IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY/AMERICUS DIVISION

QUEEN KING, SHARON JOHNSON and EVELYN REED, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated; BONITA MAYS, individually; and the CONCERNED CITIZENS COMMITTEE OF BLAKELY & EARLY COUNTY, GEORGIA.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
CITY OF BLAKELY HOUSING AUTHORITY; CITY OF BLAKELY GEORGIA; and DAN COOPER, individually and in his representative capacity,
Defendants.

x : : : Civil Action No. 1:00-CV-109-1 (WLS) : (Class Action) : : : : : x

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

:

Plaintiff, v.

: : Civil Action No. 1:02-CV-87-3 (WLS)

CITY OF BLAKELY HOUSING AUTHORITY; :

CITY OF BLAKELY GEORGIA; and DAN

COOPER, individually and in his official capacity :

as Executive Director of the City of Blakely

Housing Authority,

:

Defendants.

:

x

CONSENT ORDER

I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Queen King, Sharon Johnson, and Evelyn Reed, on behalf of themselves and a
class of past, present, and future African-American tenants and applicants of the Blakely Housing Authority who were, are, or will be subjected to racial discrimination, along with plaintiffs Bonita Mays, individually, and the Concerned Citizens Committee of Blakely and Early County, Georgia (collectively “Private Plaintiffs”) filed their complaint on June 26, 2000 against the City of Blakely Housing Authority (BHA) and its executive director Dan Cooper. In their complaint, Private Plaintiffs allege that the BHA and Dan Cooper: (1) established, maintained, and perpetuated a racially-segregated and unequal system of low-income public housing; (2) subjected AfricanAmerican tenants of the BHA to more onerous terms and conditions in the rental of housing because of their race and/or color; and (3) retaliated against Private Plaintiffs for organizing and protesting against the allegedly discriminatory conduct. Specifically, Private Plaintiffs claim that such conduct violates the Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq. (specifically 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a), (b), (c); 3608; and 3617); Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, and its implementing regulations, 24 C.F.R. §§ 1.1-1.10; the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. §§ 8-3-200, et seq. (2002), and its implementing regulations, Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 186-2-.02(1) and (2) (2001); the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; Article I, § 1, Part V of the Constitution of the State of Georgia; and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 1983. The BHA and Dan Cooper deny all of the Private Plaintiffs’ allegations and contend that they have taken effective steps to address and prevent any racial discrimination at the BHA.
- 2 -

By order dated September 17, 2003, the Court certified a class, under Rule 23(b)(2), Fed. R. Civ. P., consisting of all past, present, and future African-American tenants and applicants of the Blakely Housing Authority who were, are, or will be subjected to racial discrimination, in violation of the constitutional provisions, laws, rules and regulations set forth in the preceding paragraph (the “Class”). Plaintiffs Queen King, Sharon Johnson and Evelyn Reed are the “Class Representatives.”
The United States filed its complaint on June 10, 2002, to enforce the provisions of the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq. The United States’ complaint alleges that Defendants the Blakely Housing Authority and Dan Cooper: (1) refused to rent, refused to negotiate for the rental of, or otherwise made unavailable dwellings because of the race or color of renters, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a) and (b); (2) made statements with respect to the rental of dwellings that indicate a preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race or color, or an intention to make such preference, limitation, or discrimination, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(c); and (3) coerced, intimidated, threatened or interfered with persons in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of their having exercised or enjoyed, their rights under the FHA, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3617. The BHA and Dan Cooper also deny all of the United States’ allegations and contend that they have taken effective steps to address and prevent any racial discrimination at the BHA. II. THE PRIVATE PLAINTIFFS’ ALLEGATIONS
At all times relevant to this case, the BHA operated multifamily residential rental properties totaling approximately 159 dwelling units in five apartment complexes in Blakely,
- 3 -

Georgia: Cedar Hills Apartments; Willis Cain Apartments; Cedar Hills II Apartments; Willis Cain II Apartments; and Baptist Branch Apartments ("BHA apartment complexes").
First, the Private Plaintiffs allege that since at least 1994 the BHA and Dan Cooper have engaged in improper steering based on race at its apartment complexes. Specifically, Defendants have established, maintained and perpetuated racially segregated housing by selecting housing applicants to fill apartment vacancies based on race, rather than in compliance with the BHA’s written policy establishing specific, non-race-based methods for filling vacancies. For example, the BHA, through its executive director Dan Cooper, repeatedly violated its own written policies by allowing White applicants to skip over Black applicants with higher positions on the BHA waiting lists so that the White applicants could be placed in Cedar Hills II, which the BHA reserved for White tenants.
Second, Private Plaintiffs claim that Defendants have imposed more onerous terms and conditions of rental on African-American tenants than White tenants. For example, Dan Cooper conducted armed patrols of the predominately African-American areas of the apartment complexes, and harassed and detained African-American tenants and their guests, without provocation, while not engaging in such conduct in the predominately White areas of the complexes.
Lastly, Private Plaintiffs allege that Defendants retaliated against them for forming a tenants’ association to address the discriminatory conduct, as well as for engaging in public protests about such conduct. Such retaliation included attempted evictions, attempted transfers of tenants to different apartments, increased rents and the imposition of late fees. The BHA and Dan Cooper deny all of the Private Plaintiffs’ allegations and contend that they have taken effective steps to address and prevent any racial discrimination at the BHA.
- 4 -

III. THE UNITED STATES’ ALLEGATIONS From 1994 until at least 1998, the BHA, under the direction of executive director Dan
Cooper, deliberately reserved the Cedar Hills II complex for White residents and steered AfricanAmerican tenants to BHA’s other complexes, in violation of the Fair Housing Act. Defendants accomplished this result, the United States alleges, by violating the BHA’s own policies and procedures that were designed to ensure the color-blind assignment of apartments. In addition, the United States alleges that the BHA, through Dan Cooper, made repeated statements expressing a preference to exclude African-Americans from living at Cedar Hills II. Finally, the United States claims that the Defendants harassed and intimidated African-American tenants who objected to the discriminatory practices. The BHA and Dan Cooper deny all of the United States’ allegations and contend that they have taken effective steps to address and prevent any racial discrimination at the BHA. IV. AGREEMENT
The Private Plaintiffs, the United States, Dan Cooper, and the BHA desire to avoid costly and protracted litigation and agree that the claims against the Defendants should be settled without further litigation or an evidentiary hearing. Therefore, the Private Plaintiffs, the United States, Dan Cooper, and the BHA have agreed to the entry of this Consent Order. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
JURISDICTION AND SCOPE 1. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims in the civil action pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343, 1345, and 1367(a); and 42 U.S.C. §§ 3613 and 3614(a).
- 5 -

2. The provisions of this Consent Order apply to Dan Cooper, the City of Blakely Housing Authority, its employees, officials, officers, and agents, as well as any entity, company, or person who purchases, manages, or operates any of the BHA apartment complexes.
3. All provisions contained herein have been reviewed and approved by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
4. This Consent Order is a settlement of disputed claims. The Consent Order is entered into without any admission by the BHA or Dan Cooper of having engaged in any discriminatory practices proscribed by the FHA or any other federal or state statute. The Private Plaintiffs and the United States shall have the right to present evidence of the BHA’s non-compliance in any context or situation. The BHA and Dan Cooper shall have the right to present evidence of compliance in any context or situation. GENERAL NONDISCRIMINATION PROVISIONS
5. The BHA, its employees, agents, and all those acting in concert or participation with them, as well as any entity, company, or person who manages or operates any of the BHA apartment complexes, are hereby enjoined from: a. Refusing to rent a dwelling, refusing or failing to provide or offer information about a dwelling, or otherwise making unavailable or denying a dwelling to persons because of race or color; b. Discriminating against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of rental or sale of a dwelling or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, including engaging in any harassment or intimidation, because of race or color;
- 6 -

c. Making, printing, publishing, or causing to be made, printed or published, any notice, statement, or advertisement with respect to the rental, sale, or ownership of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination on the basis of race or color; and
d. Coercing, intimidating, threatening, or interfering with any person in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his having aided or encouraged any other person in the exercise or enjoyment of any right protected by the FHA. AFFIRMATIVE RELIEF
6. Application and Tenancy Procedures: The BHA shall comply with the procedures in Paragraphs 6 through 14 with respect to the rental of dwellings at the BHA apartment complexes to ensure compliance with the Fair Housing Act and to ensure that these dwellings are made available for rent on an equal basis and on the same terms and conditions for all persons, irrespective of race or color.
7. Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures: Within one-hundred twenty (120) days of the entry of this Order (hereinafter “entry of this Order” shall refer to the Court’s final approval of this Order following the fairness hearing described below), the BHA shall create and submit for approval to the United States and HUD written Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures for: (1) receiving, handling, processing, rejecting, and approving rental inquiries and applications made in-person, by telephone, or by other means; (2) assigning prospective tenants to new units; and (3) transferring existing tenants to different units. Within fourteen (14) days of the United States’ and HUD’s approval of
- 7 -

the Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures, the BHA shall implement such written Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures. 8. Availability Lists: As of the date of entry of this Order, the BHA shall maintain current, accurate lists of all dwellings available or expected to be available for rental within the next thirty (30) days ("Availability Lists"), which include for each dwelling: a. The address, apartment number, and number of bedrooms; b. Whether the apartment is vacant and, if not, the date that the apartment is
scheduled to be vacant; and c. Whether the apartment is available to be moved into and, if not, the date that it is
expected to be available for move-in. d. The Availability List shall be updated at least weekly and shall bear the date it was
issued or updated at the top. 9. Visitor Log: Within one-hundred twenty (120) days of the entry of this Order, the BHA
shall create and maintain a log listing all persons who inquire about renting BHA apartments, providing the date of their visit, their name, their address, their daytime and evening telephone numbers, and the date by when they wish to move. The BHA shall note on the Visitor Log the dwelling units the person was shown, whether the person was given an application, and the name of the BHA employee who attended to the visitor. The Visitor Log shall contain a space in which the visitor may voluntarily note his or her race and national origin. Should a visitor not fill in this space, the BHA shall fill it in based on the good faith observations of an employee or agent. The top portion of the Visitor Log shall contain the following disclaimer: "The following information is requested to assist the Blakely Housing Authority in complying with the federal Fair Housing Act and will be
- 8 -

kept confidential. Providing your race is voluntary and this information is not required in order to rent an apartment." 10. Preference Indicator: Within one-hundred twenty (120) days of the entry of this Order, the BHA shall create and submit for approval to the United States and HUD a form that carefully and fully explains to each applicant each of the “preferences” that are available under the BHA’s Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy (ACOP), and that provides a space where each applicant can indicate which preference(s) he or she believes he or she is entitled to and why he or she holds that belief. In addition, the BHA shall require applicants to sign the Preference Indicator forms stating that they understand the various preferences and have had an opportunity to apply for each one that they believe they are entitled to. The BHA shall indicate on that form whether each preference was granted, the date of that decision, and the name of the BHA employee who assisted the applicant. Also, the BHA shall indicate on that form which document(s) (or lack thereof) justify the decision to grant (or deny) each preference and attach such supporting documents. Except with respect to the “substandard housing” preference, if written records are not available to justify a particular preference, the applicant shall not be eligible for that preference. If an applicant claims a substandard housing preference, and no documentation thereof is available, a BHA employee shall visit the dwelling claimed to be substandard to make visual observations of the physical condition of the dwelling, and shall complete and sign an affidavit documenting the visit, the location, a description of the property and the observations he or she makes concerning the physical condition of the dwelling. If the BHA employee visiting such dwelling also makes the determination
- 9 -

whether the substandard housing preference is warranted or not, such affidavit shall include an explanation of the reasons why such preference is warranted or not, and such employee shall ensure that the requirements of this Paragraph concerning the contents of the Preference Indicator forms are also satisfied. If the BHA employee visiting such dwelling does not make such determination, the BHA employee who does so shall make the determination based on the contents of such affidavit and shall ensure that the requirements of this Paragraph concerning the contents of the Preference Indicator forms are satisfied. The Preference Indicator shall be updated for each applicant when that applicant becomes one of the top five members of the waiting list. Within fourteen (14) days of the United States’ and HUD’s approval of the Preference Indicator, the BHA shall implement the Preference Indicator. 11. Wait Lists: As of the date of entry of this Order, the BHA shall maintain waiting lists for each size unit that contains each applicant’s name and race (based on the information filled out by the applicant on the Visitor Log or if that information is not provided on the employee's or agent's good faith observation), current address, daytime and evening telephone number, the number of intended occupants, and a description of the dwelling for which each applicant is eligible (e.g. number of bedrooms). The BHA shall also indicate, for each applicant, the time and date he or she was placed on the list and the name of the BHA employee who received the applicant’s application. The rank of each applicant on the waiting list shall be determined in accordance with the BHA’s ACOP. Complete, accurate and up-to-date written records shall be maintained to justify each applicant’s rank
- 10 -

on the waiting list, the type of dwelling for which each applicant is eligible, and each “preference” given to each applicant. 12. Placement Log: Within one-hundred twenty (120) days of the entry of this Order, the BHA shall develop and maintain a log that explains which applicant(s) was considered for each vacant unit, and why each applicant was given the unit or passed over. The log shall list the time(s) and date(s) on which the BHA attempted to contact each applicant, the name of the BHA employee who attempted to make such contact, the manner of the attempted contact (phone, mail, e-mail, etc.), the result of each attempted contact, whether that applicant was offered a unit, and that applicant’s response to the offer. If the highest-ranking applicant is not offered a unit or is not offered the first unit that has become ready for rental, the BHA shall fully explain why on the Placement Log, attaching any supporting documentation. 13. Rental Applications: The BHA shall write legibly on each rental application filled out by a prospective tenant the month, day, year, and time that the BHA received the application. The BHA shall process the applications in the order in which they are received. To the extent the BHA rejects any application for housing, the BHA shall provide, either on the application or on an attachment to the application, a written explanation why the applicant was determined ineligible for tenancy, including all reasons therefor and any supporting documentation, and the name of the BHA employee who made the decision. Within three (3) days of the decision to reject an applicant, the BHA shall attempt to notify such applicant of the rejection and the reason therefor by letter sent via regular U.S. mail to the
- 11 -

applicant’s last known address. The BHA shall permit all persons who inquire about renting a dwelling unit the opportunity to complete a written rental application. 14. Information Provided to Prospective Applicants: The BHA shall inform all persons who inquire about renting any dwelling that they will be offered the first available unit of the size they need when they become the highest-ranking applicant on the waiting list, and that if they turn down that offer, they will be treated according to ACOP regulations. The BHA shall advise all persons who inquire about renting a dwelling that they may fill out an application and, if they qualify, be put on a waiting list. The BHA shall inform all persons who inquire about renting units that they will be treated equally, irrespective of race or color.
TRAINING 15. Within one-hundred (100) days of the entry of this Order, all agents or employees of the
BHA who have any responsibility related to receiving, handling, processing, or approving applications for housing; showing units to prospective tenants; assigning new tenants to units; transferring tenants; or supervising such activities; and each member of the BHA Board of Commissioners, shall attend and complete a fair housing training program, approved by the United States, at the BHA’s expense. Nothing in this Order shall require members of the Board of Commissioners of other housing authorities to participate in such training. 16. The individuals trained shall verify their attendance at the training in writing. 17. The training shall include the following:
- 12 -

a. Informing each individual of his or her duties and obligations under this Order as well as under the Fair Housing Act;
b. Furnishing to each individual a copy of this Order and the BHA’s written Uniform and Non-discriminatory Procedures;
c. Explaining how the BHA’s procedures are designed to ensure that racial discrimination does not influence the process of providing rental information to persons who make inquiries, the process of making decisions on rental applications, and the process of assigning applicants or transfers to units; and
d. Securing a signed certification in the form of the statement attached hereto as Attachment A, from each such individual indicating that he or she has received, read, and understood this Order and the BHA’s Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures identified in Paragraph 6.
18. During the period in which this Order is in effect, within forty-five (45) days of commencing an employment or agency relationship, all new agents or employees of the BHA who have responsibility for showing, renting, or managing dwellings at the BHA apartment complexes, all new agents or employees who supervise such activities, and all new members of the BHA Board of Commissioners shall be given a copy of the BHA’s written Uniform and Non-discriminatory Procedures and this Consent Order and shall be given training as described in the preceding Paragraph, and shall be required to sign the statement appearing at Attachment A.
- 13 -

NOTIFICATION TO TENANTS 19. The BHA shall:
a. Provide each current tenant, within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Order; each new tenant, within five (5) days of the commencement of his or her tenancy; and each prospective applicant at the time of the completion of the Visitor Log with a written notice attached hereto as Attachment B summarizing the content of this Consent Order.
b. Provide each current tenant within thirty (30) days of the approval of the written Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures by the United States and HUD; each new tenant within five (5) days of the commencement of his or her tenancy; and each prospective applicant at the time of the completion of the Visitor Log with a written notice summarizing the BHA’s Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures, as well as a description of the BHA’s nondiscrimination policy. The BHA shall submit this notice to the United States for approval, along with the Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures, before distribution; and
c. Post and prominently display a full size HUD fair housing poster, HUD Form 928.1, in a conspicuous location in or near the rental office or apartment or other location used as a rental office at each of the BHA apartment complexes within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. TESTING
20. The United States may take steps to monitor the BHA’s compliance with this Order including, but not limited to, conducting fair housing tests at any dwelling in which any
- 14 -

defendant, now or in the future, has a direct or indirect ownership, management, or financial interest to deter and detect future acts of unlawful housing discrimination or to determine whether the BHA is violating any part of this Order.
RECORD KEEPING 21. Throughout the duration of this Order, the BHA shall preserve and maintain all records
which are the source of, contain, or relate to any information pertinent to its obligations under this Order, including, but not limited to, the following: a. Availability Lists; b. Visitor Log; c. Waiting Lists; d. Rental Applications; e. Leases; f. Placement Logs; g. Non-discriminatory procedures; h. Tenant rules and regulations; i. Vacancy Reports; j. Rental ledgers; and k. Any other information related to any inquiries regarding the availability of any
dwellings at the BHA apartment complexes, and the persons who made these inquiries.
- 15 -

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 22. Within one-hundred eighty (180) days of the entry of this Order, the BHA shall submit the
following records to counsel for the United States: a. Copies of all written verifications of the training conducted pursuant to the
requirements set forth above, including copies of all signed certifications of attendance; b. Copies of the signed Acknowledgment Form (see Attachment A) from the BHA’s employees and agents avowing that each understands this Order and the BHA’s written Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures; c. A photograph of all the rental offices or apartments used as rental offices at the BHA apartment complexes, which verify that the Fair Housing Poster is being displayed as required by the terms enumerated above; d. Representative copies of all of the documents required in Paragraphs 6 through 13, as well as any other materials prepared pursuant to the requirements of the terms enumerated above; e. Copies of any existing tenant rules and regulations; and f. Written verification that the Notice to Tenants has been distributed as required by the terms enumerated above. 23. Beginning six (6) months after the entry of this Order, and every six (6) months thereafter for the duration of this Order, the BHA shall deliver to counsel for the United States a report covering the preceding six months and containing the following information:
- 16 -

a. To the extent that these documents have not been provided previously, copies of all written verifications of the training conducted pursuant to the requirements enumerated above, including copies of all signed certifications of attendance, to the extent these documents have not been provided previously;
b. To the extent that these documents have not been provided previously, copies of the signed Acknowledgment Form (see Attachment A) from the BHA’s employees and agents avowing that each understands this Order and the BHA’s written Uniform and Non-discriminatory Procedures;
c. A report showing the number of households moving into dwellings at the BHA apartment complexes during the reporting period and the number of those, if any, which included African-Americans (based upon the identification described above); the date on which each dwelling was vacated; the date on which each dwelling was cleaned and ready for occupancy; the date on which each dwelling was occupied by a new tenant; and the race of each tenant; and
d. Copies of all documents referenced in Paragraphs 6 through 13. e. At any time after two (2) years of the entry of this Order, the BHA may petition
the Court for relief from the requirement set forth in Paragraph 23(d) so long as the BHA has complied with the terms of the Consent Order in good faith. The United States reserves the right to contest this petition but shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to the BHA’s petition. 24. The BHA shall also advise counsel for the United States, in writing, within thirty (30) days of receipt of any complaint, whether written, oral, or in any other form, against the BHA
- 17 -

or against any of its employees, agents or residential rental properties or dwellings, regarding alleged discrimination based on race or color. This notification shall include a copy of the complaint, the full details of the complaint, any action taken by the BHA in response to the complaint, the complainant’s name, the complainant’s address, and the complainant’s telephone number. All of the pertinent documents shall also be sent to the United States. The BHA shall also advise counsel for the United States, in writing, within fifteen (15) days of the resolution of any complaint.
INSPECTIONS 25. During the term of this Order, representatives of the United States and Private Plaintiffs
shall be permitted, upon providing reasonable notice to the BHA, and subject to signing a confidentiality order agreeable to all parties to protect the privacy of tenants and applicants, to inspect and copy at reasonable times any and all records related to the rental of dwellings at the BHA apartment complexes or related to the BHA’s obligations under this Order. The confidentiality order shall not impair the parties’ ability to effectuate any of the terms of this Consent Order or otherwise enforce any of the provisions of the Fair Housing Act.
DURATION OF ORDER 26. Except as provided in Paragraph 33(a-c) hereof with respect to the obligations of Dan
Cooper only, this Consent Order shall remain in effect with respect to the BHA for four (4) years from the date of the entry of this Order. However, in the event that there is a material and substantial failure by the BHA to satisfy the terms or provisions of the Consent Order, the United States or the Private Plaintiffs may file a motion requesting that
- 18 -

the term of the Consent Order be extended. A motion to extend the Consent Order must be filed no later than sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the Consent Order. At least thirty (30) days prior to filing such a motion, the parties to this Consent Order shall meet and confer in good faith in an effort to resolve any allegations of material and substantial noncompliance. 27. The Court shall retain jurisdiction for the duration of this Consent Order to enforce the terms of the Order, after which time the United States’ and the Private Plaintiffs’ complaints against the BHA shall be dismissed with prejudice. 28. The parties shall employ their best efforts to resolve any differences that arise in the implementation or interpretation of this Consent Order. In the event that such efforts fail, either party, after meeting-and-conferring with the other party, may bring the matter to the Court’s attention for resolution.
TIME FOR PERFORMANCE 29. Any time limits for performance imposed by this Consent Order may be extended by the
mutual written agreement of the parties. MONETARY RELIEF
30. Compensation for Identified Aggrieved Persons a. Within fourteen (14) days from the date on which 2004 Capital Fund Program (CFP) funds are delivered to the BHA from HUD or fourteen (14) days from the date of the entry of this Order, whichever is later, the BHA shall send a certified or bank check, subject to collection, via overnight mail for $190,000.00 (one hundred ninety thousand dollars) to attorneys for Private Plaintiffs who shall deposit such
- 19 -

check in an interest-bearing escrow account for the persons who allege to have been victims of the Defendants’ discriminatory conduct.1 b. All of the expenses and costs associated with the creation of this account shall be borne by the Private Plaintiffs. c. Attorneys for the Private Plaintiffs shall be responsible for distributing the money in this account (which account shall also include the $12,500 payment from Dan Cooper described in Paragraph 33(a) below) in a manner that is fair and equitable, as determined by the Class Representatives and set forth below. The distribution shall be approved by the Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e). This distribution shall provide lump-sum cash payments to the following Private Plaintiffs not to exceed the following amounts: Queen King ($27,500), Sharon Johnson ($25,000) and Evelyn Reed ($25,000), individually and as Class Representatives; individual Private Plaintiffs: Bonita Mays ($25,000) and the Concerned Citizens Committee of Blakely and Early County, Ga. ($25,000); and additional Private Plaintiffs: Rhonda Branch, Dorothy Collier, Patricia Smith, Angie Glenn, Monique Lindsey, Lisa McCoy, Alma Parks ($10,000 each). Each of these twelve Private Plaintiffs, in addition to providing substantial assistance to Private Plaintiffs’ counsel and devoting substantial time and effort in prosecuting this litigation, filed complaints with HUD in or about February 1998, which, after an investigation, led to an issuance of a Charge of Discrimination by the Georgia

1

The BHA shall make this check payable to: “The Class in Civil Action No. 1:00-CV-109-1

(WLS).”

- 20 -

Commission on Equal Opportunity against the BHA and Dan Cooper, upon which these litigations were based, in part. d. Counsel for Private Plaintiffs shall distribute part of the funds deposited in the escrow account to any member of the Class who paid excessive, duplicative, and/or unwarranted late fees to the BHA. The United States shall review the BHA’s files, which shall be made available, to identify the members of the Class who are entitled to payment under this Subparagraph and shall determine how much each member of the Class shall receive. In no event shall the total of disbursements, including the administrative costs associated with the distribution of these monies, under this Subparagraph exceed $5,000.00 (five thousand dollars). Any funds remaining after disbursement of all unwarranted late fees and payment of all administrative fees pursuant to this Subparagraph shall be disbursed pro rata to the Private Plaintiffs identified in Paragraph 30(c) hereof. In the event that the amount of late fees to which the United States determines members of the Class are entitled, together with administrative costs, exceeds $5,000.00, the amount paid to each such member of the Class under this Subparagraph shall be pro rated. e. All of the payments described in this Consent Order are contingent upon the Class Representatives (Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed), individually and in their representative capacities; Bonita Mays, individually; and the Concerned Citizens Committee of Blakely and Early County Georgia, individually, signing a general release of claims hereto attached as Attachment C.
- 21 -

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 31. Upon the resignation of Dan Cooper as the BHA’s executive director, see infra, the BHA
shall never rehire Dan Cooper or allow him to interfere with or participate, directly or indirectly, in the management or operation of the BHA. 32. Within seven (7) days of Dan Cooper’s resignation, the Private Plaintiffs shall publish a notice in the Early County News, which notice shall inform the public about the terms of this Consent Order and Dan Cooper’s resignation. The Private Plaintiffs shall bear all the costs associated with such notice.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN PLAINTIFFS AND DAN COOPER 33. The following provisions of the Consent Order settle all claims between the United States,
Private Plaintiffs, and Dan Cooper arising out of or related to any facts or legal claims asserted in this case.2 Notwithstanding any terms in this Order to the contrary, Dan Cooper’s duties under this Order encompass only the following provisions: a. Within ten (10) days of the entry of this Order, Dan Cooper shall send a certified
or bank check, subject to collection, via overnight mail for $12,500.00 (twelve thousand five-hundred dollars) to attorneys for Private Plaintiffs who shall deposit such check in the interest-bearing escrow account described in Paragraph 30(c) above for the persons who allege to have been victims of the Defendants’ discriminatory conduct.3 Such funds shall be added to the amount described in

2

The parties understand that this settlement does not restrict the right of the United States

Department of Housing and Urban Development to enter administrative sanctions against Mr.

Cooper.

3

Dan Cooper shall make this check payable to: “The Class in Civil Action No. 1:00-CV-109-1

(WLS).”

- 22 -

Paragraph 30(a) above and distributed in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 30(c) above. b. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Order, Dan Cooper shall resign from his position as executive director of the BHA. Dan Cooper shall not thereafter accept employment with or participate, directly or indirectly, in the management or operation of the BHA. c. Upon the satisfactory completion of Dan Cooper’s duties under this Paragraph 33(a-c), the United States’ and the Private Plaintiffs’ complaints against Dan Cooper shall be dismissed with prejudice. AGREEMENT BETWEEN PRIVATE PLAINTIFFS AND THE BHA 34. The following provisions of the Consent Order settle all claims between the Private Plaintiffs and the BHA and shall not apply to the United States: a. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Order, the BHA shall conduct a national search for a new executive director to replace Dan Cooper. Within sixty (60) days of the entry of this Order, the BHA shall select an applicant to serve as the new executive director of the BHA and shall submit such applicant’s name to HUD for approval. Within one (1) day of HUD’s approval, the BHA shall appoint such applicant to serve as the new executive director of the BHA. In the event that HUD does not approve the BHA’s candidate, the BHA shall, within five (5) days of HUD’s rejection, identify additional candidates to HUD for approval. If HUD rejects the additional candidates, the BHA shall have five (5) days after each time
- 23 -

HUD rejects a candidate to submit additional candidates for approval to HUD. HUD shall not unreasonably withhold its approval. b. As an alternative to replacing the Executive Director as set forth in Paragraph 34(a) hereof, the BHA, subject to approval of HUD, shall be permitted to retain or contract with an entity or company to operate and manage the BHA and otherwise to carry out the functions of the Executive Director and his or her staff. In the event such an entity or company is so retained, it shall be subject to the terms of this Order pursuant to Paragraph 2 hereof. c. Within one (1) year of the entry of this Order, the BHA shall conduct three seminars for BHA tenants on BHA property that explain tenants’ fair housing rights and their rights and responsibilities under BHA rental leases. d. Within sixty (60) days of the entry of this Order, the BHA shall distribute a copy of the HUD booklet entitled Fair Housing Is Your Right!, HUD Form 903.1, to each current tenant of the BHA. e. From the date of entry of this Order, the BHA shall forgive past due balances of former BHA tenants who are Private Plaintiffs and wish to move back to the BHA, and shall expunge from the BHA files of such tenants, to the extent permitted by law and HUD regulations, any past criminal, disciplinary, financial or other negative information that might otherwise result in such individual being denied an apartment at the BHA.
- 24 -

f. From the date of entry of this Order, the BHA shall not charge any tenants for the

costs associated with maintenance to BHA apartments arising out of routine wear

and tear or complex-wide repairs.

g. From the date of entry of this Order, the BHA shall charge tenants a late fee on

any past-due balance of ten (10) percent of the unpaid balance of the original

charge or assessment, but in no case shall any initial late fee be less than $10 or

more than $25. Subsequent fees for bills that remain unpaid for longer periods

shall not exceed 10 percent of the unpaid balance. For example, a tenant who has

a rent of $50 a month and is late paying that rent shall be charged $10 for the first month and $5 for any subsequent months that that particular month’s rent remains

unpaid. Under no circumstances shall these late fees be cumulative.

h.

The BHA shall repair, remove, or replace existing playground equipment on

BHA property and shall install playground equipment at other BHA sites to the

extent such equipment is desired by BHA tenants and within current or future

BHA budgets.

i. The BHA may charge tenants a refundable deposit to rent its community room but

in no event shall such deposit exceed $25.00. The deposit shall be refunded to the

tenant so long as the community room is left in the same condition in which it was

rented. Nothing in this provision shall prevent the BHA from seeking to recover

the costs associated with damage done to the community room in excess of the

security deposit.

- 25 -

j.

Neither the BHA’s executive director nor any other BHA employee shall be

permitted to perform security patrols or policing functions on BHA property. This provision shall in no way hinder or limit the BHA’s ability to hire licensed or

certified security personnel to perform such functions.

k. Within sixty (60) days of the appointment of a new executive director or the

retention of an independent company or entity to manage the BHA as provided in

Paragraph 34 hereof, and annually thereafter, the BHA shall publicize and conduct

an election among the BHA tenants, the winner of which shall serve as a non-

voting advisor to the BHA's Board of Commissioners.

l. From the date of entry of this Order, the BHA Board of Commissioners shall meet

with BHA tenants quarterly to discuss any issues tenants may have regarding their

housing.

m. Within fourteen (14) days from the date on which 2004 Capital Fund Program

(CFP) funds are delivered to the BHA from HUD, the BHA shall send a certified

or bank check, subject to collection, via overnight mail for $50,000 (fifty thousand dollars) to attorneys for the Private Plaintiffs to cover attorneys’ fees and costs,

which fees shall be divided amongst attorneys for Private Plaintiffs (Proskauer Rose LLP, the Lawyers’ Committee For Civil Rights Under Law, Laverne Lewis-

Gaskins, Esq. and Betty Walker-Lanier, Esq.) in a matter that is fair and equitable,

as determined by said attorneys, and approved by the Court. All other attorney

fees and costs shall be borne by the parties.

- 26 -

n. All payments to any Private Plaintiff under this Consent Order are compensation for injury suffered. Receipt of any payment pursuant to this Consent Order shall not affect any Private Plaintiff’s eligibility for public housing or any other public benefits under federal, state or local laws, rules and regulations, nor will such payments be treated as income or assets for purposes of determining rental payments to the BHA under applicable laws, rules and regulations. FAIRNESS HEARING
35. Approximately one hundred twenty (120) days following preliminary approval of this Consent Order, the Court will hold a fairness hearing for the purpose of determining whether to finally approve this Consent Order. The hearing date, time, and location will be provided in the notices described below, and members of the Class may appear at the fairness hearing and object to final approval of this Consent Order.
36. Within thirty (30) days after the Court’s preliminary approval of this Consent Order, the Private Plaintiffs will provide notice to the Class of the date, time and location of the Fairness Hearing, which notice or notices shall also include a description of the principal terms and conditions of this Consent Order (the “Notice(s)”). The form and content of the Notice(s) shall be substantially in the form annexed hereto as Attachment D (the “Personal Notice”) and Attachment E (the “Publication Notice”) and shall be subject to the approval of the United States, the BHA, Dan Cooper and the Court. Private Plaintiffs shall provide the Notice to members of the Class who currently reside at the BHA by sending a copy by first class mail to each BHA household, provided that the BHA provides Private Plaintiffs’ counsel with a list of the names and addresses of the head of
- 27 -

household at each BHA apartment unit. Private Plaintiffs shall provide notice to all other members of the Class by causing the Publication Notice to be published in the Early County News on three consecutive weeks. Such published Notice shall be in the form of a quarter-page (or larger) advertisement. All costs associated with preparing, reproducing and distributing the Notices as provided hereinabove shall be borne by Private Plaintiffs.. The BHA, at its expense, shall post the Personal Notice and the Publication Notice in conspicuous locations in or near the rental office or apartment or other location used as a rental office at each of the BHA apartment complexes. 37. Nothing in this Consent Order shall prohibit counsel for any party from notifying members of the Class of the proposed settlement at their own expense, whether by placing additional advertisements, conducting additional outreach efforts, or otherwise; provided, however, that such counsel will not solicit members of the Class to request that they be excluded from the Class.
WITHDRAWAL 38. Within twenty (20) days after the date set by the Court as the last date upon which a
request to opt out of the class must be postmarked (as indicated in the Personal Notice), Private Plaintiffs shall file with the Court and serve (by fax and overnight mail) counsel for the BHA, Dan Cooper and the United States a list of all persons requesting to opt out of the Class. Within fourteen (14) days of the date said list is served, the BHA or Dan Cooper may in their discretion withdraw from this Order and any related agreements by filing with the Court and serving (by fax and overnight mail) written notice, indicating
- 28 -

briefly the reasons therefor; provided, however, that such withdrawal is permitted only if fifty (50) or more valid members of the Class have timely submitted a request to opt out.
SIGNATURES OF THE PARTIES The parties consent to the entry of this Consent Order as indicated by the signatures of counsel below:
Respectfully submitted,

FRANK MAXWELL WOOD United States Attorney

R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
/s/____________________________________ Steven H. Rosenbaum, Chief Donna Murphy, Deputy Chief Allen W. Levy Alberto J. Ruisanchez
Trial Attorneys Housing and Civil Enforcement Section (G Street) Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20530 (202) 514-2188 (202) 514-1689 (fax)
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

- 29 -

PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
BY: /s/____________________________________ Nancy Kilson (admitted pro hac vice;
NY State Bar No. 1638501) John R. Braatz (admitted pro hac vice;
NY State Bar No. 2733335) 1585 Broadway New York, NY 10036-8299 (212) 969-3000 (212) 969-2900 (fax)
LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW
1401 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 662-8600
Betty Walker-Lanier (Ga. State Bar No. 731225) 223 2nd Street East P.O. Box 2128 Tifton, GA 31793 (229) 382-7470
ATTORNEYS FOR PRIVATE PLAINTIFFS
/s/_____________________________________ Robert B. Langstaff, Jr. (GA Bar No. 436705) 1500 Dawson Road Albany, GA 31702-1306 (229) 436-5725 (229) 436-5729 (fax)
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS CITY OF BLAKELY HOUSING AUTHORITY AND DAN COOPER
- 30 -

 
 Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COt!J.)\Ji FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION

--"'
! '·' i~ COUKT

~"-··
'

,. ' :

~, :

o· j

QUEEN KING, ET. AL. Plaintiffs,
v.
CITY OF BLAKELY HOUSING AUTHORITY, ET. AL.,
Defendants.

1:00-CV-109-1 (WLS)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v. CITY OF BLAKELY HOUSING AUTHORITY, ET. AL.
Defendants,

1:02-CV-87-3 (WLS)

ORDER Presently pending before this Court is the parties' proposed settlement agreement and consent order ("Settlement agreement") and stipulation thereto (Tabs 184, 185) ofwhich the Court had previously granted the Plaintiffs' request for preliminary approval. (Tab 186). Before the Court is the decision for final approval of the parties' proposed settlement of all African-American persons residing in public housing owned and maintained by Defendant City of Blakely Housing Authority who were discriminated against concerning housing accommodations, based on their race from 1994 until at least 1998. Having conducted a fairness hearing and heard from the parties and objectors, the Court approves the proposed Consent Decree and certifies the settlement-only class for the reasons discussed below.
1

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 2 of 11
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY This case originally was filed on June 26, 2000, as a Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(2) class action
against Defendants City of Blakely Housing Authority ("BHA") and its executive director Dan Cooper. Plaintiffs' alleged that Defendants: (1) established, maintained, and perpetuated a racially-segregated and unequal system of low-income housing; (2) subjected AfricanAmerican tenants of BHA to more onerous terms and conditions in the rental of housing because of their race; and, (3) retaliated against individual Plaintiffs for organizing and protesting the alleged discriminatory conduct. Plaintiffs' filed suit pursuant to the Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601, et. seq.; Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. § 2000d; the Georgia Fair Housing Law, O.C.G.A. §§ 8-3-200, et. seq.; the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; Article I,§ 1, Part V ofthe Georgia Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 1983.
On September 17, 2003, the Court certified the class pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 23(b)(2) consisting of all past, present, and future African-American tenants and applicants of BHA, who were, are, or will be subjected to racial discrimination. Plaintiffs Queen King, Sharon Johnson and Evelyn Reed are the class representatives.
On June 10, 2002, the United States filed it complaint against Defendants to enforce the provisions of the Fair Housing Act ("FHA"), and Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act. Specifically, the United States alleged that Defendants: (1) refused to rent, refused to negotiate for the rental of, or otherwise make available apartments because ofthe race of the individuals; made statements with respect to the rental of apartments that indicated a preference for the race of the renter; and, (3) coerced, intimidated, threatened or interfered with renters in violation of their rights under the FHA.
Upon consolidation of the two cases for discovery and for trial, extensive discovery and resolution of certain dispositive motions the case was scheduled for a bench trial for the May
2

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 3 of 11
2004 Albany Trial Term. On May 6, 2004, the parties requested a continuance in order to pursue settlement of the case. (Tab 176). The case was continued from the May Term, and subsequent terms for the terms of the settlement to be reached and approved by the various parties. (Tab 176, 177, 180, 182). On September 17,2004, the parties filed amotion for preliminary approval of the settlement agreement and a stipulation relating thereto. (Tabs 184, 185). The motion for preliminary approval also contained the actual settlement agreement. (Tab 184).
The Court granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement agreement on September 30, 2004. In its order, the Court scheduled a "fairness hearing" and ordered parties to disseminate, according to the terms ofthe consent agreement, two forms of notice to the Class informing members of the proposed settlement agreement, the fairness hearing, and the private attorneys request for fees and costs incurred in litigating this action and obtaining the settlement agreement. None of the class members filed objections to the settlement or the request for fees and costs.
On January 26, 2005, a fairness hearing was held to afford parties, objectors and nonclass members the opportunity to present evidence and be heard. At the hearing, no one appeared to object to the settlement. Further, the parties submitted evidence that the notices were properly disseminated to the class members and the public. II. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT TERMS
The proposed settlement agreement includes the following non-monetary relief, monetary relief and a sunset provision to the named Plaintiffs and perspective class members.
A. Non-Monetary Relief With respect to non-monetary relief, BHA will implement certain policies, practices and procedures in a nondiscriminatory manner. First, BHA will be enjoined from refusing to rent a dwelling, or provide information related thereto, to persons based on their race. Second, BHA will be enjoined from discriminating against any person in the terms, conditions, privileges in
3

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 4 of 11
the rental or sale of a dwelling or in the provision of services related thereto, including harassment or intimidation, because of race. Third, BHA shall be enjoined from placing any notice, statement or advertisement with respect to rental or sale of a dwelling that discriminates on the basis of race. Fourth, BHA will be enjoined from threatening, coercing or intimidating individuals exercising any rights protected by the FHA.
In addition, the agreement calls on BHA to perform certain other affirmative acts. BHA shall comply with Paragraphs 6 through 14 with respect to renting dwellings to ensure compliance with the non-discrimination provisions of the FHA. Within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the entry of this order, BHA shall create and submit for approval to the United States and HUD written Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Procedures for renting apartments, handling inquiries, assigning units and transferring individuals to different units. Within fourteen (14) days of approval of the procedures by the United States and HUD, BHA shall implement the procedures. As further set out in detail in the settlement agreement, BHA shall maintain current and accurate lists of available apartments, a visitor's log, preference indicator, waiting list for each size apartment, a placement log, rental applications, and shall provide certain information to prospective applicants. BHA shall implement a training program, as set out in further detail in the agreement, for its employees. BHA shall provide employees and board members with copies of rules and procedures and a copy of this order and agreement. BHA shall also provide tenants with the same, along with certain other notices and other documentation. BHA shall also post in a conspicuous place certain HUD posters and forms within 30 days ofthis order. The settlement agreement also provides for additional testing, reporting requirements, inspections and other matters.
As a condition of settlement, Dan Cooper, BRA's Executive Director, shall resign within thirty (30) days of this order and have no contact with the operation of BHA. Within seven (7) days of Cooper's resignation, Plaintiffs shall, at their own costs, publish a notice in the Early County News informing the public of his resignation and the terms of the settlement
4

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 5 of 11

agreement between the parties. B. Monetary Relief BHA will pay to attorneys for Private Plaintiffs a sum of $190,000.00 within fourteen
(14) days ofthis order or upon disbursement ofthe 2004 Capital Fund Program, whichever is later. (Para. 30).1 This fund, along with the $12,500.00 received from Defendant Dan Cooper, will be dispersed to the individual plaintiffs and class members as set forth in Paragraph 30 of the settlement agreement.2 All payments are contingent upon class representatives, individually and in their representative capacities, as set out in Paragraph 30(e) ofthe settlement agreement, signing a release of claims attached to the settlement agreement as Attachment C. Pursuant to the settlement between the Plaintiffs and Dan Cooper, Cooper shall pay, within ten (10) working days of this order, $12,500.00 to Private Plaintiffs' attorneys. The amount shall be added to the amount paid by BHA.
C. Agreement Between Private Plaintiffs And BHA There is also a separate provision of terms between the Private Plaintiffs and BHA Specifically, the agreement sets up a procedure BHA shall follow in selecting and hiring a new executive director for BHA Further, the agreement provides that BHA shall conduct at least three seminars for tenants to explain their rights under the FHA In addition, BHA shall forgive past due balances of former tenants who want to move back into BHA and, to the extent allowed by law, BHA shall expunge any negative information that might otherwise prevent the former tenants from being denied an apartment at BHA. The agreement provides the terms for BHA to handle late fees, application fees, maintenance fees, maintenance of the

1 •

Though not discussed in Paragraph

30 ofthe agreement,

BHA will pay Private

Plaintiffs

attorneys $50,000.00 as attorneys fees from the same Capital Fund Program as attorneys fees. (See,

Para. 34(m). The total amount paid by Defendants to Private Plaintiffs and their attorneys is

$252,500.00.

2 •

Essentially, the $252,000 settlement amount will be dispersed as follows:

$197,500 to be

dispersed to the various Plaintiffs as damage compensation; $5,000 to be paid as reimbursement

for late fees; and $50,000.00 as attorneys fees.

5

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 6 of 11

facilities, security and tenant representation and meetings with the BHA Board of Commissioners. Lastly, the agreement provides for a sum of $50,000, in addition to the $190,000, to be paid by BHA to Private Plaintiffs' attorneys.3
D. Sunset Provision The proposed settlement also has a sunset provision. The Court will retain jurisdiction for four years from the date of final approval to monitor parties' compliance with the settlement. At the end of the four years, the Court's jurisdiction will then automatically terminate without further proceedings. III. LEGAL STANDARD FOR APPROVAL OF A CONSENT DECREE Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires judicial approval of consent decrees/settlement orders. The court must approve any settlement of the claims and issues of a certified class and it must further give reasonable notice to all class members who would be bound by the consent decree. Fed. R. Civ.P. 23{e){l){A),(B). However, Fed. R. Civ. P. 23{e) does not set forth standards for determining fairness of the settlement. Rather, the Court is guided by the established principle in this Circuit that voluntary settlement is the preferred means of resolving class-action discrimination actions. See Holmes v. Continental Can Co., 706 F.2d 1144, 1147 (11th Cir. 1983). In order to approve the proposed settlement agreement the Court has an independent duty to insure that the decree is "fair, adequate and reasonable." Bennett v. Behring Corp., 737 F.2d 982, 986 (11th Cir. 1984)(citing Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d 1326, 1330 (5th Cir. 1977)).4 As part of determining fairness, adequacy, and reasonableness, the Court must also insure that the proposed settlement agreement is not the product of collusion between the parties. Id. at 986 (citing Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d at 1330). a. The Settlement Agreement Is Fair, Adequate and Reasonable

3 •

See, footnote 2, supra.

4 •

In Bonner v. City of Prichard. 661

F.2d 1206,

1209 (11th Cir.

1981) (en bane), this

court adopted as binding precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior

to October 1, 1981.

6

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 7 of 11

This Court in deciding whether the settlement agreement is fair, adequate and

reasonable will consider certain factors. Those factors are as follows: (1) the likelihood of

success at trial and range ofpotential recovery; (2) the complexity, expense and duration of

litigation; (3) the views of named Plaintiffs and class members; (4) the views of counsel for the

parties; (5) the substance and amount of opposition to the consent decree; and (6) the stage of

the proceedings at which the consent decree was achieved. Meyer v. Citizens and Southern

Nat'l Bank, 677 F.Supp. 1196, 1201 (M.D. Ga. 1988).

i.

The Likelihood ofSuccess at Trial and Range ofPotential Recovery

The benefit of the settlement agreement to the named Plaintiffs and class members

should be compared with the likelihood of success at trial and potential recovery. At this stage

of litigation, it can be fairly said, based on the evidence before the Court, that Plaintiffs had a

very good likelihood of success on the merits. While the named Plaintiffs and class members

faced many risks affecting the likelihood of a substantial monetary recover, the hurdles facing

injunctive relief were less formidable. Even so, this settlement provides Plaintiffs with a

substantial monetary settlement and nearly all of their requested injunctive relief. With respect

to the recovery under the settlement agreement, named Plaintiffs and class members obtained a

majority of the requests for relief specified in their complaint.

ii. The Complexity, Expense and Duration ofLitigation

The class action itself would have taken substantially more time and money to litigate

because of the complexity of the claims as alleged, statistical evidence and confrontational

expert reports provided by both sides. A trial on the merits and any subsequent hearing as to

recovery would involve contested evaluation of the evidence ultimately determined by the

factfinder. The Court therefore concludes that a settlement is in the best interests of named

Plaintiffs and class members since further litigation would be protracted, burdensome and

costly, without the certainty of recovery.

iii. The Views ofNamed Plaintiffs and Class Members

7

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 8 of 11
In determining whether a settlement agreement is fair, adequate and reasonable, the Court must listen to and consider the views of the named Plaintiffs and class members. The silence of named Plaintiffs and class members may be, but is not always, indicative of classwide support. Reynolds v. King, 790 F.Supp. 1101, 1109 (M.D. Ala. 1990). A court can properly interpret the absence of objections as support where most of the class is easily identifiable and has consistently expressed interest in the litigation. !d. The Court has not received any objections from the named Plaintiffs or class members. Moreover, the Court has no reason to believe that the proposed settlement agreement treats any named Plaintiff or class member unfairly and there appears to be no overt conflict between any named Plaintiff or class member. The great weight accorded majority opinion in this instance favors approving the settlement agreement.
iv. The Views of Counsel for the Parties In class actions, Courts accord great weight to the recommendations of experienced counsel. Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d at 1330. The Court "absent fraud, collusion, or the like, should hesitate to substitute its own judgment for that of counseL" !d. In the instant action, counsel for both parties recommend that the Court approve the propose settlement agreement. Counsel for both parties include exceptional attorneys experienced in class actions, discrimination cases and complex litigation. In deciding whether this proposed settlement agreement should be approved, the Court has given due consideration to the representations of counsel for both parties that the proposed settlement agreement is fair, adequate and reasonable.
v. The Substance and Amount of Opposition to the Consent Decree In reviewing the fairness, adequacy and reasonableness of the consent decree, "the number of objectors is a factor to be considered but is not controlling." Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d at 1331. None of the named Plaintiffs, class members or the public made objections at the fairness hearing. This factor does not militate against settlement.
8

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 9 of 11
vi. The Stage ofProceedings at Which the Settlement Was Achieved The proposed settlement agreement was not achieved until both parties had engaged in comprehensive discovery, pursued dispositive motions and been scheduled for trial. All necessary parties were deposed and discovery was completed. The cases had been consolidated and the class certified. The Court therefore concludes that there has been a sufficient exchange of information between the parties to grant final approval of the proposed settlement agreement. b. The Settlement Agreement Is Not A Product of Collusion The Court must consider whether there is any evidence the proposed settlement agreement was the product of collusion to determine whether it was the result of arms-length bargaining between the parties. From the onset, this case has been highly adversarial and counsel for both parties have zealously advanced the interests of their respective parties. The parties engaged in genuine and extensive discovery. The settlement negotiations necessitated multiple extensions before all parties finally, and unanimously, agreed upon the terms of the proposed settlement agreement. At the fairness hearing, there were no objections to the settlement agreement. The Court finds that there is no evidence that there has been anything but good faith bargaining by all involved and concludes that the proposed settlement agreement was achieved as the result of intense, arms' length negotiation and without collusion. IV. ATTORNEYS FEES, EXPENSES AND COSTS Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e), the Court must insure that the ultimate distribution of the attorneys' fees to Private Plaintiffs attorneys is reasonable to all named Plaintiffs and class members irrespective of the lack of opposition to the attorneys fee award. Typically, federal courts follow a practice of requiring a "prevailing party" to assume attorneys fees, expenses and costs in civil actions. Buckhannon Board and Care Home. Inc. v. W.Va. Dept. of Health and Human Res., 532 U.S. 598, 602 (2001). However, in civil rights cases, the Court may ordinarily award the "prevailing party'' of a settlement reasonable attorneys fees as part of the
9

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 10 of 11
costs and expenses of the action. Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 428 (1983). In order to establish whether one is a "prevailing party" as required for an attorneys fees
award under the civil rights statutes, the Court has to determine: (1) whether there is a change in the legal relationship between the parties; and (2) whether the actual relief in the settlement is material to legally merit an award of attorneys fees. See Buckhannon, 532 U.S. at 1840; Nat'l Coalition for Students with Disabilities v. Bush, 173 F.Supp.2d 1272, 1279 (N.D. Fla. 2001).
In the Eleventh Circuit, the first prong is satisfied where the Court either incorporates the terms of the parties' settlement into the final approval or expressly retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement. American Disability Ass'n v. Chmielarz, 289 F.3d 1315, 1320 (11th Cir. 2002)(emphasis in original). Here, the parties' legal relationship has changed, for purposes of establishing the first prong of attaining "prevailing party" status, since the Defendant has voluntarily agreed to the terms of the settlement and the Court will retain oversight of compliance with the settlement after final approval. American Disability Ass'n v. Chmielarz, 289 F.3d at 1320-21; Nat'l Coalition for Students with Disabilities v. Bush, 173 F.Supp.2d at 1279.
The second prong is satisfied when "actual relief on the merits ... materially alters the legal relationship between the parties by modifying the defendant's behavior in a way that directly benefits the plaintiff." Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. 103, 111-12 (1992). "'[T]he most critical factor' in determining the reasonableness of a fee award 'is the degree of success obtained."' I d. at 114 (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. at 436). The degree of success obtained in a settlement can be ascertained by comparing the relief awarded to the relief sought. Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. at 114. In the instant action, the terms of the settlement between the parties grant virtually every request for relief short of Defendants' admission ofliability. Specifically, named Plaintiffs and class members receive significant monetary relief as well as programmatic relief. Further litigation may not have provided the class with the successful
10

Case 1:00-cv-00109-WLS Document 190-1 Filed 03/21/2005 Page 11 of 11
outcome Plaintiffs' were able to negotiate in the monetary and injunctive relief. Therefore, the Court is satisfied that the actual relief awarded the class materially alters the legal relationship between the parties to merit an award of attorneys fees.
Consequently, the Court concludes that the named Plaintiffs and class members are "prevailing parties." Private Plaintiffs attorneys are therefore entitled to attorneys fees as part of expenses and costs and the uncontested award of $50,000.00 is reasonable for the relief obtained. VII. CONCLUSION
In sum, the Court finds that the settlement agreement which provides an aggregate total of compensation to Plaintiffs in the amount of$252,000.00 to be disbursed according to the terms of the agreement to be fair, equitable and in compliance with the relevant precedent. Further, the Court finds the injunctive and other equitable relief to be appropriate under the circumstances.
For the reasons stated above and pursuant to Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, arguments of counsel, the record and the evidence presented at the fairness hearing on January 26,2005, the Court hereby ORDERS, ADJUDGES and DECREES that the terms of the proposed settlement agreement, is fair, reasonable and adequate and is therefore finally and unconditionally APPROVED and ADOPTED. The proposed settlement order (Tab 184) by reference herein is adopted and made a part of this order. The Court RETAINS jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the proposed settlement agreement as herein approved and made final.
SO ORDERED, this J,/J'day w.~~~
W. LOUI SANDS, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11

 
 Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 1 of 21
U.S. District Court [LIVE AREA] Middle District of Georgia (Albany) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:00−cv−00109−WLS

LEAD

King, et al v. City of Blakely, et al Assigned to: U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS Demand: $0 Cause: 42:405 Fair Housing Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 06/26/2000 Date Terminated: 03/21/2005 Nature of Suit: 443 Civil Rights: Accommodations Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Queen King On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similary Situated

represented by Allison B. Feld Proskauer, Rose, LLP 1585 Broadway New York, NY 10036−8299 212−969−3960 TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

BETTY WALKER LANIER PO BOX 2128 TIFTON, GA 31793 229−387−0125 Email: walkerlanierbett@bellsouth.net LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Cheryl L. Ziegler 1401 New York Avenue, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 202−662−8331 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Christopher A. Raimondi Proskaued, Rose LLP 1585 Broadway New York, NY 10036 212−969−3000 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Laverne Lewis Gaskins P.O. Box 6058 Valdosta, GA 31603−6058 229−247−0165 Email: LG73127@bellsouth.net TERMINATED: 07/03/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Meredith R. Miller Proskaued, Rose LLP 1585 Broadway New York, NY 10036 212−969−3000 LEAD ATTORNEY

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 2 of 21

PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Nancy Kilson Proskauer, Rose, LLP 1585 Broadway New York, NY 10036−8299 212−969−3960 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Rose J Murphy Proskaued, Rose LLP 1585 Broadway New York, NY 10036 212−969−3000 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Stacy R. Horth−Neubert Proskauer, Rose, LLP 1585 Broadway New York, NY 10036−8299 212−969−3960 TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas J. Henderson 1401 New York Avenue, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005−0400 202−662−8600 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Sharon Johnson On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated;

represented by Allison B. Feld (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

BETTY WALKER LANIER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Cheryl L. Ziegler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Christopher A. Raimondi (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 3 of 21

Plaintiff
Evelyn Reed On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated;

Laverne Lewis Gaskins (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/03/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Meredith R. Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Nancy Kilson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rose J Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Stacy R. Horth−Neubert (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Thomas J. Henderson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Allison B. Feld (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
BETTY WALKER LANIER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Cheryl L. Ziegler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Christopher A. Raimondi (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Laverne Lewis Gaskins

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 4 of 21

(See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/03/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Meredith R. Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Nancy Kilson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Rose J Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Stacy R. Horth−Neubert (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas J. Henderson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Bonita Mays Individually

represented by Allison B. Feld (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

BETTY WALKER LANIER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Cheryl L. Ziegler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Christopher A. Raimondi (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Laverne Lewis Gaskins (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/03/2002

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 5 of 21

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Meredith R. Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Nancy Kilson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Rose J Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Stacy R. Horth−Neubert (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas J. Henderson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
CONCERNED CITIZENS Committee of Blakely and Early County, GA

represented by Allison B. Feld (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

BETTY WALKER LANIER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Cheryl L. Ziegler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Christopher A. Raimondi (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Laverne Lewis Gaskins (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/03/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 6 of 21

Meredith R. Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Nancy Kilson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rose J Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Stacy R. Horth−Neubert (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Thomas J. Henderson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Consol Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA United States of America

represented by Alberto J. Ruisanchez 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 202−305−1291 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Allen W. Levy U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Housing/Civil Enforcement Sec. (G Street) Washington, DC 20530 202−514−6781 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joan A. Magagna U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Housing/Civil Enforcement Sec. (G Street) Washington, DC 20530 202−514−6781 Fax: FAX 202−514−1116 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kenneth D. Johnson

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 7 of 21
U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Housing/Civil Enforcement Sec. (G Street) Washington, DC 20530 202−514−6781 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
William Gifford AUSA U.S. Attorney Office P.O. Box 1702 300 Mulberry Street, Suite 400 Macon, GA 31202−1702 478−621−2729 Email: USAGAM.CVAUSAVACANT@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant BLAKELY GEORGIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
Defendant BLAKELY GEORGIA TERMINATED: 02/27/2004

represented by ROBERT B LANGSTAFF , JR PO BOX 1306 ALBANY, GA 31702−1306 229−436−5725 Email: bob@langstafflaw.com TERMINATED: 12/05/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by BENTON J MATHIS , JR 100 GALLERIA PKWY STE 1600 ATLANTA, GA 30339 770−818−0000 Email: bmathis@fmglaw.com TERMINATED: 02/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
CHRISTOPHER E PARKER 1170 PEACHTREE ST NE STE 800 ATLANTA, GA 30309−7706 404−962−6100 Email: cparker@millermartin.com TERMINATED: 02/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jennifer Pra Koslow 100 Galleria Parkway Suite 1600 Atlanta, GA 30339−5959 770−818−1432 TERMINATED: 02/27/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
MICHAEL T HOSMER McGuireWoods LLP 201 N TRYON ST CHARLOTTE, NC 28202

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 8 of 21

704−343−2392 Email: mhosmer@mcguirewoods.com TERMINATED: 09/05/2003 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

ROBERT B LANGSTAFF , JR (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/05/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Dan Cooper Individually and in His Representative Capacity

represented by ROBERT B LANGSTAFF , JR (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 06/26/2000
06/26/2000 06/26/2000 06/26/2000 07/03/2000 07/10/2000 07/10/2000 07/12/2000 07/27/2000
07/27/2000 07/27/2000 07/28/2000 08/18/2000 08/21/2000 08/21/2000

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT filed; FILING FEE $ 150 RECEIPT # 700176 Service of Complaint due by 10/24/00 for Dan Cooper, for City of Blakely, for City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 06/28/2000)
SUMMONS(ES) issued for City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper (bjl) Modified on 06/28/2000 (Entered: 06/28/2000)
2 ANSWER to Mandatory Interrogatories filed by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens (bjl) (Entered: 06/28/2000)
1 MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to Certify Class (bjl) (Entered: 07/28/2000)
Case referred to ARBITRATION (trh) (Entered: 07/03/2000)
4 RETURN OF SERVICE executed as to City of Blakely Housing on 7/7/00. Answer due on 7/27/00 for City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 07/12/2000)
5 RETURN OF SERVICE executed as to City of Blakely on 7/7/00. Answer due on 7/27/00 for City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 07/12/2000)
3 RETURN OF SERVICE executed as to Dan Cooper on 7/7/00. Answer due on 7/27/00 for Dan Cooper (bjl) (Entered: 07/12/2000)
6 PRE−ANSWER MOTION by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Dismiss . Response due by 8/21/00, Reply to Response due by 9/5/00 for [6−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 07/27/2000)
7 MEMORANDUM by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in support of [6−1] motion to Dismiss (bjl) (Entered: 07/27/2000)
8 RESPONSE by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in opposition to Plaintiff's Request for Class Certification. (bjl) (Entered: 07/27/2000)
DEADLINE updated; set Answers to Mandatory Interrogatories deadline to 8/28/00 for Dan Cooper, for City of Blakely, for City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 07/28/2000)
SUMMONS(ES) issued for City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 08/21/2000)
DEADLINE updated; Response to Motion reset to 9/5/00 for [6−1] motion to Dismiss per request from Alison Feld (jbk) (Entered: 08/21/2000)
9 RETURN OF SERVICE executed as to City of Blakely 8/21/00 .Answer due on 9/11/00 for City of Blakely Answer to mandatory interrogatories due 10/13/00 for City of Blakely .(jbk) Modified on 08/22/2000 (Entered: 08/22/2000)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 9 of 21

08/21/2000 08/21/2000 08/23/2000 09/07/2000 09/08/2000 09/11/2000
09/11/2000
09/18/2000 09/28/2000 09/28/2000 09/28/2000 10/13/2000 03/30/2001 03/30/2001
03/30/2001 04/16/2001 04/16/2001 04/16/2001 04/16/2001

10 RESPONSE by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to [6−1] motion to Dismiss (jbk) Modified on 08/22/2000 (Entered: 08/22/2000)
11 REPLY by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays to response to [1−1] motion to Certify Class (bjl) (Entered: 09/28/2000)
DEADLINE updated; Reply to Response to Motion reset to 9/14/00 for [6−1] motion to Dismiss per request from Pat with Bob Langstaff's office. (kme) (Entered: 08/23/2000)
12 MOTION by City of Blakely Housing, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to Reply to Motion to Dismiss (bjl) (Entered: 09/08/2000)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [12−1] motion to Extend Time to Reply to Motion to Dismiss; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 09/08/2000)
13 ORDER granting [12−1] motion to Extend Time to Reply to Motion to Dismiss, Reply to Response to Motion reset to 9/29/00 for [6−1] motion to Dismiss, reset to 9/29/00 for [1−1] motion to Certify Class ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) [EOD Date 9/11/00] (bjl) (Entered: 09/11/2000)
14 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE why the motion to dismiss should not be dismissed for failure to file answers to mandatory interrogatories. Answer to mandatory interrogatories due 9/28/00 for Dan Cooper, for City of Blakely, for City of Blakely. (bjl) (Entered: 09/11/2000)
15 RESPONSE by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in opposition to [14−1] show cause order re: answers to mandatory interrogatories (bjl) (Entered: 09/18/2000)
16 REPLY by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to response to [6−1] motion to Dismiss (bjl) (Entered: 09/28/2000)
17 RESPONSE by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to [1−1] motion to Certify Class (bjl) (Entered: 09/28/2000)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [6−1] motion to Dismiss ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 09/28/2000)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [1−1] motion to Certify Class; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 10/13/2000)
18 ORDER denying [1−1] motion to Certify Class without prejudice. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) [EOD Date 3/30/01] (bjl) (Entered: 03/30/2001)
19 ORDER granting in part, denying in part [6−1] motion to Dismiss; (granting motion and dismissing plaintiffs' state law claims against City of Blakely) (denying motion as to statute of limitations without prejudice) (denying without prejudice as to defendant Cooper's protection under official and qualified immunity) (denying motion as to improper service of process) (denying motion as to Early C9o., GA's standing in this case) (denying motion for failure to state claims for which relief may be granted) (denying motion that plaintiffs are still subjected to defendants' alleged discriminatory housing practices and policies) denying motion as to plaintiffs' 1983 claim); defendants are ordered to answer mandatory interrogatories within 10 days of service of this order. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) [EOD Date 3/30/01] (bjl) (Entered: 03/30/2001)
DEADLINE updated; reset Answers to Mandatory Interrogatories deadline to 4/12/01 for Dan Cooper, for City of Blakely, for City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 03/30/2001)
20 ANSWER to Complaint by City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 04/17/2001)
21 ANSWER to Mandatory Interrogatories filed by City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 04/17/2001)
22 ANSWER to Complaint by City of Blakely, Dan Cooper (bjl) (Entered: 04/17/2001)
23 ANSWER to Mandatory Interrogatories filed by City of Blakely, Dan Cooper (bjl) (Entered: 04/17/2001)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 10 of 21

04/23/2001 05/01/2001 05/07/2001 05/21/2001 06/07/2001 06/08/2001 07/17/2001 08/02/2001
08/17/2001 08/17/2001
08/22/2001 08/30/2001
10/05/2001 12/03/2001
12/03/2001 04/03/2002
04/03/2002

24 RULES 16 AND 26 ORDER; proposed scheduling/discovery order due on 6/7/01. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 04/23/2001)
25 CONSENT to proceed before Magistrate Judge by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper (bjl) (Entered: 05/02/2001)
ARBITRATION LETTER mailed. Parties to opt−out of arbitration by 6/4/01 (trh) (Entered: 05/07/2001)
Case no longer referred to ARBITRATION. (trh) (Entered: 05/21/2001)
PROPOSED SCHEDULING/DISCOVERY order received (bjl) (Entered: 06/07/2001)
26 ORDER setting discovery conference on 7/17/01 at 3:30 in Albany. set Discovery Hearing for 3:30 7/17/01 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) [EOD Date 6/8/01] (bjl) (Entered: 06/08/2001)
27 MINUTE ENTRY of discovery conference held before Judge Sands; Court Reporter: Darlene Pino (bjl) (Entered: 08/02/2001)
28 SCHEDULING/DISCOVERY ORDER executed. Discovery shall continue until 10/16/01 and at completion of initial discovery period, the court will make a preliminary determination as to class certification. Parties to file proposed agreement as to discovery by 8/17/01. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 08/02/2001)
29 NOTICE of Discovery Agreement by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens, City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper per court's order (bjl) (Entered: 08/20/2001)
29 AMENDMENT to [28−1] Scheduling order filed by plaintiff Queen King, plaintiff Sharon Johnson, plaintiff Evelyn Reed, plaintiff Bonita Mays, plaintiff Concerned Citizens, defendant City of Blakely, defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper (bjl) (Entered: 08/20/2001)
30 STIPULATION AND ORDER for the Protection of Confidential Information. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) [EOD Date 8/22/01] (bjl) (Entered: 08/22/2001)
31 AMENDMENT to [28−1] Scheduling order filed by plaintiff Queen King, plaintiff Sharon Johnson, plaintiff Evelyn Reed, plaintiff Bonita Mays, plaintiff Concerned Citizens, defendant City of Blakely, defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper that motion for class certification shall be filed by 12/3/01. Signed by W.Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 08/30/2001)
29 AMENDED SCHEDULING/DISCOVERY ORDER executed. Dispositive Motions to be filed by 2/28/02; Discovery to be complete by 12/31/01. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 10/05/2001)
32 AMENDMENT to [29−1] Scheduling order filed by plaintiff Queen King, plaintiff Sharon Johnson, plaintiff Evelyn Reed, plaintiff Bonita Mays, plaintiff Concerned Citizens, defendant City of Blakely, defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper that discovery shall conclude on 6/7/02, dispositive motions shall be filed by 6/28/02, any motions for class certification shall be filed by 4/5/02, all motions to dismiss any party or claim to be filed by 6/28/02 and all disclosures regarding expert witnesses to be filed by 4/30/02. Signed by W. Louis Sands. (kme) (Entered: 12/03/2001)
DEADLINE updated; Reset Motion Filing deadline to 6/28/02 , Reset Discovery completion deadline to 6/7/02 (kme) (Entered: 12/03/2001)
33 AMENDMENT to [29−1] Scheduling order filed by plaintiff Queen King, plaintiff Sharon Johnson, plaintiff Evelyn Reed, plaintiff Bonita Mays, plaintiff Concerned Citizens, defendant City of Blakely, defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper; discovery ends 11/22/02; motion for class certification to be filed by 10/4/02; dispositive motions by 12/13/02. (Signed by W. Louis Sands, USCDJ) (bjl) (Entered: 04/03/2002)
DEADLINE updated; reset Discovery completion deadline to 11/22/02 , reset Motion Filing deadline to 12/13/02 (bjl) (Entered: 04/03/2002)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 11 of 21

06/21/2002 06/24/2002 06/24/2002 07/03/2002 09/27/2002 09/27/2002 10/04/2002 10/04/2002 10/04/2002 10/07/2002 10/08/2002 10/09/2002 10/10/2002 10/11/2002
10/24/2002
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
11/25/2002

34 NOTICE of attorney appearance for Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens by Betty Walker−Lanier (bjl) (Entered: 06/24/2002)
35 MOTION by Laverne Lewis−Gaskins to Withdraw as Attorney (bjl) (Entered: 06/24/2002)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [35−1] motion to Withdraw as Attorney; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 06/24/2002)
35 ORDER granting [35−1] motion to Withdraw as Attorney (signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) [EOD Date 7/3/02] (kme) (Entered: 07/03/2002)
36 CERTIFICATION of Need to File Discovery by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens in support of [33−1] Order. (bjl) (Entered: 09/27/2002)
37 EXPERT REPORT of Dr. Christopher Silver filed by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens (bjl) (Entered: 09/27/2002)
38 MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to Certify Class Response due by 10/28/02 Reply to Response due by 11/13/02 for [38−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 10/04/2002)
39 MEMORANDUM by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens in support of [38−1] motion to Certify Class (bjl) (Entered: 10/04/2002)
40 NOTICE of Declaration of John R. Braatz by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens (bjl) (Entered: 10/04/2002)
DEADLINE updated; Response to Motion reset to 11/12/02 for [38−1] motion to Certify Class ; per request Mr. Langstaff's office; to forward confirmation letter to all counsel (jbk) (Entered: 10/07/2002)
DEADLINE updated; Reply to Response to Motion reset to 11/25/02 for [38−1] motion to Certify Class (bjl) (Entered: 10/08/2002)
41 MOTION by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to respond to Motion to Certify Class until 11/27/02 (bjl) (Entered: 10/10/2002)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [41−1] motion to Extend Time to respond to Motion to Certify Class until 11/27/02; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 10/10/2002)
42 ORDER granting [41−1] motion to Extend Time to respond to Motion to Certify Class until 11/27/02 Response to Motion reset to 11/27/02 for [38−1] motion to Certify Class , Reply to Response to Motion reset to 12/11/02 for [38−1] motion to Certify Class ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 10/11/2002)
43 ORDER that currently pending in USA Vs. City of Blakely Housing Authority, et al., 1:02−CV−87−3(WLS), is a motion to consolidate the USA's case with this case. As the Court will be hearing oral arguments on 10/29/02, the Court orders that all discovery in this case be extended 30 days; discovery be suspended in this case until 10/29/02 and defendants are granted 30 days from the original deadline to name a rebuttal expert witness. reset Discovery completion deadline to 12/23/02 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 10/25/2002)
44 ORDER granting motion to consolidate case with 1:02−cv−87−3 as to discovery, denying motion to consolidate case as to trial. Motion filed in case no. 1:02−cv−87−3. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 11/15/2002)
45 SCHEDULING/DISCOVERY ORDER executed. Jury Trial set for 10/6/03. Dispositive Motions to be filed by 5/29/03. Discovery to be completed by 4/14/03. Motion to consolidate as to discovery was granted in case no. 1:02−cv−87−3. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 11/15/2002)
46 NOTICE of attorney appearance for City of Blakely by Benton J. Mathis Jr., Christopher E. Parker (kme) (Entered: 11/27/2002)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 12 of 21

11/29/2002 12/03/2002 12/04/2002 12/05/2002 03/10/2003 03/10/2003 03/14/2003 03/14/2003 03/14/2003 03/19/2003
03/20/2003 03/21/2003 03/21/2003 03/25/2003 03/31/2003 03/31/2003 04/01/2003 04/01/2003 04/01/2003 04/02/2003

47 MOTION by Robert B. Langstaff Jr. to Withdraw as Attorney (bjl) (Entered: 12/03/2002)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [47−1] motion to Withdraw as Attorney; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 12/03/2002)
48 ORDER granting [47−1] motion to Withdraw as Attorney by Robert B. Langstaff for defendant City of Blakely( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 12/05/2002)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [38−1] motion to Certify Class; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 12/05/2002)
49 NOTICE of attorney appearance for City of Blakely by Michael Towle Hosmer (bjl) (Entered: 03/10/2003)
50 NOTICE by City of Blakely OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Georgia Commission on Equal Opportunity Fair Housing division for taking of deposition. (kme) (Entered: 03/12/2003)
51 CERTIFICATION of Need to File Discovery by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens pursuant to Judge's order (bjl) (Entered: 03/14/2003)
52 EXPERT REPORT of Dr. Christopher Silver filed by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens (bjl) (Entered: 03/14/2003)
53 JOINT MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens, City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time for discovery and dispositive motions deadlines for 60 days (bjl) (Entered: 03/19/2003)
53 ORDER granting [53−1] joint motion to Extend Time for discovery and dispositive motions deadlines for 60 days reset Discovery completion deadline to 6/16/03 , reset Motion Filing deadline to 7/29/03 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) Modified on 03/19/2003 (Entered: 03/19/2003)
54 NOTICE OF SUBPOENA to Tim Cleveland c/o Blakely Housing Autority by non−party, USA, for production of documents and things. (bjl) (Entered: 03/20/2003)
55 MOTION with memorandum in support by City of Blakely, City of Blakely to Extend Time to Depose Queen King by 4 hrs (bjl) (Entered: 03/21/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [55−1] motion to Extend Time to Depose Queen King by 4 hrs; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 03/21/2003)
DEADLINE updated; Response to Motion reset to 4/7/03 for [55−1] motion to Extend Time to Depose Queen King by 4 hrs per Judge Sands (bjl) (Entered: 03/25/2003)
58 UNOPPOSED MOTION by USA to Extend Time to File Motion to Compel Until 4/30/03 Re: City of Blakely Housing Authority (bjl) Modified on 04/02/2003 (Entered: 04/02/2003)
59 UNOPPOSED MOTION to Extend Time to File Motion Compel Until 4/24/03 re: City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 04/02/2003)
56 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of [55−1] motion to Extend Time to Depose Queen King by 4 hrs as parties have settled the issue. (bjl) (Entered: 04/01/2003)
57 MOTION by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to Serve Defendants' Expert Disclosures (bjl) (Entered: 04/01/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [57−1] motion to Extend Time to Serve Defendants' Expert Disclosures; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 04/01/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [59−1] motion to Extend Time to File Motion Compel Until 4/24/03, submitted [58−1] motion to Extend Time to File Motion to Compel Until 4/30/03; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 04/02/2003)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 13 of 21

04/07/2003 04/07/2003 05/05/2003 05/05/2003 05/05/2003 05/05/2003 05/05/2003 05/05/2003 05/05/2003 05/07/2003 05/07/2003 06/04/2003 07/08/2003 08/19/2003 08/20/2003 08/25/2003 09/05/2003 09/18/2003 09/18/2003
09/22/2003

60 ORDER granting [58−1] motion to Extend Time for USA to File Motion to Compel Until 4/30/03 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 04/07/2003)
61 ORDER granting [59−1] motion to Extend Time for USA to File Motion Compel Until 4/24/03 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 04/07/2003)
62 NOTICE by City of Blakely OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Kay Johnson, for deposition (bjl) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
63 NOTICE by City of Blakely OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Evonne Pugh, for deposition (bjl) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
64 NOTICE by City of Blakely OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Bertha Pugh, for deposition (bjl) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
65 RULE 26(a)(2) DISCLOSURES filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper (bjl) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
65 UNOPPOSED MOTION with memorandum in support by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to Serve Defendants' Expert Disclosures (bjl) Modified on 05/07/2003 (Entered: 05/05/2003)
66 UNOPPOSED MOTION with memorandum in support by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Discovery Period (bjl) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [66−1] motion to Extend Discovery Period, submitted [65−1] motion to Extend Time to Serve Defendants' Expert Disclosures; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
67 ORDER granting [65−1] motion to Extend Time to Serve Defendants' Expert Disclosures, granting [65−1] Rule 26(a)(2) disclosure ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 05/07/2003)
68 ORDER granting [66−1] motion to Extend Discovery Period reset Discovery completion deadline to 8/12/03 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 05/07/2003)
69 ORDER granting [57−1] motion to Extend Time to Serve Defendants' Expert Disclosures until 5/4/03. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 06/04/2003)
70 REBUTTAL EXPERT REPORT of Dr. Christopher Silver filed by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens (bjl) (Entered: 07/08/2003)
71 JOINT MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens, City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Amend Scheduling Order (bjl) (Entered: 08/20/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [71−1] joint motion to Amend Scheduling Order; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 08/20/2003)
72 ORDER granting [71−1] joint motion to Amend Scheduling Order reset Discovery completion deadline to 8/29/03 , reset Motion Filing deadline to 11/3/03 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
73 NOTICE of Substitution of Counsel by City of Blakely from Michael T. Hosmer to Pia Jennifer Koslow (bjl) (Entered: 09/05/2003)
74 ORDER granting [38−1] motion to Certify Class ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 09/18/2003)
75 MOTION to Extend Time Period for Filing a Motion to Exclude Report and Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness by United States. Response due by 10/14/03, Reply to Response due by 10/28/03 for [75−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
76 MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to Exclude Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore . Response due by 10/15/03, Reply to Response due by 11/3/03 for [76−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 09/23/2003)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 14 of 21

09/22/2003 09/22/2003
09/22/2003 09/23/2003 09/23/2003 09/26/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003 10/15/2003 10/15/2003 10/15/2003 10/22/2003 10/24/2003 10/28/2003 10/29/2003
11/03/2003 11/03/2003

77 MEMORANDUM by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens in support of [76−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore (bjl) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
78 MOTION by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Exclude Testimony of Christopher Silver Under FRC 702 and Under Supreme Court's Decicion in Daubert . Response due by 10/15/03 Reply to Response due by 11/3/03 for [78−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
79 MEMORANDUM by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in support of [78−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Christopher Silver Under FRC 702 and Under Supreme Court's Decicion in Daubert (bjl) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [75−1] motion to Extend Time Period for Filing a Motion to Exclude Report and Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
80 MOTION by United States with memorandum in support to Exclude Report and Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore . Response due by 10/16/03, Reply to Response due by 11/3/03 for [80−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 09/25/2003)
81 ORDER granting [75−1] motion to Extend Time Period for Filing a Motion to Exclude Report and Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness until 9/23/03. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 09/26/2003)
82 MOTION by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper for Reconsideration of [74−1] order . Response due by 10/22/03, Reply to Response due by 11/10/03 for [82−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
83 MEMORANDUM by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in support of [82−1] motion for Reconsideration of [74−1] order (bjl) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
84 RESPONSE by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to [76−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore (bjl) (Entered: 10/16/2003)
85 RESPONSE by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to [80−1] motion to Exclude Report and Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore (bjl) (Entered: 10/16/2003)
86 RESPONSE by USA to [78−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Christopher Silver Under FRC 702 and Under Supreme Court's Decicion in Daubert (bjl) (Entered: 10/16/2003)
87 RESPONSE by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to [82−1] motion for Reconsideration of [74−1] order (bjl) (Entered: 10/22/2003)
88 RESPONSE by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to [78−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Christopher Silver Under FRC 702 and Under Supreme Court's Decision in Daubert (bjl) (Entered: 10/24/2003)
89 MOTION by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment until 11/21/03, responsive briefs due 12/22/03 and reply briefs due 1/6/04 (bjl) (Entered: 10/29/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [89−1] motion to Extend Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment until 11/21/03, responsive briefs due 12/22/03 and reply briefs due 1/6/04 ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 10/29/2003)
90 REPLY by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to response to [76−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore (bjl) (Entered: 11/03/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [76−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 11/03/2003)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 15 of 21

11/03/2003 11/03/2003 11/03/2003 11/03/2003 11/04/2003 11/04/2003
11/06/2003 11/06/2003 11/06/2003 11/10/2003 11/12/2003 11/13/2003 11/14/2003 11/15/2003 11/19/2003 11/19/2003 11/20/2003
11/24/2003 11/24/2003

91 REPLY by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to response to [78−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Christopher Silver Under FRC 702 and Under Supreme Court's Decicion in Daubert (bjl) (Entered: 11/04/2003)
96 USA's REPLY to response to [80−1] motion to Exclude Report and Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore (kme) (Entered: 11/10/2003)
97 REPLY by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to response to [80−1] motion to Exclude Report and Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore (kme) (Entered: 11/12/2003)
98 JOINT MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens and USA plaintiff to Consolidate Case with 1:02−CV−87−3(WLS) (kme) (Entered: 11/12/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [78−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Christopher Silver Under FRC 702 and Under Supreme Court's Decicion in Daubert; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 11/04/2003)
92 ORDER granting [89−1] motion to Extend Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment until 11/21/03, responsive briefs due 12/22/03 and reply briefs due 1/6/04 reset Motion Filing deadline to 11/21/03 , set Jury Trial for 3/1/04 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 11/05/2003)
93 NOTICE of Request for Filing of Origial Discovery by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to plaintiffs (bjl) (Entered: 11/06/2003)
94 CERTIFICATION of Need to File Discovery by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in support of [78−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Christopher Silver Under FRC 702 and Under Supreme Court's Decicion in Daubert (bjl) (Entered: 11/06/2003)
95 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Christopher Silver, Ph.D. on 7/18/03 court reporter: Deb Puckett & Assoc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/06/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [80−1] motion to Exclude Report and Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 11/10/2003)
99 RESPONSE by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens in opposition to [93−1] notice − (kme) (Entered: 11/12/2003)
100 RESPONSE by USA in opposition to [93−1] notice − (bjl) (Entered: 11/17/2003)
104 RESPONSE by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to [98−1] joint motion to Consolidate Case with 1:02−CV−87−3(WLS) (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
133 REPLY by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in support of [93−1] Request to File Original Discovery (bjl) (Entered: 11/26/2003)
101 MOTION by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time Filing Motion for Summary Judgment, Briefs, Pretrial Order and Witness and Exhibit List (bjl) (Entered: 11/19/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [101−1] motion to Extend Time Filing Motion for Summary Judgment, Briefs, Pretrial Order and Witness and Exhibit List; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 11/19/2003)
102 ORDER granting [101−1] motion to Extend Time Filing Motion for Summary Judgment, Briefs, Pretrial Order and Witness and Exhibit List reset Motion Filing deadline to 11/24/03 response to motion due 12/29/03 and reply due 1/12/04. (signed by Judge W. L. Sands) (bjl) (Entered: 11/21/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [82−1] motion for Reconsideration of [74−1] order; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 11/24/2003)
103 CERTIFICATION of Need to File Discovery by City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in support of Motions for Summary Judgment with Affidavits of Mark Redden, Kay Johnson and Dan Cooper. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 16 of 21

11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003

105 MOTION by City of Blakely for Summary Judgment . Response due by 12/29/03, Reply to Response due by 1/12/04 for [105−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
106 MEMORANDUM by City of Blakely in support of [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
107 STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED Material Facts by defendant City of Blakely Re: [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
108 MOTION by City of Blakely for Summary Judgment . Response due by 12/29/03 Reply to Response due by 1/12/04 for [108−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
109 MEMORANDUM by City of Blakely in support of [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
110 MOTION by Dan Cooper for Summary Judgment . Response due by 12/29/03 Reply to Response due by 1/12/04 for [110−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
111 MEMORANDUM by Dan Cooper in support of [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
112 STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED Material Facts by defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper Re: [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment, [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
113 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Evelyn Reed on 3/13/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
114 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Monique Michelle Lindsey on 4/2/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
115 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Lisa McCoy on 3/12/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc, Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
116 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Angie Denise Glenn on 4/2/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
117 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Dorothy J. Collier on 3/12/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
118 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Sharon Denise Johnson on 3/14/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
119 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Rhonda Renee Branch on 3/12/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
120 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Alma Parks on 7/7/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
121 DEPOSITION Vol 1 filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Queen King on 3/11/03 court reporter: Houldridge Court Reporting (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
122 DEPOSITION Vol 2 filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Queen King on 3/11/03 court reporter: Houldridge Court Reporting (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
123 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Bonita Marquis Mays on 3/31/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 17 of 21

11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/25/2003 12/03/2003 12/04/2003 12/04/2003 12/04/2003 12/04/2003 12/04/2003 12/04/2003 12/04/2003 12/09/2003 12/09/2003

124 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Benjamin Edward Cawthon on 4/1/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
125 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Patricia Ann Smith on 7/8/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
126 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Dorothea Harrod on 4/14/03 court reporter: Deb Puckett & Assoc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
127 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Kenneth W. Hall on 2/12/03 court reporter: Houldridge Court Reporting (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
128 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Sterling Jones on 2/12/03 court reporter: Houldridge Court Reporting (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
129 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Queen Ester King on 7/8/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
130 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Bertha Lee Pugh on 4/3/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc, Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
131 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): Evonne Pugh on 7/7/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc., Inc. (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
132 DEPOSITION filed by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper of deponent(s): A.J. Gentry on 2/12/03 court reporter: Houldridge Court Reporting (bjl) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
134 MOTION by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper for Filing of Original Discovery (Responses to Interrogatories). Response due by 12/18/03, Reply to Response due by 1/5/04 for [134−1] motion (bjl) (Entered: 11/26/2003)
135 NOTICE of Filing Affidavits of Kay Johnson and Dan Cooper by City of Blakely, Dan Cooper (bjl) (Entered: 12/03/2003)
136 CERTIFICATION of Need to File Discovery by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens (bjl) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
137 NOTICE of Filing Responses and Objections to Defendant Dan Cooper's First Interrogatories by Concerned Citizens (bjl) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
138 NOTICE of Filing Responses and Objections to Defendant Cooper's First Interrogatories by Bonita Mays (bjl) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
139 NOTICE of Filing Responses and Objections to Defendant Cooper's First Interrogatories by Evelyn Reed (bjl) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
140 NOTICE of Filing Responses and Objections to Defendant Cooper's First Interrogatories by Sharon Johnson (bjl) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
141 NOTICE of Filing Responses and Objections to Defendant Cooper's First Interrogataries by Queen King (bjl) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
142 DEPOSITION filed by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens of deponent: David I. Gilmore on 8/12/03 court reporter: Deb Puckett & Assoc. (bjl) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
143 CERTIFICATION of Need to File Discovery in support of [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 12/10/2003)
144 USA'S ANSWERS to First Interrogatories of City of Blakely Housing Authority filed Re: (bjl) (Entered: 12/10/2003)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 18 of 21

12/09/2003 12/09/2003 12/09/2003 12/15/2003 12/16/2003 12/16/2003 12/17/2003
01/13/2004 01/14/2004 01/20/2004 01/20/2004 01/20/2004 01/27/2004 01/29/2004 01/29/2004 01/29/2004

145 USA'S ANSWERS to First Interrogatories of City of Blakely (bjl) (Entered: 12/10/2003)
146 DEPOSITION of deponent(s): Daniel Clayton Cooper on 2/11/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc. (bjl) (Entered: 12/10/2003)
147 DEPOSITION of deponent(s): Joy T. Blocker on 7/9/03 court reporter: Mixon Reporting Svc. (bjl) (Entered: 12/10/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [98−1] joint motion to Consolidate Case with 1:02−CV−87−3(WLS); Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 12/15/2003)
148 JOINT MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens, City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time Responses and Replies to Motion for Summary Judgment, Pretrial Orders and Witness and Exhibit List Objections (bjl) (Entered: 12/16/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [148−1] joint motion to Extend Time Responses and Replies to Motion for Summary Judgment, Pretrial Orders and Witness and Exhibit List Objections; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 12/16/2003)
149 ORDER granting [148−1] joint motion to Extend Time Responses and Replies to Motion for Summary Judgment, Pretrial Orders and Witness and Exhibit List Objections Response to Motion reset to 1/20/04 for [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 1/20/04 for [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 1/20/04 for [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment , Reply to Response to Motion reset to 2/9/04 for [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 2/9/04 for [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 2/9/04 for [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 12/17/2003)
150 MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to Exceed Page Limit on response to motions for summary judgment Motion is unopposed. (kme) (Entered: 01/13/2004)
151 ORDER granting [150−1] motion to Exceed Page Limit on response to motions for summary judgment of 90 pages. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 01/15/2004)
152 RESPONSE by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to City of Blakely's [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 01/20/2004)
153 RESPONSE by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens to [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment, [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 01/20/2004)
154 STATEMENT OF DISPUTED Material Facts by plaintiff Queen King, plaintiff Sharon Johnson, plaintiff Evelyn Reed, plaintiff Bonita Mays, plaintiff Concerned Citizens Re: [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment, [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment, [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 01/20/2004)
155 NOTICE of change of counsel terminating Allison B. Feld and Stacey R. Horth−Nubert by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens. Nancy Kilson remains lead counsel and Cheryl Ziegler and Betty Walker−Lanier remain co−counsel. (bjl) (Entered: 01/27/2004)
156 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in support of [82−1] motion for Reconsideration of [74−1] order (bjl) (Entered: 01/29/2004)
157 CERTIFICATION of Need to File Discovery by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in support of [156−1] support memorandum (bjl) (Entered: 01/29/2004)
158 TRANSCRIPT, Volume I, by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper in re: Initial Discovery Conference hled 10/29/03; Court Reporter: Paul Alexander (bjl) (Entered: 01/29/2004)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 19 of 21

02/03/2004 02/03/2004 02/04/2004 02/06/2004 02/06/2004
02/10/2004
02/11/2004
02/12/2004 02/12/2004 02/16/2004 02/17/2004 02/17/2004
02/17/2004 02/20/2004 02/23/2004 02/24/2004 02/25/2004

159 MOTION by City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to File Reply Brief to Motion for Summary Judgment until 2/16/04 (bjl) (Entered: 02/03/2004)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [159−1] motion to Extend Time to File Reply Brief to Motion for Summary Judgment until 2/16/04 ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 02/03/2004)
160 RESPONSE by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens in opposition to [156−1] support memorandum Re: Motion for Reconsideration of Order Certifying Class (bjl) (Entered: 02/04/2004)
161 ORDER granting [159−1] motion to Extend Time to File Reply Brief to Motion for Summary Judgment until 2/16/04 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 02/06/2004)
DEADLINE updated; Reply to Response to Motion reset to 2/17/04 for [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 2/17/04 for [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 2/17/04 for [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 02/06/2004)
162 JOINT MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens, City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to File Pre−Trial Order and to Delay the Date of the Pre−Trial Conference and Trial (bjl) (Entered: 02/10/2004)
163 ORDER granting [162−1] joint motion to Extend Time to File Pre−Trial Order and to Delay the Date of the Pre−Trial Conference and Trial. reset Pretrial Conference for 10:30 on 2/27/04 and reset Jury Trial for 8:30 3/8/04 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 02/11/2004)
164 ORDER denying [82−1] motion for Reconsideration of [74−1] order ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 02/12/2004)
165 ORDER granting [98−1] joint motion to Consolidate Case with 1:02−CV−87−3(WLS) for trial. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 02/12/2004)
166 REPLY by City of Blakely Housing Authority, Dan Cooper to response to [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment, [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 02/17/2004)
167 REPLY by City of Blakely, Dan Cooper to response to plaintiffs' response to Motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 02/17/2004)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment, submitted [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment, submitted [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 02/17/2004)
168 REPLY by City of Blakely to response to [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment (bjl) (Entered: 02/17/2004)
Proposed pretrial order received from Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens, City of Blakely, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper, United States (bjl) (Entered: 02/23/2004)
169 MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens for Relief from Requirement that All Attorneys Appear at Pre−Trial Conference (bjl) (Entered: 02/24/2004)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [169−1] motion for Relief from Requirement that All Attorneys Appear at Pre−Trial Conference; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (bjl) (Entered: 02/24/2004)
170 ORDER granting [169−1] motion for Relief from Requirement that All Attorneys Appear at Pre−Trial Conference that attorneys Christopher Raimondi and Meredith Miller do not have to appear at the pretrial conference in order to participate in the trial of this case. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 02/25/2004)

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 20 of 21

02/27/2004 02/27/2004 02/27/2004 02/27/2004
02/27/2004
05/06/2004
05/07/2004 05/27/2004
06/01/2004 08/06/2004 08/13/2004
08/20/2004 08/23/2004 08/24/2004 08/26/2004 08/26/2004

171 ORDER granting Govt's Motion to Dismiss City of Blakely without prejudice in 1:02−CV−87−3(WLS). ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 02/27/2004)
172 ORDER granting City of Blakely's [105−1] motion for Summary Judgment ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 02/27/2004)
173 ORDER denying City of Blakely Housing Authority's [110−1] motion for Summary Judgment and denying Cooper's [108−1] motion for Summary Judgment ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 02/27/2004)
174 STIPULATION Re: as to Bench Trial by plaintiff Queen King, plaintiff Sharon Johnson, plaintiff Evelyn Reed, plaintiff Bonita Mays, plaintiff Concerned Citizens, defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper, consolidated plaintiff United States (bjl) (Entered: 03/01/2004)
175 Minute Entry of pretrial conference held on 2/27/04 before Judge Sands; set bench trial for 5/17/04 Court Reporter: Darlene Pino. Parties to provide court separate bench memos a few days before trial. Settlement negotiations underway. (bjl) (Entered: 03/03/2004)
176 STIPULATION to Postpone Trial Date by plaintiff Queen King, plaintiff Sharon Johnson, plaintiff Evelyn Reed, plaintiff Bonita Mays, plaintiff Concerned Citizens, defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper, consolidated plaintiff United States for 14 days. (bjl) Modified on 05/07/2004 (Entered: 05/06/2004)
176 ORDER granting [176−1] stipulation to continue trial for 14 days. reset Jury Trial for 6/1/04 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) Modified on 05/07/2004 (Entered: 05/07/2004)
177 STIPULATION Re: for Further Postponement of Trial Date for 30 days by plaintiff Queen King, plaintiff Sharon Johnson, plaintiff Evelyn Reed, plaintiff Bonita Mays, plaintiff Concerned Citizens, defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper, consolidated plaintiff United States (bjl) Modified on 05/27/2004 (Entered: 05/27/2004)
177 ORDER granting [177−1] stipulation postponing trial for 30 days to continue settlement negotiations. reset Jury Trial for 7/1/04 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 06/01/2004)
178 ORDER that parties show cause why case should not be placed on next available term by 8/20/04. set Status Report deadline to 8/20/04 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 08/06/2004)
179 STIPULATION Re: for Further Postponement of Trial Date by plaintiff Queen King, plaintiff Sharon Johnson, plaintiff Evelyn Reed, plaintiff Bonita Mays, plaintiff Concerned Citizens, defendant City of Blakely, defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper, consolidated plaintiff United States (bjl) (Entered: 08/13/2004)
180 ORDER granting [179−1] stipulation of continuance. Case to be placed on trial calendar for month of October, 2004. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 08/20/2004)
181 JOINT MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens, City of Blakely, Dan Cooper on consent for continuance of pre−trial conference and trial date (kme) (Entered: 08/24/2004)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [181−1] joint motion on consent for continuance of pre−trial conference and trial date ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 08/24/2004)
182 ORDER granting [181−1] joint motion on consent for continuance of pre−trial conference and trial date ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 08/26/2004)
183 ORDER denying as moot [80−1] motion to Exclude Report and Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore, denying as moot [78−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Christopher Silver Under FRC 702 and Under Supreme Court's Decicion in Daubert, denying as moot [76−1] motion to Exclude Testimony of Defendants' Expert Witness David Gilmore. Parties have advised Court they have reached a settlement of this case. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered:

Case 1:00-cv-109 As of: 07/10/2017 11:49 AM EDT 21 of 21

09/17/2004 09/17/2004 09/30/2004 09/30/2004 12/15/2004
01/26/2005 01/26/2005 03/21/2005
03/21/2005
06/13/2005 06/13/2005

08/26/2004)
184 MOTION by Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, Bonita Mays, Concerned Citizens for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement and Related Relief (bjl) (Entered: 09/17/2004)
185 STIPULATION to Enter Consent Decree by defendant City of Blakely, defendant Dan Cooper, consolidated plaintiff United States (bjl) (Entered: 09/17/2004)
186 ORDER granting [184−1] motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement and Related Relief ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 09/30/2004)
DEADLINE updated; set Status Conference for 10:30 1/26/05 Re: Proposed Settlement (bjl) (Entered: 09/30/2004)
187 NOTICE by Sharon Johnson, Queen King, Evelyn Reed that Private Plaintiffs and the Class have received, through and including the December 2, 2004 cut−off date, no requests from Class members seeking to opt out of the settlement of this litigation. (wks ) (Entered: 12/15/2004)
188 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Chief Judge W. Louis Sands : FAIRNESS HEARING held on 1/26/2005. (gpg) (Entered: 01/26/2005)
189 PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBIT LIST in re: Fairness Hearing held 1/26/2005. (gpg) (Entered: 01/26/2005)
190 ORDER − the Court orders, adjudges and decrees that the terms of the proposed settlement agreement, is fair, reasonable and adequate and is therefore finally and unconditionally approved and adopted. The proposed settlement order, re Doc. 184 , by reference herein is adopted and made a part of this order. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the proposed settlement agreement as herein approved and made final. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 3/21/05. (wks, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 3/21/2005 (wks, ). (Entered: 03/21/2005)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE − I certify that on this date I have mailed by United States Postal Service a copy of 190 Order,, including any attachments filed with this document to all non−CM/ECF participants as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. By Wanda K. Sanders, Deputy Clerk. (wks) (Entered: 03/21/2005)
191 Letter regarding deposition disposal. (wks, ) (Entered: 06/13/2005)
Deposition disposal deadline is 6/23/2005. (wks, ) (Entered: 06/13/2005)

 
 Case 1:02-cv-87 As of: 07/10/2017 12:14 PM EDT 1 of 8
U.S. District Court [LIVE AREA] Middle District of Georgia (Albany) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:02−cv−00087−WLS

United States v. City of Blakely, et al Assigned to: U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS Demand: $0 Lead case: 1:00−cv−00109−WLS Member case: (View Member Case) Cause: 42:405 Fair Housing Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 06/10/2002 Date Terminated: 02/13/2004 Nature of Suit: 443 Civil Rights: Accommodations Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

represented by Alberto J. Ruisanchez 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 202−305−1291 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Allen W. Levy U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Housing/Civil Enforcement Sec. (G Street) Washington, DC 20530 202−514−6781 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Joan A. Magagna U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Housing/Civil Enforcement Sec. (G Street) Washington, DC 20530 202−514−6781 Fax: FAX 202−514−1116 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Kenneth D. Johnson U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Housing/Civil Enforcement Sec. (G Street) Washington, DC 20530 202−514−6781 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William Gifford AUSA U.S. Attorney Office P.O. Box 1702 300 Mulberry Street, Suite 400 Macon, GA 31202−1702 478−621−2729 Email: USAGAM.CVAUSAVACANT@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant

Case 1:02-cv-87 As of: 07/10/2017 12:14 PM EDT 2 of 8

BLAKELY GEORGIA

represented by BENTON J MATHIS , JR 100 GALLERIA PKWY STE 1600 ATLANTA, GA 30339 770−818−0000 Email: bmathis@fmglaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

CHRISTOPHER E PARKER 1170 PEACHTREE ST NE STE 800 ATLANTA, GA 30309−7706 404−962−6100 Email: cparker@millermartin.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennifer Pra Koslow 100 Galleria Parkway Suite 1600 Atlanta, GA 30339−5959 770−818−1432 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

MICHAEL T HOSMER McGuireWoods LLP 201 N TRYON ST CHARLOTTE, NC 28202 704−343−2392 Email: mhosmer@mcguirewoods.com TERMINATED: 09/05/2003 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

ROBERT B LANGSTAFF , JR PO BOX 1306 ALBANY, GA 31702−1306 229−436−5725 Email: bob@langstafflaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
BLAKELY GEORGIA HOUSING AUTHORITY

represented by ROBERT B LANGSTAFF , JR (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Dan Cooper Individually and in his offical capacity as Executive Director of the City of Blakely Housing Authority

represented by ROBERT B LANGSTAFF , JR (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 06/10/2002
06/17/2002 06/27/2002

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT filed; Service of Complaint due by 10/8/02 for Dan Cooper, for Blakely Housing Auth, for City of Blakely (kme) (Entered: 06/11/2002)
Case referred to ARBITRATION (trh) (Entered: 06/17/2002)
2 ANSWER to Complaint by Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper (Attorney Robert B. Langstaff Jr.) (kme) (Entered: 06/27/2002)

Case 1:02-cv-87 As of: 07/10/2017 12:14 PM EDT 3 of 8

06/27/2002 07/01/2002 07/08/2002 07/16/2002 07/30/2002 08/13/2002 08/13/2002 08/14/2002 09/05/2002 09/23/2002 09/24/2002 09/30/2002 10/11/2002 10/24/2002
10/25/2002 10/29/2002 10/29/2002
11/14/2002
11/14/2002 11/22/2002

3 ANSWER to Complaint by City of Blakely (Attorney Robert B. Langstaff Jr.) (kme) (Entered: 06/27/2002)
4 RULES 16 AND 26 ORDER; proposed scheduling/discovery order due on 8/13/02 . ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 07/01/2002)
5 ELECTION not to proceed before a Magistrate Judge by United States (kme) (Entered: 07/08/2002)
ARBITRATION LETTER mailed. Parties to opt−out of arbitration by 8/12/02 (trh) (Entered: 07/16/2002)
Case no longer referred to ARBITRATION. (trh) (Entered: 07/30/2002)
PROPOSED SCHEDULING/DISCOVERY order received (kme) (Entered: 08/15/2002)
7 MOTION by United States to Consolidate Cases Response due by 9/5/02 Reply to Response due by 9/23/02 for [7−1] motion (kme) (Entered: 08/15/2002)
6 LETTER re: Late Proposed Scheduling/Discovery Order. Proposed scheduling/discovery order due on 9/3/02 . (kme) (Entered: 08/14/2002)
8 RESPONSE by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to [7−1] motion to Consolidate Cases (kme) (Entered: 09/05/2002)
9 REPLY by United States to response to [7−1] motion to Consolidate Cases (jbk) (Entered: 09/24/2002)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [7−1] motion to Consolidate Cases ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (jbk) (Entered: 09/24/2002)
10 RULE 26(a)(1) DISCLOSURES filed by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper . (kme) (Entered: 10/01/2002)
11 ORDER Setting Scheduling Conference for 3:30 on 10/29/02 in Albany ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 10/11/2002)
12 ORDER that currently pending in this case is a motion to consolidate the USA's case with King, et al. Vs. City of Blakely Housing Authority, et al., 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS). The discovery period in the King case is expected to expire before the Court may be able to rule on this motion. The Court will be hearing oral arguments in this matter on 10/29/02 and the Court orders that discovery be extended and stayed for 30 days in the King case; defendants are granted 30 days from the original deadline to name a rebuttal expert witness. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 10/25/2002)
13 Minute Entry of 10/22/02. Telephone conference re: consolidation of case with 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS). Deposition are suspended in 02−87. Discovery has been extended in 00/109. Court Reporter: Darlene Pino. (kme) (Entered: 10/25/2002)
14 Minute Entry of 10/29/02. Motion hearing i/c/w motion to consolidate w/1:00−cv−109−1. Court Reporter: Paul Alexander (kme) (Entered: 11/15/2002)
15 Minute Entry of 10/29/02. Initial discovery conference. Discovery to be completed by 4/14/03. Dispositive motions to be filed by 5/29/03. Trial tentatively set for 10/6/03. 20/20/20 rule discussed. ADR discussed. Court Reporter: Paul Alexander (kme) (Entered: 11/15/2002)
16 ORDER granting in part, denying in part [7−1] motion to Consolidate Cases. The Court denies the motion to consolidate the cases for trial without prejudice and grants the motion to consolidate the cases for purposes of discovery. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 11/15/2002)
17 SCHEDULING/DISCOVERY ORDER executed. Jury Trial set for 10/6/03. Dispositive Motions to be filed by 5/29/03. Discovery to be completed by 4/14/03. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 11/15/2002)
18 NOTICE of attorney appearance for City of Blakely by Benton J. Mathis Jr., Christopher E. Parker (kme) (Entered: 11/25/2002)

Case 1:02-cv-87 As of: 07/10/2017 12:14 PM EDT 4 of 8

11/29/2002 12/02/2002 12/04/2002 03/10/2003 03/10/2003 03/14/2003 03/14/2003 03/14/2003 03/19/2003 03/21/2003 03/25/2003 03/31/2003 03/31/2003 04/01/2003 04/01/2003 04/07/2003 04/07/2003
05/02/2003 05/05/2003

19 MOTION by Robert B. Langstaff Jr. to Withdraw as Attorney (kme) (Entered: 12/02/2002)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [19−1] motion to Withdraw as Attorney ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 12/02/2002)
20 ORDER granting [19−1] motion to Withdraw as Attorney (signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 12/05/2002)
21 NOTICE of attorney appearance for City of Blakely by Michael Towle Hosmer (kme) (Entered: 03/10/2003)
22 NOTICE by City of Blakely OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Georgia Commission on Equal Opportunity Fair Housing Division for deposition. (kme) (Entered: 03/12/2003)
CERTIFICATION of Need to File Discovery pursuant to Judge's Order (Document in Civil Action 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS)) (bjl) Modified on 03/14/2003 (Entered: 03/14/2003)
EXPERT REPORT of Dr. Christopher Silver (Report in Civil Action 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS)) (bjl) (Entered: 03/14/2003)
23 JOINT MOTION by United States, City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time Discovery for 60 days (bjl) Modified on 03/19/2003 (Entered: 03/19/2003)
23 ORDER granting [23−1] joint motion to Extend Time Discovery for 60 days. reset Discovery completion deadline to 6/16/03 and reset Motion Filing deadline to 7/29/03 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 03/19/2003)
24 MOTION with memorandum in support by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to Depose Queen King by 4 Hours (bjl) (Entered: 03/21/2003)
DEADLINE updated; Response to Motion reset to 4/7/03 for [24−1] motion to Extend Time to Depose Queen King by 4 Hours per Judge Sands (bjl) (Entered: 03/25/2003)
25 UNOPPOSED MOTION by United States to Extend Time to file a motion to compel until 4/24/03 re: City of Blakely's responses to document requests and interrogatories (kme) Modified on 04/02/2003 (Entered: 04/02/2003)
26 UNOPPOSED MOTION by United States to Extend Time to extend time for filing a motion to compel until 4/30/03 re: City of Blakely Housing Authority's response to document requests and interrogatories (kme) (Entered: 04/02/2003)
27 MOTION by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to serve defendants' expert disclosures Response due by 4/24/03 Reply to Response due by 5/12/03 for [27−1] motion (kme) (Entered: 04/02/2003)
28 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper of [24−1] motion to Extend Time to Depose Queen King by 4 Hours (kme) (Entered: 04/02/2003)
29 ORDER granting [25−1] motion to Extend Time to file a motion to compel until 4/24/03 re: City of Blakely's responses to document requests and interrogatories ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 04/07/2003)
30 ORDER granting [26−1] motion to Extend Time to extend time for filing a motion to compel until 4/30/03 re: City of Blakely Housing Authority's response to document requests and interrogatories ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 04/07/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [27−1] motion to Extend Time to serve defendants' expert disclosures ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 05/02/2003)
31 NOTICE by City of Blakely OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Bertha Pugh, for production of documents. (kme) (Entered: 05/05/2003)

Case 1:02-cv-87 As of: 07/10/2017 12:14 PM EDT 5 of 8

05/05/2003 05/05/2003 05/05/2003 05/05/2003 05/06/2003
05/07/2003
05/07/2003 06/04/2003 07/08/2003 08/01/2003 08/01/2003 08/01/2003 08/01/2003 08/01/2003 08/19/2003 08/25/2003
08/29/2003 09/05/2003 09/18/2003 09/22/2003
09/22/2003

32 NOTICE by City of Blakely OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Evonne Pugh, for production of documents. (kme) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
33 NOTICE by City of Blakely OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Kay Johnson, for production of documents. (kme) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
34 MOTION by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to complete discovery (kme) (Entered: 05/06/2003)
35 MOTION by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to serve expert disclosures (kme) (Entered: 05/06/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [35−1] motion to Extend Time to serve expert disclosures, submitted [34−1] motion to Extend Time to complete discovery ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 05/06/2003)
36 ORDER granting [34−1] motion to Extend Time to complete discovery Reset Discovery completion deadline to 8/12/03 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 05/07/2003)
37 ORDER granting [35−1] motion to Extend Time to serve expert disclosures. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 05/07/2003)
38 ORDER granting [27−1] motion to Extend Time to serve defendants' expert disclosures until 5/4/03. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 06/04/2003)
39 REBUTTAL EXPERT REPORT of Dr. Christopher Silver filed by plaintiffs in Civil Action 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS) per Judge's Order (bjl) (Entered: 07/08/2003)
40 NOTICE by United States OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Jennifer Sheffield re: deposition on 7/29/03. (kme) (Entered: 08/05/2003)
41 NOTICE by United States OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Ron Hinson re: deposition on 7/29/03. (kme) (Entered: 08/05/2003)
42 NOTICE by United States OF SUBPOENA to non−party, George Hutchins re: deposition on 7/29/03. (kme) (Entered: 08/05/2003)
43 NOTICE by United States OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Valerie Price re: deposition on 7/30/03. (kme) (Entered: 08/05/2003)
44 NOTICE by United States OF SUBPOENA to non−party, Michelle Schmidt re: deposition on 7/29/03. (kme) (Entered: 08/05/2003)
45 JOINT MOTION by United States, City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Amend Discovery Order (bjl) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
46 ORDER granting [45−1] joint motion to Amend Discovery Order reset Discovery completion deadline to 8/29/03 , reset Motion Filing deadline to 11/3/03 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (bjl) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
54 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE re: #53 motion by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper (kme) (Entered: 10/30/2003)
47 NOTICE of substitution of counsel by Pia Jennifer Koslow from Michael T. Hosmer for the City of Blakely (kme) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
52 MOTION by United States to Extend Time for filing a motion to exclude the report and testimony of defendants' expert witness (kme) (Entered: 09/24/2003)
48 MOTION by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to exclude testimony of Christopher Silver under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and under the Supreme Court's decision in Daubert Response due by 10/15/03 Reply to Response due by 11/3/03 for [48−1] motion (kme) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
49 MEMORANDUM by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper in support of [48−1] motion to exclude testimony of Christopher Silver under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and under the Supreme Court's decision in Daubert (kme) (Entered: 09/23/2003)

Case 1:02-cv-87 As of: 07/10/2017 12:14 PM EDT 6 of 8

09/22/2003 09/22/2003 10/28/2003
10/29/2003
11/03/2003 11/04/2003 11/19/2003
11/20/2003 11/24/2003
11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003
11/24/2003 11/24/2003
11/24/2003 11/24/2003

50 MOTION by United States to exclude the testimony of Defendants' expert witness David Gilmore Response due by 10/15/03 Reply to Response due by 11/3/03 for [50−1] motion (kme) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
51 MEMORANDUM by United States in support of [50−1] motion to exclude the testimony of Defendants' expert witness David Gilmore (kme) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
53 MOTION by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time for filing of summary judgment briefs, pretrial orders and witness and exhibit list objections Plaintiff does not oppose motion. (kme) Modified on 10/29/2003 (Entered: 10/29/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [53−1] motion to Extend Time for filing of summary judgment briefs, pretrial orders and witness and exhibit list objections ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 10/29/2003)
56 JOINT MOTION by United States and private plaintiffs in case 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS) to Consolidate Cases Response due by 11/26/03 Reply to Response due 12/15/03 for [56−1] joint motion (kme) (Entered: 11/10/2003)
55 ORDER granting [53−1] motion to Extend Time for filing of summary judgment briefs, pretrial orders and witness and exhibit list objections ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 11/10/2003)
57 MOTION by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time filing of summary judgment briefs, pretrial orders and witness and exhibit list objections Motion submitted in lead case 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS) (kme) Modified on 11/19/2003 (Entered: 11/19/2003)
58 ORDER granting [57−1] motion to Extend Time filing of summary judgment briefs, pretrial orders and witness and exhibit list objections ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 11/21/2003)
59 MOTION by City of Blakely for Summary Judgment Response due by 12/17/03 Reply to Response due by 1/5/04 for [59−1] motion. All discovery (depositions, etc.) related to his motion are filed in case number 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS). Cases were consolidated as to discovery. (kme) Modified on 11/25/2003 (Entered: 11/25/2003)
60 MEMORANDUM by City of Blakely in support of [59−1] motion for Summary Judgment. Exhibits can be found attached to document #106 in case #1:00−CV−109−1(WLS). (kme) Modified on 11/25/2003 (Entered: 11/25/2003)
61 RESPONSE by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to [56−1] joint motion to Consolidate Cases (kme) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
62 STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED Material Facts by defendant City of Blakely Re: [59−1] motion for Summary Judgment. Exhibits are attached to document #107 in case number 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS). (kme) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
63 MOTION by Blakely Housing Auth for Summary Judgment Response due by 12/17/03 Reply to Response due by 1/5/04 for [63−1] motion. All discovery affiliated with this motion are filed in case number 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS). Cases were consolidated as to discovery. (kme) Modified on 11/25/2003 (Entered: 11/25/2003)
64 MEMORANDUM by Blakely Housing Auth in support of [63−1] motion for Summary Judgment (kme) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
65 MOTION by Dan Cooper for Summary Judgment Response due by 12/17/03 Reply to Response due by 1/5/04 for [65−1] motion. All discovery affiliated with this motion are filed in case number 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS). Cases were consolidated as to discovery. (kme) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
66 MEMORANDUM by Dan Cooper in support of [65−1] motion for Summary Judgment (kme) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
67 STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED Material Facts by defendant Blakely Housing Auth, defendant Dan Cooper Re: [65−1] motion for Summary Judgment, [63−1] motion for Summary Judgment (kme) (Entered: 11/25/2003)

Case 1:02-cv-87 As of: 07/10/2017 12:14 PM EDT 7 of 8

12/09/2003 12/16/2003
12/16/2003
12/17/2003
01/05/2004 01/06/2004 01/13/2004 01/13/2004 01/14/2004 01/14/2004 01/20/2004 01/20/2004 01/20/2004 01/21/2004 02/03/2004 02/04/2004 02/06/2004

68 Notice of Filing original discovery materials by United States. (All discovery can be found in case 1:00−CV−109−1(WLS) (kme) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
69 JOINT MOTION by United States, City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to file summary judgment responses and replies, pretrial orders and witness and exhibit list objections for [69−1] joint motion (kme) (Entered: 12/16/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [69−1] joint motion to Extend Time to file summary judgment responses and replies, pretrial orders and witness and exhibit list objections ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 12/16/2003)
70 ORDER granting [69−1] joint motion to Extend Time to file summary judgment responses and replies, pretrial orders and witness and exhibit list objections Response to Motion reset to 1/20/04 for [65−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 1/20/04 for [63−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 1/20/04 for [59−1] motion for Summary Judgment , Reply to Response to Motion reset to 2/9/04 for [65−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 2/9/04 for [63−1] motion for Summary Judgment, reset to 2/9/04 for [59−1] motion for Summary Judgment ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 12/17/2003)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [56−1] joint motion to Consolidate Cases ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 01/05/2004)
71 TRANSCRIPT of initial discovery conference held 10/29/02. Court Reporter: Paul Alexander. in re: . Court Reporter: Paul Alexander (kme) (Entered: 01/07/2004)
72 MOTION by United States to Exceed Page Limit on response in opposition to motions for summary judgment Motion is unopposed. (kme) Modified on 01/13/2004 (Entered: 01/13/2004)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [72−1] motion to Exceed Page Limit on response in opposition to motions for summary judgment ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 01/13/2004)
73 NOTICE of attorney appearance for United States by Alberto J. Ruisanchez (kme) (Entered: 01/14/2004)
74 ORDER granting [72−1] motion to Exceed Page Limit on response in opposition to motions for summary judgment (signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 01/15/2004)
75 RESPONSE by United States to [65−1] motion for Summary Judgment, [63−1] motion for Summary Judgment, [59−1] motion for Summary Judgment (kme) (Entered: 01/20/2004)
76 STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED Material Facts by plaintiff United States Re: [75−1] response to motions for summary judgment. (kme) (Entered: 01/20/2004)
77 EXHIBIT by United States in support of [75−1] motion response (kme) (Entered: 01/20/2004)
78 MOTION by United States to Dismiss defendant City of Blakely without prejudice Response due by 2/13/04 Reply to Response due by 3/1/04 for [78−1] motion (kme) (Entered: 01/21/2004)
79 Unopposed MOTION by City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to file reply briefs to motions for summary judgment (kme) (Entered: 02/04/2004)
80 ORDER denying [65−1] motion for Summary Judgment, denying [63−1] motion for Summary Judgment ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 02/04/2004)
81 ORDER granting [79−1] motion to Extend Time to file reply briefs to motions for summary judgment Reply to Response to Motion reset to 2/17/04 for [59−1] motion for Summary Judgment ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 02/06/2004)

Case 1:02-cv-87 As of: 07/10/2017 12:14 PM EDT 8 of 8

02/06/2004 02/10/2004 02/10/2004 02/11/2004
02/13/2004 03/21/2005

82 ORDER − the Court will treat the reply briefs as motions for reconsideration. ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 02/06/2004)
83 JOINT MOTION by United States, City of Blakely, Blakely Housing Auth, Dan Cooper to Extend Time to file pre−trial order and to delay the date of the pre−trial conference and trial (kme) (Entered: 02/10/2004)
MOTION(S) submitted: submitted [83−1] joint motion to Extend Time to file pre−trial order and to delay the date of the pre−trial conference and trial ; Original case file and motion sent to Judge W. Louis Sands (kme) (Entered: 02/10/2004)
84 ORDER granting [83−1] joint motion to Extend Time to file pre−trial order and to delay the date of the pre−trial conference and trial Set Pretrial Order deadline to 5:00 2/20/04 , Set Pretrial Conference for 10:30 2/27/04 , Reset Jury Trial for 8:30 3/8/04 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 02/12/2004)
Case Closed (bjl) (Entered: 02/13/2004)
86 ORDER that ther terms of the proposed settlement agreement is approved and adopted and by reference herein adopted and made a part of this order. The court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement as herein approved and made final. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 3/21/05. (bjl) (Entered: 03/21/2005)

 
 Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 1 of 11
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY/AMERICUS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v. CITY OF BLAKELY HOUSING AUTHORITY; CITY OF BLAKELY, GEORGIA; and DAN COOPER, individually and in his official capacity as Executive Director of the City of Blakely Housing Authority,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT The United States of America alleges: 1. This action is brought by the United States to enforce the Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619. 2. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1345 and 42 U.S.C. § 3614. 3. Defendants, the City of Blakely Housing Authority ("BHA"), the City of Blakely, Georgia, and Dan Cooper, in his individual and official capacity as the Executive Director of the BHA, have violated the rights of numerous African-Americans and engaged in a pattern or practice of racial discrimination by:

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 2 of 11
refusing to rent apartments to African-American tenants or applicants at Cedar Hill Homes II; subjecting African-American tenants to different terms and conditions in the rental of BHA apartments; tolerating and/or failing to protect African-American tenants from racial harassment and discrimination; and coercing, intimidating, threatening and/or interfering with AfricanAmerican tenants in the exercise or enjoyment of rights granted or protected by the Fair Housing Act. The United States seeks declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief.
4. Defendant City of Blakely Housing Authority is a public body corporate and politic created to provide decent, safe and sanitary dwellings to persons of low income. Ga. Code § 8-33(10). The BHA owns, operates and manages five public housing complexes, Cedar Hill Homes I, Cedar Hill Homes II, Willis Cain Homes I, Willis Cain Homes II and Baptist Branch Homes. These five public housing complexes are dwellings within the meaning of
42 u.s.c. § 3602 (b).
5. Defendant Dan Cooper was hired as Executive director of the BHA on April 15, 1994, pursuant to a delegation of authority from the Commissioners of the BHA. Ga. Code § 8-3-51(e) Mr. Cooper currently serves as BHA Executive Director.
6. Defendant City of Blakely established the BHA on May 2, 1950 by resolution of the City council. The Mayor of the city of Blakely appoints Commissioners of the BHA Ga. Code § 9-3-50.
-2-

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 3 of 11
In addition, the Mayor may remove any BHA Commissioner from office. Ga. Code § 8-3-53. The five public housing complexes owned by the BHA are subject to the planning, zoning, sanitary, and building laws, ordinances and regulations of the City of Blakely. Ga. Code§ 8-3-7.
7. Defendant City of Blakely has a long history of active involvement in the design, construction and operation of BHA housing. In 1954, Defendant City of Blakely and Defendant BHA designed and constructed Cedar Hill Homes I, with all 26 apartments officially designated for white tenants; and Willis Cain Homes I, with all 49 apartments officially designated for "Negro" tenants. In 1964, the Cedar Hill Homes II complex was built adjacent to Cedar Hill Homes I, with all 14 apartments officially designated for white tenants; and the Willis Cain Homes II complex was built adjacent to Willis Cain Homes I, with all 10 units officially designated for "Negro" tenants.
8. Defendant City of Blakely and Defendant BHA intentionally established a racially segregated dual system of public housing. In support of this racially segregated dual system of public housing, Defendant City of Blakely and Defendant BHA located the Willis Cain Homes adjacent to the "Negro" high school and residential area, thereby increasing the concentration of minorities and furthering racial isolation and segregation.
9. In 1981, Baptist Branch Homes were constructed, with 50
- 3-

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 4 of 11
units unrestricted by race. In the early 1980s, Defendants began placing African-American tenants in Cedar Hill Homes I, but continued to refuse to rent apartments in Cedar Hill Homes II to African-American tenants.
10. After Defendant Cooper was hired as BHA Executive Director in 1994, he continued to implement Defendants' discriminatory policies by refusing to rent vacant apartments in Cedar Hill Homes II to eligible African-American applicants on the BHA waiting list and by holding those apartments vacant until suitable white applicants could be located.
11. Defendant Cooper's methods of implementing Defendants' discriminatory policies included, but were not limited to:
(a) skipping white applicants over black applicants - who had higher positions on the BHA waiting list - so that white applicants could be placed in vacant Cedar Hill Homes II apartments;
(b) placing white applicants ln Cedar Hill Homes II apartments without verifying their application information and refusing to place African-American applicants in Cedar Hill Homes II apartments, even if they were entitled to waiting list preferences; and
(c) placing and maintaining single white tenants in twobedroom Cedar Hill Homes II apartments and thereby making those two-bedroom apartments unavailable to
- 4-

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 5 of 11
African-American families on the BHA waiting list, in violation of the BHA Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy (June 27, 1996), which states that single tenants must occupy studio or one-bedroom apartments. 12. Since Defendant Cooper was hired as BHA Executive Director, African-American tenants have been subjected to racial harassment and discrimination, including but not limited to Defendant Cooper's actions of: using racial slurs and derogatory terms when speaking of African-American applicants and tenants; walking through the predominantly African-American housing complexes wearing fatigues and armed with a gun; stopping and searching African-American tenants without cause; and, at various times, requiring African-American tenants to remain inside their apartments and out of BHA common areas and meeting rooms. 13. Beginning shortly after Mr. Cooper arrived, numerous African-American tenants have complained of racial harassment and discrimination to Defendant Cooper, Defendant BHA and Defendant City of Blakely. Defendants have failed or refused to take adequate action to prevent, stop or correct the racial harassment and discrimination suffered by African-American tenants. 14. African-American tenants who complained of racial harassment and discrimination have been subjected to coercion, intimidation and/or retaliation, including but not limited to Defendant Cooper's and other BHA employees' actions of: refusing
- 5-

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 6 of 11
to allow African-American tenants to use BHA meeting rooms or recognize their tenants' council; having the police detain African-American tenants or otherwise disrupt their meetings; improperly increasing African-American tenants' rental rates or transferring them to smaller apartments; and threatening AfricanAmerican tenants with eviction and initiating unwarranted eviction actions.
15. Defendant BHA and Defendant City of Blakely have failed to take effective steps to: alert Defendant Cooper and other BHA employees that racial harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation would not be tolerated on BHA property; take appropriate action against Defendant Cooper and other BHA employees who engaged in racial harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation; inform tenants of the procedures for reporting racial harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation; or train Defendant Cooper and other BHA employees in procedures to prevent, stop and correct racial harassment, discrimination and retaliation.
16. As set forth above, Defendants' statements, actions, and failures to act, including the maintenance of policies intended to discriminate against African-Americans, constitute:
(a) A pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of rights granted by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619; and
- 6-

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 7 of 11
(b) A denial to a group of persons of rights granted by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619, which raises an issue of general public importance.
17. Defendants, by their statements, actions, and failure to act, as set forth above, have:
(a) Refused to rent, refused to negotiate for the rental of, or otherwise made unavailable, dwellings because of race or color, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a);
(b) Discriminated in the terms, conditions or privileges of the rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of race or color, ln violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(b);
(c) Made statements with respect to the rental of dwellings that indicate a preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race or color, or an intention to make such preference, limitation, or discrimination, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(c); and
(d) Coerced, intimidated, threatened or interfered with persons in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of their having exercised or enjoyed, their rights under the Fair Housing Act, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3617.
18. Persons who have been the victims of Defendants' racial
- 7-

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 8 of 11
harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation are aggrieved persons, as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 3602(i), and have suffered harm and incurred damages as a result of Defendants' discriminatory housing practices.
19. Defendants' discriminatory actions were intentional, willful and/or taken in disregard for the rights of those African-American applicants and tenants who were subjected to Defendants' discriminatory housing practices.
WHEREFORE, the United States prays for an Order from this Court that:
1. Declares that the discriminatory housing practices of Defendants, as set forth above, violate the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619;
2. Enjoins Defendants, their agents, employees and successors, and all other persons in active concert or participation with them or any of them, from:
(a) Refusing to negotiate for the rental of, or otherwise making unavailable or denying, a dwelling to any person because of race or color;
(b) Discriminating against any person in the terms, conditions or privileges of rental of a dwelling because of race or color;
(c) Making statements with respect to the rental of dwellings that indicate a preference, limitation, or
- 8-

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 9 of 11
discrimination based on race or color, or an intention to make such preference; and (d) Coercing, intimidating, threatening, or interfering with any person, in the exercise or enjoyment of any right granted or protected by the Fair Housing Act; 3. Awards such damages as would fully compensate each identifiable victim of Defendants' discriminatory housing practices for injuries suffered as a result of Defendants' discriminatory conduct, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d)(1)(B); 4. Awards punitive damages to each identifiable victim of Defendants' discriminatory housing practices, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614 (d) (1) (B); and 5. Awards civil penalties to the United States, in the amount authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d) (1) (C), in order to vindicate the public interest.
- 9-

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 10 of 11
The United States further prays for such additional relief as the interests of justice may require.

FRANK MAXWELL WOOD United States Attorney

BOYD, JR. Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division

Assistant U.S. Georgia Bar No. : P.O. Box 1702 Macon, GA 31202-1702 478-752-3511 4 78 - 752 - 352 0 (fax)
~-

' · ef, Housing Enforcement Section
Deputy Chief KENNETH D. JOHNSON Trial Attorney Housing & Civil
Enforcement Section (G Street) Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 202-514-6781 202-514-1116 (fax)

- 10 -

Case 1:02-cv-00087-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/10/02 Page 11 of 11
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that I have this date served the within and foregoing Complaint in a properly addressed envelope with sufficient postage affixed to ensure delivery upon the following: Robert B. Langstaff, Jr., Esq. Langstaff Law Offices 1500 Dawson Road Post Office Box 1306 Albany, Georgia 31702-1306
1i This0~ day of June, 2002.

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

ALBANY DIVISION

QUEEN KING, SHARON JOHNSON, and EVELYN REED, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated; BONITA MAYS, individually; and the CONCERNED CITIZENS COMMITTEE OF BLAKELY & EARLY COUNTY, GA,
Plaintiffs,
22.
CITY OF BLAKELY HOUSING AUTHORITY; CITY OF BLAKELY, GEORGIA; and DAN COOPER, individually and in his representative capacity,
Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. ) ) Class Action ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY, INJUNCTIVE, AND MONETARY RELIEF

INTRODUCTION

1. This complaint is brought as a class action against the City of Blakely Housing Authority ("BHA"), City of Blakely, and Dan Cooper, both individually and in his official capacity, under the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §3601, et seq.; Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, and its implementing regulations, 24 C.F.R. § 1, et seq.; the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 1983; the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-200, et seq., and its implementing regulations, Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 186-2.02 (1) and (2) (1998); and Article I, § 1, Part V of the Constitution of the State of Georgia.

2. Specifically, Defendants have acted to establish, maintain, and perpetuate a raciallysegregated unequal system of low-income public housing and have failed to disestablish that system of public housing. Defendants have also subjected tenants of the Blakely Housing Authority to different terms and conditions in the rental of housing on the basis of race and/or color and have engaged in retaliatory conduct because of the attempts by certain class members to exercise their rights under the amended Fair Housing Act and

the free speech provisions of the Constitution of the State of Georgia to challenge Defendants’ discriminatory conduct.
3. Queen King, Sharon Johnson, and Evelyn Reed ("class representatives") bring this action as a class action on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated for declaratory and injunctive relief and for monetary damages incidental thereto. Queen King and Sharon Johnson, along with Bonita Mays and the Concerned Citizens Committee of Blakely and Early County, GA ("Concerned Citizens Committee" or "the Committee"), also bring this action individually for damages (collectively, along with the class representatives, referred to as "Plaintiffs").
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4. Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3601, et seq., in that this action involves violations of the amended Fair Housing Act; 42 U.S.C. § 1331, in that this is an action arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States; and 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(3), because this complaint alleges deprivation of Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights under color of law.
5. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
6. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), in that Defendant City of Blakely, Georgia ("City") is a municipality located in this jurisdiction, Defendant Blakely Housing Authority ("BHA") is an instrumentality of Defendant City of Blakely, Georgia, located in this jurisdiction, and Defendant Dan Cooper ("Cooper") is a resident of this jurisdiction. Moreover, all of the events giving rise to this complaint occurred in this jurisdiction and the property that is at issue is located in this jurisdiction.
PARTIES
7. Queen King, Sharon Johnson, Evelyn Reed, and Bonita Mays (collectively referred to as "individual plaintiffs") are adult African-American women who are either former or current tenants of the Blakely Housing Authority who were subjected to Defendants’ discriminatory housing practices and policies.
8. The Concerned Citizens Committee is an organization located in Blakely, Georgia, that advocates for the civil rights, including fair housing rights, of others in and around the City of Blakely, Georgia. The Committee engages in activities to counteract and eliminate discrimination and protect the rights of its members and constituents to enjoy the benefits of living and working in a non-discriminatory environment. As a result of Defendants’ discriminatory conduct, the Committee’s resources have been diverted and its efforts have been frustrated. Furthermore, the Committee is a membership organization, whose members include all of the class representatives and individual plaintiffs, who each have standing to bring this lawsuit in their own right.

9. The City is a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Georgia. The City established the BHA to manage its public housing. The City appoints the Board of Directors and funds the activities of the BHA and acts in concert with it in carrying out its housing and redevelopment programs. The City is a recipient of federal financial assistance within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000d.
10. BHA is a municipal housing authority organized under the laws of the State of Georgia by the City of Blakely. BHA operates and administers a system of low-income public housing in and for the City, including conventional public housing, pursuant to the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. BHA owns and operates five public housing projects in and around the City of Blakely, with a total of approximately 160 units of rental housing. BHA is governed by a Board of Directors and managed by an Executive Director. BHA is a recipient of federal financial assistance within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000d.
11. Defendant Cooper is the Executive Director of BHA, a position he has held since 1994. Defendant Cooper’s appointment as Executive Director of BHA was endorsed by the Board of Directors of the BHA and he answers directly to that Board. Defendant Cooper is responsible for the management of BHA and the enforcement of its rules and regulations. As such, he is responsible for establishing final policy with respect to Defendant BHA and public housing in Defendant City of Blakely.
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
12. The class representatives bring this action as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on their own behalf and on behalf of a class consisting of all former, current, and future African-American tenants and applicants of BHA who were, are, or will be subjected to the continuing racial segregation and discrimination and the conditions and effects thereof as alleged herein in contravention of the Constitution and federal and state statutes ("the Class").
13. The members of the Class are so numerous that the joinder of all members is impractical. See F.R.C.P. 23(a)(1). While the exact number of the class members is unknown at this time and can only be ascertained through appropriate discovery, Plaintiffs believe that there are at least 315 individuals who were or continue to be subject to the discriminatory practices alleged herein. Moreover, the number of future class members cannot be discerned with any precision.
14. There are questions of law and fact common to the Class, as required by Rule 23(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The common questions include whether the Defendants’ practices and policies alleged herein violated the Class’ rights under (a) the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601, et seq.; (b) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, and its implementing regulations, 24 C.F.R. § 1, et seq.; (c) the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 1983; (d) the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 83-200, et seq., and its implementing regulations, Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 186-2-.02 (1) and (2) (1998); and (e) Article I, § 1, Part V of the Constitution of the State of Georgia.

Common questions also include whether Defendants have established a policy or practice of racial segregation of housing at BHA and whether Defendants subjected the Class to different terms and conditions in the rental of BHA housing.
15. The claims of the class representatives are typical of the claims of the other members of the Class and all members of the Class sustained injuries arising out of Defendants’ wrongful conduct complained of herein. See F.R.C.P. 23(a)(3).
16. The class representatives will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the members of the Class, as required by Rule 23(a)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and are represented by counsel who are qualified, experienced, and able vigorously to prosecute this action.
17. This class action is maintainable under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class by establishing and perpetuating racially segregative policies and practices and by treating the Class less favorably than non-minority BHA residents, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief and corresponding declaratory relief with respect to the class as a whole.
BACKGROUND AND FACTS
Establishment, Maintenance, and Perpetuation of Racially-Segregated Housing
18. BHA owns and operates the following five public housing projects: (a) Cedar Hill Homes; (b) Willis Cain Homes; (c) Cedar Hill Homes II; (d) Willis Cain Homes II; and (e) Baptist Branch Homes.
19. Since its establishment, Defendant BHA has racially-segregated its housing projects, with African-American residents concentrated in certain projects and white residents concentrated in others.
20. The Board of Directors of Defendant BHA and Defendant Cooper have maintained and perpetuated that segregation up to the present and have failed to take appropriate measures to disestablish that segregation.
21. With the exception of Cedar Hill Homes II, which has been reserved almost exclusively for whites since it was built, the other four projects operated by BHA are currently over 90% occupied by African Americans, with few or no white residents.
22. BHA has a written policy for admission into its low-income housing that sets forth admission preferences. BHA maintains a waiting list for admission based on the size of the unit and the applicant’s number of preferences. These preferences include, in order of priority, whether the applicant is (a) elderly or handicapped, (b) a working family, (c) living in substandard housing, or (d) a resident of Early County for the past twenty-four months.

23. During Defendant Cooper’s tenure as Executive Director of BHA, he has placed at least four tenants in Cedar Hill Homes II, all of whom were white.
24. In placing at least two of those tenants in Cedar Hill Homes II, Defendant Cooper selected white applicants over African-American applicants who were higher on the waiting list and had more preferences.
25. Defendants’ segregative practices and polices have continued through the present.
26. Defendant City of Blakely is a recipient of federal housing and community development funding and, as such, is required to administer all programs and activities related to housing and community development in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing, pursuant to § 808 of the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3608, and 24 C.F.R. § 570.601.
27. Upon information and belief, Defendant City of Blakely has certified to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that it has and will affirmatively further fair housing in order to receive federal housing and community development funding.
28. During his tenure as Executive Director of BHA, Defendant Cooper has made statements indicating his intention to maintain racial segregation in BHA housing.
Different Terms and Conditions of Rental Because of Race
29. Defendants BHA and Cooper implemented a written policy relating to guest visitation. That policy prohibits any activity or conduct that poses a safety or health risk and states that non-residents who violate the policy shall be barred from BHA property.
30. Defendant Cooper has repeatedly and continually enforced that policy, many times improperly, against the African-American residents of BHA, while not enforcing that policy against white residents.
31. Defendant Cooper also had a practice of driving through the areas of the BHA where the residents were predominantly African American and detaining and harassing those tenants and their guests, generally without provocation. Defendant Cooper did not engage in that same conduct in Cedar Hill Homes II, where the residents are predominantly white.
32. Defendant Cooper routinely threatened African-American residents with eviction, both properly and improperly, and pursued such evictions aggressively. Defendant Cooper did not, however, treat white tenants similarly.
33. Defendant Cooper routinely verbally harassed African-American tenants by directing racial epithets and other derogatory terms at them, while not treating white tenants in a similar manner.

34. Defendants also cut down all the trees in Cedar Hill Homes, which is predominantly African American, while leaving the trees standing in nearby Cedar Hill Homes II, which is exclusively white. This had the effect of making Cedar Hill Homes a less desirable place to reside.
35. Defendants have also installed outside surveillance video cameras in Cedar Hill Homes, which is predominantly African American, while not installing such cameras in nearby Cedar Hill Homes II, which is exclusively white. As a result, African-American tenants in Cedar Hill feel threatened and intimidated.
Retaliatory Conduct
36. Because of Defendant Cooper’s conduct in harassing African-American tenants and their guests, by early 1996, the individual plaintiffs had begun forming a tenants’ association consisting of BHA public housing residents.
37. Plaintiff King, with the assistance of the Concerned Citizens Committee, led the effort to form the tenants’ association, whose primary purpose was to contest the discriminatory conduct of Defendant BHA in general and Defendant Cooper in particular.
38. On or about May 30, 1996, Plaintiff King attended a meeting of the BHA Board of Directors to request a hearing to introduce the tenants’ association. After this meeting, Defendants engaged in numerous acts of retaliation and harassment against members of the tenants’ association, including the individual plaintiffs.
39. This retaliatory conduct included sending Plaintiff King an eviction notice the day after she attended the BHA Board of Directors meeting to request a hearing to introduce the tenants’ association.
40. Although the eviction proceeding was ultimately settled, Defendant Cooper continued his campaign of harassment against Plaintiff King by, among other things, attempting to transfer Plaintiff King and her three daughters from a four bedroom apartment to a two bedroom apartment and increasing her rent more than six fold.
41. In late 1997, Plaintiffs King, Mays, and other members of the Class participated in a public demonstration denouncing BHA’s discriminatory practices. Defendant Cooper retaliated against Plaintiffs King and Mays for their participation in the demonstration by subjecting them to acts of harassment, which included refusing to accept tendered rent payments and instituting eviction proceedings.
42. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ retaliatory conduct has continued through the present.

Fair Housing Investigation
43. In and around February of 1998, Plaintiffs and other class members filed complaints alleging housing discrimination with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3601, et seq.
44. HUD subsequently referred those complaints to the Georgia Commission on Equal Opportunity ("the Commission"), pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3610(f).
45. The Commission investigated those complaints and, on June 28, 1998, issued a Charge of Discrimination and Summary of Findings. Based on its investigation, the Commission found reasonable cause to believe that a discriminatory practice had occurred.
INJURIES SUFFERED
46. The discriminatory actions of Defendants described above were intentional, willful, and taken in disregard for the rights of the Class.
47. As a result of Defendants’ racially discriminatory conduct, class members suffered discrimination, segregation, separate and unequal living conditions, and humiliation and emotional injury incident thereto.
48. Moreover, the unlawful conduct of Defendants caused the Concerned Citizens Committee to suffer damages in the form of economic loss, through the expenditure of resources to identify and counteract Defendants’ racially discriminatory conduct and frustration of purpose of its mission of promoting non-discrimination.
CAUSES OF ACTION
49. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege paragraphs 1-48.
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Federal Fair Housing Act)
50. As a result of Defendants’ conduct as described herein, Plaintiffs are aggrieved persons within the meaning of § 802(i) of the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3602(i), and have suffered damages.
42 U.S.C. § 3604(a)
51. By selecting white applicants over African-American applicants, who were in higher positions on the waiting list and who had more preferences in accordance with BHA’s own policies, Defendants violated § 804(a) of the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a), in that they refused to rent, otherwise made unavailable, or denied dwellings on the basis of race.

42 U.S.C. § 3604(b)
52. By establishing and maintaining racially-segregated public housing, Defendants have violated § 804(b) of the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(b), in that they discriminated in the terms, conditions, or privileges of rental of dwellings based on race.
53. Defendants have also discriminated in the terms, conditions, or privileges of rental of dwellings based on race, as well as in the provision of facilities in connection therewith, in violation of §804(b) of the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (b), by treating African-American tenants less favorably than white tenants. For example, Defendants harassed, interrogated, and threatened African-American tenants and their guests while not treating white tenants in a similar manner. Defendants also lessened the enjoyment of the homes of the tenants in Cedar Hill Homes, which is predominantly African American, by cutting down the trees and installing video surveillance cameras, while not cutting down the trees or installing video surveillance cameras in nearby Cedar Hill Homes II, which is exclusively white.
42 U.S.C. § 3604(c)
54. By making statements indicating an intent to maintain segregated public housing, Defendants violated § 804(c) of the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(c), in that they made statements indicating a preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race.
42 U.S.C. § 3617
55. By engaging in harassing and retaliatory conduct in response to the attempt by certain class members to form a tenants’ association and otherwise to protest the discriminatory conduct of Defendants, Defendants violated § 818 of the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 3617, in that they intimidated, threatened, or interfered with certain class members in the exercise or enjoyment of, on account of certain class members having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of certain class members aiding or encouraging others in the exercise or enjoyment of, rights granted or protected by § 804 of the amended Fair Housing Act.
42 U.S.C. § 3608
56. By establishing, maintaining, and failing to disestablish their segregated public housing, as well as engaging in racially discriminatory housing practices, Defendants City of Blakely and BHA have failed affirmatively to further fair housing, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3608 and 24 C.F.R. § 1, et seq.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
57. As a recipient of federal financial assistance and by engaging in discriminatory conduct against the Class, Defendants violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, et seq., and its implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. § 1, et seq.
Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the
United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 1983
58. By engaging in discriminatory conduct, including under color of state law, against the Class and individual plaintiffs, Defendants violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 1983.
Ga. Code Ann. §§ 8-3-202(a) and 8-3-222 (Georgia Fair Housing Law)
59. As a result of Defendants’ conduct as described herein, Plaintiffs are aggrieved persons within the meaning of the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3201(2), and have suffered damages.
Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-202(a)(1)
60. By selecting white applicants over African-American applicants, who were in higher positions on the waiting list and who had more preferences in accordance with BHA’s own policies, Defendants violated the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3202(a)(1), in that they refused to rent, otherwise made unavailable, or denied dwellings on the basis of race.
Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-202(a)(2)
61. By establishing and maintaining racially-segregated public housing, Defendants have violated the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-202(a)(2), in that they discriminated in the terms, conditions, or privileges of rental of dwellings based on race.
62. Defendants have also discriminated in the terms, conditions, or privileges of rental of dwellings based on race, as well as in the provision of facilities in connection therewith, in violation of the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-202(a)(2), by treating African-American tenants less favorably than white tenants. For example, Defendants harassed, interrogated, and threatened African-American tenants and their guests while not treating white tenants in a similar manner. Defendants also lessened the enjoyment of the homes of the tenants in Cedar Hill Homes, which is predominantly African American, by cutting down the trees and installing video surveillance cameras, while not cutting down the trees or installing video surveillance cameras in nearby Cedar Hill Homes II, which is exclusively white.

Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-202(a)(3)
63. By making statements indicating an intent to maintain segregated public housing, Defendants violated the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-202(a)(3), in that they made statements indicating a preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race.
Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-222
64. By engaging in harassing and retaliatory conduct in response to the attempt by certain class members to form a tenants’ association and otherwise to protest the discriminatory conduct of Defendants, Defendants violated the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-222, in that they intimidated, threatened, or interfered with the individual plaintiffs in the exercise or enjoyment of, on account of certain class members having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of certain class members aiding or encouraging others in the exercise or enjoyment of, rights granted or protected by the George Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-202(a).
Art. 1, §1, Part V of the Constitution of the State of Georgia
65. By threatening and attempting to evict certain members of the Class, including the individual plaintiffs, assessing fines against them, refusing the tender of rent by them, and engaging in other harassing behavior against them, all under color of state law and in retaliation for their participation in and efforts to organize a tenants’ association and otherwise protest Defendants’ discriminatory housing policies and practices, Defendants have violated Art. 1, § 1, Part V of the Constitution of the State of Georgia, in that Defendants’ acts were motivated by and in retaliation for and as punishment for the individual plaintiffs’ exercise of rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution of the State of Georgia.
RELIEF REQUESTED
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court grant the following relief:
1. Declare that the discriminatory housing practices and discriminatory retaliatory acts of the Defendants, as set forth above, violate the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601, et seq.; Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, and its implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. § 1, et seq.; the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982 and 1983; the Georgia Fair Housing Law, Ga. Code Ann. § 8-3-200, et seq.; and Article I, § 1, Part V of the Constitution of the State of Georgia.
2. Enjoin Defendants, their agents, employees, and successors, and all other persons in active concert or participation with any of them, from:

1. discriminating on the basis of race or color against any person in any aspect of the sale or rental of a dwelling; and
2. failing or refusing to make all dwellings available for rental by Defendants in a non-discriminatory manner;

3. Order Defendants promptly to take effective action to disestablish the continuing segregation of the Blakely Housing Authority and the conditions, features, and effects of that segregation;

4. Award monetary damages incidental to injunctive and declaratory relief to each former and current tenant who is a member of the Class;

5. Award such damages as will fully compensate the Concerned Citizens Committee for its injuries caused by Defendants’ discriminatory conduct;

6. Award such damages as will fully compensate Queen King, Sharon Johnson and Bonita Mays for their individual injuries caused by Defendants interference with their rights under Art. I, §1, Part V of the Constitution of the State of Georgia.

7. Award punitive damages against Defendant Cooper in his individual capacity;

8. Award Plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs; and

9. Grant such other additional relief as may be just and appropriate.

Respectfully submitted,

Nancy Kilson (NK-4557) Allison B. Feld (AF-9464) Stacy R. Horth-Neubert (SH-0970) Proskauer Rose LLP 1585 Broadway New York, NY 10036-8299 (212) 969-3960 (212) 969-2900 (fax)

Thomas J. Henderson Cheryl L. Ziegler Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law 1401 New York Avenue, NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 662-8600 (202) 783-5113 (fax)

Laverne Lewis-Gaskins Law Office of Laverne Lewis Gaskins, P.C. P.O. Box 6058 Valdosta, GA 31603-6058 (912) 247-0165 (912) 247-0950 (fax)

Counsel for Plaintiffs