Case: Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles v. Garcetti

2:20-cv-04940 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: June 3, 2020

Closed Date: July 7, 2020

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This lawsuit, brought in the the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, was filed on June 3, 2020. The plaintiffs were represented by attorneys from the ACLU of Southern California. This lawsuit followed nation-wide protests that occurred in response to the killing of George Floyd by a police officer in Minneapolis. While most protests were peaceful, some ended in violence, property destruction, rioting, and looting. Many cities, including Los Angeles and San Bernardino, is…

This lawsuit, brought in the the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, was filed on June 3, 2020. The plaintiffs were represented by attorneys from the ACLU of Southern California. This lawsuit followed nation-wide protests that occurred in response to the killing of George Floyd by a police officer in Minneapolis. While most protests were peaceful, some ended in violence, property destruction, rioting, and looting. Many cities, including Los Angeles and San Bernardino, issued curfews in an attempt to quell these riots.

This action challenged these curfews as violations of free speech and assembly, free movement, due process, and challenged the San Bernardino curfew as a violation of the establishment clause (the San Bernardino curfew included a provision that exempted attendants of religious meetings from the curfew.) The plaintiffs sought injunctive and declaratory relief that would void the curfew and prohibit the cities from enforcing them.

The following day, June 4th, 2020, the case was assigned to District Judge Philip S. Gutierre and to Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo. Judge Gutierrez informed the parties that he was part of a mandatory alternative dispute resolution (ADR) program and asked the parties to try to form an agreement before going to trial.

On July 7, 2020, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the complaint, citing that fact that the city had rescinded the curfews already and not attempted to reinstate them. The case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Jack Hibbard (7/7/2020)

Related Cases

Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles, Central District of California (2020)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17221511/parties/black-lives-matter-los-angeles-v-eric-garcetti/


Judge(s)

Castillo, Pedro V. (California)

Gutierrez, Philip S. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Arulanantham, Ahilan T (California)

Bibring, Peter (California)

Bitran, Eva Lucia (California)

Chia, Liga (California)

Eliasberg, Peter J. (California)

Kwon, Dae Keun (California)

Mendoza, Ana Graciela Najera (California)

Wong, Adrienna (California)

Judge(s)

Castillo, Pedro V. (California)

Gutierrez, Philip S. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Arulanantham, Ahilan T (California)

Bibring, Peter (California)

Bitran, Eva Lucia (California)

Chia, Liga (California)

Eliasberg, Peter J. (California)

Kwon, Dae Keun (California)

Mendoza, Ana Graciela Najera (California)

Wong, Adrienna (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:20-cv-04940

Docket [PACER]

July 7, 2020

July 7, 2020

Docket
1

2:20-cv-04940

Complaint

June 3, 2020

June 3, 2020

Complaint
7

2:20-cv-04940

Notice of Voluntary Dismissal

July 7, 2020

July 7, 2020

Pleading / Motion / Brief

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17221511/black-lives-matter-los-angeles-v-eric-garcetti/

Last updated May 30, 2022, 3:06 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-26676579 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiffs Eric Jeffrey Stith, Kimberly Beltran Villalobos, Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles, Tom Dolan, Lexis Olivier Ray. (Attorney Ahilan T Arulanantham added to party Kimberly Beltran Villalobos(pty:pla), Attorney Ahilan T Arulanantham added to party Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles(pty:pla), Attorney Ahilan T Arulanantham added to party Tom Dolan(pty:pla), Attorney Ahilan T Arulanantham added to party Lexis Olivier Ray(pty:pla), Attorney Ahilan T Arulanantham added to party Eric Jeffrey Stith(pty:pla))(Arulanantham, Ahilan) (Entered: 06/03/2020)

June 3, 2020

June 3, 2020

RECAP
2

CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs Kimberly Beltran Villalobos, Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles, Tom Dolan, Lexis Olivier Ray, Eric Jeffrey Stith. (Arulanantham, Ahilan) (Entered: 06/03/2020)

June 3, 2020

June 3, 2020

PACER
3

NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs All Plaintiffs, identifying Black Lives Matter Los Angeles, Kimberly Beltran Villalobos, Eric Jeffrey Stith, Tom Dolan, Lexis Olivier Ray, Eric Garcetti, Michel R. Moore, City of Los Angeles, Alex Villanueva, Kathryn Barger, Teri Ledoux, Eric McBride, City of San Bernardino. (Arulanantham, Ahilan) (Entered: 06/03/2020)

June 3, 2020

June 3, 2020

PACER
4

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez and Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo. (lh) (Entered: 06/04/2020)

June 4, 2020

June 4, 2020

PACER
5

NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) (Entered: 06/04/2020)

June 4, 2020

June 4, 2020

PACER
6

STANDING ORDER REGARDING NEWLY ASSIGNED CASES by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (ji) (Entered: 06/04/2020)

June 4, 2020

June 4, 2020

PACER
7

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Plaintiffs Kimberly Beltran Villalobos, Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles, Tom Dolan, Lexis Olivier Ray, Eric Jeffrey Stith. (Arulanantham, Ahilan) (Entered: 07/07/2020)

July 7, 2020

July 7, 2020

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Policing

Special Collection(s):

Police Violence Protests

Key Dates

Filing Date: June 3, 2020

Closing Date: July 7, 2020

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles and several individuals who claim that the the curfew imposed in LA and San Bernardino amidst the Spring/Summer 2020 protests infringed on their constitutional rights

Plaintiff Type(s):

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU of Southern California

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

City of Los Angeles (Los Angeles, Los Angeles), City

City of San Bernardino (San Bernardino, Los Angeles), City

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Establishment Clause

Freedom of speech/association

Right to travel

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Form of Settlement:

Voluntary Dismissal

Issues

General:

Over/Unlawful Detention