15.09.2020 Views

Docket #99 page 640, US 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals appeal No. 17-2273, the Class certified in Percy v. Brennan, Federal District Court SDNY Case 73-cv-04279, reported at 384 F. Supp 800,

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page58 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

tn·-~J·:~·t:;;~_: ::.~r.:~~\.fT.~~S .J)Ir.:·.L'l-1IC~'I C~C\tJI~.T·<br />

~~}CJCJ·~:_:;_-_i_;_;~r·.l'-; l}IS-~rr-~~IC~;f C~l~ :·~E\:/ YC;f{K<br />

- - - - - - - -X<br />

~\I~.i::.F:;_~~'? ~ •. -:: f;T:"I=z~~y· r IJ()f-I~·J iv1£l~(~_r:,D() i rvt!\l~"CJr~I;<br />

:>~~>::~,x r.< .. ( ·:- -~----~_:·u.'r I~2\C-.c~ .-:~_nc1 tl·J·:::; J:,J.X:,1'.T()t-J.Z\.L<br />

l~~-3~-)C,::~~~LJ:. r'T::_:;:~ J?C?J< ~C'll.C .~\.TTVl:.:.:ct~l-2~1-~'J: C)J?<br />

C~C>~:--.-- r:·· :1~: ~~,(-_?I?"I,;: ~<br />

r.: .:-:~; ~L;F: r ,:_r ., I~? :E~1:J1~: 7-\ff r S:?~ c ret c~. y:y c~ r: ~La f) C) ·r- ;<br />

'.fL.}~ u·f.-·l I ·:~:·Ti.i) S'IArr E~S DEP t'~r::lt;~~IF~1:~'T C'JJ:, Ll: .. B()f.~;<br />

:;;r:~.R~:;z-~~r:.~_-} ~~-:


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page59 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

' ..<br />

..<br />

LOUIS J. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ.<br />

Attorney General, St<strong>at</strong>e <strong>of</strong> New York<br />

Two World Trade Center<br />

New York, New York 10047<br />

Attorney for Defendants<br />

·LLOYD G. MILLIKEN, ESQ.<br />

Assistant Attorney General<br />

WAJ~T8H. H. COLLEl:\AN, ESQ.<br />

DOF:AfJ r c:


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page60 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

LASIGm, D. J.<br />

This case, brought on behalf <strong>of</strong> m<strong>in</strong>ority persoLs<br />

seek<strong>in</strong>g tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and employmen-t <strong>in</strong> thE N'"'"'' York ccmstruc--<br />

tion <strong>in</strong>dustry, challenges <strong>the</strong> affirm<strong>at</strong>ive action plan,<br />

{"tLe Nev.J ~t'ork Plan") ·v.rhich cnrren tly qoverns Ff~der;.:d_ ar:d<br />

St<strong>at</strong>e assisted ~onstruction<br />

projects <strong>in</strong> New York City.<br />

York Plan fails to guarantee equal protection and <strong>the</strong><br />

ri~:rht<br />

to equal employment opportunities as required by<br />

<strong>the</strong> United St<strong>at</strong>es Constitution, 42 U.S.C. §1981 and Executive<br />

Order <strong>No</strong>. 11246.<br />

At issue also is <strong>the</strong> validity <strong>of</strong><br />

federal and st<strong>at</strong>e <strong>at</strong>tempts to pre-empt local government<br />

efforts to impose affirm<strong>at</strong>ive action requirements which<br />

are more rigorous than those conta<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> New York<br />

Plan, althm;gh our d.ed sian <strong>in</strong> ~it_}:__~!~- D~~~~ond, 379 F.<br />

S.D.N.Y.<br />

Su.j_::p. 503 (/.L974) has <strong>at</strong> least pari:i.al1y disposed <strong>of</strong> this<br />

aspect <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> case.<br />

The pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs are Albert <strong>Percy</strong>, Manuel R. Mejia,<br />

and J-ohn Mercado, who move to represent a class <strong>of</strong> fellol'l<br />

black and Spanish-surnamed <strong>in</strong>dividuals seek<strong>in</strong>g employment<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> construction <strong>in</strong>dustry, and two organiz<strong>at</strong>ions,<br />

Fight Back and N<strong>at</strong>ional Associ<strong>at</strong>ion for thE; Advancement<br />

<strong>of</strong> Colored People (NAACP) .<br />

Defendants are <strong>the</strong> Secretary<br />

<strong>of</strong> Labor, <strong>the</strong> United St<strong>at</strong>es Department <strong>of</strong> Labor, <strong>the</strong><br />

Assistant Secretary <strong>of</strong> Labor for Employment Standards,<br />

l.<br />

0642


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page61 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

<strong>the</strong> Directol:' <strong>of</strong> t:he Office c.f <strong>Federal</strong> Contract Co;npliance,<br />

and. <strong>the</strong> Office <strong>of</strong> <strong>Federal</strong> Contract~<br />

CompLiance,<br />

Yo:r:J


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page62 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

A. Flc,CTS<br />

The New York Plan was established <strong>in</strong> 1970 to combr:oad<br />

erj:.J.al eTHJ?1C)YD1~r·:t.<br />

oJJlig·a .. t:.icJns 011 f·s:dfJJ:aJ. a.n.c.l ft~:c1c::c-·<br />

Part I<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> order requires<br />

th<strong>at</strong> federally-fund~C::d<br />

contJ:;;;cts <strong>in</strong>clude i:l'F:; provi~>ion<br />

th<strong>at</strong>:<br />

"rl•}Le cont-.ra.ctc,r \·.:rl.l1 r.:.c\·t dis"'-"<br />

c:ci.Jn.i.nai:'2 clsJaiilst.


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a class 2<strong>17</strong>9151, action Page63 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

conta<strong>in</strong>ed 1n Parts II illld III .<br />

. rooter <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Off :i.e:::: <strong>of</strong> FedercJ J CoJ;trzcct Cornpl.i anc~c:, is<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Secretary <strong>of</strong> Labor.<br />

Secretary <strong>of</strong> Labor, 33 Fed. Reg. 2600 (Sept. 4, J968) .)<br />

Compliance with <strong>the</strong> order is obta<strong>in</strong>ed througt adhsrence<br />

An imposed plan., as t.he na.rne i.ndic<strong>at</strong>:es, it:: a p1al:<br />

which is imposed by <strong>the</strong> Secretary <strong>of</strong> Labor, establish<strong>in</strong>g<br />

with <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g m<strong>in</strong>ority particip<strong>at</strong>ion each year.<br />

Eesponsibi1<br />

i ty for compltancc .rests Hi th <strong>in</strong>di "1;-:i duc:tJ. contrc.G·tors.<br />

l\. hometmvn plan typicc.lly comb<strong>in</strong>es t.he efforts o£ local<br />

contractors and contractors' associ<strong>at</strong>ions, build<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> fo:t·rnul<strong>at</strong>icn <strong>of</strong>. a plan for vo1unt:ary compliance \>lith<br />

tlw order.<br />

oblig<strong>at</strong>ions fall on <strong>the</strong> trade as a whole ra<strong>the</strong>r than on<br />

any <strong>in</strong>dividual contractor, and can be s<strong>at</strong>isfied by m<strong>in</strong>ority<br />

employment or tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g on any work performed by <strong>the</strong> trade,<br />

whe·<strong>the</strong>r federally- funded or priv<strong>at</strong>e. The borneto-vm plan<br />

approach holds <strong>the</strong> unions ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual<br />

cont.ractors responsible for comply<strong>in</strong>g with <strong>the</strong> a.££irm<strong>at</strong>ive<br />

action requirements.<br />

An adm<strong>in</strong>istr<strong>at</strong>ive corr®ittee assigns<br />

4.<br />

0645


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a class 2<strong>17</strong>9151, action Page64 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

Hf.::tir s1la~-e go.::.?.lsn t.c: i11di\;id1J.Dl cz)nt:ra·::.::.to1~·s~ J\ h()ITK.:·to\.·.'n<br />

Bid Conditions (<strong>Federal</strong> Bid Conditions) used<br />

jects <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> geogra<br />

cal area <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> hometown plan.<br />

J?o~r· o.n.y t.:r-ade.s net: iJ(.1=tt.ir::i};:·<strong>at</strong>i.n.~; .:L11 t.hc hon1et.c\-·tn<br />

plan, mand<strong>at</strong>ory affirm<strong>at</strong>ive action requirements are set<br />

forth <strong>in</strong> Part II <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Federal</strong> Bid Conditions.<br />

directly on <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual contractor, ra<strong>the</strong>r than on <strong>the</strong><br />

non-particjp<strong>at</strong><strong>in</strong>g trad~<br />

as a whole.<br />

Part IV <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Federal</strong> Bid Conditions provides<br />

th<strong>at</strong> tbe faj_Iure <strong>of</strong> a <strong>cv</strong>ntrac to;~<br />

-to kdke good faith<br />

efforts t_c) meet his fa:Lr shr:n:c-: c:bli~r<strong>at</strong>i_ons under "-' home·-<br />

town pJan can result: <strong>in</strong> his be<strong>in</strong>g placed under Part II<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> conditions, as well as possible imposition <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

sanctions authorized by Section 209 <strong>of</strong> Executive Order<br />

<strong>No</strong>. 11246.<br />

The federally approved hometown plan <strong>in</strong> New York<br />

City, which is challenged heye, is <strong>the</strong> New York Plan.<br />

It<br />

was submi tt_ed -to <strong>the</strong> federal government for approval <strong>in</strong><br />

1970 by <strong>the</strong> Board <strong>of</strong> Urban Affairs, an entity cre<strong>at</strong>ed<br />

by <strong>the</strong> New York Build<strong>in</strong>g and Construction Trades Council,<br />

0646


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page65 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

associ<strong>at</strong>ions (<strong>the</strong> Build<strong>in</strong>g Trades<br />

lcye£s Associ<strong>at</strong>ion<br />

a Tld ·tl1 e C~er1.e :c a_l C o.n.t:r~ a.c:t ors 1\~~ ~:(::··-:; i . .:~ t:. :i c;n) ~ 1 1 h-t~ lJc~-: .....r ~los~}~·<br />

Plan became effective after approval resp2ctively by <strong>the</strong><br />

Mayor (Executive Order t3l), ths Governor (Executive<br />

Order 143) and, <strong>in</strong> August 1971,<br />

<strong>the</strong> Office <strong>of</strong> <strong>Federal</strong><br />

Contract Compliance.<br />

The Plan has been extended from t<strong>in</strong>s<br />

to time and is presently scheduled to expire <strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong> end<br />

<strong>of</strong> December, 1974.<br />

be set: <strong>at</strong>. <strong>800</strong> maximum." (Plan, }\:ct.ic1e IV, <strong>of</strong> §2)<br />

were established on a craft-to-craft basis. and qualified<br />

gradua~?s <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 2~ogram W~£e t~ be reco~nended to<br />

tY1e approJ~l-:i<strong>at</strong>e UJ1ic)11 ~ 1 f():c C()!Jsidf.:.·c<strong>at</strong>:.ic:n fc~L~ n~eJnb(:?:cshi_p .. :':<br />

(Plan, Article II, §2).<br />

The Plan expired by its terms on July 1, 1972,<br />

but, as <strong>in</strong>dica·ted aLready, it has been extended from t<strong>in</strong>;e<br />

to time.<br />

The extended plan diffe;:s f:r:mn <strong>the</strong> orig<strong>in</strong>al<br />

<strong>in</strong> provid<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> 1,000 ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>800</strong><br />

2/<br />

m<strong>in</strong>ority workers. -<br />

B. MOTIONS TO DISJ:HSS<br />

The grounds <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> motions to dismiss <strong>in</strong>clude:<br />

(1) <strong>the</strong> federal defendants• claim th<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong> pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs<br />

6.<br />

0647


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page66 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

(2) <strong>the</strong> st<strong>at</strong>e and priv<strong>at</strong>e defend2nts' claim th<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs have failed to exha8st federal, st<strong>at</strong>e and city<br />

c:ts EiE~~c-t. ic;x~:. t.h <strong>at</strong>: L.1-Jc ir1cli 'f j_6l1-~~ 1 IJ J a _·I 11 i:.: j_ f f s 1 ·dC }(. stand <strong>in</strong>sJ ;<br />

th<strong>at</strong>. <strong>the</strong> Stc:cte Dep.::;rtment. <strong>of</strong> La.boT J.C:><br />

i.ro:rnunc from su.'t.t,:<br />

and (6) <strong>the</strong>ir assertion th<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong> compla<strong>in</strong>t fails to st<strong>at</strong>e<br />

3/<br />

.c: ..... : '"j ~ ~ - •• -'-<br />

-!.,.


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a class 2<strong>17</strong>9151, action Page67 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

2000e-3, which de<br />

do not <strong>in</strong>clude <strong>the</strong> promulg<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> an unconstitutional<br />

~ffirrna~ive<br />

action pl~n.<br />

suppo~t ~heir claim, for while <strong>the</strong> court <strong>in</strong> Hadnott v.<br />

Laird, 463 F.2d 304, 305 (D.C. Cir. 1972) dismi3sed <strong>the</strong><br />

compla<strong>in</strong>t for <strong>the</strong> pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs' failure to appear first<br />

.,.. . ..,<br />

'~l:/SrE: ICl.l.L t~c~ fu.1f i .L .l t.l1e i .r cc~n. t:.r: a.ci.-:.1J.a 1 cornrn.i. t -~<br />

discrim<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>21 on <strong>the</strong> b~3is<br />

<strong>of</strong> r~~e.<br />

pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs note, <strong>the</strong> compla<strong>in</strong>t is not one under Title VII;<br />

pl.air.t'ciffs .be-:rc a.:ce r1ot asl~_:Lng t~h<strong>at</strong> t:}i(~ san.ctior1s <strong>of</strong> Ex-..<br />

ecutive Ordc.:r· <strong>No</strong>. 11246 be irnposed upon third p


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page68 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

rector <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Office <strong>of</strong> <strong>Federal</strong> Contract Compliance.<br />

Regul<strong>at</strong>ions promulg<strong>at</strong>ed by <strong>the</strong> Office give <strong>the</strong> Director<br />

but however broad <strong>the</strong> scope <strong>of</strong> those regul<strong>at</strong>ions, a<br />

compla<strong>in</strong>ant may only chalJ. er;ge <strong>the</strong> a1lrc';ged dJ..:::: cr i<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>:j_o,..·<br />

o.f· a "pr.imc contr:a.ctoT or svbcont:ractor" 1<br />

s;L 2 3<br />

(a)), not <strong>the</strong> unconstitution~lity<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> contract's<br />

equal P~plovment oppor~unity clause itself.<br />

2. Exhaustion <strong>of</strong> <strong>Federal</strong> Adm<strong>in</strong>istr<strong>at</strong>ive<br />

Ren1edies Ur1der tl8 tJ .. S~C .. §l98l~<br />

...<br />

-- -·---~-·-.__-------__..,<br />

-.... ~,...--.--<br />

The st<strong>at</strong>e defendants also assert th<strong>at</strong> pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs<br />

have adequ<strong>at</strong>e remed:i.es under federal st.<strong>at</strong>utes.<br />

As noted above, Title VII <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Civil Rights Act<br />

<strong>of</strong> 1964, does not prohibit discrim<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>ory acts by<br />

government <strong>of</strong>ficials except where <strong>the</strong> government is <strong>the</strong><br />

employer.<br />

<strong>No</strong>r does it proscribe tbe activities <strong>of</strong> govern·-<br />

ment <strong>of</strong>ficials or priv<strong>at</strong>e entities which oper<strong>at</strong>e to foster<br />

discrbn<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>ion by employers or unions.<br />

9 .<br />

0650


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page69 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

pria~P,<br />

Congress specifically rejected <strong>the</strong> proposition<br />

§ J. 9 D l ... 'Tt.e I-Ic-1.J.E;e:; .a.rJ.d. Sell.Ctt.:e ContTlti t~t::.=.:f:.:::s t.h<strong>at</strong> J: .. et:>or·t .. e.{_1 ·t:l'J


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page70 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

s ce y ()\Ttl


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page71 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

1527 (2d Cir. October 11, 1974)<br />

v. Doard <strong>of</strong> Educ<strong>at</strong>ion, 3<strong>73</strong> U.S. 6G8 (1963). As <strong>the</strong> Eisen<br />

<strong>in</strong>adequ<strong>at</strong>e ... or where it is certa<strong>in</strong>ly or probably<br />

r~~2d z~t 569.,<br />

futile." 421/ The case <strong>at</strong> hand supports this position<br />

dict<strong>at</strong>ed an adverse outcome.<br />

Here <strong>the</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istr<strong>at</strong>ive<br />

rerneCt;{ (locs not e\ren exi~:;t: as t.r) tl1e sut~j::~c:·t: n1a.tte.1:· <strong>in</strong><br />

lack stand<strong>in</strong>g to seek relief for <strong>the</strong> class <strong>the</strong>y represent<br />

because <strong>the</strong> claim <strong>of</strong> discrim<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>ion alleged here is not<br />

properly directed aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong>m, but ia<strong>the</strong>r is, or should<br />

be, lodged aga<strong>in</strong>st th


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page72 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

lfrrl-112 i.rlt:;_}-;.i.] ity ()~f tlle r;1oi.~:tiffs<br />

and <strong>the</strong> class represent to oL-<br />

->ca<strong>in</strong>. E-::::m.ploJ.,.rn,:?n.t c:::i~ t::co:~l.n.l:ng j_;:; tJ·~e<br />

direct result <strong>of</strong> employment pract.<br />

i CZ.:-': ;:~ ():f C C) I-~::. t Y'\5. c: t: i ()J1 j_l·~- -d.:._·:::~ t r·~::~-<br />

11.n i_c,_n s a.n.d<br />

... yc,:c}~ t..--: j_ ty a.Yc:~.?:~. \\/11 i.c:J-:1 c1.l.z~, c:cirn<strong>in</strong>,~ ·::~ c<br />

age: i11st JJlacJ-:.:. a.n.(~_ Sp~:-~n ·j_ s}:l··· s u.rndJ-:Jcd<br />

frE:rs•.)rls. ~) ( '11 24)<br />

aga<strong>in</strong>st m<strong>in</strong>ority persons <strong>in</strong> no way precludes <strong>the</strong> 2xist~nce<br />

othc:r.s,<br />

To establish stand<strong>in</strong>g a party must allege<br />

a personal stake <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> outcome <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ~ont~oversv a~ to<br />

presen~~tion<br />

<strong>of</strong> issues nron which <strong>the</strong> court so larg2<br />

construction workers who allegedly c:.nd<br />

' '<br />

cc.::nL~.nue<br />

to be denied en~loyment<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> New York construction<br />

<strong>in</strong>dustry, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs have <strong>in</strong>itially demonstr<strong>at</strong>ed<br />

"a personal stake".<br />

The existence <strong>of</strong> stand<strong>in</strong>g depends first on<br />

"whe·<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> plai ntif:f alleges ·th<strong>at</strong>. <strong>the</strong> chc:t1.lenged a.ction<br />

has caused him <strong>in</strong>jury <strong>in</strong> fac·t, economic or ot~herw.i.se",<br />

As soc ia.t.ion 397 t.J .. S~<br />

13,<br />

0654


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page<strong>73</strong> - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

150, .152 (1970) 1<br />

and second on whe<strong>the</strong>r tbe pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs<br />

are "~·ri.th<strong>in</strong> t.hc: cla::::~; o.f per.'::;o:ns i:::h<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong>: ·-·- provi::;ion[s}<br />

397 lJ .. S .. <strong>at</strong> 1!:)5 ..<br />

fondants assert, <strong>the</strong> denial <strong>of</strong> job opportunities alone,<br />

"<strong>the</strong> right not to be subjected to racial discrim<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>ion<br />

cb.a. ::~ge~d. -;.vi t.h_ e:~n fc:;rcen\::::r.j.t_ <strong>of</strong> Ex(~.c ui::.i-..:e Or de: r t-Jo ~ 11_ 2 4 fr; if<br />

th,::ey have, by a.pp:roval <strong>of</strong> t.b:::.~ New Yor}t Plan 1<br />

failed to enfo.tce<br />

tion~<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> construction <strong>in</strong>dustry and has <strong>in</strong>flicted an<br />

<strong>in</strong>jm~y 1 :\pon plc""t<strong>in</strong>tiffs. <strong>No</strong>r:J;c:iJk C. U. H. E. , .. l"~or'i·J


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a class 2<strong>17</strong>9151, action Page74 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

The priv<strong>at</strong>e defendants challenge <strong>the</strong> stand<strong>in</strong>g o~<br />

u.s. 415,<br />

301 F. <strong>Supp</strong>. 1:346, l34tj (E.D.N.Y. 1969).<br />

an organiz<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> black and Hispanic construction workers<br />

'v!hich devotes <strong>the</strong> rnajor:Lt}'' <strong>of</strong> it':> ef:fort.s to obta:~n<strong>in</strong>g<br />

which seeks t.o protect <strong>the</strong> c.ivi1 .?~i,;hts<br />

<strong>of</strong> black r:;c,o'c-sons.<br />

{AmendE"d Cor:1pla.i:nt., '\!4f<br />

7, 29), and which has previouc;···<br />

ly represented its members <strong>in</strong> ant~i-d).scrim<strong>in</strong>a tion suits.<br />

357 u.s. 449 (1958). In contrast to <strong>the</strong> organiz<strong>at</strong>ional<br />

pla<strong>in</strong>tiff <strong>in</strong> Sierra Club, which was found to lack stand<strong>in</strong>g<br />

because it f~iled to allege th<strong>at</strong> ~ts members "would be<br />

significantly affected by <strong>the</strong> ... actions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> responden.-t:.s<br />

1" _s_i_e_'J.?.E_a_~J.:.1~-~)-v_._~_-1(_:;_rtor~_, SUJ2_!a_, 405 U.S. <strong>at</strong> <strong>73</strong>5, both<br />

15.<br />

0656


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page75 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

aims <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se two groups are alleged to be directly and<br />

ad_'f·/erseJy· a_f~~c~c~~c·.d. 1:;~t' <strong>the</strong> irlarleqlla.t;ies ZJ.f t:.he .Ne'~


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page76 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

"The di~,,,·tric~t cou:ct:' s ho1cL<strong>in</strong>~r t3.-ii:'.L<br />

<strong>the</strong> Associ<strong>at</strong>ion lacked st~md<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

sue wns hande0 dawn prior to ~h<strong>at</strong><br />

c)t t:1·1c St1r."'rern(_:;: Col]:J::t_ i:n /)_::;~_-,-Dc~_i<strong>at</strong>.5 C:1!<br />

<strong>of</strong> JJa_ t:a_ 1) :~r.)c~ c:: ~~~ ;:_; i n~~J SeJ~\? . .-1. (.~~~ (} z-q a.n ..-i. -~"'<br />

·;:~f t:11b.t. de .....<br />

c. i. s i (Ji'J ~~~r1d tJ.-if.: rrto x·~::: rec E:3·1 t: d.ec J. ::~ :i. c,·n<br />

<strong>in</strong> Citj_zcns to ?reserve Overton<br />

Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402,<br />

91 r.~.Ct:, 8J.4; 2-S L.Ed .. 2d_ U6 (197l)<br />

is <strong>at</strong> least d6ubtful."<br />

It is not aJlesed th<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong> aims <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> organiz<strong>at</strong>ions<br />

conflict with those <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs or <strong>the</strong> class <strong>the</strong>y<br />

455 F.2d 41 (7th Cir. 1972). The determ<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> a<br />

class would <strong>the</strong>refore not alter a f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g tha~ Fi?~t Back<br />

Cif T~abt;:r~<br />

42 U.S,.C, §1981 m!..


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page77 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

1956) ~ o.££~dr 3 t·J,\'~.2d. 356 (19S7); BJ.~ce~n "'f./ ..<br />

·--··---···<br />

7. The Suit Aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong> Governor and<br />

pla<strong>in</strong>t fails to st<strong>at</strong>e a cause <strong>of</strong> action aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong> Gover-<br />

In review<strong>in</strong>g a motion to dismiss for failsre to<br />

st<strong>at</strong>e a claim aga<strong>in</strong>st a st<strong>at</strong>e <strong>of</strong>ficial, <strong>the</strong> Supreme Cour~<br />

recently reiter<strong>at</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> proposition th<strong>at</strong> "<strong>the</strong> alleg<strong>at</strong>ions<br />

u.s. (April <strong>17</strong>, 19 7{1) , and "should not be-:; dismissed<br />

~or<br />

failure to st<strong>at</strong>e a claim unless it appears<br />

beyond doubt. ·th<strong>at</strong>: pla<strong>in</strong>tiff cmJl.d prove n.o set. <strong>of</strong> fic


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page78 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

here clearly st<strong>at</strong>es a viable claim aga<strong>in</strong>st th~<br />

Governor<br />

r::lair1t.ifi;;_; 1 cJa.i.rn.. Th·::~ rnoti.(.JD. tc; di::;rr;iss <strong>the</strong> cc~rrrpl.clir1·t<br />

agd<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong>se <strong>of</strong>ficials is <strong>the</strong>refore denied.<br />

C. MOTION FOR A DETPRMINATION OF A CLASS<br />

order allow<strong>in</strong>g thjs action to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed as a class<br />

ac1:ion F'-n~su~nt<br />

to Hu1es 23 (a) an.d (b) (2) <strong>of</strong> th


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page79 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

The priv<strong>at</strong>e defenda~ts<br />

argue th<strong>at</strong> pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs have not<br />

St<strong>at</strong>es Constitutio~<br />

or Executive Order <strong>No</strong>. 11246 necesc;f<br />

l:Zu.1e :? 3)<br />

p:dbc':lotn<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>e over<br />

, 425 1'.2d 8S3,<br />

ai.: 937 ..<br />

Pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs' c1a1rns are also typical <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> class<br />

claims. P:u1e 23 (a) ( 3), The facts here vi.ci:ua1.1.y· m.irro:r<br />

Tenney approved <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong>tenance <strong>of</strong> an action on behalf <strong>of</strong><br />

20.<br />

0661


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page80 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

a nearly identical class.<br />

The fact th<strong>at</strong> Rios <strong>in</strong>volved<br />

defendants suggest, render <strong>the</strong> pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs' cJ.airns<br />

119 0 ·- 2 (IL D • N , Y , 1 9 7 0 ) ,. a f f ' d<br />

~---···----<br />

(1971)'<br />

tltou~J11 F}la<strong>in</strong>tiS:fs ma5t l1ave. rnE!t t11E~ c~t)J;,licaL;lc star1d.a.1~d.s<br />

<strong>of</strong> Hu1e 23 r<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir pleadi:·;gs do ncrt. esta.b.1.i.sh a need for<br />

a c;1a.::_>s<br />

a.ct:ic1.n<br />

rule w~ich<br />

rsquires th0 demonstr<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> such a need<br />

party DDpos<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> class has acted or refused to act<br />

on grounds generally applicable to <strong>the</strong> class, <strong>the</strong>reby<br />

mak<strong>in</strong>g appropri<strong>at</strong>e f<strong>in</strong>al <strong>in</strong>junctive relief or correspond<strong>in</strong>g<br />

declar<strong>at</strong>ory relief with<br />

respect to <strong>the</strong> class as<br />

490 F.2d 1255, 1261 (2d Cir. 19<strong>73</strong>), approved <strong>the</strong> denial<br />

<strong>of</strong> a cla.ss determ<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>ion where cla~;s<br />

relief 'YlOuld be<br />

21.<br />

0662


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page81 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

. ., '<br />

J 1.JtlCJln~;_n -r:.,<br />

than <strong>the</strong> <strong>Court</strong> ultim<strong>at</strong>ely dccrce3 and st<strong>at</strong>ed it did ~ot<br />

been made here, and s<strong>in</strong>ce Rule 23 grants pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs <strong>the</strong><br />

without demonstr<strong>at</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> necessity <strong>of</strong> class relief.<br />

See <strong>No</strong>tes <strong>of</strong> Advisory Committee on Rules Rel<strong>at</strong><strong>in</strong>g to ths<br />

19 66 Amc'nchnents <strong>of</strong> Fede:ra.l. n.uJ.es <strong>of</strong> Civil Procedm:e<br />

Miller, <strong>Federal</strong> Practice and Proc~dure: Civil §§<strong>17</strong>75, <strong>17</strong>76,<br />

(1972}. Bur:: see<br />

5 - ., < ...._ .... , 516 (S.D.N.Y, 197


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page82 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

a:.t'f.: rn·~-~.rnf:"):~::_r·:3 <strong>of</strong> tl1e 0.c.fc.n


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page83 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

practices, <strong>the</strong>n gre<strong>at</strong>er efforts arc mandnted by <strong>the</strong> Canrepresent<br />

are b2<strong>in</strong>g viol<strong>at</strong>ed. ~):_~:t.~· tJni.ted. E-J·Lc::.t:e ..:3 \i" ... Fia.\le:s<br />

·--------~----- .,_..______________________________ ;:!_______ _<br />

}~"(:1-l_t~idcs<br />

-~--~---.... ~---<br />

Never<strong>the</strong>less, as pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs ~<br />

evidentiary hear<strong>in</strong>g is necessary to establish facts which<br />

a.<br />

The actual method bv which tra<strong>in</strong>ess are selected and<br />

<strong>the</strong> Plan without a developed knowledge <strong>of</strong> its actual<br />

impact <strong>in</strong> oper<strong>at</strong>ion.<br />

276 (2d CiL 19<strong>73</strong>), "Wh<strong>at</strong> is <strong>in</strong>voJ:ved [J.n a motion for a<br />

prelim<strong>in</strong>ary <strong>in</strong>junction] i~<br />

an evalu<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> where <strong>the</strong><br />

equities lie, consider<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> addition to <strong>the</strong> hardships<br />

such factors as <strong>the</strong> unce:rt:a<strong>in</strong>ty <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> issues raJ sed, .. ''.<br />

24.<br />

0665


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page84 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

Order <strong>No</strong>. 11246 has never been juJiciaJly detsrm<strong>in</strong>ed.<br />

call<strong>in</strong>g approxi~<strong>at</strong>e<br />

De consolid<strong>at</strong>ed with <strong>the</strong> tyial on <strong>the</strong> rr~rits<br />

as providea<br />

lJ}- P1.11{~ 65 {a~) {2) ()f t:l·je l: 4 ec1e:cu"1 P .. ule::; CJ£ ci~\?j_.l .b':C()CF:(iurt=:'."<br />

Plan, we turn to <strong>the</strong> rema<strong>in</strong><br />

"ad211.i n i s·ter i11~J c~g(:;!±G i c s ar~:; clireci:ed<br />

to <strong>in</strong>form <strong>the</strong>ir grantees th<strong>at</strong> where<br />

<strong>the</strong>re is a viahle and effective<br />

hornet>O\\'n or imposed cc·r1st:ruction <strong>in</strong>-­<br />

du:stry plc.u:1 <strong>in</strong> oper<strong>at</strong> icm <strong>in</strong> a<br />

geographical area, additional<br />

and/or supplementary St<strong>at</strong>e or local<br />

EEO requirements may not be<br />

applied to <strong>Federal</strong>ly-assisted<br />

0666


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page85 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

(."'.(.}D :-:; l: Y:l.! c.·: t.5. C>.n r .::: t }-_:_ ~:3 l-::. ;:;. \-'f.:<br />

been ap0roved by ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> Goveznor<br />

or- tll.i.E: rJ-.:-:r::~;~rt:lnC:·:n.·t r3h(>-~J1::J 1:>(~} i11~"<br />

eluded <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> specific<strong>at</strong>ions [far<br />

a1J. Stc:·l~E~ a::·J'-~- ::-~tco <strong>the</strong> equal employmeT1t<br />

26.<br />

0667


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page86 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

reguirements <strong>of</strong> Executive Oreer<br />

11.246, cts r;n:~~.ncle-cir and. i~t~.s i.rtl;)1C!.!1~:::nt-<br />

:Lng r\.!J.-E~.s! :r-c~~-JlJl<strong>at</strong>ior·l~~; .r ;_~_r;_·::} :J.r:d(:;:·s!<br />

.i.r1 c 1 'LJ.(3.i ng ~F~: .... ~cLE! r :::i.1 E:(~~ ;).a: l -21Tl1;) l o~~~rr:.r:-~rl t.<br />

oppor~unity bid documents <strong>in</strong>corpo-<br />

:c .:~. t .. ~;_n g t.t:.{-? .rc ~1 ~J i ·c~:..:··tnen-~~- '3 c:f \n.J J. r.::r2 t c: __·cy<br />

or imposed construction <strong>in</strong>dust~y<br />

plans establjshsd pursuant to <strong>the</strong><br />

I~;::ecuti\re ():cc~;:::~c .. t$ ".39 I'r;d. ~ J~;.::g ..<br />

p~ojects to submit th2 requi~emerrts to <strong>the</strong> Director <strong>of</strong> th~<br />

Office <strong>of</strong> <strong>Federal</strong> Contract C<br />

Director was to render a dccis~on<br />

which could be a0pealed<br />

~~ ~~~.~ Tr~t;~~ t~e 0 ~:c ~~~~ 1 h :~:~:~JCTr-~~~~~,5 or<br />

trai11ir.::g reqt.l~-i~rernen-t.--:£~<br />

sh.::-\,11 11ot. b-f:<br />

<strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> federally assisted<br />

construc~ion contracts until <strong>the</strong><br />

Director~ or, <strong>in</strong>. <strong>the</strong> case <strong>of</strong> an<br />

<strong>appeal</strong>, <strong>the</strong> Assistant Secretary, has<br />

had an opportunity to make a determ<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>ion<br />

<strong>in</strong> accordance with this<br />

paragraph.n 41 C.F.R. §60-l.4(b)<br />

(2), 39 Fed. Reg. 2365 (January<br />

21, 1974}.<br />

Pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs challenge all three regul<strong>at</strong>ion~<br />

as <strong>in</strong>valid<br />

for failure to be published <strong>in</strong> accordance with<br />

federal and st<strong>at</strong>e law.<br />

They also challenge <strong>the</strong> Brenn~n<br />

employment oppo:ctunity prcqrams.<br />

27.<br />

0668


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page87 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

Memorandum ~nd<br />

<strong>the</strong> JunQ 29, lS<strong>73</strong> St<strong>at</strong>e letter.<br />

Ir1 t.}-f':3<br />

quirements <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Ad~<strong>in</strong>istr<strong>at</strong>ive<br />

Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.<br />

and <strong>the</strong> federal defendants <strong>in</strong> this case are accord ly<br />

all<br />

enjo<strong>in</strong>ed from enforc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Erc2:na:l1 lielr:e>:candum or~/ teder·-<br />

ally-assisted construction projecls.<br />

Pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs next argue t~2t<br />

<strong>the</strong> St<strong>at</strong>e letter is<br />

<strong>in</strong>valid because it was not pubJi~hed<br />

as required by Art-<br />

:lcle 4 1<br />

§8, New York Consi:i tution, and New York Exec:·:t.ive<br />

Law §102.<br />

Article 4, §8 <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> St<strong>at</strong>0 Constitution<br />

(McK<strong>in</strong>ney 1969) provides:<br />

28.<br />

0669


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page88 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

"<strong>No</strong><br />

()X"<br />

-; .<br />

Y (~ ~jU .. !. Ci ·c l. C; ~ 1<br />

bv any st<strong>at</strong>e department, beard,<br />

b~reau, <strong>of</strong>ficer, authority or cornmission;<br />

except such as rel<strong>at</strong>es to<br />

tl-~(: crgar·t:1.:/,~~t.i{).l-J o:c :i.nter.rJ,·-~.1. rr~~~.:rla~~;f~-­<br />

ment <strong>of</strong> a sta~e dc0artment, beard,<br />

}:_; lJ.:C (::: ?:l U 1<br />

2 1 1 t: h.f)l~ .i 1·::;( C~ y· C()ll't:Ci i 'i. ;:_; i ()D. ::<br />

shall be effective until jt is filed<br />

T~e legisl<strong>at</strong>ure shall pro-<br />

\;j_d_e _fc;r L-.-~-2 specc.r.~'/ :tc ...:.~:.:.ic;!·;. c)f<br />

s tlc.ll ru.J. ~~ ~:; .?::_xJ,:J_ X.'(::·-~-l11 {:t t .. i.0~1E- l })y<br />

a.pp:copr:i2tc lt:·f~4S (· n<br />

'<br />

(McK<strong>in</strong>ney 1972) which provi.des for J.ic;z;_t.:L(_;r.~. <strong>of</strong> Ei~LI<br />

been <strong>in</strong>terpreted by tho New York <strong>Court</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Appeals</strong> <strong>in</strong><br />

v. Cull 10 N.Y.2J '~3, 218 N.Y.S.2d 38, <strong>17</strong>6 N.~.<br />

2d 495 (1961) , <strong>in</strong> which<br />

"The term 'rule or regul<strong>at</strong>ion,' has<br />

not, it is true, been <strong>the</strong> subject <strong>of</strong><br />

r)rec .i se d:..:: f j_]-;. it i ();·: ' J:>tl t: ·t.J:l:::~ s:c c;c.1rl }.)8<br />

I.i t t.le: donb-: th<strong>at</strong>, as emp1.oyc·d 1 n t.he<br />

cor1s t.i. t11 .. i:j_c~na1 l)Y"C"~V is ic~n, it_---_, E:rtJ.l:Jx·aces<br />

any k<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> legisl<strong>at</strong>ive or quasilegisl<strong>at</strong>ive<br />

norm or procedure which<br />

establishes a p<strong>at</strong>tern or course <strong>of</strong><br />

conduct for <strong>the</strong> future. The label<br />

or na.rae err~r:.>l(Jj.recl is 11


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page89 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

defendants do not contest <strong>the</strong> fact th<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong> letter<br />

was n~ver published 1 <strong>the</strong> motion £or surr@ary judgment.is<br />

granted, and <strong>the</strong> St<strong>at</strong>e defendants are enjo<strong>in</strong>ed from<br />

enforc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> letter ttlithout meet<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />

8/<br />

necessary public<strong>at</strong>ion requirements.<br />

C. MOTION FOR PRELJ:t1emorandum and <strong>the</strong> St<strong>at</strong>e letter as to locallyadm<strong>in</strong>istered,<br />

public construction sites which receive<br />

federal or sta·te assistance as <strong>the</strong> case may be.<br />

D. FEDERAL DEFENDANTS 1 NOTIO:JS TO DISHISS<br />

The pla<strong>in</strong>·tiffs move to dismiss for failure to<br />

by<br />

exha.ust <strong>the</strong> re.medy allegedly afforde0/ <strong>the</strong> January 1974<br />

regul<strong>at</strong>ion.<br />

As <strong>in</strong>dic<strong>at</strong>ed above <strong>in</strong> detail, we held <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

companion case <strong>of</strong> Cit.y v. Diamond, S~J?r~-'<br />

th<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

Januar_y regul<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Secx


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page90 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

For <strong>the</strong> reasons set forth above, <strong>the</strong> motions to<br />

dismiss are denied except as to <strong>the</strong> New York St<strong>at</strong>e Department<br />

<strong>of</strong> Labor.<br />

The motions for deter-m<strong>in</strong><strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong> a<br />

class and for partial surnmary judgment are granted.<br />

The<br />

motion for prelim<strong>in</strong>ary relief is granted to <strong>the</strong> extent<br />

<strong>in</strong>dic<strong>at</strong>ed.<br />

It is so ordered.<br />

Da·ted: New York, New York<br />

<strong>No</strong>vember 8, 1974.<br />

3J .•<br />

0672


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page91 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

1. Pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs' motion to sonsolid0to this case with ~ rsis<br />

t.ha t.<br />

"\~ ("J r }~. J? .t.ari ;- i:)l1 L vJ it:-, ,:_=s_ .c (~Y-Y £ J.·:c::t; t i! :::· I> 1 n tl j :n. \J c;_.o:rt aT _'i ;· .13 7 .3 <<br />

frJ-lr~ TC: .:·1_ ~E t;;.; r , i::b -r; C ~L t_y· r:· .t'C:Hf(1J.l ~~J ~1-;.:.t:.: (~l .i. t:.::: c;'.;..,-- I: ;_~·u 1{:? ~~ :} r~c-t<br />

rc. ~1'-1 1. Z.{ L:. i o:~ E:: l c f f e c "C. i ·.,?(:! .. Jt1t :;_; 2 0 , 1 ~~: 7 ~~ " ~r·j-I ~:: ~~:;e .-;.:·-1...!.1 ::.~: s -=l~-1 c1<br />

J:'(::~Jt·: 1c:· t-:J.0r~~:::~ :- t:~)i~J~::.:'t~·:(.: :-:·· -..:-:·3~ t~b t.2·;_r:: 1"-.-J.::·::;-·c;~c; ~; F;~~--~:;c::J t.i\tf: Cfr·d


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page92 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

Enterpri.so 0ssoci<strong>at</strong>ion, Lo~~l 638, 360 F.<strong>Supp</strong>. 979<br />

-T·s·~~·i;:-IY ~- -~z--.~-----J~~~f--T~~)~~~-j~~ii::"t. ,:; :c:!:;·· -~ ·- I) r -~)~ c; 5_ (; ~-=-: <strong>of</strong> d. i ~=) c: r· _;_ re:t n .:.r. t: i c_:;_~-3<br />

;c_:~ !T·~·~::) J () ~( ::-:::. ~::· :?~; i 2. [~ -3 () ("· -~ ::~ . ~ ·:- r~ ::· .lJ j (") ·: r:- -.~: ; ; fJn j_ -;_~: C>:·;~ S


1974-11-08; Filed Memorandum #41415 motion granted<br />

<strong>Case</strong> allow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, action Document to be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, as a 2<strong>17</strong>9151, class action Page93 - <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-07-24 doc 1<br />

11<br />

I<br />

l<br />

I!<br />

:l<br />

I<br />

z<br />

II<br />

lls<br />

II<br />

II Z<br />

"<br />

tl 1--t<br />

i! ~<br />

0<br />

I<br />

II<br />

I<br />

!<br />

0675


IN THE UNITED S'l'ATES DISTJUC'I' COURT<br />

.FOR THJ.: SOUTHERJ.'J DISTRICT OF NEW YORK<br />

-------------------------------------x<br />

ALBERT E. PERCY, ~~ al.,<br />

1974-11-14; Filed Order to Show Cause by Pltffs<br />

<strong>Case</strong> <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, for an order Document enjo<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, defts ... ret 2<strong>17</strong>9151, 11-20-74- Page94 <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-10-06 doc 38<br />

-aga<strong>in</strong>st-<br />

Pla<strong>in</strong>t.iffs,<br />

·····:·<br />

·: : ~-- ..<br />

ORDER TO SHOW CA<strong>US</strong>E<br />

PE'l'ER ,J. BRENNAN, et al. ,<br />

Defendants.<br />

-------------------------------------x<br />

<strong>73</strong> Civ. 4279<br />

{N.E.I,.)<br />

Upon all prior proceed<strong>in</strong>qs had here<strong>in</strong> and upon <strong>the</strong><br />

annexed affidavit <strong>of</strong> Dennis .R. Yeager, let tho defendants show<br />

cause before t.his <strong>Court</strong>. io. E~.->;~PJtL<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> OnitE~d St.<strong>at</strong>es <strong>District</strong><br />

<strong>Court</strong>. for th€ Sou<strong>the</strong>rn Di.st.r:i.ct <strong>of</strong> New York, Foley Square,<br />

Nev? York, New York 10007 on <strong>No</strong>vember2,{, 1974 <strong>at</strong> 10:00 a.m. why<br />

-..........,..,~~~·---..-.-- ~~ .............. """"" ............... ~ .<br />

an order should not be


IN 'fHF~ UNI'I'ED STATES DISTRICT COURT<br />

FOR THE SOUTHERl'~ DISTRICT OF NEW YORK<br />

------------------------------------x<br />

ALBERT E"' PERCY, ~!:_ al. ,<br />

Pla.<strong>in</strong>tiffs,<br />

1974-11-14; Filed Order to Show Cause by Pltffs<br />

<strong>Case</strong> <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, for an order Document enjo<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, defts ... ret 11-20-74- 2<strong>17</strong>9151, Page95 <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-10-06 doc 38<br />

-aga<strong>in</strong>st.-<br />

.BRENNt\N, ~t al. ,<br />

Defendants.<br />

------------------------------------x<br />

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT<br />

OF APPLICATION FOR<br />

OEDE:RTn-S1f0wC'A\JSE<br />

AND INJUNCTION<br />

<strong>73</strong> Civ. 4279<br />

(l>l.E.L.)<br />

DENNIS R. YEAGER, be<strong>in</strong>g duly sworn, deposes and says~<br />

1. He is an <strong>at</strong>t.orney for. pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs <strong>in</strong> this m<strong>at</strong>ter.<br />

2. On ,July 24th, 1974, this <strong>Court</strong> entered an op<strong>in</strong>ion<br />

City <strong>of</strong> New York v. Di_~~~-0-'<br />

<strong>73</strong> Civ, 5293, <strong>in</strong> which it dedared<br />

29 C.F.R. §60-lA (39 Fed. Reg. 2365 [January 21, 1974]<br />

"Regul<strong>at</strong>ion") to be "<strong>in</strong>valid."<br />

3. On <strong>No</strong>vember 8, 1971, this <strong>Court</strong> entered a Memorandum<br />

<strong>in</strong> this action i.n which, after f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>q th<strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong>re was no<br />

ne


1974-11-14; Filed Order to Show Cause by Pltffs<br />

<strong>Case</strong> <strong>17</strong>-<strong>22<strong>73</strong></strong>, for an order Document enjo<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 71, 11/22/20<strong>17</strong>, defts ... ret 11-20-74- 2<strong>17</strong>9151, Page96 <strong>of</strong> 215<br />

<strong>certified</strong> 20<strong>17</strong>-10-06 doc 38<br />

5. Pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs have not previously sought <strong>the</strong> relief<br />

sought <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Order to Show Cause <strong>in</strong> support <strong>of</strong> which this<br />

affidavit is submitted.<br />

6. This Mo·tion is brought on by Order to Show Cause<br />

because pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs are clearly entitled to <strong>the</strong> relief requested<br />

under this <strong>Court</strong>'s declar<strong>at</strong>ory judgment <strong>in</strong> City <strong>of</strong> New York v.<br />

!?_~5E!c~:m~,<br />

<strong>73</strong> Civ. 5293, and its Hemorandum <strong>in</strong> this case and, upon<br />

<strong>in</strong>form<strong>at</strong>ion and belief, ·<strong>the</strong> Defendants United St<strong>at</strong>es Department<br />

<strong>of</strong> I,abor, Peter J. <strong>Brennan</strong>, Bernard DeLury and Phillip ,T. Davis<br />

are cont.<strong>in</strong>u<strong>in</strong>g to enforce <strong>the</strong> Regul<strong>at</strong>ion.<br />

WHEREFORE deponent. respectfully request.s th<strong>at</strong> this<br />

<strong>Court</strong> grant pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs Order to Show Cause and Motion for an<br />

.<strong>in</strong>junction prevent<strong>in</strong>g fur<strong>the</strong>r enforcement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> .<strong>in</strong>valid<br />

Regul<strong>at</strong>ion.<br />

Attorney for Pla<strong>in</strong>tiffs<br />

Sworn to before m€l<br />

this 12th day <strong>of</strong> <strong>No</strong>vember, 1974<br />

~.J~<br />

NO'l'ARY PUBLIC

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!