Filed Date: Feb. 2, 2011
Closed Date: 2011
Clearinghouse coding complete
On February 2, 2011, an animal welfare activist filed this lawsuit in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Essex County, against the City of Newark under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff, represented by public interest counsel, alleged that his rights to free speech and to be free from unlawful seizure were violated when he was arrested for engaging in protected expressive activity on March 7, 2010. Specifically, the plaintiff claimed that he was arrested for protesting on a public sidewalk outside of the Prudential Center in Essex County. The plaintiff was protesting the treatment of an elephant by the circus that was in town, and claimed that he was arrested after refusing to follow instructions by police officers to stand in a designated "protest zone." This zone was located further away from the Prudential Center and out of the view of circus-goers.
The plaintiff further claimed that the City of Newark had a custom, practice, and policy of restricting and prohibiting expressive activities protected by the First Amendment on sidewalks outside of the Prudential Center. In his complaint, the plaintiff pointed to multiple cases in recent years that brought similar allegations and corroborated this: People's Organization for Progress v. City of Newark, Dkt. No. C-268-04 (Ch. Div. filed July 2004) (which resulted in a Consent Order protecting the rights of individuals seeking to engage in expressive activity on the streets of Newark); Lima v. Newark Police Dept., No. 08-CV-426A (D.N.J. filed Sept. 2007); and Quodimine v. City of Newark, No. 09-3596 (D.N.J. filed Oct. 2009). The plaintiff claimed the City's actions had violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights, as well as rights under the New Jersey Constitution and New Jersey Civil Rights Act. He sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as compensatory damages.
On February 23, 2011, the parties reached a settlement by means of a consent order. Although the parties agreed that the order reflected "a compromise of a disputed claim and does not in any way admit liability on the part of Defendants," the City agreed not to restrict the rights of individuals engaging in free speech activity on City sidewalks. Consent Order at 4. The City further agreed to train its police officers and employees who are involved in issuing special events permits about the rights of protesters every six months. The City has an ordinance that requires a permit to be issued for free speech activities when the number of participants is 50 or more. The City also reimbursed the plaintiff's attorney's fees, which amounted to $1600. In return, the plaintiff released the City of any liability arising out of his arrest and agreed to dismiss the case.
Summary Authors
Greg in den Berken (11/12/2014)
Vichness, Paul J. (New Jersey)
Barocas, Edward (New Jersey)
Zurofsky, Bennett Dann (New Jersey)
Torok, Danielle P. (New Jersey)
Vichness, Paul J. (New Jersey)
Last updated Aug. 30, 2023, 2:26 p.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: New Jersey
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Feb. 2, 2011
Closing Date: 2011
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
The plaintiff is an animal welfare activist who was arrested while protesting on a public sidewalk outside of the Prudential Center in Essex County for failing to stand in a designated "protest zone."
Plaintiff Type(s):
Attorney Organizations:
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
City of Newark (Newark, Essex), City
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Unreasonable search and seizure
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Amount Defendant Pays: $1600
Issues
General:
Policing: