Case: Lino v. City of New York

10-106579 | New York state trial court

Filed Date: May 19, 2010

Closed Date: 2013

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 19, 2010, the New York Civil Liberties Union filed this putative class action suit on behalf of two male New York City residents who were allegedly stopped and frisked without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. The plaintiffs sued in New York State Court and alleged numerous violations of New York law, as well as violations of the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. They sued under state law and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. According to the complaint, Plaintiffs, both…

On May 19, 2010, the New York Civil Liberties Union filed this putative class action suit on behalf of two male New York City residents who were allegedly stopped and frisked without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. The plaintiffs sued in New York State Court and alleged numerous violations of New York law, as well as violations of the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. They sued under state law and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

According to the complaint, Plaintiffs, both under the age of 40 and without criminal records, were stopped, questioned, searched, arrested, and given summonses that were later dismissed. Nevertheless, the NYPD kept their contact information in a massive stop-and-frisk database. The NYPD stored the information of all people stopped and frisked, refusing to seal misdemeanor and felony records. NYPD was also collecting information of individuals who were neither arrested nor summoned, and of those whose arrests and summonses were dropped. This database served as the index for investigations later carried about by the NYPD. 80% of people stopped and frisked were Black or Latino.

Plaintiffs sought declaratory judgments and an injunction requiring defendants to seal all records. On June 24, 2011, Justice Barbara Jaffe issued an order that granted the defendant's motion to dismiss. 932 N.Y.S.2d 761. {explain basis for decision and then the subsequent appeal which reversed, from the Dec, 20, 2012 order}

The parties settled in July 2013. Under the settlement, New York City paid $10,000 for all the claims that were or could have been raised by any plaintiffs in this action - including all costs, expenses, and attorney fees, and agreed to remove all information establishing the identity of individuals who were stopped, frisked, or questioned. The settlement also required the NYPD to cease entering such identifying information into the database. The City issued a written directive barring further entries into the database, and that directive was provided to the NYCLU under the terms of the settlement.

The court did not retain jurisdiction over the matter; the case was dismissed on the same day as the settlement was entered.

Summary Authors

Nili Blanck (3/17/2018)

People


Judge(s)

Catterson, James M. Jr. (New York)

DeGrasse, Leland G. (New York)

Jaffe, Barbara (New York)

Manzanet-Daniels, Sallie (New York)

Mazzarelli, Angela M (New York)

Richter, Rosalyn H. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bell, Alyssa (New York)

Dunn, Christopher (New York)

Presa, Rachel (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Cardozo, Michael A. (New York)

Judge(s)

Catterson, James M. Jr. (New York)

DeGrasse, Leland G. (New York)

Jaffe, Barbara (New York)

Manzanet-Daniels, Sallie (New York)

Mazzarelli, Angela M (New York)

Richter, Rosalyn H. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bell, Alyssa (New York)

Dunn, Christopher (New York)

Presa, Rachel (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Cardozo, Michael A. (New York)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Friedman, Nancy E (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Complaint

May 19, 2010 Complaint
BL-2

Summons

Khan and Lino v. City of New York

May 19, 2010 Complaint

Decision and Order [Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Complaint]

932 N.Y.S.2d 761, 2011 WL 2610501, 2011 N.Y.Misc.LEXIS 3172

June 28, 2011 Order/Opinion

Opinion

New York state appellate court

101 A.D.3d 552, 2012 N.Y.App.Div.LEXIS 8713

Dec. 20, 2012 Order/Opinion

Stipulation and Order of Settlement and Discontinuance

Aug. 7, 2013 Settlement Agreement

Docket

Last updated May 11, 2022, 8 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

State / Territory: New York

Case Type(s):

Policing

Special Collection(s):

Stop-and-Frisk (NY)

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 19, 2010

Closing Date: 2013

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Putative class action suit filed on behalf of two New York City residents who have been stopped, questioned, searched, arrested, and given sumonses that were dismissed, despite their personal information being stored on an NYPD database that functions as an index for investigations. Both are men of color, under the age of 40, with no criminal history.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU Affiliates (any)

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Denied

Defendants

City of New York (New York), City

New York Police Department commissioner , City

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Law-enforcement

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

State law

Constitutional Clause(s):

Unreasonable search and seizure

Availably Documents:

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Attorneys fees

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Amount Defendant Pays: 10,000

Order Duration: 2013 - None

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Implement complaint/dispute resolution process

Issues

General:

Disparate Impact

Disparate Treatment

Racial profiling

Search policies

Discrimination-basis:

Race discrimination

Race:

Black

National Origin/Ethnicity:

Arab/Afgani/Middle Eastern

Hispanic