Case: U.S. v. City of Los Angeles

2:00-cv-11769 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: Nov. 3, 2000

Closed Date: 2013

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On November 3, 2000, the United States filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California under 42 U.S.C. §14141, alleging that the City of Los Angeles, its Board of Police Commissioners and its Police Department (collectively the "LAPD") deprived individuals of their constitutional rights through the use of excessive force, false arrests and improper searches and seizures. The suit was an offshoot of a lengthy internal investigation of the LAPD's Rampart Divisi…

On November 3, 2000, the United States filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California under 42 U.S.C. §14141, alleging that the City of Los Angeles, its Board of Police Commissioners and its Police Department (collectively the "LAPD") deprived individuals of their constitutional rights through the use of excessive force, false arrests and improper searches and seizures.

The suit was an offshoot of a lengthy internal investigation of the LAPD's Rampart Division and its anti-gang unit known as "CRASH" (Community Resources Against Street Hoodlums). The investigation focused initially on alleged criminal acts of a former LAPD officer Rafael Perez. Perez was charged with possession of cocaine he stole from the LAPD evidence locker and theft. After a mistrial on those charges, Perez cut a plea deal with prosecutors, wherein he agreed to provide information regarding untold corruption and misconduct within the CRASH unit at the Rampart Division. Perez claimed that he and dozens of officers routinely framed suspects, planted and manufactured evidence, lied in court and physically abused suspects on a widespread scale.

Perez implicated over 70 police officers and based upon his allegations of fabricated evidence and perjury by officers, approximately 100 criminal convictions were eventually overturned and thousands of other criminal cases were tainted. In the wake of the Perez testimony, in September of 1999, the LAPD police chief Bernard Parks commissioned a Board of Inquiry comprised of LAPD command staff to investigate the depth of the corruption scandal and analyze departmental failures. In March of 2000, Chief Bernard did away with all of the LAPD CRASH units, and in April of 2000, the Los Angeles Board of Police Commissions formed the Rampart Independent Review Panel, to investigate the scandal.

Eventually, the Department of Justice began its own investigation into the LAPD. On May 8, 2000, the Department of Justice advised the LAPD of the findings of its investigation of the LAPD's pattern or practice of police misconduct, which included: "the unconstitutional use of force by LAPD officers, including improper officer-involved shootings; improper seizures of persons, including making police stops not based on reasonable suspicion and making arrests without probable cause, seizures of property not based on probable cause; and improper searches of persons and property with insufficient cause." The DOJ also advised the LAPD that it intended to file suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §14141 and seek injunctive and declaratory relief. The DOJ offered to defer the filing of litigation if the LAPD agreed to negotiate in good faith and arrive at a consent decree. LAPD and Los Angeles city officials met with the DOJ and agreed upon a settlement of the government's claims, which included the filing of a formal consent decree.

Contemporaneously with the filing of the government's Complaint on November 3, 2000, the parties filed a joint application for the entry of the consent decree.

In November 2000, the Los Angeles Police Protective League (the "Police League"), the designated bargaining unit for the LAPD officers filed a motion to intervene. The Police League averred that 42 U.S.C. §14141 was unconstitutional and that the proposed consent decree was at odds with the collective bargaining agreement in place between the City and the Police League members. A number of community groups, including the ACLU, and individuals who lived in the community also sought leave to intervene in the underlying action. Along with their motion to intervene, the community interveners filed a complaint in intervention, asserting claims as plaintiffs under 42 U.S.C. §1983 against the defendants.

The district court (Judge Gary A. Feess) denied motions to intervene by both Police League and the community groups and individuals, but did grant them amicus status. The intervenors filed notice of appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The district court refused to stay the underlying proceedings pending the intervenors' appeal.

On June 15, 2001, while the intervenors' appeal was pending, the district court approved and entered the consent decree. The consent decree provides specific guidelines designed to remedy deficiencies and reform the conduct and culture of the LAPD. The reform measures include:

  • tighter controls on gang units;

  • strict oversight on use of force;

  • shift of responsibility for investigations of misconduct complaints;

  • a sophisticated computerized system to identify potential at-risk behavior (TEAMS II)

  • data collection relative to pedestrian and motor vehicle stops.

In accordance with the consent decree, the parties agreed upon an independent monitor Michael Cherkasky and Kroll Associates. The monitor was charged with oversight of the implementation of the provisions of the consent decree and provided quarterly reports on the progress made by the LAPD. Through the implementation process the independent monitor has submitted quarterly reports (21 as of the end of 2006) to the court and the parties have also submitted numerous status reports detailing the progress made.

On April 22, 2002, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, affirmed in part and reversed in part the District Court's ruling on the motions to intervene, overturning the denial of the Police League's motion to intervene but affirming the denial of the community group's motion. U.S. v. City of Los Angeles, 288 F.3d 391 (9th Cir. 2002). The Court of Appeals noted that the Consent Decree had been entered while the denial of intervention motions were appealed, but did not require the district court to rescind the consent decree.

For the next four years, the LAPD worked on continued implementation of the overhauls called for by the consent decree. On January 18, 2006, the parties filed a joint request to extend the consent decree's duration. On March 22, 2006, the Court denied that motion, but issued ordered all parties to show cause why the consent decree should not be extended for a minimum of two additional years as several major tasks called for in the consent decree remained uncompleted.

On April 28, 2006, the parties filed another joint motion to amend the consent decree. On May 15, 2006, the Court denied that motion, but ordered that the consent decree be extended another three years to and including June 15, 2009. On June 9, 2009, the court extended the consent decree to June 30, 2009. On June 29, 2009 the Court extended the consent decree to July 17, 2009.

On July 17, 2009, the Court approved termination of the consent decree and approval of the Transition Agreement. This established a reporting and monitoring structure for the various "Gang Units" in the LAPD through the Office of the Inspector General.

For the next three years, until May 15, 2013, the City of Los Angeles filed regular status reports with the OIG.

On May 15, 2013, the Court dismissed the case, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, in light of full satisfaction of the Transition Agreement.

Summary Authors

Kristen Sagar (6/15/2009)

Andrew Steiger (1/28/2014)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4142948/parties/united-states-v-los-angeles-city-of/


Judge(s)

Browning, James Robert (California)

Feess, Gary Allen (California)

Hawkins, Michael Daly (Arizona)

Rawlinson, Johnnie B. (Nevada)

Reinhardt, Stephen Roy (California)

Rymer, Pamela Ann (California)

Thomas, Sidney Runyan (Montana)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Brown Cutlar, Shanetta Y. (District of Columbia)

Coon, Laura (District of Columbia)

Harrington, Sarah E. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Browning, James Robert (California)

Feess, Gary Allen (California)

Hawkins, Michael Daly (Arizona)

Rawlinson, Johnnie B. (Nevada)

Reinhardt, Stephen Roy (California)

Rymer, Pamela Ann (California)

Thomas, Sidney Runyan (Montana)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Brown Cutlar, Shanetta Y. (District of Columbia)

Coon, Laura (District of Columbia)

Harrington, Sarah E. (District of Columbia)

Jung, Je Yon (District of Columbia)

Kim, Wan J. (District of Columbia)

Lee, Bill Lann (California)

Mayorkas, Alejandro N. (California)

Moossy, Robert J. (District of Columbia)

Murphy, Donna M. (District of Columbia)

Murray, Jeffrey Robert (District of Columbia)

O'Beirne, Patricia (District of Columbia)

Perez, Thomas E. (District of Columbia)

Posner, Mark A. (District of Columbia)

Saucedo, Luis E. (District of Columbia)

Smith, Jonathan Mark (District of Columbia)

Weiss, Daniel H. (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Bina, Sahar (California)

Bowers, Terree (California)

Burton, Mark Francis (California)

Carter, William W. (California)

Cramer, Robert (California)

De La Guerra, Carlos (California)

Delgadillo, Rockard (California)

Glaser, Patricia L. (California)

Hahn, James K. (California)

Katrinak, Raymond Paul III (California)

McOsker, Timothy B. (California)

Merkin, Frederick N. (California)

Raffish, Julie S. (California)

Trutanich, Carmen A. (California)

Other Attorney(s)

Bloomfield, Kathryn S. (California)

Chemerinsky, Erwin (North Carolina)

Conley, Ted D. (California)

Friedman, Frederick D. (California)

Garcia, Ricardo D. (California)

Hernandez, Enrique (California)

Kamin, Mitchell A. (California)

Koskie, Michael E. (California)

Lhamon, Catherine (California)

Lysaght, Brian C. (California)

Marchant, Diane (California)

Petersen, Gregory G. (California)

Ribakoff, Joseph M. (California)

Rosenbaum, Mark Dale (California)

Silver, Stephen H. (California)

Yagman, Marion R. (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Cherkasky, Michael (California)

Reno, Janet (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

May 23, 2013 Docket

L.A. Police Department Board of Inquiry into the Rampart Area Corruption Incident

March 1, 2000 Monitor/Expert/Receiver Report

Correspondence from Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division to City of Los Angeles notifying of its intent to file suit for civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. §14141 if Consent Decree cannot be obtained

No Court

May 8, 2000 Findings Letter/Report

Confidential Combined Settlement Document

Sept. 8, 2000 Settlement Agreement

Independent Analysis of the Los Angeles Police Department's Board of Inquiry Report on the Rampart Scandal

No Court

Sept. 11, 2000 Monitor/Expert/Receiver Report

Report of the Rampart Independent Review Panel - Executive Summary

No Court

Nov. 16, 2000 Monitor/Expert/Receiver Report

Justice Department and City of Los Angeles Agree on the Appointment of Michael Cherkasky as Primary Monitor in the Los Angeles Police Department Pattern or Practice

U.S. v. Los Angeles Police Department

No Court

May 18, 2001 Press Release
123

Consent Decree

June 15, 2001 Settlement Agreement
130

Status Report

Oct. 15, 2001 Pleading / Motion / Brief

Report of the Independent Monitor of the Los Angeles Police Department - First Quarterly Report

Nov. 15, 2001 Monitor/Expert/Receiver Report

Resources

Title Description External URL

Policing Los Angeles Under a Consent Decree: The Dynamics of Change at the LAPD

Christopher Stone, Todd Foglesong, Christine M. Cole

The Los Angeles Police Department is today completing one of the most ambitious experiments in police reform ever attempted in an American city. After a decade of policing crises that began with the … May 1, 2009 http://www.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/Harvard-LAPD%20Study.pdf

Structural Police Reform

Stephen Rushin

For most of American history, courts and policymakers have relied on a small handful of relatively non-invasive tools to fight police misconduct. These traditional approaches to police regulation mer… Jan. 1, 2015 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2414673

Overseeing Agency Enforcement

Rachel E. Barkow

A big part of what agencies do-indeed, the core of their executive power-is law enforcement. Whether it is a statute or an agency regulation, agencies make sure that individuals and entities comply w… Jan. 1, 2016 http://www.gwlr.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/84-Geo.-Wash.-L.-Rev.-1129.pdf

Evaluating Section 14141: An Empirical Review of Pattern or Practice Police Misconduct Reform

Joshua Chanin

Section 14141 of the Violent Crime Act of 1994 fundamentally restructures the regulation of police behavior in the United States. Since the law’s passage, dozens of police departments have undergone … Jan. 1, 2016 http://hdl.handle.net/1811/79758

Reforming High-Stakes Police Departments: How Federal Civil Rights Will Rebuild Constitutional Policing in America

Ivana Dukanovic

This Note uses the Ferguson Police Department as a 14141 case study and provides suggestions and predictions for sustainable law enforcement reform. The Note proposes that 14141 is the change agent f… June 21, 2016 https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly/vol43/iss4/6/

Police Union Contracts

Stephen Rushin

This Article empirically demonstrates that police departments’ internal disciplinary procedures, often established through the collective bargaining process, can serve as barriers to officer accounta… Jan. 1, 2017 https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3890&context=dlj

De-Policing

Stephen Rushin & Griffin Edwards

Critics have long claimed that when the law regulates police behavior it inadvertently reduces officer aggressiveness, thereby increasing crime. This hypothesis has taken on new significance in recen… March 1, 2017 https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4723&context=clr

From Selma to Ferguson: The Voting Rights Act as a Blueprint for Police Reform

Jason Mazzone & Stephen Rushin

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 revolutionized access to the voting booth. Rather than responding to claims of voter suppression through litigation against individual states or localities, the Voting R… April 1, 2017 http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4352&context=californialawreview

Federal Intervention in American Police Departments

Stephen Rushin

For much of American history, the federal government has played a limited role in local police regulation. That all changed in 1994, when Congress passed a little known statute that permitted the US … April 7, 2017

State Attorneys General as Agents of Police Reform

Jason Mazzone, Stephen Rushin

This Article provides a cautionary tale about uses of parens patriae by state attorneys general and an alternative. It urges that the common law doctrine of parens patriae should not allow state atto… Feb. 27, 2019

Interrogating Police Officers

Stephen Rushin, Atticus DeProspo

This Article evaluates the procedural protections given to police officers facing disciplinary interrogations about alleged misconduct. It demonstrates that state laws and collective bargaining agree… Aug. 13, 2019

Competing Case Studies of Structural Reform Litigation in American Police Departments

Stephen Rushin

In 1994, Congress passed 42 US.C. § 14141, which gives the US. Attorney General the authority to initiate structural reform litigation against police departments engaged in a pattern or practice of u… Sept. 1, 2019

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4142948/united-states-v-los-angeles-city-of/

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT filed Summons(es) Not Issued referred to Discovery Rosalyn M. Chapman (pc) (Entered: 11/07/2000)

Nov. 3, 2000 PACER
2

NOTICE OF INTERESTED PARTIES filed by plaintiff USA, defendant Los Angeles City of, defendant Bd of Police Comm, defendant LAPD (pc) (Entered: 11/07/2000)

Nov. 3, 2000 PACER
3

JOINT APPLICATION filed to enter Consent Decree ; Lodged Propsd Consent decree (rrey) (Entered: 11/08/2000)

Nov. 3, 2000 PACER
4

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT of joint appl to enter Consent Decree [3-1] (rrey) (Entered: 11/08/2000)

Nov. 3, 2000 PACER
135

NOTICE by plaintiff USA of related case(s) CV 99-11629 GAF (AJWx) (rn) (Entered: 01/24/2002)

Nov. 3, 2000 PACER
5

NOTICE OF INTERESTED PARTIES filed by intvr Los Angeles Police Protective League (rrey) (Entered: 11/09/2000)

Nov. 8, 2000 PACER

Placed in file - not used

Nov. 8, 2000 PACER
6

EX PARTE APPLICATION filed by intervenor Los Angeles Police Protective League for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 ; decl of Terri N Schallenkamp; Lodged Propsd ORd (rrey) (Entered: 11/09/2000)

Nov. 8, 2000 PACER

PLACED IN FILE - NOT USED; (Propsd) Ord Gr intvrs ex parte appl for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 ldg on 11/8/00 (rrey)

Nov. 8, 2000 PACER
7

MINUTES: (In Chambers) granting exparte appl for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 [6-1] & the mot is Ord fld as of 11/9/00; the hrg on the mot for lv to intervene shall be heard on the following sched: (1) opp to mot to be fld on or before 11/27/00; (2) rply to opp to be fld on or before 12/11/00 ; (3) hrg on the mot on 12/18/00 @ 9:30 IT IS SO ORD by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: None (rrey) (Entered: 11/13/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
8

(AMENDED) PROOF OF SERVICE by intervenor LA Police Protective League on 11/8/00 of ex parte appl for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1; memo of p/a in suppt; decl of Terri N Schallenkamp (rrey) (Entered: 11/13/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
9

Amended PROOF OF SERVICE by Intervenor Los Angeles Police Protective League on 11/8/00 of ntc of interested parties svd Frederick N Merkin, Senior Assist City Atty; Alejandro N Mayorkas & Mark Posner by mail (bg) Modified on 11/14/2000 (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
10

Amended PROOF OF SERVICE on 11/8/00 of ntc of motion for lv to intervene as a dft svd Frederick N Merkin, Senior Assist City Atty; Alejandro N Mayrokas, US Atty & Mark Posner, Special Litigation SEction - Civil Rights Div by mail (bg) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
11

Amended PROOF OF SERVICE by Intervenor Los Angeles Police Protective League on 11/8/00 of motion for lv to intervene as a dft; memo of p&a svd Frederick N Merkin, Senior Assist City Atty; Alejandro N mayorkas, US Atty; Mark Posner, Special Litigation SEction - Civil Rights Div by mail (bg) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
12

PROOF OF SERVICE on 11/8/00 of declr of Enrique Hernandez in suppt of mot for lv to intervene as a dft svd Frederick N Merkin, Senior Assist City Atty; Alejandro N mayorkas, US Atty; Mark Posner, Special Litigation Section - Civil Rights Div by mail (bg) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
13

Amended PROOF OF SERVICE by Los Angeles Police Protective League on 11/8/00 of declr of Adam L Marangell in suppt of mot for lv to intervene as a dft svd Frederick N Merkin, Senior Assist City Atty; Alejandro N mayorkas, US Atty; Mark Posner, Special Litigation SEction - Civil Rights Div by mail (bg) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
14

Amended PROOF OF SERVICE by Intervenor Los Angeles Police Protection League on 11/8/00 of prop ord svd Frederick N Merkin, Senior Assist City Atty; Alejandro N Mayorkas, US Atty; Mark Posner, Special Litigation Section - Civil Rights Div by mail (bg) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
15

Amended PROOF OF SERVICE by Intervenor Los angeles Police Protective League on 11/8/00 of answer svd Frederick N Merkin, Senior Assist City Atty; Alejandro N Mayorkas, US Atty; Mark Posner, Special Litigation Section - Civil Rights Div by mail (bg) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
16

Amended PROOF OF SERVICE by Intervenor Los Angeles Polcie Protective League on 11/8/00 of prop ord granting ex parte for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 svd Frederick N merkin, Senior Assist City Atty; Alejandro N Mayorkas, US Atty; Mark Posner, Special Litigation SEction - Civil Rights Div by mail (bg) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
17

NOTICE OF CHANGE of hearing date re mot for lv by intervenor Los Angeles Police Protective League (rrey) (Entered: 11/27/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
21

MOTION by L A Police Protect to intervene as a deft ; P&A; motion hearing set for 9:30 12/18/00 (lc) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000 PACER
18

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Gary A. Feess; IT IS SO ORD: any opp to the mot of the Police Protective League is hereby cont to be fld from 11/27/00 up to & including 12/4/00 in compliance w/ guidelines set forth in Local Rule 7.6; dfts shal personally serve the Los Angeles Police Protective League w/ the opp (rrey) (Entered: 11/29/2000)

Nov. 27, 2000 PACER
19

NOTICE OF ASSOCIATION of Counsel for defendants by attorney Patricia L Glaser, Raymond Paul Katrinak III (rrey) (Entered: 12/05/2000)

Dec. 4, 2000 PACER
26

MEMO IN RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to intervene as a dft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 4, 2000 PACER
27

MEMO OF P/A IN OPPOSITION by defendants to motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 4, 2000 PACER
28

DECLARATION of Frederick N Merkin by defendants in suppt of opp to motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 4, 2000 PACER
29

DECLARATION of R Paul Katrinak by defendants in suppt of opp to motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 4, 2000 PACER
30

AMENDED PROOF OF SERVICE by defendants on 12/5/00 of ntc of association of cnsl (rrey) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 5, 2000 PACER
20

EX PARTE APPLICATION filed by L A Police Protect for order shrt time to strk US opp; to mot o intervene Lodged ord, ord str, mot, decl (lc) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 7, 2000 PACER
25

MINUTES: In chambers: LA Police Protective League exparte motion for order shrt time to strk US opp granted [20-1]; crt read & cosidred mot to strk US Opp to mot to intervene, mot Denied; LA Police Protective League 25 pg rply is to bf fld 12/11/00 by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: none (psend) (lc) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 8, 2000 PACER
22

NOTICE OF motion to intervene as a deft; 12/18/00 9:30 [21-1] filed by LA Police Protective League (lc) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 9, 2000 PACER
23

DECLARATION of Enrique Hernandez in suppt by movant L A Police Protect re motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (lc) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 9, 2000 PACER
24

DECLARATION of Adam L Marangell in suppt by L A Police Protect re motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (lc) (Entered: 12/11/2000)

Dec. 9, 2000 PACER
31

OBJECTIONS by movant L A Police Protect to the decl of Frederick N Merkin submitted in opp to motion to intervene as a dft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/12/2000)

Dec. 11, 2000 PACER
32

OPPOSITION by movant L A Police Protect to United States exhs submitted in suppt of opp to motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/12/2000)

Dec. 11, 2000 PACER
33

EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS by movant L A Police Protect to the decl of R Paul Katrinak submitted in opp to motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/12/2000)

Dec. 11, 2000 PACER
34

REPLY by movant L A Police Protect to City of Los Angeles memo of p/a in opp to motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/12/2000)

Dec. 11, 2000 PACER
35

REPLY by movant L A Police Protect to United States memo in response to motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/12/2000)

Dec. 11, 2000 PACER
36

DECLARATION of Cliff Ruff by movant L A Police Protect in suppt of rply to United States opp to motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/12/2000)

Dec. 11, 2000 PACER
37

DECLARATION of Gregory G Petersen by movant L A Police Protect re public posting of incorrect "Consent Decree" (rrey) (Entered: 12/12/2000)

Dec. 11, 2000 PACER
38

MINUTES before Judge Gary A. Feess: Motion to intervene [21-1] is CONTINUED to 9:30 on 12/19/00 CR: N/P (Psend) (jp) (Entered: 12/13/2000)

Dec. 12, 2000 PACER
39

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Gary A. Feess re filing of corrected copy of United States mem in resp to the Los Angeles Police Protective Leagues mot to intervene as a dft (rrey) (Entered: 12/13/2000)

Dec. 12, 2000 PACER
40

Memo in response to the Los Angeles Police protective Leagues by plaintiff USA to motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (twdb) (Entered: 12/14/2000)

Dec. 12, 2000 PACER
41

NOTICE OF MOTION by propsd intvrs to intervene ; motion hearing set for 9:30 1/8/01 Lodged Propsd Ord & intvr cmp (rrey) (Entered: 12/18/2000)

Dec. 18, 2000 PACER
42

MEMORANDUM OF P/A IN SUPPORT by propsd intvrs of motion to intervene [41-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/18/2000)

Dec. 18, 2000 PACER
43

DECLARATIONS by propsd intvrs in suppt of motion to intervene [41-1] (rrey) (Entered: 12/18/2000)

Dec. 18, 2000 PACER
44

PROOF OF SERVICE on 12/18/00 by propsd intvrs of cmp in intervention, ntc of mot to intervene; memo of p/a in suppt; decls in suppt; propsd ord (rrey) (Entered: 12/18/2000)

Dec. 18, 2000 PACER
45

NOTICE OF INTERESTED PARTIES filed by movant Michael - Garcia, movant Ernesto Luevano, movant Duc - Pham, movant Jesus Nieto, movant Salvador Salas, movant Robert Hernandez, movant Carlos - Gonzalez, movant David Askew, movant Timothy Campbell, movant Alberto Lovato, movant Tonye Allen, movant James M Lawson Jr, movant SCLCLA, movant Homeboy Industries, movant ACLU, movant Asian Pacific, movant Radio Sin Fronteras (rrey) (Entered: 12/20/2000)

Dec. 18, 2000 PACER
48

SUGGESTION of lack of fed jurisd & lack of standing to sue, mootness & collusive actn lacking actual controversy by propsd intvr Los Angeles Police Protective League (rrey) (Entered: 12/21/2000)

Dec. 18, 2000 PACER
46

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION by interested parties Fitzpatrick, Rodriguez, Blumberg, Canales, Rivas, Hernandez, Guerrero, Rodriguez Jr, Quintana, & Moss for permissive intervention purs to FRCP 24(b) ; decl of Mitchell A Kamin; motion hearing set for 9:30 1/8/01 Lodged Propsd Ord (rrey) (Entered: 12/20/2000)

Dec. 19, 2000 PACER
47

MINUTES: (In Chambers) continuing hearing on propsd intvrs motion to intervene [41-1] to 9:30 1/22/01 ; plf & dfts shall have until 1/3/01 to file their opps, & the propsd intvrs shall have until 1/12/01 to file their replies by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: None (rrey) (Entered: 12/21/2000)

Dec. 19, 2000 PACER
49

MINUTES: Los Angeles Police Protective Leagues motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] is taken under submission & will issue a written Ord by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: Irene Nakamura (rrey) (Entered: 12/21/2000)

Dec. 19, 2000 PACER
50

EX PARTE APPLICATION filed by interested parties/movants for an Ord maintaining 1/8/01 as the hrg date for their mot for permissive intervention (rrey) (Entered: 12/21/2000)

Dec. 19, 2000 PACER
51

MINUTES: (In Chambers) denying exparte appl for an Ord maintaining 1/8/01 as the hrg date for their mot for permissive intervention [50-1]; continuing hearing on motion for permissive intervention [46-1] to 9:30 1/22/01; plfs & dfts shall have until 1/3/01 to file their opps & the propsd intvrs shall have until 1/12/01 to file their replies by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: None (rrey) (Entered: 12/21/2000)

Dec. 20, 2000 PACER
53

RESPONSE by plaintiff to interested ptys motion for permissive intervention [46-1] (rrey) (Entered: 01/05/2001)

Jan. 3, 2001 PACER
54

MEMO OF P/A IN OPPOSITION by defendants to interested ptys motion for permissive intervention [46-1] (rrey) (Entered: 01/05/2001)

Jan. 3, 2001 PACER
55

DECLARATION of R Paul Katrinak by defendants in suppt of opp to interested ptys motion for permissive intervention [46-1] (rrey) (Entered: 01/05/2001)

Jan. 3, 2001 PACER
56

MEMO OF P/A IN OPPOSITION by defendants to ACLUs motion to intervene [41-1] (rrey) (Entered: 01/05/2001)

Jan. 3, 2001 PACER
57

DECLARATION of R Paul Katrinak by defendants in suppt of opp to ACLUs motion to intervene [41-1] (rrey) (Entered: 01/05/2001)

Jan. 3, 2001 PACER
52

JOINT STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Gary A. Feess re brief sched for mot to intervene; ddl for filing resp to the mot to intervene is hereby cont to 1/5/01; the ptys shall serve cnsl for the propsd intervenors by hand (rrey) (Entered: 01/05/2001)

Jan. 4, 2001 PACER
58

ORDER by Judge Gary A. Feess denying Los Angeles Police Protective Leagues motion to intervene as a dft [21-1] (ENT 1/8/01) (send/ntc) (rrey) (Entered: 01/08/2001)

Jan. 5, 2001 PACER
59

RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to intervene [41-1] (rrey) (Entered: 01/09/2001)

Jan. 5, 2001 PACER
60

RECEIPT OF TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 12/19/00 (Re: ) CR: Irene Nakamura (pjap) (Entered: 01/10/2001)

Jan. 8, 2001 PACER

Transcript (CV)

Jan. 8, 2001 PACER

TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings held on 12/19/00 (pjap)

Jan. 8, 2001 PACER
61

REPLY by propsd intvrs on their motion for permissive intervention [46-1] (rrey) (Entered: 01/11/2001)

Jan. 10, 2001 PACER
62

REPLY MEMORANDUM OF P&A IN SUPPORT by proposed Invtervenors re motion to intervene [41-1] (bg) (Entered: 01/16/2001)

Jan. 12, 2001 PACER
63

Supplemental REPLY by Proposed Intervenors re motion to intervene [41-1] (bg) (Entered: 01/16/2001)

Jan. 12, 2001 PACER
64

NOTICE OF APPEAL by plaintiff L A Police Protective League to 9th C/A from Dist. Court ord fld 1/5/01, ent 1/8/01 [58-1] (cc: Adam L. Marangell, The Petersen Law Firm; Mark Burton, Asst. City Atty.; Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro, LLP; Alejandro N. Mayorkas, AUSA; Mark Posner) Fee: Paid (wdc) (wdc) (Entered: 01/18/2001)

Jan. 17, 2001 PACER
65

EX PARTE APPLICATION filed by movant L A Police Protect for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 ; decl of Adam L Marangell; Lodged propsd ord (rrey) (Entered: 01/18/2001)

Jan. 17, 2001 PACER
66

MINUTES: (IN CHAMBERS) the Crt is in rcpt of the ex parte appl fld by Los Angeles Police Protective League; the hrg currently set for 1/19/01 @ 9:30 is hereby vac; any resp to said ex parte appl to be fld NLT 1/22/01 ; file-stamped courtesy copy of resp to be delivered to the chambers NLT 5:00 1/22/01 by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: Not Present (rrey) (Entered: 01/18/2001)

Jan. 18, 2001 PACER
67

MINUTES: that the motion for permissive intervention [46-1] is submitted, that the motion to intervene [41-1] is submitted; The crt tks the matter under submission. The crt will prepare a written order by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: Lisa Gonzalez (bg) (Entered: 01/23/2001)

Jan. 22, 2001 PACER
68

RESPONSE by plaintiff USA to exparte motion for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 [65-1] (bg) (Entered: 01/23/2001)

Jan. 22, 2001 PACER
69

EX PARTE APPLICATION filed by plaintiff USA for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 Lodged prop ord & mot docs (bg) (Entered: 01/23/2001)

Jan. 22, 2001 PACER
70

DECLARATION of Patricia L O'Beirne by plaintiff USA in suppt re exparte motion for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 [69-1] (bg) (Entered: 01/23/2001)

Jan. 22, 2001 PACER
71

notice of non opp by plaintiff USA, defendant Bd of Police Comm, defendant LAPD to exparte motion for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 [65-1] (bg) (Entered: 01/23/2001)

Jan. 22, 2001 PACER
72

REQUEST for judicial notice by proposed intervenors re motion to intervene [41-1] (bg) (Entered: 01/23/2001)

Jan. 22, 2001 PACER
75

MINUTES: The crt has rec'd the Police League's mot to stay. Pla & dfts may oppose this mot, however any opp must be fi nlt 1/30/01. The Protective League may then fi a resp nlt 2/5/01. The crt will hold a hrg on the mot on 2/8/01 @ 9:30 am; In addition the crt has rec'd pla's mot to correct ord. The Protective League & dfts may oppose this mot, however any opp must be fi by 1/30/01. Pla may then fi a resp nlt 1/29/01. The matter will then be tkn under submission. The crt will contact the parties if a hrg is deemed necessary by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: n/p (bg) (Entered: 01/25/2001)

Jan. 23, 2001 PACER
73

ORDER by Judge Gary A. Feess granting exparte motion for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 [69-1] (bg) (Entered: 01/25/2001)

Jan. 24, 2001 PACER
74

ORDER by Judge Gary A. Feess granting exparte motion for relief from Local Rule 7.4.1 [65-1] (bg) (Entered: 01/25/2001)

Jan. 24, 2001 PACER
77

EXHIBITS inadvertently omitted from ntc ofmot to correct ord denying the LA Police Protective League's re motion to intervene as a deft [21-1] (bg) (Entered: 02/01/2001)

Jan. 25, 2001 PACER
76

NOTIFICATION by Circuit Court of Appellate Docket Number appeal [64-1] 01-55182 (weap) (pjap) (Entered: 01/30/2001)

Jan. 30, 2001 PACER
78

Memo of P&A in OPPOSITION by defendant Los Angeles City of, defendant Bd of Police Comm, defendant LAPD to LA Police Protective League's mot to stay proceedings (bg) (Entered: 02/01/2001)

Jan. 30, 2001 PACER
79

RESPONSE by plaintiff USA re motion for stay pending appeal by L.A. Police Protective League [78-1] (fvap) (Entered: 02/01/2001)

Jan. 30, 2001 PACER
80

MINUTES: (IN CHAMBERS) Crt set this matter for Status Conf on 10:00 2/8/01 by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: Not Present (PSEND) (ir) (Entered: 02/02/2001)

Feb. 2, 2001 PACER
83

REPLY by movant L A Police Protect to memo of p/a in opp to LAPPL mot to stay proceedings (rrey) (Entered: 02/13/2001)

Feb. 2, 2001 PACER
84

REPLY by movant L A Police Protect to US resp to mot for stay pending appeal by LAPPL (rrey) (Entered: 02/13/2001)

Feb. 2, 2001 PACER
85

POSITION re mot to correct ord by Los Angeles Police Protective League (rrey) (Entered: 02/13/2001)

Feb. 2, 2001 PACER
81

ORDER by Judge Gary A. Feess denying interested ptys motion for permissive intervention [46-1], denying propsd intvrs motion to intervene [41-1] terminating movants S Moss, M Quintana, Raul Rodriguez, L Guerrero, G Hernandez, A Rivas, R Canales, Paul Blumberg, Raul Rodriguez, D Fitzpatrick, Radio Sin Fronteras, Asian Pacific, ACLU, Homeboy Industries, SCLCLA, James M Lawson, Tonye Allen, Alberto Lovato, Timothy Campbell, David Askew, Carlos Gonzalez, Robert Hernandez, Salvador Salas, Jesus Nieto, Duc Pham, Ernesto Luevano, Michael Garcia, L A Police Protect (ENT 2/9/01) (send/ntc) (rrey) (Entered: 02/09/2001)

Feb. 8, 2001 RECAP
82

MINUTES: status conf held ; Crt & cnsl discuss the stat of the case & pending issues by Judge Gary A. Feess CR: Lisa Gonzalez (rrey) (Entered: 02/12/2001)

Feb. 8, 2001 PACER
86

ORDER re mot for stay pending appeal & mot to correct prior ord by Judge Gary A. Feess; the Crt finds that the LAPPL is not entitled to a stay of this actn; acc, its mot is DENIED; the US mot is GR & the Crt hereby amds its 1/8/01 Ord (see doc for fur details) (ENT 2/13/01) (send/ntc) (rrey) (Entered: 02/13/2001)

Feb. 9, 2001 PACER

PLACED IN FILE - NOT USED; ntc of mot to correct ord den the Los Angeles Police Protective Leagues mot to intervene & memo in suppt ldg by plf on 1/22/01 (rrey)

Feb. 12, 2001 PACER

PLACED IN FILE - NOT USED; Ntc of mot & mot for stay pending appeal ldg by LAPPL on 1/17/01 (rrey)

Feb. 12, 2001 PACER

PLACED IN FILE - NOT USED; (Propsd) Ord correcting Ord den the LAPPL mot to intervene ldg by LAPPL on 1/22/01 (rrey)

Feb. 12, 2001 PACER

PLACED IN FILE - NOT USED; (Propsd) Ord re mot for stay ldg by LAPPL on 1/17/01 (rrey)

Feb. 12, 2001 PACER

Placed in file - not used

Feb. 12, 2001 PACER
87

TRANSCRIPT DESIGNATION and ordering form for date: 12/19/00 CR: Irene Nakamura (wdc) (wdc) (Entered: 02/16/2001)

Feb. 16, 2001 PACER
88

ORDER RE AMICUS BRIEFING by Judge Gary A. Feess (rrey) (Entered: 02/20/2001)

Feb. 20, 2001 PACER
89

CERTIFICATE of Record Transmitted to USCA (01-55182) (cc: all parties) (cbr) (Entered: 02/23/2001)

Feb. 23, 2001 PACER
90

NOTICE OF APPEAL by movants Michael Garcia, Ernesto Luevano, Duc Pham, Jesus Nieto, Salvador Salas, Robert Hernandez, Carlos Gonzalez, David Askew, Timothy Campbell, Alberto Lovato, Tonye Allen, Reverend James M Lawson, Jr., Southern Christian Leadership, Conference Los Angeles, ACLU of Southern California, Homeboy Industries, Asian Pacific American Legal Center, and Radio Sin Fronteras to 9th C/A from Dist. Court Ord fld 2/8/01 & ent 2/9/01 [81-2] (cc: Mark D. Rosenbaum, ACLU Foundation of Southern California; Erwin Chemerinsky, University of Southern California Law School; Alejandro Mayorkas, U. S. Attorney; James K. Hahn, City Attorney; Steven H. Rosenbaum, U. S. Department of Justice; Patricia Glaser, Christensen Miller fink Jacobs Glaser Weil & Shapiro LLP) Fee: Paid. (pjap) (Entered: 02/27/2001)

Feb. 26, 2001 PACER

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Policing

Key Dates

Filing Date: Nov. 3, 2000

Closing Date: 2013

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

United States Department of Justice

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU Affiliates (any)

ACLU National (all projects)

ACLU of Southern California

U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Los Angeles Police Department (Los Angeles), City

Case Details

Causes of Action:

34 U.S.C. § 12601 (previously 42 U.S.C. § 14141)

Constitutional Clause(s):

Unreasonable search and seizure

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Order Duration: 2001 - 2009

Issues

General:

Excessive force

Failure to discipline

Failure to supervise

Failure to train

False arrest

Improper treatment of mentally ill suspects

Inadequate citizen complaint investigations and procedures

Racial profiling

Discrimination-basis:

Race discrimination