Support Article

How To Search Guide
Search for:
clear search

Docket Number

Key Dates

Filing Date

Settlement / Judgment Date

Terminating Date

Plaintiffs

Defendants

Case Details

Outcome

Issues

MORE▾

Document Details

Document Filing Date

MORE▾

Document Citation (Choose One)

Use this for most court reporters

S.Ct. reporter and WL only

LEXIS and L.Ed. only

Search for:

Support Article

How To Search Guide
6 cases, 6 documents
Ordered by
PRISON CONDITIONS
Plata v. Newsom

4:01-cv-01351 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: Aug. 20, 2001

NOTE: Documents relating to the prison overcrowding proceedings in this case under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which led to imposition of a statewide prison population cap, affirmed by the Supreme Court, are presented in a different case record. See "related cases" below. Summary: On April 5, 2001, nine male California incarcerated persons filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, against officials of the California Department of C…
EDUCATION
Flores v. Arizona

4:92-cv-00596 | U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

Filed Date: Aug. 20, 1992

Closed Date: Aug. 7, 2015

This school funding case was filed on August 20, 1992 in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. The plaintiffs, several students and their parents, claimed that the state failed to adequately fund programs for English language learners (ELLs). In 2000, the district court found that state's method and level of funding ELL programs was "arbitrary and capricious" and ordered that the level of state funding for ELL programs bear a rational relationship to the cost of those …
MENTAL HEALTH (FACILITY)
Jensen v. Minnesota Department of Human Services

0:09-cv-01775 | U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota

Filed Date: July 10, 2009

On July 10, 2009, mental health patients at Minnesota Extended Treatment Options, a state facility, filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and Minnesota state law against the Minnesota Department of Human Services in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, sought injunctive and declaratory relief, and damages. They alleged that Minnesota Extended Treatment Options frequently subjected patients with developmental disabilities to the i…
EDUCATION
Jamie S. v. Milwaukee Public Schools

2:01-cv-00928 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin

Filed Date: Sept. 13, 2001

Closed Date: 2013

On September 13, 2001, seven students with disabilities, by and through their parents, filed this class-action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin against the Milwaukee Public School System ("MPS") and the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction ("DPI"). The Plaintiffs, represented by attorneys from Disability Rights Wisconsin, claimed that MPS violated their right to a free, appropriate public education as guaranteed by the Individuals with Disa…
POLICING
United States v. City of Seattle

2:12-cv-01282 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington

Filed Date: July 27, 2012

On March 31, 2011, the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Civil Rights Division opened an investigation of the Seattle Police Department (SPD) pursuant to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (then codified at 42 U.S.C. § 14141; then recodified to 34 U.S.C. § 12601), the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Following a comprehensive investigation, on December 16, 2011, the DOJ announced its findings that SPD engag…
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
Roy v. Los Angeles County

2:12-cv-09012 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: Oct. 19, 2012

On October 19, 2012, five named plaintiffs filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, challenging the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s (LASD) practice of holding individuals subject to immigration detainer beyond their release date solely on the basis of the detainer. The plaintiffs alleged that these practices violated state law, the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and the California Constitution (Cal. …