Case: Farrakhan v. Gregoire

2:96-cv-00076 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington

Filed Date: Feb. 2, 1996

Closed Date: 2011

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On February 2, 1996, a group of African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, and Native-Americans having felony convictions filed a pro se action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, claiming that the state of Washington's felon disenfranchisement scheme violated the Voting Rights Act ("VRA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1971 et seq., and the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The state constitution made persons convicted …

On February 2, 1996, a group of African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, and Native-Americans having felony convictions filed a pro se action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, claiming that the state of Washington's felon disenfranchisement scheme violated the Voting Rights Act ("VRA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1971 et seq., and the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The state constitution made persons convicted of an "infamous crime" (generally, a felony) ineligible to vote. Because, according to the plaintiffs' allegations, minorities were disproportionately prosecuted and sentenced, they were disproportionately represented among the persons disenfranchised under the Washington constitution. The plaintiffs alleged that the resultant race-based vote denial and vote dilution violated the VRA and the federal constitution.

District Judge Robert H. Whaley granted the plaintiffs' motion for appointment of counsel, resulting in the plaintiffs being represented by private attorneys and counsel from University Legal Assistance. Subsequently, counsel amended the complaint, adding a plaintiff, retaining the VRA violation claim, and modifying the list of federal constitutional amendments allegedly violated to include the First, Second, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss. Judge Whaley denied the motion in part, saying that the VRA could be proven to be violated by a vote disenfranchisement scheme that results in vote denial based upon race, as the plaintiffs had alleged. The claims of vote dilution in violation of the VRA and of constitutional violations were too conclusory or unsupported, in the judge's view, leading him to dismiss those components of the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Farrakhan v. Locke, 987 F. Supp. 1304 (E.D. Wash. 1997).

On October 26, 1999, plaintiffs filed another amended complaint, making the same claims of racial discrimination against their voting rights but adding causes of action based upon alleged denial of the right to vote due to nonpayment of legal financial obligations, which the plaintiffs said constituted a denial due to a previous condition of servitude, and upon a claimed denial of due process stemming from the allegedly vague and unduly burdensome statutory process in Washington for an offender to gain restoration of voting rights. The complaint sought declaratory and injunctive relief, damages, and attorneys' fees and costs.

Judge Whaley granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment in an unpublished order on December 1, 2000. Although the judge found that the disenfranchisement provision had a clear disproportionate impact on racial minorities, he said the plaintiffs could not show a causal relationship between the disenfranchisement and the result prohibited by the VRA. Neither was there any evidence that the disenfranchisement provision was motivated by racial animus or that its operation, by itself, had a discriminatory effect. In the judge's view, discrimination in the criminal justice system may show a flaw in that system, but that is different than proving a flaw with the disenfranchisement system. The totality of the circumstances failed to establish a causal link between Washington's felon disenfranchisement provision and reduced minority access to the state's political process. The court also rejected the challenge to the state's restoration of civil rights process, saying that the plaintiffs allegations failed to establish their standing to make such claims (i.e., they did not show that they were eligible to or had sought restoration) and, even had they shown standing, they had produced no evidence that something in the restoration process made restoration difficult or impossible because of race.

The plaintiffs appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. (Amicus curiae briefs supporting the plaintiffs were filed by attorneys with the ACLU of Washington, the Brennan Center for Justice, and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.) A panel of the that court agreed with Judge Whaley that a claim of vote denial due to felon disenfranchisement is cognizable under Section 2 of the VRA, that the state disenfranchisement law did not violate the VRA, and that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the state's restoration of rights process; however, the appellate court reversed the district judge on his analysis of whether the totality of the circumstances established unlawful racial discrimination and denial of minority voting rights as the effect of the disenfranchisement provision. Specifically, Circuit Judge Richard A. Paez wrote, the district court should not have excluded from its' analysis evidence of racial bias in the criminal justice system, because precedent requires examination of how a challenged voting system interacts with external factors such as social and historical conditions to result (or not) in the denial of the right to vote on account of race or color. The court remanded the case for the district court to make factual findings assessing the totality of the circumstances, including plaintiffs' evidence of racial bias in the state's criminal justice system. Farrakhan v. Washington, 338 F.3d 1009 (9th Cir. 2003). Before the remand, however, the appellate court considered whether to hear the matter en banc. A majority of the active judges did not vote for en banc review, so none occurred, but judges favoring rehearing filed a lengthy dissent calling the panel opinion a questionable interpretation of the VRA, potentially destructive of the VRA, and wrongly based upon plaintiffs' evidence of statistical disparities in the criminal process when studies based on such disparities are "notoriously unreliable." Farrakhan v. Washington, 339 F.3d 1116 (9th Cir. 2004) (Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc). The state failed in its' effort to have the U.S. Supreme Court grant a writ of certiorari to review the case. Locke v. Farrakhan, 543 U.S. 984 (2004).

When the case finally returned to the district court, the parties filed a joint status report advising that several months of discovery proceeding were anticipated, that a fifth amended complaint was contemplated, as was a motion for class certification, and that cross-motions for summary judgment would be forthcoming. Accordingly, the parties asked that the trial setting be for no earlier than March 2006.

Cross-motions for summary judgment were eventually filed and, in an unpublished order on July 7, 2006, Judge Whaley granted the state's while denying the plaintiffs'. While he continued to find plaintiffs' statistical evidence of racial bias in Washington's criminal justice system "compelling" and a factor which interacts with the state's disenfranchisement law in a meaningful way, the judge concluded that the multiple other factors relevant to analysis under a totality of the circumstances test counterbalanced the discriminatory effects resulting from the functioning of the state's criminal justice system.

The plaintiffs appealed for the second time to the Ninth Circuit in December 2006. After oral argument, Washington law was changed to provide that the voting rights of felons will be "provisionally restored," at such time as those convicted under Washington state law are no longer under the authority of the Washington Department of Corrections, and, as to those convicted under federal law or in any other state, they are not in custody. See Wash. Laws of 2009, ch. 325, HB 1517. The Circuit Court determined the new law had no effect on the case but to moot the claims of one plaintiff who was no longer in custody. The Court reversed the lower court decision, holding that Plaintiffs have demonstrated that the discriminatory impact of Washington's felon disenfranchisement is attributable to racial discrimination in Washington's criminal justice system and remanded with instructions to grant summary judgment to plaintiffs.

On October 7, 2010, the en banc Ninth Circuit overturned the panel decision, holding that a state can prohibit felons from voting even if the ban disproportionately harms minorities. The court found that plaintiffs had not shown "that their convictions and resulting disenfranchisement resulted from intentional racial discrimination in the operation of the state's criminal justice system.

As of March 24, 2012 there has been no additional action in this case.

Summary Authors

Mike Fagan (6/5/2008)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5358384/parties/farrakhan-v-gregoire/


Judge(s)

Clifton, Richard R. (Hawaii)

Gould, Ronald Murray (Washington)

Graber, Susan (Oregon)

Kleinfeld, Andrew Jay (Alaska)

Kozinski, Alex (California)

McKeown, M. Margaret (California)

Nelson, Dorothy Wright (California)

O'Scannlain, Diarmuid Fionntain (Oregon)

Paez, Richard A. (California)

Rymer, Pamela Ann (California)

Judge(s)

Clifton, Richard R. (Hawaii)

Gould, Ronald Murray (Washington)

Graber, Susan (Oregon)

Kleinfeld, Andrew Jay (Alaska)

Kozinski, Alex (California)

McKeown, M. Margaret (California)

Nelson, Dorothy Wright (California)

O'Scannlain, Diarmuid Fionntain (Oregon)

Paez, Richard A. (California)

Rymer, Pamela Ann (California)

Schroeder, Bruce L (Washington)

Thomas, Sidney Runyan (Montana)

Wardlaw, Kim McLane (California)

Whaley, Robert H. (Washington)

Wood, Harlington Jr. (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Adegbile, Debo Patrick (New York)

Chachkin, Norman J. (New York)

Cronin, Dennis C. (Washington)

Gianoli, Angela (Washington)

Gray, Danielle C. (New York)

Haygood, Ryan Paul (New Jersey)

McNeil, Alan Lynn (Washington)

Merson, Jim (Washington)

Shaw, Theodore M. (New York)

Vail, Jason T. (Washington)

Weiser, Lawrence A. (Washington)

Williams, Carter (Washington)

Wilson, Mark (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Even, Jeffrey Todd (Washington)

Judge, Daniel J. (Washington)

McKenna, Robert M. (Washington)

Murphy, Carol A. (Washington)

Other Attorney(s)

Allen, Jessie (New York)

Borgen, Lori Outzs (District of Columbia)

Cartagena, Juan (New York)

Carter, Zachary W. (New York)

Danelo, Peter A. (Washington)

Gregoire, Christine O. (Washington)

Hirsch, Sam (District of Columbia)

Hodgkiss, Anita S. (District of Columbia)

Metzger, Gillian E. (New York)

Moramarco, Glenn J. (New York)

Northup, Nancy (New York)

Talner, Nancy Lynn (Washington)

Tarson, Derek Sherman (New York)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:96-cv-00076

06-35669

Docket [PACER]

Aug. 23, 2011

Aug. 23, 2011

Docket
81

2:96-cv-00076

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, and Denying in Part Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend

Farrakhan v. Locke

987 F.Supp. 1304

Nov. 13, 1997

Nov. 13, 1997

Order/Opinion
108

2:96-cv-00076

** Plaintiffs' Fourth Amended Complaint Adding New Causes of Action

Farrakhan v. Locke

Oct. 26, 1999

Oct. 26, 1999

Complaint
153

2:96-cv-00076

Order Granting Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment

Farrakhan v. Locke

2000 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 22212

Dec. 1, 2000

Dec. 1, 2000

Order/Opinion

01-35032

Brief of Appellant

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

April 19, 2001

April 19, 2001

Pleading / Motion / Brief

01-35032

Brief Amici Curiae

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

April 26, 2001

April 26, 2001

Pleading / Motion / Brief

01-35032

Brief of Appellees

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

June 4, 2001

June 4, 2001

Pleading / Motion / Brief

01-35032

USCA Order

Farrakhan v. Washington

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

338 F.3d 1009

July 25, 2003

July 25, 2003

Order/Opinion

01-35032

**Order

Farrakhan v. Washington

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

359 F.3d 1116

Feb. 24, 2004

Feb. 24, 2004

Order/Opinion

03-01597

Supreme Court Order

Locke v. Farrakhan

Supreme Court of the United States

543 U.S. 984

Nov. 8, 2004

Nov. 8, 2004

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5358384/farrakhan-v-gregoire/

Last updated Aug. 2, 2022, 3:01 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link

COMPLAINT Fee−status: ifp Receipt #: ifp (FmrEmp) (Entered: 02/02/1996)

Feb. 2, 1996

Feb. 2, 1996

Law Clerk assigned to case is RM (NS) (Entered: 02/21/1996)

Feb. 21, 1996

Feb. 21, 1996

1

COMPLAINT (Summons(es) issued) Fee−status: ifp Receipt #: ifp (FmrEmp) (Entered: 04/08/1996)

April 8, 1996

April 8, 1996

2

ORDER TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, DISMISSING COMPLAINT IN PART WITH PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING SERVICE by Judge Robert H. Whaley (Clerk to file cmp w/o pmyt of filing fee; Clerk to mail cc: #1 #2 pltf AG; USM to serve dfts); response due 5/23/96; IT IS ORDERED that the claims against the State of Washington are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; IT IS ORDERED Pltff's claims against the National Rifle Association are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; the Clerk is further directed to TERMINATE Defendants National Rifle Association, Inc., and the State of Washington from this action. (FmrEmp) (Entered: 04/08/1996)

April 8, 1996

April 8, 1996

3

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant; Atty Daniel John Judge appearing (PW) (Entered: 04/22/1996)

April 22, 1996

April 22, 1996

4

MOTION by plaintiff for reconsideration of the court's order to dismiss plaintiffs complaint in part with prejudice , and to amend the complaint with supplemental pleadings (PW) (Entered: 04/22/1996)

April 22, 1996

April 22, 1996

5

SUMMONS/RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Mike Lowry (PW) (Entered: 05/24/1996)

May 23, 1996

May 23, 1996

6

SUMMONS/RETURN OF SERVICE unexecuted − attempted as to defendant Chase Riveland (no response to waiver) (PW) (Entered: 05/24/1996)

May 23, 1996

May 23, 1996

7

ORDER Denying Motion For Reconsideration And Denying Motion To Amend by Judge Robert H. Whaley denying motion for reconsideration of the court's order to dismiss plaintiffs complaint in part with prejudice [4−1], denying motion to amend the complaint with supplemental pleadings [4−2] (cc: all counsel) (PW) (Entered: 05/30/1996)

May 29, 1996

May 29, 1996

8

NOTICE by plaintiff Muhammad Shabazz Farrakhan of change of address (PW) (Entered: 06/03/1996)

June 3, 1996

June 3, 1996

9

MOTION by defendants for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (PW) (Entered: 06/10/1996)

June 10, 1996

June 10, 1996

10

Memorandum of authorities by defendants in support of motion for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) [9−1] (PW) (Entered: 06/10/1996)

June 10, 1996

June 10, 1996

11

Notice by defendants of hearing setting motion for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) [9−1] (w/o oral argument 7/8/96 ) (PW) (Entered: 06/10/1996)

June 10, 1996

June 10, 1996

12

Proof of service by defendants of: # 9 −11 (PW) (Entered: 06/10/1996)

June 10, 1996

June 10, 1996

Law Clerk assigned to case is LT (NS) (Entered: 06/13/1996)

June 13, 1996

June 13, 1996

13

MOTION by plaintiff Muhammad Shabazz Farrakhan to transfer case (PW) (Entered: 06/14/1996)

June 14, 1996

June 14, 1996

14

Affidavit in support of motion to transfer case (PW) (Entered: 06/14/1996)

June 14, 1996

June 14, 1996

15

Memorandum by defendant in opposition to motion to transfer case [13−1] (PW) (Entered: 06/25/1996)

June 25, 1996

June 25, 1996

17

Stipulated MOTION for continuance of hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss (PW) (Entered: 06/28/1996)

June 28, 1996

June 28, 1996

18

Status Conference Certificate (PW) (Entered: 06/28/1996)

June 28, 1996

June 28, 1996

18

Discovery Plan pur. to FRCP 26(F) (PW) (Entered: 06/28/1996)

June 28, 1996

June 28, 1996

19

Notice by defendants of hearing setting motion for continuance of hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss (07/03/96) [17−1] (PW) (Entered: 07/01/1996)

July 1, 1996

July 1, 1996

20

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley granting motion for continuance of hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss [17−1] setting motion for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) [9−1] ; w/o oral argument 8/19/96 (cc: all counsel) (PW) (Entered: 07/08/1996)

July 8, 1996

July 8, 1996

TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE HELD Hrg Location: S/RHW; Tape 96−RHW−4, 5207−5714 court reporter (PW) (Entered: 07/18/1996)

July 17, 1996

July 17, 1996

21

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley ; Telephone status conf reset 8:00 8/28/96 Spokane, WA setting motion to transfer case [13−1] 8:00 8/28/96 with status conference (cc: all counsel) (PW) (Entered: 07/31/1996)

July 31, 1996

July 31, 1996

Status Conference Notice ;telephonic status conf 9:00 8/28/96 Spokane, WA (NS) (Entered: 08/05/1996)

Aug. 5, 1996

Aug. 5, 1996

22

MOTION and notice by plaintiff Muhammad Shabazz Farrakhan for enlargement of time to file answer to defendant's motion to dismiss complaint (PW) (Entered: 08/20/1996)

Aug. 19, 1996

Aug. 19, 1996

23

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley (granting motion for enlargement of time to file answer to defendant's motion to dismiss complaint [22−1]; pltfs shall file resp by 9/9/96; setting motion for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) [9−1] ; w/o oral argument 9/20/96 ; Telephone status conf set 8:30 9/26/96 Spokane, WA setting motion to transfer case [13−1] 8:30 9/26/96) (cc: all counsel) (LAM) (Entered: 08/27/1996)

Aug. 26, 1996

Aug. 26, 1996

24

Response by plaintiff Muhammad Shabazz Farrakhan to motion for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) [9−1] (PW) (Entered: 09/09/1996)

Sept. 9, 1996

Sept. 9, 1996

25

MOTION by plaintiff Muhammad Shabazz Farrakhan for determination of a class in connection with challenge to State of Washington's voting qualifications (PW) (Entered: 09/12/1996)

Sept. 11, 1996

Sept. 11, 1996

26

MOTION by plaintiff Muhammad Shabazz Farrakhan for appointment of counsel (PW) (Entered: 09/16/1996)

Sept. 13, 1996

Sept. 13, 1996

27

Memorandum by plaintiff in support of motion for appointment of counsel [26−1], motion for determination of a class in connection with challenge to State of Washington's voting qualifications [25−1] (PW) (Entered: 09/16/1996)

Sept. 13, 1996

Sept. 13, 1996

28

Notice by plaintiff of hearing setting motion for appointment of counsel [26−1] (w/o oral argument 9/20/96 ), setting motion for determination of a class in connection with challenge to State of Washington's voting qualifications [25−1] (w/o oral argument 9/20/96 ) (PW) (Entered: 09/16/1996)

Sept. 13, 1996

Sept. 13, 1996

End file #2 (PW) (Entered: 10/02/1996)

Sept. 13, 1996

Sept. 13, 1996

29

Reply Memorandum by defendant to Memorandum in Opposition to motion for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) [9−1] (PW) (Entered: 09/17/1996)

Sept. 16, 1996

Sept. 16, 1996

30

Proof of service by defendant of: # 29 (PW) (Entered: 09/17/1996)

Sept. 16, 1996

Sept. 16, 1996

31

MOTION by plaintiff for three judge panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2284 and 42 U.S.c. 1973(c) (PW) (Entered: 09/17/1996)

Sept. 16, 1996

Sept. 16, 1996

32

Memorandum by plaintiff in support of motion for three judge panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2284 and 42 U.S.c. 1973(c) [31−1] (PW) (Entered: 09/17/1996)

Sept. 16, 1996

Sept. 16, 1996

34

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley (in light of pltf's recent filings, the hrg dates for all motions currently pending before the Court are stricken and reset for hrg w/o oral arg on 10/11/96; setting motion for three judge panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2284 and 42 U.S.c. 1973(c) [31−1] ; w/o oral argument 10/11/96, setting motion for appointment of counsel [26−1] ; w/o oral argument 10/11/96, setting motion for determination of a class in connection with challenge to State of Washington's voting qualifications [25−1] ; w/o oral argument 10/11/96, setting motion to transfer case [13−1] ; w/o oral argument 10/11/96, setting motion for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) [9−1] ; w/o oral argument 10/11/96) (cc: all counsel) (LAM) (Entered: 09/19/1996)

Sept. 18, 1996

Sept. 18, 1996

35

Memorandum by defendants in opposition to motion for three judge panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2284 and 42 U.S.c. 1973(c) [31−1], motion for appointment of counsel [26−1], motion for determination of a class in connection with challenge to State of Washington's voting qualifications [25−1] (PW) (Entered: 09/25/1996)

Sept. 24, 1996

Sept. 24, 1996

36

Proof of service by defendants of: #29 &35 (PW) (Entered: 10/15/1996)

Oct. 15, 1996

Oct. 15, 1996

37

ORDER Granting Plaintiffs' Motion For Appointment Of Counsel, Inter Alia by Judge Robert H. Whaley granting motion for appointment of counsel, appointing Denis Cronin of the Maxey Law Offices for plaintiffs [26−1] vacating [13−1] motion to transfer case vacating [25−1] motion for determination of a class in connection with challenge to State of Washington's voting qualifications vacating [9−1] motion for dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) vacating [31−1] motion for three judge panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2284 and 42 U.S.c. 1973(c) with leave to renew; telep status conference set 2/25/97 2:00 p.m., court to initiate call (cc: all counsel) (PW) (Entered: 01/29/1997)

Jan. 29, 1997

Jan. 29, 1997

TELEPHONE STATUS CONFERENCE HELD S/RHW; Tape−97−RHW−2, 1900−2518 (PW) (Entered: 02/26/1997)

Feb. 25, 1997

Feb. 25, 1997

38

Status Conference Order by Judge Robert H. Whaley: tele status conference set 10:00 4/18/97; pltfs' oral motion for an extension of the response deadlines for defts' motions granted to 4/30/97 (cc:all counsel) (PW) (Entered: 02/26/1997)

Feb. 26, 1997

Feb. 26, 1997

39

MOTION by plaintiffs to amend pro se complaint (PW) (Entered: 04/18/1997)

April 16, 1997

April 16, 1997

Proposed First Amended Complaint re: motion to amend pro se complaint [39−1] (PW) (Entered: 04/18/1997)

April 16, 1997

April 16, 1997

41

Notice by plaintiff of hearing setting motion to amend pro se complaint [39−1] (tele argument) 9:00 5/29/97 (PW) Modified on 05/09/1997 (Entered: 04/18/1997)

April 16, 1997

April 16, 1997

42

MOTION by plaintiffs for extension of deadlines (PW) Modified on 05/09/1997 (Entered: 04/18/1997)

April 16, 1997

April 16, 1997

43

Proof of service of: #39−42 (PW) Modified on 05/09/1997 (Entered: 04/18/1997)

April 16, 1997

April 16, 1997

40

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT for damages, attorneys' fees, declaratory and injunctive relief [1−1] (PW) (Entered: 05/09/1997)

April 16, 1997

April 16, 1997

44

Notice for plaintiffs Muhammad Shabazz Farrakhan, plaintiff Al−Kareem Shadeed, plaintiff Michael D Adams, plaintiff David Conyers, plaintiff George Mitchell, plaintiff Marcus Price, plaintiff Ramon Barrientes, plaintiff Michael Aivarado, plaintiff Tracy Huitt, plaintiff Tim Schaff, plaintiff Richard Snell, plaintiff Clifton Briceno, plaintiff Ernest S Walker of association of attorney Alan Lynn McNeil (PW) Modified on 05/09/1997 (Entered: 04/18/1997)

April 18, 1997

April 18, 1997

45

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley Pltfs may file objections or other comments regarding Pltf's motion to amend pro se complaint on or before 5/8/97; if no objections are filed, court will consider motion on 5/29/97 (cc: all counsel) (PW) Modified on 05/09/1997 (Entered: 04/18/1997)

April 18, 1997

April 18, 1997

TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE HELD Hrg Location: S/RHW; Tape 97−RHW−8 2028−2612; Order Forthcoming (LAM) (Entered: 04/21/1997)

April 18, 1997

April 18, 1997

47

Objections by plaintiff Michael Aivarado to motion to amend complaint [39−1] (PW) Modified on 05/09/1997 (Entered: 05/09/1997)

May 8, 1997

May 8, 1997

Law Clerk assigned to case is RP (DC) (Entered: 05/13/1997)

May 13, 1997

May 13, 1997

48

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley (in anticipation of the parties' agreement re the prop amd cmp, the tele hrg on the mtn to amend pro se cmp (Ct. Rec. 39) is canceled; amended complaint to be filed by 5/27/97; obj or acquiescence in the filing thereof to be filed by 5/29/97, or may be communicated to Court in the telephonic presence of opposing counsel; in the event that the parties do not reach an agreement on the filing of the prop amd cmp, the court will resched oral arg on pltf's mtn) (cc: all counsel, pltf Barrientes, Briceno, Price &Schaaf) (LAM) Modified on 05/20/1997 (Entered: 05/20/1997)

May 19, 1997

May 19, 1997

49

Objections by plaintiff Marcus Price to dismissal as a plaintiff [48−2] (PW) (Entered: 05/22/1997)

May 22, 1997

May 22, 1997

50

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT for Damages, Attorneys' Fees, Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Attorney Fees by plaintiff (terming Al−Kareem Shadeed, Michael D Adams, David Conyers, George Mitchell, Michael Aivarado, Tracy Huitt, Richard Snell, Mike Lowry, Chase Riveland; adding Al−Kareem Shaheed, Carl Maxey, State of Washington, Gary Locke, Joseph Lehman, Ralph Munro) (LAM) (Entered: 05/28/1997)

May 27, 1997

May 27, 1997

51

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley granting motion to amend pro se complaint [39−1]; Clerk directed to file 2nd amend compl; pltfs shall serve 2nd amnd compl in accordance with FRCP and LR; Once this has been done &responsive pldg has been filed by defts, Court will sched stat conf; Clerk directed to provide copies of this Order to pltfs Barrientes, Briceno, Price &Schaaf; Pltfs are advised that the Court will treat plfts' atty Dennis Cronin as pltfs' sole representative in future proceedings; Hence, unless otherwise ordered by Court, copies of future Orders will be sent only to Mr Cronin (cc: all counsel, Barrientes, Briceno, Price &Schaaf) (LAM) (Entered: 06/02/1997)

June 2, 1997

June 2, 1997

End file #3 (PW) (Entered: 06/23/1997)

June 2, 1997

June 2, 1997

52

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant State of WA, defendant Gary Locke, defendant Joseph Lehman, defendant Ralph Munro ; Atty Daniel John Judge, Jeffrey Todd Even appearing (PW) (Entered: 06/20/1997)

June 20, 1997

June 20, 1997

53

MOTION by defendants for dismissal for failure to state a claim (PW) (Entered: 06/20/1997)

June 20, 1997

June 20, 1997

54

Memorandum by defendants in support of motion for dismissal for failure to state a claim [53−1] (PW) (Entered: 06/20/1997)

June 20, 1997

June 20, 1997

55

Notice by defendants of hearing setting motion for dismissal for failure to state a claim [53−1] (w/o oral argument 7/23/97 ) (PW) (Entered: 06/20/1997)

June 20, 1997

June 20, 1997

56

MOTION by defendants to file overlength brief (PW) (Entered: 06/20/1997)

June 20, 1997

June 20, 1997

57

Affidavit of Daniel J Judge regarding motion to file overlength brief (PW) (Entered: 06/20/1997)

June 20, 1997

June 20, 1997

58

Notice by defendant of hearing setting motion to file overlength brief [56−1] (w/o oral argument 7/23/97 ) (PW) (Entered: 06/20/1997)

June 20, 1997

June 20, 1997

59

Proof of service by defendants of: #52−58 (PW) (Entered: 06/20/1997)

June 20, 1997

June 20, 1997

60

MOTION and Affidavit for continuance of filing plaintiffs' reply brief (LE) (Entered: 06/25/1997)

June 24, 1997

June 24, 1997

61

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley GRANTING MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF FILING PLAINTIFFS' REPLY BRIEFS [60−1] (the new filing deadline shall be July 11, 1997) (cc: all counsel) (LE) (Entered: 06/26/1997)

June 26, 1997

June 26, 1997

63

Stipulation to an Agreed Order Extending Time of Filing Plaintiffs' Response Brief (LE) (Entered: 07/11/1997)

July 10, 1997

July 10, 1997

Proposed Agreed Order re: stipulation [63−1] (LE) (Entered: 07/11/1997)

July 10, 1997

July 10, 1997

64

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley (granting stipulation to extend time of filing plaintiffs' response brief) [63−1] (cc: all counsel) (LE) (Entered: 07/15/1997)

July 15, 1997

July 15, 1997

65

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley (re motion for dismissal for failure to state a claim [53−1] ; 7/23/97 hrg date is stricken; mtn reset w/o oral argument 9/2/97) (cc: all counsel) (LAM) (Entered: 07/28/1997)

July 25, 1997

July 25, 1997

66

MOTION by plaintiffs for leave to amend complaint pursuant to FRCP 15(a) , and to substitute parties pursuant to FRCP 25(a) and Request for Oral Argument Pursuant to LR 7.1(h) (LE) (Entered: 08/07/1997)

Aug. 7, 1997

Aug. 7, 1997

67

Memorandum of Law by plaintiffs in support of motion for leave to amend complaint pursuant to FRCP 15(a) [66−1], and motion to substitute parties pursuant to FRCP 25(a) [66−2] (LE) (Entered: 08/07/1997)

Aug. 7, 1997

Aug. 7, 1997

68

MOTION by plaintiffs to extend time for hearing , and to file overlength brief pursuant to LR 7.1(f) (LE) (Entered: 08/07/1997)

Aug. 7, 1997

Aug. 7, 1997

69

Notice by plaintiff of hearing setting motion for leave to amend complaint pursuant to FRCP 15(a) [66−1] (w/o oral argument 9/10/97 ) (LE) (Entered: 08/08/1997)

Aug. 8, 1997

Aug. 8, 1997

69

Notice by plaintiff setting hearing on motion for leave to amend complaint pursuant to FRCP 15(a) [66−1] (w/o oral argument 9/10/97 ), and to substitute parties pursuant to FRCP 25(a) [66−2] (w/o oral argument 9/10/97 ) (LE) (Entered: 08/08/1997)

Aug. 8, 1997

Aug. 8, 1997

70

Notice by plaintiff setting hearing on motion to extend time for hearing [68−1] (w/o oral argument 9/10/97 ), and to file overlength brief pursuant to LR 7.1(f) [68−2] (w/o oral argument 9/10/97 ) (LE) (Entered: 08/08/1997)

Aug. 8, 1997

Aug. 8, 1997

71

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Whaley granting motion to extend time for hearing [68−1], granting motion to file overlength brief pursuant to LR 7.1(f) [68−2] re−setting motion for dismissal [53−1] with oral arg 1:00 10/17/97 Spokane, WA (cc: all counsel) (PW) (Entered: 09/02/1997)

Sept. 2, 1997

Sept. 2, 1997

72

Plaintiffs' Responsive Memorandum Of Authorities In Opposition To Defndant's Motion To Dismiss [53−1] (ECH) (Entered: 09/08/1997)

Sept. 5, 1997

Sept. 5, 1997

73

Plaintiffs' Third AMENDED COMPLAINT Adding New Plaintiff And New Cause Of Action re:complaint [50−1] (ECH) (Entered: 09/08/1997)

Sept. 5, 1997

Sept. 5, 1997

74

MOTION by defendants for extension of time to file response to motion for leave to file third amended complaint (LE) (Entered: 09/18/1997)

Sept. 18, 1997

Sept. 18, 1997

75

Affidavit of Daniel J. Judge regarding motion for extension of time to file response to motion for leave to file third amended complaint (LE) (Entered: 09/18/1997)

Sept. 18, 1997

Sept. 18, 1997

76

Proof of service by defendant of: #74−#75 and Proposed Order (LE) (Entered: 09/18/1997)

Sept. 18, 1997

Sept. 18, 1997

Proposed Order Granting Defendants' Motion for extension of time to file response to motion for leave to file third amended complaint [74−1] (LE) (Entered: 09/18/1997)

Sept. 18, 1997

Sept. 18, 1997

77

Response by defendant to motion for leave to amend complaint pursuant to FRCP 15(a) [66−1] (LE) (Entered: 09/26/1997)

Sept. 26, 1997

Sept. 26, 1997

78

Reply Memorandum by defendants re motion for dismissal for failure to state a claim [53−1] (LE) (Entered: 09/26/1997)

Sept. 26, 1997

Sept. 26, 1997

79

Proof of service by defendants of: #77 &#78 (LE) (Entered: 09/26/1997)

Sept. 26, 1997

Sept. 26, 1997

MINUTES: HEARING before RHW/SPO; court reporter Debra Clark; re Motion to Dismiss &Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint; Order forthcoming (LE) (Entered: 10/20/1997)

Oct. 17, 1997

Oct. 17, 1997

81

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO AMEND by Judge Robert H. Whaley (defts' motion for dismissal for failure to state a claim [53−1] is granted in part and denied in part; defts' motion is denied as to pltfs' vote denial claim; pltfs' vote dilution claim and all of pltfs' constitutional claims are dismissed; the parties are instructed to note that only Farrakhan, Shaheed, Price, Barrientes, Schaaf and Briceno remain as plaintiffs in this action; motion for leave to amend complaint pursuant to FRCP 15(a) [66−1] is granted in part and denied in part; pltfs' motion to add Bevan Maxey is granted, nunc pro tunc, for the purposes of appeal; [66−2]; pltfs' motion to add a due process claim is denied [66−1];) terminating party Bevin Maxey, party Carl Maxey, party Ernest S Walker, COB: 155−41 (cc: all counsel) (LE) (Entered: 11/14/1997)

Nov. 13, 1997

Nov. 13, 1997

82

MOTION by defendants for Leave to File Interlocutory Appeal and to stay , and Alternative Motion for extension of time (LE) (Entered: 12/01/1997)

Nov. 28, 1997

Nov. 28, 1997

83

Memorandum of Authorities by defendants in support of Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Interlocutory Appeal [82−1] and stay [82−2], and alternative motion for extension of time [82−3] (LE) (Entered: 12/01/1997)

Nov. 28, 1997

Nov. 28, 1997

84

Affidavit of Daniel J. Judge regarding motion for Leave to File Interlocutory Appeal, regarding motion to stay, regarding motion for extension of time (LE) (Entered: 12/01/1997)

Nov. 28, 1997

Nov. 28, 1997

85

Notice by defendants setting hearing on motion for Leave to File Interlocutory Appeal [82−1] (w/o oral argument 12/30/97), setting motion to stay [82−2] (w/o oral argument 12/30/97), setting alternative motion for extension of time [82−3] (w/o oral argument 12/30/97) (LE) (Entered: 12/01/1997)

Nov. 28, 1997

Nov. 28, 1997

Proposed Order Granting Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Interlocutory Appeal [82−1] and stay [82−2] submitted by defendants (LE) (Entered: 12/01/1997)

Nov. 28, 1997

Nov. 28, 1997

86

Proof of service by defendants of: #82−#85 &Proposed Order (LE) (Entered: 12/01/1997)

Nov. 28, 1997

Nov. 28, 1997

87

Responsive Memorandum by plaintiffs in opposition to defendants' Motion for Leave to File Interlocutory Appeal [82−1], and stay [82−2] (LE) (Entered: 12/11/1997)

Dec. 11, 1997

Dec. 11, 1997

88

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL by Judge Robert H. Whaley (granting motion for Leave to File Interlocutory Appeal [82−1], granting motion to stay [82−2], striking motion for extension of time [82−3]) (cc: all counsel) (LE) (Entered: 01/06/1998)

Jan. 6, 1998

Jan. 6, 1998

Case Details

State / Territory: Washington

Case Type(s):

Criminal Justice (Other)

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Feb. 2, 1996

Closing Date: 2011

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Group of individuals convicted of felonies by the State of Washington, challenging state voter disenfranchisement provision

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

Legal Services/Legal Aid

NAACP Legal Defense Fund

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Unknown

Defendants

Secretary of State and Chief Election Officer for the State of Washington, State

Department of Corrections of the State of Washington, State

Governor of the State of Washington, State

National Rifle Association, Inc., Private Entity/Person

State of Washington, State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1981

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None