University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name K.L. v. City of Glendale PN-CA-0026
Docket / Court CV1108484 ( C.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Policing
Attorney Organization ACLU of Southern California
Case Summary
On October 13, 2011, eight students (including minors) of Hoover High School (HHS), filed a class-action lawsuit in the Central District of California under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and the California Constitution against the cities of Glendale and Los Angeles and the County of Los Angeles. The plaintiffs, ... read more >
On October 13, 2011, eight students (including minors) of Hoover High School (HHS), filed a class-action lawsuit in the Central District of California under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and the California Constitution against the cities of Glendale and Los Angeles and the County of Los Angeles. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU of Southern California, asked the court for injunctive and monetary relief, claiming discrimination, unlawful search and seizure, and conspiracy to violate civil rights.

Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that on Friday, September 24, 2010, administrators at Hoover High School and officers from the Glendale Police Department, the Los Angeles Police Department, and the Probation Department interrogated, photographed, and collected personal information from approximately 56 students, all of whom were Latino although the school is only 25 percent Latino.

As the students went to the tables where they normally eat lunch, Hoover administrators ordered them into nearby classrooms, where multiple armed and uniformed police officers were waiting for them. The students were detained for between 30 and 90 minutes, during which time they were told that they were on a "gang list" and the officers searched some students and their belongings. They were allowed to leave only after they had submitted to interrogation about their personal information and activities and were forced to pose for mock "mug shots." The school officials and police had no evidence that the students were doing anything illegal or breaking school rules at the time they conducted the roundup. (www.aclusocal.org/kl)

On September 21, 2012, plaintiffs settled with the City of Glendale. On October 19, the County of Los Angeles answered the amended complaint. Subsequent negotiations resulted in an additional settlement, and in September 2013, pursuant to the settlement agreement, the case was voluntarily dismissed against the remaining defendants.

Under the settlements, joint operations between the school officials and police must be approved by the superintendent, except in emergencies. Glendale Unified School District clarified that its policies governing teachers' and administrators' interactions with police, including the requirement that parents be notified when students are interrogated by police, apply both to officers entering from off-campus and those permanently assigned to schools. The Glendale Police Department agreed to train all of its officers on department policies related to interactions with students on campus and to revise its policies regarding racial profiling. Both agencies also agreed to allow independent verification that all information collected during the incident has been destroyed. The agencies also paid monetary damages and attorney's fees.

Nadji Allan - 12/02/2014


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Unreasonable search and seizure
Defendant-type
Law-enforcement
Discrimination-basis
Language discrimination
National origin discrimination
Race discrimination
General
Disparate Treatment
Failure to train
Juveniles
Over/Unlawful Detention
Pattern or Practice
Racial profiling
Record-keeping
Search policies
Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)
Language
Spanish
National Origin/Ethnicity
Hispanic
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action State law
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
42 U.S.C. § 1985
Defendant(s) City of Glendale
City of Los Angeles
County of Los Angeles
Plaintiff Description Latino students of Hoover High School whom had been gathered and subjected to interrogation, search, and photographing by armed police officers while at school.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations ACLU of Southern California
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Moot
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Attorneys fees
Damages
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Private Settlement Agreement
Voluntary Dismissal
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year n/a
Case Ongoing Yes
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Federal Enforcement of Police Reform
By: Stephen Rushin (University of Illinois College of Law, University of California, Berkeley - Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program )
Citation: 82 Fordham Law Review 3189 (2014)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Panopticism for Police: Structural Reform Bargaining and Police Regulation by Data-Driven Surveillance
By: Mary D. Fan (University of Washington)
Citation: Forthcoming, 87 Washington L. Rev. __ (2012).
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  What Happens When Police Are Forced to Reform?
Written: Nov. 13, 2015
By: Kimbriell Kelly, Sarah Childress and Steven Rich (Frontline/Post)
Citation: Washington Post (Nov. 13, 2015)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
2:11-cv-8484 (C.D. Cal.) 09/27/2013
PN-CA-0026-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint for Injunctive Relief, Declaratory Relief and Damages 10/13/2011
PN-CA-0026-0002.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
First Amended Complaint 10/21/2011
PN-CA-0026-0003.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Request for Dismissal and Vacating The Order to Show Cause Hearing 09/16/2013 (C.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0026-0001.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Wright, Otis D. II (C.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0026-0001
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Bibring, Peter (California)
PN-CA-0026-9000
Sapp, David B. (California)
PN-CA-0026-0002 | PN-CA-0026-0003 | PN-CA-0026-9000
Teukolsky, Lauren K. (California)
PN-CA-0026-9000
Voorhees, Bert (California)
PN-CA-0026-0002 | PN-CA-0026-0003 | PN-CA-0026-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Lehman, Jennifer A D (California)
PN-CA-0026-9000
Maurer, Ann M (California)
PN-CA-0026-9000
Smith, Colleen R. (California)
PN-CA-0026-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -