University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Abdullah v. County of St. Louis PN-MO-0004
Docket / Court 4:14-cv-01436 ( E.D. Mo. )
State/Territory Missouri
Case Type(s) Policing
Attorney Organization ACLU Chapters (any)
Case Summary
On August 18, 2014, plaintiff,an individual who has been ordered to refrain from standing for more than five seconds on public sidewalks in the City of Ferguson or face arrest, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The suit was filed against the County of ... read more >
On August 18, 2014, plaintiff,an individual who has been ordered to refrain from standing for more than five seconds on public sidewalks in the City of Ferguson or face arrest, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The suit was filed against the County of St. Louis under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking injunctive and declaratory relief, in addition to nominal damages and attorneys' fees. The plaintiff's claims arose from allegations that the County of St. Louis, and various law enforcement agencies involved in the protests arising from the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, instituted a policy of prohibiting individuals from standing on public sidewalks for more than five seconds under threat of arrest in violation of the First Amendment and Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution.

On October 6, 2014, the District Court (Judge Catherine D. Perry) issued a Memorandum, Order, and Preliminary Injunction entering a preliminary injunction in favor of plaintiff on the basis that the defendant's policy of requiring peaceful protestors to walk, rather than stand still, violates the Constitution and that defendant would likely continue to apply the policy without such an injunction. Specifically, the preliminary injunction bars defendants from enforcing or threatening to enforce a policy or practice of arresting individuals who are peaceably standing or assembling on the public sidewalks and otherwise complying with all laws.

The case is ongoing.

Brendan Brown - 10/10/2014


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Due Process
Freedom of speech/association
Content of Injunction
Preliminary relief granted
Defendant-type
Jurisdiction-wide
Law-enforcement
General
Pattern or Practice
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) County of St. Louis
Plaintiff Description A program coordinator for the ACLU of Missouri affected by the Ferguson no standing still policy
Indexed Lawyer Organizations ACLU Chapters (any)
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief Litigation
Form of Settlement None on record
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)
4:14-cv-01436 (E.D. Mo.) 08/18/2014
PN-MO-0004-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint 08/18/2014
PN-MO-0004-0002.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Memorandum, Order, and Preliminary Injunction 10/06/2014 (E.D. Mo.)
PN-MO-0004-0001.pdf | Detail
Document Source: Plaintiffs' counsel
Judges Perry, Catherine D. (E.D. Mo.) [Magistrate]
PN-MO-0004-0001 | PN-MO-0004-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Clancy, Thomas P. (California)
PN-MO-0004-9000
Davis-Denny, Grant A. (California)
PN-MO-0004-9000
Degtyareva, Victoria A. (California)
PN-MO-0004-9000
Doty, Grant R. (Missouri)
PN-MO-0004-9000
Rehn, Nathan M. (California)
PN-MO-0004-9000
Rothert, Anthony E. (Missouri)
PN-MO-0004-0002 | PN-MO-0004-9000
Trujillo-Jamison, Kenneth M. (California)
PN-MO-0004-9000
Wilcox, Gillian R. (Missouri)
PN-MO-0004-0002 | PN-MO-0004-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Isaacson, Robert J. (Missouri)
PN-MO-0004-9000
Layton, James R. (Missouri)
PN-MO-0004-9000
Shuman, Michael A. (Missouri)
PN-MO-0004-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -