Case: Bull v. County of Sacramento

03-C043944 | California state appellate court

Filed Date: March 13, 2001

Closed Date: Jan. 13, 2005

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

Plaintiff filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 in California state court challenging the Sacramento County Jail's policy of strip-searching all detainees, regardless of charges. Plaintiff was arrested on misdemeanor charges for protesting at a hearing where the Forestry Department was discussing cutting down trees on private property. She was taken to jail and subjected to a strip search, including a videotaped body cavity search. She subsequently filed a state court class action suit again…

Plaintiff filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 in California state court challenging the Sacramento County Jail's policy of strip-searching all detainees, regardless of charges. Plaintiff was arrested on misdemeanor charges for protesting at a hearing where the Forestry Department was discussing cutting down trees on private property. She was taken to jail and subjected to a strip search, including a videotaped body cavity search. She subsequently filed a state court class action suit against the sheriff and county, alleging privacy and other civil rights violations.

On March 14, 2000, the Sacramento County Superior Court (Judge Thomas Cecil), certified the class. The court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs on the privacy rights issue in January 2003, awarding each class member was awarded the greater amount between actual damages or $1,000. (The court ruled for defendant on the §1983 claim, finding that the sheriff had immunity from suit.)

Defendants appealed, seeking to have the class action decertified and reversal on the summary judgment decision. While that appeal was pending, Sacramento County changed its search policy.

The private attorney for the plaintiff then brought a similar §1983 class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, but the court refused to allow any plaintiffs who were included in the state court class.

The parties then reached a settlement, which they submitted to the superior court in June 2004. The court (Judge Richard Park) approved it preliminarily that same month, setting a fairness hearing for October 2004. Judge Park gave final approval to the settlement on October 22, 2004. According to news reports, eventually over 4300 claims were submitted. Attorney Mark Merin received a $3 million dollar fee; $500,000 was allocated to claim administration. The 7 named plaintiffs split $410,000. Most other plaintiffs received between $1000 and $3500; about 1000 claimed more because of psychological injury they suffered. In the end, defendants' total payout was about $15 million.

Summary Authors

Margo Schlanger (7/14/2007)

People


Judge(s)

Cecil, Thomas (California)

Damrell, Frank C. Jr. (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Cable, Keith Daniel (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Cassidy, Terence J (California)

Dority, Avery Emil (California)

Judge(s)

Cecil, Thomas (California)

Damrell, Frank C. Jr. (California)

Nowinski, Peter A. (California)

Park, Richard K. (California)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

01-01545

03-C043944

Appellate Docket

County of Sacramento v. Superior Court, Sacramento County

May 29, 2003

May 29, 2003

Docket

C043989

Appellate Docket

County of Sacramento v. Bull

Aug. 26, 2003

Aug. 26, 2003

Docket

2:03-cv-01795

Docket (PACER) (Related Case)

Michael v. County of Sacramento

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Jan. 29, 2004

Jan. 29, 2004

Docket

2:03-cv-00458

U.S. District Court Docket (PACER) (federal case)

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Jan. 13, 2005

Jan. 13, 2005

Docket
22

2:03-cv-00458

Memorandum and Order [Re: Motion to Dismiss]

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

July 23, 2003

July 23, 2003

Order/Opinion

01-01545

Stipulated Motion for Preliminary Approval of Provisional Settlement Class and Settlement of Class Action

California state trial court

June 4, 2004

June 4, 2004

Settlement Agreement

01-01545

Order for Preliminary Approval of Settlement of Class Action

Bull v. County of Sacramento/Hale v. County of Sacramento

California state trial court

June 9, 2004

June 9, 2004

Order/Opinion

01-01545

Class Action Notice and Claim Form

No Court

Sept. 30, 2004

Sept. 30, 2004

Notice Letter
35

2:03-cv-00458

Order for Dismissal with Prejudice

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Jan. 12, 2005

Jan. 12, 2005

Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated Aug. 30, 2023, 2:38 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Strip Search Cases

Key Dates

Filing Date: March 13, 2001

Closing Date: Jan. 13, 2005

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

People booked at the Sacramento County Main Jail between March 14, 2000, and June 6, 2003, on an infraction or misdemeanor offense or felony offense not involving violence, drugs or weapons and subjected to a strip search before arraignment.

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

County of Sacramento (Sacramento), County

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Unreasonable search and seizure

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

None of the above

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Issues

General:

Search policies

Strip search policy

Affected Sex or Gender:

Female

Male

Type of Facility:

Government-run