all
recollec-
at
an opportunity
deposition,
that
best
time
present
time.
to
at
look
you?
true
and
no
you?
21
23
true
Miss
errors,
very
were
differently.
15
20
him say
it?
your
is
own handwriting
11
17
It
That
me ask
have
you givethis
MR. SCHWELB:
71
about
were
the
you
Of course,
your
deposition
I would
asked
this
question
Honor,
if
prefer
and
he wants
to
did
have
you
give
Balistreri-cross
this
answer.
THE COURT:
4
5
you
7
8
9
what
try
to
You tried
had
12
for
13
by another
14
place
15
against
Civil
Miss
Goldstein
20
21
" that
22
a criminal
23
in
in
the
of
with
you
Miss
down
your
affidavi
Goldstein,
July
the
attorney
Department
19,
civil
1974
and
at
my
rights
suit
on that
occasion
by
Goldstein.
on in
your
affidavit
I was a criminal
made me feel
Was that
Goldstein
wrote
attorney?
you.
Miss
in
Justice
interviewed
Thank
"
Trump Management."
MR. SCHWELB:
charge
stated
Donna
morning
connection
another
just
you
of
employer,
and
fact
Falcone,
I said.
that
Division
on the
No,
Miss
You know,
by Miss
Now, were
19
25
Rights
my former
18
24
exaggerate.
interviewed
business
16
affidavit,
exaggerate?
to me and what
attorney
of
to
Now, I believe
" I was
the
your
not
didn't
said
that
right.
fair?
Yes.
11
17
be
she
10
All
Now, in writing
did
72
you
being
only
Miss
Goldstein?
was
the
only
one
I said
it
that
because
that
said,
held
on
questioned
me.
I meant
when
they
came
looking
they
my place.
for
were
me at
all
Miss
she
such
trying
That
is
Is
Goldstein
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
came at
15
2:00?
to
it
No one
The others
Very
And they
Polite
I think
that
right
know,
there
feel
somebody
like
my unfairly
about
as
at
other
than
a criminal?
except
19
20
and
nice
you
I felt
that
you
today
12:00
three,
Well,
affidavit
22
right,
is
A
Miss
Goldstein
and
testified
left
that
at
she
about
was
in
your
three
and
three
and
it
a half
a half
says,
hours."
11
hours.
which
That
isn't
it?
Yes,
and maybe
Q
they?
hours.
Approximately
approximately
that
o'clock
you
lasted
were
fairly?
testified
affidavit
a half
21
to you,
fairly.
before
In your
three
were
treated
a little
there
all
and
17
25
I was
you
nice.
Yes.
hours
they,
by it.
make you
treated
24
that
me when
testimony
to
and
I meant
your
tried
hours
reach
what
16
23
odd
did.
18
73
Balistreri-cross
ten
Three
it
is
right.
minutes,
hours
It
or
and
three
ten
is
approximately
hours
minutes?
and
seven
three
minutes
About
until
time.
about
5
6
me of
dating
10
2:00
your
affidavit
Donald
Trump
Actually
whether
you
dated
Donald
Trump
did
Donald
Well,
if
I guess
12
you mean?
13
I assume
14
That
15
It
is
that
17
18
questions,
19
different
did
she
not,
Yes.
21
She asked
23
there
A
24
were.
25
think
in
Around
stated
front
that
is
that
right?
said
to
" . she
of my husband
according
you
to
do you
that
11
you,
date
accused.
what
she
And is
that
what
meant.
assumption.
Thank
you.
Goldstein
asked
you a number
of
about
racial
composition
of
the
buildings?
20
whites
you
2:00.
11:00
my assumption.
Now, Miss
to
you,
is
MR. SCHWELB:
16
ten
after
ask
is
your
a quarter
accused.
that
is
is
she
someone
You guess
or
Trump,
that
11
22
From about
after
Now, in
accused
that.
a quarter
7
8
74
Balistreri-cross
were
in
each
She said
white.
how many
them?
what
do you
think
were
And I said
and
think
black
I didn't
the
and
know.
denominations
how many do you
Balistreri-cross
not,
that
4
5
And you
she
A
I would
as whites.
know,
were
was accusing
Well,
assume
inferred
that
if
you meant
And I said
in
from
you or
you had
I didn't
that
10
GR fls
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
next
questions,
page.)
you
discrimination?
me a question
did
did
we have
like
that
as many blacks
the'building.
(Continued
those
Trump of
asked
8
9
75
you
76
GR/rp
2amrl
1
2
3
cusing
you of
lying
MR. COHN:
that
the
12
oid
14
what
It
18
she
said
ask
understand.
Miss
was ac-
You took
from
the
racial
composition
of
Goldstein
--
friendly
of
questions
Do you understand
Excuse
the
withdraw
it?
question?
Do you want
me.
about
to know
question.
phrased.
Now, at
the
strike
At the
a very
she
lying?
you a lot
about
was poorly
20
25
she
MR. SCHWELB:
17
--
me?
you of
THE WITNESS:
16
24
I don't
THE COURT:
15
she
building.
13
23
Excuse
11
that
What?
10
that
that?
THE WITNESS:
22
from
about
MR. COHN:
21
- Schwelb
19
- cross
CROSS-EXAMINATION
4
5
Balistreri
conclusion
that,
of
conversation,
Yes.
Yes.
your
discussion
with
please.
beginning
of
your
didn't
I was polite
you?
to her.
to you?
discussion,
you had
77
1
Balistreri
- cross
her
Yes.
Yes.
at her nails
and said,
11
Yes.
12
13
At the beginning.
14
15
16
17
Yes.
10
18
manicures.
you couldn't
in your
rude
said,
you said,
"Goodbye.
11
line
of
"Goodbye"?
"Goodbye!? .
and I wouldn't
be
to her.
MR. SCHWELB: I have no further
this
witness,
questions
your Honor.
22
just
23
25
11
of conversation?
21
24
business?
19
20
I think?
had a manicure.
a cup of coffee?
manicures,
just
"I
- Schwelb
(Continued
on next
page.)
a second?
of
78
Balistreri
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. COHN:
Just
you on the
about
- redirect
one.
subject
of the
Government
the
scope
of the
wondering
if
11
to ask it
as an omitted
12
Mr.
I could
it
Honor.
probably
is.
for
see.
Beyond
I was
permission
I suppose
possibly
I'll
give
you an
some recross.
15
16
right.
I'll
let
question.
BY MR. COHN:
19
20
any information
21
going
22
23
your
--
13
17
from --
direct.
10
14
to
information
Trump organization
18
having
say anything
--
about
how the
say anything
Government
to you about
knew what was
that
Yes.
you answered
She said
the
24
I said,
25
She said,
phone,
"You told
me
did you?"
"Yes , I answered
"Did you notice
the
phone. "
the
79
1
Balistreri
phone if
anyone
I said,
in the voices.
11
are
tapes,"
incident
"
I said,
of it."
I said,
the
11
you know,"
She said,
14
I said,
15
She said,
16
I said,
' Shoo,
"I never
that
every
did that.
I never
"There
in the background
shoo, ' or
about
that
trying
to bring
''Well,
the
even heard
tapes.
I did this
"I didn't
11
always
on
11
the phones.
of this.
11
this?"
What
to me?M
19
answer
the phone.
18
20
she said,
tapes?"
13
you're
"Why?
"Because
And that's
11
12
I said,
she said,
10
was on the
I really
She said,
17
that
redirect
allegation
further.
think
is necessary,
21
22
23
24
(Witness
25
any cross
on that
your Honor.
you -down.
excused.)
with
your Honor s
80
1
Miranda-
permission.
2
3
direct
THOMAS
MIRANDA,
having
been first
testified
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. COHN:
called
duly
Mr. Miranda,
Yes.
10
11
Yes.
12
did there
14
Yes.
15
July
16
That's
17
18
19
sion
21
wanted
this
morning?
with
her about
to talk
of 1974?
right.
on the
and a half,
subject
two hours.
of whether
you
to her or not?
22
Never.
23
I told
25
home?
20
24
of the Court
as follows:
13
as a witness
She didn't
mention
that
to me.
in this?
her
I don't
want to be involved
in this.
81
1
Miranda
2
3
have to answer
her
- direct
Never.
tion
in any of the
A
She asked
And did
or not
10
11
my answer,
questions
that's
with
your
13
Well,
15
is.
17
she told
of higher
me that
authority
16
satisfied
--
she threatened
or jail
understand
your Honor.
19
20
21
(Question
24
25
it
the witness,
23
me
or whatever
18
22
with
right.
the question
whether
answers?
with
yes.
to you about
12
14
discrimina
of discrimination,
In the beginning
about
Trump buildings?
questions?
that
answer
hear
be read,
it.
Read it
with
which
your Honor?
back.
read.)
BY MR. COHN:
Q
answers,
Mr. Miranda?
A
In connection
with
the question
I refused
to
82
1
Miranda
be cooperative
in relation
be involved.
4
5
discrimination
at the
Well,
building,
with
- direct
precisely
that
No.
10
After
keep pushing
Yes.
13
16
17
18
Well,
conversation
Q
that
discrimination
her
there
of the
was not,
interview
put
it
that
this
way.
did she
was the
term
we have.
are
Puerto
Rican;
is
correct?
19
I am Puerto
20
21
Two years.
22
Rican.
23
CROSS-EXAMINATION
24
BY MR. SCHWELB:
25
Trump
used by h.er?
A
of the
--
you on it?
15
had been
her?
12
11
there
want to
yes.
What did you tell
"jail
I don't
Trump buildings?
14
case.
11
this
Mr. Miranda,
you filed
the
Trumps?
further,
an affidavit
your
Honor.
in this
83
1
case
Miranda
earlier,
- cross
If
Yes.
To whom?
You signed
I signed
a paper
And that
affidavit
wasn't
I file
Yes.
11
You don't
is
in this
a paper
is
that
That's
14
Youwere given
16
is
17
was written
in legal
terms;
the
legal
terms
very
well;
right?
A
ddn't
an affidavit?
when?
understand
13
15
which
case?
it?
10
12
an affidavit
right.
a chance
that
to make changes
on a document
in legal
but you
terms;
right?
I don't
18
mentioned
19
and good
that
to me.
looked
all
think
so.
I don't
I saw the
right
20
You didn't
21
No.
22
Who write
23
Somebody in the
24
What office
25
Trump office.
write
think
affidavit
and I signed
it,
it?
office.
was that?
that
they
even
did you?
84
1
Miranda
- cross
Thank you.
Now, when
'This
gentleman
came first
For the
Deposition.
10
11
affidavit,
here,
a hearing
I met
in the
him over
deposition;
is
Whatever
that
right?
your
had you?
13
fidavit,
Miss Goldstein
could
get
16
could
get
into
think
that's
I don't
19
20
MR. SCHWELB: If
22
your
Honor,
explained
24
sought,
Q
trouble?
affidavit
trouble?
question.
objection
I understand
is well
the ground
inquire
affidavit
whether
explain
for
was being
anyone
asked
etc.
Did anybody
take.
I could,--
23
to his
a proper
af-
to that.
serious
that
of your
serious
I object
respect
18
the objection,
as a result
in ver
15
25
when I
you call.
No.
21
here
lobby.
17
Roy Cohn.
Mr.
12
14
Mr. Cohn?
affidavit
--
85
1
10
was being
Miranda
taken?
If
that
- cross
anybody
-- well,
is
quite
explain
it
to you?
Did anybody
The result
Did anybody
No.
10
No.
11
Now, I think
6
I
12
office
13
14
to answe
question.
difficult
after
I don't
--
explain
this
Miss Goldstein
following
of the
the affidavit?
to you --
the
affidavit?
remember
if
it
was the
day.
15
Sometime
16
Yes.
17
You told
18
Miss Goldstein
19
his
case
after?
had interviewed
you about
you,
you --
that
this
case
and it
was
in his
lousy
cas?
case?
20
I --
21
You didn't
22
That's
23
Now, he's
24
25
So he spent
want to be involved
true.
a very busy man, is he not?
only
about
five
or ten minutes
with
86
1
11
you;
Miranda
is
that
- cross
right?
15 or 20 minutes,
Didn't
Five,
short
time?
short
time.
9
10
summary of everything
10 minutes.
that
that
it
I don't
your
happened
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
follow
affidavit
between
In this
particular
case
tion.
13
JC fols.
was five
or 10 minut
the
is
s?
time.
a fair
you and
Miss Goldstein?
11
12
you testify
more or less.
(Continued
on next
page.)
I was looking
for
prote
87
Miranda
Trump
2am2
gr/nc
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. SCHWELB:(Cont.)
..-'.cross/Scnwelb
You see,
authority
affidavit
11
happened
13
14
of everything
that
day?
I put a fair
picture
of everything
that
Right.
16
17
because
18
the second,
It's
I didn't
very difficult.
have it
because
19
it
for me to
happens
Mr. Miranda,
called
In the first
right
place
at the moment,
All right.
20
isn't
it
true
that
Miss Goldstein
22
23
purpose
24
read
25
higher
in my house?
15
21
picture
words,
scared.
happened
I was a little
If
in other
of
the question
Let me just
12
city.
in this
or somebody else,
Q
10
I'm a minority.
of this
just
a minute.
I know the
to
it.
MR. SCHWELB:I'm sorry,
your Honor.
I was
88
1
going
to take
Q
telephone,
16
17
18
get
25
withdraw
it.
is
all
first
right.
contacted
you by
she not?
That
is
right.
polite
up the
polite.
she wasn't
rude,
Well,
I was not
You say
You see,
cooperative,she
was a little
--
right.
own purpose
with
to be there
discrimination
to
in
Trump buildings.
22
24
did
some information
21
23
I'll
rude.
15
20
but
was she?
13
19
This
with
11
14
by step
step
meeting
10
12
it
THE WITNESS:
- cross/Schwelb
Miranda
mind,
Right.
Right?
in other
But that
authority
doesn't
words,
So in the
that
mean that
or something
like
position
that
she is,
I don't
job properly.
89
1
Miranda
- cross/Schwelb
authority?
Yes.
in the Department
Let me just
youtestified
girl?
Somebody higher
Justice.
and isn't
it
true
that
A nice
She wasn't
10
11
12
Yes.
13
The agency?
14
Yes.
15
At the
you -- you-had
nice
rude
girl.
that
she is a nice
coffee
and donuts
18
if
with
you about
her job,
her,
the Trump --
she asked
I remember.
friendly
of Puerto
20
Yes.
21
And at the
Of course.
24
As a matter
end of it
of fact,
again,
isn't
discussion
Ricans,
was very
23
Yes,
25
true
22
it
girl.
17
19
isn't
you think
16
of
didn't
you said
about
Puerto
you?
friendly?
you -she?
she is welcome
aid
90
1
Miranda
2
3
Anytime.
Thank you.
Now, it's
you told
that
her that
that's
true,
you didn't
Mr. Trump's
I don't
All right.
necessary,
10
11
isn't
it,
Mr. Miranda,
want to be involved
She told
She mentioned
All right.
something
about
No.
14
15
Higher
18
that
authority
She said
that
She mentioned
20
Is that
21
That's
22
Thank you.
authority?
Goldstein's
presence
to your son?
something
like
Now, during
23
talk
authority?
That's
interview
you,
is
25
if
authority.
19
24
that
it.
case
Is that
17
in this
want to be involved.
13
16
that
case?
12
- cross/Schwelb
the course
at your house,
that.
threatening?
threatening.
of your -- of Miss
did you have occasion
to
91
1
2
3
4
didn't
8
9
I called
Now, didn't
to give
12
16
ANd he advised
20
21
22
23
24
25
No.
In other
words,
information
to her,
You talked
Yes, I did.
And wasn't
to him, too,
the subject
subject
of the
with that
son told
The
she talked
didn't
you?
of your conversation
information?
conversation
with my son.
conversation.
give
was in relatio
she finish,
To do it
my
or not.
All right.
Now, Mr. Miranda,
as to
he?
you should
18
19
you to give
17
to her?
Yes.
14
15
you call
information
11
- cross/Schwelb
my son.
10
13
whether
Miranda
about
would it
be fair
Miss Goldstein's
want to be involved
to say that
visit
to your house
in the
in the case?
I object
to that.
Cross-examination,
it
is fair
your Honor.
cross-
92
1
Miranda - cross/Schwelb
6
examination.
Do you understand
8
9
10
back.
rephrase
you involved
in the case;
is that
it,
your Honor.
to get
want to be involved
right?
That is right.
Okay.
11
12
Read it
THE COURT:
6
7
the question?
13
No.
Weren't
14
you talking
15
room today?
16
Oh.
A black
Yes.
Yes.
And a nice
Very nice
17
gentleman
in the courtroom
18
19
20
21
22
23
fellow?
24
25
fellow.
today?
court-
93
1
Miranda
2
3
4
5
6
7
of
Truthful.
Now, didn't
to return
don't
18
I dont recall
No, I don't
I don't
with
you didn't
a deposit
want to have
the
that.
it?
remember that.
remember doing
that.
I never
Now, is it
that
I don't
So you do recall?
I didn't
I never
and talking
did it.
with this
g y
did.
you don't
recall
or you didn't
do it.
recall.
20
25
to return
19
24
with
do it?
17
23
that
in relation
16
22
having
him that
deposit,
recall.
14
21
deposit?
11
15
a black
10
13
Truthful?
12
- cross/Schwelb
In other
this
I'm talking
of the ---
matter
we discuss
words,
everything
about
that
of the company,
he --
I work.
I consider
this
I never
someth ng
or --
is in particula
idea
of what incident
to a black woman?
94
I
Miranda - cross/Schwelb
moreover,
of this
22
23
24
25
testimony
The problem
If I may
is that
is very apparent.
All right,
your Honor.
BY MR. SCHWELB:
16
21
on that?
14
20
of the case
is getting,
13
19
It
is.
it
12
18
the merits
briefly
Mr. Miranda's
11
17
hearing.
particular
be heard
IO
to as
and beyond
15
into
objected
examination
that's
else
of Justice
Goldstein?
First,yeah
-- was another
girl.
I don't
rememb r
Was it
Elise
I think
this
Yes.
Is it
Goldweber?
is the name.
glasses
tod~y?
in the third
95
1
2
Miranda
in the right-hand
3
4
side?
Yes.
All right.
- cross/Schwelb
to
you?
Very polite.
And pleasant?
Pleasant.
Yes.
And there
9
10
you questions,
also,
did she
11
not?
12
13
14
Miss Goldstein
15
questions
More or less.
any information
to the ones
you?
A
16
17
asked
were similar
about
discrimination
you whether
you had
by Trump, didn't
they?
18
19
Yes.
with
her and
were
20
friendly
21
with
A
her also?
And isn't
it
a fact,
MR. Miranda,
22
told
Miss Goldweber
that
racial
markings
23
pieces
of paper
attached
24
A
25
No.
to applications?
that
were placed
you
on
96
1
Miranda
10
2
3
4
5
6
7
told
12
13
place
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
No.
No.
Department
possible
10
14
You didn't
Justice
11
those
tell
people
discrimination
her that?
that
to Miss Goldstein?
tell
anybody or tell
that
with
No.
that
- cross/Schwelb
-- about
any black
tell
No.
an incident
of
family?
anybody that
any of the
Jews?
them that
they wanted
to keep your
white?
A
No.
You didn't
tell
any of those
people
any of
things?
A
Any of those
things.
Now, I think
you testified
was written
the affidavit
by somebody else?
Yes.
at any time?
A
that
Yes.
97
JIXX
Miranda - cross/Schwelb
11
THE WITNESS:
REDIRECTEXAMINATION
BY MR. COHN:
6
7
word "jail"
A
in the beginning
10
11
12
of the interview
Quite
difficult
--
I believe
it
was
of the conversation.
you telephoned
do?
Before,
before.
13
14
15
was the
do you remember?
but I think
Sometime before
questions.
All right.
No further
further,
your Honor.
further,
your
Honor.
16
17
18
19
your Honor.
20
the exception
of the testimony
21
could
a second,
all
please,
we have with
of Cecilmans
who we
22
23
subject
24
that
25
motion.
that
not call
to confirmation
incident
That's
took place
it.
after
Then we will
statement
the date
rest.
of our
Subject
to
98
1
2
Miranda
12
3
4
minute
conference
the
COURT:
THE
(continued
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to resolve
Yes,
next
a three-
Mr. Cohn?
calendar.
with
We may be able
5
6
- cross/Schwelb
certainly.
page.(
this
.and unclog
99
GR:MM 1
T2R3
MR. SCHWELB:
excuse
ing
has
his
been
I might
say
by defendant
for
that
not
no
produc-
witnesses.
MR. COHN:
Mr.
I' 11 give
Schwelb
has
your
Honor's
patience
this
because
it
Miss
8
9
sets
10
the
11
incorrect
12
in
13
next
14
and
15
to
16
was desired.
is
morning,
week,
she
not
had
be over
of
explained
in
this
direct
pleasure
around
at
her
to
today,
she
had
I had
has
12:20
in
them
with
to
change
told
--
29th,
said,
on a phone
whenever
her
sornethinq
of
different
on October
was available
courtroom
all
three
two of
she
I know
here.
up to
be here
when
with
of
hours
which
and
issue
subpoenas,
them
for
instead
the
tried
the
of
around
a little
three
one
calling
marshals
in
had
serving
longhand
sent
going
dates,
a qoo d excuse.
gets
Falcone
of marshals
17
Honor,
furnished
18
Your
call
testimony
to
do with
the
Zisselman's?
MR. COHN:
19
20
concerned,
21
as
I tried
I could.
had
23
date
24
had
25
today.
a calendar
had
to
switched
Yes.
to
As far
treat
When your
problem,
be changed.
around
their
as
them
Honor
and
had
the
the
with
are
as much courtesy
a calendar
Court
I contacted
proqrams
Zisselman's
of
the
and
problem,
Appeals,
I
the
Zisselman's
could
not
who
come
100
I said
2
to
them,
"If
you?"
They
cannot
get
We can
to
agree
"Now that
us with
Mr.
5
6
said
He apparently
first
fy.
11
wants
these
Now I think
one
of
the
having
second
affidavits,
16
timony
would
if
his
18
that,
your
19
suggested
20
That's
Zisselman's
be in
miqht
I miqht
be able
Zisselman's.
I thought
would
thoughts
the
the
so testi
and only
other.
--
both,
I accept
hearing,
were
with
me take
In
their
tes-
affidavits.
a couple
offered
it.
I would
here,
these
of minutes
on
him anything.
to
some tim.
be a possibility,
save
all.
THE COURT:
23
MR. SCHWELB:
will
Let
I never
22
25
be there.
they
this
accordance
Let
to
can't
--
not
is
the
21
24
offer
conclude
Honor.
that
Honor
and
MR. SCHWELB:
17
and
Your
the
we take
he's
expedite
that
that
that
MR. COHN: If
to
of
stipulate
13
stipulate
you
notice."
and
MR. SCHWELB:
15
We just
affidavits
12
order
I qet
us that,
made a proposal
sugqesting
affidavits
14
told
could
to.
10
has
you,
you have
a subpoena.
Schwelb
We have
I subpoena
Mr.
me study
Cohn's
testify
it
right
All
right.
Your
proposal,
in accordance
Honor,
that
Mr.
with
I will
and
their
determine
stipulate
Mrs.
it
as
Zisselman
affidavits.
They
101
3
weren't
affidavits.
2
3
MR. COHN:
Honor?
Or read
4
5
They were
them
THE COURT:
exhibits,
if
MR. COHN:
Paul
THE CLERK:
dant's
I have
in
and
Exhibit
You can
have
them marked
Thank
Paula
That's
A in
Paul
Exhibit
( So marked.
14
MR. COHN:
We rest,
15
18
for
19
that
the
20
kind
of proof
21
credible
and
haven't
contempt
aqainst
an order
22
23
the
the
against
defendant
the
marked
THE COURT:
All
Paula
Bin
evidence.
your
Honor.
Honor,
defen-
States,
the
right.
this
against
the
States,
Court
time
Miss
Gold-
proceedings
on the
make anything
if
Zisselman
I move at
United
didn't
heard.
is
proceedings
required,
marked
one
United
evidence
been
Zisselman
13
stein
as vour
evidence.
Defandant's
17
your
Zisselman.
The other
dismiss
now,
vou.
THE CLERK:
to
marked?
them
11
16
marked
have
( So marked.
marked
them
or
10
12
statements.
you wish.
Should
siqned
arounds
approaching
considers
May I see
the
the
that?
They
yet?
24
THE CLERK:
Yes,
25
THE COURT:
Do you want
your
Honor.
to
be heard,
Mr.
Cohn,
103
I think
1
2
part
of the
the
a case
a charge
rights
it's
it's
Government
which
and I think
further
by putting
meet,
when it's
10
those
stages,
11
knowledqe
12
Government,
13
permitted
14
tion
15
complaint
16
around
17
circumstances
18
a prosecutor.
defendants
the
send
Government
Trump buildinqs,
is
mit a little
21
I've
22
fering
law.
been through
The second
24
this.
As is
25
this
did not
filen
with
Honor's
IT won't
that
circumstances
what they
trial
issue
take
issue
the
of the
aaency,
is
informa-
time
inthe
undercover
a lot
to
and after
the
an
which
are
and furnish
outside
imoroner
20
Court
-- when with
in a --
periods
charoe,
the
or any other
particulars
that
of the
to and does
is
resists.
for
Government
Urban Lea~ue
or the
when there
and clarifies
case
of
a serious
on notice,
a priority
and I would
violative
of all,
stoutlv
complaint
when the
to the
it's
containinq
defendant
the
the
of power on the
expands
the
first
a case
the
When there
23
an abuse
of a defendant,
in progress,
19
--
teste
of attendant
conduct
onthe
leave
on that
me very
in another
oart
of
to sub-
long because
forum on dif-
recently.
phase
apparent
ofthe
from the
motion,
your
testimony
come -- we probably
haven't
Honor,
before
is
you,
scratched
the
109
11
who sends
supervision
telling
civil
r.icr"'ts
being
charged
certainly
telling
12:00
housekeeping
boys
and
them
out
to
call
case
in
12
the
13
nothinq
14
in
rules
night,
to
job
can
this
closing
record,
to
relation
that
in
do with
to
his
22
23
24
25
hours
to
Honor
not
there
is
which
not
at
10:00,
that
the
11:00,
better
things
references
completely
outside
are
motion
--
I object.
(Continued
make
he complained
Your
is
by t~e
original
anything
and
think
to
are
that
he entitled
to
this
I think
homes
I just
my judgement
MR. SCHWELB:
21
to
--
employees
courtesy
that
extend
within
former
be done
argument
16
20
--
I think
certainly
go around
MR. COHN:
19
of
which
job.
1 and
murder
15
18
these
MR. SCIDAJELB: Is
11
flw 17
should
and
not
do the
witnesses
with
them
to
control
ground
at
10
notes
the
on next
page.)
not
true
and
about?
and
didn't
have
happe
ll
GRrp
2amr4&5
7
8
12
13
14
that
outside
evidence
19
of a request
the
tasks
tactics
that
an agency
in respect
politeness
this
anything
Mr. Schelb,
--
section,
I find
no
of the
nature
to them.
I consider
acted
that
with
office
was permitted
assigned
make about
by his
such a request.
in the record
of Gestapo
an extraordinary
which,
in my view,
even of criminal,
and respect
for
charge
the
has always
with
rules
to
the
utmost
and laws of
country.
MR. COHN: Let me say this,
16
18
of the night.
15
17
FBI agents
10
11
record?
4
5
in the
As far
a better
with
Judge
friend
you completely.
Neaher.
I have.
I have written
I agree
that
publicly,
magazines,
books,
newspaper
a:rticles,
and I think
20
they
consider
21
22
me such.
But I will
say this
tolyour
Honor.
I think
it
in a civil
rights'
case,
23
for
agents
24
25
to be at potential
I will
witnesses'
homes.
have to take
notice
of the
fact
that
the
Federal
Bureau
of
judicial
111
1
Investigation
is precisely
not only
United
States
of the
Department
the
ivolations
but
And this
to my attention
or agents
that
could
type
conduct.
10
it
that.
of the
acts
in purely
time
that
anyone
has charged
matter
with
in a civil
be described
it
as storm
some kind
trooper
of conduct
or Gestapo~
in the
the
such a charge
13
charge
is utterly
without
14
B here.
16
no~ against
The charge
the
in this
..from A to
proceeding
is
FBI.
18
why I haven't
we' re going
contempt
17
against
and I think
foundation.
15
and I never
brought
a charge
I have personal
would.
reasons
My relationship
23
24
25
an FBI agent
22
matters.
record
21
arm
civil
first
12
20
investigating
11
19
investigates
laws of the
as the
of Justice
is the
It
in regular
course
to the
is no evidence
in this
record.
than
FBI,
giving
names of persons
112
1
2
the department
tion
with
wishes
to have interviewed
a particular
matter.
trained,
tion
assignments
perhaps
are
professional,
would be that
based-upon
in the evening,
oftentimesrequired
10
in order
11
people
12
hours.
13
whatever
14
that
15
other
16
shown here.
own schedule
they
because
their
time,
performed,
oftentimEBbecause
as I say,
in my judgment
action
It
by
during
there
would warrant
this
Court
is perfectly
the daytime
employees
were approached,
19
attempted
to be interviewed.
20
son or another,
21
witnesses,
22
tions
23
a basis
24
attorneys.
which is
However,
is nothing
here
any contempt
or
on the basis
'.Obvious that
18
they
agents
in the evening
even approachable
the
of
went out,
17
25
their
or presump-
to work late
to get matters
aren't
to be well
late
in connec-
of the proof
some former
were interviewed
Presumably
kind.
out to be willing
in some certain
But I hardly
for
critisizing
the actions
I feel
that
here
nothing
or
situa
find
it
of the plaintiff'
113
1
reason
why this
them or censure
that
grant
tion
Court
in this
Government's
from the
condemn
them or punish
is my ruling
the
should
matter,
motion
and I therefore
to strike
this
MR. COHN:
All
Your Honor,
like
11
the
FBI.
--
I'd
right.
like
That that
the point
allegation
on that?
clarified
concernin
12
13
it
have to
argue.
14
15
THE COURT: It
16
17
18
progress
19
Magistrate
of this
for
is unnecessary,
case,
of discovery
Is this
21
22
time that
23
1974.
all
along
discovery
there
and he thought
there
to the
specification.
ruled
would terminate
it
t e
or --
24
you.
in is,
I remember referring
purposes
going
I assure
Fine.
20
25
applica-
record.
10
And
case
had probably
ruling,
under
that
at that
by September
he though
the
statute
114
1
discovery
2
3
4
7
8
9
10
tions.
We engaged
13
schedule
14
15
16
17
18
19
,.didn't
22
23
24
25
of not calling
-- couldn't
defendants.
a lot
understand
in a Courtroom
After
having
set
and all
except
the Government,
us, exactly
of that.
the GovernI
in that
number.
or something,
as noticed
in what would be
something
one witness
sick
the
bunch of depositions,
All of those
who
another
about
of ex-employees
admissible
by
were pro~uced
by the Government,
by
and we
20 depositions,
prior
of September
20
21
of weeks to
the facts
think
at that
in no discovery.
11
12
taken
5
6
already.
to the cut-off
In addition
certain
records
date
thereto,
over.
and we turned
additional
records
September
1, 1974.
and all
ordered
We.had turned
of that
could
of
1st.
Judge Catoggio
to be turned
all
was completed
conceivably
some
plus
by
be regarde
120
1
11
2
3
two rulings
about
the
here.
I heard
contempt
motion.
agree,
10
which I guess
Be it
a civil
12
case
13
seen anything
14
don't
15
day about
undercover
buildings
while
21
time,
24
25
when it
case,
respectfully
dis-
and I know
comes to making a
think
like
a criminal
this
I should
and let's
didn't
assume a
case,
be met with
agents
I'm trying
period.
phone calls
going
civil
I have never
in a discovery
around
to get this
I
every
to the
case
to that
for
ready.
the
.eightee
th
your Honor.
MR. COHN: Your Honor,
prepare
They're
22
23
I might
19
20
is my prerogative
17
18
decision.
11
16
doing
this
it
case, before
inquiry.
new things,
-- they
filed
for
to trial
to get hit
not mentioned
the complai
it.
in is responding
Are we going
are we going
didn't
they
they
to your
November 25th?
by them with
in the
complaint
t.
121
1
12
in the
interrogatories,
going
ruled
understand
why in October,
having
a trial
in a priority
10
these
based
of records
to be -- when Judge
date,
case,
1974,
it
1, 1974,
still
I do not
your Honor
this
is a statute
why we're
Catogg o
requirement
talking
about
things.
11
12
our discovery,
and carloads
set
upon
over?
When is there
that
based
why we are,
your
Honor?
13
14
15
that
16
Discovery
17
was a ruling
ffi
made.
right.
we had considerable
19
20
records
21
employees.
22
1973.
that
Mr. Catoggio
of that
discovery
which got
We asked
We never
reason
25
that
I think
it
in discovery.
the
1st.
-- Magistrate
That
Catoggio
recall
them late
former
in -- the
fall
of
got them.
Now, finally,
24
difficulty
Part
23
that
we've
gotten
them.
is our responsibility
to interview
For that
with
them,
us
to
122
1
2
13
determine
what facts
As soon as we get
our answers
bility
inter-
to interrogatories.
Mr. Cohn is
that
information
we supplement
It
is our responsi-
to do it.
hurry,
talking
and we're
boggles
the
11
object
12
they
fact
that
they
to them.
answered
this
delaying
the
I come
14
to be met with
15
be held.
16
against
17
only attorney
fate
didn't
it,
case
being
in
is something
I've
of the
answer
Then after
them about
13
18
about
the mind.
If you recall
10
they
that
it
20
possible,
21
a right
22
23
trying
and we've
did answer
them,
is he's
can't
Cohn, Jones
in.
He's
the
them.
to move as quickly
but we do discovery
to interview
didn't
in Cohn against
or whatever
as possible
they
come up here
Mr. Cohn is
Jones,
them,
interrogatories,
a proposition
19
25
And we've
viewed them.
24
they have.
as
And that's
what we're
to do.
With the new information,
have an excellent
I believe
with
that
we
admission
123
1
14
of discriminatory
policy,
seven
by their
or eight
agents
happens,
it
we've
to your
don't
employee
and with
statements
want to rent
to blacks,
of discovery
which often
deal
more.
I understand
that
We want to gi
Honor.
your
case
has a point
11
date,
12
come to an end.
13
cerned.
about
thoroughly
there
but
having
I think
Mr. Cohn
to be some cut-off
confident
as far
you want to
that
as trial
the matter
preparation
has
is con-
You understand?
14
16
about
proof.
got a great
10
15
how they
'fHE COURT:
prepare
incidents
buildings
Now, as a result
definite
with
your Honor.
I think
he's
to that.
THE COURT: It's
17
you're
18
only
to find
19
this
(indicating).
dealing
with
that
it
very
a case
unsettling
that
is
like
this,
like
20
21
22
23
date,
24
some relation
25
discovery.
as to when the
to believe
cut-off
last
shaped
minute.
with
respect,
that
our rights
of
th t
124
1
2
15
looking
at his
considerable
these
impression
that
had been.
Magistrate,
matters
these
though,
could
be ironed
Did I misunderstand?
10
were in conflict
11
I think
except
a little
--
number of people.
18
additional
19
In other
21
the
22
investigation
23
us,
24
25
deposition
we've
reason
I think,
we just
because
matters?
their
interviewed
number of those
people
a
have
we
and we want to
want to take
words,
'A
evidence
20
realize
to interrogatories.
15
17
ago
your Honor,
interviews
depositions.
all
too.
14
16
that
while
I didn't
I have a responsibility,
it
I advised
We have additional
of referring
12
in
records.
13
dispatch
we only
got it
by the
just
in August.
recently
is because
FBI based
disclosed
that
got it
and
we had an
on the
records
he gave
I may be wrong.
of
'74?
125
1
16
the date.
takes
a certain
these
people
my word that
on it.
amount of time
and we're
we're
move --
I give
moving with
the
Our position
We're
the complaint,
trying
10
interrogatories
11
direction.
12
this
simply
case
as clarified
filed
I am going
in answer
14
Honor upheld
15
motion
16
dates
in the
17
In other
18
19
20
says
21
22
23
24
25
based
events
that
contempt
comes after
in this
the
case.
in this
case
a current
situati
1974.
The complaint
October,
to the
26th on this
the complaint
someone indicated
in July,
to get
complaint
of
as strenuously
to anything
words,
to be this.
to your Honor's
just
charged
this.
by the answers
to object
morning,
clarify
dispatch
on the allegations
13
this
your Honor
utmost
is going
based
it
1973,
in this
and that's
So I am going
to the date
to object
case
charges
up to
what I am prepared
all
of which relate
of the
at the
filing
trial
of the
to meet,
to
complai
to the admission
126
1
17
of anything
complaint
are
that
which is all
called
aonor
gatories.
we are called
I think
He wants
upon --what
is saying
to file
to your
supplemental
he now has.
10
of the trial
he will
11
evidence.
12
comes,
I don't
13
serve
14
delaying
15
God bless
care
me with
the
if
try
trial
him,
to offer
if
taking
17
18
19
At the trial
21
I will
that
23
on legal
both
in
to
without
contemplated?
to that
r~serve
my
suggest
those
day
at all.
right
to object
of any proof.
22
when the
him do it.
to the offering
to
more deposition.
16
20
interro
he wants
anything,
and without
let
so that
he does that,
any supplemental
we
case.
is this.
made in this
with
respect
24
25
in that
case
to inform
the Cou t
to that.
do that.
I would view this
as
127
1
18
any equity
speak
if
I am simply
type
as of the
that
THE COURT: It
like
lations
the past,
growing
This
with
is a -- well,
civil
enforcement
where the
13
suppose
to the extent
14
whether
it
15
the
17
about,
18
19
20
23
24
25
it's
Government
have the
pattern
that
and I
proves
they're
benefit
there
it,
after
had in
talking
of discrimination.
an exi!Jting pasttern
that
to make a point
ligitation,
which they
was filed,
therefore
so that
of thing.
in a certain
type
going
in mind the
sort
in
consider
mind if your
and re-
occurred
So I suggest
I'll
that
or that
the
it
a past
of discrimination
rights
or evidence
before
situation
of discrimination,
that
was filed
of course,
legal
normal
of a statute
be by evidence
possession
the
I suppose
is pattern
21
22
claim
complaint
their
the
of contract
12
16
isn't
out of something
a breach
was to be granted
-not.
dealing
would
not a pre-judgement.
where you're
sense
That's
saying
10
11
action,
asking
or will
relief.
you have that
of it
of your
in
at the trial
--
about
a civil
128
1
19
rights
case
position
point
a date
evidence
the
that
over
that
raises
ordinary
--
that
months
opportunity
it
to some kind
litigation
the
of
and litigants
after
of which
filing
to th
up until
of a complaint
and
and given
to meet.
I think
--
law on that.
10
a --
and I understand
I hope .we
I find
will
your
be able
out every
Honor wants
to furnish
it.
things.
11
I prefer
12
the
13
to give
you an opportunity
14
people,
trial
15
of this
case.
not to delay
If we have to suspend.the
to interview
your
17
intend
18
about?
19
Honor's
good offices
to give
me his
I don't
know.
we'll
21
week.
22
here
23
certainly
I'd
like
give
--
the
final
I believe
24
over
or almost
25
that
we got
the
that
over.
in --
last
statement
--
with
thing
the
is
one this
my operating
four
comi g
counsel
over.
FBI investigation
We have
he talke
your Honor,
them a substantial
to consult
as to whether
through
20
al
some of these
16
tr
a substantial
or five
days,
is
either
number
that
we
129
1
20
want to amend.
2
3
We will
give
that
to them next
week.
answers
as the
case
With respect
question
hold
10
posed,
that
essence
We find
goes along.
to the question
of course,
equity
-- to supplement
looks
there
to the
of the
future
12
13
to respond
that
15
against
16
-11-r-a-f-fi-c-a-n-t-e.against
17
Insurance
Company, 409
18
the
to equal
19
corded
25
Metropolitan
right
the highest
Thank you,
Life
to argue
to respond
the
has said
Insurance
it
to one point
in Trc:fficante
Company,
the Metropolitan
u. s.
now.
205,
Life
at page 211,
housing
opportunity
national
priority.
that
your Honor.
22
24
and that's
to one --
14
21
that
of tbat.
Just
20
legal
11
23
there
is an
If
is,
could
have just
denied?
word about
this
of this
motion
and
that
130
1
THE COURT:
21
MR. COHN:
2
3
anything
that
costs
had
Honor's
things
a particular
furnish
12
it
to
13
I think
a charge
14
laws
seriously
15
is
16
that's
17
the
defendant
18
trial
date,
is
why it
to
stand.
dispute
has
them
this
to
pay
costs
particular
but
motion
I abide
by your
Schwelb
ask
for
of
of
for
law.
the
who has
the
last
the
people
civil
interesting
We
civil
rights
against
whom it
rights
in
been
statement,
this
asking
law and
case
for
the
that
it
is
priority
Government.
ready
wants
us
Schwelb's
violation
to
to
meet
file
a minute's
it
next
delay
22
THE COURT:
23
MR. SCHWELB:
24
MR. COHN:
be this
Mr.
violate
not
asked
you.
to
is
We are
21
I thought
when the
made do not
19
25
up by denying
Your Honor
In response
Mr.
it
I don't
never
characteristic
MR. COHN:
20
let
ruling.
10
will
word?
The Government
MR. SCHWELB:
I'll
--
so I even
I think
The final
THE COURT:
11
Well,
All
and no matter
week,
in
this
we're
what
.not
going
trial.
right.
Thank
Thank
you.
you.
November
25th,
that
Courtroom?
THE COURT:
November
* * * *
25th
is
still
the
date.
wil
/1
I/
,;
'?J"'"
. 730
undersigned
Defendants'
States
SUPPLEMENTAL
AN5'WERSTO
DEFENDANTS'INTERROGATORIES
of America,
attorney
First
NOV14 1974
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
hereby
plaintiff
supplements
herein,
by
its Answers to
Interrogatories.
Supplemental Answers to
Interrogatories
1 and 2
1.
that
The following
defendants
apartments
through
unavailable
information
their
constitutes
agents
on account
evidence
ways:
(a)
that
believed
Gardens in 1971.
at Laurence
the superindent
building
opposite
to be Laurence
at
Laurence
Towers, whose
(last
name unrecalled),
he would be better
indicating
that
trouble.
of rental
Apartments.
Hall early
planning
responsibilities
to Frank.
unknown).
are caucasion
Zinunerman {current
are former
tenants
at Kendall
1970.
At or about
as a rental
.!!2.!5:!.inform their
that
black
Hall
Mrs. Spitrey
to blacks
responsibilities
to
time later,
were assigned
advised
agent,
the apartment
the Zinunermans
neighbors,
told
since
and who
in renting
had
at
house.
Respectfully
(.\
submitted,
/'
~~d~~
FRANK~ELB
NORMAN GOLDBERG
DONNAF. GOLDSTEIN
Attorneys,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
AFFIDAVIT
CITY OF WASHINGTON )
ss
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA)
I, Donna Goldstein,
say:
1.
Civil
I am an attorney
Rights
Division,
United
States
for plaintiff
Civil
2.
foregoing
I am informed
Plaintiff's
Interrogatories
information,
of Justice,
in United
States
of the facts
and correct
of this
case.
to the best
of my
DONNA
STEIN
Attorne,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
Subscrfbed and sworn to before
this/
c.J-of November 1974.
My Commission expires:
me
The
Answers to Defendants'
NOTARYPUBLIC
v.
Supplementary
are true
Department
CERTIFICATEOF SERVICE
I hereby certify
of the foregoing
Defendants'
mail,
postage
that
Plaintiff's
Interrogatories
prepaid,
addressed
Answers to
in the United
to counsel
for the
defendants:
Roy M. Cohn, Esquire
Saxe, Bacon, Bolan & Manley
39 E. 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
J
'
&~0
d ..J:?.
..
EIN
Attorne
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
States
".
NEW
..JOHN
GODFREY
ROGERS
RO'!'
SAXE
H. BACON
YORK,
(212)
(1909l9S3l
NEW
472
YORK
10021
THOMAS
- 1400
(19191962)
C'
M. COHN
SCOTT
MICHAEL
DANIEL
E. MAN
LEY
(ADMITTED
A. BOLAN
COUNSEL
ILLINOIS
AND JNOIANA)
ROSEN
November
16,
li7J.4L
;.,..,
1;,1
....
J. DRISCOLL
/:' i /".
F
,: ;).
[:.
HAROLD
MELVYN
JEFFREY
LORIN
SCHWARTZ
"Jn1J
l~ C, 1.,,
;J/ .:j
I'._,
RUBIN
A. SHUMAN
DUCKMAN
TIME
JUL ..
P~M
....
Judge
L_..
i.~~~
Neaher:
When we last
appeared
before
Your Honor,
it was
brought
to Your Honor's
attention
that
the case now bore
stamped
resemblance
to the original
allegation
contained
in the complaint
and to their
specification
by the Civil
Rights
Section's
responses
last
January,
1974, amplifying
the complaint
by listing
the specific
locations
and incidents
already
called
upon to me at the trial.
Extensive
depositions
of the people
involved
in the listed
incidents
and others
in the Trump management
were taken
- all by the
government,
none by us, as we were anxious
to expedite
this
trial.
Discovery
was terminated
by Magistrate
Cattagio
on
September
1, 1974, and we moved the case for trial
by communicating
with Your Honor's
chambers.
However,
thereafter,
the government
served
a whole
new set of amended or additional
answers
to the ten month
old answers
to interrogatories.
From these
it appeared
that
right
during
the taking
of discovery,
the government
was
going around
trying
to bolster
its case by the use, among
other
techniques,
of undercover
tester
agents
of the Urban
League,
in an attempt
to entrap
(albeit
substantially
unsuccessfully)
certain
employees
of the defendants.
This new slew of answers
to interrogatories
and
alleged
incidents
obviously
produced
an entirely
new list
of alleged
incidents,
some within
a few weeks of the September
set of new answers
to interrogatories.
Nevertheless,
we persisted
in our attempt
to have this
case disposed
of
promptly.
't [....
{ .
,Lv
)
Mr. Frank
Schwelb
'/
f'-LJl1
f!i
is required
as a
available
at your
1
,
....
..
.
CIS:HAB:gp
F. 730959
)~
'
'
- --x
1\1.\fJ.a.TNqirFlr::f
SUPPLEMENTAL
0
AlfllcJiiR'S"TO DEF.ENDANTS'
Plaintiff,
INTERROGATORIES
-againstCivil
FRED C. TRUMP, et
Action
No.
73 C 1529
al.,
Defendants.
-
The United
undersigned,
submits
fendants'
69th
On or
Street,
conferred
the
with
Johnston
the
Mr.
at
that
in
blacks,
were
kept
Avenue,
at
the
that
24,
answer
by its
to
de-
a rental
agent
"people
be
July
N.Y.,
a black
a
to
that
Brooklyn,
November
was
George
in
that
rent
and
trouble"
that
2401 Nostran
League
defendants
a one-bedroom
Times
on or
inquired
shown
the
about
about
apartment
it.
N.Y.
20, 1974
NP.
Attorney
Depaprtment
Washington,
and
was available.
white,
was
the
renting
nothing
effect.
persons.
Urban
of
there
implying
Jacobs,
the
New York
Sim Johnston,
apartment
he could
the
that
those
agent
about
because
community
from
by
informed
to
Godfrey
tester
rental
the
from
1972,
inquire
told
in
131
League,
employed
part,
who make
safe
31,
in
or words
area
would
The Urban
Sarnell
safe,
area
about
a one-bedroom
comples.
was
was advertised
later
Sim Johnston,
Sarnell,
a specific
Jacobs
George
of
that
complex
1972.
informed
Dated:
in
On or
Beachaven
few minutes
and
supplementary
an employee
apartment
renting
herein,
N.Y.,
immediate
Johnston
Brooklyn,
to
July
plaintiff
1972,
Shorehaven
the
indicated
Shorehaven,
14,
neighborhood
also
2.
June
Louis
the
the
no blacks
spoke
following
about
Sarnell
at
of America,
New York,
defendants
were
interrogatories.
1.
E.
States
GOLDBERG
of Justice
D.C.
V E R I F I C A T I O N
STATE OF NEW YORK
) ss. :
COUNTY OF KINGS
Division,
Civil
I,
Norman
1.
I am an attorney
United
counsel
for
Action
No.
knowledge
Goldberg,
States
are
being
in
Department
in
United
of
the
Supplementary
true
and
the
duly
sworn,
Housing
of
depose
Section,
Justice,
and
Civil
one
of
States
v.
Fred
C. Trump,
facts
of
this
case.
and
correct
Answers
to
the
best
to
Defendants'
say:
Rights
the
et
al.,
belief.
me this
1974
The foreInterro-
of my information,
NORMANP. GOLDBERG
Attorney,
Housing
Section
Civil
Rights
Division
Department
of Justice
Washington,
D.C. 20530
before
and
73 C 1529.
I am informed
Plaintiff's
gatories
P.
plaintiff
2.
going
-
'
'
T:t,l:AJt .............
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
undersigned
answer
to
submits
States
attorney
defendants'
Blate,
tenant
currently
Beachaven
larger
apartment.
unknown,
near
observed
the office.
want to rent
the following
While at the
through
The agent
to blacks
submitted.
Brooklyn,
in the
to inquire
office,
about
or words
to that
proceeded
to pull
he wanted
to glve
the
appearance
agent,
people
that
effect.
down indicating
that
defen-
moving to a
the rental
to Blate
is
Beachaven
went to the
stated
New York,
defendants'
Mr. Blate
1970,
office
plaintiff
Answer
residing
rental
by its
supplemental
In addition,
49 Nixon Court,
Soa1etime in late
dants'
herein,
to an answer previously
Hr. Saul
Complex.
plaintiff
submits
Supplemental
a white
SUPPLEMENTAL
ANSWER
TO DEFENDANTS'
INTERROGATORIES
interrogatories.
a correction
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 73 CIV 1529
of lunerica,
hereby
P.M
..............
_____________
The United
DEC3 1974
the office
name
walking
"we" do not
The agent
then
to :31.ate that
was closed.
Corrected
Reference
Supplemental
Answer served
Zeller
Answer
on November 4,
to Gomez, Zeller
Gomez that
ments Zeller
order
when blacks
informed
to implement
be changed
informed
inquired
there
the defendants'
The portion
statement
to blacks.
them that
in Plaintiff's
1974.
to a discriminatory
According
contained
made by
as follows:
Gomez that
Zeller
about
Trump
further
renting
apart-
were no vacancies
discriminatory
Respectfully
policy.
submitted,
NORMANP. GOLDBERG J
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
in
AFFIDAVIT
CITY OF WASHINGTON
ss
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA )
I, Norman P. Goldberg,
1.
Rights
I am an attorney
Division,
United
for plaintiff
Trump, et al.,
Civil
foregoing
Plaintiff's
Interrogatories
mation,
Department
in United
Action
I am informed
duly sworn,
Civil
of Justice,
States
and say:
and one
v. Fred C.
No. 73 C 1529.
of the facts
Supplemental
of this
case.
The
Answer to Defendants'
knowledge
depose
States
of the counsel
2.
being
to the best
of my infor-
and belief.
NO
GOLDBERG
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
Subscribed
and sworn to before
this ci,.c'110 of November, 1974.
'
me
vLi/~'t_(,
~(~@~L,
1
(/
NOTARY
PUBLIC
My Conunission
expires:
~1'-'"?J
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby
of the foregoing
Interrogatories
postage,
prepaid,
certify
that
on November
Plaintiff's
Supplemental
were placed
in the United
addressed
to counsel
7).
Cl...,1974,
copies
Answer to Defendants'
States
for
mail,
the defendants;
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
CIS:HAB:gp
F. 730959
'
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-
-againstFRED
c.
TRUMP, et
al.,
Defendants.
S I R S
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that
December,
Cadman
1974
Plaza
at
the
East,
in
plaintiff
in
Adolpho
Gomez,
the
Federal
before
You are
Dated:
as
Rules
Borough
Procedure,
attend
continue
and
will
oral
States
by law
from
day
cross-examine.
12th
day
Attorney,
City
take
the
take
to
day
225
deposition
pursuant
a Notary
to
of
of New York,
examination,
before
authorized
on the
Brooklyn,
action
of Civil
A.M.
United
of
upon
will
to
10:00
the
a witness,
of
examination
invited
the
of
above-entitled
some other
The oral
will
the
Office
at
of
to
Public,
or
depositions.
until
A Spanish
completed.
interpreter
be present.
Brooklyn,
December
New York
4, 1974
Yours,
etc.
TO:
Saxe,
Bacon,
Bolan & Manley,
39 East 68th Street
New York, N.Y. 10021
th
Esqs.
r,r;;
TIME
A.M
.. ............
P.M
........ .
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 73 CIV 1529
)
)
V
SUPPLEMENTAL
ANSWER
TO DEFENDANTS'
INTERROGATORIES
______________
Defendants.
The United
its
undersigned
mental
answer
)
)
States
of America,
attorney
hereby
to defendants'
submits
black
August
17,
to inquire
with
renting
Mr. Jacobs
was informed
for
Jacobs,
Center,
went
Avence,
or one-bedroom
agent
that
rent.
supple-
3323 Nostrand
a studio
that
was available
Mr. Godfrey
located
neither
following
apartment,
day.
by
Answer
1972,
complex
about
the
herein,
interrogatories.
Supplemental
On or about
plaintiff
Center,
III,
a white
went into
male associated
the rental
office
of
3323 Nostrand
departed
Avenue,
Brooklyn,
in order
to inquire
bedroom apartment.
Johnston
were available
for
a few minutes
about
renting
was informed
after
a studio
that
the
Jacobs
or oneapartments
rent.
Respectfully
submitted,
Attorney~
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department
of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
AFFIDAVIT
CITY OF WASHINGTON
)
)
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
I,
Donna Goldstein,
being
I am an attorney
1.
Rights
Division,
of the
counsel
for
Trump,
et al.,
Civil
2.
United
plaintiff
Interrogatories
knowledge
depose
Section,
and say:
Civil
of Justice,
States
v.
and one
Fred
C.
No. 73 C 1529.
of the
facts
Supplemental
is true
sworn,
Department
in United
Action
Plaintiff's
duly
in the Housing
States
I am intormed
foregoing
mation,
ss
of this
case.
The
Answer to Defendants'
and correct
to the
best
of my infor-
and belief.
(
(--,
,,...
~'~
'
DO~~~'?oL~~
Attorney,
J:tc{using Section
Civil Rights Division
Department
of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
Subscribed
and sworn to before me
this I 7 t{.., day of December, 1974.
My Commis
ion expires:
iiuX l..,O~"'";:::
,:.:.:;,irP.S June
14. 19'7'1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby
certify
that
of the foregoing
Plaint
f's
Interrogatories
postage
prepaid,
were placed
addressed
for
Answer to Defendants'
States
mail,
the defendants:
Attorney,
ousing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
.
l';".''~
-~
-'''
.} .
......l~J..-w~d~
'... .JSl)
,
1;..
...
1:;<17s
a..:::i.. J-t
DG+t!HU
~ sO
FEBla l915
"'
':". UJ 175-52.:..20
:-
u~s.
Action
i \' r ,
'S.
Dbi
Cl
FEB~~: ,.1
c.
Tramp. et al.
Ne;,~-73C1S29
'
..
I ;-,~
I am writing
~o request an early conference with the
Court so that a CQi::'iSB.Iit decree~ which has been agreed Upon in
principle~
can be entered as soon aa po@sible.
proposed
modified
provides
.1..
of Uuderstan.ding 1 executed
on January 20.,
to the Court on Jauu.~ry 21, 1975, and the
consent decree -wh:lc.his attached t::her(-;to.t which may be
only as described in the memorandum. 'lne memo:rti'ndum
t.heir
that
entirety
in
th.a final
coo sent
de;. ae.
ancountered
in this
action~ including
the p!rntponement: of two trial
dB.tea._ and the
requircmBnt for expedition. contained in 42 u.s.c. i3614~ the
i
1
i,;f{_.
...
#'
;
- 2. -
..
"';,.,
contad.n.s a. ti:metahle
Meoorndutn of Unde.:rstantHng
exem.1.t.ion
of
fur
fi..."'l.al
of t:he IDt!:tno:n.rndum 1
by Fe:hr11ary 14;i: 1975 ~ nt:he
the decree..
Unr'ie:r the
decree
ha.a be.en executed
termn
if no final
partiIHJ aha11 then seek
a13s1.~ts.nce of
Court to resolve
. any dispute
arising
sol,;ly out of <lisagroerr.u.-:i:r.ttas tcf tha
meaning of a.ny proposed change referred
to in the ~ie,.-oclrandumof
Understanding
...tt
.'.
' Shortly
standing>
a.ft:er
~laintiff
the
execut!on
of the
1-!emorandum of Under-
proposed
contair1ing
the provieiona
p~evi.ously agreed upon.
Several
attempts
to contact
Mr... Cohnt both before
and after
t:he
Fcbr,.t~u~y 14 deadline~
have gone 1manswered~
and, no d.ecree baa
there.fore
been executed.
Accordingly~
we are wt'i.tin:g t:o request
that s. meeting t>n'.th the Court be scheduled
in accordance
with
the provisions
of the l>ieinorandum of Unde~atanding~
~o th.at the
settlement
can be made final
and t:he consent:
decree
promptly
mits:red.
Thank you for ya.u.r conaider.ation.
consent
decree
Sincerely*
J.. STANLEY POTTL.~:;ER
ABHiatililt
.l'ttt:oruey General
Civil
,,
Ri.ghts Division
. /'
f /}a..
By:
{j
...k
.9 ') 7
~-.
(J(J
.J:Jtw{.t.t--
FRANKE. SCH.WELB
Chief
.Houilng Section
'
----------------
--------
..........
---- ...
- ..
'
.............
............
-'
Qr
FEBlsl91S
: DJ 17S-.52-20
~
Ibe Honorable
u~s.
Eward
'Oist:t'i.ct
It. Neaher
Judge
,Eastern District
of New York
22.5 Cac:ban Plaza E ..
Brooklyn" N8WYork 10023
Ru:
for
expedition
contained
in 42
u.s..c.
13614ll' the
o-
parties
shall then !Jeek the assistance
of the Court to resolve
any dispute arising
solely out of disagre~t
as ttf the
lDftilDfngof any proposed change referred to in the Memorandum.of
~d.erst:anding,.
after
Sincerely,
STANIEY POT'l'INGER.
J.
Assistant
Civi.l
At:t:ol'.'lley Gene~al
llights
./
By:
I)
Division
.9 ) ii
FJIANK g_
SCHWELB
Chief
Housing SeGtion
..
~'
'
{j{J
j/UJ...,.-k'-:. ..J
...
-f~tt--
UNITED
STATES
DISTRICT
COURT
LEWIS ORGEL
CLERK
U. S, COURT HOUSE
BROOKLYN,
NEW YORK
11201
February
20,
1975
Re:
Dear
a copy
Hon. -----E-DW
above
c.
Trump et
al.
Si:c:
I enclose
herein
on ___
entitled
of
the
memorandum
.......
A
....Rn...-1'!..-.NB.AHF.JL_ ___
..February
and
order
of
filed
_ , U.S.D.J.
20, .1.9..7..s__
in
the
matter.
Very
Lewis
Clerk
truly
yours,
Orgel
of Court
By:
Thomas B. Costello
Chief
Deputy
Clerk
Encl.
cc:
Fran!, E. Schwclb,
:\;s(.
U.S. AttorneyB.},.J-;..
----,:,,
.....,~
r,..-
-x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
-against73 C 1529
FRED c. TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP and
TRUMP MANAGEMENTS, INC. ,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
11
~
TiMC
MEMORANDUM.
ORDER
Pursuant
February
18,
with
court
the
standing,
in
the
therefor,
to
from
plaintiff's
counsel
requesting
the
in
accordance
with
the
Memorandum
of
Under-
1975,
and
filed
the
court
January
above-captioned
20,
scheduling
action,
and
good
counsel
for
the
of
a meeting
with
cause
appearing
is
ORDERED that
chamber~
Room 252,
purposes
as
set
at
forth
10:00
in
a.m.
the
parties
on March
Memorandum
5,
appear
1975,
U.
Brooklyn,
February
New York
20, 1975
for
of Understanding.
~R..~
Dated:
dated
1975,
dated
it
a letter
P.ici.
S.
D.
J.
in
the
20530
MA'<
8 197S
Ad~
Reply to t:ie
Dirioion Indicated
JSP:FES:dcr
DJ 175-52-11
~
r,1AY1 ::J
TIMEA.'.1.........
PJ.1
..............
.
2 -
*/ This meeting took place only after Mr. Cohn twice cancelled
s'cheduled conference
calls between him, defendant Donald Trump,
and counsel for the United States which were supposed to resolve
Mr. Cohn adthe controversy
once and for all.
Subsequently,
vised counsel that defendant Donald Trump would come to Washington to negotiate,
but his father and Mr. Eskanazi came instead.
- 3 -
- 4 -
Proposed Consent Order pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding) and Section IV A(3) p. 8 of Appendix E (the Proposed Consent Order drafted pursuant to the April 15 meeting)],
and with
affirmative
steps to ensure equal employment opportunity
(see
III C p. 11 of Appendix B ~/ and IV C p. 10 of Appendix E).
In
the Memorandum of Understanding
agreed to on January 20, 1975,
(Appendix A) and in the settlement
negotiated
with Mr. Trump and
Mr. Eskanazi (Appendix E), the Injunction,
including
the affirmative provisions,
applied to all of defendants'
properties
in
New York City.**/
The reporting
provisions
(part V, p. 15
Appendix B, and'"""part VI, p. 17, Appendix E) were to apply to
fifteen
properties.
'!!!!.!:.IDefendants now propose, contrary to
the explicit
provisions
of prior agreements,
that the affirmative provisions
of the Decree (see part Ill of Appendix Band
part IV of Appendix E) apply only to those properties
listed
in
the reporting
provisions.
This proposal is inconsistent
with
what has been previously
settled
and makes the decree far less
effective
in ensuring the full enjoyment of equal housing opportunity.
While we have, at defendants'
request,
agreed to a number of changes in the January 20th Memorandum of Understanding,
even though defense counsel had then represented
it to be a final
settlement,
we cannot agree to the three most recent proposals.
Defendants apparently
take the position
that without these new
alterations,
all three at odds with what they have previously
signed, they will not execute a consent decree as they have
previously
committed themselves to doing.
*I
conditionally
agreed
to de-
'!!!!.!:.I
Reduced
to fourteen
at subsequent
meetings.
- 5 -
- 6 -
that further
negotiations
without the assistance
of the Court
would be any more productive
than the many dozens of attorneyhours already spent.
Once a settlement
in substance has been
reached between counsel which provides
for resolution
by the
Court of any difficulties
in completing the settlement,
then
we believe
that the parties
are required
to utilize
the machinery for resolution
by the Court of disputes
as to the meaning
of the Understanding,
and are not free to disregard
prior commitments.
In the event that the Court should think it inappropriate to require
the defendants
to comply with their prior agreements, then we must reluctantly
request
that the case be
scheduled for trial
at an early date.
In this connection,
the
Memorandum of Understanding
includes
a list of witnesses
for
each side, and only four witnesses
- the two Trumps, Althea
Gibson, and one NAACPrepresentative
- are eligible
to testify
for defendants.
Accordingly,
substantially
all of plaintiff's
case will be uncontradicted.
Since the case was, for all practical purposes,
settled
once, it would seem to be an unnecessary
expenditure
of time and resources
to go to trial.
Nevertheless,
if the defendants
are not to be bound to their prior bargains,
we will be ready to proceed.
Sincerely,
J. STANLEYPOTTINGER
Assistant
Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
J
By:
/0
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief
Housing Section
cc:
!----FILMED
)I'
-x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
TIME
A.M
.............. .
P.M7
~-.c. Ts2 9
TIJ..-.}mD
,. __
u,
Wl
-
i-....,..
h_;..,:,i
'.
--
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
0 RD
The court
sel
in
the
above-captioned
Understanding
it
and
appearing
progress
that
of
conference
4,
1975,
having
is
in
case
Proposed
hereby
Courtroom
of
the
scheduled
correspondence
concerning
Consent
a conference
settlement
ER
received
Order
with
the
action
is
for
3:00
the
therein,
necessary,
such
Wednesday,
No. 2.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:
Brooklyn,
May 19,
New York
1975
S.
D.
J.
of
and
concerning
p.m.,
U.
coun-
Memorandum
filed
court
from
~.,....= .....,,.,_
the
a
June
.-,u-,r,
T:t'
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED C. TRUMP,et al.,
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529 TIME/\.M.............
P.M.........
MEMORANDUM
IN SUPPORT
OF PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST
TO ENFORCEA SETTLEMENTAGREEMENT
_____________
Defendants.
On January
lawsuit
executed
the provisions
was intended
language
a ''Memorandum of Understanding"
for settlement
as a settlement
as:
"Plaintiff
agrees
of the representation
principle
1, p. 1.
stated
the country
until
such
solely
on
case is settled
herein."
in
(Emphasis added)
counsel,
for a matter
mid-February,
of executing
1975.
a final
No final
enforced.
It is well established
and will
this
and plaintiff
containing
and contains
entered
that
in this
The Memorandum
to a continuance
Because defendants'
settlement
of the case.
agreement
the basis
Para.
into voluntarily
that
"cannot
be summarily enforced
a settlement
be repudiated
by the Court."
agreement
by either
party
Cummins Diesel
Michigan,
1962);
Inc.
v. The Falcon,
see also
Bond Co.,
All States
Kelly
and specifically
way affects
and to later
enter
into
whether
or whether
they
a written,
signed
intended
the provisions
of language
left
contract
v. Robinson,
v. Greer,
supra.
exists
question
is "whether
419 F.
In cases
the crucial
contract
the
of a prior
Pyle v. Wolf,
No such question
Memorand\llll contemplates
a lawsuit
contract
contract."
1972).
may be a valid
agreement,
agreement
in the
doc\llllent in no
to compromise
Autera
Kelly
a binding
written
to be contained
an accord
intended
the later
of a subsequent
agreement
is only an oral
contemplated
374 F.
provisions
nature
1969),
only matters
all
to writing.
not reduced
to determine
However,
The anticipation
Even an oral
all
de Navagaceon v. Harris,
outlines
the binding
where there
382
Decree.
settlement.
although
denied,
of a Consent
Decree.
v. The Bankers
1967).
The January
execution
Inc.
1965) !;!!.
v. Greer,
CA ANONVenezolana
2d 33 (5th Cir.
final
Investors,
that
contained
the final
exists
here.
decree
shall
The
contain
- 2 -
portions
the
as to the meaning
of the settlement.
of
Since
the final
decree
the prior
agreement,
settlement
of this
to the execution
indicated
settlement,
concern
and plaintiff
to effectuate
a final
to seek changes
provisions
represents
of this
alone
as a
Memorandum,
about various
agreed
Decree.
provisions
of the
to numerous changes
However,
in substantive
believes
appropriate
a settlement
defendants
in order
have continued
provisions,claiming
each provision
relief
is agreed
what a court
that
in a case
to by the parties,
would order
can stand
"memorialize"
that
these
While plaintiff
consider
the agreement
to simply
lawsuit.
Subsequent
defendants
was intended
for
after
the Fifth
of the settlement
of this
it
kind,
once
is irrelevant
a trial
Circuit
to
on the merits.
stated
in
1949):
Where the parties,
acting in good faith,
settle. a controversy,
the courts will
enforce the compromise without regard
to what the result
might, or would have
been, had the parties
chosen to litigate
rather than settle.
intended
absence
inunediately
after
the signing
draft
and execute
a Final
Decree at that
- 3 -
time,
to
and a provision
was inserted
providing
disagreement
memorandum.
The parties
as to its
readiness
to resolve
trial
and will
and, accordingly,
that
to proceed
will
if such disputes
the parties
pursuant
proceed
lists
to
incorporated
be unable
to resolve
as to the meaning of
- and we believe
to trial
the Court
of the
any
to the last
that
the
is prepared
provision
in the
signed Memorandum.
*I
- 4 -
CONCLUSION
reasons,
Memorandwn of Understanding
decree
entered
in accordance
we believe
that
should be enforced
the
and a
therewith.
Respectfully
submitted,
FRANKE. S
NORMANP.
OLDBERG
DONNAF. GOLDSTEIN
Attorneys,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
CERTIFICATEOF SERVICE
I hereby certify
of the foregoing
on June~'
1975, copies
to Enforce a Settlement
counsel
that
at the following
Request
to
address:
DSTEIN
Attorney
ousing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
1
_,
1,,,--
L ,.
'--'-it'
,..--Y-'""
v.
FRED C. TRUMP, et al.,
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529
MEMORANDUM
IN SUPPORT
OF PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST
TO ENFORCEA SETTLEMENTAGREEMENT
_____________
Defendants.
On January
lawsuit
executed
the provisions
was intended
language
a ''Memorandum of Understanding"
for settlement
of the case.
as a settlement
as:
"Plaintiff
agreement
agrees
the basis
of the representation
principle
along
Para.
the lines
that
stated
to leave
the country
and will
this
case
herein."
for a matter
and plaintiff
solely
on
is settled
(Emphasis
counsel,
mid-February,
such
in
added)
of executing
1975.
the
a final
No final
now seeks
to have the
enforced.
It is well
entered
The Memorandum
and contains
in this
containing
to a continuance
1, p. 1 . Because defendants'
was about
into
established
voluntarily
that
"cannot
be SUIIIIlarily enforced
a settlement
be repudiated
by the Court."
agreement
by either
party
Cummins Diesel
Michigan
1962);
Investors,
830 (1965);
1966);
2d 33 (5th Cir.
Decree.
way affects
outlines
the binding
Even an oral
and to later
enter
to determine
whether
intended
a written,
signed
of language
Autera v. Robinson,
contract
supra.
the crucial
exists
419 F.
In cases
question
is "whether
the
as a memorial of a prior
contract
that
contained
of
No such question
Memorandtnn contemplates
contract
contract."
left
doctnnent in no
to compromise a lawsuit
agreement,
agreement
in the
agreement
a binding
written
the provisions
to be contained
of a subsequent
nature
is only an oral
they intended
only matters
provisions
to writing.
or whether
all
all
the later
not reduced
where there
374 F.
The anticipation
settlement.
although
382
de Navagaceon v. Harris,
of a Consent Decree.
and specifically
final
denied,
1967).
The January
execution
1965) ~.
Kelly v. Greer,
CA ANONVenezolana
the final
exists
here.
decree
shall
The
contain
portions
the
as to the meaning
of the settlement.
- 2 -
decree
the prior
agreement,
settlement
of this
Subsequent
defendants
to the execution
provisions
can stand
of this
"memorialize"
alone
as a
Memorandum,
a final
to seek changes
to simply
lawsuit.
and plaintiff
to effectuate
agreed
Decree.
in substantive
to numerous changes
in order
However, defendants
have continued
provisions,claiming
that
these
While plaintiff
represents
believes
appropriate
a settlement
consider
the agreement
indicated
settlement,
was intended
each provision
relief
is agreed
what a court
that
in a case of this
to by the parties,
would order
of the settlement
after
it
kind,
once
is irrelevant
a trial
Circuit
to
on the merits.
stated
in
1949):
Where the parties,
acting in good faith,
settle
a controversy,
the courts will
enforce the compromise without regard
to what the result might, or would have
been, had the parties
chosen to litigate
rather than settle.
the signing
intended
absence
innnediately
Decree at that
- 3 -
time,
to
and a provision
was inserted
providing
disagreement
memorandum.
The parties
as to its
readiness
to resolve
trial
and will
the differences
to proceed
that
if such disputes
the parties
and, accordingly,
will
in the Memorandum.
pursuant
proceed
lists
to
incorporated
be unable
to resolve
as to the meaning of
and we believe
to trial
the Court
of the
any
to the last
that
the
is prepared
provision
in the
signed Memorandum.
*/
- 4 -
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing
reasons,
Memorandum of Understanding
decree
entered
in accordance
we believe
should be enforced
that
the
and a
therewith.
Respectfully
submitted,
fL~~l~~
FRANKE. SCHWELB
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG
DONNAF. GOLDSTEIN
Attorneys,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
.,
CERTIFICATEOF SERVICE
I hereby certify
of the foregoing
to Enforce
counsel
that
on June~'
Memorandum in Support
a Settlement
1975, copies
of Plaintiff's
at the following
Request
to
address:
DONNAF. GOLDSTEIN
Attorney ,C}fousing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
FILED
IN CLER.K'S
OfFtCE
CIS:HAB:iq
F.11=730959
U. S. DISTRICT
COURTE.D.N.Y.
TIM[ A.M~.........
P.M,,m,OilBf}R:
..'!'O SHOW CAUSE
,M
...................
Plaintiff,
Civil
Action
73 C 1529
-againstFRED C. TRUMP, et
No.
al.,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
Upon the
the
affidavits
having
application
filed
been
shown,
in
it
support
is
this
Court,
Court
uouse.
after
as
counsel
submitted
to
subsequent
a permanent
the
in
an appropriate
expenditure
incurred
2 of
the
the
a.m.,
defendants
constitute
than
States
as
soon
there-
on January
of
20,
not
be
Understanding
1975,
and
the
and
thei
counsel;
costs
against
amount
for
by counsel
for
defendants
unnecessary
plaintiff
service
time
and
herein.
upon counsel
be m~de by~~~~
aa..c:--~~-------,
June G:, 1975, at 'g,'oof!f1;, and that
thiS
Shall
later
or
should
IT IS FURTHER ORDEREDthat
for
cause
show cause
United
Memorandum
by defense
assessing
good
and
why
herein
commitment
States
herein
injunction
to
Court
and
defendants
Courtroom
pursuant
(2)
counsel
the
may be heard,
herein
United
thereof,
lo"'"'-, at ID
on June
(1)
entered
in
the
hereby
ORDERED that
before
of
shall
good
and
sufficient
service.
IT IS SO ORDERED this
day of
June
1975
~e-~
EDWARDR. NEAHER
United
States
District
Judge
CIS:HAB:gp
F. 730959
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
-againstFRED C. TRUMP, et
PLAINTIFF'S
APPLICATION FOR
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE
al.,
Defendants.
- - X
The United
fully
moves
this
show cause,
if
States
Court
any
of America,
for
there
an Order
be,
(1} a permanent
pursuant
mitted
to
to
the
the
commitment
and
appropriate
incurred
their
amount
the
interests
of
counsel,
thereto.
plaintiff's
to
be entered
heretofor.esub-
1975,
and
the
subsequent
be assessed
see
28 U.S.C.
prays
for
1927,
and
such
against
the
in
an
expense
other
relief
as
may require.
is
based
FRANKE.
basis
memorandum
not
herein.
justice
legal
20,
plaintiff
further
GOLDSTEIN and
The
not
Understanding
time
The application
DONNA F.
should
unnecessary
for
Plaintiff
of
should
for
by counsel
defendants
counsel;
requiring
injunction
on January
by defense
respect-
why
Memorandum
Court
plaintiff,
on the
SCHWELB and
therefor
herein
affidavits
filed
is
set
on June
Attorneys
U.S. Department
the
forth
4,
of
attachment
in
1975.
of Justice
the
CIS:HAB:gp
F. 730959
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-
Plaintiff,
AFFIDAVIT
-againstFRED C. TRUMP, et
al.,
Defendants.
-
) ss. :
COUNTY OF KINGS
FRANKE.
SCHWELB, being
duly
sworn,
deposes
and
says:
1.
I am the
Rights
Division,
charge
of
of
this
knowledge
and
to
1975
and
the
its
office
appointment)
me,
which
attached
satisfactory
did.
to
that
he was going
back
on Monday;
signed
this
about
4:15
Mr.
and
he would
his
clients.
hung
get
p.m.
not
leave
the
He then
for
"next
the
best
of my
of May 8,
are
also
revised
the
time
the
get
the
week"
he could
it
after
talk
that
he
on another
that
time,
and would
consent
leave
for
was
at
weekend
for
him,
decree
people
true.
in Mr.
contact
conference
not
States.
affidavit
Cohn related
I should
said
United
to
eleven
signed
the
(the
about
that
supervisory
I had waited
with
and
it
after
him that
we could
in
to
secretary
Bermuda
and
affidavit
Mr.
to
Civil
of my letter
Eskenazi.
that
week;
true
her
p.m.,
he could
that
to
I advised
was in a conference
matter
are
his
Section,
Ms~ Goldstein's
5:35
I asked
she
of
The contents
since
our
with
contents
3. At about
Cohn's
Housing
on behalf
belief.
Court
the
of Justice,
litigation
I am familiar
date
of
Department
this
2.
Chief
at
be
decree
his
office;
showing
no longer
it
to
and
up.
4.
implement
months,
My colleagues
the
but
Memorandum
our
attempts
and
of
I have
been
Understanding
have
been
frustrated
attempting
for
about
by our
to
five
com-
plete
inability
for
the
very
on these
get
short
to
concluded
without
time
dated
that
this
matter
assistance
because
with
in
have
for
"one
has
constant
amount
it
housing
is
and
Goldberg's
even
time.
by 42
this
be
kind
5.
our
of
the
settlement
and
January
Ms.
the
u.s.c.
that
3614,
every
the
for
to
before
an Order
forth
occurred
clear
in
the
me this
No.244502158
Kings County
Mr.
throughout
warning
conduct
must
that
cases
that
this
of
an Order
77
-2-
any
and
Memorandum
which
signed
of
to
be
of
kind;
be granted,
implement
by the
Understanding
1975.
the
and
To Show Cause
negotiated
EV&L
YN SOMMER
i)ufary Public, Stale of New Yo,;.
Qualified in
fair
extraordinary
tactics
enter
6t~:~~~'kl
It.
most
we ask
FRANKE.
Sworn
time
requires
delaying
promptly
previously
20,
all
any-
throughout
counsel's
foregoing,
no further
set
inordinate
way expedited."
of
Court
These
thin"
supervise
- have
which
some
delay
up an
Goldstein's
bar
made
"pretty
States
- the
counsel
decree.
Catoggio's
record,
In view
this
parties
United
their
additional
spread
this
agreed
their
have
taken
to
delays
at
application
that
is
Magistrate
"in
tolerate
and
of
more
on the
governed
that
the
years
despite
defendants,
for
These
in my seventeen
case
which
for
final
have
reached
them
or
promised
resolved
been
and
in
changes
in my
reluctantly
have
to
my responsibility
litigation
country,
Court
resulted
of my own time,
way since
this
always
and
Based
forth
I have
defendants
the
job.
I have
Court.
conference"
produced
the
a ~oom
be expeditiously
submitted
case
into
set
1975,
more
variations
are
"settlements"
each
has
never
the
and
but
which
complete
cannot
prior
signature,
request,
to
May 8,
of
defendants,
asked
Mr. Cohn
some of which
Court
the
elusive
needed
the
conclusion
but
the
experiences,
letter
upon
to
SCHWELB
Plaintiff,
- against
FRED C. TRUMP, et
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 15
al.,
Defendants.
-
COUNTY OF KINGS
I,
and
duly
sworn
do hereby
depose
say:
1.
of
I am an attorney
Justice,
States
and
v.
Fred
one
of
:Tc"Y\.~
On Jttfted~o,
plaintiff's
counsel,
this
action
by executing
with
defendants'
provisions
to
be executed
3.
despite
not
able
forth
the
in
May 8,
attached
hereto.
4.
By an Order
scheduled
a conference
3:00
P.M.
a legal
al.
dated
in
this
another
of
of
Understanding
in
24,
The memorandum
the
final
of
by counsel
for
counsel
of
decree
of
outlined
which
was
1975.
execution
some of
letter
these
the
10:00
action,
for
a.m.,
to
June
while
sign
over
agreement
this
and
we have
efforts,
Frank
1975
matter
agreement,
defendants
of Mr.
May 19,
the
plaintiff,
for
implement
on this
At approximately
memorandum
Goldberg,
a Memorandum
to
1975
in United
settlement
with
months,
Department
the
the
efforts
five
plaintiff
Roy Cohn.
to
States
I negotiated
The details
of
for
be contained
to meet
decree.
a period
is
and
United
Norman
by February
numerous
final
1975,
Subsequent
been
et
counsel
to
the
counsel
C. TrumE,
2.
the
for
are
Schwelb,
set
which
Court
4,
1975
at
I was filing
I was approached
by
Mr.
Roy M. Cohn,
company
Mr.
of defendants
Irving
to
informed
be at
10:00
as
P.M.
fact
of
Mr.
Cohn prior
reached
typed
office
at
to
final
P.M.
the
Decree
5.
My colleague,
the
would
Housing
States
in
principal
purpose
of
it
conference
be available
of
day,
June
this
in
conversations
a final
and we agreed
at
was engaged
Court,
form
Frank
of
of
for
while
Cohn requested
Mr.
time
not
Mr.
next
the
Accordingly,
by the
terms
who had
negotiations.
During
heard
the
with
he and
Decree,
that
and
the
I have
to meet
5,
I again
at
1975,
at
his
which
be executed.
Section
Department
New York
Court
in
Trump and
defendants
he would
the
the
Donald
understood
directed.
being
who was
settlement
that
on the
in
4:00
the
the
matter.
so advised.
Decree
of
to
of
had
a criminal
agreement
was
time
Court
and Mr.
he had
and
3:00
the
in
a.m.,
defendants,
Trump
me that
the
the
an agent
participated
Cohn
Court
for
Fred
Eskanazi,
previously
Mr.
counse~
the
Schwelb,
Civil
Justice,
had
the
P.M.
3:00
completing
who is
Rights
the
Chief
Division,
arranged
to
United
come to
conference
and
for
resolution
of
this
the
the
lawsuit.
6.
On June
Cohn's
offices
P.M.}.
Mr.
5:35
P.M.
contacted
where.
had
Cohn,
the
agreed
however,
Schwelb,
Mr.
Cohn,
accompanying
Neaher's
at
1975 Mr.
Mr.
This
7.
5,
Schwelb
time
did
through
is
(earlier
I arrived
changed
not
appear.
Mr.
Cohn's
secretary,
was
conference
who apparently
conversation
and
described
in
at
Mr.
to
4:15
At approximate!
in Mr.
else-
Schwelb's
affidavit.
At approximately
law clerk
Mr.
5:40
David
P.M.
Brown and
occurred.
I telephoned
2 -
advised
Judge
him of what
8.
Mr.
offices
at
Schwelb,
Mr.
Eskanazi
approximately
5:45
and
I left
P.M.
DONNAGOL1fS':pEIN
Subscribed
and sworn to
me thi 9 6th day of June,
I/''".
.j
~
..1.
,.. . ...
,!
before
1975.
,.,.,,
................"' ........
. ..\
. ~<!(~"},yl/YY~!
,.
MI.YN
SOMM&ll
77
3 -
Mr.
Cohn's
T. S/8/75
JSP:FES:dcr
DJ 17S52ll
Honorable Edward&. N~aher
United Statee Dir.trict
Judge
Eastern ot~crict of New York
22S Cadman Plaza Ear.t
Bew York. New York 11201
le:
United Stat~
C.f.,
No.
1~ C
Y.
Fred
c.
Trump. et al.,
1529
cc:
Records
Chrono
Schwelb
L....--Goldstein
Goldberg
Trial
File
be contaiaed
in th~ir
entirot7
1a the final
Coa.z..:>Dt Deere'-!.
On lcbro.ery
ConsQnt Ord1..-r
(attach.P.d btr~to ar: lipp,.,n<llx .B) ba:,ed on th1.? ~r:ttl?Jment out .
11n,1d 1n th,! Memorandum of Und~r,tanding
vas foNarde.d
to
coWl~e-1.
Thereafter,
Mr. Cohn forward~d to this office a propo~ed
Cons:t:nt Order ~1bich omitte:d cwny of th;.! major provi~ionf'
of the
Ce-rms G$r,20d to in tb, January 20th M.!tnOrandum. (A
"'ettlem-0nt
copy of this proposal
1 .i;ttacb~d b~::r,:to af? lppt:-ndix C.)
On
.Ksrch 14, i:e vrot,:t Mr. Cohn a lt:tt~r a copy of \',:hich is attached
as Appcndiz .o, indicating
that ~e beli~vad
th" t!,rms 0 the fint
tli!s~nt
had bb D fixt::d by th..:: f((morandum of Understanding
filed
in this Court and th~t ~,:1 th~refor'.;; fouad th~ def.adants propo~ al compl,,tf.dy unaccept.able.
On .April 1.5 1971\. after w,1 had
a.gain 1 ncount~"r d F.ub t.ential
difficulties
in iin<ltng anyone
with whom to d<?al, d~f..:n..!ant Fr,.d C. Trump, and 1'1~ collea~u~
Mf Irving. t: - k.1n.azi cam;) to 1,,,: hint"ton to rnt~0t vitb eounf,el or
p aintiff~
*1 witnout th.::ir COWi' ii but wit.ti hit col:bl.3:0.t, to
.
0
!7
1ht(: m., tin 6 tooi< pl<:-\c.. only aft r Mr. Coho. twlct? cnncJ:lLd
d ~onf,r..1Dc, callt:. bct\,!'t'f:l\ him. d,f'.:'n<laot llonald True:;,,
aad coun, l for th
Unit,i:d Statea
which t;;E'r~ l',uppos<d to r.::t:olVt.<
th( controv,;;rt,y once and for all.
Sub. rqu ntly,
Mr. Cohn ad
vis.:;d coun,,.;_l tbf!t ccf:nd~at
Donald Trump ~oul'1 com.1-to t;echlng
toa to 11,~gotLat.;' but bir,1- fath~r and Mr. E kanaz:1 cam,c, int,t,1.u'-1.
.scb;dul
discues
the t~:ms of the final Coa.a,~ne Order.
l>-cl'ipitu our
that ve bad D~\gotiated
in good faith the
often $tated po!ition
Cermt of a rettla,,lll~nt which we con~idered binding oa th:e part
lea by th,;!; e!gn~?d H morandum of Uaderst.acding.
all threa coon
sel for plain.tiff
ii,ea.t half a day with Mr. Trump and
Mr. E~kana::i,
snd )fa. Goldstein
trp:;;at th-c r":11.S.inder of Che day
wieh Mr. E~'kana:;-'.i, "10rklm; ouc ff hr;t. 1,.~~ understood
to be a final
~ttl~m.enc. It wag the und~r&t6Dding of all concvrn~d that
Mr. Trump and Mr. ErJ.:.anazi ,,ere aq~otiating
for all deft"!ldvnt.
1
Appe:ndix E.
llOll propo~e
to dialet:ia provirioa~ .
d~aling with th~ inclu~iou of fair hou~tng
1a ad1tf:rtii."in.g {tc~e Ill A(:3) p. 8 of .App~ndix il (th,i,;
Sp"'cificslly
pr~viou~ly
stat,,z,.r1t:~
agr~~d to.
d::f ,,ndants
Proposed
,t
th;.:
lotc Ill t(l)
!/
May 2 m::'tins.
plaintiff
conditionslly
agreed
to d~-
of th~ decree.
-**I
Sc~ Br.nnm, v. Ft ,1:!~, 4B8 F. 2d 443 (5th Cir. 1974) for th:1
proprL:ty
c,f r. lL i,t ,:.;.::-rwlr}t!;7~.
oth r thz~n thos,-:: tit -;,hich th:
nZltionwit!t:
r,,.,lf_._f
all(,Ld
~ircrimin;:ltion
occurr,Hi.
In f'i ld,
uas ~r.:nt .. d, "'h :r,,~~ h r,, .. ,..;.: n-:,'..,;otie~i:iJ:m::rt1ve
nrovL;ion;';.
appl1cabl,:~ only to ci:w Yo;k, and - not aff ,,ctin?~. tL.:f t:.nd~ntt!i prop~rt1, & in lktJ J r:...f!.y, V.arylend end Virginia.
0
'
.
- 5 -
dum of Uad~retandin3
filed
in thl;
Court.
(1)
r,a-~olvr"? th{: thr<:'i" ts~'lli:?~ f:parating
th~ prrtl ..
by .:valu, tin:; t.h pr s .nt pod.tiour
of th.: pflrti,:r
QS ng:.,i.ni-t thi3 M~m.orandwa of Und(;!rs tan.cliag and
(2)
<~ntt.:r an Order pursuant
to that M.:morandum
of
Understznding,
ith,:r by i!i ruing a docu:i.wnt in th,t
form of App,'n~ix
.t:11 ~& thr-: Court 1 s Or<l::~r, or by
ents:ring
en Gt~Lr bar itd on th<;. M..rooran{!u:m of Under
rt.anding and th::: initial
propo~;cd Gonr nt. Ord.?r
attached
th;:r~to (1'.pp,.auic,:s. I. ,u1d B).
ar!'.", of cour,1;.,:1,r::>ady to m.~et \,,1th th,J Court end with
coun',:.:!l .at tb:: Court's
conv,:,ni net to r ,,olve thit ms.t
ttr,
and w"' hop that thi
litigation
can bi:. comp l.3t:4.d without
furth,.::r e..lay.
In vi."" of th con' tant ett, mpt~: by d:,f n;::anti::
W1.!
d.ef,D~c
and in vi,;;'A of
-e do oot think
...
..
-::~;>~ncitur.,
of
tiitt.
and r
: ou:rc:.:~: to
go to
trial.
if
Vd
will
N vtrth:
prier
barg&in11,
be r~ady to proca~d.
J. ST/NLEY POTrUIGEi
A1\.slat.ant J ttorncy
G, Dtiral
87:
Lil,t~. E. SCfi'/ELB
Lhief
Bou1:1in1S..-ctioa
ce:
1, sh,
.-
----------------------------------------x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
- against
RED C. TRUMP, et
AFFIDAVIT
Civil
Action
73 C 1529
al.,
No.
Defendants.
----------------------------------------x
STATE OF NEW YORK)
)
OUNTY OF NEW YORK)
SS.:
Agreement
in
the
will
2.
the
ith
Miss
constant
are
Grumet
at
until
late
conference
. Eskenazi
ignatures,
and
3.
everything
him this
eft,
which
was fine.
Schwelb
minor
language
modifi-
the
at
all
by the
paranoia.
the
Mr.
Eskenazi
time
problems.
corpus
had
to
out
except
left
for
at
I did
proceeding
stop
in
Civil
Without
appointed
I called
worked
Court
recital,
few remaining
were
at
met
my
not
before
another
the
by
actual
needed.
have
a copy
this
kept
week after
at
of
of
by minute
way uptown.
was agreed
I arrived
aspects
and
to
and
substance
to
afternoon,
be signed
hysterics
aria:says:.
on the
the
habeas
I was not
it
and
DeGiarde
things
I asked
suggested
in
on the
that
the
very
the
reached
applications
a minute
the
deposes
today.
and Mr.
solved
court
been
assuming
with
sworn
decree,
These
Goldstein
of
hone
consent
later
Court
and
has
be made
Section
duly
Mr.
week.
repeating
upon
and
the
office
Mr.
Schwelb
Schwelb
same
when could
I had reviewed
the
me and my clients
and
fails
the
found
to
final
that
state
came on the
tling,
it
which
was
be signed.
draft
Mr.
in
with
my
Schwelb
had
his
affidavit
...
he returned
into
to my office
my office,
f pleasantries,
igning
of
said
the
gone
nd Mr.
Eskanizi
iss
Goldstein
5.
o the
Court
nd the
this
The business
e have
for
which
nothing
papers
4.
anguage
to
so far
to
It
is
about
any
costs
Mr.
went
them
for
thereof
the
by
to
then
is
/'
9th
1975
/1
/ .
l,4?~.
/~.~:,~,
ANNTURCHIANO
a brief
exchange
in
absolutely
that
the
ridiculous.
Mr.
to
inconvenience
Fred
work
Mr.
Trump
out
the
Schwelb
and
New York.
submitted
signing
left,
left.
of
that
the
a date
decree
convenient
by the
Court.
ROY M.
worn to this
ay of June,
he had
had
Washington
come to
the
after
dissatisfaction
Schwelb
than
respectfully
be fixed
acceptance
returned,
about
rather
by having
I had
and
appease
decree
an hour
week,
themselves
the
about
tn-
parties,
..
FILE
IN Ct ti~l(":; ()F!(~E
U. S. DISTRICTCOURTE.D. N.Y
CIS:HAB:ec
F. #
TIME
A.M
............
P.M.............
CONSENT ORDER
Plaintiff,
- against
Civil
Action
No. 73 C 1529
This
America
Act
of
action
on October
1968,
42
The claim
have
was
failed
nondelegable
housing
opportunity
persons
to
carry
pursuant
u.s.c.
3601
et~-
and
out
liability,
further
prepared
that
Decree.
Fair
defendant's
vigorously
in
resolve
as
order
said
the
and
assure
that
com-
equal
numbers
have
failed
Act.
allegations.
of
resolve
case
to
substantial
existence
the
Housing
defendants
result
the
adjudication
litigation,
this
to
of
affirmative
subordinates
deny
to
the
Act
the
under
to
Fair
that
Housing
denied
States
the
their
with
been
without
is
exercise
obligations
protracted
to
the
has
admission
and
to
United
to
States
subordinates,
Accordingly,
any
United
under
their
Defendants
without
the
duty
by their
of
1973,
neglected
pliance
by the
15,
of
and
instituted
this
merit
or
absence
matter
parties
by the
the
entry
of
without
hereto
of
and
are
a Consent
It is expressly
of this
and agreed
admission
by it
crimination
of a violation
as set
any other
forth
applicable
principal
prepared
that
this
against
dis-
Trump Management,
employees
the execution
is in no way an
of the complaint,
opportunity.
to resolve
Inc.,
their
promote equal
prepared
rule
of defendant
to affirmatively
for assuring
in the Fair
of the merits
officers
that
of the prohibition
statute,
Irrespective
will
understood
will
however,
Inc.,
are
Accordingly,
the parties
are
of the following
Consent Order.
I.
It is hereby
consideration
contained
ORDERED,ADJUDGEDand DECREEDthat
of their
in part
III
affirmative
herein,
assumption
the complaint
capacity,
contained
therein,
with prejudice,
and
predating
in
of responsibility
against
against
as to all
this
Fred C.
them in their
allegations
Order.
II.
INJUNCTION
It is hereby
defendant,
all
persons
its
ORDERED,ADJUDGEDand DECREEDthat
officers,
in active
agents,
concert
permanently
employees,
or participation
enjoined
- 2 -
the
from:
successors,
the
and
with any of
GENERALINJUNCTIVEPROVISIONS
1.
the sale
Refusing
to sell
or rental
any dwelling
of,
or otherwise
to any person
sex or national
Discriminating
conditions,
or privileges
the provision
color,
Making,
made, printed,
color,
religion,
able
for
religion,
inspection,
fact
so available.
attempting
to coerce,
opportunity
or denying
religion,
any notice,
or enjoyment
protected
of a dwelling
or enjoyment
secure
housing
origin,
because
of race,
choice
or interfere
of the right
color,
is in
of any person
origin.
with,
or
housing
of the right
- 3 -
based
is not avail-
or interfering
opportunity.
that
or an intention
sex or national
by the Fair
to be
or advertise-
any dwelling
the residential
threaten
or causing
or discrimination.
or rental
threatening,
therewith,
or discrimination
that
religion,
or in
origin.
statement
or rental
origin
sale
of a dwelling,
or publishing,
limitation
the exercise
equal
for
in the terms,
sex or national
sex or national
color,
Coercing,
in the exercise
color,
in connection
to any person
Influencing
of race,
6.
or facilities
limitation,
sex or national
account
or rental
to the sale
Representing
S.
of sale
printing,
any person
religion,
any preference,
on race,
of race,
against
or published,
to negotiate
making unavailable
on account
of services
of race,
3.
refusing
origin.
2.
because
or rent,
to assist
others
to
on
7.
or
the
Engaging
effect
of
in
protected
connection,
defendants
qualification
for
of
total
income,
payments
persons,
or
act
denying
opportunity
group
any
or
practice
abridging
the
by the
Fair
Housing
shall
not,
in
rental
of
fail
or
including
other
or
to
salary,
income
from
has
right
to
equal
Act.
In
this
determining
any person,
refuse
which
the
family,
fully
wages,
or
count
source
purpose
housing
income
other
a woman's
alimony,
whatever
the
support
received.
III
ASSUMPTION OF RESPONSIBILITY BY
PRINCIPALS OF TRUMP MANAGEMENT
INC., AND TRAINING PROGRAM FOR
AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES
Trump Management
units
in
therefore
company
estate
not
New York
have
therefore
conununity
only
The Fair
in
the
its
of
its
Housing
effect,
Inc.,
controls
area
a major
and
impact
occupies
and
can,
can
result
from
well
as
from
deliberate
and
on housing
by its
and
prohibits
regardless
Act
elsewhere,
a position
own agents
Act
many thousands
employees
conduct
of motivation,
thoughtlessness
discrimination.
4 -
and
rental
activities
opportunities.
of
example,
its
of
The
leadership
in
influence
but
which
and
lack
also
is
the
real
activities
of many others.
discriminatory
violations
of
the
of
information,
the
as
Accordingly,
A.
shall
it
The principal
thoroughly
the
under
the
as
judicially
defendant
amended
and
and municipal
other
of
Housing
appropriate
(2)
Take
steps
officers
themselves
with
their
carried
B.
Inc.,
Within
rental,
by its
of
Fair
the
rights
and
Urban
forth
of
1968,
under
of
the
Development
and under
assure
of
under
laws;
Guidelines
days
principal
that
and
this
Order;
their
principal
familiarize
and
to
assure
herein
is
that
the
successfully
program
in
Housing
any manner
Act
entry
the
this
all
1968.
5 -
Such
this
to
contact
the
program
and
with
with
public
for
and
Decree,
conduct
employees
employment
Decree,
of
shall
applications
in
of
of
for
information
or process
provisions
the
who have
provide
accept
of
officers,
responsibilities,
tenants,
engaged
Act
interpreted;
and
(30)
an educational
or
Housing
undertake
thirty
employment
spective
obligations
obligations;
set
personally
out.
Defendant
complete
the
similarly
Personally
program
Fair
to
and
training
of
agencies;
assistants
(3)
themselves
all
civil
Regulations
Department
the
Trump Management,
acquaint
with
pertinent
them
follows:
of
basis
state
are
officers
on a detailed
as
or
ORDERED as
forthwith
(1)
the
is
rental
pro-
about
rentals,
process,
their
shall
or who
to
duties
include:
inform
under
(1) Furnishing
a letter
sunnnarizing
of the Fair
the terms
Housing Act as it
and employee
of this
applies
Decree and
to the
employee.
(2) Informing
in person
of this
its
or by general
meeting,
agents
and employees
applicable
Fair
and employee
under
subject
be advised
that
action,
of this
Order.
that
he has read
and received
preceding
required
so instructed
ten
and employee
of all
signed
described
shall
above
in the
a copy of each
the initial
statements
will
upon execution.
- 6 -
be instructed
in
to the effect
comply with
Copies
set
a statement
and will
disci-
to plaintiff.
the letter
and forwarding
statement
Decree
for disobedience
statement
the instructions
paragraph
such signed
accordance
a signed
failure
or other
and to sanctions
(3) Securing
his
of this
him to dismissal
plinary
agent
the various
Each such agent
of the provisions
Housing Acts.
shall
and employee,
that
he has been
such instructions
date
be
within
of employment.
be furnished
to plaintiff
IV
AFFIRMATIVE PROGRAM
It
and
is
for
Order
further
a period
take
Housing
41:
parties
to
its
are
on the
day
hottoin(q
an
and
compliance
the
with
this
the
Fair
ew.n
of
Part
the
list
erganj
is
opportunities
&1nd weekly
zations
this
of
decree.
~
and
This
epen
:iis L of
v e.cancics
of
in
in
Trump
The
letter
Listing
espies
an interest
rental
area.
shall
Central
origin.)
the
vacancies
Metropolitan
or
persons
national
V, below,
forward
with
or
synopsis
Part
made.
in writing,
owned
an appropriate
weekly
V of
New York
qualified
sex
defendant
its
all
anticipated
of
the
apartments
to
be a full
text
'1-iseretiun,
lotter
that
in
of
New York,
religion,
and
Defendant's
Center
New York,
New York
on the
of
available
present
a copy
be done
er
implement
plaintiff
Subsequently,
in
mentioned
agree
Center
a~ i~.
adopt
Community
Policy
outlined
in
infra
\\ ~ ~-- per!5ons
'v
for
of
described
may,
of
Open Housing
procedures
mailing.
Housing
entry
ensuring
the
defendant
buildings
shall
forthwith~/
the
at
Avenue,
counsel
statement
apartment
to
and
shall
following
to
without
reg:ard
to race,
color,
as ~-e.,- 1(lu-H\'.'t' 1")ro ,:cl., c(.
Included
in such letter
shall
general
~~
the
150 Fifth
by the
standards
years
defendant
1968:
Notify
copies
the
steps
aimed
Notification
to
Nondiscriminatory
League,
managed
(2)
following
of
1.
with
two
program
Act
A.
of
the
affirmative
Urban
ORDERED that
prior
to
the
of
vacancies
mailing
Open
shall
I1e1:1siHg enter
the
above-
-t.o any
~ometin9"
clflS.
all
eqUa-1.
..
*/ The defendant's
obligations
to implement
each
this
Order
for affirmative
action
shall
begin
ten
following
the entry
of this
Order,
unless
otherwise
specified
herein.
7 -
provision
(10) days
of
2.
aproved
Post
and maintain
by the
Secretary
Urban Development
where
there
rental
nonwhite
policy.
housing
of the
(HUD} ~/
Implement
3.
the
is
fair
Department
in all
activity
The defendant
of the
or public
aimed
in all
__JJap&.s,
telephone
directories,
radio,
media,
and on all
billboards,
literature
the
and the
logo
fair
shall
housing
placed
by the
to the
practices
Housing
lines,
is
attached
1,
These
placed
all
Company or its
with
.~~~
\\\
l~\J\l
IP!
and the
and easily
advertising
in the
Department
advertising
"B" to
Reg.,
conform
of
guide-
pp.
6700-02,
guidelines
this
Order.
37 F.R.
newspaper
3429
(a copy
adve1. tising
~eiyht
(8) lines
o:f pri~-onl-y--a~ly:~~'.n~'1paper-amr
mm:e. 'Def'-enaant."--snalr--cont:-inue -t-ts present
ael9rt; sing
shall
po,li_Qj..e.s,
*4/
housing
audible.
advertising,
the
be used and shall
8 -
J''.::i
Opportunity"
words
A copy of these
as Appendix
signs,
shall
in 37 Fed.
t'I
b,. Id 10
television
agents
recommended
1972.
0t)(l f'tl'N'
promotional
logo.
on April
... / in s0we-
Housing
In addition,
as published
rental
"Equal
be prominently
**~/
legible.
advertising:
and other
words
informing
Include,
brochures,
at
-ta,fl\i:'.~ytJikCi ~ ''r
shall
pamphlets,
defendant
nondiscriminatory
a.
and other
and
contact.
program
of defendant's
in a form
of Housing
offices
an advertising
community
signs
words "equal
be easily
/ !J
:JL~/.1
.
. ;
~wr-dJ:
__
_
cJ,.__,,.
cZ.'c, 7k
I S-,,._L
~A.,'-f!_,l,J_/J...~
E-'u,,j'hA-1;, ,,R_<Yt;_j,.-y)1'{_Jrx,lh,
l~
. 4.+1
04lll't-i--b~.e
,ru.1-d:
a.J \_,_o_,.-\
c;-cb-"kc;4
q_L'-'..CL.{
fl12--~fu'>!A
a_&,
v-eztz~
kwt's
/s
LJ9
aJ
iA,
,1,-
L-1,,
Q_,~ 9
a._,,.,,__,
'JO~ .
-L,;;.-{.
cP ()._~ \eg__
d
1a._y
/j'
'
a&
jQ\,L,<;.
c~itu~
sktQ
ct:.bITsfCd
~lw L->Tu.vs
,--t.k
"'qn,-Y\/W,n~+
\\C'
1/
<tAe,t_{
f+<"J
V <; ln 1
I
k>.&1
"X,1f/
Q(P(J"'
-+,.,t-H
l
J
-v
+,.__~1
bu~Mj
,E,_
a-{- -~ci c_,l_ rfi1A ~<-t
V
LU0f~
~-vv-i
fl{},(,.,.) ~-
(Jvi/l.<;,
~H
0. ,,,J,,L.t<-c;/-e_.cJ
t7r, ~ ro
,QQ...e)k,1nr ,4-k.ce
\ru ~ ~
l!M.C/~,c1
a,l, Lt_,~i.Vl
tJilL-1.
~u.__(1vv
~o_~
...
3
c-L</
Allocate
advertising
budget
directed
Rican
primarily
the
advertisements,
tising
budget
this
Provide
to
all
qualified
sex
or
procedures
as
the
shall
Spanish
requirements
media
not
the
adver-
advertisements
of
shall
Trump
stress
with
adbuildings
or
give
substantial
to
each
firm,
association
other
or
organization
engaged
agency,
regard
Each
of
such
defendant's
apartment
or management
by the
without
origin.
recipient
person
company,
or managed
persons
for
notification
referral
checking
owned
national
the
or
act
credit
apartments
radio
of
in
with
and
buildings
written
corporation,
service,
one
occupancy.**/
by defendant
*/
in
to
display
and
together
cross-section
and
emphasis
black
in minority
vacancies,
agreed
15 line
meet
its
Puerto
have
black-oriented
All
a full
and
defendant's
provision.
minority
advise
10% of
shall
vertise
undue
the
stations,
buildings
with
in
of
in media
black
press,'!:._/
to
Trump
company,
the
one
of
language
4.
to
of monthly
Rican
allocation
of
advertising
The parties
placement
Puerto
proportion
to
communities.
that
the
a reasonable
defendant
to
race,
company
are
that
available
color,
notification
objective
locating
shall
standards
to
religion,
also
and
rental.
The parties
agree
that
the placement
the Amsterdam
News and El Diario
will
**/
If the listed
apartments
with vacancies,
the buildings
ad so that
the same apartment
disproportionately
advertised
of such
satisfy
advertisements
this
requirement.
do not include
all Trump buildings
listed
shall
be rotated
with each
buildings
are not continuously
or
under this
subsection.
9 -
B.
Program of Providing
Apartment Seekers
For two years
shall
notify
League,
fifth
after
available
the entry
Avenue,
apartment
less
that
apartment
at least
of renting
applicants
the apartment.
three
building
days prior
During
shall
this
to the defendant
provide
of every
avned
tenancy
of
to placing
three-day
All applicants
shall
defendant
10003,
qualified
Order,
in each apartment
to refer
of this
period,
for Minoritx
150 Fifth
and/or
Listings
referred
the defendant
by the
or its
represerve
sentative
with an appropriate
identification
which will
to advise
the defendants
such applicant
that
pursuant
three
applicant
days if no qualified
has filed
an application
apartment
may be placed
defendant's
color,
c.
transfer
seeking
referred
to rent
After
by the Center
the apartment,
to be rented
custom without
sex or national
Affirmative
subsection.
normal business
religion,
to this
regard
the
in
to race,
origin.***/
Employment Program
The defendant
shall
recruit,
employees
and agents
without
hire,
assign,
regard
promote
to race,
and
color,
*/ The requirements
of this provision
need not be followed for
apartment buildings
which presently
have or in the future reach
a black occupancy rate of 10%. For these apartment buildings,
apartments
shall continue to be rented without regard to race,
color, religion,
sex or national
origin.
~/
The three-day
period shall begin when notification
has
beenmmpleted
and the Open Housing Center has received,
either
in person, by telephone,
or by mail, the listings.
For
purposes of this Decree, rental
on the open market shall mean
rental
to any person not referred
by the Open Housing Center.
***/ This provision
shall
not apply to Trump Village.
- 10 -
religion,
blacks
sex
and
fessional
or
other
national
origin
nonwhite
persons
positions
and will
in
as vacancies
for
endeavor
to
supervisory
which
and
they
are
place
pro-
qualified
arise.
Pursuant
the
following
1.
in
a prominent
defendant
this
program,
the
defendant
shall
take
steps:
Display
employees,
the
to
an equal
place
and
clearly
applicants
where
*/ This poster
approved
by the
Equal Employment
employment
visible
for
opportunity
to
employment
applications
for
poster~
prospective
in
each
employment
agents,
office
are
taken.
shall
be in the form,
size
and prominence
United
States
Department
of Labor and the
Opportunity
Commission.
- 11 -
of
2.
any
Notify
part
of
in writing,
of defendant's
this
Decree
and
without
regard
to
shall
not
hired
possess
exacting
force
color,
and
hiring
that
those
before
the
of
the
terms
for
any
in
institution
or
Part
to
national
the
recruited
or
job
this
origin.
defendant
or position
with
IV(C)
be referred
employees,
effect
of
of
are
sex
persons
were
representing
employees
nonwhite
nonwhite
which
union
religion,
qualifications
than
labor
prospective
race,
require
employees
work
that
In recruiting
each
more
respect
to
white
action.
of
at
nondiscriminatory
and
building
defendant
agrees
shall
whether
owned
that
or
opportunity
or managed
the
not
equal
and
in
by Trump Management,
following
standards
applied
at
all
to
to
an applicant.~
rent
of
and
its
properties
Income
One week's
be at
following
assure
selection
Standards
1.
must
to
be uniformly
determining
A.
assure
tenants
each
procedures
in
to
least
equal
gross
to
income
from
one month's
all
rent,
sources**/
except
in
the
circumstances:
(a)
mobile
The applicant(s)
payments,
or
of
$50.00
a month,
in
excess
of
four
have
other
with
(4)
outstanding
fixed
debt
a remaining
months,
in
debt
- 12 -
excess
period
or
*/
The following
standards
shall
not be applicable
Park which is subject
to other
federal
regulations
by 22l(d)
of the National
Housing
Act.
**/
This shall
include
alimony,
assistance
payments,
or guarantor's
of public
assistance
recipients,
employment,
pensions,
etc.
auto-
child
support,
assurances
wife's
income,
to Tysens
imposed
public
on behalf
part-time
is in excess
of
(3) persons.
circumstance
equal
If an applicant
standards,
composition
to one month's
qualify
obligations
payments
sufficient
the applicanrs
income
for rental
a guarantor
f:
who can
of the guarantors
for his
net
rent.
verify
one week's
fixed
monthly
or her residence,
rental,
as well
as
income standards.
(b) If the applicant
three
six
is willing
months security
(3)
deposit
(6)
months rent
in advance.
(c)
If a tenant
switches
building
to another
tenant
2.
obligations
to Trump Management,
Occupancy
7!,- ~-h.0(]
0.
I)
nvk~
on . ._,(P~v 1('..j,
Application
past
in a twowbeEl-e,am ,
d efev1cf a.,j.,{_fsha,,e}I
Procedures~/
1.
*l/
in a one-bedroom
and if that
in the past.
apartment.
B.
supply
apartmem:
or will
Trump building
Inc.,
to post
Procedure
tmder
ten
--Q.~
age.
These procedures
are substantially
based
practices,
as described
during discovery.
- 13 -
tnay--- be-of~
on defendanes
V)/l 4
ves~c.1
I
a.
Applications
apartment
building
accept
this
Applications
or rental
agents
applications,
wi$hing
and instructed
tenant,
to apply
said
(i)
at the
is applying
be received
by Super-
by the defendant
to
in the requirements
shall
be accepted
judgment
unless
be received
of
Applications
no subjective
shall
authorized
3601 !:..E_~-
will
for an apartment.
intendents
for tenancy
from all
or agent
on the acceptability
prospective
visibly
tenant
persons
shall
of a prospective
is:
and objectively
drunk
and disorderly;
(ii)
visibly
the influence
and objectively
or rental
or there
under
of drugs;
(iii)abusive
towards
the superintendent
agent;
is,
(iv)
that
a visible
her apartment
cleanliness
rights
this
and objective
the applicant
shall
tenants.
former
or
on the
to satisfy
agents
shall
landlord
to
the subjective
intendent
or its
his
and
In order
defendant
the applicant's
maintained
care
so as not to intrude
criteria,
ascertain
indication
not maintain
with sufficient
of other
contact
will
premises.
In no event
impression
by a super-
or style
of grooming disqualify
an applicant.
subtection
solely
shall
apply
criteria.
-14-
make
This
to cleanliness
b.
the
The superintendent
application
deposit
of
and
rent
therefor)
submit
the
rental
completeness
one month's
substitute
then
for
or
deposit,
and
and
from
all
shall
one
No superintendent
or
rental
agent
on the
acceptability
except
c.
as
outlined
Applications
of
acceptability
in
the
shall
defenant's
d.
If
employment
applicant.
employment
shall
race,
color,
e.
shall
within
ten
been
accepted
sex
ten
applicant
of
reason
applicant
not
twenty
rejected,
the
rejection,
and
has
to
failed
days
applicant
of
the
(i-iv)
above.
offices.
to
of
an
a determination
Section
Managers
check
with
employed
applied
whether
but
or
in
of
the
disposition
from
the
time
on credit
without
regard
wherever
not
objective
to
possible
he or
can
shall
of
of
she
the
standard
she
not
has
be
notify
no event
he or
be informed
specific
each
origin.
defendant
therefor,
to
based
an application
days,
shall
and/or
respect
be informed
If
(10)
be informed
(20)
review
authority
tenancy
and
national
days
tenancy.
within
the
or
shall
business
for
the
for
acceptability
be uniformly
processed
beyond
of
applicant
(10)
(a)
credit
be conducted
religion,
Each
for
two main
have
be reviewed
a uniform
The standards
and
B(l)
shall
offices.
conducted,
check
shall
be made by the
main
reasonable
The agents
defendant's
in
shall
(or
a security
application,
to
applicant
the
and
review
require
applicants.
determination
make a determination
shall
a W2 form
W2 form
of
agent
the
shall
his
an
application
applied.
reason
he or
If
for
she
meet.~/
*/ Applicants
who have not been accepted
for tenancy
pursuant
to V(B) (a) above need not be informed
of the reasons
for the
defendant's
decision
not to accept
his or her application.
However,
defendants
shall
still
note the reason
for nonacceptance
in its
records
and its reports
to plaintiff
pursuant
to Sections
VI and VII herein.
- 15 -
2.
Providing
Seekers
Rental
a.
Defendant
shall
Information
maintain
Brooklyn,
at
on a weekly basis,
of each currently
to be vacant
thirty
or available
days.
ability
and shall
available
of its
buildings
the monthly
Defendant
a similar
list
complete
lists
of all
for
Apartments
to all
interested
inquirers
at each
vacant
at
and a notification
in the New
at defendant's
Brooklyn,
main
New York.
availability
the next
about
maintain
apartments
inspection
on the apartment
also
available
available
expected
of avail-
inquiring
of the apartments
that
b.
or available
shall
by type of apartment
located
to be compiled
persons
building
offices
vacant
rent,
be shown to all
are available
Listing,
include
that
York area
offices
shall
apartments.
central
This list
its
Avenue, Brooklyn,
apartment
to Apartment
list
(2(a)
for rental
above)
by an authorized
and listed
shall
agent
be shown
of the
defendant.
c.
fications
Inquirers
shall
for rental,
be uniformly
including
informed
the income,
- 16 -
of the quali-
security
deposit
d.
No waiting
defendant's
offices
any preference
Rental
list~/
will
or apartment
for persons
will
are available
buildings
referred
be on a first-come,
apartments
be maintained
at any of the
nor shall
by present
first-served
there
be
tenants.
basis
when
for rental.
VI
REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
It
entry
is further
of this
Decree,
for
for
three
shall
file
t:he plaintiff
information
owned and/or
three
arrl thereafter
the defendant
on counsel
following
ORDEREDthat
with
a report
the following
(3) times
the Court
containing
apartment
the
per year
and
the
buildings
1.
Argyle
2.
Westminster
3.
Fontainebleau
4.
Lawrence
Gardens
5.
Sea Isle
Apartments
6.
Bachaven Apartments
7.
Shorehaven
8.
Belcrest
9.
Highlander
Hall
Hall
Apartments
and Lawrence Towers
Apartments
Apartments
Hall
10.
Saxony Hall
11.
Clyde Hall
12.
Edgerton
13.
Winston
14.
Sussex
Apartments
Hall
Hall
*/
,.1.
1TVn.C.j
,.J)
--.VU
, c
O
V ,r-
o.
d)Cc
- 17 -
f V"14 f u.,5-f_
a.
observable)
making inquiry
of terms of rental
period
in person
of an apartment
made inquiry;
2.
were offered
3.
filled
4.
submitted
5.
were accepted
6.
were rejected;
7.
withdrew
8.
had applications
submitted
the preceding
reporting
that:
an applicant
for
A report
during
with deposit;
occupancy;
applications;
pending
period.
may be forwarded
the following
during
the availability
an application;
to plaintiff
about
(as visually
out an application;
reporting
This report
by race*/
hereto
reflecting
as Appendix C.
the applications
the preceding
information
on a form similar
reporting
for tenancy
period,
including
an
application:
1.
name, address,
number,
business
and race;
2.
date
of application;
3.
whether
4.
date
5.
a deposit
notified
of apartment
was received;
of acceptance
or rejection;
and monthly
rent
sought;
!/
- 18 -
all
notations
of race
shall
6.
if accepted,
apartment
7.
if rejected,
reason
8.
name of person
accept
9.
detailed
statement
supporting
to
nor rejected,
status
of application.
may be forwarded
rejected
who decided
the application;
accepted
or disposition
This report
therefor;
or persons
or reject
if neither
chosen;
to plaintiff
hereto
applicant,
on a form similar
as Appendix D.
the report
of the reason(s)
shall
For each
include
for rejection
and
information.
c.
including
A list
of vacancies
the date
during
the apartment
each apartment
the preceding
was placed
was rented
quarter,
on the market'!_/
or otherwise
committed
for rental.
d.
Reports
filed
include
the current
tenants
in each apartment
defendant,
preceding
in Sections
1.
statistics
reporting
of all
and labor
unions
of
during
the
including:
letters
checking
also
to the race
taken
to implement
I and II above,
Order shall
of the steps
period
Copies
to this
with respect
building
and an account
and credit
this
pursuant
sent
companies,
pursuant
to apartment
Fair
to Parts
locators
Housing groups,
III and
IV of
Decree.
!_/
2.
Representative
ments
copies
placed
in
to
this
pursuant
the
of
all
Amsterdam
Order
and
newspaper
News and
the
date
of
advertise-
El Diario
each
advertisement.
3.
of
The name,
each
rental
employee
Order,
agent,
as of
by Part
signed
Part
refuses
II
to
shall
sign
include
circumstances
relation
II
the
office
assignment
date
of
the
the
educational
has
been
conducted,
obtained
this
Decree.
such
a statement
statement
and
any
and
this
copies
any rental
of
of
accordance
the
action
entry
office
program
in
If
a full
of
and main
that
statements
of
and
superintendent
an assurance
all
with
position
employed
required
of
race,
agent
defendants
all
pertinent
taken
by them
in
thereto.
VII
RECORD KEEPING PROVISIONS
following
following
the
records
entry
for
of
all
the
this
defendant
Decree,
apartment
shall';
make
buildings
for
two
and preserve
owned
the
or managed
by them:
1.
time
of
The name,
contact
availability
and
*/
at
the
size
of
address,
each
telephone
person
or
terms
of
of
apartment
rental
sought,
number
inquiring
of
date
in person
an apartment
if
and
about
therein,~/
known.
by maintaining
a guest
owned by the defendants.
- 20 -
and
register
the
2.
A detailed
application
all
and the
steps
taken
acceptability
record
of all
reasons
for
by the
for
employee
rejected
the
application.
All
records
3.
which
information
under
Order.
this
defendant
the
to the
steps
are
the
defendant
of,
of the
endeavor
from the
the
and the
source
name
obligations
plaintiff
shall
records
times,
provided,
to minimize
inspection
or
or contain
pertinent
reasonable
shall
including
to defendant's
plaintiff
on each
or who approved
Representatives
to inspect
action,
applicant
pertinent
permitted
that
such
taken
in ascertaining
of the
who took
any of the
such
defendant
tenancy
of the
action
of such
be
of the
however,
any inconvenience
records.
VIII
It
is
further
years
from the
least
twenty
for
the
ORDEREDthat
entry
(20)
of this
days
prior
for
a period
Decree,
the
to the
event,
extending
defendant
report
two
shall,
at
to counsel
plaintiff:
1.
residential
property,
2.
acquired
The divestment
ownership
or management
or management
by the
through
in
defendant.
transfer
interests
interests
or sale,
in residential
of any
property.
IX
It
after
counsel
is
the
further
entry
for
ORDEREDthat
of this
plaintiff,
Decree
for
the
in writing,
a period
defendant
of all
of two years
shall
advise
complaints,~/
from
*/ For purposes
of this Decree,
"complaints"
shall mean any
information
which comes to the attention
of the defendant
or
its officers
from whatever
source received,
which indicates
a possible
denial
of equal housing opportunities
under the
Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.,
or a potential
violation
of this Decree.
- 21 -
whatever
source,
opportunity
received
in housing
Trump Management,
period
of two
the defendant
at properties
Inc.
after
ness
of this
fifteen
Decree,
received
to investigate
an explanation
is determined
plaintiff
shall
necessary
to correct
and shall
afford
days to effectuate
any other
additional
actions
judicial
before
with
relief.
bear
its
- 22 -
with
party,
to be
to the complaint,
seven
(7)
to compel compliance
shall
by either
believes
Each party
plaintiff
discriminatory
for a motion
it
is
in the complaint.
leading
steps
there
the defendant
and provide
an additional
appropriate
to the complaint
of the alleged
court
the conditions
notify
the effective-
afford
to be valid
the defendants
that
contained
of such a complaint
the complaint
of the information
If the complaint
leading
shall
notice
for
Decree,
threatening
the plaintiff
managed by
by the plaintiff.
determines
equal
shall,
of this
received
plaintiff
the entry
complaints
regarding
owned and/or
In.addition,
years
of all
by the defendant
own costs.
applying
this
effects
to the
Decree,
or
'
The Court
for all
shall
retain
'
jursidiction
purposes.
ORDEREDthis
"'il day
I~
of
L ..
of this
action
, 1975.
EDWARDllNEAHER
United States District
Judge
The undersigned
apply for and
consent to the entry of this
Order:
For the Plaintiff:
(1{rV(IV&U{L--..
RbY
M. COHN
&
Manley
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
NORMAN
P. G LOBERG
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
sing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Waslington, D. C. 20530
,A(11 JO
.-,-tt;,'/C:-t:.~
t.:
?
rf ,T CIC ''-'i.:~>
,
CHTL
t U.S. Attorney
n District
of New York
37 F.R. 342.9
Feb. 16 ,. 1972.
:R,.ules
and Regulations
.Title24_-HOUSING
AND
URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
Chapter ~office of Assistant Secretary for Equal Opportunity, Department of Houslng and Urban Devel.opment
HOUSING
No. R-72-165)
~UBCHAPTER A-FAIR
(Doclcet
PART 110-FAIR
HOUSING POSTER
The purpose of this regulation Is to
require the display of a fair housing
poster by persons subject to sections 804806. of the Civil Rights Act of1961land to
prescribe the qontent of this poster:
Notice of a proposed amendment to
Title 24 to include a new Pa.rt 72 was
published in the FEDERAL REGISTER on
August 4, 1971 (36 F.R. 14336). <Under
the reorganization of Title 24 published
in the FEDERAL REGISTER on December 22,
1971 (36 F.R. 24402), the fair housing
poster will become new Part 110.) Comments were received from appfoximately
20 interested pe1sons and organizations
and.consideration has been given to each
comment.
Some comm:mts with respect to proposed 72.10 criticized the coverage of
the proposed regttlation as too broad,
while other comments objected that the
coverage is too mrrow, and various suggestions were made. for changes in coverage. Comment.,; were directed not only
to what dwelllngs should be included
but also. to the stage at which. the re-.
quirement should take. effect: and the
... persons to whom It should apply. In
response to the comments, .72.lO(a)
(now 110.10 (a) and .(b)) has been
i'evlsed to clarify the extent orcovcrag-e, to broaden coverage to the extent
appropliate arid to eliminate unnecessary
burdens where the requirement can appropriately be nan-owed or eliminated.
Under 110.10 (a> and Cb>, display of
tllo prescribed poster at a single-family
d-welling is not required unless the dwell. ing is. being offered for sale or rental In
conjunction with the sale or rental of
other dwellings; however it a real estate
3429 a
broker or agent is handling the sale or
renfal he must display the poster at any
place ~f business where the dwelling :Ls
being offered for sale or rental. With respect to all other dwellings covered by
the Act the poster must be displayed at
any pla~e of business where the dwelling
is offered for sale or rental; in addition,
the poster must be displayed at the dwelling except that in the case of a singlefamily dwelling being orrered for sale or
rental in conjunction with the sale or
rental of other dwellings, e.g., a subdivision, the poster may be dhpl~yed at
model homes instead of at each of the
individual dwellings. Finally, in the case
of dwellings other than a single-family
dwelling not being offered for sale or
rental in conjunction with the sale or
rental of other dwellings, the poster must
be displayed from the beginning of construction through the end of the sale or
rental process.
l::'leveral comments suirnested revisions
in the language of the poster described
in proposed 72.25. Such suggestions included rewriting the poster in terms of
the individual's rights rather than the
Act's prohibitions,
adding additional
prohibitions contained in the Act, emphasizing the nature of penalties for
failure to post, 1md listing the HUD area
office instead of the regional office as a
location to which to send complaints.
The new 110.25 adopts the suggestion
with regard to the area offices in that
the poster wlll provide for insertion of
the address of the regional or area office
as appropriate. It has been decided that
instead of lengt.hening the content of the
poster by adding addition11I prohibitions,
the poster should be made shorter and
easier to understand by briefly hir{hUghting the major prohibitions. In addition, the Equal Housing . Opportunity
logot.ype and slogan have been inserted
at the top of the poster.
A comment by the Federal Home Loan
Bank Board (FHLBB) recommended
exempting from this regulation any person subject to a regulation of the FELBB
requiring that person to post a poster
substantially similar in content to the
poster described in HUD's regulation. A
similar comment was made by the Board
of Governors of the Federal Reserve System with respect to entities subject to
supervision by any of the four Federal
financial regulatory agencies. The Department will authorize n person subject
to the jurtsdiction of a Federal financial
regulatory agency to utilize a po~ter prescribed in a regulation .by such agency,
and approved by the Department, instead of the poster prescribed by HUD.
However, all of the other requirements of
Part no will remain fully ap!Jlicable regardless of whatever sanctions the regulatory agenc_y prescribes for failure to
comply with its :l'egulation. This provision is set forth in *110.25(b). The requirement, set forth in 110.lO(c), that
financia1 institutions post .and maintain
a 'fair hom,ing poster will not be effective
until May 1, 197.2, in order to allow time
for the Federal financial regulatory
agencies to .issue appropriate regulations.
proposed . 72.30 stated that a failure
to display the poster .as required would be
Sec.
110.1
110.5
Purpose.
Definitions.
Subpart
110.10
110:15
110.JO
ll0.26
Availability of posters.
Description
of posters.
110.30
Su.bp.CIFI
C.,.,,.,!:nforcemen.t
;Effect of failure .to display poster.
no
\'
6701
plementary
advertising campaign that ls,
directed at other groups, or the use by a developer of racially mixed models to advertise one of the developments and not others.
0, Policy andpractfaell guidelines. The
following guidelines are offered as suggested
methods of assuring equal opportunity in
rea.1 esta.te ad vertlslng:
1, Gui4elfne8 for use of. logotype, statement, (YI' slogan. All advertising of residential
real estate for sale or rent can contal.n an
Equal Housing Opportunity logotype, r:i~tement or slogan as a mea.t).Sof educating the
homeseeking publlc that the property ts
available to all pe,rsons regardless of race,
color, rellgl.on, or national .origin. Table l
(see appendix) lnd!cetes suggested sizes for
the use of the logotype. In a.ll space advertising which ls. less tha.n 4 column lnehes of a
page ln size, the Equal Housing Opportunity
slogan should be used, The advertisement
may b& -grouped with other advertisements
under a captl<;>nW'.hlchstates that the housing ls _a.vallable to a.11without regard to race,
colc,,r, religion, or national origin. Alternatively, 8-6 percent ot the advertisement copy
may b& devoted to a statement of t'he equal
housing opportunity pol1cy of the owner or
agent. T&ble a (see appendix) conta.lns copies
of the suggested Equal 'Housing Opportunity
logotype, statement and slo~n.
a. Guidelines for use of human models.
Human models ln photogra.phB, dra.'Wlngs, or
other graphic techniques may b& used to
indicate racial Inclusiveness. If models are
use4 In display advertising oa.mpa.igns, the
models should be clearly definable as reasonably representing both majority and miporlty
groups i the metropol1tan area. M:odels, If
used, should lndlcrute to the general public
that the houslpg Is open to all without regard to race, color, rel1gton, or natlo_nal
origin, and Is not for the exclusive use of one
APPENDIX
Sft!.eof
Logotype
in inches
a1 :ir::
:ir:: 2.
1,
Aroximate
size of
advertisement
1h
page up
or larger---------------14page
to ,i
4001umn Inches to *i page._____
Less than 4 column Inches,______
1no not use.
page___________
% x %
(1).
TABLE n.-II.LUSTRA'l'IONS
Oli' LOGOTYPE,
STATEMENT, Al'ID SLOGAN
such group.
for notification
o/ Fair
3. Guidelines
Housing Poliey. (a.) Employees. All publishers
notice.
J, SIMMONS,
Assistant Secretary
for Equal Opportunity.
EQUAL
HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY
Equal Housing Opportunity statement:
We are pledged to the letter and spirit of
U.S. policy for the achievement of equal
housing opportunity throughout the Nation,
We encoui::age and support an affirmative
advertising and marketing program in which
there are no barriers tcr obtaining housing
because of race, color, religion or national
origin..
Equal Housing Opportunity slogan:
"Equal Housing Opportunity."
TABLE
llI-ILL'tlS'l'RA'l'ION
No'l'IcE
Oli'
Pm!LISHE!l'S
Publlsher's notice:
All real estate advel'tlsed ln this newspaper
1a subject to the Federal Fair Housing Aet ot
1968 which makes 1t Ulegal to advertise "any
preference,
llmltatton.
or d!scrtmtnation
based on race, color, rellg1on, or national
origin or an Intention to make any such
prefe~noe, limitation, or d1scr1mlnatlon."
This newspaper will not,. knowingly accept
any advertising for real estate which ls In
violation of the law. Our readers are hereby
tnfonned that all dwellings advertised In this
newspaper
are available on an equal
opportunity baals.
[FR Doc.72-4988 Filed 841-72;8:45
GPO
930.389
am]
APPENDIXB
37 F.R.
6700
4/1/72
HOUSING
Notice of Statem;nt of Policy
In order to facilitate and promote
compliance with the requirements of
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968
and particularly section 804(c) thereof
(42. U.S.C. 3601, 3604(c)) regarding
notices, statements or advertisements,
the Department of Housing and Urban
Development has prepared guidelines to
indicate graphic and written references
that are appropriate for the preparation,
publication, and general use of advertising matter with respect to the sale or
rental of a dwelling as defined by the
Act.
Notice of a proposed statement of polREGISicy was published in the FEDERAL
TERon May 21, 1971 (36 F.:a.. 9266). Comments were received .trom 26 interested
persons and organizations and consideration has been given to each comment.
Several comments observed that the
proposed policy statement was at times
unnecessarily limited to the field of
newspaper advertising. In response to
the comments, the policy statement has
been revised in several places to clarify
that the guidelines apply to advertisements in all media, including, e.g., television and radio, as well as to advertising
agencies and other persons who us~
advertising.
Several organizations suggested additional catchwords connoting a discriminatory effect for .inclusion in section
A-3. That section has been expanded to
include several additional terms which
may have a discriminatory effect when
used in a discriminatory context.
In response to other comments, section A-6 has been revised to clarify how
directional references could be employed
in a discriminatory context with an
ethnically, as well as a ractally, discriminatory effect. Also, section A-7 has been
added relating specifically to designation
of religious, ethnic or racial facilities to
identify an area or neighborhood.
A number of comments indicated that
human models or Equal Opportunity advertisements can and have been used
selectively to promote the development
of racially exclusive communities. A new
section C-4 has been added in order to
meet this specific problem. The previous
human models section has been clarified
by revision and reorganization in the
new section C, in light of comments
which indicated confusion or uncertainty surrounding the use of human
models.
eight points.
A number of organizations suggested
the inclusion of a publisher's notice to
appear with real estate advertising. A
suggested notice has been included as
Table m, in lieu of the provision in the
proposed guidelines for direct notification to' all firms or persons using the
advertising services of a publisher. This
provision was removed in light of objections that such notification would be
unworkable or would impose great hardship since a large volume of real estate
advertising is placed by a great number
of persons on a nonrecurring basis,
Finally, a number of minor editorial or
organizational changes have been made
in order to. clarify or simplify the
advertising guidelines.
Several organizations suggested that
the guidel1ne1>make specific. reference
to the roles of other enforcement agencies, including the Department of Justice
and local agencies. These comments sugge;;ted that the guidelines specify that
they do not alter or affect conciliation
agreements or court orders obtained by
these agencies, as well as by the Department. Such JI. disclaimer appears to be
unnecessary, since there is nothing in
the guidelines to -indicate an intent to
alter or affect agreements or orders; obtained by the Department and other
agencies.
This document is issued pursuant to
section 7 (d). Department of Housing and
Urban Development Act, 42 U.S.C.
3535(d).
The statement of Policy reads as
follows:
PUBLICATION
GumELINES
OF THE
FOR
CoMPLIANCE
CIVIL RIGHTS'
Acr
POLICY STATEMENT
l. Selective geographic impact. such selective use may involve the strategic pla.cement
of btllboa.rds, brochure a.dverttsements distributed within a limited geographic area.
by hand or tn the mall, or advertising in particular geographic coverage edtttons of major metropolitan
newspapers, or In !or.al
newspapers which are mainly advertising vehicles for reaching a partlcule.r segment of
the community, or in displays or announcements only In selected sales offices.
2. Selective use Of equal opportunity
slogan or logo. Such selective ur,:e may involve
using the equal opportunity slogan or logo
In advertising reaching some geographic
areas, but not others, or wtth respect to
some properties but not others.
3. Selective use of.human models. Such selective advertising may also involve the use
of human models primarily in media that
cater .to one ra.c!,a.lor ethnic segment of the
population tbat ts not bat.a.need by a. com-
3430
110,5
Dcfini1iona,
(el "Person" includes one or more individuals, corporations, partnerships, associations, labor'organizations, legal representatives, mutual companies, jointstock companies, trusts, unincorporated
organizations, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, receivers and fiducia11es.
(fl
"Secretary" means the Secretary
of Housing and Urban Development.
(g) "Fair housing poster" means the
poster prescribed by the Secretary for
display by persons subject to sections
804-806 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. no.Is Locn1ion of poslel'S.
(hl "The Act" means title VIII of 'the
All fair hot1sing posters shall be promiCivil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3601
nently displayed so as to be readily apet seq.
parent to all persons seeking housing
(i) "Person in the business of selling
or renting dwellings" means a person as accommodations or financial assistance
or brokerage services in connection
defined in section 803(c) of the Act.
therewith as contemplated by sections
Subpart !?-Requirements
for Display 804-806 of the Act.
of Posters
110.20
Availability of po&ters.
l l 0.10
Pl'r~ons subject.
(a) Except to the extent that paragraph lb) of this section applies, all persons subject to section 804 of the Act,
Discrimination in the Sale or Rental of
Housing, shall post and maintain a fair
housing poster as follows:
(1) With respect to a single-family
dwelling <not being offered for sale or
rental in conjunction with the sale or
rental of other dwellings) offered for sale
or rent9.l through a real estate broker,
agent. salesman, or person in the business
of selling or renting dwellings, such person shall post and maintain a fair housing poster at any place of business where
the dwelling is offered for sale or rental.
(2) With respect to all other dwellings
covered by the Act:
(i) A fair housing
poste1: shall be
posted and maintained at any place of
business where the dwelling is offered for
sale or rental, and
(ii)
A fair housing poster shall be
posted and maintained at the dwelling,
exc~pt that with respect to a singlefamily dwelling being offered for sale or
rental in conjunction with the sale or
rental of other dwellings, 'the fair housing poste1; may be posted and maintained
at the model dwellings instead of at each
of the individual dwellings.
<3) With respect to those dwellings
to which subparagraph (2) of this paragraph applies, the fair housing poster
must be posted at the beginning of construction and maintained throughout
the period of construction and sale or
rental.
Description
of poslcrs.
EQUAL
HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY
We Do Business In Accordance With the
Federal Fair Housing Law
(Title VIII of the Clvll Rlghtll Act ot 111118)
IT IS ILLEGAL
TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST
ANY PERSON BECAUSE bF RACE,
COLOR, RELIGION, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN
In the sale or rental of housing or reslden
tlal lots.
In advertising the sale or rental ot hoUllilig,
Efl'eet
of
failure
lo
di11play
poster,
J.
SIMMONS,
Assistant Secretary
tor Equal Opportunity.
(FR Dac.72 2262 Filed 2-15-72;8:45
am]
..
Ir'
"
APPENDIXC
TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC.
DATE:
-----------
RE:
Rental
Analysis
Report
THE BREAKDOWN
OF PERSONSBY RACEMAKINGINQUIRYIN PERSON
ABOUTTHE TERMSANDAVAILABILITYOF APARTMENTS
FOR THE PERIODOF
---------
TO
---------
AT -----------------------------APARTMENTS
WHITE
MADEINQUIRY
WEREOFFEREDAN APPLICATION
FILLED OUTAN APPLICATION
SUBMITTED
DEPOSITWITHAPPLICATION
APPLICATIONSWITHDRAWN
BEFOREPROCESSING
APPLICATIONACCEPTED
APPLICATIONSWITHDRAWN
AFTER PROCESSING
APPLICATIONSREJECTED
APPLICATIONSPENDINGEND OF PERIOD
APPENDIX D
APPLICATIONSFOR TENANCY
AT
APARTl:1ENTS
JAHE*
)DRESS,
HmIE ,&
BUSil\~SS
PHONES
RA.CE.
....
IF
DATE
IF
NA!!E OF
DEPOSIT REJECTED,
APPLI- SIZE, TYPE OF
ACCEPTED,
EMPLOYEE
DATE
OF
CANT'S APT. DESIRED MONTHLYDESIRED
REC'D
REASON
DATE
OF
AND DATE
ACTI~~Go:~
RENTAL DATEOF
APPLICA- WEEKLY (Brs., FurAND
R.A.TE OCCUPANCY DATE
NOTIFIED l\OTIFIED APPLIC..;TIO~
INQUIRY TION
INCOME nished)
'
\
...
'
..,.
..
'It
.,
.,
*"
..
'
..
'\
...
~
persons
are applying
please
so indicate
.. -
..
'
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTI()Ns
NO. 73 C 15~
)
)
)
v.
Uv1 T 29 )975
)
)
TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC. ,
P,~I..
____________
SUPPLEMENTAL
ORDER
Defendant.
On the
of America,
application
and after
24, 1975, it
of the plaintiff,
conference
is hereby
))
ordered
action
States
filed
Part V(A)(2)
of the
amended as follows:
(a)
Occupancy
Not more than two (2) persons
bedroom apartment.
defendant
its
past
shall,
grounds. that
q.e\or
e k' y Ni
ORDEREDthis
~-c
in a one-
For a two-bedroom
in a uniform
practices
No applicant
the United
shall
.......
. ......
manner,
with respect
be denied
apartment
adhere
to
to occupancy.
tenancy
solely
on the
Ive(...,
EDWARD
R. NEAHER
United States District
Judge
1
2
3
4
OF NEW YORK
-------------
FRED
c.
- against
TRUMP, et
al.,
7
8
5
6
COURT
.
.
:
Defendants.
-
73 C 1529
u. s.
10
Court House
Brooklyn,
New York
11
12
13
14
15
e f o r e :
HON. EDWARDR. NEAHER,
U.
S.
D.
J.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
BURTON SULZER
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
1
2
2
A p p
e a r a n c e s :
By:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Also
Present:
FRED TRUMP
DONALD TRUMP
IRVING ESKANAZI, ESQ.
THE CLERK:
2
3
Fred
Trump,
seems
to
think
the
bullet.
Honor.
10
THE COURT:
11
MR. COHN:
like
ment
that
was proposed
14
have
read
that,
15
general
16
give
17
brought
18
giving
19
if
21
Honor,
24
25
and
Honor's
Neaher
--
at
order.
Court,
statement
them
this
case
and
the
your
one
by one?
in view
Neaher
permission,
you would
application
of
the
this
opportunity
to
final
week,
docuyou
a couple
of
like
personally
fact
the
morning,
go over
Fred,
the
last
you have
Judge
If
court,
end of
I believe
that
to
in
bite
you have
the
observations
Government
rather
this
--
to
than
your
Honor,
--
the
tenor
THE COURT:
22
23
Judge
on this
to
from
his
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
20
hear
that
problems,
everybody
to
With
13
we could
versus
Yes
could
us the
States
Mr. Cohn,
say,
12
to
United
unnecessary
We have
Would you
you tell
with
has
MR. COHN:
I must
be plagued
time
hearing,
al.
THE COURT:
et
Civil
Mr.
he can
under
If
of
I may,
I don't
the
oath.
to
object,
your
this.
think
Trump wants
take
I have
stand
to
this
say
procedure
something
and be sworn
is
to
in
the
and give
his
4
1
I assume the
I will
Government
give
portunity
as I say,
case
understood
11
understanding
12
ies,
and --
that
14
your
15
some principles
16
could
17
factory
18
were.
of the
give
there
been heard.
But
history
that
of this
so,
because
had heretofore
you an opto
of puzzlement
papers
and
No one is going
he hasn't
the
Honor,
isn't
not be reduced
to both
sides,
We have gotten
19
20
gotten
21
finished,
25
feeling
that
that
I will
motion
by all
the
part-
it?
13
24
to be heard.
to be heard.
from all
been submitted
23
wants
me in a state
10
22
a government
my own knowledge
leaves
Honor.
is
Mr. Trump --
of course
your
to the
and I think
question
last
point
of a little
Thursday
which
decree.
provided
in the
to decretal
we then
event
it
was satis-
direction,
where we are
like
unfortunately
stops
recited
form that
the opposite
bit
It
of lack
we have
99.99
it
is
per cent
just
of patience
us from getting
a
such as
there
100
per cent.
We have a document
which
is very
close
to a fin
document.
It
is
cerned,
and it
an important
is not the
thing
kind
on at
this
are
apart
that
if
everything
I could
11
we are
12
is here
--
point
those
motion
glad
close
is minor
-- all
on it,
15
side
16
So we are
17
solve
with
as well
has precipitated
I have nothing
forum because
here
and
everybody
an affidavit
explaining
our position
said
in our papers.
We have everybody
here
and if
ready.
those
final
few problems
20
your
Honor,
recall
21
yesterday
we can
25
Fred Trump
into
19
an affidavit?
yesterday.
seeing
out to the
it.
clerk's
office
afternoon.
THE COURT: You say in this
date
problems
as we have solved
24
we
of days we probably
18
23
that
language
this
oouple
to have this
I submitted
14
22
else.
very
13
very
But this
10
of thing
con-
throat.
to everybody
convenient
of the decree
to the
by the
Court
parties
affidavit
be fixed
and the
for
that
the
acceptance
signing
thereof
by the
court,
decree
is
which
now in
form
changes,
which
Mr. Fred
which
I think
would
have
a small
which
the
little
any
it
15
MR. GOLDSTEIN:
some minor
language
example,
one point
to make to your
inserted
of
had
in
Honor,
inadvertently,
opposite
passed
sex
to
an age
standpoint,
occupy
that
would
and a couple
of
able
to work
these
things
out
May I have
a copy
The most
of
recent
the
decree.
decree,
your
Honor?
MR. F.
17
18
sign
19
them,
20
with
this
TRUMP:
this
initial
it
and
the
record,
You call
sign
it.
the
We want
Judge,
we can
shots,
we change
to
get
through
this.
THE COURT:
22
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
your
Off
morning.
21
time,
your
perhaps
that
will
I am sure
If
the
Government
I may take
does,
a few minutes
too.
of
Honor
THE COURT:
24
25
was not
--
THE COURT:
23
the
that.
we had been
we reviewed
me that
it
for
going
they
14
16
minor:
children
like
frankly,
are
Government
from
things
If
very
to
be signed.
there
after
suggest
Honor,
Trump is
bedroom
11
after
are
required
be permissible
12
--
to
to
Your
to be signed
10
13
form
MR. COHN:
seems
Let
me hear
expedite
from
matters.
the
young
lady
and
1
2
3
THE COURT:
understand
4
5
6
times
before
that
understood
of
10
the
11
provisions
what
of
14
what
16
the
like
to
see
19
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
20
the
21
The memorandum
22
decree
23
contained
25
consent
not
the
in
have
as we have
may have
understanding
I would
the
many
that
Court
clearly
state
set
that
out
the
decree.
open
was simply
their
little,
that,
by the
an additional
to
way,
Attached
all
entirety
if
if
memorandum
is
a copy?
certain
that
copy,
it.
initially
makes
states
of
I have
You have
decree
in
memorandum
facts
often
case,
happened
papers?
THE COURT:
Very
this
Was a copy
18
24
the
be a better
was left
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
and
as
--
in
you would
is
so that
be contained
THE COURT:
submitted
is
understanding
We believe
memorialize
in
matter.
of
case
would
happened
to
the
application.
Our concern
and only
think
memorandum
your
a recitation
them,
has
read
in
in this
we would
12
17
feelings
come heretofore
what
15
your
I have
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
13
We have
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
to
submitted
by the
plaintiffs
revisions
in
consent
other
in
the
provisions
the
anything,
of understanding,
the
and
final
is
left
essentially
are
to
be
decree.
open
in
the
the
next
1
2
decree
was to memorialize
the
settlement,
all
10
on Thursday,
in this
your
11
document?
is
Honor,
courtroom
is
that
13
ment
everything
the
about
familiar
with
this
after
the
on Tuesday.
conference
That
is
the
based
15
THE COURT:
16
18
minor
revisions
Since
19
20
revisions
21
in toto
22
provisions
23
memorandum.
24
25
been
and I believe
on your
state-
that
minor
was --
open,
and they
we are
talking
about.
signing
portions
are merely
of the memorandum,
have attempted
of the
consent
Initially,
impression
left
but defendants
large
final.
that
the
it
week.
we had
the
me with
have always
one?
by the Government
things
one.
last
14
17
fifth
--
12
terms
upon.
the
the United
the correspondence
to renegotiate
decree,
to in the
States,
not minor
while
between
entire
first
hesitant
the parties
-in
this
matter
will
bear
that
very
out
hesitant
to re-
negotiate,
3
changed
various
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
in order
to proceed
last
five
about
to be able
little
skeptical,
to ask the
that
if
months
summarily,
then
final
will
for
for
not
close
in the
today
to have my undivided
14
this
What I would
near
like
understand
it
17
standing,
which
18
statement
of principles,
19
specific
to the
today,
this
so
decree
so that
it
may
goin
accomplishment
21
because
22
decree.
it
23
of
as I
memorandum of under-
I do recognize
is
although
to some extent
I suppose
certain
are made --
essentially
down to is this,
this
that
here
me a
supervision
to assure
to get
we have here
provisions
20
25
enter
leaves
future.
attention
16
thing
close
we are
decree.
15
24
now that
drink
supervision
13
so many times
is why we are
assistance
Court
well
promises
the
and that
become a reality
12
to the
that
to drink
Court's
the
we have
portions.
to execution
adopts
right.
is
final
provisions
the
attached
are
contained
consent
to the
edge
10
1
MR. F.
of
TRUMP:
THE COURT:
MR. COHN:
yourself
Thursday?
to
the
What are
In other
final
THE COURT:
document
to
find
we will
11
hold
that.
12
than
I had
13
words,
I want
be out
to
what
Let
they
address
point
me see
Maybe we can
about?
you want
that
Do you want
THE COURT:
10
we talking
document
out
MR. COHN:
to
produced
myself
to
of difference
Mr. Fred
for
this
on
the
final
there
is.
Trump to
a moment.
accomplish
address
testify?
We will
more
quickly
thought.
Has anyone
got
a marked
MR. COHN:
We have
copy
of
this
consent
order?
14
15
the language
16
changes
THE COURT:
18
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
191
20
21
22
11
2
!
25
was not
a memorandum,
your
Honor,
with
would want.
we
17
Judge,
here.
One hour,
that?
not
seen
that.
Mr. Cohn
-THE COURT:
me and maybe
one
Give
one to
to Mr.
Bracht!.
to
MR. BRACHTL:
Yes,
THE COURT:
Let's
turn
It
be a participant
might
to page
Ms. Goldstein
your
Honor.
be useful.
7-A,
item
one.
here?
and one
to
11
I
1
your
Honor,
refer
or managed,"
managed . " --
properties
of Tysen's
Park
to --
under
A, the
and it
is
a federal
the
for
11
without
12
like
that
is,
owned or
defendant,
of course,
and I think
and I think
we are
is accomplished
requiring
exclusive
all
with
additional
record
Trump Village
--
Tysen's
agreed
reference
keeping
14
Trump Village
15
affect
16
that
17
requirements,
18
and things
their
they
from particular
9bligations
is
that
to them
and things
objective
like
the
under,
and
which would
federal
statutes
such as tenancy
criteria
for
accepting
they
talking
tenants
that.
provisions
20
simply
provisions
21
22
federally
23
eluded
funded
in the
Tysen's
provisions
under
were constructed
These
19
25
say
owned
that.
13
24
would
"Apartments
"Apartments
would
project,
project
same effect
it
7-A-l
a Mitchel-Llama
10
line,
would say
I suppose
The reason
third
on page
to notify
are
the
community
and. state
provisions
project,
that
about
notify
the
of vacancies,/
projects,
should
are
while
not be incommunity
as
to vacancies.
These were,
previous
to coming
in today
-- all
I
I
12
1
these
2
3
upon on numerous
Trump Village
occasions.
is Tysen's
managed by Trump?
your Honor,
Mitchel-Llama
supervision.
These
one is under
I think
10
are
state
Tysen's
Act;
we had all
is already
agreed
12
14
important
We might
15
16
up settlement
17
negotiate
Donna.
20
burdensome
23
24
25
go through
on minor
white
under
these.
points,
We are giving
so far
Honor,
attempt
to get
the decree.
I don't
want to hold
you a lot
totally,
everyone's
this
--
so many times.
which the
almost
was unnecessary
you exclude
done.
them,
of buildings.
It's
on 23 points
we have given
federal
and would be an
21
22
to include
and renegotiate
19
it
the
18
under
which is virtually
project
two buildings,
under
that
Now, apparently
composition,
the
supervision
11
13
Park and
Government
to
also.
tell
your
made here,
judgment,
in an
13
1
Mr.
Trump
who has
been
gone
to
Washington
here
to
try
himself
very
and
constructive
working
rather
hammer
Eskanazi,
than
this
have
thing
about
Village,
nondiscriminatory
other
the
status
of
which
would
insure
or
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
11
are
no requirements
12
rights
13
with
that
enforcement
respect
to
We are
14
15
of
projects.
16
while
17
population,
not
the
about
Tysen's
Park
large
it
does
19
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
20
rnately
eight
21
alleged
to
TRUMP:
or
ten
exist
at
23
of
24
properties
tion
what
of
we allege
in
the
the
Trump
of
these
30 per
projects
kinds
Island
and
minority
cent.
cent.
But
properties.
of
different
understood
community,
government
kinds
Staten
There
no civil
federal
I had
be the
of
not.
and
a significant
Trump
however,
to
Trump
it.
Over
other
and
come through
is
and
in
anything
sort?
two very
have
per
Trump Village,
that
of
as we understand
MR. F.
would
state
is
come up
Park
presently
operation
talking
folks
have
availability
I am aware
by the
18
22 ,
of
us,
there
the
message
There
the
Tysen's
that
anything
with
is
two,
housing
agencies
10
those
an attorney
out.
25
and Mr.
it
unlike
to
be approxi
what
we have
properties.
is
very
representative
reputation
and
It
of
is
of
the
the
racial
Trump
composi-
an exclusively
14
1
2
or almost
exclusively
desirable
project.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
white
We have agreed
visions
that
to exclude
it
was set
preferences
groups
up under.
in tenant
because
and they
it
is
would interfere
desirable
with
Mitchel-Llama
decree
however,
12
impression
about
13
exceptions
their
In other
15
I realize
16
Center
17
and so forth
this
that
18
project,
provisions
it
that
is a very
availability
words,
is
these
be created
if,
simply
are
some false
in the
agreed
to notify
available
light
of the
to?
you say
to all
qualified
Honor,
I don't
persons,
--
and other
project.
THE COURT: Would there
14
certain
to veterans
in the
pro-
regulations
a state
that;
is a very
from certain
to the
selections
have accepted
It
it
11
19
project.
think
would open.
20
21
22
thing"
23
and then
and say
people
25
are
in.
in the
some-
--
24
go to Tysen's
same position
that
thousands
place
these
of New Yorkers
15
1
Trump Village
Honor.
not been,
for
whatsoever
which is
kept
because
there
supervised
entered
12
who inquired
13
the waiting
is,
16
exist.
that
19
purpose.
20
be included.
21
do advertise
22
manner.
23
give
24
Village
have just
list
as far
they
names
vacancies
anything
requires
with
as
are
Open Housing
but merely
give
the opportunity
only
the people
of joining
under
vacancies
To include
to all
it
those
that
to the
they
serve
no
shall
not
that
when they
in a certain
that
the circumstances
them,
advertise
blanketly
as the rest
then
requires
they
vacancies
would really
is no vacancy
Advertising
we would be doing
to provide
been discussed
a message
that
Trump Village
If there
requirements
waiting
list.
Excepting
18
has
any advertising
their
at Open Housing
the decree
17
there
Department,
15
your
et cetera.
listing
11
25
is concerned,
State
order,
Therefore,
Eskanazi,
is an extensive
by the
first
list.
up the matter.
in the proper
14
Irving
clear
as Trump Village
10
it
that
same equal
would
Trump
opportunity
and
16
1
that
is misleading.
2
3
which
seems to be very
would be meaningful
apply
it
to other
is under
10
at another
Housing,
state
it
because
them,
in effect
these
special
provisions
recognize
regulation
already.
if you stick
notices
respecting
14
There
is a provision
buildings
with
16
Spanish
17
Center
18
apartment.
19
ence to certain
20
list,
tenants
shall
Because
we aave
--
excluded
and does
it
shall
whereby
of black
Tysen's
for
and
an
prefer-
from that
provision.
it
say
excluded?
24
two?
has to give
of one of
Trump Village
22
they
to Open
jump to fill
We have excluded
25
sent
21
23
them in back
a three-day
tenants
that
3 on page 10.
numbers
a certain
be given
these
in the decree
insignificant
that
would
mislead
13
15
that
we all
will
Neaher's
of the decree
and federal
point
these
11
12
provisions
buildings
to Judge
cogent.
to exclude
Having excluded
not talking
not apply
footnote.
to Trump Village.
This provision
17
1
2
one,
the part
criterion
where it
standards
goes through
for
the objective
determining
the
rental
eligibility
of
tenants.
4
5
Footnote
subject
to other
tenant
eligibility.
7
8
9
10
11
We did
would appear
outside
the
equal
defendants
that
14
housing
public
with
to
respect
to be taking
opportunity
exclusion
large
that
projects
housing
requirements
that
-the
to.
see how it
serves
any function
on proper-
--
16
by name, saying
17
defendant,
18
the
19
worried
how about
this:
Instead
apartments
parentheses,
footnotes
with
a cosmetic
of mentioning
them
the
exceptions
noted
If they
in
are
about
MS. GOLDSTEIN: Someone who is going
is going
22
is
exclusions.
of the equal
were agreeing
problem,
to read
it
and rent
24
an apartment
to read
it
wrong.
23
25
it
specific
20
#2
Those are
to the
15
21
regulations
Park because
I don't
ties
federal
Tysen's
of the requirements
12
13
one excludes
for
a 30-page
person
wants
to go
decree?
want to be unreasonable
18
1
your
Honor,
2
3
7
8
9
--
this
for
days
and days.
4
5
but
to be entered
to be unreasonable.
one of the
reasons
that
have today
is that
provisions
spent
time we sit
10
I have retained
I understand
renegotiating
12
the
Government's
13
Suppose
14
to race,
15
mention
color,
if
position
decree
and each
neutral,
is merit
to
here.
one were
simply
as hereinafter
to say,
without
provided.
regard
You don't
-- you understand?
16
17
18
the
19
without
regard
20
origin,
as hereinafter
21
partly
need to be changed.
and I think
point
the
this
your point
that
11
I suppose
defendant
are
available
to race,
color,
are
under
23
their
24
they
25
provisions
are,
religion,
they
persons,
sex or national
are
problem
a general
regardless
and whether
--
qualified
provided.
an injunction,
properties,
you.
owned or managed by
to all
22
following
they
under
of the
are
is the
injunction
type
excluded
a general
defendant
that
all
of properties
from affirmative
injunction
to mak
19
1
apartments
2
3
available
to all
that
they
are
available
persons.
say they
were not.
as hereinafter
I just
provided.
Do you understand?
Then whatever
Trump or Tysen's
provisions
erence.
the difference
will
be governed
hereinafter
provided,
is with
respect
to
that
makes the
diff-
Do you understand?
10
MR. COHN: It
11
MS. GOLDSTEIN: It
12
that
13
Tysen's
14
provisions
15
all
16
a little
seems like
in would make it
--
17
18
qualified
were not
appears
appear
included
which require
say under
you,
triple
22
which provision
asterisk,
shall
not apply
seems to be
you
them to hold
days.
provision,
which is the
to Trump Village,
but
do you mean?
to --
it
3 --
21
three
but
to
25
and
of
20
requires
Trump Village
available
24
putting
them to make it
19
23
to me that
injunctive
in terms
solution.
in the general
that
a perfect
a property
provision
provision
off
the market
that
requires
that
for
them
20
1
2
3
4
provided
Tysen's
Village
which
is the
right.
simply
then
general
means that
you turn
I am attempting
to preserve
time
these
more specifically
bear
to satisfy
11
is
12
except
13
else
for
that
they
sides
that
because
you should
Trump Village
I don't
not
in
provided
here
personally
attemptin
I do think
it
and Tysen's
I am simply
after
saying
all
Park
are
available
everything
fine,
your
as herein-
provided.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
THE COURT:
23
provided
24
all
25
same
want to over-
a mediator
not
the
are
is
which
is available.
14
15
both
important
and at
to
sentence,
approach,
of whatever
I am simply
first
you,
in 10 and 12.
you on that.
10
gentlemen
as here-
someone goes
cosmetic
for
the benefit
if
is,
not to the
blanket
to satisfy
So my point
to all
as hereinafter
my point?
fine.
same page --
the words
" are
qualified
Honor.
"national
available
persons,
that?
origin."
as hereinafter
or are
available
"
regard
to race,
color,
to
21
1
religion
or
8
9
10
11
THE COURT:
I know they
you
it
the
special
also
are
might
in
record
a problem
be that
I would
is
what
your
Honor.
details
I am trying
it
treatment
expect
should
wait.
to
to
having
apply,
in
provided.
copy?
Government,
will
some difference
that
this
you may,
but
the
exceptions
and
that
talking
We were
thinking
recognized
may be realized
with
we are
say
respect
to
to
be so,
about
I don't
here.
Do
you understand?
12
MR. F.
TRUMP:
13
excluded
because
14
restricted
now.
15
they
standpoint,
17
that
18
let
us
19
but
Trump Village,
it
20
and
would
say
--
MR. F.
21
Donna?
22
3,000
They
under
I don't
look
well
I don't
for
being
--
either
from
the
you to
a large
be
highly
and
We have
from
your
Government's,
be attempting
co-ops.
would
people.
TRUMP:
are
the
think
not
they
restrictive
pick
certainly
to~
Tysen's
Park,
prominent
--
in Trump Village,
nothing
to
do with
families.
23
THE COURT:
24
MR. F.
are
are
We don't
THE COURT:
16
25
Yes,
hereinafter
The mechanical
keeping
know,
as
May I mark
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
origin,
THE COURT:
national
rental.
It
TRUMP:
is
partly
Three
co-op?
thousand
were
co-op
and
880
22
THE COURT: It
number of apartments
about
select
it,
the
is disagreeing
ing special
10
sentence
11
exceptions
State
takes
with
care
13
in conserving
14
standable,
noted,
15
believe
16
are
17
housing
that
that
is
to retain
we will
in the
try
by call-
opening
be creating
--
if
point
with
the
the
--
you are
interested
which
is under-
here,
I don't
vast
when you
majority
of
here.
at
are,
the
I assume
foot
you are
of the
decree
going
and
come to you?
THE COURT: If any difficulties
21
nobody
saying
we are
would be unreasonable
involved
jurisdiction
saying,
a major
18
is
of funds,
upon to deal
is
They
you might
the Government
not called
of everything.
to them there
expenditure
if
forget
Neaher
of on pages
are
a significant
two buildings,
any of that,
attention
instead
are
to New Yorkers.
12
22
Trump Village?
20
all
19
is
to iron
come up we will
them out.
point,
we agreed
to forward
to the
Open Housing
23
24
the
statement
of vacancies
right.
We agreed
to that
after
Center.
a lot
of
23
discussion.
Then they
own discretion
letter
persons
equal
go ahead
Center,
and weekly
copies
list
or organizations
10
to be involved
in this
11
without
12
to an enormous
13
superintendents,
14
15
League,
16
but
17
which both
impugning
sides
is
office
the
20
with
21
to not accomplish
22
fusion.
we all
of extra
in processing
to advertise
papers,
of all,
really
our experience
it
leads
work for
applications,
Center,
the
Urban
not in every
on a sort
paper
of rigid
Open Housing,
to flood
every
of our vacancies,
anything
agree,
basis,
to.
mind notifying
of lists
which are
in any way,
Open Housing
right
is a limitation
because
motives
have agreed
an indiscriminate
because
in promoting
groups
volume of confusion,
selected
19
25
an interest
process,
we have agreed
We don't
get our
may at its
of do-good
their
the
in certain
24
it,
above-mentioned
of groups,
First
saying
opportunities.
as to numbers
23
received
of the
with
copies
in language
of vacancies
What permeates
18
having
forward
housing
and put
it
but a total
chaos,
has been,
but
if
ther
organization
is
just
going
amount of con-
and by the
time
they
as I understand,
before,
by the
time
24
they
get
through
distributing
it
has all
become obsolete
anyway:
Places
are
rented,
and the
superintendents,
the
clerical
help
go crazy.
is to flood
they
forward
want,
which
discretion
something
organizations
10
is to notify
forward
the
in here
copies
with
on however
the
says
an interest
provision
Open Housing
which
this
at
Center,
its
own
persons
and
in promoting
equal
housing
opportunities.
11
I think
12
that
is what that
is
to put
about.
this
in perspective
13
and get
14
memorandum of understanding
stated
that
15
approximately
groups
to which this
16
ation
a little
history
three
of that
or four
paragraph,
there
would be
inform-
would be sent.
17
After
the decree
18
Eskanazi
19
off
20
spent
Mr. Eskanazi,
21
Mr. Eskanazi,
22
rather
23
to four
groups,
24
and let
them distribute
25
our initial
the
entire
than
in April
day with
and I believe
have the paper
So at his
why not
or May, I don't
the consent
this
remember
decree,
it
was his
and I
was agreed
suggestion,
work of sending
by
that
them constantly
Center
it.
suggestion,
and to eliminate
the
need to
25
1
4
5
6
7
8
one group,
If the defendants
specific
groups
much negotiation
since
then
brought
up as a sticky-wit,
at this
late
to change
gradual
11
the
12
coming to the
13
is that
of the
broadcast
This
and this
lapse
in time,
that
concerned
because
vacancies,
you will
apartments
if
of the
they
be flooded
which are
are,
with
no longer
and
people
available;
right?
MR. COHN: That
15
The second
is one concern.
concern
is this:
16
fication
17
the
18
19
three
20
Housing
to the
people
other
Open Housing
directly.
or five
Center,
this
does
That accomplishes
other
is
22
23
would they
or ten other
its
the
it.
it
now to give
noti-
They see
and why do
a bow to
-- the
Open
function.
to the
groups
Open Housing,
what
what
add to it?
We think
Center
fair
confused
of these
14
24
be more than
so I am a little
21
we will
it.
10
25
to,
provision.
stage
to send this
this
groups
in the
area,
there
are
a number of
in the metropolitan
26
area:
Various
sat
other
Housing
and a very
they
the
10
#3
groups
similar
Center
don't
specific
to the
limited
resources
do also
initially,
this
come into
also
understand
16
over
the
17
the management
18
after
the
it
if
will
20
of inquiry,
21
accomplish
22
cause
23
and everything
the
people
with
other
on
--
your Honor.
your position
people
matter,
are
here
I can
dispatched
of activity
who get
for
there
long
Government's
to expend
advertising
a lot
and so forth,
else,
On the other
24
things
generate
dealing
apartment
these
impact
advertising
is correct,
as a practical
19
25
hand,
that
city
office
play?
13
15
Open
does
not certain
on the other
are
because
literature,
12
but,
Center.
to have the
14
There
Center
to distribute
that
groups.
staff.
have the
provisions
source.
-- we never
Open Housing
Open Housing
community
is a possible
have housing
is one operation,
If the
groups
11
other
Commission
flow
purpose.
monies
all
means is a long
to travel
to these
places
in vain.
hand,
provisions
isn't
it
enough to,
and so forth,
with
the
to eliminate
27
1
this
sort
of broadcast
Is this
was this
--
a standard
tailored
provision,
tion
One is
operation,
the
10
the
community,
11
uniform.
12
the
13
this
14
uniform;
15
significantly.be
absolutely
is done frequently.
it
housing
and the
otherwise
of the
impact
not necessarily
have
22
encountered.
24
25
seen
of the
ing detailed
Amsterdam
of the
need
in
is
not
comm.unity of
pursuant
decree,
distribution
in all
is
to
fairly
decree
would
by the
Housing
of list
portion
the
are
pages
listings,
--
of vacancies,
of our decrees,
decrees.
your
which
There
the
other
less.
is done in a significant
21
size
It
opportunities
terms
the
notifies
20
23
on the
but
but
the
17
19
standard;
of the
this
of notifica-
depending
16
18
two kinds
nature
equal
decree,
to groups?
are
general
way, or
--
in here:
by the
the
is a problem
finger
of subsequent
advertising
Honor,
right
provisions
in El Dario,
ones
that
on it.
requir-
28
1
2
3
This
beginning
and
this
it
the
language
at
Open Housing
the
Center
Let
me ask
MR. COHN:
I have
THE COURT:
Once
you,
though,
as
a practica
the
what
MR. COHN:
but
an idea
is
Open Housing
to
stop
them
Center
from
gets
dispersing
anyway?
I don't
12
I don't
want
to
14
tion.
MR. COHN:
16
THE COURT:
17
MR. F.
18
she
said,
which
19
exclusively
for
is
the
them
20
THE COURT:
21
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
Housing
Center
THE COURT:
24
MR. F.
25
MR. COHN:
stop
them,
at
we take
its
that
one.
use
out.
own discre-
the
--
their
as what
it
is
one.
own discretion,
in
there.
We wan
-is
coming
The
last
its
That's
TRUMP:
to
how about
can
same
What
may at
23
They
if
operate
Honor,
Remember
TRUMP:
okay
can
Your
is
them.
That's
Center
15
know what
encourage
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
13
22
general
selected
THE COURT:
information,
10
11
they
less
matter
or
--
more
and
is
sentence,
own discretion
"The
Open
"
out.
Thank
The next
out?
you,
page
Judge.
--
I don't
think
there
29
1
should
be any
2
3
6
7
the
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
and
they
will
not
buildings
with
it
going
is
not
to
there?
with
Tysen's
and
has
no vacancies
only
if
13
all.
this.
14
I don't
ence
16
to
to
17
about
five
to only
is
it,
advertise
a pink
to
they
elephant
see
Include
in
their
then
problem
all
advertising
--
be
present
any
buildings
will
to advertise.
you do advertise
they
policy.
you conform
with
this
at
with
are
not
refergoing
that.
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
the
that
a need
Pursuant
If
argue
is
really
MR. COHN:
15
you need
so that
there
THE COURT:
to
this,
As I understand
11
12
Trump Village
exist.
THE COURT:
advertising
If
vacancies
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
That
includes
boroughs.
19
MR. COHN:
20
Let
21
Is
problems
be in
10
18
3-A.
Trump Village?
8
9
with
Can we handle
problem
us talk
We can
about
deal
with
Tysen's
that,
for
Judge.
a second,
if
we
can.
(Counsel
22
confer,
MR. ESKANAZI:
23
24
before
25
in
that
nature.
the
There
off
Miss
the
Goldstein
two buildings
is
record.)
a difference
are
mentioned
completely
as to
the
even
different
number
of
30
1
minority
people
living
in
Tysen's,
but
even
if
we take
Miss
Goldstein's
figure
and
she
said
ten
per
cent,
one
of
the
--
it
happens
to
distinctions
in
the
be a little
higher,
but
one
of
the
agreement
is
even
if
we list
with
6
Open Housing,
three
they
want
us to
list
and
hold
for
less
than
days
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
8
ten
per
cent
Only
properties
with
minority.
MR. ESKANAZI:
This
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
It
one
meets
the
criteria.
10
11
provision
because
12
13
MR. COHN:
it
is
not
14
17
18
19
they
to
are
viewing
be careful
I --
there
means.
22
is
23
minority
in
fact
24
from
if
they
excluded
excluded
is
this
make
Why should
now because
provision
provision
--
is
is,
-they
generous
here
sure
as
what
that
be excluded?
said
has
the
Tysen's
over
the
exclusion.
by operation
Bon
you or
--
just
in
I think
have
as to
Tysen's
results
Tysen's
from
that
provision.
Tysen's
you have
which
that
population
a different
a standpoint
to
in
that.
problems
Because
percentage,
be included
somebody
want
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
provision,
of
be future
MR. COHN:
to
That
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
21
a significant
How do we in
because
I think
have
because
this
might
not
They want
included
MR. COHN:
20
25
does
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
15
16
it
will
page
of
10.
the
I made
31
1
no statement
with
to its
advertising
tions
Development.
was that
by the
minority,
reading
10
okay,
but they
of this,
all
properties,
within
Department
or exclusion
on page B.
prescribed
inclusion
provisions
Our understanding
certain
12
done
13
have no vacancies,
14
building
15
the
16
advertising,
17
housing
18
the
the
we are
had a vacancy.
not requiring
advertising
all
simple
advertising,
you which
requiring
that
statement,
be included,
if
if you
you follow
three-word
opportunities,"
provision
you to advertise
we are
blacks,
--
procedures
and Urban
Under your
advertising
HUD Guidelines,
to advertise,
regula-
of Housing
all
would the
11
all
"equal
as required
by
HUD guidelines.
THE COURT: I am having
19
20
respect
your problem
here,
In other
21
22
advertise
23
particular
24
with
25
lationship
this.
I must say,
words,
either
or with
your advertising
But that
to the
on this
as I understand
question
--
for
understanding
one.
as I understand
generally
building,
a problem
it,
respect
if
you do
to any
has to comply
it
without
instance,
is
reit
32
likely
that
for
Tysen's,
for
instance?
3
4
5
that
is
not exist.
looking
the
premise
of this
is based
on the
to achieve
10
unique
11
is
and admitted
project
Park
it
13
15
standpoint,
16
really
17
cost
18
to do it.
is a very
us a lot
Tysen's
19
live
is the
necessary
thing
21
uses
the
22
that
it
percentage
23
24
these
25
the
while
for
does
is recoga
Staten
it's,
you
It
is
in is going
to
period
us.
we are
the
supposed
does
to the
per cent.
expense
she
fact
I don't
of adding
where we advertise
Island
admit
while
I can attest
of thirty
newspaper
the
it
is also
of minorities,
cent,
is maybe in excess
to every
we put
the
there
lines
It
ten per
where
expensive
20
figure
Government
on page 12.
advertising,
of money over
a large
supposedly
footnote
Each sentence
Park,
only
your
Government.
is the
it's
onerous.
in areas
it
Federal
is,
the
It
by the
I imagine
that
by Miss Goldstein.
know --
fact
exist.
12
14
point
does
in that
supervised
the
whole hearing
integration
Now, in Tysen's
nized
I think
Press,
in
or the
33
#4
different
expensive.
papers,
because,
quite
honestly,
There
or eight
are
ads.
2,100
"equal
lines,
,he
';,
;,-;,
ten
e<>,after
opportuflity"
~-;.
ads.
ten
ads in here,
ads.
housing
is very
We have about
We would have
it
-,."
linesr,
?{!tall
ads,
like
lines,
in this
11
the
one other
12
13
tory
14
foolish
15
estate
--
against
there
us;
isn't
it
and we will
is
decree,
put
twelve
10
2,100
this
underneath
:~~
eight
signing
that.
ten
different
advertiser
I think
expensive
places,
it
and it
be the
laughing
should
be left
in the
is discrimina-
makes us appear
stock
of the
real
industry.
16
I think
17
18
19
20
point,
21
of action
22
displayed.
that
which requires
print
that
He is telling
23
24
atory
provision
25
you won't
find
ads,
out
altogether.
what do they
housing
your
because
one other
housing
Honor that
if
eight
opportunity"
this
you go through
builder
like?
opportunity.
look
11
next
lines
be
is a discriminthe whole
or developer
who is
paper
34
1
required
to do that.
guidelines,
courts
these
tunity"
the
display
given
in these
cases,
significant
cases,
require
housing
the
the Washington
opportunity
11
city
12
is a frequent
Post,
newspaper,
the
--
country
you pick
use of
11
equal
in the
you pick
up almost
any large
housing
opportunity"
industry
an eight-line
win this
as a small
ad is not consid-
ad.
case
if we fought
19
be too
sure
of that.
ad is
not consid-
ad.
In fact,
21
We would
it.
18
ered
up
ad.
16
22
ficant
size
23
lines,
but agreed
24
defendants.
25
if
for
occurrence.
20
oppor-
is
the
14
17
which
do not use.
if
in
what is called
defendants
ered
courts
housing
logos,
13
15
all
use of "equal
throughout
10
HUD advertising
by a number of
circwnstances
weight
by practically
and in certain
equal
the
ad.
an eight-line
We generally
to increase
The Washington
Post,
ad is considered
do it
it
the
in three
to eight
Boston
a signior more
lines
papers,
for
the
the
35
1
Philadelphia
papers,
this
would
not
appear
are
saying,
at
all
un-
usual.
3
What the
defendants
since
no other
apartment
owners
follow
the
guidelines,
we should
not
be obliged
to.
Perhaps
what
they
are
speaking
to
is
need
for
greater
enforcement
by the
Civil
Rights
Division,
8
9
10
11
something
that
the
into
this
case
--
that
the
classified
case
includes
12
13
14
15
16
alleged
that
engaged
in
ination
against
18
19
20
in
this
is
defendants
in
blacks
never
practice
in
of
New York
into
without
agreed
on a number
of
this
The first
23
have
24
integral
memorandum
The second
made
came
City
fact
in
no
it
very
part
of
Now, at
the
one
--
clear
the
we have
City:
in
the
discrim-
that
in
even
the
a case
they
city.
of
this
that
defendants
the
have
occasions.
of
understand
we have
to
continual
requirements
and
this.
it
the
have
image
entered
decree
where
discriminate,
be followed
22
about
New York
a situation
HUD guidelines
to
since
concerned
a discriminatory
a consent
21
25
very
Division,
advertising
a pattern
We have
kind
we are
the
developed
17
Rights
this.
However,
have
Civil
them
never,
that
contained
and
this
at
all
time
was an
decree.
more
than
eleventh
hour
we again
are
36
1
2
renegotiating
more significant
4
5
6
tion
to all
shall
11
of the
advertising
conform
advertising
placed,
to the
practices
housing
recommended
eight.
With respect
which are
14
and set
15
of a house with
16
community
that
it
in the
HUD
respect
17
18
that
19
other
20
by the
is additional
ads will
the
to
ads should
limited
sign,
housing
are
and it
opportunity
to that
we just
of Housing
21
22
to
which
the
ads
bordered
of the
outline
is known in the
said,
in addition,
requirement
to the
have
logo.
eight-line
conform
it
of display
logo consists
to the
just
Department
in terms
an equal
With respect
all
use of a logo,
about
and then
as equal
that
We have
to the
talks
generally
off,
states
opportunities.
13
25
and so forth,
HUD guidelines
24
guidelines.
12
23
decree.
10
parts
guidelines
all
prescribed
ads.
not requiring
the
only
ones
I think
in the
that
is
New
37
1
terrible
and it
certainly
is discriminatory.
you an idea
of lineage,
the publishing
business,
they
classify
fourteen
lines
as equal
to an inch,
so when we speak
of eight
lines,
we are
saying
any ad that
would be just
over
a half
that.
inch
in size
or more,
So if we advertise
fourteen
buildings,
we would have
that
fourteen
times.
it
is very
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
everything
small.
the
go through
for
proposed
is a basic
they
22
a completely
23
of money, accomplish
24
result,
25
that
and just
tell
this
is
very,
very
awfully
hard
newspapers
this
and
they
next
provision
was
cooperating
here
be singled
and taking
out
for
position,
cost
them a great
to nothing
are
itis
up the
to find
is harsher
unique
others
now since
why should
treatment
I can't
are
is probably
months
21
that
the
one because
decree,
and this
of problems,
three
Because
consent
because
two thousand
over
fact,
problem
This
19
20
looking
to say to people
it
and
expensive.
probably
lines,
it's
deal
as a practical
pigs
in a way
not discriminatory
38
1
2
when they
have read
have yet
to find
probably
a total
of 300,000
are
ads and
being
asked
to do here.
4
5
three
years,
in these
into
one that
property
13
been charged
14
Rights
15
not
owners
Act,
decrees,
I have
ads.
a quick
look at the
in the
in that
with
newspaper
which they
have checked
17
MR.
paper
19
it
for
have agreed
three
say,
21
down the
22
an awfully
this
is the
list,
25
the
there
spirit
last
there
basic
If these
out,
entere
the other
in that
they
of the
Civil
by consent
an ad in.
and there
have
We
is not one.
in New York.
20
24
months
that
to settle
is never
n. TRUMP: We haven't
23
are
violation
on
this.
same position
a serious
going
They are
12
18
but
11
16
have done,
10
they
claim
the
at all
this
big problem,
just
isn't
language,
and if
anything,
as I
you look
but this
is
one.
people,
wasn't
of just
a trial,
that,
they
decree
pointin
is
in
have gone so
40
1
3
4
5
We have tried
something
something
10
11
12
ting
yielding
history
300,000
other
If we advertise
we hardly
papers
here
and put-
only
people
in
it
on the
just
part
of any
seems grossly
unfair
and discriminatory.
MR. BRACHTL: Your Honor,
14
the
15
those
16
regarded
17
explain
citation
18
to the
regulations
appears
HUD regulations
postdates
a significant
that
it
the
decree
difference
with
that
Lefrak
in this
to me from
the date
decree,
area,
respect
of
which
is
which may
to that
decree.
these
guidelines.
20
MR. BRACHTL: It
21
of this
22
advertising
decree
seems to me that
is to assure
really
affirmative
is at the
heart
23
24
25
advertising
fashion.
to see this
or developer,
in the
are
to make us the
and do
themselves.
builder
here
to the Government
On top of that,
the
a composite
is in a discriminatory
in ads in minority
13
19
that
We are
8
9
regard.
6
7
in every
to take
I never
thought
that
of advertising
bothers
of the
that
decree.
that.
me a little
in the
sense
bit
was
of the
tiny
39
1
far,
the
as you go through
lists
of vacancies,
decree,
it
is
cant
thing
deal
of advertising.
fourteen
me.
they
do.
Their
This
A person
who is looking
11
just
so much.
12
very
limited
13
operation.
in
16
my office
17
the
18
opportunity
for
a Title
an apartment
We are
a.suit
-- that
by my office
can do
and very,
not dealing
and requiring
with
a large
entered
has -- brought
provision
the
by
following
use of equal
--
20
MR. COHN: It
21
Judge,
every
22
cation,
23
When we leave
this
Open Housing
Center
Dario
clientele
HUD guidelines
in New York
Center
that
to
the publi.
19
25
way to reach
Open Housing
resources.
there
ad is approximately
As I say,
15
They do a great
10
14
average
lines,
notifications,
--
They advertise.
or fifteen
24
the
this
just
point
Miss Goldstein
does
isn't
we talk
says
this
she is going
not do it.
there.
about,
notifi-
us that
the
Then El
press
41
1
ads
saying
is
available.
indeed,
instance,
ing
a particular
I have
it
might
from
passing
complex,
it
MR. F.
equal
and
THE COURT:
where
in multiplying
13
lines
it
16
could
A 14-line
like
this,
building
there
for
advertis-
is
me say
these
not
very
one
it
is
this,
after
with
be a very
tiny
to
us,
that
--
I can
these
in
that
see
extra
expensive
The defendants'
considered
available
I think
ads
we know
a huge
important
thing
tiny
conceivably
ad is
that
where
many apartments
is
Let
City,
Parkway
That
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
14
Starrett
with
TRUMP:
12
15
page,
by on the
housing,
11
a whole
three
advertising,
be something
about
unquestionably
of
two or
generally.
Even on this
or
thought
to
blurb
availability,
apartment
always
be said
a long
10
that
item.
ads
are
not
the
industry,
tiny.
your
Honor.
THE COURT:
17
I don't
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
18
MR. P.
TRUMP:
know whether
The ads
One-inch
that
is
they
I have
are
seen
fourteen
all
of
-the
--
lines.
19
MR. D. TRUMP:
It
is
a very
small
ad.
20
THE COURT:
They
get
fourteen
lines
in one
inch?
21
Off
the
reco~d.
22
(Discussion
off
the
record.)
23
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
Your
Honor,
perhaps
we could
work
24
25
out
a rotating
cut
the
expense
proportion,
in
half.
that
is,
every
other
ad,
to
42
1
2
MR. D. TRUMP:
MR. BRACHTL:
and
ceeds
eight
and what
each
right
ads
14
"equal
15
other
16
not
17
to
or
is
the
the
expense,
much about
number
total
inserting
ads
did,
these
because
20
21
sees
out
say
that
of
ads
is
the
expens
that
ex-
advertising
budget
these
words
three
is
in
a minority
of
over
housing
eight
or
is
last
point
is
that
If
If
have
seem
as this
you read
own purpose.
and was
group
that
looking
and
for
an
I saw ten
which
said
and not
the
and
others
one
all
do
I was confined
this
that
they
everybody
a minority
insofar
that
impression
MR. COHN:
to
seems
almost
ten.
We will
going
it
opportunity
the
ten
that
something,
assume
MR. BRACHTL:
or
about
two thousand
or
almost
something
your
in
opportunity,"
equal
their
you
up a newspaper
I ~ould
eight
almost
to
I were
eight
tell
you defeat
I picked
if
have
We can
on this
That
law
heard
the
of
I want
housing
18
25
but
If
13
24
what
cost
by insisting
apartment,
23
the
now,
12
22
what
lines,
MR. COHN:
11
19
for
ad.
10
We have
I was wondering
you pay
Donna?
Will
take
person
logo
the
the
and
others
is
concerned.
this,
Judge
Neaher,
want
is
to
create
bound
by this.
risk.
is
1990
looking
don't,
do not
in
and
it
observe
line
with
is
the
the
43
1
2
3
4
5
other
provisions
vertising
ing
equally
lists
system,
the
constant
of
the
fact
that
have
got
City
of
decree
11
about
the
12
that
in
one
to
the
ad?
14
here.
do run
17
all.
Mr.
that
are,
would
objection,
in
the
the
history
form
all
ad they
of
of
the
a consent
digressed
respond
to
industry
in
a position
the
industry.
about
ads.
if
the
is
the
from
inquiry
more
This
some.
That's
was put
to
say
about
We would
we were
the
only
I don't
they
the
will
THE COURT:
You might
people,
not
as
the
expense.
be the
laughing
ones
think
be the
that
the
at
would
the
be.
primary
stock
of
had
defendants
laughing
be commended.
of
we
be in
way it
forth
cost
that.
most
would
--
with
than
logo
Expense
here
lineage,
familiar
I am curious
TRUMP:
you were
24
25
add to
small
you have
think
I suppose,
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
22
in
Cohn,
Donna
be in
and
MR. F.
the
to
relatively
you would
MR. BRACHTL:
20
every
I don't
some larger
18
record-keeping
system
person
When we talked
It
the
furnish-
--
There
16
League,
the
ad-
unfair.
Now if
I think
15
newspapers,
do this
grossly
MR. COHN:
13
where
notification
MR. BRACHTL:
my question.
decree
Urban
be the
seems
10
23
the
New York
21
to
to
this
in minority
of
19
of
stock
are
of
44
1
is a little
behind
other
3
this
cities
will
5
6
7
10
11
continue
like
this.
find
very
It
subject
provision
of this
--
to a suit
are
13
stock
14
the Court.
I think
15
is
MR. COHN:
very
other
is
defendants
Title
8.
explicit
most important
they
are
going
simply
not
the
Are these
and it
in a consent
HUD regulations
19
20
and developer.
is --
decree
example.
23
asked
It
is
have the
before
in compliance
logo?
not.
is
point
to Starrett,
laughing
here
ads all
there
on the
22
question
which don't
21
to be the
other
18
a custom
and usage
of every
builder
which
a good
Government
is
has never
them to do that.
In a decree
years
and it
25
Post
under
17
24
the
in situation
kind.
To say that
with
cities
Washington
is not
is considered
believe
long.
up the
I don't
You pick
common occurrence.
12
16
use of advertising.
for
You won't
in the
since
this
here
and in a period
regulation
of over
was specifically
three
promulgated
45
1
which
supports
to
they
say,
and
this,
the
I read
nothing
so we are
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
of
a continuing
racial
erty
a claim,
now asked
practice
over
discrimination
in New York
to
this
requirement
guidelines,
has
How long
would
there
spirit
of
avoid
what
language
single
the
and
it
the
United
period
all
is
--
resolution
States
of
caused
of
time
most
of
Trump prop-
white.
that.
even
they
out
say
anything,
opportunity,"
saying
is
did
be allowed
to
say
is
don't
If
we refer
language
asking
want
that
there,
is
such
us to
do.
to
and
where
the
I think
they
made where
the
want
They mention
advertising
HUD
in
you
group.
in twelve
we will
ourselves
in
two thousand
we are
in mind
Two years.
a particular
if
you have
endure?
HUD guidelines
Donna
I think
flag
25
this
by the
You should
MR. ESKANAZI:
22
24
reference
negotiating
We deny
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
16
23
TRUMP:
THE COURT:
15
21
with
that.
13
20
have
be virtually
MR. D. TRUMP:
19
differently,
done
a long
which
11
18
to
a claim
MR. F.
17
been
We are
Mr. Cohn,
10
14
has
a little
others.
12
it
of
more
take
ads
in
it
will
ours
or
less
minority
the
putting
groups
Times
say
don't
"equal
up a red
--
the
others
to
46
1
may not,
but
we will.
specifically
MR. BRACHTL:
is
THE COURT:
problem
with
That
schools
and
MR. ESKANAZI:
MR. BRACHTL:
expense
claim
9
10
is
that
read
12
the
13
to
take
large
ties
which
16
with
almost
white,
17
only
in his
properties
18
to minority
19
and
20
guidelines
24:
25
groups;
called
are
the
next
Rican
slogan
to
solve
periodic
interval
grab
of
use
the
them
the
appli-
the
there.
art
is
propersome
may be run
trying
of
that
defendants
and
logo
he is
a term
up about
operate
population
and
and
to
in
what
the
the
appeal
industr
HUD
at.
Is
there
provisionwith
possible
black
is
the
brings
which
in which
aimed
to
practice
the
stealing,
communities
ought
and only
that
least
forth.
developers
the
whole
Times.
a sufficient
THE COURT:
21
23
ha~e
at
properties
15
is
put
is
the
else.
however,
New York
it
You find
is
be overdone.
You probably
the
certain
it
can
I gather,
HUD guidelines,
14
22
It
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
11
That
everything
no longer
THE COURT:
cants
be applauded.
Not necessarily.
to
--
respect
monthly
this
any way,
to
15-line
by having
a larger
ad for
looking
over
black
and
the
display
them
place
ad.$, is
at
Trump buildings,
at
Puerto
it
some
or
47
what
have
This
this
is
of
10
a good
really
black
media
the
and
black
Puerto
and
We are
do with
to
do it,
figuring
portion
15
really
16
minority
of
Rican
in
19
whether
that
on,
next
two years
ad which
say,
or
--
Anyway,
and
going
or
the
to
pick
this
size
of
in
course,
of
ads
by
in
addition
it
the
to
says
in
-leave
those
Times
is
ads
the
out
is
greatest
looking
up the
for
an apartment
New York
Times,
Rican.
Would
insert
that,
to
Puerto
you
in
handled
that
to
Anybody
whatever
included
housing
press,
THE COURT:
20
and
toward
TRUMP:
is
black
be perhaps
ads
primarily
newspaper,
New York
can
Rican
MR. D. TRUMP:
18
partners
I was thinking
repulsive.
17
limited
it.
It
Puerto
MR. F.
fair
Starrett
number
directed
14
25
to
THE COURT:
13
24
appear?
--
nothing
increasing
the
23
would
get
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
12
22
even
MR. D. TRUMP:
11
21
might
this
Starrett.
8
9
in which
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
6
7
you,
you object
this
is,
the
a monthly
some kind
equal
to
housing
of
requirement
basis
large
for
the
general
opportunity
and
logo?
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
I have
another
alternative,
your
48
Honor.
2
3
provisions,
properties
centage
having
advertise
with
equal
housing
say a black
of less
than
as we do with the
them,
percentage
THE COURT: Is it
seem to be concerned
12
apartments
13
little
records
to do that?
available
that
with
come on the
MR. F. TRUMP: It
in this
building,
nothing
16
17
altogether
18
ment as fitting
19
high,
20
Washington.
21
I see the
22
The next
23
see if
sure
development
market
--
to say is,
here
we
of individual
and an ad goes
in,
they
but
I would ever
are
Post
I go there
two
construe
Perhaps
there
a couple
I am not
this
require-
of something
an inch
I don't
in
live
and I go there
of times
I am going
and
a year.
down to look
and
there.
is obvious
I think
actually
the confines
I have daughters
Washington
building,
big.
I wouldn't.
time
It
that
is one in that
I am saying,
within
honestly
24
in,
the
in any
ad.
14
25
possible
have the
11
15
have an answer.
10
per-
15 per cent?
They will
for
occupancy,
event.
other
opportunities
#5
How about
there
that
is
nobody else
something
here
will
to be said,
have it
the
49
defendant
is
requiring
them
paper
in the
such
decree
take
is
13
the
made,
in
advertising
Sunday
Real
in a
Estate,
maybe
papers.
cast
Would this
around
solve
quarterly
ad quarterly
MR. ESKANAZI:
inches,
that
and
it
rotate
would
we would
it?
This
whole
reporting.
Suppose
we
-That
is
three
Two inches,
so each
reach
all
our
times
a year,
your
MR. COHN:
or
six
inches,
we throw
building,
times
Four
Let's
three
four
an ad like
so eventually
buildings.
Three
MR. ESKANAZI:
16
time
be a different
THE COURT:
15
say
a year
times
is
not
very
much.
a year.
every
ad over
five
inches
inches.
MR. D. TRUMP:
18
19
in
of
been
Honor.
14
17
or
have
some kind
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
10
12
as this
a large
claims
place
MR. COHN:
11
a lawsuit,
to
Sunday
in
I would
We have
many ads
over
five
inchesr
say.
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
additional
point,
20
your
Honor?
I know we are
stretching
your
patience
21
22
considerably.
THE COURT:
I am an exceedingly
patient
man.
23
I am really
interested
in
trying
to
work
out
something
24
here
25
which
I think
is
going
to
be realistic
and not
50
1
just
really
shrink
appear
in those
because
it
there
big problems
is
ad here
at the
think
this
11
three
12
whether
that
little
this
statement
in this
that,
this
city.
there
ought
--
something
or four-inch
city
and that
is one of the
What I am trying
to be at
least
I don't
that
ad,
know whether
would be visible
or whatever
it
will
put
15
once a month.
three
or four
buildings
to the
is.
I don't
together
we will
we insure
rotate?
I don't
one building
know whether
that
it
two,
23
it
know
be?
Judge?
and say it
the
is possible
buildings
--
are we choosin,,
it
should
three,
to your
be up to us,
surveillance,
about
it
complaint.
In other
words,
the
idea
is
I
I
I
four.
wouldn'
24
25 I
We
to be advertised?
21
eye,
do that.
19
you do
you do that.
14
17
to say
a monthly
16
would
of some sort.
or not,
13
ads.
about
I was thinking
10
22
tiny
about
I really
to the defendant.
thought
is no question
20
acceptable
Remember landlords
18
is
that
it
will,
51
1
the advertising
will
apply
to all
their
buildings,
take
it,
the
spirit
of this
I think
all
in a revolving
way
should
turn
up in these
ads.
once a month
6
7
8
10
11
12
we will
take
a certain
ad that
says
"Trump Equal
we take
it
on a rotating
and if we could
together
three
or four
14
and probably
21 ,
or four
bottom
and over
all
buildings,
of that,
three
the
we will
go over
put them
we will
or four
period
of our buildings,
months,
take
differen
of twelve
month
and then
some,
times.
be a display
advertise-
ment
MR. D. TRUMP: They are
expensive.
Nobody uses
that.
19
20
three
a big blank
17
18
Housing,"
basis,
at the
buildings,
we have covered
16
not just
Queens buildings,
13
15
take
and then
Brooklyn
number,
terminology
you will
22
talk
23
of 15-line
24
of one inch.
about
is a misunderstanding
or definition
see that
El Dario
of display,
in the
next
point
as to
because
when they
speak/
!
25
display
I think
ads,
they
the Government
are
talking
speaks
about
in terms
somethinJ
of display
II
1
52
ad as merely
a black
line
around
2
3
signifying
is the
10
of properties
11
incur,
12
of properties
13
provision
14
on the consideration
15
that
16
agreement.
that
in terms
that
the
would
it
will
least
this
cover
unreasonable.
I think
20
the
defendants
had reached
this
provision
in the
a settlement
It
to solely
date
of each
even considering
number
to the
a trial
was included.
would
agreed
to this
been
number
impact,
and parcel
court
and I have
as opposed
off
have agreed
inches.
provision
signed,
of putting
three
decrease
defendants
The defendants
or more.
of frequency,
19
and
subsequent
provision.
Honor it
the
is
equities,
agreement
and
is not an unreasonable
provision.
I wonder whether
23
25
say at
that
24
it
to a size?
inches
significant
18
22
I think
inches?
and impact
decrease
17
21
ad.
be satisfactory.
the
however,
month,
from going
there
could
to every-day
cover
be this
compromise,
a small
percentage
of
53
1
their
buildings.
3
4
5
in other
the
offer
a flat
words,
all
percentage,
offerings
of one apartment
If
included
with
tion
what we are
coverage
to twelve
times
10
further,
to reduce
11
12
means that
13
the
14
logo
--
housing
lity
17
tion.
with
here
the
a larger
large
the
a year,
time
but the
then
three
or four
units
recitaotherwise
and,
number
once a month,
coverage
certainly
which
or
down to about
you get
at the
on
to be a fair
program
I glance
as
from daily
in the
you think
That
--
once a month:
advertising
ad?
are
is a reduction
more visibi-
attracts
paper
my atten-
I look at
ads.
20
logo,
have a reduction
in this
The first
18
not
offerings
opportunities,"
describing
we will
of those
16
19
"equal
exposure
15
the
cent
considered
in one newspaper
one day.
of
50 per
perhaps
21
would wish
to connect
22
opportunity
23
to them,
but
24
of these
advertising
25
offered
recitation
the
the
with
requirement
on one day,
units,
manner
the
recitation,
the
specific
ads,
would be that
that
defendants
equal
housing
would be up
50 per cent
is one apartment
being
either
54
1
in a block
or individually
with
this
recitation.
If
they
wish
to block
all
of their
ads together,
advertising
from seven
if
they
wish
to diminish
their
days
whatever
their
advertisin
is,
50 per
cent
of the
units
offered,
considering
a unit,
as I say,
the
offer
of an apartment
on a day,
would have
to be associated
with
either
in a block
or separately
with
9
10
this
unless
wish
they
17
20
21
gether
notice
it
24
25
is
as Luna Park,
different
in the
going
opportunities,"
costs
to pay for
let's
say,
apart,
Luna Park
Forest
only
extra
ones
block
line.
in there.
them to-
in most cases
borough
buildings
or five
if
and location,
Hills,
they
are
in an entirely
section,
the
conforming
in Brooklyn,
inches
that
apart,
different
Brighton
MR. BRACHTL: If
difficulty
really
that
you
such
all
in
locations.
to be four
inches
the
because
specific
If we own ten
22
23
advertising
18
19
housing
13
16
their
"equal
12
15
cut
of
to.
11
14
recitation
is
they
are
or maybe twelve
column;
in the
Beach section.
true,
then
there
will
be
to your program.
section
in consolidating
at
a time;
in one
that
is
55
1
Brooklyn
one
lyn,
for
example,
advertised
the
MR. COHN:
advertising
"equal
shall
for
housing
appear
in
of
11
apartments
12
tised
13
14
ads
15
more
equal
an ad to
in
the
course
17
the
18
opportunity."
a year
four
apartments
with
reference
buildings,
and
run
the
once
the
Brook-
housing
a month,
of
a year
and
the
logo
a minimum
specific
buildings
basis
adver-
so that
be covered
least
to
words
fair
and
at
logo,
we were
We were
just
MR. F. TRUMP:
once,
in
one
all
such
or
just
talking
You can't
That
talking
about
put
would
about,
the
line
not
"equal
a logo?
make a display
ad out
it.
MR. COHN:
22
housing
We are
talking
about
the
words
opportunity."
THE COURT:
are.
City
read,
of
20
25
this
shall
THE COURT:
24-
once
opportunities.
buildings
19
23
or
on a sectional
MR. F. TRUMP:
of
three
do that.
be rotated
the
about
be advertised
City
to
times?
16
21
have
How does
shall
over
means
New York
inches
shall
willing
opportunity"
10
three
That
would
with
whatever.
We are
MR. BRACHTL:
..
Queens,
MR. D. TRUMP:
time,
I don't
know what
the
newspaper
"equal
56
1
2
every
the
newspaper
different.
3
4
a display
sidered
we are
about
talking
larger
logo
equal
to put a logo
housing
"shall
that
be prominently
meaning
11
be -- with
12
buildings
the words
placed
"equal
reference
that
and easily
housing
the words
legible,"
opportunity,"
to advertising
for
shall
--
13
14
15
word ttinclude"
16
ature."
17
advertising
18
go back,
19
insert,
down to the
Then start
for
"equal
appear
00
21
II
Specific
apartments
advertised
shall
fifth
line,
"With reference
the words
"shall
to strike
as follows,
of a minimum of three
all
is a
ad.
10
rI
is con-
opportunity.
in because
in it
ad.
22
is
housing
to
buildings,"
then
opportunity,"
then
be advertised
be rotated
in the
are
on a sectional
buildings
basis
covered
so tha~
in such
2311
24
25
ads at
least
once in the
Then go back,
these
course
words,
of a year."
11
shall
then
be
II
57
1
prominently
2
3
placed
and easily
legible."
directories,
also
does,
it
deletes
radio,
television
use that.
ment talks
envisioned.
10
of impact.
and agreements
It
renders
the
12
13
cancy
14
Housing
lists
minority
being
--
provision
El Dario,
to the
16
decrease
17
the
it
from all
defendants
could
the
you've
Amster-
got vaOpen
place
going
to
I would think
that
such an ad
on a monthly
about
I
I
I
basis.
a weekly
basis.
21
25
in terms
properties,
19
24
was not
Centers.
18
23
settle-
Urban League,
22
this
15
20
their
minute
advertising:
supplied
that.
it?
in all
heretofore
11
include
"
is why we couldn't
get
to-
gether.
MS. GOLDSTEIN: We had gotten
have signatures
together.
We
--
through
I
II
58
1
2
3
4
to a document
which included
put their
this
people
10
a chance
isn't
to read
12
stand
13
you don't
so.
signed
any document.
it.
push without
what they
it.
You can't
it
are
and they
giving
these
doing.
are
doing
and you
be intelligent
about
something
read.
14
15
16
provision.
11
signa-
into
in A andto
have really
Judge.
18
thought
consider
a distinct
20
the
21
would be looked
22
availability,
23
appear
24
Trump as an equal
25
management,
Court
advance
from looking
at
so far
on a periodic
building
-- which
housing
opportunity
management,
papers,
I
to
it
or apartment
than
basis
a new B.
as is apparent
of housing
regularly
that
in terms
daily.
would be to eliminate
17
19
contracts
normal
size
ad
characterizing
landlord
apartment
or
management,
59
1
2
3
4
and
provide
double
of
t6
you have
asterisk,
B before
to
with
That
I suppose
the
might
MR. F.
MR. COHN:
THE COURT:
11
THE COURT:
make sure
13
to
the
that
Daily
MR. COHN:
15
THE COURT:
16
MR. COHN:
17
THE COURT:
18
in
19
"newspapers"
20
whatever
the
if
it
the
Times
to
the
only
one
--
I suppose
your
read
the
policy,
else
want
if
is
you go
around
like
defendant
shall,
out
telephone
to
the
this
A, includ
word
directories,
that?
No.
That
B -would
Then
run
B would
to
publication.
something
strike
be in
they
make B
no objection
Then
--
specifically?
comparable
says
advertising
down to
the
bottom
page?
THE COURT:
make
used.
is
know what
or
B would
have
part
I would
papers,
that
you change
would
all
B, all
one
know.
I think
so it
MR. COHN:
23
only
I would
THE COURT:
22
25
--you
to
Times
advertising
MR. COHN:
21
24
all
footnote,
Times.
the
don't
It
under
the
is
case
News --I
14
Just
I don't
in
which
New York
So maybe
one,
that
the
That
the
papers.
all
10
12
next
say
TRUMP:
in
the
even
somewhere
that
black
you cover
here
take
you come to
C, dealing
5
6
what
be,
include
in
all
of
60
1
newspaper
certain
advertising
size
at
MR. COHN:
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
times
12 times
a year
ed by the
basis?
12
people
18
19
For
defendants?
other
It
which
is
365 times
large
see
in
source
that
of
is
I don't
case
twelve
a year
to
even
win
that
to
the
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
be select
on a weekly
it?
in
you
something
a newspaper
and
in which
that
that
I find
is
no
legend.
is.
then
at
for
give
a distinct
that,
to
be done
you pay
letters
this
units
unrealistic.
advertising
not
four
not
trying
know what
over
to
totally
Will
will
ad containing
ment,
not
from
three
is
I'm
If
this
an ad of
inches.
ad,
Can this
THE COURT:
major
16
17
going
MR. D. TRUMP:
11
the
three
A monthly
we are
THE COURT:
10
15
--
Minimum of
MR. BRACHTL:
14
a month
a year?
13
once
--
least
If
advance
for
the
you want
to
litigate
I am ready
end of
to
go.
a final
We understand,
Govern-
You might
decree.
your
Honor.
20
THE COURT:
so I suggest
that
you phrase
along
21
those
lines
as has
been
indicated
here
that
the
group-
22
ing
of
buildings
in
a particular
section--
buildings
23
apartments,
whatever
it
would
be,
and
it
would
be at
24
least
25
a three-inch
ad which
I would
say
would
be
or
61
1
2
substantial
tunity"might
so that
"equal
see
or
housing
oppor-
three-line
basis,
it.
I gather,
is
not
possible
in
this
--
display
Not
unless
it
becomes
a display
I don't
know what
you mean by a
advertisement.
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
squared-off
Blocked
off.
One of
these
ads.
MR. D. TRUMP:
It
also
makes
it
a very
expensive
ad.
MR. COHN:
estate
It
couldn't
run
in
the
regular
That
is
usually
real
column.
THE COURT:
16
17
which
be a two-line
THE COURT:
14
15
can
in
advertisement.
12
13
you
and
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
10
11
even
newspaper
8
9
size
The logo,
in
new housing,
I agree.
isn't
done
for
it?
18
MR. F.
TRUMP:
19
THE COURT:
That's
You are
right.
not
talking
about
new hous-
20
MR. BRACHTL:
21
22
be run
third
MR. COHN:
23
Sunday
that
the
day
of
we specify
of
each
that
such
an ad
month?
Why not.
MR. BRACHTL:
24
25
on the
Might
the
The purpose
ad is
behind
an important
it
one.
is
simply
62
1
2
people
reason,
arises
apparently
It
another
apartment
10
Sunday
might
time.
don't
look
once
MR. F.
TRUMP:
in the
summertime.
13
but
I don't
14
for
Sunday.
know if
looking
for
housing
18
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
20
advertisement
21
day
MR. F.
it
is
this
it
vacancy
ads.
might
who are
might
are
very
put
Sunday
You want
If
is
to
be on Sunda
looking
not
for
around
well
it
the
limit
we are
the
clearly
twice
TRUMP:
an
in
on
be on a Sunday
specifically
biggest
day
for
it
to
Sunday?
considering
greatest
from
the
a Sunday
impact,
a greater
impact
than
gets
on a Sunday
a Wednes
pages
of
It
lost
because
as much.
MR. D. TRUMP:
24
25
for
advertisement.
22
23
that
a week.
It
standpoint
is
is
it
--
THE COURT:
Government's
you want.
when the
place
once,
we should
17
19
to
The supers
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
15
going
people
MR. D. TRUMP:
12
control
be on Friday
I think
when
to
be a problem,
don't
are
if
Friday
least
might
they
regard
at
That
MR. COHN:
16
or
preparing
are
first
the
With
MR. BRACHTL:
11
Make it
THE COURT:
apartment
Believe
advertising.
it
or not,
you have
twelv
63
1
2
MR. F.
have
TRUMP:
MR. BRACHTL:
THE COURT:
MR. ESKANAZI:
grant
month,
that
it
have
enough
the
makes
it
to
hard
14
third
people
or
throw
from
18
as to
19
We have
looking
Sunday
the
that
you do
a
simple
reason
we may not
size.
as
long
as
it
appears
there
an apartment,
will
I believe,
be
by the
is
a technical
problem
standpoint.
provide
not
that
Maybe we can
the
having
that
THE COURT:
it
is
very
Government
I don't
MR. BRACHTL:
I am asking
write
can
the
decree
so
the
day.
provide
experts
MR. D. TRUMP:
me that
be one
of vacancies,
Maybe there
21
25
if
for
care
I see.
week --
THE COURT:
24
here,
Honor,
Statistically,
for
20
22
Sunday,
in an ad of
MR. BRACHTL:
17
23
you
a month.
fourth
their
should
You don't
THE COURT:
15
it
paper
your
because
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
more
on a Sunday,
a Sunday
I think,
a specific
on Sunday
12
16
not
is
I think
THE COURT:
13
it
May we suggest
This
Sunday,
but
10
once
you want
it.
11
If
it
think
that
One Sunday
Not a day
is
realistic.
a month,
Judge.
for
be made in our
I don'
--
they
their
discretion.
t understand.
indicate
discretion.
It
that
they
seems
to
cannot
64
1
control
the
space
allocations
of
newspapers.
They can
take
3
an ad for
a Sunday,
go in on some Sunday
I take
in
that
it,
and
then
it
will
month.
MR. ESKANAZI:
No, your
Honor.
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
6
of
10
11
12
MR. ESl(:ANAZI:
experts
or
in housing,
fourth
of
month
and perhaps
our
best
13
14
time
would
vacancies
--
first
of
the
MR. COHN:
18
as regards
shall
20
one
advertise
Sunday
--
MR. COHN:
22
THE COURT:
change
24
25
it
out
time,
last
or
that
are
not
the
third
and we are
week of
the
second
Sunday
leases
generally
preceding
would
be
know.
Do your
run
on
All
Would
of
them
this
do.
be something
that
you had
Let's
put
see,
it
the
this
defendant
way,
shall,
B,
at
least
advertise
--
How about
with
reference
You have
three
there.
shall,
A, --
and this
to
newspaper
We don't
want
all.
The defendant
direction
night
a month.
21
to
people
point
first
to
THE COURT:
19
by Thursday
month?
16
in mind
these
the
we never
MR. ESKANAZI:
23
in
the
15
17
be in
be a horrible
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
the
to
Because
I might
Sunday
aware
the
has
week before.
the
7
8
It
is
a mandator
65
1
MR. COHN:
THE COURT:
3
4
MR. COHN:
less
than
5
6
A is
once
--
general
about
B will
begin
way it
is.
"shall
advertise
"
shall
advertise
not
Sunday
in every
month
a month.
well,
or
At least
shall
circulation,
one
--
such
insert
in a newspaper
as the
New York
of
Times
--
how
that?
MR. ESKANAZI:
10
MR. COHN:
11
THE COURT:
12
circulation,
13
Sunday
14
three
15
in a particular
Yes.
such
in
every
inches
Fine.
(Cont'g)
--
the
New York
as
month,
in
17
THE COURT:
clude
in--
19
kind,
the
20
say
the
advertising
would
words
"equal
you
say
housing
at
least
one
of
least
at
apartments
--
provision.
basis,
and
shall
larger
type
of
opportunity"
--
insome
we can't
apparently.
MR. COHN:
22
MR. F.
23
THE COURT:
At the
24
MR. COHN:
And shall
words
general
available
With a rotating
21
ad the
Times,
of
an advertisement
On a rotating
what
logo,
newspaper
section
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
18
and
length,
16
25
the
The defendants
THE COURT:
shall
just
No.
TRUMP:
"equal
At the
housing
foot
foot
of
contain
of
the
the
at
opportunity."
ad.
ad.
the
All
right.
foot
of
the
or
66
1
2
THE COURT:
call
it.
It
MR. COHN:
THE COURT:
size--
11
Whats
wrong
about
12
that
the
it
14
you have
to
--
15
just
16
some discretion
17
business
18
their
putting
surveillance.
21
it
that
one
paragraph
If
--
If
time.
--
type
specify
the
in
to
the
put
minimum
advertising?
a bigger
ad in.
wonderful.
I am talking
apartments
to
appear
so
it
is
see
they
least
them
as
in
will
would
it
at
a three-inch
a practical
a three-inch
utilize
demand
that
ad,
matter
ad.
the
space.
they
not
I think
Their
throw
paper.
up to
their
a problem
develops
Let's
how it
see
Fortunately,
good
faith
we can
and
your
resolve
works.
we are
now on page
12,
two.
The second
cruiting
typed
apartment.
apartment
MR. COHN:
22
24
of
I can't
I am leaving
at
Thats
20
something
be included
number
one
economics
19
you
that?
THE COURT:
13
least
with
not
type
type.
Are we to
to
minimum
is
of
opportunity."
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
11
25
housing
THE COURT:
10
23
In at
of properties
8
9
equal
kind
In caps.
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
number
know what
may be a sized
I dont
and
hiring
full
paragraph,
nonwhite
beginning
employees."
"The reThat
the
67
1
defendants
qualifications
effect
of
shall
nonwhite
exacting
respect
to
than
whites
persons
those
before
to
that
the
possess
were
in
institution
action.
We are
to
even
solutely
an employment
the
asking
that
fact
that
on page
though
this
complaint
no questions
civil
rights
11
ing,
because
12
ative
13
without
regard
14
origin,
and will
15
nonwhite
16
tions
or
rental
We don't
rental
decree,
19
second
paragraph
20
see
21
we have
that
it
23
It
adds
24
qualifications
nonwhite
saying
that
which
that
in
adds
12,
anything
to
in
page
It
a requirement
not
applicants
will-
an affirmhire,
or
nationa
and other
professional
this
apartment
qualified
to
arise.
decree,
put
subdivision
not
posi-
in
that
two.
already
We don't
in what
10.
adds
that
quite
a bit,
employment
be raised
for
sex
are
is
we shall
they
that
is
to
blacks
and
not
we are
religion,
place
ab-
is
it
agree
be required
on pa9e
MR. BRACHTL:
22
to
to
we should
agreed
say
color,
for
this
nevertheless
to,
raises
case,
supervisory
feel
action
but
endeavor
in
this
pointing
affirmatively
employment,
to
race,
as vacancies
18
in
program,
persons
17
10 we agree
case,
to
be eliminating,
an antitrust
we do it,
employment
that
about
case
10
25
require
more
with
this
not
jobs;
at
least
that
is,
your
Honor.
requirements
and
with
to
not
respect
be raised
68
1
2
over
the
force
at
3
4
standards
the
and qualifications
time
MR. COHN:
understand
it,
THE COURT:
MR. COHN:
talking
sexes
about
over
11
12
Judge.
13
tions,
14
those
15
1700
16
of
17
people,
18
home,
19
they
20
there,
21
there
22
220 families.
feet,
families
they
take
for
are
to
tell
25
bedroom.
than
second
instance,
We have
us that
That
them.
to
our
that
of
request.
Mr.
the
Trump was
different
two-bedroom
built
second
are
40 per
and
we say
there
--
in
cent
we must
building
cent
bedroom:
the
the
would
We rent
we have
probably
but
they
sold
carefree
are
up to
have
these
their
living
and
no children
in
Wilshire,
whole
Three
blacks,
220 families,
building
two-bedroom,
put
FHA specifica-
buildings.
married,
us,
apartments,
bedroom.
Estates
15 per
children
under
different
move in with
six
to
thing
children
the
children
the
I don't
on 13?
In Jamaica
more
their
agreed
the
and
in a dozen
have
them.
13.
We have
100 square
couples.
in
old.
small
them
is
to
it
it
the
are
to
24
That
TRUMP:
They
23
What is
were
commenced.
it
give
They have
years
MR. F.
give
Page
before,
ten
action
we will
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
MR. COHN:
10
this
We will
but
that
which
and
out
they
two children
160 children
of
want
in each
where
69
our
pattern
7
8
9
--
MR. COHN:
you tell
is
the
TRUMP:
we have.
has
put
same exact
have
as
far
as
where
the
the
most
11
they
eleven
and
12
single
13
it.
14
established
bedroom.
We would
16
should
17
18
rent
to
twenty
could
the
all
colored,
22
MR. F.
want
to
a double
The next
are
that
bed
year
in a
and we have
not
done
we have
to
say
as the
a two-bedroom
vacating
tenant
be forced
Even
I'm
Patio
Gardens,
to
which
sure
TRUMP:
They
say
--
up to
two children
years
of
opposite
sex
to occupy
24
opposite
sex
to
up to
It
ten
is
is
children.
not
THE COURT:
we will
years.
have
23
25
is
they
pattern
a two-
--
we don't
THE COURT:
in
TRUMP:
21
from
in a little
old.
and
same occupancy
F.
get
be changed
two children
sleep
years
our
same patter
We don't
housing
be changing
that
MR.
can
concerned,
sex
twelve
bad
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
19
20
It's
over
have
then
the
family
there.
you could
a girl
If
do it,
follow
are
of opposite
You have
15
to
vacating
in
10
are
like
to
children
family
two children
bedroom
We want
Whatever
bedroom
the
you
Judge?
MR. F.
that
How would
really
of
those
changes.
two children
the
age
--
footnote.
of
of
the
the
70
1
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
We have
already
stated
that
five
is
okay
with
us.
MR. F.
TRUMP:
We don't
want
the
two children
where
there
is
an adult
building
with
a beautiful
lobby
and carpeting
in
the
halls.
MR. COHN:
to word
it
exactly?
7
8
MR. F.
TRUMP:
same occupancy
as the
A two-bedroom
vacating
should
have
the
tenant.
MR. COHN:
10
11
to
use
as
13
16
17
standard
anything
MR. F.
vacating
the
14
15
a leasing
apartment
12
The defendant
18
TRUMP:
easier.
Any higher
in
persons
the
in
MR. F.
24
if
25
children
than
presently
2,
Occupancy,
not
apartment.
TRUMP:
That
is
That's
Maybe they
that
would
more
than
not
more
than
no good.
fine
will
with
want
us.
to
do it
in a
case.
MR. F.
families
two-bedroom
a ,uggestion
a two-bedroom
MR. COHN:
23
census
apartment;
20
22
a vacated
one-bedroom
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
certain
I have
Under
19
21
be required
apartment.
two persons
three
for
not
--
MR. ESKA.NAZI:
make it
shall
or
TRUMP:
150 families,
150 families
in
If
there;
have
we have
six
children
and
200
we certainly
don't
want
one
60 two-bedroom,
they
would
ruin
we don't
the
lobby
want
60
and ruin
71
l
the
building.
They'd
and
ings
they
is
unfair
they
are
it
is
the
phrasing
There
are
restricting
11
were
there
not?
MR. F.
12
13
put
14
you can't
them
in
children
turn
TRUMP:
do this
in
the
corner
the
build-
these
into
adult
four
year-old
years,
Judge,
boy with
will
even
there
with
It
is
to
used
the
unfair
but
bit.
children
unfair
A lot
of
give
MR. F.
think
to
from
be
rentin,
children
where
people
Would you
babies,
I agree
you one
TRUMP:
the
have
Court
law with
a ten-year-old
MR. ESKANAZI:
23
is
a dispute,
me a little
about
local
TRUMP:
THE COURT:
22
It
I don't
violates
MR. F.
over
troubles
is
to
you
say
no other
though.
which
19
there
--
THE COURT:
decree
think
an apartment.
alternative,
17
25
You can
people
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
15
24
around
buildings.
some laws
about
21
from
have
adult
that
laws
20
to
10
18
children
buildings.
16
ten
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
7
8
it
because
--
bring
with
Why say
only.
I would
say
can
respect
sign
to
--
two children
you don't
put
not
a ten-
sister.
everything
you
restrict
to
say
say.
they
it
to
as the
one.
72
1
vacating
tenant
had.
should
not be a restriction
against
you,
this
should
up to.
5
they
will
be
pleased.
7
is nothing
wrong,
is there,
wit
two persons
in a one-bedroom
apartment?
children
if
they
did
to two
come around.
11
on something.
persons
14
ments or is that
that
two
two-bedroom
is
apart-
your maximum?
arrangements:
the maximum.
in two-
bedroom apartments
MR. F. TRUMP: Same occupancy
tenant
23
MR. D. TRUMP: It
rent
as the vacating
had.
THE COURT: Same occupancy
24
25
beyond
21
22
19
20
focusing
apartment.
17
18
in a one-bedroom
Occupancy,
not
15
16
You under
You are
to more than
--
says
to solve
as the
two-bedroom
make it
--
You can't
on the bottom
73
1
2
instead
of ten-year-old,
up doing
it
that
four
your
you can't
bedroom apartment.
son is
pointing
rent
out,
years
old.
this
to more than
is really
four
You can't
persons
stuff
11
in a two-bedroom.
12
that
you
in a two-
five,
six,
seven,
to.
not be required
We want to maintain
as
telling
13
and end
seem to understand,
10
five-year-old
way.
14
make it
two children
the
pattern
in the building.
to two adults.
15
THE COURT: It
16
to rent
17
persons,
18
19
a two-bedroom
including
says
you shall
not be required
apartment
to more than
two adults
four
and includ-
two children.
20
two-bedroom
21
persons.
--
in all
22
23
cept
someone without
24
rather
25
the
than
injunction.
grounds
children
as the
decision
is made on that
impermissible
in a
to acbasis
in your
74
1
rental
decisions.
in the
footnote,
isn't
is
the
ten
years
down
it?
whole
problem
five
I think
the
would be solved.
apartment,
that
says
practices
12
to the
procedures
are
described
10
11
we refer
below,
on defendants'
and
past
past
to people
practice
similar
to the
ones
these
he has had
before.
13
14
a comma after
the
15
including
procedures
16
defendants'
17
based
asterisk
in discovery?
Mr. Trump's
apartments
double
covery,
18
the
past
including
word "discovery"
are
practices,
of favoring
20
two childre
21
in,
but
move out
not that
couple
you put
we are
23
24
persons
25
it
is,
in a two-bedroom
defendants
shall
during
vacating
on
discensus?
in.
If a couple
a couple
with
bound to every
22
two,
based
as described
a policy
another
in footnote
substantially
19
Could we put
with
two children
two-bedroom
a policy
we say,
apartment
follow
their
two
whateve
procedure.
75
1
MR. F. TRUMP:
As far
MR. ESKANAZI:
What he means
THE COURT:
art
in your
Is
that
business,
MR. F.
MR. BRACHTL:
something
TRUMP:
Yes.
It
is
not
10
MR. ESKANAZI:
It
is
11
THE COURT:
12
MR. F.
13
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
THE COURT:
tially
based
15
during
discovery.
MR. F.
16
a term
of
apartment.
~mbiguous,
your
TRUMP:
necessary.
not
necessary.
a two-bedroom
To follow
These
on defendants'
MR. ESKANAZI:
isk
apartment
past
practices.
procedures
past
are
practices
You don't
need
the
substandescribed
opposite
We can
throw
out
the
first
aster-
completely.
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
20
we prefer
to
leave
first
bedroom
practice,
sentence
It
stays.
apartment
and then
As long
as you agree
to
five,
that.
THE COURT:
22
25
is
section.
18
24:
For
TRUMP:
14
23
per
somewhat
is
21
numbers,
that
Census
It
19
the
Honor.
17
is
concerned.
census?
is
occupancy.
4
5
as census
is
just
fixing
The next
defendant
maybe
would
shall
that
it
could
up here.
be for
follow
its
be the
The
a twoexisting
one
foot-
76
1
note,
these
procedures
years,
procedures
--
is
the
that
are
limitation
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
TIIE COURT:
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
of
the
same
one
sex,
Children
asterisk
It
THE COURT:
12
apartment
13
occupancy.
these
past
covery.
years
of
of
age.
Judge?
It
don't
and
TRUMP:
is
bring
think
its
two children
into
the
past
practices
you can
during
to
--
a two-bedroom
then
described
sex,
that
for
and
children
refer
that
they
say
the
to,
is
where
of
disthat
it?
two children
shall
be under
five
point?
There
is
one
slight
Why would
you
say
problem
it
at
all,
superfluous.
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
to
text
you want
opposite
Is
MR. F.
23
25
what
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
tate
sexes.
be consolidated
follow
were
that
involved
21
24
different
says,
all
the
will
practices
Except
20
22
it
an asterisk,
That's
17
19
of
Yes.
Up in
defendant
And then
14
are
be five
note.
11
18
will
-could
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
16
on such
children
Where
10
15
on children
And where
THE COURT:
based
it?
substantially
up is
the
past
The one
that
with
practices
problem
respect
which
to
as described
I hesi-
occupancy,
during
77
1
discovery
were
3
4
described
during
cedure.
That
stuff
more
11
objective
apartment
its
talks
about
was fairly
people
in
You want
shall
to
it
say
adhere
is
for
in
MR. ESKANAZI:
If
your
past
you continue
uniform
to
and
a two-bedroom
a uniform
exceed
manner
the
to
to
vacant
Adhere
to
past
20
MR. COHN:
On page
manner.
So this
practice.
No problem
with
no problem
that.
on our
next
point,
list.
22
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
23
MR. COHN:
Added
At the
tothe
bottom
Trump Village
prohibiting
rent
17-D.
We have
and no waiting
was to
people.
a uniform
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
provision
rent
in
19
we say
to
practice
I said
MR. COHN:
this
not
--
be revised.
25
is
care.
not
THE COURT:
Neaher,
as
shall
24
pro-
--
It
to people,
17-D,
As long
really
18
21
application
desire
a two-bedroom
TRUMP:
occupancy
to
as
practices?
MR. F.
is
practices
uniform.
The Government's
defendant
past
16
17
discovery
THE COURT:
14
15
past
we don't
12
13
about
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
10
uniform.
asterisk
THE COURT:
7
8
all
The second
5
6
at
of
shall
the
use
asterisk.
the
page,
be excepted
of
a waiting
Judge
from
list.
78
1
THE COURT:
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
from
list.
this
Trump Village
provision
Trump Village
prohibiting
MR. D. TRUMP:
5
6
Honor?
It
stand.
You have
now is
seems
in
that
looking
comes
bit
a waiting
11
for
a three-bedroom
12
the
person,
13
to
14
bedroom
apartment
becomes
15
in
by chance
and
16
would
rent
just
has
23
24
25
the
a waiting
the
straight,
your
for
list,
me to
months,
comes
a qualified
four
months
looking
a superintendent
likes
an apartment.
the
theoretically
meets
person,
Finally
available.
under-
saying
so somebody
apartment,
person,
right
a waiting
What we are
apartment,
a three-
Somebody
then
wants
that
walks
person
-We understand
that
Trump Village
list.
MR. D. TRUMP:
I am talking
about
our
other
buildings.
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
21
22
three
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
19
20
for
person
have
17
18
in
knows
the
list.
be excepted
of
difficult
a three-bedroom
tenant
use
this
no waiting
10
what?
shall
the
Can I get
a little
we have
for
shall
throughout
discovery,
served-no
waiting
backs
done,
are
procedure
That
that
list
and
being
therefore
is
it
the
is
procedure
described
a first-come
- first-
maintained,
to maintain
and
no call-
a uniform
79
1
MR. COHN:
THE COURT:
stood
to
from
this
press
release.
signed?
22
23
24
to
yourself
raise
following
that
That
problems
what
shall
we under-
be excepted
correct?
was a nice
Something
We had
half
day's
work,
first
apart
suggested
Have we solved
THE COURT:
right
we fell
on here
is
this?
an original
to
We have
-Is
it
to
be
be signed?
an original
that
needs
changes.
I want
them
to
sign
the
original
now.
MR. COHN:
Can we sign
our
original
right
now,
Judge?
THE COURT:
notes
indicating
original
and
I am satisfied
has
been
said
I want
25
TRUMP:
Do you have
some minor
20
21
is
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
18
19
--
THE COURT:
16
17
We are
Trump Village
MR. COHN:
14
15
want
restrict
Judge.
12
rn
to
practices.
provision
MR. F.
10
11
be your
THE COURT:
8
9
You don't
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
want
here.
4
5
You don't
Mine is
what
is
not
to
fully
be done.
I will
not
sign.
that
the
new inserts
here,
the
then
clients
it
sign
I have
You sign
I will
will
to
marked.
only
sign
conform
become
the
the
when
to what
final.
back
page
on
80
1
2
the
understanding
that
the
changes
discussed.
we've
I will
that
those
sign
changes
MR. COHN:
press
in view
press
is
that
release.
of
that
the
history
release.
don't
13
public
14
and writes
15
given
do anything
information
out
go for
MR. COHN:
say what
press
no
Then we decided
a joint
that.
with
So there
that
They will
we want.
I am sure
Lefrak?
your
releases.
an informational
(Time noted
25
that.
Essentially,
office
19
24
we wanted
we suggested
this,
about
THE COURT:
23
all
when I am satisfied
release,
to
They wouldn't
18
22
with
provision
12
21
a press
of
MS. GOLDSTEIN:
20
carries
only
They objected
11
will
decree
As to
THE COURT:
17
signature
conform.
10
16
the
takes
what
we
We have
simply
release.
say
Honor,
the
a
decree
We have
they
want
and we
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
V.
TRUMPMANAGE:MENT,
INC.,
E.t:1.1t.~
fully
moves this
against
referred
United
States
1.
plaint
MOTIONFOR SUPPLE:MENTAL
RELIEF
rect
of the Civil
that
of its
On June
with
prohibited
by the Fair
it
ordered
to implement
housing
opportunity.
detail
fair
nates
with
(hereinafter
some-
of its
motion,
the
filed
its
housing
similarly
laws,
of the Fair
enter
an Order
VIII,
as might
discriminatory
this
Court
permanently
from engaging
Housing
their
enjoining
the
and directing
entered
an Order,
The defendant
was also
equal
of Trump Manage-
the Order
themselves
by
practices
to promote
themselves
under
to cor-
officers
to acquaint
and to assure
3601
practices.
program
The principal
obligations
42 U.S.C.
in any discriminatory
Act.
com-
Housing
be necessary
enjoining
an affirmative
understood
Act of 1968,
of Title
steps
past
were ordered
Trump's
violations
the Court
10, 1975,
of the parties,
Inc.
relief
States
violations
in privity
ment,
respect-
supplemental
the United
Rights
such affirmative
the effects
consent
Inc.
In support
alleging
from future
2.
an Order granting
15, 1973,
action,
and prayed
to take
herein,
alleges:
VIII
defendant
for
plaintiff
Trump Management,
On October
Title
of America,
to as Trump).
in this
et~.,
it
Court
the defendant
times
Act,
States
that
responsibilities.
.lf.'
Cl~~~
Defendant.
_____________
The United
..
. srRtcrco:J::,cE!
'\...
personally
and in
subordi-
3.
comply fully
fically,
with
they
(a)
this
Made apartments
(b)
tion,
10, 1975.
Speci-
to black
black
of rental
that
with
persons
persons
in the
of a dwelling
(d)
Represented
race
that
respect
indicate
and discrimination
spection
on
a preference,
based
to black
dwellings
limita-
on race;
persons
were not
and rental
to the rental
and
because
available
of
for
in-
were in
so available;
in violation
of paragraphs
1, 2, 3 and 4 of Part
II of this
Order.
4.
plaintiff
In conformity
with
has notified
attention
correct
the violations.
action
discriminatory
conduct
frequency
it
that
enjoyment
5.
action
to prevent
has created
and a substantial
in order
to ensure
rect
effects
the
future
to
in some instances,
it
has not
and racially
has occurred
with
impediment
such
to the
opportunity.
including
extension
additional
noncompliance.
- 2 -
affirmative
of the decree,
nondiscrimination
of past
opportunity
violations,
a substantial
Order,
complainants,
by Trump agents
relief,
Court's
Trump a reasonable
of individual
of equal
Further
IX of this
the needs
adequate
Part
Trump of complaints
accommodated
full
against
Made statements
fact
to
of race;
of dwellings
taken
unavailable
and conditions
account
(c)
Order of June
have failed
of race;
Discriminated
terms
its
Court's
and agents
have
on account
Court's
officers
in the future
is necessary
and to cor-
WHEREFORE,the United
this
Court
that
such period
the injunction
2.
housing
that
such as those
contained
steps
for
that
4.
that
lief
as this
or national
origin;
counsel
victims
to
to rent
Court's
dwell-
prior
a free
without
conduct
Order,
and in-
regard
of discrimination
by unlawful
to
be compen-
on the part
of
prays
for
to continue
to report
to the
States.
such other
and proper,
proceeding,
and further
including
including
rethe costs
reasonable
fees.
David G. Trager
United States Attorney
b.L~~~
Assistant
enjoy-
and
further
and disbursements
full
provisions
to provide
persons
Trump be required
Court
for
be granted
including
all
for
caused
agents;
the
citizens
IV of this
designed
individual
any injury
Trump or its
Court
choice
religion,
3.
be extended
relief
buildings,
in Part
as additional
color,
sated
upon a hearing,
to ensure
to nonwhite
white
formed residential
case
affirmative
opportunity
at predominantly
race,
that,
opportunity;
additional
realistic
as well
in this
ment of equal
ings
prays
order
1.
ensure
States
U. S. Attorney
General
,..
'
20530
Dhi&ion lndicateJ
!ind Refer to Initials and Number
DSD:HLH:mop
DJ 175-52-28
'!978
U.s. trv.
Honorable Edward R. Neaher
United States District
Judge
United States Courthouse
225 Cad.man Plaza East
Brooklyn, New York 11201
/v!,tJ
t,>()
1'.1'J,,;,,..,
,.,,c:.
"
'}
.t,
'
................
..
~/ A copy is attached
D.llJ.Y.
1 1978
- 2 -
By:
,/~.y!Jk,)l;~
/ti/v
L. Handl~y
torney
Housing and Credit
Section
)
)
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529 {EN)
)
)
v.
)
)
PI.AINTIFF'S INTER..ROGATORIES
TO THE DEFENDANTS
_____________
Defendants.
To Counsel
The following
pursuant
,)
interrogatories
are addressed
in writing,
under oath,
Rules of Civil
by the Court.
The United
within
States
five
of service.
Please
state
known or believed
or any of their
information
offic'ers,
with respect
by Donna Goldstein,
the United
2.
States
interrogatory,
by the defendants
to have any
engaged in
representative
to each person
please
identified
provide
to
of each person
misconduct
or by any other
in connection
With respect
to the preceding
information:
Esquire,
to the
be shortened
or employees
to any alleged
of
is applying
for defendants,
agents,
copies
the time to be
by counsel
Procedure
separately
and to serve
for plaintiff
to you
caseo
in response
the following
of
of the alleged
by a representative
of the United
misconduct
States
alleged
by such person;
(b) The time and date
conduct
took place;
of all
persons
about
the incident;
(d) The means and date
tion
dants
was brought
or their
(e) A full
wrongful
the United
to the attention
counsel;
description
conduct
of the defen-
and
of the alleged
by the representative
of
States.
JAMES PORTER
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
..
FRANKE. SCHWELB,Chief
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG,Attorney
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
'
)
)
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION
v.
)
RESPONSEOF UNITED STATES
TO DEFENDANTS'MOTIONOF
JULY 2 6, 1974
_____________
Defendants.
The United
States
own behalf
and on behalf
on its
Goldstein,
to defendants'
judication
of contempt
desist"
order
1.
against
conduct
representative
interviews
in this
2.
improper
The United
including
an ad-
and a "cease
alleges
and
as follows:
or by any other
in connection
Thomas Miranda,
prospective
alleges
with
the
Paul Ziselman,
witness
that
allegations
the testimony
said
or other
of this
That expedited
of prospective
of
and other
witnesses,
constitute
an
Court.
States
discovery
of misconduct
allegations
of threats
and consequently
WHEREFORE
the United
attorney;
seeking
States
States
and scurrilous,
the allegations
Donna F.
case.
1.
States,
by Donna F. Goldstein
to influence
are false
attorney,
attorney
denies
or any other
conduct,
devices
said
of Carol R. Falcone,
responding
of Motion"
the United
of the United
Paula Ziselman,
person
''Notice
States
plaintiff,
of its
against
The United
of improper
of America,
prays
as follows:
by the United
States
to
and its
..
2.
That depositions
supervised
That a full
Honorable
defendants'
Court
Notice
evidentiary
hearing
discovery
be
be held
before
for
in
of Motion;
of misconduct
the evidentiary
by the United
as scandalous,
in accordance
the Federal
Rules
Procedure,
of Civil
and a cease
and desist
order
hearing,
States
be stricken
tempt
said
on August
4. That following
gations
during
by a master;
3.
this
taken
the alle-
and its
with
attorney
Rule 12(f)
of
for con-
respects
denied;
and
5.
Court
cesses
That following
determine
and,
~his
whether
if so,
evidentiary
there
hearing,this
Honorable
of its
disciplinary
proother
or
Order.
The United
relief
as the
the costs
States
interests
further
prays
of justice
and disbursements
of this
for
may require,
together
with
proceeding.
Respectfully
JAMES PORTER
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
such additional
9,N~
submitted,
:JAMESP:TRNER
;e~uty Assistant
Attorney
General
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529 (EN)
______________
AFFIDAVIT
WASHINGTON
)
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA)
ss
FRANKE. SCHWELB,being
1.
Rights
Department
of the above-styled
I make this
contempt
discovery
Court to supervise
and desist
depositions
order
that
charge
States.
an Order be
and designating
of the Civil
of the United
of our request
expedited
and says:
and in supervisory
on behalf
in support
directing
of this
to defendants'
of Justice
litigation
affidavit
herein
an officer
deposes
Division,
entered
duly sworn,
against
with respect
attorneys
in
the United
States.
2.
this
On or about
Court a Notice
one of plaintiff's
contempt
of this
July
of Motion praying
counsel
in this
that
action,
coercion
filed
with
Donna Goldstein,
be adjdged
and threats
in
against
prospective
witnesses,
to cease
Notice
and desist
of Motion
of Carol
former
is purportedly
empioyees,
counsel,
supported
signed
which purports
The papers
call
question
the professional
an attorney
with
acquainted
reputation,
and in relation
that
out foundation
of this
of two
to
on behalf
conduct
in the manner
of defendant
and reputation
of this
of
Section,
to her professional
of improper
and therefore
at
to her
legal
competence.
conduct
constitute
ethics
I am satisfied
against
an abuse
of the processes
Court.
3.
Ms. Goldstein,
expeditiously
the factual
cleared.'
the United
handled
issues
We further
.on August
4.
called
of
Also attached
on the staff
both with
the allegations
statements
a number of events
filed
Donna F. Goldstein,
excellent
employees
by him.
whom I am well
The
described
into
conduct.
former
Ziselman.
to describe
be ordered
by the affidavits
but unsworn
is an affidavit
States
unlawful
and by the
the motion
the United
R. Falcone
defendants,
and that
of the allegations
States
requests
in accordance
may be resolved
ask that
with
that
against
the matter
42 U.S.C.
3614 so that
the evidentiary
be
hearing
reputation
be held
by defendant
to assure
to further
that
no "surprise"
witnesses
- 2 -
be
reputation,
plaintiff
has propounded
inquiring
into
witnesses
to alleged
Adequate
unless
the identity
that
"some" fonner
have acted
improperly,
unless
to answer
defendants
plaintiff
witnesses
3 of the affidavit
we ask that
is alleged
there
this
to
are supposed
within
disclose
of only
the defendants
interrogatories
voluntarily
in advance
the statements
that
in
of Roy Cohn
these
States
be
five
days,
infonnation
to
earlier.
5.
The essential
this
motion
fair
tactics
spective
is that
interference
. each party's
out interruption
of all
be free
and other
the testimony
of the United
on Ms. Goldstein's
is that
part
are false
witnesses,
both on deposition
counsel,
be fully
- 3 -
it
undue influence,
or from their
protected.
un-
States
this
of threats,
issue,
on
of pro-
to resolve
allegations
used threats
to influence
The position
In order
the testimony
of defendants'
Ms. Goldstein
of misconduct
and scurrilous.
at the hearing,
thrust
in an attempt
witnesses.
the allegations
that
of possible
Accordingly,
States.
not be possible
to the United
which suggests
of all
of the United
will
have attached
employees
to be others.
required
the hearing
Paragraph
testimony
by agents
is disclosed
defendants
to defendants
and prospective
the depositions
of the hearing.
states
for
inforrration
time to take
interrogatories
misconduct
preparation
this
brief
is essential
and
or other
and that
witnesses
with-
6.
conduct
of these
an officer
plaintiff
At least
on two separate
as reflected
States
Magistrate,
failing
to carry
covery
reprimanded
out their
and to expedite
effective
for.
here
relating
Accordingly,
the orderly
conduct
application
for
to dis-
the most
of these
by an officerof
request
United
for defendants
deposi-
this
on behalf
No previous
for
At a
Catoggio,
responsibilities
I respectfully
WHEREFORE
that
affidavits.
counsel
of reprisal
to attorneys
Vincent
the action.
means to assure
fear
to
respective
hearing
States
occasions,
Goldweber
in their
by
has expressed
-- once to Elyse
stein,
the orderly
Mr. Miranda
from defendants
tions
depositions
of the Court.
be deposed
means to assure
of the United
herein
Court.
as prayed
the relief
requested.
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, HOU$ing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. c. 20530
Subscribed
and sworn to before me
this
d?.._ day of August, 1974.
titLew..
~~4=<
~OTARYPUBLIC
My commission
expi:res :~
'/ /17?
:J,/
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529 (EN)
)
)
v.
)
)
FRED C. TRUMP,DONALD
TRUMP }
and TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC., }
_____________
)
Defendants.
AFFIDAVIT
WASHINGTON
)
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA)
ss
DONNA
F. GOLDSTEIN,being duly sworn, deposes
and
says:
1.
I am an attorney
the Department
United States
of Justice
accuse me of threatening
improper conduct
this
action.
of Pennsylvania.
to defendants'
Rights
Division
in the above-styled
in the Civil
for the
I am a member of
I make this
in the discharge
of
witnesses
affidavit
papers
which
and of other
of my responsibilities
in
case.
2.
While I interviewed
statements
and
each of these
of Carol R. Falcone
pertinent
or improper
individuals
to this
things
case,
alleged
to
I
in their
statements,
each in a fair
and objective
While a complete
viduals
think
response
way to ascertain
important
allegations,
respond
jail,
or money, or of dating
about these
accusations
at all.
briefly,
nor did I
or with anything
else.
with regard
to her
matters.
In fact,
at least
Ms. Falcone,
information
indi-
and I do so as follows:
of these
to innnediately
to the principal
the facts.
to the statements
interviewed
I made no
Ms. Falcone
that
any
and in fact,
Rights
Division
be tapped.
In fact,
at all
appeared
manner towards
to me friendly
her.
on both sides
times.
{b) I never harassed
called
On the contrary,
tell
the
him that
jail,
tn1less he cooperated
to relate
the truth.
I did not
he would be thrown in
my "ambitions"
or winning my case.
or any other
kind.
the facts
because
and I never
threats
Mr. Miranda,
to me some racially
..
- 2 -
fear
that
Mr. F.red
effect,
discriminatory
housing
practices
in which defendants
answers
to interrogatories
States
have engaged.
filed
Goldweber,
previous
discloses
that
discriminatory
case.
My interview
friendly
counsel
for plaintiff
about
practices
Mr. Ziselman,
of his
him that
the agents
I would try
cancel
unnecessary.
Ziselman,
details
must
with
in accordance
and contact
was one of
I mentioned
that
him, but I
with
as to a rental
him, since
my interview
witness
it was now
with Mr.
for plaintiff
transaction
with Mr.
account.
Accordingly,
for a short
to discuss
he considered
had,
Mr. Ziselman,
interview
Mr. Ziselman
there
Mr. Ziselman
a prospective
which differed
that
I had completed
I interviewed
I telephoned
stated
their
After
who provided
of Justice
Trump employees.
Mr. Ziselman,
to my interview
requested
a request
suggest
Prior
the Department
number of former
matters
to the
seemed to me to be
or intimidate
affidavit
Ziselman
information
I was assigned
told
suit,
on both sides.
them.
in this
provided
before
with
Plaintiff's
time since
with
it
him.
there
- 3 -
He refused
to be harassment.
me
my request
I responded
and
that
I was sorry
he felt
that
way, since
to be harassment.
(d) Mr. Manley's
Mr. Cohn's affidavit
to the records
Trump office
events,
a fact
respect
to this
3.
defendants'
are entirely
be disposed
distort
on Discovery,
In conclusion,
of at the earliest
as to these
The facts
in detail
with
in Appendix
a copy of which is
I wish to state
foundation.
up
hereof.
on my conduct
without
information
are described
leading
incident
papers
the facts
in June 1974.
Report
hereto
omitted
C to plaintiff's
attached
completely
inspection
at the
letter
that
the attacks
and integrity
I hope that
practicable
in
as an attorney
the matter
can
date.
f1-,ct;t;~c,;__
DONNA
F. GOLDSTEIN
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
Sworn to before me this
2nd day of August, 1974.
NOTARY
PUBLIC
.
My commission expires:
()~
j'//f/l
{.../ /
..
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
.)
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529 (EN)
______________
Defendants.
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF NEWYORK
)
)
ss
say that:
1.
I am presently
employed as an examining
2.
Civil
Division,
from September
3o
States
lawsuit,
Department
of Justice,
I,.
at
the
D. C.
to the institution
I interviewed
with
Washington,
4.
located
employed as an attorney
ticipated
of Investigation
I was formerly
Rights
attorney
Action
stage
I parof United
of the above-mentioned
Hall Apartments,
New York.
what,
practices
of this
prospective
Inc.
apartment
that
from a "colored"
me that
every
him to attach
applications
seekers
received
and that
being
from
he was to write
so as to indicate
the application
person.
he did this
had instructed
to all
Inc.
to me that
Inc.
of paper
black
discriminatory
of Trump Management,
sheet
was to determine
knew about
related
woman called
a separate
interview
at
Flushing,
of Trump Management,
Mr. Miranda
Williams&a
as a superintendent
Bowne Street,
Mr. Miranda
on the part
S.
all
41-10
The purpose
if anything,
Inc.
to Trump
considered
Furthermo~e,
Mr. Miranda
time a black
person
was
stated
applied
to
for an
apartment.
Mr. Miranda
6.
that
he was afraid
or words to that
discriminatory
also
that
stated
to me during
this
interview
effect,
because
practices.
he told
me about
He was reluctant
their
to have his
off",
allegedly
name
disclosed.
7.
friendly,
When it
letter
After
this
interview,
I had no further
became necessary
in the form attached
,.
personal
to disclo'se
hereto
- 2 -
contact
his
with
identity,
respects
Mr. Miranda.
I sent
persons
Inc.
in accordance
identical
letter
about
Trump Management,
information
Justice
was sent
Department
(the
practice,
one addressed
Department
records
to Mr. Miranda
and while
only one
to Phyllis
disclose
and fourteen
ELYSES. GOLDWEBER
Subscribed
this
NOTARY
PUBLIC
My commission
expires:
that
an
others.
T.
NOV
11/5/73
l J 33
~~
.,.
! _,. i
,)
'..~,.-._
t~:~~
",roo'~ !. ':'l'
t:c:
U;.1it-:.!
?;J2~:i
.!,,.
! ;:\;:: ;:ir
tlnt
y,yJ r
;'.;-,,~r
th l't,
d.1rinry
t'l-1;:,
fLw ~cn;t'.t,,
I r:::-i,c;f.:~,wit:;-: yo; Zt::011t four
-:::,~;n1ri:y;-:.
1 ,-:cn;u;
,.fit t1 ~ru.-,,
'.::-:,.'n t:, I;, G
., .: q.r~ t::c
in f 1.)r-r:J..:1
t.Lc,: l
}otl ~J111 r:i,-,n~/ ot
r t-~:'",.J~)l:~ r:,1vt-~ _1/;, tJ~ ..~~ :~::1:~.1rt-r.-~:t
t c:,f
JU.f.itic0.
r~.:".:;2ntlj 1 fil~! ..i Zl l,.,.v:~;,tt t i~1 t:1c
,:1t.~ral c~">l!~rt.
ii1 1ro')'i:lT1
all--~:rin<! tl!:lt
Fr:::..t c. :'r:r:,,,
.i':,rv1ld r-1r'.,
.~n:1rc:1~:;.} :,"lnaf,Ht-t;11t,
I:1c.,
.
ti(~1,.-~t,:.1 th.:: Fi:ir
:1cn1s ir1.'J i\~t
ll~{ ,:-;1(;!;!<) .ir10 i ~1 r1.c:l. 1? ~ :i.qcr i:~.in4~t ica@
!iay n,1v.:-;: hroarl a::out t.'!"." co ..:.:::-t :~'.lit a1r,~:1,!y.
la<Jt
In
court
-'!ornrar.y which
?1~vo a rir;:.t
t!1c:'{
suit
li~~
t~iJ,
t~~
c:~.1rfV't'.
t.o fin.?
L:t,.'
w>:-;~,
if
..1.i.~c~~..i ~'-\
~:l-t: ti;1rJ' lir;:,iD.:t t.
~\e;co1.,}.-t.:n ,;,;;f.~n(lan.ts Go r;:;1.::;t,
yo.:r nn.::~G ..,,111
fur:-:is1H.!d ta t.'v:,;;, iri t1c:,:::or,!"\:1C<'? with ::curt
It
r:,:!ly
<ir<~ r;~1:~r,~f<::.-"?
..";:i. th
in9ly,
!1r,V('.?>to
rules
;ir,-:
..
::..f?
t:1-"t
th;,
law',l-.:cr::-: r~pr0:J.:':nti:1g
;:;v1 ~~:".in t.hinrJ is
th~ '";ri.;"'\.>'J
th.1.t 10....:
cc:
Records
Chrono
'Goldweber
~-ne--
Kosack-Hold
Reichard-Hold
t,J
'~
._,..:
t..
L ,
..J<
'/C:.J
'.",
....
' . ... i
.t; :;
f'
,, .c-
It
1.
;-_1.:/
'C.t''JY ;,.1
t,:~t11
; t"1--..t
7 ,1
.:11:t
:l''J~l
l.~'" 1 -t.(,r-c.1r
,._()
:~i
~::1-~:~,
~'l
...
.l
yTd
c:-l;;
it ,
cl'.:> 31..j'i
t.n
a~lvi3':1l
:~l_::)rl
t:1in.r,
to
i:1
,;:'\~ ...l': t
t:~c
~:ol.:
y(J:Jr
():_;
1.
e;
).t('.)l~
t ~l i :::: a
,,,.,i
:-~;l.
1,6,i\~7:.."'::
r'
:.:;
:;t.~t.,
n t (1t:~ ; r~-~.::.~
'/ Ot:! 't:.:::..-:
ti 1;~ I
.~'l...:
.::4;r:r
:;t ..;:~t
.r<)3ti,:~~5:Si()r~
.~.:~it
J..:():t'
/~
t~>1-1t
f ':-~,7
~lti_lo~,(~
;.tsL~i
<~
.-!":/:.1 .so that
"f0~-_1 -~.....
,
rtlff)tl
(; J :-,
7_:(~r- .:.~\r~::r..t
..; t..!'iJ.t tct);:
i~:. ,Jr:: rcc;:111 all
?1~1.C8.
A~:<::1, if
~/O~l ~J.;.-.;;;i.:~~tr) -:;t::-,-; it,
~/(:1J Cttn
llt
lz::a.5t 1:\.1.) ~!:tr-~ t.:nt. ~/O;J lt."\'\f'C: i1rt ..! d ,;.1r\~Ct:
to ro~,2::Ji..~L
,.1v;::rytr-.LH1.
.r.l.:io, if ro:::. :v,::r- :o :.~i,:;1 ~- ~.::atG11:c1nt,
n~\~f: surr:? './01.l r_r::,t to l::".'-::, 0. :;r:,,,-/ f:n 1("'\ur'..;,:,l f.
2tbo,tt.
..
T
f'
yo""J.., l ;'}Tor11~...i
'f./~:~ry::~1r..:;1 ;J.Il~)?"t::(~lrt~-'-J
?oi~r l':ttti(1<r
~~.!
riry'.1t aw:1y,
Plea:Ji:: c:111 ~<' ( :~)1.le:.,~t)
!. (2 1)2)
73)~41J2.
:rf ! .:ire: ,uavai1;,hlE'
,.,,\en you c01ll,
! tiill
l'.\?tur;1
yon,
~ ti(l!l~
call
H s :1c,(..,
~1 ns
:; ~ i ~ ,l .~ r f: i.~ \t<~r..,,,i-:-~to(,.r
t (1r.t
-- ..._
t}n. t }OU :,:
'"i.) infor:,,<': 11 dt:-(sU-!:
t:~i,~.
-~~----
worry
I"in:1lly,
l;:.:t r:'t:'.! r.:::;;'.1c"tt t;;.:it yon :1,1v.:: n!)thin,;
aLrn.1t.
You Jo :iot 11.:::.v.~to tz1lk t,"> .,nyonc or
..
tn
::ii--,;:1
,.,r~.~r
r;t,;t
.,.
;,_,')
u.
j :~ t ..t ~:i;,
,i
t~~
!ir;i;
t:i. r) r ~ l
(:;t.;rt(~
vision
r:i l
.>
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
__________
Defendants.
The United
davit
States
having
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529 (EN)
ORDERTO SHOWCAUSE
applied
ing is scheduled
mine motions
attorneys
and it
before
involving
in this
further
misconduct
which alleged
misconduct
is denied;
discovery
is necessary
so that
this
that
the nature
justifies
judicial
a hear-
by one of the
expedited
in accordance
motion;
that
that
appearing
pending
and it appearing
alleged
action,
Court by affi-
appearing
and appropriate,
determined
this
to this
with 42 U.S.C.
3614; and it
of the respective
supervision
parties'
of depositions
further
allegations
relating
considered
to the
the pertinent
submissions,
reason,
IT IS HEREBYORDEREDthat
there
be,
Brooklyn,
soon thereafter
as counsel
of FRANKE. SCHWELB
defendants
show cause,
if any
may be heard,
why
M.,
or as
(1) defendants
should
answer plaintiff's
to the pending
service
interrogatories
motion within
thereof;
should
supervision
shall
five
with
respect
days of
respect
not be conducted
to this
under
the
of the Court.
IT IS FURTHERORDEREDthat
defendants
with
to
and
not be required
service
upon counsel
be done by
than
no later
, and that
for
this
shall
constitute
service.
IT IS SO ORDEREDthis
day of August,
United
States
District
1974.
Judge
_,,
'
)
)
)
)
)
v.
)
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALD
TRUMP )
)
and TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC.,
MEMORANDUM
OF THE UNITED STATES IN
SUPPORTOF THE ENTRYOF AN ORDER
TO SHOWGAUSE
)
)
)
_____________
Defendants.
On or about
seeking
July
an adjudication
Department
including
order
that
Ms. Goldstein
influence
among other
States
Department
a hearing
Chief
to this
case,
of Motion
In five
threatened
witnesses
on this
affidavits
a response
allege
and sought
in this
matter
that
to
case.
The
supported
and a "cease
things,
has filed
a Notice
Donna F. Goldstein,
States.
of prospective
have requested
The United
assigned
counsel
filed
against
the United
of defense
the testimony
defendants
Division,
attorney
against
has,
defendants
of contempt
of Justice
and desist"
26, 1974,
by affidavits
Civil
of Justice,
of improper
conduct.
Rights
denying
In preparation
each
of the
hearing
on August
depositions
against
16, 1974,
of several
Ms. Goldstein,
as well
have also
to determine
the pertinent
by plaintiff's
has applied
thereof;
vised
Brief
the defendants
incident
of mis-
the United
States
not be required
interrogatories
motion within
by an officer
Court with
five
should
respect
days of service
In this
accusations
against
one of its
counsel,
these
Rules
the
case,
the United
States
on August
do so unless
Procedure
time permitted
and,
vests
the
for responding
They seek
16, 1974.
the depositions
charges
of Civil
defendants
Donna F. Goldstein.
on fo~ hearing
to take
to shorten
Interrogatories.
not be super-
of the Court.
of the Federal
discretion
about
with
to
and
Rule 33(b)
and cannot
for
In addition,
mation
on counsel
of any alleged
should
entitled
Donald Trump.
to the pending
matter
the
been served
attorneys.
answer plaintiff's
,to
has noticed
as of defendant
details
(1) defendants
A.
States
of the affiants
interrogatories
conduct
the United
against
to bring
The United
States
the
is
of several
persons
and to otherwise
prepare
for
their
identities
- 2 -
are disclosed.
the hearing,
..
'Defense
counsel
of the persons
had signed
order
rights
ledge
to prepare
B.
fully
protected,
counsel
have unduly
Plaintiff
contends,
the effect
of plaintiff's
that
influenced
however,
counsel
at least
that
of which he is aware.
3614.
occasions
Magistrate
with
- 3 -
know-
and
be forthcoming.
of
plaintiff's
of prospective
are false
consideration
witnesses.
and have
of the case
The affidavits
of two
testify
time,
is that
the allegations
In
interrogatories
by an Officer
-- Elyse Goldweber
if he should
to advance
cannot
motion
behavior
Ms. Goldstein's
in a short
response
42 U.S.C.
only some
pleading.
Plaintiff's
answered
the expedited
requires.
that
the testimony
from defendants
her.
of defendants'
of preventing
Miranda
against
Should Be Supervised
thrust
defendants'
is entitled
why an immediate
The Depositions
this Court.
that
Goldstein's
and assure
The basic
with
plaintiff
case
indicated
of attorney
submission
is no reason
disclose
for
of the purported
are brief
there
statements
are
affidavit
deponents
expressed
fear
to the discriminatory
Cattogio
discovery
Thomas
of reprisal
practices
--
tactics
sworn testimony
source.
Freeman,
Cir.
witnesses,
Court.
61 F.R.D.
JAMES PORTER
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
side
is imperative
Federal
that
be conducted
Practice
has used
or pressure
should
denied
either
interference
4 Moore's
Coop. v. Iowa-Illinois
cert.
it
the depositions
v. Harris,
38 F.R.D.
1957),
being whether
be given without
of this
1915; Fisher
Elec.
vis-a-vis
Accordingly,
an officer
herein
see also
Co.,
First
their
from any
before
28.02,
p.
Shapiro
v.
Iowa Hydro
General
FRANKE. SCHWELB,Chief
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG,Attorney
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
ll
APPENDIX
A
-x.
,l
Plaintiff,
- against
~rr~~7-~0rl:?\}1DD!1
OF TJ!tr)~:::z:.~~"i'ii'!I)T:
;(~ t~
----------
FRr:D C . Tmn1P;
DOnl\l,D
and '.l'runp Mr;;.nage:nen t,
l,cticn
Civil
-----
73 c 132
No.
'1'RU~1.P
Inc. ,
Defendants.
-x
Plaintiff
which
is
~dvisad
11 to the
appen.d.,~d hereto
plaint.if!
settled
on the
in principl.e
The agreed
uocree
the
forwarded
of
alo11g the
settlenvant
a proposed
Defense
counsel
is
th:'.! decree
the
statt1d
is _b~sc<l on the
counsel
agrees
representation
lines
decree
has
subject
satisf-t,ctory,
Plaintiff
herein.
basis
to d;)fense
A.
counsel
to a
that
c-:u-:c
thhi
i1rirr~i11.
proposed
and attached
consent
hereto,
to
Bubject
following:
(a}
defendants
on tho
Inc.
them as officers,
binds
.J.nd that
it
defendants.
i offices
would
grounds
in decree
hold
by
that
~'1.erefore
La.nguage
Provisions
that
described
solely
to defense
as Attnctunl'..nt
s counsel
modifications
continuance
is
h.:ls forwarded
t.h~.'!i!l
a decree
agents,
without
agaln.st
etc.
oo superfluous
of certain
reqtdring
to be dismissed
Trmnp
mention
of
Tru..,"i'.JpHanageutentr
under
- F
Rule G:>,
~
'a.!'.'\'..o
c
,J.V
. n ,,
I
i
to ret,.1in
provisions
assumption
II
as
them
as nar:c-d
a.mended accordin,;rly.
of responsib:tllty
th~ir
nan.es.
by Fred
(b)
The provision
on pp.
4-5
the
hrvolving
ments
to persons
on public
assistance
shall
Under
the
standards
of Part
IV, of the
proposed
that
incone
footnote
income
shall
applicant,
be included
including
support
public
and wifes
financial
general
with
payments,
as stated.
decree,
sources
alimony,
of any
child
in determining
the
on pp.
prefatory
language
provis.:bms
6-7 involving
wife'.'J
eliminated,
i11 Pc.rt
I of
the
income
and included
as
decree
to be
in
set
forth
(P.
11) to
in
B hereto.
(d)
Procedural
(e)
Equal
be eliminated
history
vision.
Defendants
number
of ads of six
advertisements
in
use
not
lines
presently
(f)
On p.
clarified
On p.
not
be changed
unreasonably
or mor~ or the
language
to include
(g)
or less.
Defendants
because
advertisin
of
substitute
this
l
1
pro-
or change
the
nu_tnber of <lisplay
used.
12,
ad in Spanish-speaking
in advertising
lines
shall
shall
2 to be eliminated.
st~tements
presently
in minority
as to advertisements
one monthly
ad in black
presz
and one
press.
12, cross-section
in minority
advertised
~n page
opportun1ty
policies
media
all
bD considered
provision
injUt"1Ctive
Attachment
be omitted
of apart
of any applicnnt.
Tha
sumrnarizctl,
assistance
incorr.e shall
eligibility
(c)
ind,icating
renting
media
of Trump apart.~cnts
clarified
to include
only
to be
buildings
with vacancies.
(h) On p .. 13,
3-day
period
for
the
Open Housing
Center
to ref
r
!
Open marbat
completed.
referred
by
fair
hous:!.ng
to be dafincd
group.
to mean rental
to anyone
not
Objective
(i)
as to all
all
buildings
persons
and uniform
by defendants
17, inclusion
referred
by present
(k) Provision
list
is
based
option,
a uniform
included
in the
shall
leasing
agents,
reviow
applications
Provision
before
and
plaintiff.
preference
1'.t defendants'
buildings
tenancy,
may be
If no final
credit
to be
of discrimination.
provisions,
only
in the
reference
superintendents,
central
references
of the
standards
that
for
the
.affirmative
entry
office
who
or othen~ise
for
consent
be_en executed
to the Court
rental
are
of Boyd v. Lefral~
now
Second Circuit.
provisions
of the order
opportunity
ha11
for
upon ruling
of Appeals
dis so lying
to be submitted
defendants
process.
victims
and those
niodi'cation
the Court
allowing
employment
explaining
(o) Provision
decree
practices,
prohibiting
at all
to include
agents,
rental
ponding
the defendants
with
practices.
be included
affirmati"Je
for
to appropriate
years
past
them,
procedure
be clarified
subject
three
to determine
tenants.
from alleged
rental
in the
(n)
list
shall
participate
than
qualifications,
decree.
of complaints
to employees
used
of provision
current
waiting
(1) Provision
notified
procedures
17 prohibiting
on p.
on defendants
rental
ahd negotiated
On p.
(j)
including
to be based
to be prepared
for
standards'
objections
by February
upon motion
by the
on the
of the decree!
I
by
plaintiff.
proposed
14, 1975,
the parties!
I
I
i
I
,I
'
shall
so inform
of the
ment
Court
as to
to
the
The parties
the Court.
resolve
any dispute
Decree
and
those
not
final
Consent
If
for
The parties
of this
Court.
as Attachment
Agreed
solely
out
provisions
as
in
to meaning
the asoistanj
of disagree-
ref erred
be contained
a Conmmt
1975 the
exchanged
to
in tho
the
attached
in the
in their
C.
Tru.-up
Althea
Gibson
representative
parties
of
lists
list
The defendants'
the
is
Decree
witness
The plaintiff's
upon this
of January
day
24,
Donald
20t!t
any reason
have
seek
entirety
in
Decree.
by F'ebruary
entered
in aispute
shall
then
change
Jl.11 other
Me.":toran<lumof Understanding
the
arising
Memorandum of Understanding.
Consent
shall
not
shall
agreed
seek
a new trial
witnesses
shall
is
tJ:ie Order
appended
hereto
be as
HP...1\CP
1975.
For
the
i
i.,:ate.
with
in accordance
of witnesses
upon and
Plaintiff
/
Donna Goldstein
Hor.man P. Goldberg
follows:
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
CONSENTORDER
)
)
FRED C. TRUMP, DONALDTRUMP )
)
and Trump Management, Inc.
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________
This
action
was instituted
of America on October
that
and practice
by the United
the defendants
have engaged
making dwellings
U.S.C. 3604(a);
by discriminating
of rental
and color,
of dwellings
in violationaf
42 U.S.C.
with respect
to the rental
preference,
limitation
and color
in violation
dwellings
tion
.....-,.., --..~,..,...,,,.,.._~,.._
-w,- ..,-
and con-
of race
3604(c).
and color
by making statements
which indicate
based
3604(c);
of race
on race
and by
and color
for inspection
were in fact
per-
in the terms
of 42 U.S.C.
of 42 U.S.C.
to black
of 42
of dwellings
on account
and
in violation
because
3604(b);
of the Fair
dwellings
and discrimination
to persons
in a pattern
unavailable
of race
representing
_,......,.,.
....--,
to rent
sons on account
ditions
Plaintiff
in violation
to the Fair
3601 .:.! ~
of discrimination
States
so available,
that
and rental
in viola-
In December 1973,
claim
against
defendants
plaintiff
for
of defamation
or malicious
was dismissed
for
lack
the Complaint
motions
~~-~~ ..
The counterclaim
also
of the subject
filed
motions
counsel
misconduct
the United
filed
held
the evidence
adduced
'::: ........~
,.: :"',;'
.. ......
.... ,:;._..,>:"
was denied
the record,
the Court
no credible
evidence
the United
States
United
States
neglected
opportunity
out their
claim
that
attorneys
essentials,
their
':'t
from
Housing
the result
and that
of the
equal
subordinates
by
housing
numbers of
have failed
the Act.
Complaint,
and
compliance
to substantial
to
Defendants
by their
any discrimination
of the
of
and nondelegable
that
of the individual
was
or agents.
Act to assure
under
there
have failed
affirmative
obligations
of the merits
._.::..j_.
the claim
the defendants
defendants'
at the direction
:\':~,
and stricken
on the part
insubstantial,
defendants
..,.~.;.
.. ..
respects
thereof,
conduct
carry
in support
of improper
with
and that
that
is that
subordinates,
order
finding
its
the Fair
of
explicitly
to exercise
duty under
tive
in all
or any of its
Strippedto
to
the motion
a motion
in contempt
States.
persons
which
statement,
for alleged
their
to dismiss
were denied.
agai~st
in the nature
of jurisdiction
....: "
$100,000,000
On July
court
a counter-
prosecution.
The defendants
matter.
filed
agents
is
defendants.
however,
Irrespecthe
.'
- 2 -
affirmatively
for
assuring
that
entry
their
p::
Sta
employees
equal
~te
will
comply with
opportunity.
prepared
~s
Accordingly,
to resolve
this
case
by
"1sent decree.
of a
INJUNCTION
It
is hereby
the defendants,
cessors,
with
the
Refusing
sale
employees,
concert
permanently
to sell
or rental
of,
any dwelling
religion,
or rent,
suc-
or participation
enjoined
conditions,
or privileges
or in the provision
therewith,
from:
to negotiate
making unavailable
to any person
en account
cf race,
origin.
against
any person
of sale
or rental
of services
because
refusing
or otherwise
sex or national
Discriminating
national
in active
are hereby
2.
tion
agents,
. GENERALINJUNCTIVE PROVISIONS
or denying
color,
officers,
persons
any of them,
1.
for
their
and all
,,-.1;:.-/~~~
.r~'.:. #., .....~
ORDERED,ADJUDGEDANDDECREEDthat
in the terms,
of a dwelling,
or facilities
of race,
color,
in connec-
religion,
sex or
origin.
Making,
3.
printing
be made, printed,
or
advertisement
with
dweliing that
indicates
discrimination
national
limitation
re
based
origin,
or publishing,
. lished,
any preference,
or an intention
to
'statement
or
any notice,
ct to the .sale
on race,
or causing
color,
or rental
of a
limitation,
religion,
or
sex or
or discrimination.
- 3 -
rr~r:
f,'
l
4.
Representing
to any person
because
color,
r2ligion,
s~v or national
origin
is not
available
for
sale
dwelling
is
5.
in fact
on account
national
origin.
6.
the
Coercing,
son in the
exercise
others
7.
purpose
to equal
of the
equal
right
opportunity
or
any per-
to equal
Housing
Act of
of the right
housing
to
opportunity.
or practice
of denying
with,
with
by the Fair
in any act
effect
housing
"
or enjoyment
to secure
of any
sex or
or interfere
protected
Engaging
choice
religion,
or enjoyment
exercise
or the
when such
or interfering
threaten
opportunity
assist
color.
threatening,
to coerce,
or in the
any d~ellin~
or rental
residential
of race,
attempting
..:,;;.~.,,..
1968,
that
so available.
Influencing
person
housing
inspection,
of race,
which has
or abridging
protected
the
by the
the
right
Fair
Hous-
ing Act.
II
RENT.A_LTO PERSOXS RECEIVE;G
The great
in the
Consequently,
wise
the
qualified
racially
in the
business
person
majority
of persons
are
blanket
p2rsons
black
exclusion
necessity
receiving
exists
public
-l-.~--~---:--:-- --..
"'-"".
-~ :i .~"'
excluding
assistance
4 -
and is
of business
for
assistance
Rican
ancestry.
from tenancy
public
effect,
of a showing
on public
or of Puerto
rec2iving
discriminatory
absence
PUBLIC ASSISTP~CE
of other-
assistance
legally
has a
impermissible
necessity.
No
from residence
who, through
any
guarantor
or otherwise,
ihe rent
stand3rds
forth
set
Affidavits
their
counsel~
statements,
th2 other
filed
in thi3
and press
to rent
which reluctance
past
public
assistance
right
of the
now, however,
the
rent
to persons
able
to all applicants
with
enjoined
standards
being
or rental
or having
assistance,
such per~on
~ith
re3pect
The parties
of Appeals
recognize
for
Rptr.
(E.D.
13,650
housin~
there
- 5 -
in active
or more
15,
on
of public
against
any
oppottunicies.
is pending
before
defendant's
Clark,
No. 71-1433,
N.Y. April
officers,
to any person
of Mr. Justice
Organization,
rental~
different
discriminating
that
are
any of them,
those
~o
to be
for
been a recipient
to his
they
their
them or with
from applying
of sale
opportunity
which are
and all
or participation
appeal
if
and successors,
concert
the Court
assistance
defendants,
employees
receiving
of the defendants
is ORDEREDthat
agents,
of his
of such communi-
housing
requirements
applied
assistance,
by persons
policy
public
of
to the public
to equal
stated
receiving
nondiscriminatorily
account
public
effect
exercise
and
out-of~court
on the part
The predictable
the
are permanently
nonracial
of certain
it
to pay
by defendants
receiving
stringent
action
reluctance
to persons
the media.
Accordingly,
objective
reports
cation
.J~ is
capacity
herein.
disclose
defendants
through
1974).
retired
in
P.H.E.O.H.
That case
involves
importa:-i.t
private
1andlor~
assistance.
issues
regarding
.o rent
r,;n~
to persons
party
~2ith~r
a party
to the
3- d litigation,
Boyd is
likely
r.o affect
to this
issue.
O~DE1ED th2t
appropriate
further
the
receiving
of
public
to the present
the
ultimate
actioh
law with
Accordingly,
the
agree,
r party
may apply
modification
developments
parties
of this
in the
to this
Order
is
decision
controlling
2ith
the
obligation
in
respect
and it
Court
in the
is
for
light
of
litigation.
Boyd
WIFE'S INCOME
1974, 42 U.S.C.
In August,
prohibit
discrimination
as that
P~ior
based
by New York
in housing
on race,
to that
income
equally
mining
whether
the
pay the
rent
on sex,
in violation
the
which preceded
the
partially.
to this
officers,
has
course
August,
it
in deter-
capacity
discrimination
to
based
3604.
in this
indicated
1
,..,.::.:2
s incc:::e
t:..,
action,
capacity
whether
to eliminate
employees.and
a lack
it
Housof cer-
,;,;ras cc:..1.ate:d in
to pay the
r2nt,
was counted
any doubt
is ORDEREDthat
- 6 -
..
husband
financial
defendants
at all,
In order
agents,
the
origin.
to consider
of her
.~ t
was prohibited
of depositions
an applicant's
question,
that
unlawful
individual
if it was counted
or national
refusal
of 42 U.S.C.
th,::r
determining
with
family
the
on sex as well
sex discrimination
constitutes
During
based
reli~ion
A landlord's
wife's
ing Act,
color,
amendment,
law.
with
defendants,
successors,
and,
fully
or
respect
their
and all
those
in active
of them,
are
to give
wife
.\
concert
full
or participation
with
permanently
enjoined
and 2qual
consideration
in d2teroining
the
rente.l
them or with
from failing
any
or refusing
to th2 iuccme
qualifications
of a
of a married
:~
- ~,.::
couple
or the
capacity
of that
couple
units
therefore
tunities.
The individual
can,
own agents
The Fair
Housing
in its
and elsewhere,
a major
in the
impact
influence
Act prohibits
as well
The individual
defendants
not
and
only
'
of many others.
which
is
of motivation,
of information,
community
but also
oppor-
occupy
the activities
conduct
regardl2ss
on housing
estate
of
and its
therefore
real
and employees
effect,
many thousands
defendants
example,
of their
tions
have
of. leadership
by their
tory
activities
position
,., '-t,
in the
controls
discrimina-
and viola-
from thoughtlessness
as from deliberate
and lack
discrimination.
... J
the
responsibility
agents
area
to assure
and employees
mote equal
housing
A.
They are
and to take
Defendants
it
they
have both
nondiscrimination
opportunity
Accordingly,
..., 1
that
,and a significant
and elsewhere.
responsibility
recognize
opportunity
generally
prepared
advantage
by their
to pro-
of t~at
out
that
opportunity.
is ORDEREDas follows:
Fred
Trump
'
shall
forthwith
- 7 .-
......~~if"f*
ifJ!,f"
-..-'!-..,.,_.~-
- ..-,-~
...~. ..........-,~-..
(1)
thoroughly
acquaint
on a detailed
basis
the Fair
1968,
as amended;
under
state
civil
rights
laws;
and under
(2)
this
to assure
and officers
themselves
with
are
shall
principal
familiarize
and
to assure
forth
conduct
employees
information
herein
that
the
is success-
applications
of this
and complete
with rental
with
to the public
an edu-
or employprospective
about
for rentals,
rental,
or who
their
obligations;
or process
engaged
set
shall
ment responsibilities,
or accept
agenc~es;
for all
provide
and
out.
the defendants
tenants,
of Housing
similarly
their
program
thirty
program
Regulations
appropriate
that
undertake
carried
Within
pertinent
and other
assistants
fully
and municipal
Order;
Take steps
training
Housing Act of
of the Department
(3)._Personally
cational
under
personally
of the obligntions
under
Urban Development
Decree,
with all
and Guidelines
B.
themselves
of this
~ousing
Decree,
Act of 1968.
to
and their
Such program
include:
(1)
Furnishing
a letter
summar?~ing
the terms
of this
Housing Act as it
the employee.
- 8 -
and employee
Decree
applies
to
(2)
Informing
person
or
visions
and employee,
seeting,
by ~ener2l
of the pro-
of this
Decree
and of duties
of the
agents
and employees
under
'
the various
applicable
his
disobedience
(c)
Securing
such agent
tioned
shall
subject
disciplinary
for
a signed
the provisions
and to sanctions
order.
statement
he has read
warding
be advised
him to dismissal
action,
of this
that
described
shall
to comply with
Decree
or other
Housing Acts.
and employee
fai\ure
of this
Fair
from each
the letter
men-
the instructions
in the preceding
paragraph
and for-
'
statement
to plaintiff.
Each new agent
accordance
and employee
with
the procedures
to sign
a statement
been so instructed
and will
required
within
ten
(10)
ment.
Copies
to plaintiff
set
signed
be instructed
to the effect
comply with
days following
of all
shall
be
he has
such instructions
the initial
statements
that
in
will
date
of employ-
be furnished
upon exec~tion.
III
AFFIRMATIVE
PROGRAM
It
~/
forthwith
is
take
further
the
ORDEREDthat
following
steps
the defendants
to adopt
shall
and implement
~/ The defendants'
obligations
to implement each provision
of this Order for affirmative
action shall begin ten (10)
days following
the entry of this Order, unless otherwise
s p 0. c i f i c d h -~n: in
- 9 -
an affirmative
the
program
F2ir' Housing
effects
Act of 1968,
of any previous
compliance
and at overconing
cf i~pairing
with
the
s by the defendants
~ct
or effect
Housing
rights
which
secured
by
Act:
Notification
to the Community of Defendants'
Nondiscriminatory
Policy
Notify
1.
Metropolitan
the
Area,
plaintiff
dants
aimed at ensuring
that
apartments
to race,
Included
to all
color,
rental
standards
below,
and a general
religion,
of an appropriate
shall
buildings
to agree
c.
II
Subsequently,
zations,
defendants
of vacancies
described
This mailing
shall
2.
approved
shall
Post
by the
i~fr~
weekly
Secretary
Central
IV of this
in Part
fair
of groups.)
and maintain
on the text
mailing.
on identities
II
IV,
and anticipated
agree
to its
b.
of the
shall
prior
defen-
origin.
in Part
of present
for
without
synopsis
outlined
The parties
letter
persons
be a full
statement
(Parties
a.
to counsel
sex or national
and procedures
Area.
copies
qualified
in Trump apartment
Metropolitan
with
in such letter
vacancies
groups
in writing,
are available
regard
following
housing
of the Department
- 10 -
"'
,,...
,t, . - ..,, ..
list
~igns
Listing
decree.
is made.
in a form
of Housing
k/
and Urban De; .~.::ipm2nt (F .. J)
dants
where
3.
forming
natory
-re
The defendants
Include,
telephone
other
media,
:~,-
~..
..-~
.-
'
,-
brochures,
literature
the words
and the
logo
-. .. '"""""'
._.:,'"''..,
..-
r
'f
fair
shall
"Equal
practices
advertising
guidelines,
Allocate
advertising
all
advertising
agents
shall
recommended
of Housing
{b)
Opportuni-
and
Department
"B" to this
Housing
placed
Company or its
guidelines
promotional
be prominently
by the
of these
signs,
words
placed
6700-02,
and
These
In addition,
pp.
television,
logo.
legible.
form to the
in newspapers,
and other
housing
~/
ir,-
nondiscrimi-
billboards,
easily
Reg.,
ai:::ed at
shall
radio,
and on all
defen-
contact.
advertising,
directories,
and the
in all
pamphlets,
ties"
or public
co::i.r:iunTty of defendants'
policy.
(a)
of the
2:1,
nom:hit-2
rental
offices
re~- ?l activity
is
I::-..}.(:::;:ent
the
in all
con-
in the
as published
on April
is
1, 1972.
attached
A copy
as Appendix
Order.
a reasonable
budget
proportion
to advertising
of their
in media
37 FR 33429 (a copy
**/
.. ~,
...
directed
Rican
primarily
to the
co~.munities.
that
t~o rac
black
and Puerto
The parties
hly
display
have agreed
advertis0~2nts
in
::_I
the black
with
or Puerto
allocation
advertising
Spanish
budget
language
tisements
stations,
this
provision.
advertise
a full
give
to buildings
emphasis
Provide
association,
organization
as referral
written
engaged
by defendants
apartm2nt
qualified
persons
sex or national
advise
the
recipient
and procedures
!/
origin.
for
stress
with
or
sub-
""
or other
firm,
person
or
company that
def2ndants
are
regard
to race,
without
adver~
to each
locating
or management
All
not
notification
corporation,
company,
the
occupany.
company,
agency,
~eet
!!;.I
minority
and
cross-section
and shall
undue
radio
in minority
of Trump buildings,
stantial
checking
shall
of Trump buildings
shall
together
to black-oriented
".C
4.
press,
of 10% of defendants'
requirements'of
media
Rican
apartments
available
to all
color,
credit
objective
religion,
shall
also
standards
rental.
The parties
agree that
tisements
in the Amsterdam
satisfy
this requirement.
the placement
of such adverNews and El Diario will
**/
If the listed
apartments
do not include
all Trump
buildings,
the buildings
listed
shall be rotated
with
each ad so that the same apartment
buildings
are not
continuously
advertised
under this subsection.
.'
- 12 -
-:
~.
.
I : .'.
'
B.
Prograr:1 of Providing
Apart~ent
Seekers
Listings
for :rinoritY:
er the
.until'further
notify
150 Fifth
fifth
tenancy
days prior
During
this
After
three
Center
ment,
to placing
that
apartment
day period
the
days ii
to race,
normal
to place
and profe
qualified
employees
religion,
blacks
ion~l
apartment.
applic2nt
referred
to be
custom without
origin.
Program
recruit,
sex or national
positions
by the
the apart-
sex or national
and agents
and other
to rent
shall
to the
the
business
E~olovm2nt
shall
applicants
seeking
religion,
The defendants
three
of renting
no qualified
color,
at least
qualified
may be placed
regard
Affirmative
percent,
an application
in defendants'
build-
to refer
purpose
of
which has a
:;I
three
or
10003,
in each apartment
ten
rented
color,
New York,
than
the apartment
and transfer
shall
has filed
C.
defen~ants
New York,
of less
for
O~dcr,
apartment
Court,
Center
Avenue,
available
of this
League,
every
Order
of this
nonwhite
hire,
assign,
promote
without
regard
to race,
and will
endeavor
origin
persons
as vacancies
iJr
in
supervisory
arise.
!/
The requirements
of this provision
need not be followed
for apartment
buildings
which pre:.scntly have or in the
future reach a black occupancy rate of 10%. For these
apartment
buildings,
apartments
shall continue to be rented
without regard to race, color,
religion,
sex or national
origin.
- 13 -
'
Pursuant
1.
newspaper
Place
that
program,
the defendants
acvertise8ents
prfr:arily
on a regular
serves
the black
shall
basis
in a
cornmunity de-
!!_/
the available
scribing
2.
able
'
to this
jobs
3.
Prominently
the
Display
4.
..
employment
clearly
Part
(c) of this
sex or national
employment
shall
for
poster
agents,
in each office
employment
each labor
reg~rd
'!!I
opportunity
to prospective
and that
without
of avail-
Employer."
are
of
taken.
work fore~
Decree
of the terms
prospective
to race,
of
employees
color,
religion,
employees,
the
origin.
In recruiting
tions
for
of defendants'
to be referred
defendants
visible
in writing,
part
are
an equal
where applications
Notify
advertising
Opportunity
and applicants
b2rs are
III
in all
"Equal
place
the defendants
J... :,
include
slogan
in a prominent
employees,
work opportunities.
not
and hiring
require
with
nonwhite
that
they
possess
more exacting
respect
to white
qualifica-
than
those
employees
before
the
institution
of this
2ction.
IV
In order
assignment
to assure
oE tenants
nondiscriminatory
and to assure
equal
select:bn
and
opportunity
in
:!::!:.IThis poster
.... . ... :r
\.
&
housing
at each building
or any of them,
the
follo~ing
A.
defendants
standards
shall
and implement
procedures:
-and
Incooe
One week's
at least
equal
. . , ~- (2)
gross
current
salary
to cne month's
'!:_/
sources must be
from all
rent
Occupancy
(Deftndants
to make a proposal
based
on their
standards.)
**I
B.
Procedures
1.
Application
a.
Anplications
the apartment
applying
for
Procedure
for
building
tenancy
an apartment.
fendants
applications,
requirements
42
accepted
of this
3601 et
from all
intendent
acceptability
Order
--
u.s.c.
or agent
be received
Applications
or rental
to accept
will
by Superintendents
1968,
adopt
Standards
(1)
persons
shall
agents
shall
wishing
to apply
make no subjective
of a prospective
by the de-
and instructed
Applications
is
be received
authorized
:=:ea.
tenant
at
in the
Housing Act of
shall
be
and the
judgment
tenant.
superon the
past
prac-
- 15.:
,_,.T
,_
'.
b.
The iuperint~ndent
the application
security
for
agents
substitute
shall
tion,
corr.pletQness
of on2 ~~nt~'s
d2po;it
r~asonable
for
or rental
then
review
submit
and shall
rent
th2refor)
agent
the deposit,
to make a determination
described
A11 hereto
Applications
of acc2pcaoility
for
informed
tenancy.
Hall,
Central
Providing
Seekers
a.
Defendants
at 2611 l{2st
Avenue,
Hall,
York area,
or available
vacant
as
be conducted
with
and a determina-
shall
for
Rental
shall
be informed
within
five
rejection,
maintain
Brooklyn,
at their
central
and Lawrence
on a weekly
expected
Gardens,
basis,
apartment
specific
to Aoartment
New York,
or available
be
to meet.
Brooklyn,
Gardens
shall
and of the
Information
2nd Street,
Patio
Managers
main offices.
check
be reviewed
each curren~_v
on the accept-
2.
Edgerton
shall
If rejected,
standard
2064 Cropsey
shall
days whether
of the r2ason
objective
offices
Each applicant
(5) business
cepted
shall
in the defendants'
e.
agent
employed
or rental
and employment
11
to each applicant
d.
tion
credit
in Appendix
respect
The
of an applicant.
A uniform
c.
applicants.
(o=
No superintendent
for
and a ~2 fo~n
ability
revi2w
require
from all
and determination
shall
of
in the New
to be vacant
the next
thirty
This
days.
the
list,
the
and shall
be shor.m to all
apartments.
each of their
vacant
and date
wqich are
agent
also
about
maintain
at
of the apartments
available
for rental
list
interested
of the
Jnquirers
qualifications
d2posit
inquiring
list
availability
be shown to all
c.
nvail-
of
building.
Apartments
authorized
shall
similar
on the apartment
shall
of apartment,
persons
Defendants
buildings~
at that
b.
listed
type
r2nt,
available
.. .,.
include
. ability
.;
shall
(2(a)
inquiriers
and
above)
by an
defendants.
shall
be uniformly
for rental,
including
informed
of the
the income,
security
d.
defendants'
offices
be on a first-come,
are available
for
list
will
be maintained
or apartment
buildings.
first-served
basis
at any of
Rental
will
when apartments
rental.
V
REPORTINGREQUIREHEi'.1TS
It
the
entry
per year
serve
is
further.ORDERED
of this
Decree,
the defendants
on counsel
the following
tor
information
owned and/or
buildings
1.
Arovlc
2.
Westminster
3.
Fountainbleu
/:;;).;
that
three
and thereafter
shall
file
pi2i~tiff
for
months
(3)
three
(3)
with
the Court
a r
ort
the following
after
times
and
cont2inin;
apartment
Hall
Hall
Apartments
- 17 -
r---
4.
Lawrence
Gard2ns
5.
Sea L;le
art:n.=~ts
60
Beachhaven
;.partm2nts
7.
Shorehaven
Apartments
8.
Belcrest
9.
Highlander
Apartments
Hall
10.
Saxony Hall
11.
Clyde Hall
12.
Edgerton
13.
Winston
14.
.Sussex
15.
Oakdale
Apartments
Hall
Hall
Aoartments
(Norfolk,
a.
Virginia)
in person
about
the availability
apartment
during
the preceding
number by race,
!/
!I
by race,
or terms
reporting
making inquiry
of rental
period
of an
and the
that:
1.
made inquiry;
2.
were offered
3.
an application;
As visually
observable.
- 18
'
. -F---'l
'
.. t'1
,..
!.
4.
submitted
::>.
~2~2
accept~~
6.
were
rejected;
7.
withdrew
8.
had
. .1
b.
submitted
the
an applicant
ior
applications;
pending
reporting
period.
A report
reflecting
following
deposit;
accupa~cy;
applications
during
with
the
the
preceding
information
at
the
of
applications
reporting
for
end
each
the
for
period,
person
tenancy
including
submitted
an ap-
plication:
1.
_name,
address,
number,
and
2.
cot2
application;
3.
whether
4.
date
5.
weekly
of
notified
-~~,
~
For
of
sought;
6.
if
accepted,
apartm2nt
7.
if
rejected,
reason
8.
name
each
if
p~rson
rejection;
and monthly
rent
chosen;
persons
the
accepted
nonwhite
or
therefor;
or
reject
neither
rejected
received;
applicant
apartment
9.
...-.'
was
of
or
hqrne telephone
of acceptance
income
of
and
race;
a deposit
accept
. .J
business
who decided
to
application;
nor
rejected,
applicant,
the
of
the
reason(s)
during
the
status
report
shall
....
include
tion
a detailed
and
c.
quarter,
supporting
A list
including
statement
for
rejec-
information.
of vacancies
the
date
the
apa::~ent
preceding
Ln
was placed
- 19 -
I
J_,,,
__.,_,._.
_________
-...
_:__
~----..
.,..........,
......
,, :"
..... ~.'tf -
'
~' .
'
. - -- f"'T7
~
:_I
the
market
oci2rKise
and the
Reports
also
include
the
race
of tenants
the
program
1.
Copies
2.
of all
and III
checking
of this
advertisement
matn office
entry
to implement
above,
companies,
including:
Fair
pursuant
to
Decree.
of all
since
the
was placed,
race,
newspaper
entry_ of this
in which
and the
position
rental
agent,
e~ployee
of this
educational
this
st2ps
date
advertisement.
The name,
ments
of the
to apartment
unions
copi2s
placed
ment of each
the
sent
to the
m,med or
period
of each
3.
letters
shall
resp2ct
I 2nd II
and labor
advertisements
the
reporting
R2pr2s2ntative
Order,
with
and an account
in Sections
groups,
II
or
Order
apartr:-,:.:1t building
and credit
Ho~~ing
to this
statistics
preceding
outlined
Parts
pursuant
defendants,
locators
.4 1
fi~ed
current
the
was r~nted
rental.
in each
managed by the
during
each apartment
fer
cc~~itt2d
d.
'taken
date
obtained
Decreeo
superintendent
and
as of the
an assurance
required
in accordance
If
assign-
employed
Ord2r,
program
and office
any r~ntal
by Part
with
agent
date
that
of
the
I has
Part
refuses
I of
to
..
"!;_/ Includin:-:;
Center
ability
where appropriate,
was contacted
conc~rning
in accordance
with Part
- 20 -
sign
such a statement
includ2
a full
the defendanLS
st3t~=~nt
circumstances
all
of
in relation
shall
rtiacnt
taken
by them
thereto.
VI
RECORDKEEPING
PROVISIONS
IT IS FURTHERORDEREDthat
'
three
years
preserve
following
the
the
following
entry
the defendant
of this
records
for all
shall
Decree,
for
make and
apartment
buildings
1.
The name,
address,
of each person
th2 availability
::.I
the
size
telephone
or terms
of apartment
inquiring
of an apartment
ofrental
sought,
in person
if known, and
whether:
2.
inquiry
he was offered
B.
he filled
C.
he submitted
A detailed
and application
3.
defendants
of
A.
such steps
out an application;
an applicati:m
record
of all
with
action
A detailed
record
in ascertaining
applicant
an application;
of all
the
taken
for
steps
deposit.
on each
such action
taken
acceptability
by the
for
tenancy
or who approved
or rejected
the application.
- 21 -
" .. ,
i-,_.. -r-r,,ptt,
'''""1.;-,_:~,..r~-_,~.,..
-,+-,-,,.~--""""""""""
t
4.
any of
under
All
records
the information
this
er.
be permitted
the source
pertinent
to defendants'
Re?~ese~t3tives
to inspect
the defendants.at
however,
which are
that
inconvenience
of
to the defendants
or contain
obligations
pla
the
pertinent
reasonable
shall
of,
ti~es,
endeavor
tiffs
11
records
of
provided,
to minimize
any
of
such recordso
VII
It
three
is further
years
shall,
at least
to counsel
1.
residential
for
twenty
of this
for a period
Decree,
days prior
(20)
extending
the defendants
to the
event,
report
the plaintiff:
2.
ownership
ORDEREDthat
or management interests
acquired
The divestment
or management
by the
through
interests
in
defenda~ts.
transfer
or sale,
in residential
of any
property.
VIII
Each party
for
all
shall
bear
its
The Court
shall
retain
purposes
until
the
ORDEREDTHIS
own costs.
jurisdiction
termination
day of
of this
of this
Order.
, 1975.
EDI.JARD2-~r:.~.~.:Z
United States District
The undersigned
consent to the
Order:
action
Judge
..f
~-_,1,__,-,f------"".".
~-
~--'
..........
_,....,"'""'~':"-::0---
. !
'
I..
'!Ii' ..
i
I
INJUNCT~ON
I
!
!
It
their
is
officers,
active
7.
see
Engaging
protected
shall
not,
any person,
fully
support
count
and all
any of them,
appended
or practice
or abridging
Fair
defendantp,
persons
are
family,
a woman's
or other
total
or other
right
Act.
the
has
in
hereby
group
purpose
or the
to equal
housing
opportunity!
connection,
qualification
of persons,
income,
A.
the
In this
income
income
as Attachment
which
the
Housing
in determining
payments
with
Decree,
in any act
by the
successors,
the
from:
Proposed
of denying
effect
employees,
or participation
enjoined
the
agents,
concert
permanently
1-6
hereby
including
from whatever
for
fail
salary,
source
defendants
rental
of
or refuse
to
wages,
received.
alimony,!
II
I
I
I
I
!
1,;-!
~Ii
Ii
...
IN THE UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURTFOR
THE EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK
UNITED STATESOF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
Vo
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PIAINTIFF'S PROPOSED
LIST OF WITtmsszs
submits
the following
names of persons
expected
to be called
include
called
it
to rebut
include
as witnesses.
testimony
may be called
as adverse
This list
wit~esscs
by defendants'
any of defendants'
who are
officers
cloes not
who may be
witnesses
nor does
or managing agents
who
witnesseso
Best
Kalman Biczo
Saul Blate
Mae Brown
Maxine Brown
of that
agency to
if necessary,
certain
Bush
BarbarA Campbell,~
New
another
press
reporter
conference
announced
million
present
or
at the
at which defend2..nts'
the filing
of a $100
counterclaimo
James Chestnut
Solomon Cohen, an agent
of the Division
Rights,
other
State
agent
record:,
of NewYork, or some
of that
authenticate,
agency to
if necessary,certain
Peter Connan
Terrence
Cox
David DeReinzus
Henrietta
Davis
Jack Fogler
Edwardo Galdnmes
.Annette
Gandy
Monique Golden
Elyse Goldweber
Adolpho Gomez (testified
Allan
by deposition)
Gross
Charles
Robert
Hall
Echmrd Harris
l!
Lorraine
of Human
Haynes
''
Betty
Roeber
Alfred
Godfrey
and Sheil~
Hoyt
J0.cobs
Pritthinelln
Johnson
Kirschenbaum
employee to verify
certain
(if
authe~ticity
p~ges of classified
defendants
to authenticity
unwilling
of
advertisements
to stipulate
of reproduction
of
those pages)
Carl Nickelson
Dorothy
Orr
Salzman
Ruth S2.rver
Scott
Silberberg
Spiro
Ralph Stein
James Gordon White
Respectfully
submitted,
FMNK E.
SCir.'1ELB
NORl!Al: P. GOLDI3E:-:.G
Dm-:?:AGOLDSTED!
j
.1
l1
Attorneys,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Dc-p1..1,.
...-'"-~1
...
,....r. Js
...~ cc
t....h4~1.
'-'
U
Washington, Do C. 20530
\.,JJ..
'
L,..J,..
CERTIFICATEOF SERVICE
!hereby
of the foregoing
were served
certify
that
Plaiatiff's
on counsel
on January
Proposed
for defendants
, 1975, copies
List
of Witnesses
by hand:
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Departm~nt of Justice
Washington, Do Co 20530
"
APPENDIXB
IN THE UNITEDSTATESDISTRICT COURTFOR THE
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEWYORK
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 73 C 1529
)
)
)
>
'
)
v.
TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC.,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
_________
This
,
.I
America
of 1968,
action
on October
42 U.S.C.
defendant
was instituted
15, 1973,
pursuant
alleges
and practice
making dwellings
of
Housing
that
Act
the
of discrimination
Housing
and by otherwise
States
to the Fair
Plaintiff
in a pattern
cf the Fair
dwellings
by the United
3601 .!:;! ~
has engaged
in violation
PROPOSEDCONSENT
ORDER
unavailable
to rent
to black
persons
on account
3604(a);
dwellings
ation
and color,
by discriminating
of dwellings
3604(b);
of race
because
by making
which
based
and by representing
of race
statements
indicate
on race
in the
terms
and color
with
a preference,
and color
to persons
dwellings
dwellings
were in fact
in violation
and conditions
in violation
respect
on account
so available,
inspection
of rental
of 42 U.S.C.
to the rental
limitation
in violation
for
of 42 U.S.C.
and discrimin-
of 42 U.S.C.
of race
3604(c);
and color
and rental
in violation
of
that
when such
of 42 U.S.C.
I
i
3604(d).
Stripped
to its
States
is that
failad
and neglected
essentials,
the defendant
the claim
and its
of the United
principal
officers
have
to exercise
delegable
duty under
the Fair
by certain
of their
subordinates,
housing
that
opportunity
certain
out their
under
these
that
incidents
of discrimination
residing
in Trump apartment
affirmatively
and will
United
that
promote
States
of a consent
their
employees
equal
opportunity.
is prepared
that
in most. ~rump
claim
that
insubstantial,
period
only a few
of fourteen
number of blacks
- 2 -
presently
of the
officers
of
to resolve
decree.
years
Irrespective
the principal
Inc.,
of
Moreover,
has alleged
.however,
Trump Management,
assuring
is
and
to carry
contends
Defendants
buildings.
defendant
for
equal
re~iding
corporation.
are a significant
of the complaint,
Plaintiff
presently
over.a
there
'
have failed
agents
plaintiff
and that
merits
that
of the d_efendant
contends
compliance
to a number of persons
the Act.
by their
defendant
the result
allegations.
any discrimination
the principals
with
number of blacks
supports
and non-
Act to assure
.subordinates
of defendant's
the insubstantial
affirmative
Housing
obligations
buildings
their
comply with
Accordingly,
this
case
the Act
the
by the entry
INJUNCTION
It is hereby
ORDERED,ADJUDGED
ANDDECREEDthat
the
,.
defendant.,
persons
its
officers,
in active
are hereby
agents,
concert
permanently
employees,
or participation
enjoined
successors
and all
from:
GENERALINJUNCTIVEPROVISIONS
Refusing
1.
the sale
or rental
any dwelling
of,
Discriminating
conditions,
or privileges
because
of services
of race,
3.
color,
Making,
made, printed,
color,
of race,
against
any person
of sale
or rental
religion,
l
i1
religion,
printing,
fact
or denying
religion,.
sex or national
any notice,
Representing
origin
sale
therewith,
to be
or advertisethat
or discrimination
origin,
based
or an intention
or discrimination.
to any person
sex or national
or causing
of a dwelling
sex or national
or in
origin.
statement
or rental
limitation,
religion,
in the terms,
that
or rental
because
of race,
any dwelling
color,
is not avail-
is in
so available.
1.
5.
for
of a dwelling,
or _publishing,
to the sale
color,
in connection
4.
to negotiate
making unavailable
or facilities
any preference,
on race,
refusing
on account
or published,
or rent,
origin.
2.
the provision
or otherwise
to any person
sex or national
to sell
account
Influencing
of race,
the residential
color,
religion,
choice
of any person
sex or national
origin.
- 3 -
--w!'.~
"""'*-4-4kl!"O"Ac,..,
___
,.,._!'IIIPlllll!!,-..----~4+1'!lf:.?(,...A
,...,
'~'?'"l'!'l!!.f*'!"13!2"!":i'""'"---.-.:,Wffiutfi1Ji;
01 11<>1 ZMll%$;4ibiSM4,+?lf'l'N
,. 0
\,1111'--..
MW'.lfii!il,P,
on
6.
attempting
Coercing,
threatening,
to coerce,
threaten
, in the exercise
opp~r.tunity
protected
the exercise
secure
or enjoyment
or enjoyment
Engaging
or the effect
or interfere
with,
or
of the right
by the Fair
equal housing
7.
or interfering
to equal housing
of the right
to assist
others
to
opportunity.
in any act or practice
of denying
opportunity
protected
connection,
defendants
or a.bridging
by the Fair
shall
the right
to equal housing
Housing Act.
no~
In this
in determining
,,,.
for rental
other
group of persons,
fail
total
income,
salary,
including
ments or other
of any person,
or refuse to fully
wages,
count
alimony,
source
family,
support
or
a woman's
pay
received.
II
ASSUMPTION
OF RESPONSIBILITYBY
PRINCIPALSOF TRUMPMANAGEMENT
INC. , ANDTRAININGPROGRAM
FOR
AGENTSANDEMPLOYEES
Trump Management Inc.,
units
therefore
occupies
in its
ma~y thousands
and elsewhere,
company therefore
estate
controls
own agents
a-position
by its
effect,
regardless
example,
conduct
influence
but also
The
in the real
the activities
of many others.
which is discriminatory
of motivation,
from thoughtlessness
activities
opportunities.
of leadership
and employees
and its
of rental
and violations
and lack
of the
of information,
as
- 4 -
I
I
f~~
h :-\c@i_lD,.:.~+;:;a!4
4~
i&#,414
fl..,.
f/-41iW,
Al#
A~:i*':"
'*"'!- 4
t _;t;acww
nc44
t
I
well
as from deliberate
discrimination.
of Trump Management,
to assure
responsibility
employees
generally
are prepared
of that
A.
opportunity
out that
ti
it
housing
and elsewhere.
They
and to take
is ORDEREDas follows:
officers
of Trump Management,
acquaint
with
the defendant
under
the Fair
all
civil
Regulations
appropriate
assistants
and officers
themselves
with their
(3) Personally
training
carried
B.
program
laws;
under
of the
similarly
obligations;
undertake
set
under
forth
this
their
Order;
principal
familiarize
and
to assure
herein
and
that
the
is successfully
out.
Within
the Defendant
rights
to assure
of
agencies;
personally
of the obligations
and Guidelines
of Housing
Inc.,
forthwith
themselves
basis
other
and
equal
responsibility
on a detailed
pertinent
agents
to promote
Department
its
thirty
principal
- 5 -
r-----.._.------~~I
by their
the
opportunity.
The principal
state
officers
nondiscrimination
(1) thoroughly
that
to carry
Accordingly,
presently
recognize
and a significant
opportunity
advantage
Inc.,
The principal
shall
of this
conduct
and
Decree,
complete
an educational
tenants,
provide
or accept
are engaged
employees
or process
with rental
with pro-
to the public
applications
about
for rentals,
of this
Decree,
and their
or who
to inform
duties
under
the Fair
a letter
shall
summarizing
of the Fair
Such program
the terms
Housing Act as it
include:
and employee
of this
applies
Decree
and
to the
employee.
(2} Informing
in person
of this
or by general
and employee,
meeting,
of the provisions
its
agents
and employees
applicable
Fair
under
the various
Housing Acts.
and employee
shall
to comply with
shall
subject
plinary
action,
of this
Order.
the provisions
preceding
a signed
failure
Decree
or other
disci-
for disobedience
statement
the letter
the instructions
paragr?ph
his
of this
and to sanctions
he has read
and received
that
him to dismissal
(3} Securing
agent that
be advised
described
and forwardirig
above
in the
a copy of each
to plaintiff.
- 6 -
,i )C.nt,t,,A
i 4
4W
4PM4i
JQMCS
UCl(i.
0: _SUSA,
.... ;;;
a 4,
ti>\.
Zl.J#,,#iifDAiAPf.i,Pf!W4f.!
.J$0S
so instruc.ted
a statement
and will
signed
to the effect
that
date
will
be
he has been
such instructions
the initial
statements
in
comply with
set
be instructed
within
of employment.
be furnished
to plaintiff
upon execution.
III
AFFIRMATIVEPROGRAM
It is further
take
the following
ORDEREDthat
steps
compliance
rights
,i
secured
A.
with
the effects
the Fair
or effect
Housing Act:
forthwith~/
an affirmative
Housing Act
of any previous
shall
actions
of impairing
Notification
to the Community of Defendantis
Nondiscrimint:ory
Policy
1.
politan
that
the defendant
Notify
Area,
in writing,
apartments
to all
the following
qualified
in Part
synopsis
persons
to counsel
without
regard
to race,
for plaintiff
are available
color,
reli-
origin.
Included
in such letter
shall
of the rental
standards
and procedures
outlined
IV, below,
anticipated
with copies
groups
and a general
vacancies
statement
in Trump apartment
York Metropolitan
area.
The parties
of an appropriate
letter
prior
to its
of present
buildings
shall
agree
be
and
in the New
on the tex~
mailing.
*/
!!!!Qt-!lll"!"!f0'!!'"~
"!"'.""''""'' -~ _...., .... -
.-----
... ~-...,...,...,..,..,.,...,.,_.,...,,...,
_____
,_!!E_O_www_.,..,
""'!JI!"!'.""'."".
---
"P,"J,
11'11!'4A-4&iiif_..
.....t""_C_il""!f
J!l!fl,i""'h""i
'l"l"OLU--------"""''*~'w;
__
__,,o..,..t4""'1'1,
-
a.
'
(Parties
to agree
b.
If
c.
II
'
Subsequently,
defendant
shall
infra
in Part
approved
Post
by the Secretary
is rental
Implement
3.
the nonwhite
policy.
Central
decree.
fair
papers,
and other
Include,
signs
of the Department
offices
or public
in a form
of Housing
and
of the defendant
program
where
at informing
nondiscriminatory
rental
shall
in all
advertising,.:.:~:/
telephone
directories,
radio,
media,
and on all
billboards,
pamphlets,
brochures,
literature
shall
contact.
community of defendant's
a.
of vacancies
This mailing
housing
an advertising
The defendant
Listing
is made.
(HUD)~/ in all
activity
of groups).
IV of this
and maintain
Urban Development
there
weekly
on identities
housing
and other
logo.
*}
in newstelevision,
signs,
promotional
Housing
Opportunities"
logo
33429 (a copy
shall
be prominently
In addition,
all
Company or its
practices
Housing
lines,
agents
by the
conform
to the
in the Department
in 37 Fed.
Reg.,
1, 1972.
attached
communittes.
reasonably
a reasonable
together
prominent
with
ments
a full
Provide
company,
of its
in media
and Puerto
display
shall
All
in minority
that
press,~/
and
advertisements
of
advettise
with
undue emphasis
vacancies,
to buildings
occupancy.~/
notification
to act
two
Rican
media shall
or give
corporation,
Rican
advertisements,
of Trump buildings
written
by defendant
Order.
to black-oriented
minority
is
of 10% of defendant's
stations,
not stre~s
substantial
In radio
opportunities"
budget
cross-section
and shall
with
monthly
provision.
Trump buildings
guidelines
have agreed
the allocation
language
of this
pp. 6700-02,
advertising
Spanish
4.
to advertising
The parties
guide-
proportion
to the black
radio
A copy of these
primarily
of
advertising
on April
budget
legible.!/
placed
directed
*I
shall
recommended
advertising
engaged
and easily
advertising
(b) Allocate
tion,
placed
or other
as referral
and television
advertising,
shall be used and shall
to each firm,
person
associa-
or organization
agency,
apartment
housing
***/
If the listed
apartments
with vacancies,
the buildi.ngs
ad so that the same apartment
disproportionately
advertised
- 9 -
in
locating
service,
company that
to all
color,
religion,
cation
shall
B.
also
qualified
advise
origin.
Listings
after
Order of this
without
of defendant's
the entry
Court,
of this
Order,
or until
shall
notify
the Open
defendant
of every fifth
in each apartment
owned and/or
building
tenancy
days prior
,...in2t;;;,,
uu..a..
""
Center
shall
After three
Center
of less
to placing
thi~
'-
...
the apartment
an application
Avenue,
apartment
that
apartment
to refer
may be placed
available
._._
of renting
days if no qualified
has filed
150 Fifth
+-hr''"'"'-day .,.....,.,..;
0~
t"''-'
........
to the defendant
objective
for Minority
three
to race,
at least
regard
for rental.
Program of Providing
Apartment Seekers
persons
the recipient
and procedures
Housing Center
company, or management
sex or national
further
checking
apartments
are available
standards
credit
applicant
seeking
'
on the
t-b.o
Uonsina
.... JI,._. nnen
...,,.t"" ..
..... o
qualified
applicants
the apartment.
referred
to rent
by the
the apartment,
to be rented
in
"
defendant's
color,
J,
I
!
!
j
j
normal business
religion,
custom without
sex or national
regard
to race,
origin.
10 -
The defendant
shall
employees
and agents
transfer
r~lig~on,
blacks
recruit,
sex or national
and other
fessional
positions
without
origin
nonwhite
hire,
assign,
regard
and will
persons
to race,
endeavor
color,
to place
supervisory
in
as vacancies
promote and
and pro-
atise.+/
Pursuant
to this
the following
1.
papers
describing
2.
jobs
advertisements
primarily
serve
the available
Prominently
the slogan
3.
the defendant
shall
take
steps:
Place
that
program,
on a regular
the black
and Spanish
in newsconnnunity
work opportunities.~/
include
in all
"Equal Opportunity
Display
basis
an equal
advertising
of available
Employer."
employment opportunity
poster~/
..
in a prominent
employees,
place
clearly
and applicants
the defendant
visible
to prospective
agents,
where applications
of
!I
References
to employees and agents in Part III C of this
Decree shall include only those persons who are presently
employed as or seek to be superintendents,
rental
agents,
leasing agents, or central
office personnel who receive,
review
or approve applications
for tenancy or otherwise participate
in the rental' process.
I
l
I
l
4.
any part
. of this
without
Notify
in writing,
of defendant's
work force
prospective
regard
color,
to race,
In recruiting
dant shall
hired
each labor
possess
exacting
before
employees
are to be referred
employees,
persons
recruited
or
more
with respect
of this
origin.
the defen-
the institution
III(C)
sex or national
nonwhite
nonwhite
qualifications
than those
employees
that
religion,
and hiring
not require
union representing
to white
action.
IV
IMPLEMENTATION
OF OBJECTIVERENTAL
STANDARDS
ANDPROCEDURES
In order.to
assignment
housing
Inc.,
of tenants
defendant
shall
be applied
to an applicant
A.
selection
equal
and
opportunity
in
and procedures.
shall
nondiscriminatory
and to assure
at each building
standards
that
assure
the following
in determining
and procedures
whether
or not to rent
are as follows:
Standards
1.
Income
One week's
at l~ast
equal
2.
gross
salary
to one month's
from all
sources!_/
must be
rent.
Occupancy
l.
(Defendants
to make a proposal
based on their
current
standards.
!,/
- 12 -
.......
-.--_,,_,
.,_,
...
ri
.......
,,
~---
...
'
Other Objective
3.
Within
defe~dant
rental,
fifteen
shall
Standards
propose
to plaintiff
and uniform
procedures
qualifies
for rental,
applicant
including
mining
credit
stringent
and procedures
shall
Procedures
Application
a.
Applications
building
an apartment.
or rental
cations,
for
with plaintiff
and submitted
tenancy
will
of this
be received
authorized
Order.
shall
on the acceptability
from all
or agent
for
by Superintendents
by the defendant
be accepted
at the
is applying
be received
to accept
in the requirements
for deter-
These standards
.Applications
for
Procedure
and instructed
of the Fair
practices.
(30)
Applications
agents
procedures
an
'!:_/
1.
apartment
whether
for
past
thirty
Decree,
standards
arid standards
be negotiated
all
than defendant's
objective
for determining
credit
worthiness,
of this
of this
appli-
Order and
3601 et~
persons
shall
wishing
to
make no subjective
of a prospective
tenant.
"
b.
The superintendent
application
for completeness
of one month's
therefor)
'!/
rent
from all
These procedures
as described
during
or rental
and shall
agent
shall
require
a security
The agents
review
the
deposit
substitute
shall
past
then submit
practices,
- 13 -
r,,
the deposit,
mination
for review
superintendent
or rental
make a determination
agent
and deter-
shall
No
on the acceptability
to
for tenancy
of an
applicant.
Applications
c.
of acceptability
shall
in the defendant's
days whether
tenancy.
If rejected,
shall
Rental
a.
Defendant
shall
available
be informed
objective
Information
(5)
for
of the
standard
maintain
to Apartment
at their
Brooklyn,
central
on a weekly basis,
apartment
offices
be compiled
five
to meet.
Providing
Seekers
Patio
within
shall
2.
Avenue, Brooklyn,
be informed
the applicant
Hall,
Managers employed
for rejection,
and a determination
main offfces.
business
be reviewed
Each applicant
d.
reason
shall
Hall,
a Central
of each currently
Edgerton
Listing,
vacant
to
or
"
expected
to be vacant
the next
thirty
apartment,
of availability
and shall
about available
apartments.
j
l
at that
buildings
This list,
each of its
1
days.
or available
shall
include
be shown to all
Defendant
a similar
list
persons
shall
also
the type of
and the date
inquiring
maintain
of the apartments
at
vacant
building.
- 14 -
{
I
?;
I
'I
.,
\
Apartments
b.
on the apartment
to all
availability
interested
list
inquirers
for rental
(2(a)
above)
by an authorized
and listed
shall
agent
be shown
of the
defendant.
Inquirers
c.
fications
shall
for rental,
be uniformly
including
informed
the income,
of the quali-
security
deposit
No waiting
defendant's
offices
any preference
Rental
will
list*/
will
or apartment
for persons
buildings
referred
be on a first-come,
be maintained
at any of the
nor shall
by present
first-served
there
be
tenants.
basis
when apart-
for rental.
V
REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
It is further
entry
of this
for three
serve
years
I
l
the defendant
three
shall
file
(3) times
per year
a report
the
containing
apartment
the
buildings
1.
Argyle Hall
2.
Westminster
3.
Fontainebleau
4.
5.
Sea Isle
6.
Beachaven Apartments
~/ Since this
discriminatory,
three
and thereafter
information
owned and/or
1
i
Decree,
on counsel
'following
ORDEREDthat
Hall
Apartments
Apartments
is defendant's
present practice
and it is nonplaintiff
interposes
no objection
thereto.
- 15 -
7.
Shorehaven
8.
Belcrest
9.
Highlander
Apartments
Apartments
Hall
10.
Saxony Hall
11.
Clyde Hall
12 .. Edgerton
Apartments
13.
Winston Hall
14.
Sussex Hall
15.
Oakdale Apartments
Oceanaire Apartments
(Norfolk, Virginia)
a.
person
about
thea,ailability
during
the preceding
race,!:.! making
by
of terms of rental
reporting
period
inquiry
in
of an apartment
that:
1.
made inquiry;
2.
were offered
3.
filled
4.
submitted
5.
were accepted
6.
were rejected;
7.
withdrew
8.
had applications
b.
mitted
'
!.7
out an application;
an applicant
applications;
pending
period.
A report
reflecting
the preceding
information
As visually
with deposit;
for occupancy;
reporting
during
following
'
an applica~ion;
the applications
reporting
observable
.. l6 -
""--..
.........
~.,
~.,,.,
....-
period,
submitted
for tenancy
including
the
an application:
sub-
1.
name, address,
number,
business
and race;
2.
date
of application;
3.
whether
4.
date notified
5.
a deposit
was received;
of acceptance
sought;
6.
if accepted,
apartment
7.
if rejected,
reason
8.
name of person
9.
statement
supporting
information.
c.
including
the date
nor rejected,
applicant,
to
status
the report
of the reason(s)
of vacancies
A list
who decided
of application.
nonwhite
a detailed
therefor;
the application;
accepted
or disposition
rent
chosen;
or persons
or reject
if neither
and monthly
of apartment
accept
or rejection;
during
the apartment
each apartment
include
for rejection
and
the preceding
quarter,
was placed
was rented
shall
on the market*/
or otherwise
committed
for rental.
d.
i
J
!
filed
include
the current
tenants
in each apartment
defendant,
Reports
ceding
statistics
and an account
reporting
pursuant
period
Order
with respect
building
shall
also
to the race
of
of the steps
to implement
taken
during
the pre-
Sections
I and II above,
to this
in
including:
- 17 -
i
1
t ,,
1.
Copies
of all
and credit
letters
checking
and labor
sent
companies,
unions
pursuant
Representative
copies
to apartment
locators
Fair
groups,
Housing
to Parts
II and III
of this
Decree.
2.
ments placed
since
the entry
of each newspaper
placed,
3.
in ~hich
of each rental
by Part
of all
signed
with
refuses
shall
Part
that
in relation
was
assignment
the educational
obtained
Decree.
program
and copies
If any rental
statement
of this
in accordance
such a statement
a full
circumstances
and office
to sign
the name
the advertisement
as of the date
I of this
advertise-
Order,
superintendent
statements
include
of this
position
an assurance
required
newspaper
of each advertisement.
agent,
employee. employed
Order,
of all
agent
the defendants
of all
pertinent
taken
by them
thereto.
VI
.. RECORDKEEPING PROVISIONS
IT IS FURTHERORDEREDthat
years
following
following
the entry
records
for
of this
all
apartment
the defendant
Decree,
shall
for
three
buildings
owned or managed
by them:
1.
time of contact
telephone
of each person
inquiring
about
and
the
- 18 -
,...,
'
...
-"~
- . .-~.
---
~~"'-----~~---.,,,.
the
,..,....~..,.._.-tflP""""----~--~>"----~"'"''"""-"''<'_.,-
~-,"-"<-~-"--------,-.-
avai~aoi~icy
the size
cerms or rencaL
or
of apartment
2.
A.
he was offered
B.
he filled
c.
he submitted
A detailed
and application
3.
dant
out an application;
an application
of all
record
with deposit.
action
taken
on each inquiry
of all
steps
the acceptability
taken
by the defen-
for tenancy
of the
or who approved
4.
or rejected
All records
of the information
mitted
an application;
A detailed
cnerein,_:,
record
in ascertaining
applicant
this
sought,
an aparcmenc
or
Order.
the application.
pertinent
to defendant's
Representatives
to.inspect
pertinent
reasonable
times,
the plaintiff
shall
endeavor
the defendant
or contain
obligations
of the plaintiff
'
of,
shall
records
under
be per-
of the defen-
provided,
to minimize
any
however,
that
any inconvenience
to
of such records.
VII
It is further
years
least
twenty
ORDEREDthat
of this
for a period
Decree,
extending
the defendant
to the event,
three
shall,
report
at
to counsel
residential
2.
ownership
property,
or management interests
acquired
The divestment
by the defendant.
through
or management interests
building
in
transfer
or sale,
in residential
of any
property.
by maintaining
a guest
owned by the defendants.
register
- 19 -
I
t~-,-
~
"'
......................
~ ..
VIII
It is further
after
the entry
counsel
ORDEREDth~t
of this
for plaintiff,
whatever
source,
opportunity
in writi~g,
received
in housing
Trump Management,
for a period
of all
Inc.
shall
advise
regarding
owned and/or
In addition,
years
complaints,~/
by the defendant
at properties
of three
from
equal
managed by
plaintiff
shall,
of this
Decree,
for a
',
period
the defendant
of all
the entry
complaints
received
Decree,
fifteen
an explanation
If the complaint
plaintiff
shall
to correct
.afford
tuate
alleged
is determined
the defendants
appropriate
leading
judicial
plaintiff
by either
with
party,
to be necessary
to the complaint,
and shall
seven
actions
is
in the complaint.
discriminatory
additional
the defendant
it believes
an additional
steps
the effectiveness
and provide
to be valid
there
of such a complaint
contained
before
afford
the complaint
the conditions
the complaint
shall
of the information
that
threatening
of this
received
the plaintiff
by the plaintiff.
determines
notify
effects
applying
with this
leading
to
of the
to the court
Decree,
or any
relief.
'!/
By consent
this
Decree
of the parties,
is binding
with
the understanding
on the defendant
corporation's
that
principal
,'\
officers,
of ,the affirmative
assumption
in consideration
of responsibility
in Part
by Fred C. Trump
II hereinJit
is FURTHER
individual
capacities
as party
.defendants
dismissed
to this
action.
X
Each party
The Court
all
shall
shall
bear
its
retain
own costs.
jurisdiction
of this
action
for
purposes.
ORDEREDthis
day of
, 1975.
EDWARDNEAHER
United States District
Judge
The undersigned
apply for and
, consent to the entry of this
Order:
-l
'
j ....------
t
,
r~"'~
\,
-n
..
u:HTED
APPENDIX ('
PlnilltifC
)
)
)
)
)
v.
:
/...
;
/.
FRED C. TiWt-1P,
n:1i:,1r
no~\ ,i\Lfl
OIUH:R
)
)
)
Defen<lants.
cm~S!:\T
)
)
CIVIL
_______
_______)
,.
Th i s a c t j on ,.,-:i s i n s t l t u l c d h y th c Un i t c d S t a t es o f
on October
Amcric1
of 1968,
42 U.S.C.
have
e duty
by their
tunity
has been
'
Housing
A..::.t
1s that
their
exercise
tlousing
the
assure
to
that
equal
numbers
to suhstantial
have
affirrr;::itivc
Act
result
thC' defc:Hlan;:,s
failed
:rnJ non-
coDplinncc
oppor-
housing
of per5ons
to carry
out
and t!H:
~bligatic
their
the
that
vigorously
number
deny said
allegations
if any,
of violations,
are
and clai~
insubstantial,
~inutc
'
and
. '.
States
fair
subordinates
Defendants
/
to
with
denied
Fair
seq.
United
the
subordinates,
defendant's
;,
under
to the
pursuant
--'
and neglected
failed
delegab]
ct
-
3601
of the
The claim
I ,
1973,
15,
11
dc minimis"
was not
',;
the
and that
done at
officers
the
if
there
direction
of the
of Trump Management,
Accordingly,
without
individual
it
defendants
or
Inc.
adjudication
the merits
of
and with,'
out
any admission
and in order
as to tl1c existence
to resolve
litigation,
including
the
hereto
entry
parties
of a Consent
It
.!
this
a long,
are
"
I cdmination
as
'
. ,;t,i
protracted
consuming
this
forth
and Agreed
''.',
of a violation
set
further
and ti~e
to tesolve
understood
l !L';',~)
by it
costly
prepared
is expressly
ii
admission
without
of liability,
case
by the
in the
1:1CI1 t,
it~.:.
1::.; lll
of the prohibition
Fair
the exccuti0~
that
against
Ilo11~.ing Act of
1968,
dis
OY'
I' any
II
trial,
Decree.
I!
matter
or absence
tJ1ey assert
II
!I
chetnqcd bdnds
in
J.4 yo::irs
establishes
t.1-iis.)
I~.C
!I
II
'
It
Complaint
missed
ORDERED,ADJUDGEDAND DECREEDthat
is hereby
against
Fred
them in their
against
personal
the
J. Trump is dis
capacity.
II
is
It
their
officers,
in active
hereby
for
ORDEREDthat
further
agents,
concert
color,
enjoined
1.
Refusing
sale
or rental
or denying
2.
conditions
of,
therewith,
refusing
or otheiwise
making
sex or national
Discriminating
provision
persons
arc
of sale
unavailable
on account
of race,
or rental
color,
1n the
any pcr~pn
terms,
of a dwelling,
or facilities
of race,
to negotiate
origin.
agaihst
of services
because
any of them,
or rent,
to any person
or privileges
and all
successors,
with
Inc.
from:
sell
to
any dwelling
religion,
in the
employees,
or particjpation
permanently
the
Trump Management,
or
in connection
religion,
sex or national
origin.
Making,
3.
be made,
printed
that
indicates
based
not
available
is
5.
on account
l!
to the
for
in fact
or
sale
u n al
inspection,
sale
Pr :
1 T!
or
or discrimination
origin,
limitation
to any person
to
of a dwelling
or rental
sex or national
preference,
11,.t 1
statement
limitation,
religion,
Representing
dwelling
I,
color,
to make such
4.
coJoi:,
respect
or causing
any notice,
any preference,
on race,
intention
or publishin~,
or published,
with
advertisement
printing
or discrimination.
because
t f1 :1 t
or rental
or an
of race,
:: !lV
when such
so available.
InfluenC"ing
of r::icc 1 color,
the
residential
religion,
choice
of any person
sex or n'ntional
origih.
. ...... , .
,.
,,
6.
attempting
in the
Coercing,
the
exercise
secure
housini;
or the
housing
In this
J_n any
effect
opportunity
connection,
group
a woman's
alimony,
support
Act of
or
person
housing
1968,
to assist
or practice
act
in
or
others
to
which
has
the
the
right
to
or abridging
protected
clefcnd2nt
for
of persons,
account
any
to equal
right
right
of denying
income .qualifications
other
with
i!ousing
of the
with,
opportuPity.
Engaging
7.
interfering
interfere
or
Fair
the
by
or
of the
or enjoyment
or enjoyment
equal
purpose
threaten
protcctc<l
exercise
equal
coerce,
to
opportunity
thrcatc,dng,
total
sh::ill
rental
fail
not,
Fair
Housing
or refuse
take
salary,
income
the
family
to fully
including
or other
Act.
in determining
of any person,
income,
payments
by the
or
into
wages,
from whatever
source
1~ece i ved.
III
units
in the
therefore
in the
"
estate
the
employees
hibits
a major
defendants
real
fluence
1,. -;
have
individual
but
thoug~tlessness
deliberate
and elsewhere,
and its
therefore
occupy
not
only
is
in its
The
of leadership
example,
own agents
The Fair
discriminatory
activities
a position
of their
of rental
opportunities.
by their
and can,
of many others.
which
1:1,)ti',i;cfj_01
many thousands
on housing
community
also
controls
impact
activities
conduct
o{
Inc.
in-
and
Housing
Act pro-
effect,
regard-
Il
'
'
1 ,
and lack
of information,
as well
as from
discriminati.on.
Accordingly,
A.
The
it
officers
is ORDERED as
follows:
sh:111
forthwith:
Il
fC:,\
,,,,
,
r,Jf>l'.~.-t,',L,
,,
. ..;;.,..,., .
thorouehly
(l)
a detailed
the
basis
Fair
state
llousing
Housing
(2)
of their
all
Act of 196S,
civil
steps
this
and officers
themselves
with
set
forth
B.
Within
the
dcfP-ndant
program
for
all
bility,
sha11
employees
for
employment
Decree,
Such program
letter
the
about
shall
(2)
person
Fair
Housing
shall
the
the
responsiprovide
or process
in any manner
Fair
provisions
of
Housing
Act of
and employee
of this
applies
under
Acts.
Decree
to the
of thjs
his
Decree
failure
o r o t h c r d i s c i p 1 i nary
employee;
in
of the provisions
the various
shall
and of
and employee,
be :i<lvise<l that
d i s mi s s :d
an educational
or accept
engaged
terms
Act as it
and employees
provisions
of this
tJnants,
them of the
under
or by general
Housing
out.
entry
.1
agents
program
or e~ployrnent
informing
training
include:
summarizing
Fair
principal
carried
rental,
to inform
furnish
(1)
the
prospective
duties
appropriate
and complete
or who are
process,
of
and
of the
days
rental
with
rentals,
and thci~
that
conduct
with
pertinent
familiarize
obligations;
(:rn)
to the public
applications
their
is successfully
thirty
Decree,
information
that
to ~ssure
herein
under
under
and other
similarly
their
undertake
laws;
under
Order;
to assure
assistants
on
obligations
of the Department
Development
and under
personally
as amended;
rights
and Guidelines
take
(3)
1968.
with
an<l Urbin
agencies;
this
themselves
and mu,1icipa]
Regulations
the
acquaint
of
'l ,..~ , i
.~ J
.4,
,. ....
<"
~
applicable
and employee
to comply with
sub-jcct
him to
a c t hrn , a n <l to
in
:I
I
sanct.ior:s
(3)
1.Li.sobcdicncc
for
.securing
and received
preceding
the
accordance
statement
required
with
the
to sign
so instructed
from each
such
mentioned
above
in the
dcscribccl
a copy of each
to plaintiff.
procedures
out
to the
with
comply
the
he instructed
shall
set
a statement
ten
Order;
forwarding
and
and employee
and will
letter
instructions
paragr:1ph
this
statement
a signed
age11t that
signed
of
above
effect
such
initial
in
and shall
that
be
he has been
instructions
within
of employment.
date
IV
AFFIRMATIVEPROGRAM
It
forthwith
take
affirmative
Fair
further
is
the
following
program
Housing
A.
aimed
the
steps
at
where
activity
is
rental
z.
the
April
Housing
"Equal
with
an
the
in all
sh a 11 con form
Department
of Housing
3s
1, 1972.
published
A copy
to
placed
by
lines
the Company
r cc o mmc n J ,; Ii
pr a c t ices
Development
guidelines
the
advertising
as to ads of fifteen
in 37 Fed Reg.,
,.
defendant
contact.
appropriate
the
in a
of Housing
of the
offices
a~d Urban
of these
signs
Department
advertising
all
of Defendant's
housing
or public
Opportunityu
In addition.
a g c n ts
guidelines,
Include
fair
of the
Secretary
(HUD) in all
or its
and implement
compliance
Community
or morA.
shall
Policv
by the
forw approved
words
to adopt
ens~ring
Notifica!-_ion
t~he
Nond1scriminatorv
--------~'-------'-
there
defendq,nt
Act of 1968.
1.
ORDERED that
pp.
is
advertising
6700-02,
attached
on
as
1r1
..
B.
A ff i
Tlll11" j
v c I:m
Plaintiff
has working
workers.
for
acknowledges
them a large
Despite
this,
against
discriminate
or national
for
take
the
following
to this
Display
in a prominent
agents,
employees
2.
members are
p~rt
Part
of this
or national
for
positions
arise.
visible
for
shali
Decree
to prospective
in each
employment
each labor
work force
and that
without
employment
employment
for
in writing
regard
of the
to race,
are
union
prospective
not
and hiring
require
institution
sex
ice
taken.
whose
terms
of
employees
color,
religion,
origin.
shall
in effect
rclii;ion,
opportunity
clearly
In recruiting
defendant
equal
of defendant's
sex
not
the defendant
applications
Notify
to be referred
color,
qu:1lificd
policy,
an
place
where
are
will
and professional
and applicants
of the defendant
IV (c)
arc
and minc)rity
steps:
1.
poster
they
presently
of bJr,ck
clue to race,
in snpcrvisory
Pursuant
defendant
the dcfcnd,ant
hohcvcr,
which
r.im
that
percentage
anyone
origin
as vacancies
Pro
llll'r1t
they
more exacting
respect
of this
that
to white
nonwhite
possess
than
employees
employees,
the
qualifications
those
before
which were
the
action.
1
j
'
In
orJcr
assignment
housing
a;;;sure
of tenants
J.t each
any of them,
i P I:..
o., s ta
to
,,
and t? assure
building
defendant
r1cl," ....
, cl"
~
" 'l L1
"''
JJ r o ,.- c
l
noi,cliscri1:1inatory
equal
owned or managcJ
shall
,f .11 l'
,l
adopt
,.,.
selection
opportunity
by defendant
and implc.mcnt
the
and
i.n
or
follow-
;,
'1
1,
!i
A.
Stand:1rds
1.
I ncomc
One week's
be at
least
following
salary
net
circumstances
rent
from all
unless
sources
must
any of the
pertain:
a.
If a guarantor
b.
I additional
a customer
c.
that
switches
Inc.
with
references
tenarit
rental
quality
who will
doctors,
guarantee
their
responsibility.
If a particular
f.
balance.
(attorneys,
or relatives,
financial
to Trump
has a bank
who furnish
from people
professionals
etc.)
obligations
a substantial
Individuals
e.
and if
in the past.
If a prospective
account
in aJvance.
Trump building
Management,
d.
to pay rent
to another
tenant
is used or if
security
is willing
If a tenant
building
is used.
difficulty
building
is experiencing
due to economic
or other
conditions.
g.
If a prospective
relatives)
Inc.
tenant
docs business
and will
vouch for
(or his
financial
stability.
~/
income,
!~111) l) '.J
1.
trnblic
il
i r1 de t .r1ai r~
t...,
to assure
}
!1
t 1; ~~
of any applicant,
a.ssistanc~
payments,
'..
c h ...:
payment
- " - ,, ~~. 1
.. l j
of rent
including
wife's
alimony and child
l) 1
C ':: r!:; id 0 r 1 ~ .r,...,
.,
-~:1 ,"';~ .Ll. \.:; c,:t ~--::"/ .
~~
-, : 1
r: ': r! '.
1~
when due.
2.
four
-7-
persons
in a one bcdroo.n
h:o
'
I
f
I
i
I
l
..
,Ii'""
j
I
t
chi1c1rcn
of
;he
same
~ I: 1 i c ~! t i o n l:1 r
1 .
at the
apartment
where
Applications
agents
instructed
shall
tenant
shall
he
be accepted
superintendent
the
tive
acceptability
tenant
3601
shall
make
iv.
b.
review
the
tenant
said
unless
on
prospec-
towards
dressed
building
with
to a
tenants
or rental
living
to be forwarded
agent
and shall
require
security
substitute
for
review
and
main office.
respect
Appli<:a ti ons
shall
in the defendant's
-8
or
would be offended.
of acceptability
employed
shabbily
completeness
to the defendant's
be conducted
superintendent
at which other
for
rent
of drugs
agent.
The superintendent
applicants
d.
Managers
and the
Abusive
application
a current
from all
determination
Fair
judgment
Blatantly
of one month's
with
check' shall
to apply
in the
determination
and
Applications
Visably
point
therefor)
or rental
no subjective
rental
together
iii.
payment
the
is:
ii.
the
of
and of the
ct~
of a prospecti.ve
i.
shall
office
applications,
Order
wishing
persons
be re-
an apartment
to accept
of this
42 U.S.C.
or agent
for
defendant
from all
will
by superintendents
requirements
Act of 1968,
tenancy
management
or
is applying
.
received
by the
in the
for
b~lilding
the
authorized
Housing
c:tc.
o c e clu r c.
Applications
a.
complex
apartment,
Procedures
B.
ceived
in a two bedroom
sex,
to each applicant.
s ha 11 be reviewed
be made by the
main office.
and
Section
ti
l
i
.1
I
e.
twenty
Each
(20) business
accepted
for
informed
of the
I. objective
<lay::; whether
tenancy.
for
which
to be compiled
available
apartment
include
the
monthly
rent
maintain
shall
type
vacant
Brooklyn,
This
list
list
or
shall
the
shall
Defendant
a similar
listing
vacant
buildings
at that
New York
of each current
of availability.
and date
at their
basis,
of apartment,
specific
to
maintain
at each of their
II apartments
Informntion
Brooklyn,
on a weekly
be
Cr::"'..
Defendant
Avenue,
been
to meet.
h'Ithin
shall
and of the
Rental
~ art~_!1 t S l~-
a.
office
the applicant
failed
he has
informc-d
be
rejection,
Providing
2.
shall
If rejected,
reason
standard
central
nppl.icant
also
of the
building.
~)
Inquirers
b.
'of
the
qualifications
security
deposit
for
shall
rental,
be uniformly
including
the
informed
income,
VI
REPOR~INGREQUIREMENTS
It
entry
is
further
of this
the defendant
ORDEREDthat
Decree,
shall
three
and thereafter
file
with
three
the Court
for
the plaintiff
a report
containing
for
the
apartment
buildings
following
(3) months
1.
Argyle
2.
Westminster
3.
Fontainbl9au
4.
Lawrence
Se a I s l e /\.p ;ir t mc n ts
following
owned and/or
Hall
Hall
Apartments
Gardens
the
and serve
the
after
an<l Lawrence
Towers
on counsel
information
managed
. if.
I"' -
6.
Beach
Huvcn
7.
Shore
Ilavca /\partmcnts
8.
Bclcrcst
9.
Bighlan<lcr
a rental
ments,
Apartments
H,,11
10.
Saxony Hall
11.
Clyde Hall
12.
Edgerton
13.
Winston
14,
Sussex
A.
Ap~rt~1cnt<;
Apartments
1Ial 1
Hall
If a prospective
of an apartment
will
fill
tion
will
will
be retained
on said
form,
application
by defendant
telephone
Date of Application
3.
Whether
the
4.
Weekly net
a depo~it
ll
I!
Ii
11
application
term of this
Apartrnen t sought
6.
If rejected,
7.
Name of person
reason
therefor
or persons
or reject
If neither
and
sought
.5.
rejection.
of a complaint,
rejection
Order:
and Home
who decided
together
to
the application
accepted
or rejected,
status
of application.
sh a 11.
for
informa-
was given
Fc1.
reasons
develop-
following
income of applicant
rent
.or disposition
on no~ification
about
number
monthly
said
the
.Business
2.
8.
inquiry
and said
during
Name, Address,
accept
making
out an application
be asked
1.
applicant,
to include
with
person
,-.
t)
i~
t~
\,_,,
,-.
,., (~ 'r
-,
I
i
the defendant's
rcsportsible
, '--
i
for
. """",
~~
..:..:r.l'-''""-"',.....
..,:.,_' -
...,...,,,_____
Nt_'-r-
......
'
..
, VI I
It
is
further
ORDEl<EDthat
complaints
arise
under
Government
shall
furnish
complaint
complaint,
and the
building
Thereafter,
the
the provision
and a brief
of the
description
.
including
with
notice
thereof,
is received
to investigate
i~ determined
what
conditions
leading
to which
the
any,
the
to advise
if
from
and if
or,
was made.
days
(30)
complaint
the
to the complaint;
incident
complaint
have thirty
to be valid,
if
and substance
of the alleged
such complaint,
steps,
the
nature
of such complaint
by defendant
Government
of the
shall
Order,
the person
the date
respect
any future
of this
tl1e name of
the defendant
date
whenever
correct
the
the
complaint
is determined
Government
invalid,
before
any motion
compel
the
of
basis
the
for
an Order
compliance
shall,
at
least
to counsel
for
this
shall
to this
Court
with
motion
to
Order.
ORDEREDthat
twenty
apply
to be
VIII
from the
the~complaint
with
It is further
years
determining
Governmdnt
two (2)
for
a period
for
entry
of this
Decree,
(20)
<lays prior
to the
extending
the defendant
event,
report
the plaintiff:
1.
in residential
property
in the
or management
interests
acquired
by the
defenuant.
2.
of any owncrsl1ip
The divestment,
or management
through
interests
transfer
or salet
in residential
property
.. i 1 -
....
'
''01\
,,....,,.-.i,,
". ,,
IX
Two years
thereafter,
If
the
the
United
thirty
(30)
shall
from the
States
fails
clays of the
to
Order
interpose
Notice
and the
or further
Decree
is
defendant
be dissolved
hearing
<late this
ol
the
this
or
Order.
any objection
of Motion,
complaint
entered,
this
dismissed
within
injunction
without
Court.
Each party
for
all
shall
bear
~The Court
shall
retain
purposes
until
the
its
own costs.
jurj_sd~~tion
termination
ORDEREDTHIS
of
of this
this
action
Order.
day of
1975.
EDWARD NEAI-IER
United
The undersigned
consent
to the
ORDER:
For the
States
District
Defendant:
For the
!!
-12-
Plaintiff:
Judge
>
~"
/)
APPENDIX D
'
r,;,
JSP:FES:NPG:mp
DJ 175-52-28
.,.
--~."
-
!~;,,;)
10021
you~
As I explai.ned
that
to you by telephone,
and wish
we understand
this
dis agreement
as to
the
rnenrd.ng of
any proposed
in the
ch~nge ref~rred to
"!er:iorandmn of 'Cndcrsttmdi.ng.
ns to me m.ln3
of Understandin~
in their entirety
Consent })ecree.
Chr0110
Tria.1
Memorandum
sh.~11 be contained
in the final
Records
Mr. Schwelb
Mr. Goldberg
in the
I./
FiG~
- 2 ...
The"bounterdraft"
apart
once
the
pre!JSure
to us
somewhat reassured,
took
to be your
hopefully
assurtmce
with reason~
by what I
chat
1..u,.11,
w,,11:1,
view the
to Uw J.<i y
-.-1.....
.." <.-.
""n,.. "--~ _,_11'- _.. . __,,
u
.......,,..,-...
...,,.,<V
...QU-YUlAi
,10
.u....L,"-t.,;l:\.
..1- -~ - ,_ - d
l,.lt:l:11.1.~SHt!
~,,
...
the ultimate
resoluti'1n
of thi.s C'1Se nnd that you do
regard it as a valid instrument which both parties
are
bound to follow as closely ~s possible.
Accordingly,
I am going along with your request
to drttft: a new letter whf..:h e.ets forth the differences
between
your
"counterdr.sft.:
version
of
by t\e
Memorandu.-rs of Understanding
and that
we believe
that the c'.lse should be settled
forthwith
on the terms to which we previously
3greed.
It is
.!12!my intention
to txeat an agreement previously
net~otiated
negotiations
as being
a starting
point
for
new
.... 3 -
a.
Paragraph
II A. (1). "!../ Defend.c.nta'
notlf ic:.1tion to thrtH:1 fair housing groups
(na.1;1es to be llf;reed u~,on by the parties)
of
defendants'
ftdr
housinf1; polici~s
and
subse(1uent weekly notiiica.tion
of defendants'
vacunc:f.os to c,<t.ch group.
We would be
s~tisfied
ta delc;a~e
the responsibility
fo'r selecting
the f..iir housing grotma to
the New York City C:m::mission on Human Rights.
Alternnt:ively,
wl! ::::,uld be content
with the
selection
of the following 3roups:
New 'lotk City Open Housing Center,
(1) the
the
witness
fair
houning
log~ in all
types
of advertising
including
paragrttph
for. prior
negotiated
modifi.cation.
As you
*/
- 4 -
and (g)
()
of Memorandum of
Underctanding
f~r prior 11cgot!ated
tion of our original
proposal.
d.
of
modifica
Written
notification
to all appropriate
companies
with whom defendants dobusiness
of
defendants'
fair housing policies.
o.f paragraph
(h) makes
it
quite
clear
f.
Paragraph
words
III
C (2).
t'Eo.ual Opportunity
Inclusion
Employeru
of the
in all
employment advertising.
h.
- 5 -
l.
Footnote
to Pcirne;raph
IV A (1).
Paragraph IV B (2)(a).
Maintenance
at selected
apartment complexes in Brooklyn
j.
vacancies
lisi.:.in~s
at defend-1.nts'
of all
buildings
..
Paragraph IV (d).
Rentals m3de
avaiJ~ble on first-come,
first-served
basis.
k.
1.
to
~w.1
m.
(4).
.>
consent
2. Qther
deer~:
a.
The prefatory
proposals
We should
of
chdnges related
eve?yone
language
to se~tJement
of cha two
"" rn:l.ni.mnrn.
PI
- 6 -
b.
The differences
of: our
proposal
defendants'
to either.
complaints
between Paragraph
propossl
party'
relating
of h,?usin.g
VIII
of
to notification
discrimi.nation
~re negotiable.
a.
The terms of the dismissal
of Fred .~nd
Donald Trump i.nd:tvidt.tal ly should be reu:> trded
to cm1form to the !1..:r;10randum of Understaritling
which cl~rifics
that they are still
officers
of the corroration.
in as
the footnote
in our original
proposal is
still
valid.
In any event, your people
teetified
that th(;?y counted public assistance
payments now and ::l-ince the standards
are
not to be more atr:tngent than before,they
should continue to do so.
in suitable
fbrm,
t.tnd g~~t.ting
to the Court.
it
signed
and
If we do not hear
Understanding.
.. 7 ..
All in t1.ll, I h:.r<,'e tn say I don't know whether
you are
to be :lmprcsGE'.'d or surpi:::i.!;ed e.t the way tlut
Then again,
I suppose
making a cr.rrecr of thif, C'!"~~~.
I wculd like
you always nPcd rr.atm::L'll for a book.
to t:hfnk that I'll
get a co!11p11mcntary
copy of the
ne>:.t one too, and good lur.:k {:Ven if I am .s.til1
with the Chri l Ri3hts
Division ..
Si.ucerely.
J. STANLEYPOTTINGER
Assistant
Attorney General
Ci.vil Rights Division
By:
FRAUKE. SCUUEL3
Chief
Housing Section
'
APPENDIX E
IN THE UNITEDSTATESDISTRICT COURTFOR THE
EASTERNDISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA,
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
)
FREDC. TRUMP,DONALD
TRUMP )
and TRu'MP MANAGEHENT' INC. ' )
)
)
Defendants.
)
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 73 C 1529
CONSENTORDER
_________
This action
was instituted
'
America on October
j,
1
and neglected
nondelegable
duty under
by their
opportunity
and that
under
Defendants
the Fair
Housi.ng Act
the defendants
and
com-
subordinates
the result
that
equal
vigorously
numbers of persons
have failed
deny said
if
if any,
of the individual
to carry
allegations
are
insubstantial,
defendants
without
any admission
litigation,
by the entry
and
or the officers
of Trump
Inc.
Accordingly,
and in order
out their
and claim
without
housing
the Act.
that
Management,
of
affirmative
with
their
to substantial
direction
is that
to exercise
that
there
to the Fair
States
subordinates,
defendant's
States
obligations
!.
of the United
have failed
pliance
by the United
this
hereto
of a Consent
matter
.I
cf the merit
as to the existPnce
to resolve
the parties
adjudication
without
are prepared
, and
or absence
further
of liability,
prot:i:acted
to resolve
Decree.
this
case
It is expressly
of this
understood
admission
by it
criminati.cn
of a violation
as set forth
any other
applicable
principal
prepared
that
rule
against
dis-
or regulation.
Trump Management,
emp.loyees will
this
is in no way an
of the complaint,
opportunity.
to resolve
the execution
their
promote equal
prepared
'
of defendant
to affirmatively
for assuring
in the Fair
of the merits
officers
Inc.,
of the prohibition
statute,
_Jrrespec.tive
will
'v
however,
Inc.,
the
are
Accordingly,
the parties
are
of the following
Consent Order.
I.
l
It is hereby
consideration
contained
ORDERED,ADJUDGEDand DECREEDthat
of their
in part
III
affirmative
herein,
assumption
the complaint
capacity,
contained
therein.
with prejudice,
of responsibility
against
against
as to all
in
Fred C.
them in their
allegations
II.
INJUNCTION
It is hereby
defendant,
all
I.
persons
its
ORDERED,ADJUDGEDand DECREEDthat
officers,
in active
agents,
concert
permanently
employees,
or participation
njoined
the
successors,
and
with any of
from:
,
,
.,/
I
i
;
I
.. 2 -
'
.,/
'
1.
Refusing
to sell
or rent,
refusing
to negotiate
for
the sale
or rental
any dwelling
of,
or otherwise
to any person
sex or national
Discriminating
conditions,
or privileges
the provision
of services
of race,
3.
color,
Making,
made, printed,
color,
religion,
religion,
for inspection,
'fact
so available.
any notice,
origin
Coercing,
therewith,
to be
or advertise-
of a dwelling
origin,
that
based
or an intention
or discrimination.
that
or rental
because
of race,
any dwelling
religion,
choice
is in
of any person
sex or national
threatening,
color,
is not avail-
the residential
color,
or causing
or discrimination
limitation
or in
origin.
statement
or rental
to any person
Influencing
of race,
sex or national
sex or national
sale
of a dwelling,
in connection
limitation,
religion,
able
6.
color,
in the terms,
or publishing,
to the sale
sex or national
account
or rental
printing,
Representing
5.
of sale
religion,
any person
or facilities
any preference,
on race,
of race,
against
or published,
o~_acc9unt
or denying
origin.
2.
because
making unavailable
or interfering
origin
with,
or
attempting
to coerce,
in the exercise
opportunity
threaten
or enjoyment
protected
of the right
or enjoyment
secure
housingopportunity
of the right
ho1:1sing
by the Fair
the exercise
equal
or interfere
to assist
- :, -
others
to
on
' ,.
7. Engaging
or-the
effect
protected
connect~on,
defendants
qualification
by the Fair
income,
fail
or other
the right
not,
family,
to fully
wages,
count
source
the income
or other
alimony,
housing
In this
in determining
or refuse
salary,
to equal
Housing Act.
of any person,
including
..
shall
for rental
group of persons,
payments
or abridging
of denying
opportunity
total
a woman's
support
received.
III
ASSUMPTION
OF RESPONSIBILITYBY
PRINCIPALSOF TRUMP:t-1ANAGEMENT
INC., ANDTRAININGPROGRAM
FOR
AGENTSAND EMPLOYEES
Trump Management Inc.,
units
therefore
have a major
. company therefore
estate
in its
and elsewhere,
and its
by its
own agents
regardless
example,
but also
The
in the real
influence
the activities
of many others.
which is discriminatory
of motivation,
from thoughtlessness
activitie_s
of leadership
conduct
of rental
opportunities.
and employees
on housing
a position
The Fair
many thousands
impact
occupies
controls
and violations
of the
as
discr~nination.
The principal
officers
'
of Trump Management,
responsibility
employees
Inc.,
to assure
recognize
generally
nondiscrimination
and a significant
opportunity
that
opportunity
by their
agents
to promote equal
and elsewhere.
and
housing
They
'.'t
are prepared
advantage
to carry
of that
out that
responsibility
and to take
opportunity.
I
I
- 4 -
...
j
j
I
I
'
Accordingly,
A.
presently
it
is ORDEREDas follows:
The principal
officers
of Trump Management,
acquaint
basis
the defendant
themselves
with all
and municipal
civil
forthwith
personally
of the obligations
Inc.,
of
I'
rights
laws;
under
under
\'
pertinent
Regulations
Department
and Guidelines
of the
and
other
appropriate
agencies;
to assure
and officers
I
,themselves
similarly
with their
(3) /Personally
that
principal
familiarize
obligations;
undertake
their
Order;
and
to assure
that
the
training
carried
program set
forth
herein
is successfully
'out.
B.
Within
the Defendant
complete
thirty
(30)
--.-
~y its
principal
an educational
officers;
or employment responsibilities,
spective
rental,
tenants,
or acc~pt
shall
provide
of this
conduct
or process
and
Decree,
with pro-
~o the public
applications
about
for rentals,
or who
to inform
!.
I
the Fair
..
'
of this
- ..
and their
duties
under
'
l
j
Decree,
- 5
include:
I
..
Iv
(1) Furnishing
a letter
surrnnarizing
of the Fair
and employee
Housing Act as it
applies
Decree and
to the
employee.
Informing
(2)
in person
of this
its
or by general
meeting,
agents
applicable
Fair
Housing Acts.
be advised
that
of this
Order.
agent
that
he has read
and received
preceding
--such
paragraph
signed
required
ten
(10)
the procedures
to sign
a statement
Copies of all
signed
to the effect
the initial
statements
will
upon execution.
- 6.-
I
J
mentioned
above
in the
a copy of each
be instructed
in
comply with
days following
described
and will
disci-
to plaintiff.
with
so instructed
the letter
and forwarding
statement
Decree
for disobedience
statement
the instructions
a signed
failure
or other
and to sanctions
Securing
his
of this
him to dismissal
plinary
(3)
of the provisions
shall
and employee,
that
he has been
such instructions
date
be
within
of employment.
be furnished
to plaintiff
..
I
IV
AFFIRMATIVEPROGRAM
It
is further.ORDERED that
the defendant
steps
following
impairing
rights
A.
by the defendant
secured
Notify
Urban League,
with copies
an
the effects
of any
by t!:he Fair
or effect
of
Housing Act:
150 Fifth
to counsel
Avenue,
without
regard
Included
to race,
in such letter
standards
general
and procedures
statement
apartment
buildings
parties
shall
agree
to its
mailing.
Housing Centera
infra
that
are available
religion,
shall
be a full
outlined
synopsis
defendant
copy of its
weekly Central
in Part
V of this
decree.
is made.
may, at its
forward
and a
vacancies
shall
in Trump
area.
of an appropriate
Subsequently,
origin.
of the rental
V, below,
described
persons
sex or national
in Part
owned or
qualified
and anticipated
on the text
in writing,
apartments
to all
color,
of present
for plaintiff
of this
Notification
to the Community of Defendant's
Nondisc1=:J:.~inatory Policy
1.
the entry
compliance
forthwith*/
previous
shall
letter
The
prior
Listing
of vacancies
This mailing
shall
.1
!
I
l
mentioned
letter
persons. or organizations
l
i
housing
''
*/
own discretion,
with
copies
of the above-
of vacancies
an interest
in promotin<- 1equal
opportunities.
The defendant's
obligations
to implement each provision
of
this Order for affirmative
action shall begin ten (10) days following
the entry of this Order, unless otherwise
specified
herein.
- 7 -
.
2.
by the Secretary
approved
'
fair
housing
signs
of the Department
in a form
of Housing and
Urban Development
where there
is rental
3.
activi~y
offices
a.
in a~J. advertising,*'>':,/
telephone
directories,
media,
and on all
and other
nondiscriminatory
radio,
in newstelevision
billboards,
brochures,
literature
llogo
shall
housing
logo.
be prominently
legible.~/
placed
and other
signs,
pamphlets,
placed
all
is attached
advertising
agents
shall
advertising
in 37 Fed. Reg.,
as published
1, 1972.
and easily
conform
on April
promotional
In addition,
to the practices
lines,
rental
shall
Include,
papers,
contact.
connnunity of defendant's
The defendant
of the defendant
or public
Implement an advertising
the nonwhite
policy.
(HUD).:_/ in all
A copy of these
of
guide-
pp. 6700-02,
guidelines
Order.
**/
i.
j
'
This subsection
dealing with newspaper advertising
shall
only apply to newspaper ads of six (6) lines or more. Defend~nt
shall continue its present advertising
policies,
and shall not
thange its present practices
with respect to the size 4~d type
of advertising
by shortening
or by otherwise changing its policy
of placing display ads to avoid the requirement
of including
the equal opportunity
statement.
advertising,
the words "equal
be used and shall be easily audible.
- 8 -
'
(b) Allocate
advertising
dir~cted
a reasonable
budget
to advertising
the placement
monthly display
black
have agreed
of reasonably
prominent
advertisements,
budget
Spani.sh language
stations,
quirements
of this
advertise
a full
of 10% of defendant's
shall
provision.
All advertise-
cross-section
and shall
undue emphasis
to buildings
and
in minority
with vacancies,
media shall
of Trump buildings
not stress
or give
with substantial
occupancy.**/
Provide
written
company, corporation,
by defendant
Rican press,!/
to black-oriented
4.
one in the
advertising
minority
in media
The parties
together
radio
of its
Ri.can communities.
that
proportion
notification
or other
to each firm,
person
to act as referral
association
or organization
agency,
apartment
engaged
locating
service,
credit
apartments
all
persons
sex or national
origin.
the recipient
procedures
qualified
advise
checking
without
regard
to race,
objective
color,
to
religion,
shall
standards
also
and
for rental.
*7
The parties
agree that the placement
in the Amsterdam News and' El Diario will
!!!.I
are available
If the listed
apartments
with vacancies,
the buildings
ad so that the same apartment
disproportionately
advercised
of such advertisements
satisfy
this requirement.
..
'
B.
Progran!_.9f Providing __
Lj_:;>S.,ingsfor _Minority
Apa~trnf~nt
S~~eker~
notify
--________
-~eague,
fifth
150 Fifth
apartment
that
apartment
at ~east
building
three
applicants
the apartment.
shall
days prior
to the defendant
provide
of
to placing
three-day
All applicants
shall
avned
tenancy
qualified
of renting
defendant
10003, of every
refer
Order,
in each apartment
period,
of this
less
to
the entry
available
and/or
after
referred
the defendant
by the
or its
represerve
sentative
with an appropriate
identification
which will
to advise
the defendants
such applicant
by the
three
an application
apartment
may be placed
defendant's
C.
religion,
seeking
employees
subsection.
referred
to rent
by.the
After
Center
the apartment,
to be rented
custom without
sex or national
Affirmative
to this
applicant
normal business
The defendant
transfer
pursuant
days if no qualified
has filed
color,
that
regard
the
in
to race,
origin.
EmploY!nent Program
shall
recruit,
and agents
without
hire,
assign,
regard
promote and
to race,
color,
*/
The requirements
of this provision
need not be followed for
apartment buildings
which presently
have or in the future reach
a black occupancy rate of 10%. For these apartment buildings,
apartments
shall continu~ to be rented without regard to race,
color, religion,
sex or national
origino
!!.I
The three-day
period shall.begin
when notification
has
been completed and the Open Housing Center has received,
either
in person, by telephone,
or_by mail, the listings.
For
purposes of this Decree, rental
on the open market shall mean
rental
to any person not referred
by the Open Housing Center.
10 -
,.,.
religion,
blacks
sex or national
and other
fessional
origi.n
nonwhite
positions
and will
endeavor
perso.rn in supervisory
to place
and pro-
as vacancies
arise.~/
Pursuant
the following
1.
place
For every
serve
the available
2.
the defendant
shall
take
-available
on a regular
employment opportunity,
basis
and Spanish
in newspapers
community~/
that
describing
work opportunities.~/
Prominently
include
"Equal
Display
in a p'rominent
employees,
third
the black
the slogan
3.
program,
steps:
advertisements
primarily
jobs
to this
place
Opportunity
an equal
clearly
and applicants
the defendant
in all
advertising
of available
Employer."
employment opportunity
visible
to prospective
poster~/
agents,
where applications
of
"!_/ References
to employees and agents in Part IV C of this
Decree shall include only those persons who are presently
employed as or seek to be superintendents,
rental agents,
leasing agents, or central
office personnel who receive,
review or approve applications
for tenancy or otherwise
p'articipate
in the rental process.
'!::!:_/The parties
agree that the placement of such advertisements in the Amsterdam News and El Diario will satisfy
this
requirement.
***/ If defendants
..
'
. 4.
any part
Notify
in \vI"iting,
each labor
of defendant's
work force
of this
prospective
without
regard
color,
to race,
In recruiting
dant shall
__hi_red p~ssess
exacting
before
employees
are to be referred
employees,
persons
recruited
or
more
with respect
of this
origin.
the d~fen-
the institution
IV (C)
sex or national
nonwhite
nonwhite
qualifications
than those
employees
that
religion,
and hiring
not require
union representing
to white
action.
IMPLEMENTATION
OF OBJECTIVE RENTAL
STANDARDS
AND PROCEDURES
In orderto
assign.~ent
housing
Inc.,
A.
of tenants
nondiscriminatory
and to assure
at each building
defendant
standards
whether
assure
shall
and
opportunity
in
adopt
and procedures
or not to rent
equal
selection
which shall
be applied
in determining
to an applicant.
Standards
Income
1.
One week's
be at least
equal
gross
to one month's
rent,
sources~../ must
except
in the following
circumstances:
(a) The applicant(s)
payments,
or
other
have outstanding
fixed
debt
in excess
debt
period
automobile
of $50.00
four
(4) months,
I
L_,.
of
or
I
I
in excess
.. r
r ~~
'
(3)
{a)
(b) above,
or
equal
___
.If an applicant
qualify
funds sufficient
obligations
the applican~s
if:
who can
monthly
or her residence,
rental,
income
for rental
a guarantor
of the guarantors
for his
net
rent.
payments
of
one week's
to one month's
verify
is in excess
persons.
circmnstance
standards,
composition
as well
as
income standards.
'
If the applicant
is willing
deposit
{b)
three
six
months rent
(6)
(c) If a tenant
building
tenant
,
Inc.,
2.
to another
has met his
or will
supply
in advance.
switches
Trump building
obligations
and if that
to Trump Management,
in the past.
Occupancr
Not more than two (2) persons
apartment.
to post
(4)
in a one-bedroom
persons,
in a two-bedroom
apartment.
B.
Procedures
1.
**I
Application
Procedure
"t
*/
Except
different
that
children
of age may be of
sexes.
- 13 .,...,..,"
Applications
a.
apartment
for
building
accept
Applications
or rental
Order
3601
wi~hing
to apply
'
tenant,
shall
and the
judgment
unless
be received
said
by Super-
by the defendant
to
of
be accepted
from all
or agent
tenant
persons
shall
make
of a prospective
on the acceptability
prospective
is applying
be received
superintendent
visibly
(i)
tenant
at the
in the requirements
Housing
Applications
no subjective
shall
and instructed
will
.'
authorized
agents
applications,
this
tenancy
an apartment.
intendents
for
is:
and objectively
drunk
and disorderly;
(ii)
the
visibly
influence
and objectively
of drugs;
(iii)abusive
or rental
or there
under
towards
the superintendent
agent;
is;
a visible
(iv)
that
her
will
the applicant
apartment
cleanliness
rights
this
and objective
with
soas
of other
criteria,
contact
the
ascertain
maintained
shall
the
intendent
of grooming
subbection
indication
not maintain
sufficient
not
care
to intrude
tenants.
applicant's
or its
former
or
and
on the
In order
defendant
his
to satisfy
agents
shall
landlord
to
premises.
i.mpression
of th~ manner
d:tsqualify
shall
apply
In no event
by a super-
of dress
or style
an applicant.
solely
This
to cleanliness
criteria.
I
l
I' i
~
b.
The superintendent
the application
deposit
for completeness
rent
therefor)
from all
or rental
of acceptability
as outlined
within
(i-iv)
be reviewed
a uniform
of an
above.
and a determination
credit
be conducted
The standards
color,
for tenancy
to
Managers employed
main offices.
race,
for review
If conducted,
-applicant.
shall
in B(l)(a)
shall
shall
in the defendant's
d.
agent
shall
on the acceptability
Applications
c.
a secur::ify
The agents
No superintendent
except
review
require
applicants.
applicant
shall
and determination
make a determination
i .
agent
and shall
of one month's
substitute
or rental
with respect
of acceptability
be uniformly
religion,
Each applicant
ten
(10) business
shall
without
regard
to
origin.
be informed
days whether
to each
based on credit
applied
sex or national
e.
check and/or
wherever
possible
'
been accepted
'
for tenancy.
processed
within
applicant
of the reason
applicant
beyond twenty
ten
If an application
(10) days,
defendant
therefor,
can not be
shall
notify
but in no event
shall
of his
the
an
application
If
rejcted,
rejection,
has failed
to meet.
the applicant
shall
be informed
objective
of the reason
standard
he o~I she
.. 15
,/
/\
for
2.
Providing
Seekers
a.
Defendant
Rental
shall
Information
at
maintain
Brooklyn,
on a weekly basis,
of each currently
to be vacant
thirty
or available
days.
ability
and shall
available
of its
buildings
the next
include
shall
by type of apartment
that
complete
lists
b.
Apartments
on the apartment
to all
interested
inquirers
vacant
at
in the New
at defendant's
Brooklyn,
main
New York.
availability
at each
and a notification
apartments
for inspection
about
also maintain
available
available
of avail-
inquiring
of the apartments
building
of all
persons
Defendant
list
rent,
be shown to all
a similar
located
or available
that
offi.ces
vacant
to be compiled
expected
the monthly
Listing,
shall
apartments.
off i.ces
This list
central
its
Avenue; Brooklyn,
apartment
to Aeartment
list
(2(a)
for rental
above)
by an authorized
defendant.
and listed
shall
agent
be shown
of the
\
\
c.
fications
Inquirers
for rental,
shall
be uniformly
including
informed
the income,
of the quali-
security
deposit
- 16 -
r ..,..
i '
..
,.
'd.
No waiting
defendant's
offices
any preference
Rental
will
list~/
will
be maintained
or apartment
for persons
buildings
referred
be on a first-come,
apartments
are available
at any of the
nor shall
by present
first-served
there
be
tenants.
basis
when
for rental.
VI
REPORTINGREQUIREMENTS
It
entry
ORDEREDthat
of this_ Decree,
is further
.
following
arrl thereafter
the defendant
on counsel
three
shall'
three
file
the
a report
inform~tion
containing
apartment
the
buildings
owned and/or
1.
Argyle Hall
2.
Westminster
3.
Fontainebleau
t
I
Hall
'
Apartments
!
I
!
ll
4.
5.
Sea Isle
6.
Rachaven Apartments
7.
Shorehaven
8.
Belcrest
9.
Highlander
Apartments
.. T ------
Apartments
Apartments
Hall
10.
Saxony Hall
11.
Clyde Hall
12.
Edgerton
13.
Winston Hall
14.
Sussex Hall
Apartments
i
.&-,--
'.'t
*/ Since this
discriminatory,
.'/ i
is defendant's
p~esent practice
and it is nonplaintiff
interposes
no objection
thereto.
- 17 , /
,/
,,
a.
obs~rvable)
making inquiry
in person
of terms of rental
period
of an apartment
made inquiry;
2.
were offered
3.
filled
4.
submitted
5.
were accepted
6.
were rejected;
reporting
submitted
for
reporting
A report
during
with deposit;
occupancy;
applications;
pending
period.
may be forwarded
~he following
the preceding
that:
an applicant
to plaintiff
during
the availability
an application;
bad applications
This report
about
out an application;
7. withdrew
8.
hereto
reflecting
as Appendix C.
the applications
the preceding
information
on a form similar
reporting
for tenancy
period,
including
an
.application:
1.
name, address,
number,
business
and race;
2.
date
of application;
3.
whether
4.
date
5.
a deposit
notified
of apartment
was received;
of acceptance
or rejection;
and monthly
rent
sought;
...
*/
all
notations
of race
shall
' ,,
6.
if accepted,
apartment
7.
if rejected,
reason
8.
name of person
accept
9.
tothe
detailed
statement
supporting
to
nor rejected,
status
of application.
may be forwarded
rejected
who decided
the a~plication;
accepted
or disposition
This report
therefor;
or persons
or reject
if neither
chosen;
to plaintiff
hereto
applicant,
on a form similar
as Appendix D.
the report
of the reason(s)
shall
For each
include
for rejection
and
information.
c.
including
of vacancies
A list
the date
during
the apartment
each apartment
the preceding
was placed
was rented
quarter,
on the market!_/
or otherwise
committed
for rental.
d.
Ij
I
I
j
Reports
filed
include
the current
t'enants
in each apartment
defendant,
preceding
in Sections
1.
reporting
Copies
of all
also
to the race
taken
to implement
of
during
the
including:
letters
checking
Order shall
of the steps
above,
unions
to this
with respect
building
period
I and II
and labor
*/
statistics
and an account
and credit
this
pursuant
sent to apartment
companies,
pursuant
Fair
to Parts
locators
Housing groups,
III and
IV of
Decree.
..
- 19 I
I
!
+ ,I
. ,.
'
I:
'
i
~.
Representative
ments placed
pursuant
copies
of all
newspaper
advertise-
to this
advertisement.
3.
of each rental
position
agent,
and office
superintendent
an assurance
required
of all
with Part'll
.circumstances
relation
of the entry
obtained
Decree.
and copies
in accordance
If any rental
such a statement
a full
statement
agent
the defendants
of all
of this
program
of this
include
the educational
statements
to sign
refuses
shall
by Part
signed
that
assignment
pertinent
taken
by them in
thereto~
It
VII
RECORDKEEPING PROVISIONS
IT IS FURTHERORDEREDthat
years
following
following
the entry
records
the defendant
of this
for all
Decree,
apartment
shall,for
two
buildings
the
owned or managed
by them:
1.
time of contact
availability
the size
telephone
of each person
or terms of rental
of apartment
sought,
A. he was off~red
B.
he filled
c.
he submitted
inquiring
in person
of an apartment
about
and
the
therein,~/
out an application;
an applicat:i.on
with deposit.
a guest
~/ This may be accomplished by maintaining
at each apartment building owned by the defendants.
register
- 2.0 -
l'"
f
,::
>
2.
inquiry
A detailed
record
and application
of all
action
A detailed
3.
'
record
of all
taken
on each
steps
taken
by the defen-
. i
dant
in ascertaining
the acceptability
applicant
or who approved
or rejected
the application.
;
I
4.
All records
oi,
or coritain
any
of the information
pertinent
to defendant's
obligations
under
1
this Order.
kepresentatives
of the plaintiff'shall
be per/
mitted to inspect ana copy all pertinent
reco;ds of the defen-
!
I
reasonable
times,
provide~,
however,
that
the plaint~ff
shall
endeavor
to minimize
any ~nconvenience
to
the defendant
of such rec9rds.
'
-~
-----.,.1
VIII
It
is further
years
least
twenty
ORDEREDthat
of this
I
for a .period I extending
I.
Decree,
the defepdant
at
report
to ~ounsel
.1
shall,
to the event,
two
-~
. I
1.
residential
2.
or management interests-
acquired
by the
The di.vestment
through
..
defendant.
transfer
;_
o:d sale~i
ownership
or management interests
in residential
after
the entry
ORDEREDthat
of this
Decree
~ofany
---~..,
property.
r ---~~--~
IX
It is further
In
. -----4
for a period
the defendant
of two _years
shall
advise
.i- ~--------
counsel
.for plaintiff,
in,writ:!.ng,
!/
complaints,~/
from
l
t'
of all
- 21 ..
\
~
.,, ....
_..,,
__
'
\~hatevcr
source,
opportunity
received
in housing
period
of two
-- - - the defendant
Inc.
after
ness
fifteen
(15)
received
Decree,
to investig~te
an explanation
is determined
plaintiff
shall
necessary
to correct
and shall
afford
to the complaint
of the alleged
court
the conditions
it
leading
steps
actions
judicial
before
shall
relief.
bear
"t
1
I
the defendant
its
22 -
own costs.
is
plaintiff
with
in the complaint.
by either
party,
to be
to the complaint,
seven
(7)
conditions
applying
with this
Each party
the effective-
discriminatory
additional
there
to remedythe
any other
that
believes
an additional
appropriate
notify
and provide
contained
days to effectuate
Decree,
afford
to be valid
the defendants
for a
of such a complaint
the complaint
of the information
If the complaint
leading
shall
managed by
shall,
threatening
the pla1ntiff
equal
by the plaintiff.
determines
of this
received
plaintiff
the entry
complaints
regarding
owned and/or
In.addition,
years
of all
defendant
at properties
Trump Management,
by the
effects
to the
Decree,
or
,.
The Court
for all
shall
retain
jursidi.ction
of this
actj.on
purposes.
ORDERED
this
day of
, 1975.
EDWARD
NEAHER
United States District
Judge
The undersigned
apply for and
consent to the entry of this
Order:
For the Defendants:
ROYM. COHN
~axe, Bacon, Bolan & Manley
39 E. 68th Street
New York, New York
FRAh1KE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
FRED C. TRUMP
P. GOLDBERG
NOR11AN
Attorney,
Housing Section
Ci.vil Rights Division
_Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
DONALDTRUMP
Q
~.
~ A-~&-:::t.L
'. .
~-!;
DONNAF. G0~9STEIN
Attorney,
H:;i,using Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
.
'
"
HENRYBRACHTL
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Eastern District
of New York
'"
APPENDIX A
37 F .R. 3429
Feb. 16, 1972
Title'24-HOUSIHG
AND
URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
Chapter I-Office
of Assistant Secre
tary for Equal Opportunity, Department of Housing and Urban Development
$U8CHAPTER A-FAIR
(Doclcct
HOUSING
No. R-72-165)
PART 110-FAIR
HOUSING POSTER
The purpose of this regulation is to
require the dispby of e. fair housing
Poster by persons :subject to sections 804806 of the Civil H.ir:hts Act of 1968 and to
prescribe the content of this poster.
Notice of a pro1;03cd n,ncndment to
Title 24 to include a new Part 72 was
published in the FE:flERAL REGISTER on
August 4, 1971 L36 F'.R. 14336). <Under
the reorganizati::m of Title 24 published
~ .
-.
'
.....
_,'..":'\.~; ~
i
l
~,.
'.,,.
-,.
'
3429 a
broker or ngent is handling the sale or
rental he must display the poslcr at any
place ~f bu:iine.ss where the dwclli11c is
being o!Tcrcd for n.lc or rental. With rc.r;pect to all other dwellings covered by
the ,\ct. the poster must be displayed at
any place of bu.,i11c,,s where the dwelling
is offered for sale or rrutal: in addition,
the poster must be disp\aycd at the dwelling, except that in the case of a sin&;lcfamily dwelling bcin:; o!Tcred for sale or
rental in conjunction
with the sale or
rental of other dweilin~s, c.:, . a subdivision, the poster may be di:playcd at
model hornr-s instead of nt c::cch of the
individu'll dwelling:;. Finally. in the ca.se
of dwellings allier than a single-family
dwelling not bcrnr:s offered for sale or
rental in conjunction
with the s::1le or
1ental of other dwellings, the poster must
be displayrd from the bcginnini:; of construction thrcugh the end of the sale or
1ental process.
Several comments Sllf:f~estrd revisions
in the language of the poster drscribed
In proposed ~ 72.25. S:.ich su~!e,tions included rewriting the poster in terms of
the individual's
ri1:;hts rather th:in the
Act's prohibitions.
adding
additional
prohibitions
cont::iined in tile Act, emphasizing the nature oi pcn:tllil's for
failure to po~t. 11nd listing the HUD area
office instead of the rei:'.ional office as a
location to whic-h to send complaints.
The new l l0.2fl adopt;, the suggestion
With rerrard tn the area ottice~ ln that
.the poster will provide !or insertion of
the address of the rc<;ir,nal or ar<"a omce
as appronriatc. It has be~n decided that
instead of lrnr>thenin('! the contf'nt of the
poster by adding additionnl prohibitions.
the poster should be made shorter and
easier to understand
bv briC'fly hi"'hli'lhtinp: the major prohibitions. In addition, the Equal Hou~ing Opportunity
logotype and slogan hwe been inserted.
at the top of the poster.
A comment by tl~e Federal Home Loan
Bank Board
<FHLBB> recommended
exempting from this rer;ulation any person subject to a re:,:ulat;on of the F'HLBB
requiring that pnson to post a poster
substantially
similar in content to the
poster det.cribed in HUD's rcrr.ulation. 'A
similar comment wa!': msde b\' the B'.)ard
of Governors of the Fedrral Reserve System with respect to entities subject to
supervision by any of the four Frcternl
financial re,rnlatory ai:;cncies. The Department will authotizc a r>crson subject
to the jurisdiction of a Federal financial
regulatory agency to utilize a po::ter pre~
&eribed in a regulation bv such a';cncy,
and approved by the Department,
in~
stead of the poster prescribed by HUD.
However, all of the other requirf'ments of
Part 110 will remain folly ap)licnbie regardless o! whatc\er snnctions the rei;uJatory arency prescribes for failure to
comply with its rerulntion.
This provision is set rorth in* 110.25,bl. The re
(lU!remem. set f0rth in~ llOJl}/cl,
tlrnt
financial
in."Lt1jtic111s p<;.,,Land n1r~:ntn~111
ll fnir hVU'U11-~' f)(l:,ter \\tll
11tt Lf.' t'.'I~lt't!VC
until May 1, 1972, in order to aliow t:mc
dcemrd a discriminatory
housing practice, I.e .. an act unlawful under sections
8114.805, and 806 of tiUe Vlll, ::mct prim,i.
f:icic evidence of n violn lion of lhcse r.~ciions. as aplicablc. There were comments fnrc:;nP, this 1>ro,is1(na:1d n comment i;taf'.nc: that such a provi>ion wa!'l
beyond the Dcp:11 Lment's n11:hority M1
the ;-,:round that Litle VlIJ p1P. 0 cril;c the
specific .ict~ of clisn;minrition
ll'hich arc
unlawfnl. Tilcrc was a,sa n c::imm::nt 1i:-commc11dinr, that failure t') cJmply shr;uld
subject a person to suspcn~ion from
eligibllity for FHA insurance.
The Drpartmcnt
believes tlrnt it has
to require a fair housing
the authority
.Poster, nnd that proposed* 72.30 does not
prescribe a new violation not provided for
in title VIII. nather. the S('etion provides
an appropriate
evidenlia ry mechanism
for assisting in the determination
of
whether a vi,.ilation of Litle VI1I has occurred. For purposes of clarity, the provi- .
sion has been combined
with proposed f 72.35-complaint.s-!nto
a new ,.
110.30-Effcct
of failure
to display
poster-and
the combined text shortened. Under 110.30, when a person
claiming- to have bem injured by a discriminatory housing prac 1.icc files a complaint pursuant to Part 105-Fair
Housing, a failure to display the required
poster shall be deemed prima facic evidence of such practice.
The comment with respect to apr,lica'tion of ndditional sn.nctio:1s Is rejected,
since such sRnctlons as well as others ll re
provided in the Affirmative Fslr Housin~
Marketing Rc1rnlations pubiished January 5, 1972 (37 P.R. 75 \. for failure t'J
make the postine; required at FHA project sites by 200.620<!> of that rerrulation. Although Part 110 is applicnble to
some persons who are not covered by
the Affirmathe Fair Housinr. Marketin's
regulations,
the Department
considers
that the insertion in Part 110 of the .sanctlons prnposed in the comment
is not
appropriate.
Accordingly, a new Part 110 is added
to Title 24 to read as follows:
Sec.
$ubpotl A-PurpoH
e>ndDellnitions
110.5
Purpose.
Definitions.
Subpart
110.10
110.15
110.20
110.25
B-Requi,.,ment,
for Dhpfay of Poslers
Pe.rsons subject.
Location of posters.
A,allnhll!ty of posters.
Description
o! post(;rs.
110.30
Effect
llO.l
Subpa,t C-Enforcemen!
o! !allure to disp!ar
poster.
Part l l O
are issued ,iuder sc-ctlm1 7(d) of the Department or Housing e.nd Urbnn Development
Act or 1965 (42 u.s.c. 3535(d)).
AUTHORl'TY: The provisions
Subpart A-Purpose
of this
and Definitions
} IO.I
l'ur11osc.
The Il'[':1.11:\tions set forth in this part
contain the procPdurcs
cst;,.bl!$bed ,y
'..he Secretary of Hou,,ing ;md Urban .1,.:veloprnent with respect to Lhe display of
a !air housing poster by persons subject
to sections 804-B06 of the Civil Rights Act
o! 196B; 42 U.S.C. 3604-3606.
,,...
.t
..
. ,
3430
ll0.5
Definitions.
<n> "Department"
means the Depart
mcnt of Housing and Urbnn Development.
<b) "Discriminatory
housing prnctlce''
means an act that is unlawful under section 804, 805, or 806 of title VIII.
(c) "Dwelling" means nny building,
structure, or portion thereof whlch is
occupied as, or desitmed or intended for
occupancy a.,, a residence by one or more
families, and any vacant land which is
offered for sale or lease for.the construction or location thereon of any such
building, structure. or portion thereof.
Cd) "Pamily" includes a single individ-
ual.
'I
<e>"Person" includes one or more individuals, corporations. partnerships, associations. labor'org:i.nizations. legal representatives,
mutual companies, jointstock companies, trusts. unincorporated
organizations. trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, receivers and f!ducia1ies.
(f)
"Secretary" means the Secretary
ot Housing and Urban Development.
(g)
''Fair housing poster" means the
poster prescribed by the Secretary for
display by persons subject to sections
804-806 of the Civil Right.,; Act of 1968.
(hl "The Act'' means title VIII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3601
et seq.
(i) "Person in the business of ~elling
or renting dwellings" means n person as
defined In section 803< c > of the Act.
Subpart -Requirements
for Display
of Posters
110,10
;
')
P<-nou,i. ~uhj(-rt.
<a> Except to th~ extent that paragraph ( b) of this section applies. all per sons subject to section 804 of the Act.
Dlscriminotion in the Sale or Rental of
Housing, shall post and maintain a fair
housing poster as follows:
0) With respe.:.:t to a single-family
dwelling lnot being offered for sale or
rental in conjunction with the sale or
rental of other dwellmgs) offered for sale
or rcnt~.l throu!'.'h a real e!'>tate broker,
agent, salesrmm. or per:;on in the business
orselling or renting dwellings. such person shall post and m;1intain a fair housing poster at auy place of bu:c;iness where
the dwelling is o!Tered for sale or rental.
(.2) With respect to all other dwellings
covered by the Act:
<O A fair housing
poster shall be
posted and maintained at any place of
business where the dwelling is offered for
sale or rental. and
(ii)
A fair housing poster shall be
po~ted and muintalned at the dwellin.:r,
except that with respect to a singlefamily dwelling being offered for sale or
rental in conjunction with the sale or
rental of other dwellings, the fair housing poster may he po,tcd and nrnintainrd
at tl1e model dwcllln,.s m~tc:id of at each
of the individual dwelling;;,
(3) With rrspect to those dwellings
to which subparagraph
t:.?l of this paragraph applies, the fair housing poster
must be po:;tcd at the beginning of con. struction
and maintained
throur:hout
the period oI construction and sale or
rental.
brokers.ii
Subpart C-Enforcement
110.30 Effeet or failure to di,play
po!!-ter.
l.oraiion of po,tc1~.
All fair housing posters shall be prominently dif.played so as to be readily ~Pparent to all per.sons seeking housing
accommodations
or financial assistance
or brokerage
services in connection
there-with as contemplated
by sections
804-806 or the Act.
110.20
Availabili1y of po~lcrs.
All persons subject to this part may
obtain fair housing posters from the Department's
:-egional and area 01"nces. A
facsimile may be used if the poster and
the lettering are equivalent in size and
legibility to the poster available from the
Department.
110.25
Dc.-niption
of po,wr~.
<a.) The fair housing poster shall be
l 1 inches by 14 inches and shall bear
the following legend:
injured by a discriminatory
housing
practice m1y file a complaint '\l.ith the
Secretary pursuant to Part 105 of t!us
ch1pter. A failure to display the fair
housing poster as reqUired by this par:
shall be deemed prima facie ev1der.ce of
a discriminatory
housing practice.
Effective date. This part shall be ef
!ective February 25, 1972, except for
110.lO<cl
which shall be effecti\e
May 1, 1972.
SAMUEL
J.
SlMMONS,
Assistant Secretary
tor
Equal Opportunit11.
2-15-72;8:45
amJ
//.,,
./
.,,,
.
"-..:
:.fl
C::::J ~:
c.. ,...":
.
.
't'
t.-.i,_ ...,.._l>
!
f
~~--~..t,',.,;,'
,. . -
We Do Business
In Accordance
W1th
Federal Pair Housing Lo.w
(Title
\'Ill
the
Act or 111ee)
IT 1S It,U:O.\L
TO D1SCRIMINATE
ANY PEnSON
COLOR.
RELIGION,
AGAINST
BEC1'.l..i3E OF RACE,
OR NATIONAL
ORIOIN
1nc.
APPENDIXB
37 F.R. 6700
4/1/72
In response
to publishers'
comments,
Office of Assistant
Secretory
for Equal
Opportunity
(Docket
No. R-72-1081
persons aud organization.; a:nd consideration has been given to each comment.
Several comments observed that the
proposed policy statement v.>asat times
unnecessarily
limited to the field of
newspaper advertising. In response to
the comments, the policy stat~ment has
been revised in several places to clarify
that the guidelines apply to advertisements in all media, including, e.g., television and radio, as well as to advertising
agencies and other persons who use
advertising.
Several organizations suggested additional catchwords connoting a discriminatory effect for inclusion in section
A-3. That section hns been expanded to
include several additional terms which
may have a discriminatory effect when
used in a discrirninatory context.
In response to other comments. section A-6 has been revised to clarify how
directional references could be employed
in a. discriminatory
context with an
ethnically, as well as a ractaliy, discriminatory effect. Also. section A-7 has been
added relating specifically to designation
of religious, ethnic or racial facilities to
identify an area or neighborhood.
A number of comments indicated that
human models or Equal Opportunity advertisements can and have been used
selectively to promote the development
of racially exclusive communities. A r.ew
section C-4 has been added in order to
meet this specific problem. The previous
humnn models section has bcC'n clarified
by rc\ision and rcor;:aniz:,tion m ti:~
new section C. in livhL of comment,;
which indicated confusion or uncertainty surrounding
the use of human
models.
eight points.
A number of organizations
suggested
the inclusion of a puhlish1;r's notice to
appear with real ,srnte o.dvertis!ng. A
suggested notice has been included as
Table III, in lieu of the provision in the
proposed guidelines for direct notification to all firms or persons using the
advertising services of a p'..l:J!isher. This
provision was removed in ligllt of objections that sucil notification
would be
unworkable or would impose great hardship since a large volume of real est.ate
advertising is placed l:.,ya great number
of persons on a nonrecurring basis.
Finally, a number of minor editorial or
organizational changes h::we been made
in order to clarify or simplify the
advertising guidelines.
Several organizations suf(gested that
the guidelines make specific reference
to the roles of other enforcement agencies, including the Department. of Justice
and local agencies. These comments suggested that the guidelines specify that
they do not alter or affect conciliation
agreements or court orders obtained by
these agencies, as well as by ~he Dcpartr.1ent. S:.ich a disclaimer appears to lit:
unnecessary, since there is nothing in
the guidelines to indicate an intent to
alter or affect agreements or orderi obtained by the Department
and other
agencies.
This document is issued pursuant to
section 7(dl. Department of Housing and
Urban
Development
Act, 42 U.S.C.
3535(d).
The statement
follows:
PUBLICATION
WITH
Tr:n.i:
of Policy
0UIDEt.INES
OF THE
vur
FOR
ClVlL
reads . a..~
CuV.PLIANCE
R!GHrs
ACT
OF 1968
POUCY
6l'ATEMENT
a dwelling
comp!lance
VIII.
by
owner or hls s,.gent. tn
w1~h the requirc:t.,,nt,;
of title
Con!ormance
v.lth these guldellne3 wUl be
considered
in evaluating
compliance
with
tlt1o VIII Jn connection
with lnvesu,,at!on.~
by the A.ssistant. S<'cretary
o! ad'.c~tls!ng
practices 111:d policl<>s under the title.
r
'i
used In residential
real este.te advertising
to convey either o\crt or tacit cliscrlmln.'\toty
Intent. Their use should therefore be e.;old:d
in order to e:!mlnate
their <llsalmlnatory
effect. In considering a complamt under tlt!e
w!ll nonnallv
VIII, the Assistant
Secretary
consider the use of these and compart.blc
words, phrases, symbols. and forms w tndlcaw possible violation ot the title and to
II need for seeking
r~solut1ou o!
establish
the complnlnt.
I! lt ls apporent
1roru tbe
context
o! the usage thnt dLscrirnlnat1on
within the meaning o! the 'I'itlc ls likely to
result.
1. Words descriptive
of dwelling,
land
lorci, and tenant. White private home, Col
ored home. Jewish home.
2. Words indicative
of race, color, religion, or national origin. Negro, Hispano, Mexican, Indian, Oriental, Black, White, WASP,
Hebrew, Irish, Italian.
Europc:.n, etc.
3. Catch words. Rcstr!cwct,
ghott-0, dlsad
vantnged.
Also, words such as private, ln
tegrated,
traditional,
"board
1morova.1 or
"membership
approved"
It u~e.;1 !n a dl.scrlmlnatory
context.
4. Symbols or logotypes. Symbols or logotypes which Imply or sugi:;est race, color, r~ligion, or national
origin.
o. Colloqui(l/ism,. Loci>.lly ncceptoo words
or phr::1.SeSwhich imply or suggest ra.ce. color,
religion, or national
origin.
6. Directions
to the real estate for sale err
rent (use of maps or written
instructlorni).
References
to Ieal estate location made In
terms of racially or ethnically
significant
landmarks
such I\S e.n existing Black development
(signal to Blacks) or an existing
<1evelopn1ent known !cr Its exclusion o! ml
norltles
(signal to Whites}. Specif!c directions given trom a racially
or ethnically
slgnlficant
area.
7. Area (location)
description.
Use o! religious, ethnic,
or raclal facilities
to describe an area, neighborhood,
or laca.tlon.
B. Selective use of advertising
media or
content
With. discrimin,::tory
effect. 'l1le sein various media.
lective use of advertising
and with respect to various housing devel
opments or sites can lead to discriminatory
results and may lndlcate a violation or title
VllI.
1. Selective geographic impa,t. Such selective use may Involve the straregic placement
of billboards,
broclrnre advertisements
distributed
within a limited gcor;rnphic
area
m pc.r-
by hand or in the mail, or ndvertlsing
tlcul:n geographic coverage editions o! major mctropol!t.an
newspap ..rs, or In lo~al
newspap'rs which are mainly adver~ising vehicles for reaching a particulur
sebrneni; o!
the community,
or in displays or anr.ounce
ments only In ,;dected sales offices.
2. Selective use of equal opportunity
s,oga1, or logo. Such selective u;;e may involve
using the equal opportunity
slogan or logo
in advertising
reac:
.g some g~ograpb.ic
areas, but not others, or with respect to
b
not others.
some properties
J. Sc!t:ctivc use c i H1!l<Pt. :node ls. Such selc-~tive fidvert1:>1ng 1nay o.Lso 1i:.rolve t~te t4..C:i)a
o! luuna.u.
1n0del~
ptln1arHy
ill
rncd~a
tl1..i;.
r....,.,
'
6701
plementl!.ry
advertising
ca.mpntgn tho.t l!!I
directed e.t other groups, or the use by a developer o! racinlly mixed models to advertise one o! the developments
and not others.
O. Policy ana practices
gu:de11nes. T:ie
following gutde!!nes are offered e..sGugrested
methods
ot r.ssurlng equal opportun.!ty tn
real estat-0 ndvertlsing:
1. 01,ldc !tnes for use of logotype, state-
!:f t;s%t;'fits~i~
9!v~~~~
~;;r:oe!~f1~t~
1
,,
e. w t out re ard to
e,
ori tn Al rerna.ve y, 3-~ percont of t..ho
vcrt
ment copy
m1:1ybe dovoted to a statement o! tho equal
housing opportunity
poller of the owner or
agent. Tnble 2 (see appendix) cont.3.ins copies
ot tho suggested Equ..l Houslllg Opportunity
logotype, statement and slogan.
2. GutdeZinee. for use of human models.
Humo.n models Jn photographs,
drawings, or
other gre.phi.:: te<:hnlques may 'be used to
lndlcato rncla.l Inclusiveness.
If models are
used in display advertising cn.mprugns, the
models should be clearly d.crtnaole as reasonA~ly repr,;-sentlng bOth majority and mmorlty
groups In the metropolitan
area. Models, If
used, should 1ndlca.~ to the generul public
that the housing ls open to all Without regarl.l to race, color, religion, or national
origin, and Is not for tile exclusive use of one
such group.
3. Dui<lelines
/or
notification
of
APFl:NDIX
A slmple formula
Logotype
in inchc.,
4 oolumn
l.nches.......
z 2.
l x 1.
.i x %(1).
OF LOGOTYPE,
AND S!,OOAN
logotype.
r
!
Fatr
All publishers
o! advertise
agencies should poet
a copy or their nondiscrlm!n.e.tlon
policy ln 11,,
consplcuou.s place wberever persons come to
pl11ce lldvenislng
a.nd shoUld nave copies
available fer n.ll flnns and persons using
their advortlslng scr;,lces.
(c) 'Publisher's
n.otice. AU publishers
a.re
encouraged
to publish at the beginning o1
the real czt.a.te a.dvenlslng
~ectlon a notice
such as that a.ppea.rillg 1n Toble 3 (see
appendix).
III-ILLUSTRATION
NOTICE
OF
PlraLfSHEP.'S
Publisher's notice:
All real estate advertJ.B.ed tu this news;n1per
18 subJoct to the Federal Fal:r Hou.sing Act or
1968 which makes it Ulegal to adven:se "o.ny
pre!erence,
Umltatlon,
or discrimination
bs.sed on ra.ce, color, religion, or ne.tlonal
Filed 3-31-72;8:45
e. 1]
C:P O 9 303S9
"-----~--
<
--
,_
,~ '"i
'
.,
/
..
. ,.
APPENDIXC
TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC
..
RE:
Rental
Analysis
DATE:
---
Report
'fHE BREAKDOWN
OF PERSONSBY RACE MAKINGINQUIRYIN PERSON
ABOUTTHE TERMSANDAVAILABILITYOF APARTMENTS
FOR THE PERIODOF
AT
TO
---------
---------
------------------
APARTMENTS
WHITE
'
MADEINQUIRY
WEREOFFEREDAN APPLICATION
.-
APPLICATIONSWITHDRAWN
BEFOREPROCESSING
~
APPLICATIONACCEPTED
APPLICATIONSWITHDRAWN
AFTERPROCESSING
APPLICATIONSREJECTED
APPLICATIONSPENDINGEND OF PERIOD
l
i
..
..
I
I
l
J
,
AIPENDIX D -
..
."
APPLICATIONSFOR TENANCY
AT
APART}IBNTS
*ss,
Ir
I
IF
r~A!rE OF
DEPOSIT REJECTED
APPLI- SIZE, TYPE OF
'
OF
REASON ACCEPTED, E:!PLOYF:E
DATE
HC:rE .&
CA~rr's APT. DESIRED MONTHLYDESIRED REC'D
.,
DATE
ACT I~~G O'T
CF
AND DATE
AND
RENTAL DATE OF
BUSil\t:SS
APPLICA- WEEKLY (Brs. , FurNOTIFIED NOTIFIED APPLIC.;TIG~
RATE OCCUPANCY. DATE
PHONES INQUIRY TION
INCOME nished)
DATE
'.
::"'
"-'
.
.
,;/
'
'II
..-
..,..
.-
"'
'
..
'
...
..
,~
,.
..
..
persons
'
are
...r
applying
for
one apartment
please
so indicate.
-------------------------------------------------.......,_,--~-----
------~-------------------------------------------------------------
r:,.
1 r~2~
9
..a.V'
zJ
i,,'-(
.:
\j'""
JURY
TITLE
l ' --
....,,
li L.r't~, ~n,
~---~--~--DOCKET
BASIS
,- :-"'
'
OF
ATTORNEYS
CASE
UNITEDSTATESOF .AMERICA
For Plaintiff:
u. s.
ATTYf~D~:'(l
vs.
FRED C. TRUMP,DONALDTRUHP
HANAGD1ENT, INC.
and TRU:MP
-----
For Defendant:""
S;\J'..'?
BOLAN, & T"'A
1TT:EY
39 r:a::-Jt 6cth C' '-: ,~ ,, ,,-, :..
\.)
NeN ,_Yo'"k.
VIOitATION OF FAIR HOUSE1G _t.CT ""'
SEEKS: An INJut;CTION
.
OF ACTION:
TRIAL
,_:
_(:
.i_
1968
--- 1' (; __
N. Y. J ()'l? J
~ __
-----
47?-1400
Cl-AIMED
ON
DATE
ABSTRACT
OF
DEFENDANT'S
COSTS
RECEIPTS.
TO
WHOM
ACCOUNT
DUE
!!
REMARKS,
fc:TC.
RECEIVED
D1SEH.;ri.SED
r-}'
t.,.
vs.
U.S. A.
FRED C. TRUMP,INC,
ET AL
AMOUNT
REPORTED
EMOLUMENT
RETURNS
FILINGS-PROCEEDINGS
:ornplaint
10/ 15/7:
I~
Sun:unons issued.
filed.
173
, ~7773-j
-------
i complaint
1 .. -12-73
:~otice
of
complaint
motion
ret 1-11-74
& memorandum of law
of motion
filed
extend:tng
tte
for an order
dismissing
the
in support
of motion
filed.
dismiss
to affidavits
8/9
10
defts'
of Donald
--
--
11/12
time
counterclaim,
ret 1-11-74 at 10 A.M. filed.
J--S::-_74!_Unreported
orders
cited
in memo of U.S. in opposition
__ .___ L motion to dis_m
__
. i_s
__s_f_i_1_e_d_.
____________________
_____ , __
5
6
filed.
dated 11/30/73
to answer to 12/10/73
Lt
to 1-2-3-73
By NEA.Hl:::R,
J. - Order
JSS
----1
the defts
to ans','"'" to 111?6 frf3
I
.J-~l:J5-7]Pltff
s first
-mterrogatories
to ----------------1-..c......defts
filed.
ll-26-73:
By NEAHER,J. - Order.dtd
11-23-73
extending
time to answer
IN
to
__
1
13
...;;;_,__
Trump &
---
14
___
. . . .. .- , ,I
__
,,
'!.__f
16
=-~~
--
filed
that
the
deft'
s rnotior- _____
15
Defts'
reply mmm.orandum of law in support
of motion to dismiss
counterclaim
filed.
16
----~--c:';_7h i 1,rct.ice of rn0t;rin to ~("Impel dPfts
to 8l"lRWPr nltff's
interr0r;at_., ____
17 /1 _'
______ I l"lriPS ret. 1-?5-7~ f 1 10:00 A.I~. and memcrandnm of J.aw f11ea.1
'.~-::)-71..L(Before NE.A.HER, J - Case called for hearing
on motions to dis!
----~iss
_______
-------.
complaint
& counterclaim.
Mot~ons argued. - Defts' motion
ito dismiss
denied as indicated.
Deft has 2 weeks to prepare
iinterrogatories.
Order to be submitted.
Pltff's
motion to disss defts
counterclaim
Order to be submitted.
order
dismis
laint
is
denied,
etc.(see
19
answer to complaint
for injunction
filed.
Defts first
demand for interrogat9ries
to pltff
I
enographer
s transcript
dtd 1-25- 74 filed.
------__ --
---
--
filed.
cont'd
-----~-"---
..
22
-.
..
73 C 1529
c1v1L oocKET
U.S.A.
PLAlNTIF'F'
3/__19_/_7_4
___
N_o_tice to take
Notice
to tak~ deposition
upon oral examiaaticl>n fitledj_25
Notice
to take deposition
upon oral ~xaminatiJ~-fif;a:J
26
By NEARER J
Or d er d ate d 4/1/74
f l 1e d t h at t :e d e1=osJ
: .It1ons1
'
27 i
date.
of <lefts are adjd to another
filed
ret.
re: motion, for
of Motion,
5/3/74
Notice
I
28
sanctions
s motion for sa he tic ns
of nltff'
Memorandum in Support
I
29
filed.
3/19/74
./2/74
./ 23/74
RETURNS
PEF'ENDANT
-+[--~1_==c-+_2_3_++:==:=
examinati9n
fitedi
24 -i.---- _L___ _
-----+--i_n_t_e_r_r_o~g_a_t_o_r_i
__
e_s_f_i_l_e_d_.
____________
deposition
:~gL~Ti;~Ni
f-------------l
FILINGS-PROCEEDINGS
DATE
upon oral
+---+----1
--
.-
: -------
----
I
_______j_
____
--
i
I
...........-+---------
./ 23/74
----,---
I
I
----------
I
i
'
I
I
i
I
I
'!
'
I
_L__
i
I
i
II
----------
----
------
i
j
I
I
''i
.;.---~
I
I
!
I
I
I
'
110
---
--
REGISTERED MAIL
Service
Lower Concourse
Roosevelt Field Shopping Center
Garden City., New York 11530
Re:
Transcription
United
qivil
Enclosed'l~rein
1974, together
with letter
Bracht!., Esq.,
explanatory ..
Assistant
please
find
tapes
on May 3,
recorded
u. s .. Attorney.,
which letter
is self-
and cooperation
in this
matter.
Very truly
yours.,
VINCENT A. CATOGGIO
United States ~strate
Eastern District
Encls.
of New York
RE&!STfRED NO,
1221B
POSTMARK OF
JDP:HAB:eh
F. f 730959
June
Mrs.
17,
1974
Dorothy Chojecki
Manager
Eastern
Transcription
Service
Lower Concourse
Roosevelt
Pield Shoppdtn.g Center
Gard.en City,
New York
11530
Re:
United
U.S.D.C.,
States
v. Fred C. Trump, et
E.D.N.Y.,
Civil Action
al.,
.. No. 73 C 1529
Date of Hearing
Before
Dear Mrs.
- May 3, 1974
-_.Magistrate
Vincen.t
CatQggia,
Chojecki:
We would appreciate
your causing
the electronic
recording
of the testimony
in the above-mentioned
proceeding to be stenographically
transc~ibed.
This Office,
of
course,
will assume the expense of the transcript
for one
copy at the prevailing
rate plus the original
which must be
filed with the office
of the United States
Magistrates.
Our need
appreciate
your
for the
efforts
transcript
to expedite
and we 'Wnula
a11d delivery.
is pressing,
completion
Very truly
yours,
DAVID G. TRAGER
United States
Attorney
By:
HENRY A.
Assistant
Copy:
New YorJ.:
11201
BRACII'l'L
u. s.
Attorney
OCTOBER
24, 1974
B
e f o r e:
NEARER,J.
AT 10:00 A.M.
CIVIL MOTION
73 C 1529 U.S.A.
-vsFRED C. TRUMP,ET AL
APPLICATION
OF THEU.S. THATDEFrS MOTIONFOR SANCTIONS
BE HEARD,DENIEDWITHPREJUDICE& STRICKEN
AFTERHEARING.
APPEARANCES:
DAVID G. TRAGER, U.S. ATrY.
BY: H.A. BRACH.TL,AUSA.
FOR DEFTS
',
"
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529 (EN)
)
)
v.
)
)
FRED C. TRUMP,DONALD
TRUMP )
and TRUMPMANAGEMENT,
INC., )
_____________
)
Defendants.
)
)
AFFIDAVIT
WASHINGTON
)
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA)
ss
DONNA
F. GOLDSTEIN,being duly sworn, deposes
and
says:
1.
I am an attorney
the Department
United States
of Justice
accuse me of threatening
improper
this
conduct
action.
of Pennsylvania.
to defendants'
Rights
Division
in the above-styled
in the Civil
for the
I am a member of
I make this
in the discharge
of
witnesses
affidavit
papers
which
and of other
of my responsibilities
in
case.
2.
While I interviewed
statements
and
each of these
of Carol R. Falcone
pertinent
or improper
individuals
to this
things
case,
alleged
to
I
...
in their
statements,
each in a fair
and objective
While a complete
viduals
response
must await
think
it
important
to the principal
threaten
jail,
or money, or of dating
accusations
at all.
Division
be tapped.
In fact,
at all
else.
with regard
to her
In fact,
I made no
Ms. Falcone
that
any
and in fact,
the
manner towards
appeared
to me friendly
harassed
Mr. Miranda,
her.
on both sides
times.
(b) I never
called
On the contrary,
tell
nor did I
briefly,
or with anything
matters.
or that
motion I
at least
Ms. Falcone,
about these
Civil
respond
indi-
and I do so as follows:
harassed
information
of these
on the pending
to innnediately
allegations,
the facts.
to the statements
business
way to ascertain
the hearing
(a) I never
interviewed
him that
jail,
he cooperated
I did not
he would be thrown in
or winning my case.
the facts
because
the truth.
my "ambitions"
or any other
he described
and I never
to me some racially
- 2 -
fear
that
Mr. Fred
effect,
discriminatory
housing
practices
in which defendants
answers
to interrogatories
States
have engaged.
filed
in the case
Goldweber,
previous
discloses
that
discriminatory
case.
My interview
had also
practices
Mr. Ziselman,
of his
number of former
suggest
Prior
practice,
him that
the agents
I would try
cancel
unnecessary.
Ziselman,
their
After
details
I telephoned
I mentioned
that
him, but I
my interview
witness
it was now
with Mr.
for plaintiff
transaction
with Mr.
account.
Accordingly,
matters
to discuss
he considered
was one of
him, since
for a short
that
with
with
as to a rental
must
in accordance
interview
had,
Mr. Ziselman,
and contact
Mr. Ziselman
there
Mr. Ziselman
a prospective
which differed
that
I had completed
I interviewed
who provided
of Justice
Trump employees.
Mr. Ziselman,
to my interview
requested
a request
stated
to the
seemed to me to be
or intimidate
affidavit
the Department
our normal
Ziselman
information
I was assigned
told
suit,
on both sides.
them.
in this
provided
before
with
of United
for plaintiff
Mr. Miranda
about
friendly
counsel
Plaintiff's
time since
with
it
him.
there
- 3 -
He refused
to be harassment.
me
my request
I responded
and
that
..
I was sorry
he felt
that
way, .since
to be harassment.
(d) Mr. Manley's
Mr. Cohn's affidavit
to the records
Trump office
events,
a fact
respect
to this
defendants'
are entirely
be disposed
distort
In conclusion,
without
information
are described
up
as to these
The facts
in detail
with
in Appendix
a copy of which is
hereof.
I wish to state
on my conduct
that
the attacks
and integrity
I hope that
foundation.
of at the earliest
leading
incident
papers
the facts
in June 1974.
Report on Discovery,
hereto
3.
omitted
C to plaintiff's
attached
completely
inspection
at the
letter
practicable
in
as an attorney
the matter
can
date.
~t~-L-
DoNNAF. GOIDSTEIN
Att~rney,
Ho1.Eing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
Sworn to before me this
2nd day of August, 1974.
NOTARYPUBLIC
My commission
expires:
(lA--
/F' -ru,l.Ao
5/ /f / l
/
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL ACTIONNO.
73 C 1529 (EN)
_______________
Defendants.
.)
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF NEWYORK
)
)
CQUNTYOF NEWYORK )
I,
ss
ELYSE S. GOLDWEBER,
being
say that:
1.
I am presently
employed as an examining
Division,
from September
3.
ticipated
States
lawsuit,
employed as an attorney
Department
of Justice,
located
at
to the institution
I interviewed
with
the
Washington,
D. C.
4.
of Investigation
I was formerly
Rights
attorney
Action
of Justice,
stage
I parof United
of the above-mentioned
,r
Hall Apartments,
New York.
what,
if
practices
of this
prospective
Inc.
apartment
that
from a "colored"
me that
every
him to attach
applications
seekers
received
and that
being
from
he was to write
so as to indicate
the application
person.
he did this
had instructed
to all
Inc.
to me that
Inc.
of paper
black
discriminatory
of Trump Management,
sheet
was to determine
knew about
related
woman called
a separate
interview
at
Flushing,
of Trump Management,
Mr. Miranda
Williams&a
as a superintendent
Bowne Street,
Mr. Miranda
on the part
5.
all
41-10
The purpose
anything,
Inc.
to Trump
considered
Furthermore,
Mr. Miranda
time a black
person
was
stated
applied
to
for
an
apartment.
6.
that
Mr. Miranda
he was afraid
or words to that
discriminatory
also
that
stated
to me during
this
interview
effect,
because
practices.
he told
me about
He was reluctant
their
to have his
off",
allegedly
name
disclosed.
7.
friendly,
When it
letter
After
this
interview,
I had no further
became necessary
in the
form attached
personal
to disclose
hereto
- 2 -
contact
his
with
identity,
respects
Mr. Miranda.
I sent
'
...
'
persons
Inc.
in accordance
information
Justice
letter
Subscribed
t~his,-f~
,,-,
---~
-vrv,-nz)r )
NOTARY
PBLIC
My conunission
>.
expires:
EVELYNSOMMcR
Notery ltublic, St,t., ,f 'lew York
1
No. 24-'4501 l 58
Qualifi~d
Commission
in 1Caqs County
7j
"
records
to Mr. Miranda
\..Q.~
practice,
one addressed
Department
was sent
Trump Management,
on an MTST machine,
Department
(the
Justice
about
and while
only one
to Phyllis
disclose
and fourteen
that
an
others.
T.
11/5/73
!.:'; 13
,n::,o\lyr,
!;-~( ..~.,
;"1ct1!lir..q .~.:'.:'tl)).,.
t~1tJ"{
:rules
It
will
(!ii.~11~~-:::.:
Y.~;u_
Wr.tt:.t to
h<1.v~1not'1L-1.r.
t'.1t!: . ,
cc:
Ft!ir
izljl'}',
h~,Vt~
talJ::
thf~
;1:,,vo
!\~11.,.-~.
\tiol~~t
ej1:~It!tJin.(r
intt~r:ir:r1
Records
Chrono
Goldweber
~~Pll'e--
Kosack-Hold
Reichard-Hold
}- _i 1.
, f
. .
,
........'
, --'~ .._.
,
--
i ()',)
~:{~,:1 t.
.. ;..L
! /
' . -~':"'!
.1 t:.
,J..,.~
~ ..
(~';;'-~
t-::-..,.
t,. :
l "',/ t~- ,,
~,,.-:~1.
'/
,\;1/~
('
~)l. _:.\(~
:::,
'('
IL
~. '1 .!'
;
-. ..
;. t ..; -:-.t
31
__t..J
c~.:;.::
i..ri
; ~:.
t::.1:;
;i:-:;vi:_;;;i:
i tJ ~:c,l._: .:~::1-/ ~.;t._-:.t
..~_.:
........
::tt t:1)t: .1~:/r-,~1(~ r:tsi<!;:; ~(0'1
::;lf.J~l i:1 .,:~:i:.1r !><>-:;~~.i,>;~;=~:i()r'.
Yer :'- ~--~."' 1 J"';/~ -~ -:J() t-,!tc~t :/cJt: c;.:
t.:1ir1.:;. ~:11,0 ..tt: it: ._
..s~: xc:cc1l l rt.11 :..:d.r.. -~~1-:nt:; t.lictt ~o~~..,
:)l/l.(.!E!.
~::~:1, it
~:"{)d. ~-~/
..::Ci.~ ..: tn :;.i.~<~ it:,
~/CY\i.! c;;tr.!. .:l.t:
lc:a3t
:.~:.) ~-~.1r-~t;::1~--: "'/0;J :1-'1'\.c .:i~'";..l it .;.1.\:1c~:,: to r~:!~-:2::.-.,r
-.'.!Vi:!:'}'t\-i:HJ.
,l,;o,
if
'f0:1 :v '!" :lo ,;~,r;c, n stac~:it.:rn.t.
g1:11:('! s:1rr~
~.....
c,...1 (J:."~t to
t~'c),.., ;l ~r1:-:.T/ fr)J:" ,;./'"'Urs;c)lf.
1 ~-;
If. 1~;()r1i:!o r,;,:1 r !".!;/r ..,...: "1".~Pt: J..P .r t:.'. -~ ~ r' : ...'..; s .l.t1~.?!~ l~~Jrl t t, 2 t
you, I ;.:ot,1-l v~ry ;_':E:,1 ,:1:1,;r:,c:_.~;''.'>.; ,n~,r. l::>ttin(r ~-_:'! ::;,,:,'
rirf1t
a:;;1'!
Pl:-'l:JC G'.111 :.~ (,:,.1i.L ...:-:;) :-:t (2';2)
73]--,':L::~.
If!.'','.'~
U:l~'lftil;,iLlr'
,.:\;-;,,
'JOU
c~;ll,
r:
:~inally,
\lorry
a Lou I:..
Jo
:1,Gt
:1-JV.)
t:,:-st
to
! ,.,ill
r'.:.!tur.:'l I:,11;
i::; V:~!:V i::;o:)y:t lL~
---
,,
--- -~..-
yoi.1
ta 1;~ t~;
; '[ ?0~-~
;':!._:
~/Ci\
,.....
'
'
J.
1. .
! I
,,..;
.:\t. ~..:
<'j J:"! r::
y
">;ct ion
..
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
_____________
Defendants.
AFFIDAVIT
WASHINGTON
)
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA )
ss
FRANKE. SCHWELB,being
1.
Rights
I am the Chief
Division,
I make this
entered
an officer
contempt
motion
Section
discovery
to supervise
and desist
of the Civil
depositions
order
that
charge
States.
an Order be
and designating
and says:
of the United
of our request
expedited
Court
deposes
and in supervisory
on behalf
in support
directing
of this
to defendants'
of Justice
litigation
affidavit
herein
of the Housing
Department
of the above-styled
duly sworn,
with
respect
attorneys
against
in
the United
States.
2.
this
On or about
Court a Notice
one of plaintiff's
contempt
of this
July
26, 1974,
of Motion praying
counsel
Court
in this
for alleged
defendants
that
action,
coercion
filed
with
Donna Goldstein,
be adjudged
and threats
in
against
prospective
to cease
Notice
witnesses,
and desist
and that
the United
of Motion is purportedly
of Carol
R. Falcone
defendants,
former
employees,
the motion
counsel,
supported
signed
is an affidavit
The papers
call
question
the professional
an attorney
acquainted
that
out foundation
of this
of two
to
on behalf
conduct
in the manner
of defendant
and reputation
of this
of
Section,
to her professional
of improper
and therefore
at
to her legal
competence.
conduct
constitute
ethics
I am satisfied
against
an abuse
of the processes
Court.
3.
Ms. Goldstein,
expeditiously
the factual
the United
handled
issues
may be resolved
on August
by defendant
requests
in accordance
We further
4.
of the allegations
States
cleared.
called
of
Also attached
on the staff
both with
the allegations
statements
a number of events
filed
Donna F. Goldstein,
and in relation
employees
by him.
reputation,
The
described
excellent
conduct.
former
Ziselman.
to describe
be ordered
by the affidavits
but unsworn
which purports
into
unlawful
and by the
States
ask that
to assure
to further
with
that
42
no "surprise"
hearing
reputation
be held
witnesses
Ms. Goldstein's
be
3614 so that
attack
- 2 -
the matter
u.s.c.
the evidentiary
that
against
be
reputation,
...
plaintiff
has propounded
inquiring
into
witnesses
to alleged
Adequate
unless
time
the
the
that
defendants
have acted
improperly,
statements
are
this
to
supposed
defendants
within
disclose
of only
is alleged
there
the
interrogatories
voluntarily
in advance
of Roy Cohn
that
we ask that
in
be
five
days,
information
to
earlier.
5.
The essential
this
motion
fair
tactics
spective
is
that
at the hearing,
used
of all
be free
allegations
threats
to influence
The position
In order
testimony
of defendants'
Ms. Goldstein
of misconduct
and scurrilous.
the
thrust
in an attempt
witnesses.
the allegations
that
the
suggests
States
witnesses
these
defendants
to the United
3 of the affidavit
which
States.
not be possible
of possible
Accordingly,
to answer
plaintiff
disclosed
of all
of the United
will
have attached
employees
to be others.
unless
is
testimony
by agents
the hearing
Paragraph
"some 11 former
required
for
to defendants
and prospective
depositions
of the hearing.
interrogatories
misconduct
information
to take
states
identity
preparation
this
brief
the
and other
testimony
of the United
on Ms. Goldstein's
are
issue,
witnesses,
both
on deposition
undue influence,
or from their
each party's
right
and cross-examine
to examine
or disruption
be fully
- 3 -
counsel,
protected.
is that
part
this
interference
out interruption
States
it
un-
of pro-
to resolve
of threats,
on
is
false
essential
and
or other
and that
witnesses
with-
..
6.
conduct
of these
an officer
is
plaintiff
on two separate
stein,
as reflected
hearing
on May 3, 1974,
States
Magistrate,
failing
to carry
covery
effective
Honorable
out their
is
for.
that
an Order
No previous
here
counsel
Catoggio,
for
relating
conduct
for
to dis-
the most
of these
by an officerof
request
United
defendants
deposi-
this
on behalf
application
for
At a
Accordingly,
the orderly
WHEREFOREI respectfully
States
affidavits.
responsibilities
of reprisal
to attorneys
Vincent
the action.
means to assure
fear
to
respective
reprimanded
and to expedite
occasions,
Goldweber
in their
by
has expressed
-- once to Elyse
the orderly
At least
Mr. Miranda
from defendants
tions
depositions
of the Court.
be deposed
means to assure
of the United
herein
Court.
as prayed
the relief
requested.
FRANKE. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. C. 20530
Subscribed
and sworn to before me
J<.... day of August,
1974.
this
?:cfiVr!-c
~:fit
On<
NOTARYPUBLIC
My
commission
expires
:;)1--%,.,_,,)J
-~// /17?
JDP:HAB:sm
F.#730959
BY HAl"\JD
June
Attention:
Scott
United
Re:
u.s.n.c.,
14,
1974
Esqs.
Manley,
Esq.
States
v. Fred c.
E.D.N. Y. civil
Trump, et a:\,{
'\
Action No/ 73 c 1529 )
We have your
letter
Your description
of Government counsel
at
is false.
duction
fendants'
\"--._____ _,,.,.,-~//
Dear Sirs:
of June
111., 1974.
and characterization
defendants'
office
of the conduct
on June 12, 1974,
Your statement
that Attorney
Goldstein
of defendants'
documents
at your offices
office
is also false.
We are
considering
an appropriate
Very truly
agreed
instead
to proof de-
response.
yours,
J. STANLEY POTTINGER
Assistant
Attorney
General
Civil
Rights Division
Department
of Justice
~CJ
e.fi:.
?;:_
/) /
.,:::,c:r#-,L--;1-t.t:.i
.(_
..;>- ~ .
-<-----..,.
DONNAF. G-'DSTEIN, Attorney
By
..
Housing
-1-
Section
/_
'?
'
&
Manley,
Esqs.
Copy to:
l
I
2 -
June
14,
1974
., '
,t',
.-'
NEW
.JOHN GOOF"REY
SAXE 090IH9!13l
ROGERS
H. BACON
l191g,1gi,2)
YORK,
(21Z)
NEW
472
YORK
10021
-1400
THOMAS
A.
BOLAN
COUHSEt.
ROY
M. COHN
SCOTT
E. MANLEY
MICHAEL
ROSEN
. ,,
DANIEL
.J. DRISCOLL
HAROLD
MELVYN
SCHWARTZ
RUBIN
A. SHUMAN
.JEF"rREY
LORIN
OUCKMAN
June
13,
1974
BY HAND
Henry A. Bracthl,
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Donna F. Goldstein,
Attorney-Civil
Rights
Division
United
States
Department
of Justice
Federal
Building
Brooklyn,
_New York
Dear
Mr.
Bracthl:
I am in receipt
of your letter.
dated
today which was wait-.
ing .for me at my office
.upon my return
from the Colten v.
C6heri trial
this
afternoon
at 5:00 p.m.
We :stand
ready
in u.-s.-A.: v.
Miss Goldstein
and I agreed
that
the inspection
would tak.e
place
at my offices
instead
of Trump so as to not ha~ve to un=
necessarily
totally
disrupt
the Trump necessa_ry
business
routine.
I would assume. that
by your demand in your .letter
to
neinspect
the materials
at Trump offices
that
Miss .Goldstein
. glected
to inform
you of our orril agreement
to . the contrary.
We are ready
both old and
to provide
you with over 1,000 files
Friday
on
current
tenants
of Trumpp
Because
Trump cannot
~~ f4actm/,f!llolcr#1/
~ J/kvn&y
..
.,,
..
..:
-2-
function
at all with all of its current
leases
and files
out of
we will have to work out a schedule
whereby as soon
its offices,
as you have completed
inspecting
and copying this very substantial
amount of material
that this material
will be returned
to
the Trump officeand.additional
material
will be sent to our
offices
for your inspection.
With regard
to the depositions
of further
Trump personnel
tenatively
scheduled
to begin on June.18,
I already
have advised
as both Mr .. Cohn.
the Government that th:is date is impossible
and myself .will still
be on trial
before Justice
Gomez in the
Supreme Court of the State of New York in Cohen v .. Cohen and
Judge Gomez absolutely
refuses
to hear any application
for
in that case.
I will supply you
even a half-day
,adjournment
with alternate
dates as quickly
as possible
and I am sure we
can come to an agreeable
solution
which will neither
delay
the rights
of
the matter
unnecessarily
for.you
nor prejudice
the defendants
by denying them the right
to counsel
:in these
I would respectfully
suggest
that is completely
proceedings.
unfair
on your part to set forth ult:imatums
in the way of
3:00 deadlines
to respond or else in view of the fa.ct that
you are completely
aware of both Mr. Cohn ;.1nd myself
being
we
on trial
before
Judge Gomez from 9:00 to 4:30 daily~
all we reare completely
ready to cooperate
in discovery,.
quire
is a little
time in which to assemble
matter
in view
of our extremely
heavy present
lit~gation
schedule,,
Finally,
I sincerely
wish that at least
from this point for-
to CC)Operate better
in all of
ward, that we could attempt
these matterso
If your goal is to expedite
discovery
and to
prepare
for a fair
trial
for both sides as is ours,
I think
se).:ved by coopera.tion
a.nd obthat this end would be better.
servation
of the basic courtesies
normally exterJBed between.
private
counsel
in litigation
instead
of continual
threats
by. the Government
and its treating
the rules
of civil
pro-.
Bible which cannot bend
cedure as some kind of undeviating
~ts ~imetables
for even a few
to promote the ends of
Justice
..
houx:s
Very
SEM/ap
cc: Hon. Edward R. Neaher
Unted States
District
Judge
United States
Courthouse
225 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn,
New York 11201
Honorable
Vincent Catoggio
United
States
Magistrate
United
States
Courthouse
Eastern
District
of New York
225 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn,
N.Y. 11201
truly
yours,
39
NEW
JOHN
GOQF"REY
ROGERS
ROY
SAXE
H. BACON
EAST
YORK,
68
NEW
STREET
YORK
10021
THOMAS
{212) 472-1400
(!909-1953)
(J9Ha-1962i
A.
BOLAN
COUNSEL
M.COHN
SCOTT
E. MANLEY
DANIEL
J. DRISCOLL
MELVYN
MICHAEL
HAROLD
\ADMITTED
ILLINOJS
AND INDIANA/
September
11,
1975
RUBIN
ROSEN
L.SCHWARTZ
Honorable
Edward Neaher
United
States
District
Judge
Federal
Building
Cadman Plaza
Brooklyn,
New York
11201
Re:
Dear
Judge
Trump Decree
Neaher:
I am writing
to Your Honor in response
to a letter
Donna F. Goldstein,
Esq.,
United
States
Department
of Justice,
the August
5, 1975 letter
of Donna Goldstein
in which Ms.
Goldstein
alleges
that
Trump Management
is in violation
of
Real Property
Law 236, which prohibits
the failure
to rent
based on the fact
that
an applicant
has children.
Ms.
Goldstein's
presentation
omits the crucial
statutory
word
"solely.~
We submit
that
this
section
is in no way applicable
to the instant
proceeding,
as the Consent
Order entered
into
between
the parties
provides
that
rentals
shall
be pursuant
to the policy
which Trump Management
had employed
in the
past,
i.e.,
if there
w~re children
under the vacating
occupancy,
there
could be children
under the new lease.
It is thus evident
that
no one is denied
rental
solely
on the basis
that
they have children.
In fact,
this
is what the statute
provides
- that
it is a violation
only
if the sole reason
that
a prospective
tenant
is denied
rental
is that~has
children.
As a practical
matter
it is my understanding
from
discussions
between
Trump Management
and this
office
that
the
only apartments
in which this
situation
even arises
are a few
buildings
located
in the Jamaica
Estates
area of Queens.
These buildings
are not designed
to accommodate
the needs
of young children,
but rather
older
people
who need peace
and quiet
and a greater
amount of security
than is usually
found in buildings
which are designed
for the young.
of
Honorable
September
Page Two
Edward Neaher
11, 1975
In this
one area,
children
cannot
be as happy with
the facilities
as in the over thousands
of other
units,
and
what Ms. Goldstein
suggests
would be unfair
to them.
With
these
few exceptions,
the buildings
under
the control
of
Trump Management
not only welcome rental
to families
with
younger
children,
but,
in fact,
have specifically
designed
a majority
of their
complexes
to meet the needs of minors.
Respectfully,
SAXE, BACON & BOLAN, P.C.
;l)/~
1/l,-t{c~t.,~
Roy M. Cohn~sb
cc:
Donna
Goldstein,
Esq.
..
...
39
NEW
EAST
YORK,
68"
NEW
STREET
YORK
10021
RoY M.Co:a:N
(212)472-1400
COUNSEL
CABLE:
SAXUM
August
11,
1975
Trump Decree
Neaher:
terms of the
it in sig-
We declined
to execute
the decree unless
language
in the Civil Rights Section
proposal
- Article
IV, Section A
(bottom of p. 77), which gave the Open Housing Center the
unbridled
right to redistribute
vacancy lists
all over the
place - was deleted.
We pointed
up the administrative
difficulties
this would present,
and after
discussion
before Your
Honor, the language was deleted,
and the vacancy list
to
go to Open Housing Center - period.
vacancy
causing
inquiry
And what
deletion.
that he
and then
will not
Despite
this,
the Center has been mailing
out the
lists
we have sent to them to other organizations,
total
confusion
and extra work, as by the time the
catches
up with us, the list
is usually obsolete.
they are doing defeats
the very purpose of the
I am advised by Mr. Eskenazi
of the Trump office
has specifically
asked Miss Parrish
of the Center,
Miss Goldstein
to desist
- and both have said they
unless
specifically
directed
to by Your Honor.
Secondly,
Miss Goldstein
advises
that
No. 2 - p. 13 - which provides
that Trump shall
its past and existing
practices
with respect
to
apartments
and number of occupants
- is in her
"discriminating"
and should not be observed.
Article
V,
adhere to
two-bedroom
opinion
Honorable
Edward
August
11, 1975
Page Two
R. Neaher
This is to respectfully
request
Your Honor to
set a hearing
on these
ex parte
decisions
by the Civil
Rights
Section
for sometime
in early
September
(I shall
be abroad
on business
until
Labor Day.).
Hoping
Your
Honor
has
a pleasant
summer,
I am
Respectfully,
sb
~ c;111.
Cd<~'lr..,
.
{
./
Roy M. Cohn
NEW
..JOHN
GODFREY
ROGERS
ROY
(212)
(1909-1953)
NEW
472
YORK
10021
THOMAS
-1400
0919-1962)
A.
COUNSEL
M. COHN
SCOTT
MICHAEL
DANIEL
HAROLD
MELVYN
..JEFFREY
LORIN
SAXE
H. BACON
YORK,
E. MAN LEY
(ADMITTED
ILLINOIS
AND INDIANA)
ROSEN
..J. DRISCOLL
SCHWARTZ
RUBIN
A. SHUMAN
August
DUCKMAN
5,
1974
Honorable
Edward R. Neaher
United
States
District
Judge
Eastern
District
of New York
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
New York
11201
Re:
Dear
United
States
Civil
Action@
Judge
V.
et
al.
C _:-5~-=~
Neaher:
I telephoned
Mr. Brown of Your Honor's
following
receipt
of a call
from Mr. Goldberg~
the hoard of eager-beavers
in the Civil
Rights
who is working
on the above entitled
matter.
chambers
one of
Division,
Apparently,
what Mr. Goldberg
was trying
to tell
me was that
he wished
to take depositions
in connection
with the contempt
motion
concerning
prosecution
tactics
which Your Honor made returnable
for next week (August~th).
Having spent
the first
week of August
suffering
through
government
depositions
of approximately
10 more Trump
employees,
I hardly
look forward
to another
set of depositions
rel a ting
to a motion
which has not even been heard
by
Your Honor as yet.
I would respectfully
request
that
the entire
matter,
including
what,
if any, "pre-trial"
should
be
had in connection
with this
motion
be considered
by Your
Honor at one time on the already
scheduled
date of August
16th,
at which time I shall,
of course,
be personally
before
the court.
BOLAN
-2-
We wish also
to apply
to Your Honor for an
order
setting
some boundaries
on the Civil
Rights
Division's
discovery,
which is proceeding
at a pace
that
would suggest
the facts
are being
explored
now
rather
than prior
to the following
of the compliant.
The purpose
of concluding
discovery
at an early
date
would be the fixing
of an early
trial
date by Your
Honor so that
the preference
granted
by Congress
under
this
act may be fullfilled.
The defendants
who have protested
and continue
to protest
their
complete
innocence,
are most desirous
of a prompt trial.
Respectfully
RMC:ap
BY HAND
yours,
Honorable
Page Two
have asked
matter.
Vincent
A. Catoggio
We assume that
the matter
is
Judge Neaher to fix an early
now academic,
and we
trial
date in this
Respectfully
&
yours,
ft1 (:/JkA
~
. Cohn
sb
cc:
Section
<
)
)
Plaintiff,
(EN)
)
)
v.
)
)
TRU}1Pand TRUMPMANAG~fENT, )
INC. ,
)
)
______________
Defendants.
In accordance
with
Catoggio,
United
"-~er!cz,
::ubr!lits
action.
On May 3, 1974,
obligation
action
States
its
of defense
in accordance
))
the instructions
Magistrate,
report
en the
Magistrate
counsel
with
plaintiff,
stat:.is
United
of
Catoggio
as well
42 U.S.C.
of tll.e Honorable
States
of
made reference
as the Court
3614,
Vincent
to the
to expedite
and rebuked
defense
the
counsel
Depositions
Prior
substantial
defense
to the hearing
difficulties
counsel's
of May 3,
in taking
continuous
1974t
plaintiff
any depositions
cancellations
encountered
because
and rescheduling.
of
'
This activity
resources
resulted
l
of counsel
<
in a substantial
for plaintiff,
plaintiff's
memorandum in support
dated April
sition
were outstanding
plaintiff
agreed
year.
were finally
Thereafter,
.of its
until
plaintiff
in detail
in
for sanctions,
notices
of depo-
hearing,
but
defendants
had answered
and incomplete
provided
motion
Several
these
propounded
Abbreviated
as described
to postpone
the interrogatories
answers to these
interrogatories
(See pp.
to reschedule
10-1~ lnfra).
depositions,
as
follows:
1.
replacing
Manley in order
depositions
tunity
to propose
2.
Mr. Manley
depositions.
!/
him that
a new attorney
telephoned
the plaintiff
1974.!/
In deference
alternative
dates
within
at least
three
occasions
the next
These depositions
were noticed
- 2 -
to discuss.
no alternative
to
with an oppor-
was
few day~.
telephoned
the contemplated
dates
on the two
occasions
he was Ireached,
to call
back in response
call.
sent
a special
the government
as noticed,
since
delivery
intended
to
no alternative
received.a
on the grounds
but promised
5.
of defense
an inquiry
that
counsel
inspection
by counsel
2, and that
dates
depositions
schedule,
the following
periodically
visited
week.*/
the offices
than July
alternative
these
they conflicted
to suggest
of the records
dates
on the third
4.
letter
On
and failed
described
for plaintiff,
of depositions
below.
dates
that
firm
no later
be later
week in July.
from defense
counsel
firm dates
*/
that
by July
3,
he still
of depositions.
This letter
included a list of those employees scheduled to
depose who were no longer employed by the defendants.
This information, which plaintiff
had been attempting
to secure for many
months, was to be given to the plaintiff
no later than May 13,
1974, at the direction
of Magistrate
Catoggio-at
the May 3
hearing.
- 3 -
however,
to call
recommended dates.
7.
matter,
thereafter.
defense
counsel
agents
On July 9, plaintiff
of the scheduling
8.
On July
Mr. Goldberg
that
agents
on July
these
depositions
B.
Inspection
On May~'
Request
plaintiff
time.
1974, plaintiff
of eight
Records
served
and filed
Manley, an associate
that
to take
1974.
of Documents on defense
requested
to these
attempt
could not
Yielding
The first
advised
would have
schelfule
.!/
deponents.
depositions
since.his
at any other
for Production
.::elephonically
scheduled
30-31 only,
him to attend
time strictures,
30 - August: 2, 1974.
the eleven
plaintiff's
fornEr
a Rule 34
counsel
Roy Cohn.!/
,,.,,.
of Mr. Cohn,
attorney
about it.
on
of eleven
to be taken on July
permit
served notice
of depo.siticms
that
Ms.
saying
See Appendix A.
- 4 -
the course
of depositions,
inspection,
stated
and requested
filed
two occasions
records
or indicate
would travel
as noticed.
that
the proposed
forward
him another
site
any objection
or date,
of records
expressed
or any limitation
inspection.
surprise
- 5 -
on what
to inspect.
Brooklyn,
See Appendix B.
also
these
to the
Defendants
12,
inspection,
would be permitted
arrived
repre-
!.I
about
At no time during
the records
to the records
any alternative
at the designated
inspection
no objection
suggest
Ms. Goldstein
Ms. Goldstein
of the plaintiff
conversations
available
records
he knew nothing
that
telephonically
1974, to inspect
inspection
that
of one of their
States
and_.
""'~.,
of Trump
at tbeir
arrival.
Mr. Stuart
Hyman, controller
Assistant
office.
attorneys,
The other
United States
Norman Goldberg
Go!dstein,
law clerks
Phillips
been informea
stated
that
defendants'
office.
that
approximately
a records
and that
placed
a call
and stated
i~spection
Plaintiff's
that
until
he had not
on doors,
Ms. Goldstein
he contactad
to reach
not present
then left
Attorney's
overreaching,
Attorney's
counsel.
or other
office.
improper
office
- 6 -
Attorney's
Contrary
there
by defendants
was no
conduct
by
to have
representatives
He further
to the allegations
ten
was scheduled.
any records
in
representatives
and returned
banging
his office
into
counsel
Ms. Goldstein
remained
his
and Donna
office,
After
into
Attorney's
Attorney,
placed
or their
to
counsel
of the plaintiff.
telephoned
for
the Eastern
expressed
he.had
his
to begin,
to Plaintiff's
these
and that
objections
if
defendants
as noticed,
37(d)
of the Federal
tions
between
dc.fencants'
of defense
Rules
the morning
the offices
either
time,
that
informed
formally
or
a records
of Civil
sanctions
Procedure.
was autoorized
on Friday,
but
to
some negotia-
to begin
inspec-
under Rule
After
inspect-
representatives
arrived
a clerk
at these
offices
to Mr. Manley,
their
rr;
with
be
five
allowed
and to totally
stormtroopers.
to swarm haphazardly
disrupt
to this
Court.)
of.June
14 denying
Counsel
banging
their
daily
at
upon the
on the doors
through
business
on
handed
conduct
Trump offices
Letter
He claimed
them a letter
files
first
Attorney
counsel.
When plaintiff's
demanding
States
Ms. Goldstein
for appropriate
plaintiff
records
the
earlier.
plaintiff
counsel,
United
Rtquest.
apply
ing
of the
objections
no objections
informally,
tion
District
communicated
him that
at the office
all
and
the Trump
routine."
(See
the veracity
of these
- 7 -
responded
rhetorical
by a brief
flourishes.
letter
From Thursday,
records
inspection,
exclusively
was.then
2-1/2
counsel
days of records
that
the following
records
records
June
Mr. Fanelli
informed
on Thursday
the records
were not
At 11:30 a.m.,
Mr. Fanelli
plaintiff's
counsel
the automobile
carrying
result
that
records
were inspected
Washington
June 20 and
made available
as agreed.
June 21.
on
and Friday,
10:00 a.m.,
Records
for
a~ 10:00 a.m.
broken
counsel
for inspection
would be available
21, beginning
since ..neither
inspection,
of the
coIIImlllnicated almost
On Tuesday afternoon,
the plaintiff
that
for plaintiff
the: completion
afternoon,
of these
informed
the records
on Thursday
plaintiff's
of their
June
for
had
2:00 p.m.-*I
two counsel
time
at
from
no p~rpose
as a
cancellations.
arrived
on Thursday afternoon,
the driver of
Simon Wiss, recounted to plaintiff's
counsel
had to run for Trump Management by auto that
the virtues
and dependability
of the autorecords.
- 8 -
On Friday,
records
could
26,.1974.
not be available
Counsel
travelled
June
June
for
for
plaintif~
inspection
returned
ing days,
records
Not only
to belabor
We believe,
may be relatively
is petty
quite
of May 3.
defensa
Wednesday,
have been
June
D. C. and
inspection
on
of thirteen
for a little
over
work-
seven days.
however,
minor,
that
the total
*
while
harassment,
out of keeping
Moreover,
it
each
for the
with Magistrate
defendants'
papers
that
are without
foundation
records
the United
in fact.
- 9 -
item
individually
to waste
United
Catoggio'
effcrts
inspection,
States
tried
a large
States.
seems to us haras_sment
the foregoing
less,
a period
additional
not occurred.
We are reluctant
While it
that
to Washington,
during
money could
*
details.
until
the records
interruptions
Thus,
indicated
none the
jirections
to deal
with
the allegations
in
to "by-pass"
counsel
II.
DEFENDANTS'FAILLTRETO PROVIDEDISCOVERc\BLE
INFORMATION
RE0UESTEDBY PLAINTIFF
A.
Defendants'
Plaintiff's
Answers to Plaintiff's
First
pounded on November,
directing
finally
slightly
defendants
submitted
their
more than
interrogatories,
tiff
defendants
As noted
waiting
below,
nro Orders
week (letter
defendants
consisted
to at leas.t
that responses
to for
of this
the Interrcgatories,
In response
indicated
the information
after
were pro-
or objected
That submission
two pages. *I
more than
is still
to answer
response.
to defendants
Interrogatories
Interrogatories
of
three
would be forth-
promise
to complete
defendants
have failed
answers.
to provide
of the case.
memorandum is not intended
dealing
with
to be a substitute
the deficiencies
for
of deJendants'
!!!I
See Appendix C.
- 10 -
responses
to file
tion
to'Interrogatories,
such a motion
and while
in the future,
of some of defendants'
Court's
we wish
we believe
responses
should
to reserve
our right
a brief'
that
be brought
examina-
to the
attention.
(a)
Interrogatory
information
for
by defendants.
5, requests
each apartment
of the tenant
response,
defendants
defendants
claimed
plaintiff.
referred
sought
Plaintiff
the other,
a racial
In
to two documents
to have previously
to plaintiff.
received
includes
of each building.
One of thosedocuments
furnished
having
force
of basic
The information
breakdown
16 items
which
furnished
to
had in fact
been
has no record
which is purported
of ever
to be a
a list
intendents
was furnished
to plaintiff
merely
and their
1972, almost
The
consuper-
two years
ago.
~~
In eight
months,
defendants
racial
approximate
characterized
occupancy
form,
have surely
superintendents
information
particularly
the racial
since
had the
and to
in at least
Donald Trump
- 11
in an affidavit
they have
made no attempt
to do so.
information
of this
this
kind
kind.
is,
of course,
See United
ment Corporation,
Defendants
tion
Statistical
important
States
v. Real Estate
347 F. Supp.
have an obligation
from their
776 (N.D.
tc secure
Electric
of
Develop-
Miss.
1972).
such informa-
City of Philadelphia
superintendents.
v. Westinghouse
in cases
Corp.,
205 F. Supp.
831
(E.D. Pa . 1962).
(b)
In response
to Interrogatory
race,
of employment
That Exhibit,
attached
initial
them for
of black
requested
interview
employee
Exhibit
however,
of the defendants
location
job
job title,
7, which requests
and Puerto
Rican
insufficient
information
of
1 to their
contains
- facts
and
to
was provided.*/
~/ Plaintiff
has subsequently
secured some of this information
during
the inspection
of defendants'
records.
The identities
of former
employees, of course, constitute
critical
information.
See United
Corp., 370 F. Supp. 643 (N.D. Calif.
State~ v. Youritan Construction
1973), and cases there cited,
holding that proof of discriminatory
instructions
to employees meets the Attorney General's
burden of
proof.
- 12 -
about
racial
secured
apartments
ing to complain
about
Failure
In Plaintiff's
complaining
racial
furnish
relating
information
there
these
still
exist.
(Dep. p. 33).
these
records
may also
answerthose
applicants
records
was impaired,
to Defendants
requested
that
with :respect
and that
on
defendants
so that
calling
- 13 -
records
that
defendants'
by
retaining
may
some of
the Interrogator-
for information
if not destroyed,
During the
to either
stated
since
On
on deposition,
some of these
p. 99),
served
interrogatories
by defendants.
'
policy
or destroying
(Id.,
(Interroga-
was no particular
threaten-
Applications
Interrogatories
first
who
or
policies
Rejected
(Interro-
of tenants
been provided
to Produce
11),
discrimination
after
tory
(Interrogatory
gatory
B.
tenants
their
capacity
to
as to rejected
own conduct.
taking
of this
of assurance
including
de:position,
that
those
During
requests
for
provided
with
troller
there
his
clients
pertaining
would preserve
to rejected
relevant
applicants.
(Ia.,
inspection
stating
taxes
these
.:/
credulity
Whatever
to suggest
are
- and June
testified
reviewed,
records,
and after
pp. 99-100).
repeated
through
a year
their
of
between
supposed
to have
was
Hyman, comp-
"effective
the defendants
applications
a measure
applications,'plaintiff
that
e.pplications
Hyman's memorandum, it
cations
all
of rejected
of Trump Management,
defendants,
provide
were no rejected
stopped
however,
that
a single
appli-
applica-
tion.**/
Defendants
claim
Gilbert,
!.I
chat
there
office
See Appendix
have never
,,iana.ger for
applications.
seven years,
Minerva
D.
~*I
-14
responsibility
for
approving
during
the depositions
recall
ever having
rejected
tions
taken
rejected
a single
that
The six
superintendents
with
of the payment of
custody
or control
of the deponent."
produced
the others
no such records
stating
Mr. Travis,
instructed
submitted
years,
as having
superintendent
also
to give
with
rec0rds
been supplied
tesitfied
in his
deposition
for
which he
when he was
that
he was
when a deposit
A number of these
- 15 -
Apartments
a book of receipts
to each applicant
While early
(Raymond Travis),
the application.
them
existed.
Mr. Travis
a receipt
directing
at Wedgewood Hall
produced
as superintendent.
marked "refunded."
that
that
these
subpoenas
whose deposi-
"records
hired
they accepted
including
in the possession,
first
on
documents
depqsits
described
were taken
served
certain
five
tenancy.
were also
to bring
the past
she cannot
for
even though
testified
application
whose depositions
stated
from anyone,
applications,
30 and 31 that
on July
superintendents.:/
30 and 31 likewise
applications
or rejecting
receipts
Mr. Travis
he later
is
are
stated
explained
..
that
"refunded"
Ms. GilbeTt.
signifies
applications
In Mr. Travis'
receipt
book ala.me,
an apartment
at least
such "refunded"
six
plaintiff's
exist
Accordingly,
but that
9~ units,
since
there
tJhe date
it
is apparent
information
about
that
rej;,ected
were
of service
interrogatories
mation.
receipts
by
of
such infor-
applications
to plaintiff.
CONCLUSION
While some progress
the hearing
stantial
before
Magistrate
noncompliance
discovery.
with
Catoggio,
their
a harassing
of this
and disruptive
charges
assembled
defen~ants
responsibil:iities
to the disposition
scurrilous
case,
involves
while
nature.
other
remain
in sub-
in relation
material
to
critical
Even aside
by defendants
following
and
""'~
of discovery
to warrant
resistamce
consideratiorn
::.,I On
to the orderly
of
a new motion
- 16 -
--
.. .
for
s.anctions
after
present
discovery
proceedings
have been
completed.
R~spectfully
JAMES PORTER
Assistant
United States
Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
submitted,
FRANK.E. SCHWELB
Chief, Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
NORi.'1AN
P. GOLDBERG
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Depart~ent
cf Justice
Washington, D. C.
20530
DONNAF. GOLDSTEIN
Attorney,
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington, D. C. 20530
APPENDIXA
..
/.
T. 5-6-74
10021
Dear Roy:
I
I
Please
. Request
for
find enclosed
Sincerely,
J., ST,'\!Il.EY POTTINGER.
Assist;;.nt Attonicy
General
Civil
cc:
.'
Records
Chrono
Goldweber
Trial File
Hold
Rights Division
By:
ELYSE S. COLD\J'EBER
Attorney
Housing
Section
AP.PENDIXB
\
T. 5/28/74
MAY2 81974
DJ~l75-52-28
United States
v. Fred c. T~,
Civil ActlcYa th. 73 C 1529
et nl.
of May 2S,
Rcquesc
scheduled.for
April
.'
Sincerely,
J. STA~TL!:YPOTTillGER
Assi~tant Attcrney General
Civil Rigbts Di\rision
cc:
Recorde
Chrono
Ms. Goldstei
Trial File
Henry Brachtl
By:
oo:m.\GOLDSTEIN
Attorney
liousio.g Section
..
JOHN
GOOF'RCY
ROGERS
ROT
'
SAXE
H. BACON
M. COttN
SCOTT
MICHAEi.
DANIEi.
HAROl.0
MELVYN
APPENDIXC
(212)
(19099~)1
472
THOMAS A. Bou.N
1400
1191Q111e2l
DOCK
21-20
COUNSEL
'
E. MANLEY
(AO"'llTi(O
lLLIN015
ANO HiOIANA)
ROSEN
MAY2?
.J. ORISCOI.I.
May 16,
SCHWA.RTZ
RUBIN
JEF'FRE:Y
A. SHU~AN
LORIN
OUCKMAN
1974 CIVIL
b14
RIGHTS
United States
v. Fred C. Tr~~P, ~t al.
Civil Action No. 73 C 1529
:e
yours,
truly
Very
~r~U
SEM/ew
cc:
Scott
E. Manley
./:2_~ - 2:;i'''------p='
i::t..l;.:;:;,
'1 .:,~:i
. -:--:--:-1_-:...
.--; u:;~;1.,:...1
,.~~
J;d
t,;/
...
,
...,
T:,
b~tMAY211974 !
f
..-:;; ~,...nTC'."
-i..:t
1
~-
--~-,--
}'p-.r-;;;
r
l
. ,
...--......;.,l~~..;,;w,~
~.J.\
n /.,M :DIV
-------
'
-APPENDIX D
.
--------
',
..
--~
......
'
; .
.. . ........ .
... :.
..
..,,
. - .. .
t -
. 1 1'!.' i..
+a
e,
..- - .....
......
. .
- ... "1!...
- .
: _..- .. ..
'
"':
- - . . ... ..........---- ~
- ....
-...:
-.
-.
... . .
'
'"'
... ..,._~
* -
....
__
;..
__
.............
#,
....
I' .
I
I
! ,
.r...
...
!
...
i ~ :.
......
~
-
..
---
..
. f
_...._...... -
_..,
....._........-
.\
.'.
,,.
_.,,..#:
I:
..
,..
'
..
....
,_
4;
........
,o;
H,-..:-
'
'
.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify
the following
that
I have on this
documents,
postage
date mailed
prepaid,
copies
of
to:
r
10021
1.
2.
Supporting
3.
4.
5.
Plaintiff's
6.
affidavits
States
Interrogatories
to Defen:iants
to the Court
,,,.,
August
,.S, 1974
Coun"Sel for Plaintiff
..
....
NEW
.JOHN
GODFREY
ROGERS
ROY
SAXE
H, BACON
(212)
(l909195Jl
NEW
472
'YORK
100Z1
THOMAS
14()0
MICHAEL
E. MANLEY
C.OMITTEO ILLINOIS
DANIEL
.J. DRISCOLL
SCHWARTZ
MEL.VYN
.JEFFREY
ANO INOIAHA)
ROSEN
HAROLD
May
9,
1974,
RUSIN
A, SHUMAN
DUCKMAN
Elyse Goldweber,
Esqe
Attorney,
Housing
Section
u. s.
Department
Washington,
D. C.
Re::
Dear
of Just.ice
20530
United
States
Civil
Action
v E'red C. 1!'rurnp,
No .. 73 C 1529
o
et
al.
Elyse:
In connection
with
tising
by The Trump
Organization,
and its
support
of civil
rights
organizations,
you might remember
that. F'red and Donald did. not
recall
certain
specifics
at the timtS: of their
depositicJ11s.
:r am enclosing
a h~t::tc:n: fron1 CORE concernipg
advertising
and support
from 'l:he Trump Organization
in
and would appreciate
it if you would add it to
the past
the depositions.
Sincerely,
En~J~vsure
Frank
A.
COUNSEL.
(1919196Z)
M, COHN
SCOTT
LORIN
YORK.
E., Schwelb
Henry A. Brachtl,
Eng.
Hon. Vincent
A~ Catoggio
nay M. Cohn
Bar.AN
.,
..
CORE
CONGRESS
OFRACIAL
EQUALITY
:!00 West 1:1:,th S1r<,1.~.-~ \,11k, I\.\'.
100:Hl. 21:!
368-8104
conversation
and
of participation
ci~{;;1;
:leing
:A:
National
Affairs
~ ~ ~J
Advisor
NEW
JOHN
GODF"REY
ROGERS
ROY
(190919~3)
(212)
NEW
YORK
10021
4721-'IOC
(19191992)
C:OlJN5.EL
M. COHN
SCOTT
E. MANLEY
MICHAEi.
(Aoo,11nEo ILLINOIS
ANO INOIAHA)
ROSEN
DANIEi.
J.
HAFlOI.D
April
DRISCOLL
17,
1974
SCHWARTZ
MELVYN
RUSIN
.JEF"F"REY
LORIN
SAXE
H. BACON
YORK,
A. SHUMA1,f
DUCKMAN
Elyse
s. Goldweber
Atto:eney,
Housing
Sect.ion
United
States
Department
Washington,
D. C.
20530
Re:
of
Jus1ic:e
DJ 17 5--!:>2"'28
United
Civil
v.
No.
States
Action
Fred c. Tr.ump,
73 C 1529
et
al.
DE:a.r Elyse:
I never
knew you were :.,uch a hol>tempered.
white
female!
The reason
for the doubt about
the ability
to
go forward
with the continuatj_c,,'J
of depos:i tions
which
ha.ve already
comme11cE~dv was bee use J had been directed
to proceed
to trial
in another
matter.
As I have advised
you, the whole thing
is a t,1?ntpt0 1;t in .::1 t:c:-!apot, as the
other,. trial
is not going
ahead :Lor a week, and we can
continue
depositions
on Tuesdav,
ApriJ
23, at 9:30.
witnesses
We will
see
next week.
you with
the
Sincerely,.
Roy M~ Cohn
cc Hon.
Edward
Neaher
other
20530
Reply to t:ie
lliviaion Indicated
and Ref to lnitiala and Number
AUG2 2 1975
The Honorable Edward R. Neaher
United States District
Judge
Federal Court House
225 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn, New York 10023
Re:
patience
and consideration
Sincerely,
J. Stanley Pottinger
Assistant
Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
By:
()u',l,.__
V:(ife~'-'
Donna F. Gol~ein
Attomey
Housing Section
1
f
...
.
r
t a....1f. r..
1
..
.s-..
'
1
....
=
=....
,...
l
.
..;.... 11
=.
i lif
;.
..
c)ll
,
f~ fr:
l
..,itf' . !
1.
11
.I. t..
. li.
"
I.,
; 1
..
rii!-tf~f
....'.
r - .
I"~
" : .!-'
l
r~t...I Ctr
=11"f
a
:a~ .
..
r!J
ftlioC
i !
~1..,..
1.
..
~ f
'i
.:,a
rli''r1 1r
., .
I ,.Ir Jr.........
1&.r
..., ._ .,
1.
r I .~
~ It
.J
'
,ar
I
.4,.
i
:Ji
I fiiitllrJ
i ..
' .r1r1,,,
fll."f
....
II
'I'
J:,
C:
G')
N)
N)
(D
......
U1
T. 8/4/75
AUG5 1975
!toy
r.
c "IV/',
:,
J, .....
,. r~-~
~~
1...
~;..,..
Neu 'lo~
~r.~ ..~~r
, ;.:;c..,vYork
~-~
.....
..
:::,
"-"''
--~r""
-<I
.,,.~--,.-----
....
_. .. ,----
'1'
t ;-),,.
....
~~~
l
...,.
011
t;.
h..1d
::.
rtni,
-..:.~,,.,,>y
1: ....,_
~:1!.ldJ..nr::{ c .
,"',.""'!,
;, ; it
,_
.,.':Ji.:,,
,.J
oC
~.:1c pii:-t
J r.;,.'ln
..1nt:1i
to
al :.o
t:f;~:::;il
th"1 nw:,.:;.;;:-:;
of
.i. .!'":'n. ~ud;re t nh-'."r
.::::tat~ or ;ity 1At7.
unlt!r in his
rd ..-~d :vr
a~k'.!.i,.l ii.: sudj, poll. i;~j
v .. t,1d
At that t:im:'.!:, we v..?t:e u;"' .:.1t'e of t:.::-1.
It ha; r:2;;-i1ntly
;""t"'r..,.
u._~
~ ( ,,.11-.,__.,._._...,
,....,..,
~ r -.J..-,..Aa
~-, ., ..,,1
Law) p:ohibi:.:~
th~
~
311-
.-:_,;J'!C
noti
to
1 .. ,__,.__
;;
on
n 3 $:1
c.
fa:zt
,...,: fla
..... ....
''.I.
i..tin;rniSnt,;
of
~...
...
'lltat'!?
sc.::it hi 1 .-:o.;;~.::n.J.
.
.i 1 volun
ily
1u~ti~~ bi~
p t:a.::tic .). , .o.
.:., i.t. a; -:,:.:.I-.::3ti-:at
.._: c~odant
rentcl
't
l:t1*
1
:J.
,.
.I
rental
ber.::1
polic
:;J
L~:; not
a.;
y:'!t.
~:;-..,.~, ,'2\;-.:}r
~ of
tt]l]
;;.::
tnr.:tl t
in
the
. ':.>y
L,
nll p
l.:1w.
look
'Sy:
F. Gol..!jtcin
Acto:rne1
ltousini Se~tioo
,!Ontla
at
\1 S
'4ll i! r G
...
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
PROPOSEDORDER
_____________
Def end an ts .
This matter
to Dismiss
Rights
in housing.
motion
Act,
missed
doubt
for
that
is also
filed
The pleadunder
alleging
before
the 1968
discrimination
counterclaim.
consideration
For purposes
of these
of a motion
most favorable
matters
failure
to state
plaintiff
(1957);
a claim
would be unable
him to relief.
United
that
and is not
to dismiss,
the Court
States
A complaint
only when it
to prove
The complaint
subject
appears
a set
has engaged
to dismissal
beyond
of facts
Power Co.,
alleges,
355 U.S.
301 F. Supp.
in the language
in discriminatory
under
in
may be dis-
Conley v. Gibson,
v. Georgia
defendant
the allegations
to plaintiff.
practices,
plaintiff
Motion
as follows:
Statement.
3601 et~-,
defendants'
careful
of the complaint
the light
42 U.S.C.
This matter
After
1.
is before
is the Complaint
to dismiss
concludes
ing in question
Civil
this
test.
2.
With respect
Statement,
the plaintiff
the defendants
has provided
of the Government's
frame a responsive
language
pleading.
of the statute
Federal
Rules
of Civil
Inc.,
The Federal
Rules
to discover
the facts
claims
meets
Procedure
notice
to enable
The Complaint,
itself,
statement.
sufficient
to
them to
paraphrasing
the requirements
See, e.g.
United
the
of the
to a motion
States
v. Bob
provide
ample opportunity
of plaintiff's
case
following
joinder
of
issue.
3.
Defendants'
which relief
United
can be granted.
States,
as sovereign,
States
counterclaim
States
42 U.S.C.
States
slander,
IT IS ORDEREDthat
for More Definite
(2) defendants'
No suit
without
Realty
specific
or abuse
Statement
counterclaim
a claim upon
to suits
suits
consent,
of this
nature.
against
Accordingly,
Motion to Dismiss
the United
and Motion
denied,
and
dismissed
with
prejudice.
----------
, 1974
United
States
the
of process.
be and it
against
statutory
Associates,
2680 bars
(1) defendants'
to state
may be brought
v. Northside
for libel,
fails
District
Judge
,.
39 EAST
NEW YORK,
JOHN
GODFREY
SAXE (19091953)
ROGERS
H. BACON 09191962)
68TB STREET
NEW YORK
10021
THOMAS
A. BOLAN
COUNSEL
CABLE: SAXUM
ROY M. COHN
M. FRIEDMAN
STANLEY
DANIEL
J. DRISCOLL
MICHAEL
ROSEN
JOHN
F. LANG
JAMES
M. PECK
ROY R. KU LC SAR
JEFFREY
A. SHUMAN
RONALD
EDWARD
LOUIS
April
19,
1978
F. POEPPLEIN
H. HELLER
BIANCONE*
"ADMITTED
IN NEW JERSEY
ONLY
Honorable
Edward R. Neaher
United
States
District
Judge
United
States
Courthouse
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
New York
11201
Re:
Dear
Judge
conference
9:30 a.m.
Heffernan
U.S.
v. Trump Management,
73-C-1529
Inc.
Neaher:
This is to confirm
that
the scheduling
of the status
in the above-entitled
action
for May 9, 1978, at
is agreeable
to counsel,
and confirmed
by Brian
of the U.S. Department
of Justice.
Respectfully
yours,
..;.,y . -J
:.JI
(,/1---1/1./-.-..
Stanley
sb
cc:
Brian
Heffernan
M. Friedman
......
_.
~ ro[.30[
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
W ASlllNGTON,
D.C.
20530
Indicated
and Number
DSD:BFH:mop
DJ 175-52-28
We appreciate
matter.
the Court's
consideration
and time
Sincerely,
Drews. Days, III
Assistant
Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
t
''
By:
1L QL
f }J
Brian F. Heffernan
Attorney
Housing and Credit Section
MAY3, 1974
Before:
HONORABLE
VINCENTA. CATOGGIO
United States Magistrate
AT 10:00 AM
CIVIL MOTION
1529
-vs-
U. S. A.
'PEA RANCES:
For Pltff:
Henry A. Brachtl,
Frank E. Schwell,
Miss Goldweber
For Defts:
Esq.
Esq.
Esq.
MAY3., 1974
Before:
HONORABLE
VINCENTA. CATOGGIO
United States Magistrate
AT 10:00 AM
CIVIL MOTION
B C 1529
U. S. A.
-vs-
~PEARANCES
:
For Pltff:
Henry A. Brachtl.,
Frank E. Schwell',
For Defts:
Esq.
Esq.
...
.....
EASTERN DISTRICT
UNITEDSTATES OF AMERICA,
Vo
TRU!1P HANAGE}ENT,
INC o
__________
Defendants
the application
On
OF NElt YORK
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
of
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 73 C 1529
SUPFLEHENTAL
co:;sENT ORDER
the Plaint.if
of America,
and by consent
of Defenoa~t,
Inc.;
here.by
tha't
it
is
Order in this
is hereby
ordered
action
Lirt
in this
fi-led
f,
United
States
rrump Management,
~.\) (2)
of
the Consent
amended as follows:
(2) Occupancy
adults
four
(4)
in a one bedroom
p~rsons,
two
(2)
of
applicant
!/
shall
s~
be denied
as the~.
under
ter .;ncy
her;attee
he or
of persru'.1S to nee~
seven y.ears
of age may be of
...
'
'
tb.e t=e~l
te
..
t1nit,
the a0eve
and tbe
o-ccttt)tt!"lr.y
s~s
of
th9
cb:i l.dreo
..
<>.H'lferm
standard~,,
day of __
ORDEREDthis
'19750
----
Edward R, Neaher
The und~rsigned
apply for and
consent
to the entry of this
Order.
----------.....;,,_.,
_____
ROY Mo COEN
Saxe, Bncon, Bolan &
Manley
39 E. 68th Street
New York, New York
FRANKE. SCHWELB
f,
Ch
Housing
St:c tion
(//
--
,r ~~~~rl<-<-.-..0
DONNAF. GOLDSTEIN
Attorney,'
Housing Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
Washington,
D. c. 20530
~-:C<._A{
FRED C. TRUMP
DONALDTRUMP
DAVIDG.. TRAGER
United States Attorney
by HENRYA., BRACHTL
Assistant
u..so Attorney
NEW
.JOHN
GODF"REY
ROGERS
SAXE
H. BACON
(1gogl953l
YORK,
(212)
NEW
YORK
10021
472-1400
THOMAS
(1919-1ge2J
A.
BOLAN
COUNSEL
ROY
M. COHN
SCOTT
MICHAEL
DANIEL
.J. DRISCOLL
HAROLD
SCHWARTZ
MELVYN
RUBIN
.JEF"F"REY
LORIN
ANO 1NOIAN4)
A. SHUMAN
DUCKMAN
June
13,
1974
BY HAND
Henry A. Bracthl,
Assistant
U.S. Attorney
Donna F. Goldstein,
Attorney-Civil
Rights
Division
United
States
Department
of Justice
Federal
Building
Brooklyn,
New York
Dear
Mr.
Bracthl:
I am in receipt
of your letter
dated
today which was waiting for me at my office
upon my return
from the Cohen v.
Cbheri trial
this
afternoon
at 5:00 p.m.
We stand
ready
to let you begin
inspecting
and copying
records
morning,
June 14, as per my agreein U.S.A .. v. Trump tomorrow
ment with Miss Goldstein
reached
over the telephone
on Wednesday.
While I regret
the misunderstanding
that
led to your
descending
upon the Trump offices
with five
stormtroopers
Wednesday morning
banging
on the doors and demanding
to be
allowed
to swarm haphazardly
through
all of the Trump files
and to totally
disrupt
their
daily
business
routine,
I do not
feel
that
there
is any point
is carrying
the argument
any further.
I would assume that
your objective
is the same as ours
in this
matter,
namely,
proceeding
orderly
with pre~trial
dis~
covery
so as to enable
both sides
to continue
preparing
for
a fair
trial
in this
matter~
Toward that
end, we look forward to cooperating
with you Friday
morning
at our offices.
Miss Goldstein
and I agreed
that
the inspection
would take
place
at my offices
instead
of Trump so as to not haVe to unnecessarily
totally
disrupt
the Trump necessary
business
routine.
I would assume that
by your demand in your letter
to
inspect
the materials
at Trump off ices that
Miss .Goldstein
neglected
to inform
you of our oral
agreement
to the contrary.
We are ready
both old and
to provide
you with over 1,000 files
Friday
on
current
tenants
of Trump.
Because
Trump cannot
A_
Yd,aotm/,
$o/cwv J/~ntr
.
@:7
-2-
f{inction
at all with all of its
current
leases
and files
out of
its offices,
we will
have to work out a schedule
whereby
as soon
as you have completed
inspecting
and copying
this
very substantial
amount of material
that
this
material
will
be returned
to
the Trump office
and additional
material
will .be sent
to our
offices
for your inspection.
With regard
to the depositions
of further
Trump personnel
tenatively
scheduled
to begin
on June 18, I already
have advised
the Government
that
this
date is impossible
as both Mr. Cohn
and myself
will
still
be on trial
before
Justice
Gomez in the
Supreme Court of the State
of New York in Cohen v. Cohen and
Judge Gomez absolutely
refuses
to hear any application
for
even a half-day
-adjournment
in that
case.
I will
supply
you
with alternate
dates
as quickly
as possible
and I am sure we
can come to an agreeable
solution
which will
neither
delay
the matter
unnecessarily
for you nor prejudice
the rights
of
the defendants
by denying
them the right
to counsel
in these
proceedings.
I would respectfully
suggest
that
is completely
unfair
on your part
to set forth
ultimatums
in the way of
3:00 deadlines
to respond
or else
in view of the fact
that
you are completely
aware of both Mr. Cohn and myself
being
on trial
before
Judge Gomez from 9:00 to 4:30 daily.
We
are completely
ready
to cooperate
in discovery;
all we require
is a little
time in which to assemble
matter
in view
of our extremely
heavy present
litigation
schedule.
Finally,
I sincerely
wish that
at least
from this
point
forward,
that
we could
attempt
to cooperate
better
in all of
these
matters.
If your goal is to expedite
discovery
and to
prepare
for a fair
trial
for both sides
as is ours,
I think
that
this
end would be better
served
by cooperation
and observation
of the basic
courtesies
normally
extended
between
private
counsel
in litigation
instead
of continual
threats
by. the Government
and its
treating
the rules
of civil
procedure
as some kind of undeviating
Bible which cannot
bend
its
timetables
for even a few hours
to promote
the ends of
justice.
Very
SEM/ap
cc: Hon. Edward R. Neaher
Unted States
District
Judge
United
States
Courthouse
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
New York 11201
Honorable
Vincent
Catoggio
United
States
Magistrate
United
States
Courthouse
Eastern
District
of New York
225 Cadman Plaza
East
Brooklyn,
N.Y. 11201
truly
yours,
~.
,~~~-z,JA~
-,--
()
~'=tttifco~fairs
..
~cpnrtnmtf
of 3']w:;ticc
il'IJALS
UNITED
STATES
ATTORNEY
EASTERN
DISTRICT
OF NEW
FEDERAL
BUILDING
JDP:CIS:es
File
No.
730959
BROOl{LYN,
YORK
N. Y. 11201
BY HAND
August
6,
1974
Mr.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
v. Fred c. Trump, et
Action
No. 73 C 1529
al.
Cohn:
Enclosed
1.
2.
u. S.
Civil
herewith
are
the
following
documents:
Please
note that
the Order
August
8, 1974, at 2:00 P.M.
to
Show Cause
Very
truly
is
returnable
yours,
DAVID G. TRAGER
ed States
Attorney
By:__..
u.z:
.;,._
C RL I STEWART
Encls.
a/s
Assistant
U. S. Attorney
cc:
-2-,.
NEW
.JOHN
GODF"REY
ROGERS
ROY
SAXE
H. BACON
YORK,
NEW
(212)
(19091953)
472
YORK
10021
THOMAS
-1400
(1919,1962)
A. BOLAN
COUNSEL
M. COHN
SCOTT
MICHAEL
DANIEL
E. MANLEY
ROSEN
.J. DRISCOLL
May 15th,
1975
Judge
Neaher:Your
page
single
Housing
Trump
Honor
space
Section
can
letter
under
surmise
written
date
much bureaucratic
knit-picking
has
the
characterized
language
in
I think
meeting
is
last
with
precisely
the
from
to
May 8,
of
six-
by the
1975,
and
process
you
the
just
how
time-wasting
agreeing
on final
decree.
what
they're
trying
to
Your
Honor
would
what
I had
suggested
say
is
be constructive,
to
Miss
week.
R~'/ectfully,
lf/lhf/J/~?z __
ROY M.jCOHN
RMC:at
cc: Frank Schwelb,
Housing
Section
Chief
that
a
which
Goldstein
JSP:FES:DFG:car
DJ 175-52-28
Honorable Vincent A. Catoggio
Magistrate,
United States District
Eastern District
of New York
225 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn, New York 11201
Re:
Court
Despite
"academic," we
for Production
remains active
deadline.
Indeed, if plaintiff's
September third response is
deemed to be untimely because it comes after the discovery
deadline,
defendants would succeed in defeating
what would
otherwise be permissible
discovery
by making informal objections
at the eleventh
hour ..
yours,
J. STANLEYPOTTINGElt
Assistant
Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
By:
DONNA
F. GOLDSTEIN
Attorney
Housin.g Section
cc:
JSP :Ji.EStN;G:car
DJ 175-5.Z-28
United
Civil
States
v. Fred c. Trump, et al.
ActiQn No. 73 C 1529
Plaintiff
believes
that allowing this motion to remain
present state of limbo only serves to further cloud the
in this lawsuit.
It additionally
unduly prejudices
the
tation of one of plaintiff's
counsel with charges which
without foundation.
prepared to prove are totally
The United
in its
issues
repu ...
we are
in this
Respectfully
yours,
J. STANLEY
POTTINGER
Assistant
Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
By:
NORMAN
P. GOLDBERG
Attorney
Housing Section
cc:
A. Catoggio
JDP:HAB:ee
F .. f7309S9
April
BY IiAND
&.
Esqs ..
10021
I<oy M. Cohn,
Re:
Manley,
16, 19-74
Esq.
United
States
u.s.o.e.,
Civil
v.
Fred
z.n.n.Y.
Action
c .. Trump, et al.
Ho .. 73 C 1529
,------------
>ear Sirs:
We are sorry to learn from your associate
.Tef frey
Schuman, Esq .. that you will not honor your commitment to
produce previously
designated
officers,
agents and employees
of defendants
in the above action
for depositions
on April 17,
18, 19 and 22, 1974, notwithstanding
your written
stipulation,
by Mr. Schuman, so ordered by the Court on April 1, 1974,
and the oral representation
of Mr. Cohn of your firm to
Government counsel. on March 29, 1974.
'fo avoid obviously
futile
expenditure,
we have cancelled
our request
for a
stenographer
to record the depositions
on those dates.
II
:!
We regret,
too, that de.fendant has chosen to
violate
the Court's
order of February 5,. 1974 which ordered
defendants
to answer plaintiff's
interrogatories
on or
before April 1, 1974.
sanctions
We will,
of course,
against
defendants.,
apply
for
Very truly
appropriate
yours,
EDWARDJOHN BOYDV
States A7ney
--~ited
By:ZC~
~~;;-).
Ass~ant
cc~
The Honorable
United
District
States
1lRACB'1'L
u. s.
Attorney
,Judge
JSP:FES;ESG:saf
DJ 175.52-28
MAY ~ 1974
Manley, Esq.
Saxe, Bacoa, Bolan
39 East 68th Street
Scott
&
Manley
10021
Re:
papers.
Sincerely,
J. STANLEY
POTTINGER
Assistant
Civil
Attorney General
Rights
Division
By:
ELYSES. GOLDWEBER
Attorney
Housing Section
f
ee:
United States
Hon. Yineeat
C&toUio
MAY 91974
...............
......._ .
nae,, c.a,,
.......
--~I
--
.............
..,
l'N'k, -
,11
..
....
..,,,
... ......
-*
10021
1111u.1
hN
BY&I
Zlli.181,
1 .....................
lt74 ....................
....
1,1,.
~F
.. Ualll ........
1, ec a1
,..==-...
1.,1111
...............
at.t,Glate - ..-t.Soa
.., ....... t.oa of tS.. a. ................
.. 11,11- 7.
die
..
w w.W e1111-
to ...
dad ..............
8&7W
,......c,tllat
, ... tltac - ..,
..
.......
__...
..
of
............
_,.
fa
.....
- ..... .......,.i,
.....
, ., .,111
..............
......
..
...
...,.
....
u..,
......
,...........
......
.., 16, 1974, ... u..
f
......
te
u,..
' -- ...,
ef
te
........
ot ...
,.....
., , .. .
of dat
- .w ......
..... u,
... - .. -.u
.. ,adaNI
.
............
.......
17,
J .......
~
Clwll
.,.
wt.ti.I
......,....
,Dllll.
ltabta HYhiN
.....,
..............
a.1111
'
.....................
.............
., .....
-----...................
.............
.,
...
..
...................
adltMt -
DiabUt
mt111t11n..a.t
.. ._.
......
1lltl
lld.t,MI ......
Cowa
....
........
GI .1n llw
.._
....... ,.. 'Ion 11191
U,
l'
I
Jutta
t.ir.:rn.:r11
/\. J3rr.i<~Jrt
1, r;st{..
liftflisi:tlrtt t.J~ ;~. l.\trt~<.)1~.J.'}~::t
t.ern D:b)tr:tct
or tifsW
~-)2:5Cadman
aza Eaf:tt
1
n .....,.. r,J,4.r,.i
:;,.1,,.,." \?,.)"'tt
...f.Js :,__,/ ~ ~4ty
J.. ,,,. .:t.,;:'" l1.,..''f""
:!.:.-~l ~'""
1~
./.)I\.',:;; {:;..
ttanlt?y PottJnger,
Esq
st.ant Attorney Gru\~ra.1
Civil Rights Division
.J..
.?\:;
f:e;;a.1~tn1et1t
oe ,_Jut~'t~:J..,~e
Ph:l.ngton., D.
i\ t ~t :
.1)0U!l8:.
J? (~<:t:l{}f~t1.~ttl
At to:rney.,
H<_:ius1
roct:ton
the
UNITED
UNITED
EASTERN
UNl'TEO
STATES
STATES
MAGISTRATE
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
STATES
BROOKLYN,
OF
CouaT
NEW
COURT
NEW
YORK
HOUSE:
YORK
11201
18, 1974
June
Henry A. Brachtl,
Esq.
Assistant
u. S. Attorney
stern District
of New York
5 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn,
New York 11?01
Saxe, Sacon, Bolan & Manley,
39 East 68th Street
New York, New York 10021
Re:
United
Civil
qs.
v.
d c. Trump,
No. 73 C 1529
tes
Action
et
Gentlemen:
A further
the undersigned
made necessary
in this
case
will
conference
tenor
No excuse
to appear
wi
your
ter
This
will
consideration
before
meeting
~s
of June
non-attendance
invite
be held
be accepted
of the
imposition
of sanctions.
Very t:ruly
f
I
\/
I.
I .:
,, :
V V \. \,
'
"' \.-\
VINCENT A.
Unit~d
Eastern
cc:
norable
Edward R. Neaher
United States
District
Judge
Eastern
District
of New York
yours,
r
t,
l, ,.
'
('
t
CATOGGICY .;
States
Magi~trate
District
of New York
- ,
N.Y.
TO WIIOMIT Mi\.YCOHCPRN:
r-.,
\'
correct
I, PaulDZiselman1hereby
statements
of my own free
make the
will:
following
true
and
I was formerly
time basis
2nd Street,
I personally
regardless
as
Additionally,
I have never been instructed
by any
superior
of the Trump Office,
nor was it ever suggested
or
stated
to me in any way, manner or form to follow a racially
discriminatory
rental
policy
while I was employed by this
company.
In fact,
during
such employment
I rented
many apartments to minorities,
including
blacks.
Despite
the above mentioned,
I was visited
by a
representative
of the Justice
Department
who stated
that an
"FBI Agent" would be back to continue
the interrogation.
These
statements
were made in a threatening
manner and!
strongly resent
and object
to it.
I was especially
harassed
and intimidated
by a Donna Goldstein
and in my opinion,
her unethical
conduct
in itself
should be a matter
of investigation.
']
l ,'.i /
PAL~ ZISELM N
l,
I...
100 Jedwood
Valley
July
TO WHOMIT MAYCONCERN:
p H"1 l f\ 7',,1
I,
Ziselman
statements
correct.
of
my own free
hereby
will,
make
which
Plate
Stream,
19th,
the
are
L.I.,
N.Y.
1974
following
true
and
I was formerly
employed
by Trump Management
on a part-time
basis
as a rental
agent
at Beach Haven
Apartments,
2611 W. 2nd Street,
Brooklyn,
New York.
During
my employment
under
no circumstances
did I ever
discriminate,
nor was I ever told
to discriminate
by
any superior
of Trump Management
ainst
any person
regardless
of race,
color
or cree
iring
the rental
of an apartment.
'- 1 .
?(' ./ , .. ,,../
/
1.:1
/1
.;!/::z.
..C (\:
/ \
'J
~--
<, (
__a~f
Q~~ }~EJAHER,
j_
...
OCT2 4 ~14
Date:
)-A-,i,
- ....- '1-F~
IS-- - d /.1r~
- - -~"~
-.
--1
- - - 'J-4.,;,t~c
,
Attorn~y
Fla-"-'"'
cf
..::..~
..-..::...!...
0-,,,ch
/~Jt::-k
--- -
!.~::/U,,..
.
Atto~~sy
c. / DJf-::mcent l, Jr}
;{~(
c~
------ --. - - - - V/'5' - . .::..i"' .! - - - - - -~--:,,--c:-
f.V'-1.-Jrj:."'
e,
r~
(}'
'
'
re.
P~.rty D ~ft.
/,
\<Jl'lNtSS
J:: s.
'~
'
'
Attorn~y
l
,i~Lt4li,
li?-c-~/L?-c::/);,1,
,....
IDENT. EVI.CJNCE
I.
..
'
,.
'.!
L
l
lI{
..
..
,,.
OCT24 1174
Datci:
-~-i,,..,
Fla
,t,f
- #.~
- VIS' - - -
]~-.;l..,t
....- -
~1-Tu
-?.=t
---- - (
-..
u.:,?~4
- - -
D...,.t:'
...nc~n,..
e. ZL/
Attorn~y
t:'..ff
.,4
7-;;
.-.:..
'-'yY
V/'5'' -
<;.
.../f;_( ,
- -
J~ ---/~~::tu--r /fz.
Rt~~-.
--
-~
--
\..
Atto:::1~y
- - - - r,7 C;_,l::,- - - - - - - -
-="'
hirv;J'
(;
jt'
/
IP',\/]
'1;..... /
b #:
t "')<1
.:?,:
.
>'""'"'.._,.
l.y,,..
L,'
.
di ,l-i,..-...'-'( .. ,~:nY-t~
',
A.
~J
1r!.
..4<J.vi.-,
.J, ....
!DENT. EVI:C3NCE
OCT
2 4 1974
. ..l""
. .
.";Z--c.
1 - - <~~1JI-I
/3,- {
, c,f I?:~,Av)
,'L/-zAf
7
_{L_/r ,:J 'Sc,
,
~~I,
{},,Ai)/'
,......
E....,'-',..:;z,
IP..,..I
.-.1
,~.....,~.."
l vl, vi:! ::;,:.:;:unrs
!1
..... -
Attorn~y
1
\<JlTN.t;::;::;t s
,..,
f\
-~
;/
. . . t?,,,.-l1,,.._/,k
A.
t.-/;;,t,,L..,,vf
. .
L-L-w-.<....-
I ,
It -;.4 - )
~-
Ii
h/7t..Lr-1"
I> - J.-/,f-
I I
..
'
L
..
I'
I
!
'!
..
!
(
'