Case: Valdivia v. Davis

2:94-cv-00671 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Filed Date: May 2, 1994

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 2, 1994, a group of California parolees filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the State of California. Specifically, plaintiffs challenged California's parole revocation procedures under the Fourteenth Amendment and alleged that the state violated their due process rights.On December 1, 1994, the Court (Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton) certified a class defined as California parolees (1) who are at lar…

On May 2, 1994, a group of California parolees filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the State of California. Specifically, plaintiffs challenged California's parole revocation procedures under the Fourteenth Amendment and alleged that the state violated their due process rights.

On December 1, 1994, the Court (Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton) certified a class defined as California parolees (1) who are at large; (2) who are in custody as alleged parole violators awaiting revocation of their parole status; or (3) who are in custody having been found in violation of parole.

For the next several years, the parties engaged in prolonged discovery. On June 13, 2002, the Court granted partial summary judgment to plaintiffs, holding that California's parole revocation system failed to safeguard plaintiffs' due process rights under Morrissey, 408 U.S. 481, 487-90 (1972). The Court's order emphasized that, in order to ensure adequate due process, probable cause hearings must be both accurate and promptly-held. Valdivia v. Davis, 206 F.Supp. 2d 1068 (E.D. Cal. 2002). Four months later, on October 18, 2002, the Court ordered defendants to file a proposed remedial plan to address the identified due process violations.

On March 17, 2003, defendants presented their proposed Valdivia Remedial Plan (VRP), which added a preliminary Probable Cause Hearing (PCH) to the parole revocation process. Plaintiffs filed objections to the VRP related to the timing and substance of the PCH. On July 23, 2003, the Court set forth the following minimum standards for hearing: that they be conducted by a neutral decision-maker, that parolees have an opportunity to present documentary evidence and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and that the hearing's results be documented in a written report. Valdivia v. Davis, July 23, 2003.

In November 2003, the parties filed a stipulated order for permanent injunctive relief, which the Court approved in March 2004; this injunction included for alternative sanctions for minor parole violations, a PCH within 10 days after a parolee is notified of charges, a revocation hearing no later than 35 days after a parole hold is placed, and appointment of attorneys to represent all parolees facing revocation proceedings.

The parties then fought for years over compliance issues:

  • Defendants moved, successfully, for the appointment of a Special Master, and on December 16, 2005, the Court appointed Chase Riveland to the position. The Special Master has subsequently filed thirteen reports with the court addressing the implementation of the VRP.
  • On June 9, 2005, the Court found defendants in violation of the permanent injunction by virtue of a policy decision to prohibit the consideration and use of electronic in-home detention (EID) and substance abuse treatment control units as sanctions in lieu of parole revocation.
  • On August 31, 2005, the Court ordered that parolees' counsel receive access to information in their client's parole field files without any limitations or restrictions on disclosing the information to the parolee based on perceived risk of harm to the parolee's mental health.
  • On September 15, 2006, the Court ordered the case related to L.H. v. Schwarzenegger, 2:06-cv-02042-LKK-GGH (E.D. Cal.).
  • On November 13, 2006, the Court ordered implementation of the recommendations contained in the Special Master's 9/14/06 report, including improving their information systems and maintaining the infrastructure needed for self-monitoring. The Court noted that the information system changes should be coordinated with the changes already underway pursuant to a court order from Armstrong v. Schwarzenegger, 4:94-cv-02307-CW (N.D. Cal.).
  • On April 4, 2007, the Court entered a stipulated order requiring defendants to take certain steps to ensure timely compliance with the remedial sanctions provisions of the permanent injunction. These steps included, among others, adding more beds as part of the In Custody Drug Treatment Program (ICDTP), increasing the number of operational EID units, as well as distributing information regarding their updated policies and procedures.
  • On January 14, 2008, the Court ordered that defendants undertake, in consultation with plaintiff attorneys and the special master, efforts to afford due process to parolees who appear too mentally ill to participate in parole revocation proceedings.
  • On March 25, 2008, the Court adopted the report and recommendations of the Special Master, which held that use of hearsay evidence in parole revocation proceedings would be limited by parolee's confrontation rights as established by controlling law. Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger, 548 F.Supp.2d 852 (E.D. Cal. 2008). This decision was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. 603 F.Supp.2d 1275 (E.D. Cal 2009).
  • On August 7, 2008, the Court ordered specific procedures for Defendants upon taking custody of parolees who may have mental health problems. This order was prompted by a motion submitted jointly by plaintiff classes in this case and Coleman v. Schwarzenegger (see PC-CA-0002).
  • On April 12, 2010, the district court found Defendants in substantial compliance with the injunction's requirements regarding designation of information as confidential, consideration of remedial sanctions at each step, remedial sanctions order requirements for female parolees, and out of county transfers.
  • On December 2, 2010 the district court held that the defendants had met the requirements of the court's April 4, 2007 order and the return to custody assessment step of the revocation process for all facilities, including Los Angeles County Jail. Moreover, the court found defendants in violation of the November 13, 2006 order concerning information system changes. Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger, 2010 WL 4983396 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2010).
  • On May 13, 2011, the Court found the Defendants in substantial compliance with the injunction's requirements that Plaintiffs' counsel have access to the information reasonably necessary to monitor compliance and that Deputy Commissioners shall not have authority to increase the Return to Custody Assessment at the PCH.

On November 4, 2008, California voters passed Proposition 9, which altered a number of the parameters for the parole revocation systems that had been mandated by the VRP. Plaintiffs moved to enjoin enforcement of portions of Proposition 9 as conflicting with the VRP; defendants cross-moved to modify the VRP to conform to the new law. After hearing, the Court denied the defendants' motion and granted plaintiffs' motion in substantial part. Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger, 603 F. Supp. 2d 1275 (E.D. Cal. 2009). On appeal, the Ninth Circuit held that the court erred by failing to make an express determination that Proposition 9 violated constitutional rights or that the injunction was necessary to remedy a constitutional violation. Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger, 599 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2010). On remand, the Court determined several aspects of Proposition 9 were unconstitutional and ultimately granted plaintiffs' motion to enforce the VRP, with some modifications. Valdivia v. Brown, 2012 WL 219342 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2012).

In April of 2011, California transferred substantial responsibilities for the parole system to county authorities and state courts. On July 2, 2013, the Court found that the statutory realigned rendered this case moot and directed the parties to file their final motions for fees and costs. On December 17, 2013, the Ninth Circuit dismissed all pending appeals as moot.

This case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Timothy Shoffner (10/12/2012)

Tifani Sadek (10/2/2014)

Related Cases

L.H. v. Schwarzennegger, Eastern District of California (2006)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4161514/parties/valdivia-v-schwarzenegger/


Judge(s)

Hawkins, Michael Daly (Arizona)

Hollows, Gregory G. (California)

Karlton, Lawrence K. (California)

Noonan, John T. Jr. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Aljens, Erika C. (Pennsylvania)

Baldwin, Holly MacLeish (California)

Bien, Michael W. (California)

Burrell, Susan L. (California)

Comiskey, Paul Wayne (California)

Galvan, Ernest (California)

Judge(s)

Hawkins, Michael Daly (Arizona)

Hollows, Gregory G. (California)

Karlton, Lawrence K. (California)

Noonan, John T. Jr. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Aljens, Erika C. (Pennsylvania)

Baldwin, Holly MacLeish (California)

Bien, Michael W. (California)

Burrell, Susan L. (California)

Comiskey, Paul Wayne (California)

Galvan, Ernest (California)

Grunfeld, Gay Crosthwait (California)

Herman, Richard P. (California)

Holtz, Geoffrey Thomas (California)

Huey, Shirley (California)

Kennard, Karen (California)

Landon, Alexander L. (California)

Miller, Andrea M. (California)

Morris, Maria V. (Alabama)

Nelson, Laurel M. (California)

Palumbo, Kristen A. (California)

Pavone, Benjamin Laurence (California)

Perrello, Stephen J. Jr. (California)

Prescott, David (California)

Rifkin, Lori Ellen (California)

Rosen, Sanford Jay (California)

Specter, Donald H. (California)

Stewart, Loren Grey (California)

Walczak, Kenneth M. (California)

Wallace, Jackson (California)

Willits, Mari L. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Acquisto, Stephen (California)

Anderson, Robert R. (California)

Cashdollar, William V. (California)

Devencenzi, Jessica (California)

Grunder, Frances T. (California)

Gruwell, Paul B. (California)

Humes, James M. (California)

Jacob, Renju Palanilkumuryil (California)

Johnson, S. Anne (California)

Lee, Michael Gregory (California)

Lockyer, Bill (California)

Manian, Maya (California)

Mello, Paul Brian (California)

Nussbaum, Peter David (California)

Oliver-Thompson, Megan (California)

Patterson, Thomas S. (California)

Rice, Benjamin Terrence (California)

Schneider, Walter R. (California)

Tebrock, Katherine (California)

Whitney, Vickie Pochelle (California)

Wolff, Samantha D. (California)

Other Attorney(s)

Adams, Mark F. (California)

Flood, Valerie D (California)

McCabe, Michael J. (California)

Philipsborn, John Timothy (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Campbell, Nancy (Washington)

Riveland, Chase (Washington)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:94-cv-00671

08-15889

12-15457

12-15492

95-80113

Docket [PACER]

Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger

April 23, 2014

April 23, 2014

Docket
1

2:94-cv-00671

CIVIL COMPLAINT-CLASS ACTION FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND FOR DAMAGES

Cervantes v. California

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

Complaint
76

2:94-cv-00671

Order [certifying P class]

Cervantes v. California

Nov. 29, 1994

Nov. 29, 1994

Order/Opinion
540

2:94-cv-00671

Order {Denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss}

Sept. 8, 2000

Sept. 8, 2000

Order/Opinion
664

2:94-cv-00671

Order [granting partial summary judgment to Pl.]

June 13, 2002

June 13, 2002

Order/Opinion
709

2:94-cv-00671

Order [certifying Def's interlocutory appeal re: 6/13/02 order]

Aug. 29, 2002

Aug. 29, 2002

Order/Opinion
714

2:94-cv-00671

FIFTH AMENDED CIVIL CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Valdivia v. Wilson

Sept. 13, 2002

Sept. 13, 2002

Complaint
742

2:94-cv-00671

Order [that Def. serve proposed remedial plan]

Oct. 17, 2002

Oct. 17, 2002

Order/Opinion
796

2:94-cv-00671

Order [ruling on P's objections to D's proposed remedial plan]

July 23, 2003

July 23, 2003

Order/Opinion

2:94-cv-00671

Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunctive Relief

Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger

Nov. 19, 2003

Nov. 19, 2003

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4161514/valdivia-v-schwarzenegger/

Last updated Jan. 18, 2023, 3:26 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link

LODGED Order after hearing by plaintiffs (old) (Entered: 09/21/1994)

Sept. 20, 1991

Sept. 20, 1991

1

COMPLAINT before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton; Case referred to Magistrate Gregory G Hollows; Summons issued; fee paid; Receipt # 158131; jury demand by plaintiff; Notice re: Consent forms sent (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

2

ORDER setting scheduling conference for 10:30 am on 8/1/94 before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

3

MOTION for preliminary injunction by plaintiff Williams motion to be heard by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

4

MOTION for temporary restraining order by plaintiff Cervantes and for preliminary injunction by plaintiff motion to be heard by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

5

POINTS AND AUTHORITIES by plaintiffs in support of motion for temporary restraining order and [4−1], of motion [4−2] for preliminary injunction by plaintiff Cervantes and motion preliminary injunction by plaintiff Williams [3−1] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

6

DECLARATION of Steven G Williams in support of motion for temporary restraining order [4−1], motion for preliminary injunction [4−2] [3−1] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

7

DECLARATION of Attonrey Stephen J Perrello Jr in support re motion for preliminary injunction by plaintiff Williams [3−1] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

8

DECLARATION of attorney Paul Comiskey in support of motion for temporary restraining order by plaintiff Cervantes [4−1], and motions for preliminary injunction by plaintiffs [4−2] [3−1] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

9

DECLARATION of Vincent Cervantes in support of motion for temporary restraining order [4−1] and motion for preliminary injunction [4−2] (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

10

MINUTES of 5/2/94 before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton: Setting hearing on motion for temporary restraining order [4−1] and preliminary injunction [4−2] [3−1] by plaintiff's for 9:15 am on 5/19/94 (old) (Entered: 05/04/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

LODGED order on motions for restraining order and injunction by plaintiffs (old) (Entered: 05/02/1994)

May 2, 1994

May 2, 1994

11

ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton ORDERING the court will construe pltfs' memoranda of points and authorities in support of TRO as their moving papers on the motion for a preliminary injunction; All opposition to the granting of the motion must be filed by 5/13/94; Reply brief, if any, to be filed by 5/17/94; Hearing on motion is SET for 5/19/94 at 9:15 in ctrm 1; The parties are directed to address in their briefs the effect ot he Younger doctrine on the availability of injunctive relief in this case (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 05/05/1994)

May 5, 1994

May 5, 1994

12

LODGED Document order on motions for restraining order and injunction by pltfs−NOT TO BE SIGNED (old) (Entered: 05/05/1994)

May 5, 1994

May 5, 1994

13

NOTICE pursuant to Local Rule 231(D)(3) by defendant setting hearing for 5/19/94 at 9:00 am on motion for preliminary injunction before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 05/11/1994)

May 10, 1994

May 10, 1994

14

OPPOSITION by defendants to motion for temporary restraining order [4−1] and motions for preliminary injunction [3−1][4−2] by plaintiffs (old) (Entered: 05/13/1994)

May 13, 1994

May 13, 1994

15

REPLY MEMORANDUM on motions for preliminary injunctions by plaintiffs (old) (Entered: 05/17/1994)

May 17, 1994

May 17, 1994

16

DECLARATION of Stephen J Perrello, Jr in support of motions for temporary restraining order [4−1] and motions for preliminary injunction [4−2] [3−1] (old) (Entered: 05/17/1994)

May 17, 1994

May 17, 1994

17

MOTION in limine to preclude oral testimony and for other relief by pltfs motion to be heard on 5/19/94 at 9:15 by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 05/17/1994)

May 17, 1994

May 17, 1994

18

DECLARATION of Michael Connolly in support of opposition to motions for preliminary injunction [14−1] (old) (Entered: 05/18/1994)

May 17, 1994

May 17, 1994

19

OPPOSITION by defendants State of CA, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez to motion in limine to preclude oral testimony and for other relief by pltfs [17−1] (old) (Entered: 05/19/1994)

May 18, 1994

May 18, 1994

20

RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS REPLY by defendants State of CA, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez to response to motion in limine to preclude oral testimony and for relief [17−1] (old) (Entered: 05/19/1994)

May 18, 1994

May 18, 1994

21

MINUTES before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton: Hearing on pltf's motions for preliminary injunctions (4−1][4−2][3−1] Motions DENIED; Deft to prepare order; Documents and exhibits filed in court (old) (Entered: 05/20/1994)

May 19, 1994

May 19, 1994

22

SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION of Issac Cubillos for preliminary injunctions (old) (Entered: 05/20/1994)

May 19, 1994

May 19, 1994

34

SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION of Stephen J Perrello, Jr for preliminary injunctions (old) Modified on 06/14/1994 (Entered: 06/09/1994)

May 19, 1994

May 19, 1994

23

TRANSCRIPT of Judges Decision on 5/19/94 (old) (Entered: 05/24/1994)

May 23, 1994

May 23, 1994

24

NOTICE of lodging of proposed order by defendants State of California, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez (old) (Entered: 05/25/1994)

May 24, 1994

May 24, 1994

25

ANSWER and demand for jury trial by defendants (old) (Entered: 05/25/1994)

May 24, 1994

May 24, 1994

LODGED order after hearing on plaintiffs motions for preliminary injunctions by defendants (old) (Entered: 05/25/1994)

May 24, 1994

May 24, 1994

26

NOTICE by paintiffs Vincent Cervantes, Steven G Williams of partial transcript of 5/19/94 (old) (Entered: 06/02/1994)

May 31, 1994

May 31, 1994

27

CONDITIONAL MOTION by plaintiffs for hearing and argument on order denying motions for preliminary injunctions (old) (Entered: 06/02/1994)

May 31, 1994

May 31, 1994

28

MEMORANDUM by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes, Steven G Williams in support of motion by plaintiffs for hearing and argument on order denying motions for preliminary injunctions [27−1] (old) (Entered: 06/02/1994)

May 31, 1994

May 31, 1994

29

DECLARATION of Attorney Stephen J Perrello Jr in opposition to lodged proposed Order (on settlement of order denying motions) submitted by defendants (old) (Entered: 06/02/1994)

May 31, 1994

May 31, 1994

30

OPPOSITION by defendants to motion by plaintiffs for hearing and argument on proposed order denying motions for preliminary injunctions [27−1] (old) (Entered: 06/03/1994)

June 2, 1994

June 2, 1994

31

FURTHER OPPOSITION by defendants to motion by plaintiffs for hearing and argument on order denying motions for preliminary injunctions [27−1] (old) (Entered: 06/08/1994)

June 6, 1994

June 6, 1994

32

ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton DENYING motions for preliminary injunction by plaintiff [4−2] [3−1] and ORDERING the court emphasizes that its order is limited to the motion before it and is issued without prejudice to any future motions by either party; The plaintiffs' Conditional Motion for hearing and Argument is therefore MOOT (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 06/08/1994)

June 8, 1994

June 8, 1994

33

LODGED Document by defendants of order after hearing on plaintiffs' motions for preliminary injunctions−NOT TO BE SIGNED by LKK (old) (Entered: 06/08/1994)

June 8, 1994

June 8, 1994

35

MOTION by defendants to stay the damages portion and the equitable portion of the case motion to be heard by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton on 7/18/94 at 10:00am (old) (Entered: 06/15/1994)

June 14, 1994

June 14, 1994

36

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to dismiss by defendants motion to be heard on 7/18/94 at 10:00 by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 06/16/1994)

June 15, 1994

June 15, 1994

37

MOTION to continue by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams ; motion to be heard on 07/18/94 at 10:00am by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)

July 5, 1994

July 5, 1994

38

RESPONSE by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams to motion to dismiss by defendants [36−1] and motion by defendants to stay the damages portion and the equitable portion of the case [35−1] (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)

July 5, 1994

July 5, 1994

39

MOTION to amend complaint by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams ; motion to be heard on 09/06/94 at 10:00am by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)

July 5, 1994

July 5, 1994

40

DECLARATION of Stephen J Perrello Jr In Support of motion to continue by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [37−1] (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)

July 5, 1994

July 5, 1994

41

MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in support of motion to continue by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [37−1] (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)

July 5, 1994

July 5, 1994

42

MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in support of motion to amend complaint by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [39−1] (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)

July 5, 1994

July 5, 1994

43

MOTION to certify class action Rule 23 by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams ; motion to be heard on 09/06/94 at 10:00am by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)

July 5, 1994

July 5, 1994

44

MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in support of motion to certify class action Rule 23 by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [43−1] (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)

July 5, 1994

July 5, 1994

LODGED First Amended Civil Complaint Class Action for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (old) (Entered: 07/05/1994)

July 5, 1994

July 5, 1994

46

REPLY by defendants to response to motion to dismiss by defendants [36−1] and motion to stay the damages portion and the equitable portion of the case [35−1] (old) (Entered: 07/08/1994)

July 6, 1994

July 6, 1994

45

OPPOSITION to motion to continue by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [37−1] by defendants (old) (Entered: 07/07/1994)

July 7, 1994

July 7, 1994

48

NOTICE by plaintiffs of motion for continuance LR 230 (e)(g) [37−1] (old) (Entered: 07/11/1994)

July 8, 1994

July 8, 1994

49

NOTICE by plaintiffs for leave to file amended complaint [39−1] (old) (Entered: 07/11/1994)

July 8, 1994

July 8, 1994

50

NOTICE by plaintiffs of motion for certification of class action (Rule 23) [43−1] (old) (Entered: 07/11/1994)

July 8, 1994

July 8, 1994

51

PROOF OF SERVICE by plaintiff of order setting status conference [2−1] (old) (Entered: 07/11/1994)

July 8, 1994

July 8, 1994

52

STATUS REPORT by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)

July 25, 1994

July 25, 1994

53

STATUS REPORT by defendants State of CA, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)

July 25, 1994

July 25, 1994

54

PROOF OF SERVICE of [1−1] complaint and summons to defendant Pete Wilson (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)

July 25, 1994

July 25, 1994

55

PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to Craig L Brown (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)

July 25, 1994

July 25, 1994

56

PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to Joe Sandoval (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)

July 25, 1994

July 25, 1994

57

PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to the State of California by serving the State Attorney Generals Office Karen Files (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)

July 25, 1994

July 25, 1994

58

PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to James H Gomes by service on Judith Debelle (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)

July 25, 1994

July 25, 1994

59

PROOF OF SERVICE of complaint and summons as to James A Browning Jr (old) (Entered: 07/26/1994)

July 25, 1994

July 25, 1994

61

MINUTES of 8/1/94 before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton: Status conference HELD; Pretrial conference SET 1/16/96 at 3:30 pm; Jury trial set 4/23/96 at 10:00; Trial estimated to be 15 days; Court order to follow (old) (Entered: 08/09/1994)

Aug. 1, 1994

Aug. 1, 1994

60

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to dismiss by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray ; motion to be heard on 09/06/94 at 10:00am by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton (old) (Entered: 08/04/1994)

Aug. 3, 1994

Aug. 3, 1994

62

STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton ORDERING: motion filing ddl set for 10/1/95; discovery ddl set for 8/1/95; pretrial conference set for 2:30pm on 1/16/96; jury trial set for 10:00am on 4/23/96 (cc: all counsel) (kb) (Entered: 08/09/1994)

Aug. 9, 1994

Aug. 9, 1994

64

OPPOSITION by defendants to motion to certify class action Rule 23 by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [43−1] and NON−OPPOSITION to motion to amend complaint by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [39−1] (old) (Entered: 08/24/1994)

Aug. 19, 1994

Aug. 19, 1994

63

PLAINTIFFS Vincent Cervantes and Steven Williams Opposition to motion to dismiss by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray [60−1] (old) (Entered: 08/22/1994)

Aug. 22, 1994

Aug. 22, 1994

66

REPLY to Opposition to motion to certify class action Rule 23 [43−1] by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams (old) (Entered: 08/31/1994)

Aug. 29, 1994

Aug. 29, 1994

67

SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION by plaintiffs to motion to dismiss by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray [60−1] (old) (Entered: 09/06/1994)

Sept. 2, 1994

Sept. 2, 1994

68

MINUTES of 09/06/94 before Honorable Lawrence K Karlton: Motion to dismiss by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Judith A McGillivray [60−1] is DENIED; Motion to certify class action Rule 23 by plaintiffs Cervantes and Steven G Williams [43−1] is SUBMITTED after further briefing; Letter briefs to be filed by 9/19/94 by 4:30 for plaintiffs and oppositions to brief due 9/26/94 by 4:30; Motion to amend complaint by plaintiffs Vincent Cervantes and Steven G Williams [39−1] is GRANTED; Court ORDERED amended complaint filed as of 9/6/94; Motion to dismiss by defendants [36−1] or to stay the damages portion and the equitable portion of the case [35−1] is DENIED; Order to be prepared by plaintiff and submitted within 22 days; C/R Richard Fong (old) (Entered: 09/07/1994)

Sept. 6, 1994

Sept. 6, 1994

69

FIREST AMENDED CIVIL COMPLAINT CLASS ACTION [1−1] by plaintiffs (old) (Entered: 09/07/1994)

Sept. 6, 1994

Sept. 6, 1994

70

SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES to [67−1] by plaintiffs in opposition to motion to dismiss (old) (Entered: 09/07/1994)

Sept. 6, 1994

Sept. 6, 1994

71

TRANSCRIPT of proceeding hearing on 9/6/94 by C/R Richard Fong (ndd) (Entered: 09/15/1994)

Sept. 15, 1994

Sept. 15, 1994

72

BRIEF by plaintiffs on standing and mootness [68−1] (old) (Entered: 09/21/1994)

Sept. 20, 1994

Sept. 20, 1994

73

LETTER to court from counsel for defendants regarding [72−1] the letter brief filed in opposition to their earlier arguments on the issues of standing and mootness (old) (Entered: 09/23/1994)

Sept. 22, 1994

Sept. 22, 1994

74

ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton ORDERING that plaintiffs' motion for leave to file amended complaint [39−1] is GRANTED; plaintiffs' motion for class certification [43−1] is TAKEN UNDER SUBMISSION pending further briefing on the jurisdictional issues; defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint [60−1] is DENIED (cc: all counsel) (ndd) (Entered: 11/14/1994)

Nov. 14, 1994

Nov. 14, 1994

75

ANSWER by defendants State of CA, Pete Wilson, James Gomez, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, Judith A McGillivray to first amended complaint (kb) (Entered: 11/30/1994)

Nov. 28, 1994

Nov. 28, 1994

76

ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K Karlton defendants' objections to class certification on standing and mootness grounds are rejected; pursuant to this court's order file 11/14/94, a class is hereby certified under Rule 23(b)(2), consisting of: (1) California parolees at large; (2) California parolees in custody, as alleged parole violators, and who are awaiting revocation of their state parole; and (3) California parolees who are in custody having been found in violation of parole and who have been thereupon sentenced to prison custody [43−1] (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 12/01/1994)

Dec. 1, 1994

Dec. 1, 1994

77

DEFENDANTS' NOTICE of automatic substitution of party Michael Connolly substituted for dft Judith McGillivray pursuant to rule 25 of the Federal Rules of civil procedure (old) Modified on 11/03/1995 (Entered: 12/12/1994)

Dec. 9, 1994

Dec. 9, 1994

LODGED Stipulation re no purging of documents pending completion of discovery of by plaintiffs (kb) (Entered: 03/20/1995)

March 16, 1995

March 16, 1995

LODGED STIPULATION EXTENSION of time to produce documents and response to request for production of documents by defendants (old) (Entered: 03/23/1995)

March 21, 1995

March 21, 1995

79

STIPULATION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows granting lodged extension of time to 4/10/95 for defendants to serve responses to second request for production [0−0] (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 03/29/1995)

March 29, 1995

March 29, 1995

82

RESPONSE to pltf's first request for production of documents by defts Judith A McGillivray, James Gomez, Craig L Brown, Joe Sandoval, Pete Wilson, State of CA (old) (Entered: 04/12/1995)

April 10, 1995

April 10, 1995

81

STIPULATION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Gregory G Hollows ORDERING that there will be no purging of documents re this action pending the completion of discovery (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 04/12/1995)

April 12, 1995

April 12, 1995

LODGED Stipulation of parties for extension of time to complete discovery; AND motions to continuance of trail date by plaintiff Steven G Williams (old) (Entered: 08/23/1995)

Aug. 18, 1995

Aug. 18, 1995

83

STIPULATION of parties: scheduling of further status condrence; extension of time to complete discovery and continuance of trial date (old) (Entered: 09/26/1995)

Sept. 22, 1995

Sept. 22, 1995

LODGED Order Scheduling Further Status Conference submitted by V Sult (old) (Entered: 09/25/1995)

Sept. 22, 1995

Sept. 22, 1995

84

ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton pretrial conference set for 11:30 10/16/95 (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 09/26/1995)

Sept. 26, 1995

Sept. 26, 1995

86

MINUTES of Status Conference before Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton , pretrial conference set for 3:00 12/9/96 trial set for 10:00 3/4/97 Court order to follow (old) (Entered: 10/20/1995)

Oct. 16, 1995

Oct. 16, 1995

85

ORDER by Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton pretrial conference set for 3:00 12/9/96 jury trial set for 10:00 3/4/97 motion filing ddl set for 4/30/96 discovery ddl set for 5/30/96 (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 10/18/1995)

Oct. 18, 1995

Oct. 18, 1995

87

NOTICE by defendants State of California, Pete Wilson, Joe Sandoval, Craig L Brown, James Gomez and Michael Connolly regarding substitution of Tom Maddock in place of dft Brown pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 25(d) (kb) (Entered: 11/03/1995)

Nov. 1, 1995

Nov. 1, 1995

88

STIPULATION to extend time within which defendants may respond to plaintiff's thir request for documents (old) (Entered: 01/04/1996)

Jan. 3, 1996

Jan. 3, 1996

89

MOTION by attorney Stephen J Perrello, Jr to seal his motion to withdraw as counsel for Vincent Cervantes motion not noticed before Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)

March 25, 1996

March 25, 1996

90

MOTION by attorney Stephen J Perrello, Jr for leave to withdraw as attorneys of record of Vincent Cervantes motion not noticed before Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)

March 25, 1996

March 25, 1996

91

PROPOSED NOTICE of change of attorneys by attorney Stephen J Perrello representing plaintiff Vincent Cervantes (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)

March 25, 1996

March 25, 1996

93

DECLARATION of Stephen J Perello, Jr in support of his motion to withdraw as attorney of record (filed under seal and placed in vault) (old) (Entered: 04/10/1996)

March 25, 1996

March 25, 1996

LODGED order sealing declaration (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)

March 25, 1996

March 25, 1996

LODGED possibly to be sealed document by attorney for plaintiff Vincent Cervantes (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)

March 25, 1996

March 25, 1996

LODGED order granting motion to withdraw as attorneys by attorney for plaintiff Vincent Cervantes (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)

March 25, 1996

March 25, 1996

LODGED second amended complaint by plaintiff Steven G Williams, plaintiff Vincent Cervantes (old) (Entered: 03/26/1996)

March 25, 1996

March 25, 1996

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Special Collection(s):

California's Prisoners' Rights Bar article

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 2, 1994

Closing Date: 2013

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

(1) California parolees at large; (2) California parolees in custody, as alleged parole violators, and who are awaiting revocation of their state parole; and (3) California parolees who are in custody, having been found in violation of parole and who have been thereupon sentenced to prison custody.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

Prison Law Office

Rosen, Bien, Galvan & Grunfeld

Youth Law Center

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

State of California, State

Defendant Type(s):

Law-enforcement

Jurisdiction-wide

Corrections

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

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: 2002 - None

Content of Injunction:

Monitor/Master

Monitoring

Goals (e.g., for hiring, admissions)

Issues

General:

Access to lawyers or judicial system

Classification / placement

Conditions of confinement

Over/Unlawful Detention

Medical/Mental Health:

Mental health care, general

Type of Facility:

Government-run