Items

• Tentative Plan for Expanding Educational Opportunity in the Topeka School District, April 30, 1974.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. A summary of a preliminary plan presented at a Topeka School Board meeting on April 30, 1974. The plan includes school closures, student reassignment, and more.
• District of Topeka Public Schools Answers to the Second Set of Questions from Brown III Plaintiffs, With Cover Letters from ACLU Attorneys, February 6, 1984.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Document from the defense answering the second set of questions posed by the plaintiff team during evidence discovery.
• District of Topeka Public Schools Answers to Questions from Brown III Plaintiffs Concerning the Accreditation of Schools in the District with Supplementary Documents, July 13, 1984.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Document to the plaintiffs from the defense answering questions about the processes associated with the accreditation of schools in the district.
• Brief of Appellate of Former Kansas Governor John Carlin (1979-1987) to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth District, August 14, 1987.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. This brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals argues that Former Kansas Governor John Carlin did not have the power to affect desegregation and should not be a defendant.
• Court Brief Outlining the Defense Team’s Case for the United States Court of Appeals For the Tenth Circuit to Uphold the District Court’s Decision That the Topeka School District is Unitary and Not Segregated, Unknown Date.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Court brief containing the defense team’s appeal to the circuit court to uphold the district court’s decision that the district is not segregated.
• Court Document Containing the Full Witness List for the Defense Team With a Cover Letter from Defense Attorney K. Gary Sebelius Adding Two More Names, August 4, 1986.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Full list of defense witnesses that can be called during trial. A cover letter from defense attorney K. Gary Sebelius requesting the addition of two more names.
• District of Topeka Public Schools Answers to Questions from Brown III Plaintiffs Concerning the Geographic Boundaries of the School District as Presently Constituted, January 5, 1981.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Document to the plaintiffs from the defense answering questions about the geographic boundaries of the school district as presently constituted at the time.
• A Collection of Handwritten Notes and Analysis and a Draft of a Report About Topeka Schools, Especially Junior High Schools, All by William Lamson, Unknown Date.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Handwritten analysis and notes and a draft of a report on Topeka Junior High Schools by William Lamson. Some original pages and some photocopied pages.
• A Collection of Handwritten Notes and Analysis by William Lamson Pertaining to Racial Distribution in Topeka schools, Unknown Date.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Handwritten analysis and notes by William Lamson, including incomplete drafts of reports using the analyzed data.
• Expert Opinion Report Prepared by Hickman-Maslin Research titled “Analysis of Central Survey’s Poll on Topeka Schools,” With a Cover Letter from Defense Attorney K. Gary Sebelius to Chris Hansen of the ACLU, March 1986.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. This was produced by defense team expert witness R. Harrison Hickman. He concludes that people didn’t equate a school being “mainly white” with it being better.
• An Essay Titled The Role of the Kansas Supreme Court in the History of School Desegregation in Kansas before Brown v. Board of Education With a Cover Letter from Mary L. Dudziak of the ACLU, August 1983.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. This essay from an unnamed author examines thirteen court cases that predated the first Brown case taken on by the Kansas Supreme Court that dealt with segregation.
• District of Topeka Public Schools Answers to Questions from Brown III Plaintiffs Concerning the Racial Makeup of Schools and Schools of Origin for Junior High School Students and High School Students, June 1982.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Document to the plaintiffs from the defense answering questions about schools of origin for entering junior high school and high schools students since 1950.
• Enrollment and Attendance Area Maps by School for Topeka Public Schools from 1950-80.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Charts and maps showing enrollment and attendance area breakdowns for every school in the Topeka Public School System from 1950-1985.
• Accreditation Regulations Applicable to Kansas Elementary and Secondary Schools and School Districts, May 1, 1984.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. A document defining the regulation and accreditation of Kansas public schools as relating to administration, courses of study, and instruction.
• Photocopy of William Lamson’s Handwritten Analysis of Topeka Public Schools Segregation Policy.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Photocopy of handwritten notes and charts by William Lamson concerning the history of racial segregation in the Topeka Public School District.
• Plaintiff Attorney’s Response to the First Set of Questions Directed by Defendant John Carlin, Governor of Kansas, August 15, 1984.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Plaintiff attorney’s response to the defense team’s first set of questions directed by defendant Kansas Governor John Carlin.
• Plaintiff Attorney’s Response to the First Set of Questions Directed by Defendants Associated With the State Board of Education of the State of Kansas, August 15, 1984.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Plaintiff attorney’s response to the defense team’s first set of questions directed from the defendants associated with the Kansas State Board of Education.
• Plaintiff Attorney’s Response to the Defense Team’s First Set of Questions During Evidence Discovery, April 13, 1984.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Plaintiff attorney’s response to the defense team’s first set of questions, many of which will need supplemental answers because some answers will be incomplete.
• District of Topeka Public Schools Answers to Questions from Brown III Plaintiffs Concerning Exhibits from an Earlier Deposition About the Racial Makeup of Topeka Schools, December 5, 1984.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Document to the plaintiffs from the defense answering questions about Topeka school racial demographics that were addressed in an earlier deposition.
• Letter from Deputy Director of Housing and Urban Development James L. Smith to James Gray Superintendent of Topeka Public Schools, April 13, 1983.

  In this letter, Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Deputy Director Smith informs Superintendent of Topeka Public Schools James M. Gray that his department cannot make any demands upon a purchaser concerning racial balance since the all cash, as-is sale has been completed. Gray had earlier requested HUD assistance in the sale of a rental property.
• Letter from Superintendent of Topeka Public Schools James M. Gray to Mr. Walter Cade Jr. Chief of Multifamily Housing Programs Branch for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, March 31, 1983.

  Topeka Public Schools James M. Gray, in a letter to Walter Cade Jr., asks that The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) place constraints on a recently sold rental property in Topeka to ensure that there is a racially balanced mix of occupants.
• District of Topeka Public Schools Answers to Questions from Brown III Plaintiffs Concerning the District’s Involvement with Proposed City Zoning Changes, March 1, 1985.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Document to the plaintiffs from the defense answering questions about proposed city zoning changes and the district’s level of involvement with those decisions.
• Memorandum and Order from United States District Judge Richard D. Rogers With His Opinion Ruling on the Brown III Case, April 8, 1987.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. United States District Judge Richard D. Rogers’ opinion on the case. He states the Topeka School District is unitary and the plaintiff’s claims for relief are denied.
• Plaintiffs' Post-Trial Brief with Cover Letter to William Lamson from ACLU Attorney Chris Hansen, December 15, 1986.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. The Plaintiff’s post-trial brief. The plaintiff attorneys conclude that the Topeka schools are still segregated and the school board must submit a desegregation plan.
• District of Topeka Public Schools Answers to Questions from Brown III Plaintiffs Concerning a Periodic Capital Expenditure and Building Plan, July 2, 1981.

  Case Data and Exhibits for Brown III, a relitigation of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that corrected resegregation issues caused by open enrollment school choice in 1992. Document to the plaintiffs from the defense answering questions about any periodic capital expenditure plans the district might have prepared or implemented.