In its continuing efforts to keep the public informed about the ongoing admissions litigation, the University of Michigan makes these transcripts of the trial proceedings in Grutter v Bollinger, et al., Civil Action No. 97-75928 (E.D. Mich.), available to the University community and general public. As is often the case with transcription, some words or phrases may be misspelled or simply incorrect. The University makes no representation as to the accuracy of the transcripts.
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 10TH, 2001
BENCH TRIAL - VOLUME 12
101
1
2 MS. MASSIE: We just have three questions, Judge
3 Friedman.
4 THE COURT: Okay.
5 CROSS-EXAMINATION
6 BY MS. MASSIE:
7 Q Profess Larntz, you haven't done any analysis since we've
8 last spoke in the relative odds by race of getting into any
9 particular cell in the grids --
10 A That's correct.
11 Q And that's because doing that analysis would require an
12 investigation into inequalities in schooling and the effect of
13 stigma and stereotype on performance and racial bias in
14 standardized testing and a whole host of other questions about
15 race that are well outside the scope of your expertize; isn't
16 that right?
17 A Well, I'm not sure what it would involve, but certainly
18 I've not done any analysis like that.
19 Q So you can't tell us whether the affirmative action plan
20 at the University of Michigan Law School has the effect of
21 taking account of those reflections of the problem of race and
22 racism in our society; right?
23 A That's correct.
24 MS. MASSIE: That's it.
25 THE COURT: Oh, a real three questions.
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 10TH, 2001
BENCH TRIAL - VOLUME 12
102
1 MR. KOLBO: Nothing, your Honor.
2 THE COURT: None?
3 MR. KOLBO: Nothing, your Honor.
4 MR. DELERY: Your Honor, we would intend to call
5 Professor Raudenbush to respond to the particular points that
6 Dr. Larntz has made here this morning. And we've talked with
7 counsel and they have agreed to Monday morning if that is
8 consistent with your --
9 THE COURT: Well, the problem I have and I don't
10 have a specific problem is that it's surrebuttal, and we've
11 talked about that the other day. Everything that I've heard
12 today is true rebuttal. I generally don't -- because then
13 we're going to get into well, two things, we're going to have
14 to bring in -- keep bringing witnesses back. However, I don't
15 know what plaintiff's position is, but I don't think it's
16 going to take long to get his testimony because his testimony
17 didn't take long, and I'm really not too worried about the
18 time or anything, I'm more worried about getting into the
19 situation where it's rebuttal, surrebuttal. I generally do
20 not allow surrebuttal, and I'm very limited on this. What's
21 the plaintiff's --
22 MR. KOLBO: Well, I had a conversation, your Honor,
23 and we talked about scheduling, he's here, that's fine. I
24 really wasn't really thinking about the substantive reason of
25 whether or not to bring back Dr. Raudenbush, I'm not sure if
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 10TH, 2001
BENCH TRIAL - VOLUME 12
103
1 it's appropriate to do that or not.
2 THE COURT: See, my problem is if we bring him back
3 then what's going to happen -- especially when we deal with
4 experts, you know, it's even more acute when we deal with
5 experts, then I suspect he's going to say something that Dr.
6 Larntz is going to say, wait a minute, I disagree with that.
7 MR. DELERY: Your Honor, I think the reason for this
8 particular situation goes back to the issue of who really has
9 the burden here, and we're in a fairly unusual circumstance
10 where on the key issues the plaintiffs have agreed that
11 essentially the University has the burden on these points and
12 so -- that's why I think we feel it's appropriate to have him
13 respond --
14 THE COURT: How about now? You've got an hour.
15 MR. DELERY: I think --
16 THE COURT: I mean it can't take too long. His
17 testimony -- it's got to be very, very narrow.
18 MR. DELERY: I think, your Honor, he would like to
19 have a chance to -- and I think the reason is the particular
20 calculations that, you know, Dr. Larntz agreed that he hadn't
21 wanted to do them on the fly when he was here earlier. I
22 think Dr. Raudenbush would like to have a chance to look at
23 those.
24 THE COURT: The only difference is -- and I'm not,
25 you know -- the only difference is that you knew exactly what
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 10TH, 2001
BENCH TRIAL - VOLUME 12
104
1 the rebuttal was going to be about. It could only be about
2 one thing, and that was to rebut what your witness had to say
3 in terms of criticizing his report. That's the only thing it
4 could be. I wouldn't allow anything else. That's the only
5 thing to rebut. Everything else could have been anticipated
6 and could have been asked because they had the report, they
7 had everything about it. The only thing that couldn't have --
8 you know, specific of that -- as I said, he's going to come
9 back and he's -- Dr. Larntz is going to say -- these are all
10 professionals, these people that believe in what they're doing
11 and so forth. So, as I say, I don't think it's going to take
12 long so it's not the time, it's just the element of how do we
13 get around it.
14 I'll give you some surrebuttal, but it's only in
15 this case, and it's only -- I mean, just limited to -- as I
16 said -- well, actually, there's only two propositions upon
17 which he probably professionally want to explain his position.
18 MR. DELERY: That's fine, your Honor.
19 THE COURT: Monday morning is fine with me. I have
20 no problems.
21 MR. DELERY: Thank you, your Honor.
22 THE COURT: Okay. We'll see you Monday morning at
23 9:00 o'clock.
24 (Proceedings concluded, 11:15 a.m.)
25 -- --- --
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 10TH, 2001
BENCH TRIAL - VOLUME 12
105
1
2 CERTIFICATE
3 I, JOAN L.MORGAN, Official Court Reporter for the United
4 States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan,
5 appointed pursuant to the provisions of Title 28, United States
6 Code, Section 753, do hereby certify that the foregoing
7 proceedings were had in the within entitled and numbered
8 cause of the date hereinbefore set forth; and I do further
9 certify that the foregoing transcript has been prepared by me
10 or under my direction.
11
12 ____________________
JOAN L. MORGAN, CSR
13 Official Court Reporter
14
15 Date: __________________
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
|
|