Filed Date: Sept. 26, 1990
Closed Date: 2010
Clearinghouse coding complete
On 09/26/1990, the NAACP Legal and Educational Defense Fund (LDF) filed a class action civil rights lawsuit in the Southern District of California under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 against the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD), on behalf of more than 100 minority residents of Lynwood, a South-Central Los Angeles neighborhood. The suit sought monetary and injunctive relief and alleged that deputies of the Lynwood station of the LASD systematically engaged in racial abuse, beatings, unjustified shootings and other unlawful conduct. It further alleged that some of the Lynwood deputies were members of a neo-Nazi, white supremacist gang known as the "Vikings."
In September 1991, federal district judge Terry J. Hatter, Jr. granted plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction against the LASD and ordered that the LASD adhere to its own policies and guidelines regarding the use of force and searches, and submit copies of all reports alleging the use of excessive force by LASD deputies to the court for in camera on the first of every month. Judge Hatter stayed the injunction pending appeal by the LASD.
On February 12, 1993 the court of appeals issued its amended opinion reversing the granting of the preliminary junction on the basis that it was overbroad in scope and not supported by the record, which contained unresolved factual disputes.
Plaintiffs' claims proceeded to trial and after over three weeks of testimony, which included evidence regarding the Kolts Report, the jury returned a multi-million dollar verdict in favor of the plaintiffs. The case was settled post verdict for $6 million dollars payable to the plaintiffs, and the allocation of $1.5 million for use of force training by the LASD in accordance with the recommendations made by the Kolts Report. The court approved the class action settlement and directed that certain settlement documents be filed under seal. The court then terminated the case with prejudice on February 2, 2006.
On June 14, 2006, Freddie Fuiava filed a motion to intervene in the case and sought to modify any protective order or stipulation entered. The district court denied that motion and Fuiava filed a notice of appeal. On May 16, 2008, the court of appeals vacated and remanded the district court's decision because the district court did not state a reason for its denial of the motion. Fuiava renewed his motion, but on February 11, 2009, the district court again denied the motion, finding that Fuiava's request was not relevant to his collateral litigation. Fuiava appealed again, and on April 30, 2010, the court of appeals again vacated and remanded the district court's decision. The court of appeals found that Fuiava's motion was moot, since the protective order's scope was smaller than Fuiava believed, and no modification was necessary.
Summary Authors
Dan Dalton (12/28/2006)
Maurice Youkanna (7/22/2014)
L.A. County Sheriff's Department (Kolts Report and Implementation), No Court (1992)
Bybee, Jay S. (Nevada)
Fernandez, Ferdinand Francis (California)
Goodwin, Alfred Theodore (California)
Graber, Susan (Oregon)
Hatter, Terry J. Jr. (California)
Kleinfeld, Andrew Jay (Alaska)
Kozinski, Alex (California)
Orrick, William Horsley Jr. (California)
Schroeder, Mary Murphy (Arizona)
Silverman, Barry G. (Arizona)
Bybee, Jay S. (Nevada)
Fernandez, Ferdinand Francis (California)
Goodwin, Alfred Theodore (California)
Graber, Susan (Oregon)
Hatter, Terry J. Jr. (California)
Kleinfeld, Andrew Jay (Alaska)
Kozinski, Alex (California)
Orrick, William Horsley Jr. (California)
Schroeder, Mary Murphy (Arizona)
Silverman, Barry G. (Arizona)
Burton, John C. (California)
Casselman, Gary S. (California)
Chambers, Julius LeVonne (New York)
Cook, Donald W. (California)
Craig, Scott F. (California)
Denny, George V. III (California)
Eiden, Richard (California)
Foster, James Oliver (California)
Gonzalez, Jorge (California)
Hsieh, Marina (New York)
Jenkins, Alan (New York)
Lee, Bill Lann (California)
Manes, Hugh R. (California)
Mann, Robert Frederick (California)
Muller, James S. (California)
Patterson, Robert O. (California)
Reed, Kevin S. (California)
Rice, Constance L. (District of Columbia)
Shaw, Theodore M. (New York)
Watson, Carol A. (California)
Ambrose, S. Robert (California)
Bradley, Barry A. (California)
Clinton, DeWitt W. (California)
Collodel, Douglas J. (California)
Grubb, Corrine L. (California)
Humiston, Carol Ann (California)
Katz, Marc Steven (California)
Kemalyan, Richard S. (California)
Manning, Steven D. (California)
Meyers, Patrick T. (California)
Nakamura, Richard H. Jr. (California)
Olson, Robert A. (California)
Richardson, Janet Marie (California)
Shen-Urquidez, Martha A. (California)
Stroud, Zahava (California)
Wolfe, Robert S. (California)
Samuelson, Diana (California)
Satris, Michael H. (California)
Last updated Aug. 15, 2022, 3:02 a.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: California
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Sept. 26, 1990
Closing Date: 2010
Case Ongoing: No reason to think so
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
All residents of the Lynwood area who have been or may be subject to policies and practices of unnecessary or excessive force, illegal searches and seizures, or racial discrimination by deputy sheriffs of Los Angeles County.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Non-profit NON-religious organization
Attorney Organizations:
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: Yes
Class Action Outcome: Granted
Defendants
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Constitutional Clause(s):
Unreasonable search and seizure
Availably Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Content of Injunction:
Issues
Reproductive rights:
General:
Inadequate citizen complaint investigations and procedures
Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)
Discrimination-basis:
Race:
National Origin/Ethnicity: