Defendants Score In Day School Case

BOSTON--Defendants in the controversial Commonwealth Day School case yesterday won what one defense attorney termed "a substantial victory," when a U.S. District Court judge dismissed the principle plaintiff and more than half the claims in the case.

Judge Douglas Woodlock yesterday eliminated the Attorney General's Office as a player in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Arthur Brooks et al, on the grounds that the attorney general does not have standing to bring the suit on the federal level.

Woodlock also dismissed four of the seven claims brought by the 16 individual plaintiffs who in October filed suit with then-Attorney General James M. Shannon. The suit charged four Cambridge city officials and four private citizens with engaging in a "racially-motivated conspiracy" that forced the predominantly Black Commonwealth Day School to leave the city almost two years ago.

In addition, the judge ordered prosecuting attorney Margaret Burnham to clarify and refile her clients' remaining three claims within 30 days.

The hearing, during which the judge listened to arguments on a summary motion by the defense to dismiss the case, lasted less than one hour.

In an interview after the hearing, attorney Paul E. Stanzler, who represents two of the former neighbors of the school named as defendants, said the ruling was "a substantial victory for the neighbors."

"We didn't win it all, but we sure as hell won a lot of it," Stanzler said.

However, Richard W. Cole, chief of the Civil Rights Division of the Attorney General's Office, which is handling the case for the attorney general, said the office will probably appeal yesterday's ruling.

According to Cole, the judge handed down his decision on the grounds that there are "not a sufficient number of people who would be impacted" to necessitate the federal-level involvement of the Attorney General's Office. "The narrow construction of when we have standing in this civil rights case concerns us because of the impact it might have on future cases," Cole said.

Under the ruling, the attorney general may choose to refile the same case on the state level, which would result in "two parallel cases dealing with the same set of facts" on the state and federal levels because of the co-plaintiffs' federal suit, Cole said.

The suit which then-Attorney General Shannon and the parents of 16 Commonwealth Day students filed in October named as defendants Commissioner of Inspectional Services Joseph Cellucci, former Commissioner of the Department of Public Works (DPW) William Summers, DPW inspector Daniel Evans and another unidentified DPW inspector. In addition, the attorney general named Arthur and Jean Brooks of 115 Brattle St. and Ralph and Charlotte Sorenson of 117 Brattle St.

The suit charges that the defendants waged a systematic campaign of harassment that eventually led the Commonwealth Day School to leave its 113 Brattle St. location in August 1989, after a one-year stay.

The district court judge yesterday dismissed four claims, three pursuant to violations of different sections of the U.S. Civil Rights Act, and one which charged "malicious interference with contractual relations."

Of the three remaining claims, which defense attorney Burnham must now refile, two are pursuant to the U.S. Civil Rights Act, and one to the state Civil Rights Act