Case: Qandah v. Lombardi

2:12-cv-04213 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri

Filed Date: Aug. 8, 2012

Closed Date: 2013

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 8, 2012, two Missouri prisoners filed this class-action lawsuit under § 1983 against the Missouri Department of Corrections. The prisoners, represented by the ACLU, asked the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri for declaratory relief that a state constitutional amendment, voted on by the public on August 7, 2012, was unconstitutional and for injunctive relief against the enforcement or implementation of that amendment. Under Missouri's constitution, freedom of rel…

On August 8, 2012, two Missouri prisoners filed this class-action lawsuit under § 1983 against the Missouri Department of Corrections. The prisoners, represented by the ACLU, asked the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri for declaratory relief that a state constitutional amendment, voted on by the public on August 7, 2012, was unconstitutional and for injunctive relief against the enforcement or implementation of that amendment. Under Missouri's constitution, freedom of religion, the plaintiffs explained, had long been broader than under the federal First Amendment. Amendment 2 would strengthen religious rights still further -- except for prisoners. For prisoners, Amendment 2 shrank religious rights, providing that the Missouri freedom-of-religion section "shall not be construed to expand the rights of prisoners in state or local custody beyond those afforded by the laws of the United States." The prisoners claimed that the voter-approved amendment to the Missouri Constitution would, if enforced, deprive prisoners of the additional protections of religious liberty guaranteed by the Missouri Constitution (the prisoners claimed Missouri's Constitution was more protective of an individual's right to religious liberty and expression than federal law). essentially sought to limit Missouri prisoners' religious liberty to that protected by federal law, while providing even greater protection to non-prisoner Missouri citizens. The prisoners claimed this violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. They sought to define a class of all current and future prisoners in the custody of the Missouri Department of Corrections.

On September 10, 2012, the state moved to dismiss the case. On February 25, 2013, the Court (Judge Howard F. Sachs) agreed with the state that the prisoners had not identified any specific endangered exercise of religious liberty, and thus, the case was a "moot dispute over abstract, hypothetical concepts, unripe for judicial resolution." 2013 WL 684189. In dismissing the prisoners' claim, Judge Sachs said that the prisoners did not offer any reason or cite any cases to support a claim that the Missouri Constitution, prior to Amendment 2, provided prisoners any greater protection of religious liberty than federal law. Thus, there was no change in the law for prisoners, and absent a concrete injury, or even a hypothetical situation where religious liberty would be altered by the new amendment, the court had no controversy before it.

The docket shows no sign of an appeal, so the opinion is presumably final.

Summary Authors

Alex Wharton (1/2/2015)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5038134/parties/qandah-v-lombardi/


Judge(s)

Sachs, Howard Frederic (Missouri)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Doty, Grant R. (Missouri)

Rothert, Anthony [Tony] E. (Missouri)

Attorney for Defendant

Trachtenberg, Joanna L.W. (Missouri)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:12-cv-04213

Docket [PACER]

Feb. 25, 2013

Feb. 25, 2013

Docket
1

2:12-cv-04213

Class Action Complaint for Prospective Relief

Aug. 8, 2012

Aug. 8, 2012

Complaint
15

2:12-cv-04213

Memorandum and Order

Feb. 25, 2013

Feb. 25, 2013

Order/Opinion

2013 WL 2013

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5038134/qandah-v-lombardi/

Last updated Feb. 10, 2024, 3 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT against George A. Lombardi filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of All Plaintiffs. Filing fee $350, receipt number 0866−3191164. Service due by 12/10/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 08/08/2012)

Aug. 8, 2012

Aug. 8, 2012

2

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER TRANSFERRING/REASSIGNING CASE to Judge Howard F. Sachs. Upon review, case was redrawn from Missouri Constitution judge deck. Case reassigned to District Judge Howard F. Sachs for all further proceedings. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached. (Russel, Jeri) (Entered: 08/08/2012)

Aug. 8, 2012

Aug. 8, 2012

SUMMONS ISSUED as to George A. Lombardi. (James, Carrie) (Entered: 08/09/2012)

Aug. 9, 2012

Aug. 9, 2012

3

MOTION to certify class filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of All Plaintiffs. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 8/27/2012 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 08/10/2012)

Aug. 10, 2012

Aug. 10, 2012

4

SUGGESTIONS in support re 3 MOTION to certify class filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Samuel J. Howard, Allaeddin K Qandah. (Related document(s) 3 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 08/10/2012)

Aug. 10, 2012

Aug. 10, 2012

5

RETURN OF SERVICE of complaint executed by Allaeddin K Qandah, Samuel J. Howard. George A. Lombardi served on 8/13/2012, answer due 9/4/2012. (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 08/13/2012)

Aug. 13, 2012

Aug. 13, 2012

6

MOTION for extension of time to file response/reply as to 3 MOTION to certify class , 1 Complaint filed by Joanna L.W. Trachtenberg on behalf of George A. Lombardi. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/10/2012 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) 3 , 1 ) (Trachtenberg, Joanna) (Entered: 08/24/2012)

Aug. 24, 2012

Aug. 24, 2012

7

SUGGESTIONS in opposition re 3 MOTION to certify class filed by Joanna L.W. Trachtenberg on behalf of Defendant George A. Lombardi. Reply suggestions due by 9/27/2012 unless otherwise directed by the court (Related document(s) 3 ) (Trachtenberg, Joanna) (Entered: 09/10/2012)

Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

8

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Joanna L.W. Trachtenberg on behalf of George A. Lombardi. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/27/2012 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(Trachtenberg, Joanna) (Entered: 09/10/2012)

Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

9

Consent MOTION for extension of time to file response/reply as to 3 MOTION to certify class filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Samuel J. Howard, Allaeddin K Qandah. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/9/2012 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Related document(s) 3 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/20/2012)

Sept. 20, 2012

Sept. 20, 2012

10

SUGGESTIONS in opposition re 8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Samuel J. Howard, Allaeddin K Qandah. Reply suggestions due by 10/9/2012 unless otherwise directed by the court (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex, A)(Related document(s) 8 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 09/21/2012)

Sept. 21, 2012

Sept. 21, 2012

11

REPLY SUGGESTIONS to motion re 3 MOTION to certify class filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Plaintiffs Samuel J. Howard, Allaeddin K Qandah. (Related document(s) 3 ) (Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 10/01/2012)

Oct. 1, 2012

Oct. 1, 2012

12

REPLY SUGGESTIONS to motion re 8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Joanna L.W. Trachtenberg on behalf of Defendant George A. Lombardi. (Related document(s) 8 ) (Trachtenberg, Joanna) (Entered: 10/09/2012)

Oct. 9, 2012

Oct. 9, 2012

13

MOTION for leave to file surreply regarding defendant's motion to dismiss filed by Anthony E. Rothert on behalf of Samuel J. Howard, Allaeddin K Qandah. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/29/2012 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: # 1 proposed surreply)(Rothert, Anthony) (Entered: 10/11/2012)

Oct. 11, 2012

Oct. 11, 2012

14

ORDER granting 6 defendants motion for extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs' complaint and plaintiffs' motion for class certification with retroactive effect. ORDER granting 9 plaintiffs' motion for extension of time. Plaintiffs are directed to file their reply on or before 10/11/12. Signed on 10/15/12 by District Judge Howard F. Sachs.

Oct. 15, 2012

Oct. 15, 2012

16

CLERK'S JUDGMENT entered on February 25, 2013. (Duer, Tina) (Entered: 02/25/2013)

Feb. 25, 2013

Feb. 25, 2013

15

ORDER granting 8 Motion to Dismiss for mootness or lack of ripeness and the complaint is dismissed. Signed on 02/25/13 by District Judge Howard F. Sachs. (Duer, Tina)

Feb. 25, 2013

Feb. 25, 2013

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Missouri

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 8, 2012

Closing Date: 2013

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Two Missouri prisoners seeking class certification of all present and future Missouri prisoners

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU Affiliates (any)

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Denied

Defendants

State of Missouri, State

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Corrections

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Establishment Clause

Equal Protection

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Non-settlement Outcome

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Religious programs / policies

Discrimination-basis:

Religion discrimination

Type of Facility:

Government-run