Plaintiffs in this 1985 strip search case were arrested and charged with prostitution by the Delaware County Pennsylvania Detective's Office and forced to undergo "gynecological examination/strip search[es].” They filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, claiming the searches were conducted without probable cause to believe that any contraband was hidden on their bodies. Additionally, plaintiffs claimed that the physician who conducted the searches removed their clothing, fondled them and inserted a speculum into the plaintiff[s'] vagina and anus.

On defendants' motion to dismiss, the court (Judge O'Neill) found that the prosecutor defendants had failed to recognize the difference between those prosecutorial activities which receive absolute immunity and those which receive qualified immunity, and so could not rule on the defense. The court also let stand the plaintiffs' claims that defendants were liable even if they did not personally participate in the examinations; all that is necesary to survive a motion to dismiss is the allegation that defendants had personal knowledge of and acquiesced in the alleged acts.

The court thus allowed plaintiffs' claims, except those that claimed tortious acts, and allowed amendment of claims that insufficiently plead existence of a policy or practice. We have no further information about this case.

Denise Heberle - 08/14/2012


compress summary