Case: Dobrowolskyj v. Jefferson County, Kentucky

3:85-cv-00406 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky

Filed Date: April 17, 1985

Closed Date: 1987

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In 1985, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Jefferson County Jail, its director, and the county in the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky. Plaintiff, represented by private counsel, alleged that Defendants' blanket policy of strip-searching pretrial detainees without reasonable suspicion was unconstitutional.Plaintiff was arrested for menacing, a misdemeanor. Plaintiff waited in a holding cell in the Jefferson County Jail for his lawyer to post his bond. Howe…

In 1985, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Jefferson County Jail, its director, and the county in the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky. Plaintiff, represented by private counsel, alleged that Defendants' blanket policy of strip-searching pretrial detainees without reasonable suspicion was unconstitutional.

Plaintiff was arrested for menacing, a misdemeanor. Plaintiff waited in a holding cell in the Jefferson County Jail for his lawyer to post his bond. However, the cell filled up and Plaintiff was strip-searched and moved to general population.

The District Court (Judge Edward H. Johnstone) found that the constitutionality of Jefferson County's strip search policy had been settled in Tate v. Frey, No. 75-0031(A) (JC-KY-1) and denied Plaintiff's motions for declaratory judgment, summary judgment, and directed verdict. The jury found for Defendants. Plaintiff appealed.

On July 13, 1987, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (Judges Danny J. Boggs, Pierce Lively and Anthony J. Celebrezze) affirmed. The Court held that Plaintiff's strip-search did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights because (1) he was arrested for menacing, a class B misdemeanor, (2) Plaintiff was not searched until he was about to be moved into general population, (3) Plaintiff's strip-search was visual and according to jail policy, (4) the District Court had approved Defendants' search policy in Tate v. Frey (JC-KY-1). Dobrowolskyj v. Jefferson County, KY, 823 F.2d 955 (6th Cir. 1987).

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals denied rehearing on August 17, 1987.

On February 22, 1988, the United States Supreme Court denied Plaintiff's petition for writ of certiorari. Dobrowolskyj v. Jefferson County, Kentucky, 484 U.S. 1059 (1988).

Summary Authors

Shira Gordon (3/17/2012)

People


Judge(s)

Boggs, Danny Julian (Kentucky)

Celebrezze, Anthony Joseph (Ohio)

Lively, Pierce (Kentucky)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Radigan, William M. (Kentucky)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Dodd, Alan P. III (Kentucky)

McCartney, R. Allen (Kentucky)

Judge(s)

Boggs, Danny Julian (Kentucky)

Celebrezze, Anthony Joseph (Ohio)

Lively, Pierce (Kentucky)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Radigan, William M. (Kentucky)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Dodd, Alan P. III (Kentucky)

McCartney, R. Allen (Kentucky)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

86-05234

86-05451

Opinion

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

823 F.2d 955

July 13, 1987

July 13, 1987

Order/Opinion

87-00630

[Order Denying Cert.]

Supreme Court of the United States

484 U.S. 1059, 108 S.Ct. 1012, 98 L.Ed.2d 978

Feb. 22, 1988

Feb. 22, 1988

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated July 21, 2022, 3:07 a.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: Kentucky

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Strip Search Cases

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 17, 1985

Closing Date: 1987

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Man arrested for 'menacing,' a misdemeanor charge, and strip-searched before being put into the general jail population to await a bond for his release.

Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown

Filed Pro Se: Unknown

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Jefferson County (Jefferson), County

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Unreasonable search and seizure

Availably Documents:

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Strip search policy

Affected Gender:

Male

Type of Facility:

Government-run