Case: Black v. Franklin County, KY

3:05-cv-00018 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky

Filed Date: March 28, 2005

Closed Date: 2007

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On March 28, 2005, attorneys from several law firms in Kentucky filed a class action civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, challenging the strip search policy of the Franklin County Correctional Complex in Kentucky. Plaintiffs, who were females arrested for minor offenses, alleged that they were strip searched pursuant to a blank policy which required all female pretrial detainees entering the Complex to be s…

On March 28, 2005, attorneys from several law firms in Kentucky filed a class action civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, challenging the strip search policy of the Franklin County Correctional Complex in Kentucky. Plaintiffs, who were females arrested for minor offenses, alleged that they were strip searched pursuant to a blank policy which required all female pretrial detainees entering the Complex to be strip searched, without any reasonable suspicion to believe the detainees were concealing weapons or contraband. Plaintiffs alleged that the policy violated the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and sought monetary damages, injunctive relief and class certification.

Note that this case, Black v. Franklin County, followed a 1997 class action lawsuit styled Wilson v. Franklin County, KY (JC-KY-13), which also challenged the strip search policy of Franklin County Correctional Complex. The Wilson case settled in 1999.

On April 6, 2005, plaintiffs in the Black case filed a motion to certify the case as a class action. Plaintiffs later withdrew the motion pending further discovery, with consent of the defendants, and filed an amended complaint adding 24 new plaintiffs. Defendants then moved to dismiss the case on various grounds, including (1) plaintiffs' claims were barred by the one-year statute of limitations, (2) under the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") for failure to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit, (3) individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, and (4) failure to state a claim. The District Court (District Judge Joseph M. Hood) granted the motion in part and dismissed the claims of 11 of the Plaintiffs on statute of limitations and PLRA exhaustion grounds. The Court also dismissed the Ninth Amendment and equal protection claims of the remaining 16 plaintiffs, except for plaintiff Black's equal protection claim. Black v. Franklin County, Kentucky, 2005 WL 1993445 (E.D. Ky. Aug 16, 2005).

Discovery ensued. The case was reassigned on January 6, 2006, to District Judge Karen K. Caldwell for all further proceedings. On February 22, 2006, the defendants moved to strike the class action allegations from plaintiffs' amended complaint. Judge Caldwell denied the motion, but set a deadline for filing plaintiffs' motion for class certification. Black v. Franklin County, Ky., 2006 WL 2849863 (E.D. Ky. Sep 28, 2006).

Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint on December 29, 2006 and then moved for class certification. Defendants opposed certification and, in turn, moved for summary judgment. Prior to ruling on those motions, the plaintiffs attended a settlement conference on May 22, 2007, with Magistrate Judge J. Gregory Wehrman and settled the case. Judge Caldwell had dismissed several plaintiffs from the case for failing to comply with discovery orders. The remaining plaintiffs and the defendants, who settled, filed an agreed order of dismissal which was approved on August 20, 2007. The parties agreed to pay their own costs and attorney fees. Further details of the settlement were not disclosed.

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (3/1/2008)

Related Cases

Wilson v. Franklin County, KY, Eastern District of Kentucky (1997)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4633332/parties/black-v-franklin-county-kentucky/


Judge(s)

Caldwell, Karen K. (Kentucky)

Hood, Joseph Martin (Kentucky)

Wehrman, J. Gregory (Kentucky)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Adams, Charles C. Jr. (Kentucky)

Brannon, Marie K. (Kentucky)

Hellard, S. Marie (Kentucky)

Herren, Thomas K. (Kentucky)

Jones, Thomas M. (Kentucky)

McDaniel, Rodney (Kentucky)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Boyd, James E. (Kentucky)

Judge(s)

Caldwell, Karen K. (Kentucky)

Hood, Joseph Martin (Kentucky)

Wehrman, J. Gregory (Kentucky)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Adams, Charles C. Jr. (Kentucky)

Brannon, Marie K. (Kentucky)

Hellard, S. Marie (Kentucky)

Herren, Thomas K. (Kentucky)

Jones, Thomas M. (Kentucky)

McDaniel, Rodney (Kentucky)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Boyd, James E. (Kentucky)

DeSimone, Andrew D. (Kentucky)

Ensslin, Tammy Meade (Kentucky)

McSwain, Douglas L. (Kentucky)

Meade, Tammy S. (Kentucky)

Sullivan, Richard M. (Kentucky)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

3:05-cv-00018

Docket [PACER]

Black et al v. Franklin County, Kentucky et al

Aug. 20, 2007

Aug. 20, 2007

Docket
1

3:05-cv-00018

Complaint

Black v. Franklin County, KY, Franklin County Correctional Complex, James Kemper, Jr. & Ted Hammermeister

March 28, 2005

March 28, 2005

Complaint
11

3:05-cv-00018

Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint

Black v. Franklin County, KY, Franklin County Correctional Complex, James Kemper, Jr. & Ted Hammermeister

May 9, 2005

May 9, 2005

Complaint
35

3:05-cv-00018

Memorandum Opinion and Order [Re: Motions to Dismiss]

2005 WL 1993445, 2005 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 26362

Aug. 16, 2005

Aug. 16, 2005

Order/Opinion
71

3:05-cv-00018

Memorandum Order

Sept. 8, 2006

Sept. 8, 2006

Order/Opinion
72

3:05-cv-00018

Opinion and Order

2006 WL 2849863, 2006 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 73554

Sept. 28, 2006

Sept. 28, 2006

Order/Opinion
96

3:05-cv-00018

Memorandum Order [Re: Motion to Strike]

Dec. 29, 2006

Dec. 29, 2006

Order/Opinion
76-2

3:05-cv-00018

Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint

Black, et al v. Franklin County, KY

Dec. 29, 2006

Dec. 29, 2006

Complaint
132

3:05-cv-00018

Report & Recommendation

2007 WL 9751964

March 26, 2007

March 26, 2007

Magistrate Report/Recommendation
144

3:05-cv-00018

Order [Dismissing Plaintiffs' Claims for Failure to Prosecute]

Black v. Franklin County, KY, James Kemper, Jr., and Ted Hammermeister

June 11, 2007

June 11, 2007

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4633332/black-v-franklin-county-kentucky/

Last updated Aug. 12, 2022, 3:02 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
35

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: dfts' motion to dismiss pltfs' original complaint 12 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART 2) dfts' motion to dismiss pltfs' amended complaint 21 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART 3) dfts' supplemental motion to dismiss 30 IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART 4) all of pltf, Black's constitutional claims against dfts - except her equal protection claims, which remain viable - to the extent they are based on the strip searches c onducted upon Black following her return from work release, are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE 5) pltfs Maureen O. Mitchell; Deidra Wash; Rebecca Hagan; Karen Gamble; Penny Tillett; Sandra McClease; Angela Lear; Jimmy Hammonds; Davanika Barber; Natasha Mar ie Hunter; and Patricia Tipton's claims against the dfts are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE 6) pltf Cooper's claims against the dfts, to the extent they are based on the strip searches conducted upon Cooper following her return from court appeara nces are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE 7) Franklin County Correctional Complex is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE 8) the equal protection claims of all pltfs other than pltf Black are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE 9) all of the pltfs' Ninth Amendment claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood. (CBD)cc: COR

Aug. 16, 2005

Aug. 16, 2005

RECAP
72

OPINION AND ORDER: 1) Dfts' Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations 42 from Complaint is DENIED 2) pltfs' Motion to Continue or Table the Motion to Strike 45 DENIED, the Court having ruled on the Motion to Strike 3) pltfs' Motion to Extend the Ddl to Amend Pleadings 45 DENIED as moot, the Magistrate Judge having ruled on same 4) Dfts' Motions for Summary Judgment 52 and 53 are GRANTED 5) Claims of Jonathan Cox and Tommy Cummins are DISMISSED with prejudice 6) dfts ' Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memo 59 GRANTED 7) dfts' Motion to Reconsider 60 DENIED 8) Any Motion to Certify this action as a Class Action must be filed w/in 60 days of entry date of this Order w/ response and reply briefs permitted according to Local Rules. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell. (CBD)cc: COR

Sept. 28, 2006

Sept. 28, 2006

RECAP
132

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: dfts' motion to dismiss claims of identified pltfs 102 be granted in part and that claims of Jillian Baker and Darren Dean Hockensmith be dismissed w/ prejudice for failure to prosecute, failure to respond to discov ery, and failure to comply w/ this Court's Sept. 8 and Dec 29, 2006 orders. Objections to R&R must be filed w/ Clerk w/in 10 days of date of service of same. A party may file a resp to another party's obj w/in 10 days after being served w/ copy thereof. Signed by Judge J. Gregory Wehrman. (CBD)cc: COR Modified Doc Type to Opn per Order 144 on 6/11/2007 (Dearborn, Christy).

March 26, 2007

March 26, 2007

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Kentucky

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Strip Search Cases

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: March 28, 2005

Closing Date: 2007

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Women strip-searched by officers at the Franklin County Correctional Center after having been arrested for minor offenses.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Denied

Defendants

Franklin County, KY (Franklin), County

Frankling County Correctional Complex (Franklin), County

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Due Process

Equal Protection

Unreasonable search and seizure

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Unknown

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Private Settlement Agreement

Voluntary Dismissal

Issues

General:

Search policies

Strip search policy

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female

Type of Facility:

Government-run