Case: Kazarov v. Achim

1:02-cv-05097 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Filed Date: July 18, 2002

Closed Date: 2007

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On July 18, 2002, attorneys for the Midwest Immigration and Human Rights Center filed a class action lawsuit in United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, seeking habeas corpus relief for aliens who had been detained by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") in the Chicago District who have been detained for over six months after a final order of deportation had been issued and there was no significant likelihood of their repatriation within the reas…

On July 18, 2002, attorneys for the Midwest Immigration and Human Rights Center filed a class action lawsuit in United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, seeking habeas corpus relief for aliens who had been detained by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") in the Chicago District who have been detained for over six months after a final order of deportation had been issued and there was no significant likelihood of their repatriation within the reasonably foreseeable future. Plaintiffs claimed that their indefinite detention violated procedural and substantive due process rights, as well as the parameters for detention set by the Supreme Court in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 121 S.Ct. 2491, 150 L.Ed.2d 653 (2001).

The complaint was amended several times to substitute individuals as the named plaintiffs, representing the proposed class.

The government moved to dismiss the case.

On April 16, 2003, the District Court for (Judge James B. Zagel) dismissed two counts of plaintiffs' complaint as being moot, declined to issue a writ habeas corpus on three of the counts and denied the request to dismiss the remaining counts. Hmaidan v. Ashcroft, 258 F. Supp. 2d 832, 840 (N.D. IL 2003). Plaintiffs amended their complaint for a third time and then moved for class certification. The government moved to dismiss the amended complaint and opposed class certification. The Court (Judge Zagel) dismissed two counts of the amended complaint as being moot and granted class certification on the remaining claims. . Kazarov v. Achim, 2003 WL 22956006 (N.D. IL Dec. 12, 2003).

The case proceeded to trial before Judge Zagel on September 12 and 13, 2005. The parties submitted post trial briefs. On February 27, 2007, the District Court issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law and determined that neither the plaintiff class nor any of the individual representative plaintiffs were entitled to injunctive relief. Judgment was entered in favor of defendants. Kazarov v. Achim, 2007 WL 647453 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 27, 2007).

Summary Authors

Brian Ponton (8/30/2007)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5274907/parties/kazarov-v-ashcroft/


Judge(s)

Zagel, James Block (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Hagerman, Douglas M. (Illinois)

Krebs, Thomas Paul (Illinois)

Lien, John Donovan (Illinois)

Relias, Anne G. (Illinois)

Roth, Charles G. (Illinois)

Smith, Michael D. (Illinois)

Soble, Jeffrey Andrew (Illinois)

Werner, Christopher J. (Illinois)

Zollett, Andrea Kathleen (Illinois)

Judge(s)

Zagel, James Block (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Hagerman, Douglas M. (Illinois)

Krebs, Thomas Paul (Illinois)

Lien, John Donovan (Illinois)

Relias, Anne G. (Illinois)

Roth, Charles G. (Illinois)

Smith, Michael D. (Illinois)

Soble, Jeffrey Andrew (Illinois)

Werner, Christopher J. (Illinois)

Zollett, Andrea Kathleen (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Entenman, Sheila McNulty (Illinois)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:02-cv-05097

Docket (PACER)

Kazarov v. Ashcroft

July 18, 2002

July 18, 2002

Docket
1

1:02-cv-05097

Petition for Habeas Corpus & Complaint

Hmaidan v. Ashcroft

July 18, 2002

July 18, 2002

Complaint
17

1:02-cv-05097

Amended Complaint

Hmaidan v. Ashcroft

Sept. 10, 2002

Sept. 10, 2002

Complaint
31

1:02-cv-05097

Opinion

Hmaidan v. Ashcroft

258 F.Supp.2d 832, 2003 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 6325

April 16, 2003

April 16, 2003

Order/Opinion
43

1:02-cv-05097

Respondents' Memorandum Opposing Petitioners' Motion for Class Certification

Oct. 30, 2003

Oct. 30, 2003

Pleading / Motion / Brief
48

1:02-cv-05097

Petitioners Reply to Respondents' Memorandum Opposing Petitioners' Motion for Class Certification

Nov. 19, 2003

Nov. 19, 2003

Pleading / Motion / Brief
49

1:02-cv-05097

Opinion

2003 WL 22956006

Dec. 12, 2003

Dec. 12, 2003

Order/Opinion
117

1:02-cv-05097

Opinion

2007 WL 647453

Feb. 27, 2007

Feb. 27, 2007

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5274907/kazarov-v-ashcroft/

Last updated Aug. 12, 2022, 3:17 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
31

MINUTE ORDER of 4/16/03 by Hon. James B. Zagel: Defendant's motion to dismiss is granted [22-1]. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied [1-1]. Entered Memorandum Opinion and Order. terminating case. Mailed notice (gcy)

April 16, 2003

April 16, 2003

RECAP
49

MINUTE ORDER of 12/15/03 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Plaintiff's motion for class certification is granted subject to modifications [40-1]. Motion [44-1] to dismiss is granted/denied in part. Counts I and II are dismissed. Entered Memorandum Opinion and Order. Mailed notice (gcy)

Dec. 15, 2003

Dec. 15, 2003

RECAP
117

Enter MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by Judge James B. Zagel on 2/27/2007 Judicial staff mailed notice(gl, )

Feb. 27, 2007

Feb. 27, 2007

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Illinois

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: July 18, 2002

Closing Date: 2007

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Members of this class consist of aliens in the Chicago District who have been detained for over six months after a final order of deportation.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Immigration and Naturalization Service (Washington), Federal

Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Federal

Department of Justice , Federal

Department of Homeland Security, Federal

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.

Habeas Corpus, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241-2253; 2254; 2255

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Issues

General:

Habeas Corpus

Immigration/Border:

Constitutional rights

Deportation - procedure

Detention - conditions

Detention - procedures