Case: Jane Roe v. Town of Highland, IN

2:87-00236 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana

Filed Date: April 17, 1987

Closed Date: 1988

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On April 17, 1987, the original plaintiff, Jane Roe, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, challenging the Town of Highland's blanket policy of strip searching women detained for any offense, including traffic violations, whether or not there was reasonable suspicion that the detainee possessed weapons or contraband. Plaintiff sought monetary damages and moved for class certification.On September 2, 1988, the District Cou…

On April 17, 1987, the original plaintiff, Jane Roe, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, challenging the Town of Highland's blanket policy of strip searching women detained for any offense, including traffic violations, whether or not there was reasonable suspicion that the detainee possessed weapons or contraband. Plaintiff sought monetary damages and moved for class certification.

On September 2, 1988, the District Court (Judge Rudy Lozano) denied class certification on grounds that Plaintiff failed to substantiate the size of the class and the impracticality of joinder. Plaintiff Roe then settled her individual claim and the District Court entered final judgment on September 6, 1988. A procedural mess then ensued.

Twenty-nine days after entry of final judgment, Suzanne Morgan, represented by Roe's attorney, moved to intervene in the case in order to represent the plaintiff class for purposes of appealing the District Court's order denying class certification. On same day, Roe's attorney also filed a notice of appeal from the District Court's order on behalf of the putative plaintiff class.

The District Court did not rule on the intervention motion, and, in January 1989, Morgan sought but was denied intervention in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. On February 7, 1989, at the request of the putative plaintiff class, the appeal was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice.

On February 6, 1989, the day before the appeal was dismissed by the Seventh Circuit, Morgan filed a motion requesting that the District Court (Judge Lozano) rule on her intervention motion. It did so on March 16, 1989 by denying the motion on the ground that there was no pending action for Morgan to join. Morgan appealed that ruling to the Seventh Circuit.

On August 14, 1990, the Seventh Circuit (Judge Kenneth Francis Ripple) affirmed the District Court's denial of Morgan's motion to intervene. The Seventh Circuit agreed with the District Court's conclusion that the voluntary dismissal of Morgan's first appeal resulted in the termination of the case such that there was no action in which she could subsequently intervene. Morgan was thus foreclosed from appealing the District Court's orders denying intervention and class certification. Roe v. Town of Highland, 909 F.2d 1097 (7th Cir.1990).

We have no further information on this case.

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (2/17/2008)

People


Judge(s)

Ripple, Kenneth Francis (Indiana)

Wood, Harlington Jr. (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Noel, Nona (Indiana)

Susler, Janis M. (Illinois)

Taylor, G. Flint (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Tauber, Rhett L. (Indiana)

Whitton, Linda S. (Indiana)

Woodward, R. Brian (Indiana)

Judge(s)

Ripple, Kenneth Francis (Indiana)

Wood, Harlington Jr. (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Noel, Nona (Indiana)

Susler, Janis M. (Illinois)

Taylor, G. Flint (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Tauber, Rhett L. (Indiana)

Whitton, Linda S. (Indiana)

Woodward, R. Brian (Indiana)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Opinion [Re: Motion to Intervene]

Jane Roe v. Town of Highland

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

909 F.2d 1097

Aug. 14, 1990 Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

State / Territory: Indiana

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Strip Search Cases

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 17, 1987

Closing Date: 1988

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Women who were arrested and strip-searched by the Town of Highland's pursuant to its blanket policy of strip searching all women detained for any offense, including traffic tickets.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown

Filed Pro Se: Unknown

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Denied

Defendants

Town of Highland, City

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: Mixed

Nature of Relief:

Unknown

Source of Relief:

Unknown

Issues

General:

Search policies

Strip search policy

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female

Type of Facility:

Government-run