Case: Hale v. Jefferson County

On June 30, 2009, the Sheriff and Assistant Sheriff of Jefferson County, Alabama, filed suit in the Circuit Court for the Bessemer Division of Jefferson County, under state law, against Jefferson County. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, sought an immediate temporary restraining order, a preliminary and permanent injunction, and declaratory relief, alleging that actions by the state legislature to reduce budgets during the fiscal year violated state law. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that the County acted "arbitrarily and capriciously with no regard whatsoever for the various needs of the Office of the Sheriff and without regard for any constitutional or statutory obligations imposed on the Office of the Sheriff" by imposing budget cuts during the fiscal year and requiring the Sheriff's Office to submit a proposed budget for the following fiscal year that was 1/3 less than the previous year.

On July 1, 2009, the Circuit Court entered a temporary restraining order and set the matter for hearing on preliminary injunction. On July 2, 2009, defendant filed an emergency petition for relief, arguing that the Circuit Court of the Bessemer Division of Jefferson County lacked jurisdiction and was not authorized to enter a TRO. On July 7, 2009, the Circuit Court ordered the transfer of the case to the Birmingham Division of Jefferson County. On July 9, 2009, the Alabama Supreme Court granted the defendant's emergency petition, finding the Bessemer Division lacked authority to enter a TRO.

On July 16, 2009, the Birmingham Division of Jefferson County granted plaintiff's petition for preliminary injunction. The Court (Judge Joseph Boohaker) found that although the County was facing a budgetary crisis, and the Court did not have the authority to instruct the County on how to resolve the budgetary problems, the County acted "arbitrarily and capriciously" as to the Office of the Sheriff. The court enjoined the County from implementing its budgetary restrictions and ordered the parties to work in good faith towards a resolution. The parties were directed to appear in front of the court again on July 23, 2009 to report on their compliance.

On November 8, 2011, a discussion of the case was included as part of the amended complaint in a related case, Mason v. Hale, 7:11-cv-03155-TMP (

show full summary

Related Cases

Mason v. Hale, Northern District of Alabama (2011)

People

show all people

Docket

Last updated Aug. 30, 2023, 1:47 p.m.