|
|
|
Here are all the additions to the Clearinghouse collection -- cases, summaries, case studies, etc. -- over the past 90 days:
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 24, 2013 |
|
Miami for Peace v. Miami-Dade County
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 07-21088 (S.D. Fla.)
FA-FL-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (FA-FL-0002) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 24, 2013 |
|
Brown v. Free Library of Philadelphia
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-02373 (E.D. Pa.)
DR-PA-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (DR-PA-0002) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 24, 2013 |
|
Ruiz v. Robinson
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-23776-KMM (S.D. Fla.)
ED-FL-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (ED-FL-0002) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 24, 2013 |
|
ACLU of Illinois v. Alvarez
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:10-cv-05235 (N.D. Ill.)
FA-IL-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (FA-IL-0003) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 24, 2013 |
|
Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America v. University of Michigan
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 2:07-CV-11702 (E.D. Mich.)
DR-MI-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (DR-MI-0001) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 24, 2013 |
|
Fletcher v. Lamone
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 8:11-cv-03220-RWT (D. Md.)
VR-MD-0041
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (VR-MD-0041) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 23, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. Henry's Turkey Service
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: No. 3:11-cv-00041 (S.D. Iowa)
EE-IA-0023
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (EE-IA-0023) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 23, 2013 |
|
Askins v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-02600-W-BLM (S.D. Cal.)
FA-CA-0007
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (FA-CA-0007) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 23, 2013 |
|
Barry v. City of New York
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-05533-CLP (E.D.N.Y.)
FA-NY-0006
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (FA-NY-0006) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 23, 2013 |
|
Doe v. Wood County Board of Education
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 6:12-cv-04355 (S.D. W. Va.)
ED-WV-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (ED-WV-0001) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 23, 2013 |
|
P.V. v. School District of Philadelphia
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 2:11-cv-04027-LDD (E.D. Pa.)
ED-PA-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (ED-PA-0003) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 22, 2013 |
|
Brooks v. Gant
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 12–5003–KES (D.S.D.)
VR-SD-0048
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (VR-SD-0048) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 19, 2013 |
|
In re Marriage Cases
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: JCCP No. 4365 (State Court)
PB-CA-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (PB-CA-0001) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 18, 2013 |
|
Baker v. Wildflower Inn
Case Category: Public Accomm./Contracting
Trial Docket: 183-7-11 (State Court)
PA-VT-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (PA-VT-0001) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 18, 2013 |
|
Donaldson v. State of Montana
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: BDV-2010-702 (State Court)
PB-MT-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (PB-MT-0001) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 15, 2013 |
|
Wilder v. Bernstein
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 78 Civ. 957 (S.D.N.Y.)
CW-NY-0005
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (CW-NY-0005) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
May 8, 2013 |
|
Harriss v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: C-74-1884 (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0314
Female employees of Pan American World Airways, Inc. brought this suit on August 20, 1973, The complaint alleged that Pan Am's pregnancy policy was discriminatory, and disparately impacted all female employees of the company. A plaintiff class of all female flight attendants who were employed by Pan Am after October 24, 1972 was certified in 1977. The 9th Circuit held in 1980 that the policy requiring pregnant flight attendants to stop working was justified by safety considerations, but that additional facts were needed to evaluate the policy governing when previously pregnant attendants could restart work, and their seniority. The outcome of this action on remand is unknown. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0314) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
May 7, 2013 |
|
Cooper v. Pate
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: NO. 14127 (N.D. Ill.)
PC-IL-0026
In this landmark federal lawsuit, filed in 1963, a state prisoner alleged religious discrimination against him because he was a member of the Nation of Islam. Although the trial court and the court of appeals dismissed the suit, the Supreme Court reversed, in its first opinion allowing a prisoner civil rights lawsuit to proceed. At a 1965 trial on remand, the district largely found for the plaintiff, and granted an injunction; the 7th Circuit affirmed in 1967. |
|
View Case Detail (PC-IL-0026) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
May 7, 2013 |
|
Waterman v. Verniero
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:98-cv-1938 (D.N.J.)
PC-NJ-0018
Two prisoners at a facility for sex offenders filed this §1983 action against the state of New Jersey in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleging a violation of their First Amendment rights. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that a New Jersey law banning "sexually oriented materials" in the state's Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center (ADTC) was unconstitutionally overbroad and vague, as well as a violation of their right to free speech. The Court of Appeals upheld the constitutionality of the state statute. The district court subsequently rejected plaintiff's catalyst-based request for attorney fees. |
|
View Case Detail (PC-NJ-0018) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
May 7, 2013 |
|
Hoffer v. Fair
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: SJ-1985-0071 (State Court)
PC-MA-0029
This state court case dealt with the procedures used to send prisoners to the segregation unit (DSU) at Massachusetts Correctional Institute-Cedar Junction approval. In 1989, the Court ordered that defendants promulgate new DSU regulations that comply with an specific minimum requirements regarding the process and standard of referral for transfer to DSU, as well as conditions within the DSU, and in 1995, the Court issued a post-judgment final order, enjoining defendants from repealing the DSU regulations. |
|
View Case Detail (PC-MA-0029) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
May 7, 2013 |
|
Haverty v. Commissioner of Correction
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: SUCV1995-03634 (State Court)
PC-MA-0028
This lawsuit in Suffolk Superior Court began in 1995, and alleged that conditions of confinement in the East Wing units of MCI-Cedar Junction violated due process, and that Massachusetts' gang policy violated equal protection right. After substantial litigation, the trial court in 1999 granted summary judgment for plaintiffs on the due process claim, and the Mass. Supreme Judicial Court affirmed, holding that the Departmental Segregation Units (DSU) regulations must be obeyed in relevant units. In 2003, the trial court granted plaintiffs equitable relief regarding their equal protection claim, but the Mass. Supreme Court quickly disagreed, holding later that year that the trial court lacked authority to award unearned good-time credits as an equitable remedy. |
|
View Case Detail (PC-MA-0028) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
May 7, 2013 |
|
Avant v. Clifford
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1883-71 (State Court)
PC-NJ-0017
In this lawsuit decided in 1975 by the N.J. Supreme Court, a group of past and present state prisoners challenged the disciplinary procedures used to put them into solitary confinement. On June 23, 1975, the N.J. Supreme Court (Chief Justice Hughes) affirmed that the applicable standards met due process requirements and found that the legislature had properly granted defendants authority to promulgate those standards.. |
|
View Case Detail (PC-NJ-0017) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
May 6, 2013 |
|
Johnson v. Avery
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: Civ. No. 4170 (M.D. Tenn.)
PC-TN-0014
In July 1965, an inmate housed at Tennessee's State Penitentiary, Nashville, submitted a motion in the United States District Court, Middle District of Tennessee, seeking law books, a typewriter, and release from solitary confinement. Specifically, plaintiff alleged that his ongoing solitary confinement, as punishment for helping other inmates prepare habeas petitions, violated his 14th Amendment right to due process and sought injunctive relief. The Court treated the motion as a petition for habeas corpus and found for plaintiff, holding that defendants’ regulation banning 'jailhouse lawyers' was void because it effectively withheld access to federal habeas corpus from illiterate prisoners. The Court ordered defendants to restore plaintiff to ordinary prisoner status. Defendants appealed, and the 6th Circuit reversed, but was in turn reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court. |
|
View Case Detail (PC-TN-0014) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 4, 2013 |
|
Marisol A. v. Giuliani
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 95-cv-10533 (RJW) (S.D.N.Y.)
CW-NY-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (CW-NY-0001) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
May 2, 2013 |
|
McLaughlin v. Panetta
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-11905-RGS (D. Mass.)
PB-MA-0010
Plaintiffs are former service members of the U.S. Armed Forces, married to spouses of their same sex. They filed this suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on October 27, 2011, challenging the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and other exclusionary provisions of the U.S. Code. The statutes in question preclude the military from providing the plaintiffs marital benefits and family support that are offered to heterosexual couples. The case has been stayed pending Supreme Court consideration of a cert. petition in another case raising the same issue, Gill. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-MA-0010) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
April 26, 2013 |
|
Billy A. & Miss. Coalition for Citizens with Disabilities v. Lewis-Payton
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:02-cv-00475-HTW-JCS (S.D. Miss.)
PB-MS-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (PB-MS-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 25, 2013 |
|
R.C. v. Hornsby
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: No. CIV. A. 88-D-1170-N (M.D. Ala.)
CW-AL-0001
On November 15, 1988, the children of Alabama with behavioral or emotional disorders filed an action against the Alabama Department of Human Resources (DHR). The plaintiffs were represented by the Bazelon Center, Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program, and Southern Poverty Law Center.
The suit resulted in a consent decree heavily focused on providing services to help prevent these children from entering the foster care system and to expedite the process of reuniting families by providing in-home support and other services. On January 16, 2007, the consent decree was terminated. |
|
View Case Detail (CW-AL-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 24, 2013 |
|
Sam M. v. Chafee
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 1:07−cv−00241 (D.R.I.)
CW-RI-0002
On June 28, 2007, the Next Friends of ten named minor plaintiffs filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island. The plaintiffs are, or were, at the inception of this case, ten minor children who had been taken into the legal custody of the Rhode Island Department of Children, Youth and Families (“DCYF”) because of a report or suspicion of abuse or neglect. The case alleged systematic violations of the rights of such children, and sought class certification and injunctive relief. Thus far, the class certification issue is pending. A number of plaintiffs have aged out of the system, but the court has denied two motions to dismiss. The case is in active litigation as of December 2012. |
|
View Case Detail (CW-RI-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 24, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. Simat, Helliesen, & Eichner, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:97-cv-07168-KMW-MHD (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0235
In September 1997, the EEOC brought this action in the Southern District of New York under Title VII against Simat, Helliesen & Eichner (SH&E), an airline consulting firm, and affiliate Reed Elsevier. The EEOC alleged that female employees were subjected to sexual harassment in SH&E's Manhattan office. In February 2003, the court entered a consent decree, which awarded plaintiffs $2.3 million and required the defendants to conduct Title VII training and enjoined them from discriminating in violation of Title VII. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0235) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 23, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. Simat, Hellisen, and Eichner, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:00−cv−07296 (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0151
In September 2000, the EEOC filed this action in the Southern District of New York against airline consulting firm Simat, Helliesen & Eichner, Inc. (SH&E). Few details about this lawsuit are available, but it is related to two actions brought against the same defendant in 1997, which alleged that SH&E's female employees were subjected to sexual harassment. In June 2002, the parties settled and the plaintiff was awarded $135,000. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0151) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 23, 2013 |
|
Tesorov v. Simat, Helliesen
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:97-cv-07176-KMW-MHD (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0145
In September 24, 1997, five female employees brought this action in the Southern District of New York under Title VII against airline consulting firm Simat, Helliesen & Eichner (SH&E) and its affiliate Reed Elsevier. The plaintiffs claimed they were subjected to a sexually hostile work environment at SH&E's Manhattan headquarters. The EEOC filed a complaint on behalf of the same plaintiffs the same day, and the two cases were consolidated for discovery purposes in April 1998. In February 2003, the court approved a consent decree in favor of the plaintiffs, who were awarded $2,300,000, and defendants were enjoined from discriminating in violation of Title VII and were required to implement a training program for their employees. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0145) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Colorado Christian University v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-03350-CMA-BNB (D. Colo.)
FA-CO-0002
In 2011, a Christian liberal arts college filed a RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, arguing that the rules infringed on its religious freedom by requiring it to provide coverage for emergency contraception through their group health insurance plan. In January 2013, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the plaintiff had not demonstrated imminent harm, and issued a final judgment declaring the case dismissed in its entirety. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-CO-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Belmont Abbey College v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-01989-JEB (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0003
In 2011, a Catholic liberal arts college filed a RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, arguing that the rules infringed on its religious freedom by requiring it to provide coverage for contraception through its group health insurance plan. In July 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the plaintiff had not demonstrated imminent harm. The plaintiff appealed that order to the D.C. Circuit, which affirmed the dismissal and ordered that the case be held in abeyance pending the issuance of amended regulations by the defendant departments. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-DC-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Ave Maria University v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-00088-UA-SPC (M.D. Fla.)
FA-FL-0003
In 2012, a Catholic liberal arts college filed a RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, arguing that the rules infringed on its religious freedom by requiring it to provide coverage for contraception through its group health insurance plan. In March 2013, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the plaintiff's claim was not yet ripe for review. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-FL-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Newland v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-01123-JLK (D. Colo.)
FA-CO-0003
In 2012, a family of Catholic business owners filed a RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, arguing that the rules infringed on their religious freedom by requiring them to provide coverage for contraception through their business's group health insurance plan. In July 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado granted the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that the contraception mandate was not the least restrictive means of advancing the government's allegedly compelling interest in women's health and equality. The defendants have appealed that order to the 10th Circuit. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-CO-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
College of the Ozarks v. Dep't of Health and Human Servs.
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-03428 (W.D. Mo.)
FA-MO-0004
On September 17, 2012, the College of the Ozarks filed a lawsuit in the Western District of Missouri against the Federal Government, seeking to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs were granted voluntary dismissal of the case on January 16, 2013. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-MO-0004) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Louisiana College v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-00463 (W.D. La.)
FA-LA-0002
On February 18, 2012, Louisiana College filed a lawsuit in the Western District of Louisiana against the Federal Government, seeking to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On March 16, 2013, Judge Dee D. Drell ordered dismissal of the case for a lack of ripeness. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-LA-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-01635-RBW (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0005
On October 2, 2012, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., and its owner filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Michigan against the Federal Government, seekingto enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On November 16, 2012, Judge Reggie B. Walton granted a preliminary injunction, at which point the federal government appealed to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-DC-0005) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Eden Foods v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 2:13-cv-11229-DPH-MAR (E.D. Mich.)
FA-MI-0008
On March 20, 2013, Eden Foods, Inc., and its owner filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Michigan against the Federal Government, seeking to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On March 22, 2013, Judge Denise Page Hood denied plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order. The case is ongoing, and a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction has been scheduled for May 10, 2013. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-MI-0008) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Wenski v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-23820 (S.D. Fla.)
FA-FL-0004
On May 21, 2012, the Catholic Archbishops of Miami, on behalf of his respective diocese, along with several affiliated Catholic organizations, filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida against the Federal Government seeking to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. On March 4, 2013, Judge Donald L. Graham granted defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of ripeness. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-FL-0004) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Domino's Farms Corp. v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-15488-LPZ-MJH (E.D. Mich.)
FA-MI-0007
On December 14, 2012, Domino's Food, and its owner filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Michigan against the Federal Government, seeking to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On March 14, Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff granted plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-MI-0007) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Grote Industries v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 4:12-cv-00134-SEB-DML (S.D. Ind.)
FA-IN-0004
On October 29, 2012, Grote Industries and its owners filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of Indiana against the Federal Government. Plaintiffs seek to enjoin enforcement of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), contending that mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On December 27, 2012, Judge Sarah Evans Barker denied plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction. On January 9, 2013, plaintiffs appealed to the Seventh Circuit, who granted an injunction pending appeal on January 30. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-IN-0004) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Gilardi v. Dep't of Health and Human Services [Gilardi v. Sebelius]
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00104-EGS (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0004
On January 24, 2013, Freshway Foods and their owners filed a lawsuit in the DC District Court against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by public interest attorneys from the American Center for Law and Justice, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), contending that the mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. An injunction pending appeal has been ordered by the DC Circuit Court, and oral arguments are scheduled in Circuit Court for September 2013. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-DC-0004) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-03489 (N.D. Ga.)
FA-GA-0001
On October 5, 2012, the Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta, the Catholic Diocese of Savannah, and affiliated Catholic organizations filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Georgia against the Federal Government, seeking to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-GA-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Triune Health Group, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Servs.
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-06756 (N.D. Ill.)
FA-IL-0004
On August 22, 2012, Triune Health Group, Inc. and its owners filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), contending that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On January 3, 2013, Judge Amy St. Eve granted a preliminary injunction stopping the Federal Government from enforcing the contraception mandate until the Court determines the merits of Plaintiffs’ case and if further injunctive relief is needed. Defendants have appealed the preliminary injunction to the 8th Circuit. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-IL-0004) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Autocam Corp. v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-01096 (W.D. Mich.)
FA-MI-0005
On October 8, 2012, two affiliated companies, Autocam Corporation and Autocam Medical, LLC, along with their owners filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan against the federal government, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by attorneys from CatholicVote Legal Defense Fund, the Thomas More Society, and private counsel, sought to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), contending that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On October 12, 2012, District Judge Robert Jonker denied plaintiffs’ motion for an injunction in an unpublished opinion, which plaintiffs appealed to the 6th Circuit. The 6th Circuit denied a temporary injunction pending appeal, and the case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-MI-0005) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Criswell College v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-04409 (N.D. Tex.)
FA-TX-0006
On February 1, 2012, Criswell College, an evangelical Protestant college located in Dallas, filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), the First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-TX-0006) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Priests for Life v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-00753-FB-RER (E.D.N.Y.)
FA-NY-0005
On February 15, 2012, Priests for Life filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First and Fifth Amendments. Plaintiffs, represented by the American Freedom Law Center and private counsel, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-NY-0005) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Roman Catholic Diocese of Fort Worth v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 4:12-cv-00314 (N.D. Tex.)
FA-TX-0002
On May 21, 2012, the Catholic Diocese of Fort Worth filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-TX-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Archdiocese of St. Louis v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 4:12-cv-00924 (E.D. Mo.)
FA-MO-0001
On May 21, 2012, the Archdiocese of St. Louis and an affiliated charity filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Missouri against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On January 29, 2013, Judge John A. Ross granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the case for lack of ripeness. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-MO-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Grace Schools v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-459 (N.D. Ind.)
FA-IN-0003
On August 23, 2012, Grace College and Seminary, and Biola University, Inc., filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Indiana against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First and Fifth Amendments. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel and the Alliance Defending Freedom, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-IN-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Geneva College v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-00207 (W.D. Pa.)
FA-PA-0005
On February 21, 2012, a Christian College organized as a not-for-profit corporation, along with its majority stakeholder, another shareholder, and two affiliated companies filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania against the federal government, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First and Fifth Amendments. Plaintiffs, represented by attorneys from the Alliance Defense Fund, and private counsel, sought to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending mandatory contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contended that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On April 19, 2013, Judge Joy Flowers Conti granted plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-PA-0005) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
East Texas Baptist University v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 4:12-cv-03009 (S.D. Tex.)
FA-TX-0005
In 2012, two Baptist universities filed a RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, arguing that the rules infringed on their religious freedom and free speech rights by requiring them to provide coverage for contraception through their group health insurance plans. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-TX-0005) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 5:12-CV-01000-HE (W.D. Okla.)
FA-OK-0001
In 2012, evangelical Christian business owners filed a RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, arguing that the rules infringed on their religious freedom by requiring them to provide coverage for emergency contraception through their group health insurance plan. In November 2012, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that the contraception mandate did not substantially burden the plaintiffs' religious freedom. The 10th Circuit has granted expedited en banc review, and oral arguments are scheduled to occur on May 23. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-OK-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 22, 2013 |
|
Annex Medical, Inc. v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 0:12-cv-02804-DSD-SER (D. Minn.)
FA-MN-0003
In 2012, Catholic business owners filed a RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, arguing that the rules infringed on their religious freedom by requiring them to provide coverage for contraception through their businesses' group health insurance plans. In January 2013, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that the contraception mandate did not substantially burden the plaintiffs' religious freedom. The plaintiffs have appealed that order to the 8th Circuit. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-MN-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 19, 2013 |
|
A.W. v. Davis School District
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-00242-EJF (D. Utah)
FA-UT-0001
Plaintiff, on behalf of her two children, filed suit alleging that her childrens' First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were restricted when the Defendant school district removed a book depicting children with same-sex parents from regular circulation to the restricted section of the school library. In February 2013, the matter settled: Defendants agreed to return the book to regular circulation, to not remove the book from libraries for any reason based on its content, and not to rely on Utah Code §53A-13-101 as a basis for content discrimination. Plaintiffs agreed that the book may be restricted on a per-student basis, just as any other book may, at the request of a parent or guardian. As part of the agreement, both parties filed motions to dismiss. The case closed on February 4, 2013. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-UT-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 19, 2013 |
|
Hampe v. Hamos
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:10-cv-03121 (N.D. Ill.)
PB-IL-0010
Several medically fragile young adults filed this lawsuit challenging the state's policy of drastically reducing community-based services upon the recipient's 21st birthday. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-IL-0010) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 19, 2013 |
|
Disability Rights New Jersey v. Velez
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:05-cv-04723 (D.N.J.)
PB-NJ-0007
Disability Rights New Jersey (DRNJ), the state Protection and Advocacy agency, filed this lawsuit to challenge New Jersey's pervasive over-institutionalization of individuals with developmental disabilities. The court denied cross-motions for summary judgment in the fall of 2010. The parties entered a settlement agreement in early 2013 which will provide for the integration of unnecessarily institutionalized individuals into community placements in New Jersey. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-NJ-0007) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 19, 2013 |
|
Conlon v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-03932 (N.D. Ill.)
FA-IL-0002
On May 21, 2012, the Catholic Bishops of Joliet, IL and Springfield, IL, and several affiliated Catholic organizations, filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. On February 8, 2013, Judge John W. Darrah granted defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of ripeness. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-IL-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 19, 2013 |
|
Office of the Child Advocate v. Lindgren
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 1:86-cv-00723-L (D.R.I.)
CW-RI-0003
Plaintiff, the Office of the Child Advocate, sought declaratory and injunctive relief against Rhode Island’s Department for Children, Youth and Families for its practice of placing children in its custody in “night-to-night” placement. The case was filed in 1986, and settled two years later. The settlement was then amended in 1989. In June of 2007, however, the plaintiff told the court that this case had failed to solve the problems it addressed, and that a new more comprehensive case was needed. On plaintiffs' request, the court ordered in July 2007 that the consent decree be vacated and dismissed the case without prejudice. |
|
View Case Detail (CW-RI-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 18, 2013 |
|
Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co.
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 1:09-cv-02757-WYD-KMT (D. Colo.)
DR-CO-0020
Individuals who use wheelchairs and an organization representing their interests filed this class action lawsuit to challenge the inaccessible design of Hollister stores. In March 2013, the court ruled that Hollister's design violated the ADA. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (DR-CO-0020) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Jock v. Sterling Jewelers Inc.,
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 08-CV-02875 (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0237
In 2008, current and former female employees of Sterling Jewelers, Inc. filed a class action lawsuit against Sterling in the Southern District of New York claiming sex and age discrimination. Pursuant to their employment contract, Plaintiffs were required to initiate alternative dispute resolution through Sterling's "RESOLVE" program. In June 2009, an arbitrator determined that Plaintiffs could pursue class action arbitration. After a lengthy appeals process, the Second Circuit ordered the district court to confirm the arbitration award in October 2011. The arbitration is still ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0237) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Wheaton College v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-01169-ESH (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0002
In 2012, a Christian liberal arts college filed a RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, arguing that the rules infringed on its religious freedom by requiring it to provide coverage for emergency contraception through their group health insurance plan. In August 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction and denied the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiff had not demonstrated imminent harm. The plaintiff appealed that order to the D.C. Circuit, which affirmed the dismissal and injunction denial and ordered that the case be held in abeyance pending the issuance of amended regulations by the defendant departments. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-DC-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Baby Neal v. Casey
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 2:90-cv-02343-RK (E.D. Pa.)
CW-PA-0002
Plaintiffs were neglected and abused children placed in Philadelphia's Department of Human Services. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief against the state for failing to comply with statutory and constitutional requirements that protect and serve children in the child welfare system. This case was filed in 1990, and the final settlement agreement was reached in 2001. |
|
View Case Detail (CW-PA-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. GEORGIA PACIFIC
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 5:00-cv-00700-BO (E.D.N.C.)
EE-NC-0129
In 2000, the the EEOC brought this suit in the Eastern District of North Carolina under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against Georgia Pacific Corporation, one of the world’s largest manufacturers of packaging and building materials. The complaint alleged Georgia Pacific had engaged in discrimination based on race and national origin, sex discrimination, and retaliation against those employees who complained about discriminatory practices. A consent decree was entered in 2001; a class of African-American current and former employees was awarded $198,417.05, while a named plaintiff-intervenor was awarded an additional $1,582.95. The Decree, which was effective for two years, also provided for mandatory training, reporting, and EEOC oversight, as well as injunctive relief against discrimination. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-NC-0129) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. AMELCO ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 3:05-cv-02492-MEJ (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0012
In June 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed this suit in the Northern District of California under Title VII against Amelco Electric S.F., Inc. and Amelco Corporation, claiming Amelco had discriminated against its employees because of the sex, race, national origin, and religion. The parties settled on August 28, 2006, and plaintiffs were awarded $125,000. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0012) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Robinson v. Compass Group
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:08-cv-05577−SD (E.D. Pa.)
EE-PA-0229
In 2008, eleven African American plaintiffs filed suit in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against Compass Group PLC and its subsidiaries, claiming that compass had engaged in a patter and practice of race and color discrimination. In August 2009, the court dismissed the case with prejudice, noting the parties had reached a settlement agreement. The contents of the settlement is not available. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-PA-0229) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. Jack of All Trades Personnel Services, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 6:04-cv-00157 (W.D. Tex.)
EE-TX-0453
In February 2004, the EEOC filed this suit in the Northern District of Texas under Title I of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 against Jack of All Trades Personnel Services, Inc. The EEOC alleged that Jack of All Trades had engaged in discriminatory hiring practices; specifically, the company required prospective employees to undergo an unlawful medical examination and based its hiring decisions on the outcome of that exam. The case was transferred to the Western District of Texas in April 2004, and a Consent Decree was entered in February of 2005. The Decree provided for a monetary award of $154,224 for the class of individuals affected by Jack of All Trade's hiring practices as well as injunctive relief. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-TX-0453) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Fisher v. Oklahoma Health Care Authority
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 4:02-cv-00762 (N.D. Okla.)
PB-OK-0002
Plaintiffs filed this challenge to the state's planned reduction of prescription drug coverage for individuals with disabilities who live in the community and receive services via a Medicaid waiver. The District Court held that non-institutionalized plaintiffs could not assert a claim under Olmstead. The Tenth Circuit reversed, holding that alleging a risk of institutionalization was sufficient. The case then settled. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-OK-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Peter B. v. Sanford
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 6:10-cv-00767 (D.S.C.)
PB-SC-0001
Plaintiffs, individuals with disabilities in South Carolina, filed this lawsuit to challenge South Carolina's reduction of services under the MR/RD Waiver. The District Court granted a preliminary injunction preventing the reduction in services in March 2011. The case remains open. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-SC-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Joseph S. v. Hogan
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 2:06-cv-01042-BMC-SMG (E.D.N.Y.)
PB-NY-0020
Plaintiffs filed this challenge to New York's practice of warehousing individuals with mental illness in nursing homes. The District Court denied a motion to dismiss in May 2008. In September 2011, the parties settled, with the state agreeing to move all individuals with mental illness who were inappropriately placed into nursing homes to community placements. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-NY-0020) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Eternal World Television Network v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-00501-SLB (N.D. Ala.)
FA-AL-0002
In 2012, a Catholic media network filed a RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, arguing that the rules infringed on its religious freedom by requiring it to provide coverage for contraception through its group health insurance plan. In March 2013, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the plaintiff's claim was not yet ripe for review. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-AL-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Arizona Dream Act Coalition v. Brewer
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-02546 (D. Ariz.)
IM-AZ-0019
On November 29, 2012, Plaintiffs filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona against the State of Arizona. Plaintiffs are immigrants eligible for the federal DACA program, claiming that Arizona is illegally denying them a driver’s license. The ruling on Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction, and Defendants’ motion to dismiss and for summary judgment is currently pending. |
|
View Case Detail (IM-AZ-0019) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Gayle v. Napolitano
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-02806 (D.N.J.)
IM-NJ-0009
In 2012, non-citizens held in New Jersey correctional facilities pursuant to mandatory detention under the Immigration and Nationality Act, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The Plaintiffs filed suit against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. On March 15, 2013, the court (Judge Freda L. Wolfson) granted Plaintiff Gayle’s petition, and ordered a bond hearing within 10 days of the order. This terminated the case. |
|
View Case Detail (IM-NJ-0009) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
April 8, 2013 |
|
Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-00815-ABJ (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0001
On May 21, 2012, the Catholic Archbishop of Washington and several affiliated Catholic organizations filed a lawsuit in the District of DC against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs, and seek to enjoin their enforcement. On January 25, 2013, Judge Amy Berman Jackson granted defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claims for a lack of ripeness. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-DC-0001) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
April 5, 2013 |
|
BH v. DCFS
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 88 C 5599 (N.D. Ill.)
CW-IL-0003
The ACLU filed a class action lawsuit in 1988 against the state of Illinois on behalf of all children in the custody of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) who have been placed somewhere other than with their parents. The plaintiffs alleged that DCFS assigned too many cases to caseworkers, placed children in inappropriate institutions, and failed to respond to reports of child abuse. The parties entered a consent agreement under the supervision of a court monitor in 1991. The parties modified the consent decree in 1997, and again in 2003. As of August, 2012, DCFS was still out of compliance because investigator caseloads were too high. The parties negotiated an implementation plan to address investigation caseloads. |
|
View Case Detail (CW-IL-0003) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
April 4, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. FURNITURELAND SOUTH
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:02-cv-00703-WLO (M.D. N.C.)
EE-NC-0042
In August 2002, the EEOC district office in Charlotte, North Carolina brought this action in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina against Furnitureland South, Inc, alleging discrimination on the basis of national origin. The parties attended mediate and a consent decree was entered in 2003, which provided for monetary and injunctive relief. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-NC-0042) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
April 4, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. ZENELI INC
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:98-cv-72291-PDB (E.D. Mich.)
EE-MI-0142
In June 1998, the Detroit office of the EEOC brought this suit against Zeneli, Inc. and Southeast Michigan Management Corp. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The case settled by entry of a consent decree in July 1999. No information was made available pertaining to ...
|
|
View Case Detail (EE-MI-0142) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
April 4, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. TRIAD CLINICAL LABORATORY
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:04-cv-00787 (M.D. N.C.)
EE-NC-0117
In 2004, the Charlotte District Office of the EEOC, brought this suit against Triad Clinical Laboratory, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina alleging sex discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The parties reached a settlement in 2005, which provided for monetary and injunctive relief. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-NC-0117) |
|
|
CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES |
March 31, 2013 |
|
With an Eye to the Past: State Institutions Documents from Welsch v. Likins
With an Eye to the Past - State Institutions Documents: Welsch Case Documents
Written: Mar. 31, 2013
By: Minnesota Governor's Council on Developmental Disabilities
The Minnesota Governor's Council on Developmental Disabilities has compiled opinions and orders from Welsch v. Likins, as well as related documents, policy analysis, and newspaper articles from the Minneapolis Star Tribune.*
|
|
View Link Detail |
|
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 31, 2013 |
|
Brown v. Tennessee Department of Finance and Administration
Case Category: Mental Health (Facility)
Trial Docket: 00-0665 (M.D. Tenn.)
MH-TN-0002
On July 13, 2000 a group of developmentally disabled individuals and two advocacy organizations filed suit against the Tennessee Department of Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities in the Federal District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. They claimed that the defendants were violating the Medicaid Act by preventing them from receiving community based treatment. On April 30, 2001 the court certified a class and on June 15, 2004 the court approved a settlement that included provisions to provide more slots for community based treatment services. The court denied the defendants’ motion to vacate the settlement and dismiss the case on September 12, 2007 and denied the plaintiffs’ motion for specific performance on July 8, 2008. The defendants appealed and on March 9, 2009 the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for reconsideration. On July 24, 2009 the district court vacated the settlement as to one provision and granted the defendants summary judgment on the remaining issues in dispute. The case was closed on February 5, 2010. |
|
View Case Detail (MH-TN-0002) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 31, 2013 |
|
Buquer v. City of Indianapolis
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-00708-SEB-MJD (S.D. Ind.)
IM-IN-0002
On May 25, 2011, three foreign residents of Indiana filed a class action lawsuit against the cities of Indianapolis and Franklin and the counties of Marion and Johnson, seeking to enjoin enforcement of Indiana's Senate Enrolled Act 590, which would allow local law enforcement officers to make warrantless arrests of people who were subject to a removal order issued by an immigration court or a detainer or notice of action issued by the Department of Homeland Security, or who had been indicted or convicted of an aggravated felony, and would make the use of consular identification cards for identification within the state a civil infraction punishable by fine. On March 28, 2013, the District Court (Judge Barker) ruled in favor of plaintiffs, granting their motion for summary judgment, and permanently enjoining defendants from enforcing Sections 18 and 20 of SEA 590. Because plaintiffs' suit was dependent upon enforcement of these sections, the matter was dismissed without prejudice. |
|
View Case Detail (IM-IN-0002) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 29, 2013 |
|
Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-00159 (N.D. Ind.)
FA-IN-0002
On May 21, 2012, the Catholic Diocese of Fort Worth-South Bend and affiliated Catholic organizations filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Missouri against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On March 14, Judge Jon A. DeGuilio stayed the case pending (1) finalization of contraceptive regulations; and (2) appeal of University of Notre Dame v. Sebelius. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-IN-0002) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 29, 2013 |
|
Roman Catholic Diocese of Dallas v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-01589 (N.D. Tex.)
FA-TX-0003
On May 21, 2012, the Catholic Diocese of Dallas filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Missouri against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs, seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage, contending that that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On February 26, 2013, Judge Jane J. Boyle granted defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of ripeness. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-TX-0003) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 29, 2013 |
|
Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-02542 (E.D.N.Y.)
FA-NY-0003
On May 21, 2012, the Catholic Archdiocese of New York and other affiliated Catholic organizations filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First and Fifth Amendments. Plaintiffs seek to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contend that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On December 4, Judge Cogan granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss the case, essentially leaving adjudication of the merits of the case ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-NY-0003) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 29, 2013 |
|
Persico v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-00123-SPB (W.D. Pa.)
FA-PA-0004
On May 21, 2012, the Catholic Diocese of Erie and affiliated Catholic organizations filed a lawsuit in the Western District of Pennsylvania against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs sought to enjoin enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. On January 22, 2013, Judge Sean McLaughlin granted the U.S. motion to dismiss all of plaintiffs' claims as unripe. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-PA-0004) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 26, 2013 |
|
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Board of Education
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 3:65-cv-01974 (W.D.N.C.)
SD-NC-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (SD-NC-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 24, 2013 |
|
Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by any Means Necessary (BAMN) v. Granholm
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 2:06-cv-15024-DML-RSW (E.D. Mich.)
ED-MI-0001
On November 7, 2006, the people of Michigan approved by majority vote a statewide ballot initiative—Proposal 2—which amended the Michigan Constitution to prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment based on race or gender in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting in the State. Both Proposal 2 and the University of Michigan's announcement that it would comply triggered litigation. On November 15, 2012, the en banc Sixth Circuit held that Proposal 2 created a comparative structural burden that undermined the Equal Protection Clause (which the court called the "political process" argument). Accordingly, the court found Proposal 2 unconstitutional. On March 24, 2013, the Supreme Court granted review of the case. Argument will be after the Court's summer break. |
|
View Case Detail (ED-MI-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 21, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. EASTERN ENGINEERED WOOD PRODUCTS INC.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:05-cv-04786-CG (E.D. Pa.)
EE-PA-0062
In September 2005, the EEOC filed this suit in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania under Title VII against Eastern Engineered Wood Products (EEWP). The EEOC alleged that the co-owner of EEWP had sexually harassed the company's Vice President, who, due to the hostile work environment, was constructively discharged. This case was later consolidated with an action filed by the EEOC on behalf of EEWP's former President, who was discharged after he investigated the Vice President's sexual harassment complaints. In May 2006, the parties reached a settlement agreement. EEWP's former President was awarded $1,900,000 while EEWP's former Vice President was awarded $1,200,000. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-PA-0062) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 21, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. AIRGUIDE CORPORATION
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:02-cv-22912-JAL (S.D. Fla.)
EE-FL-0002
In September 2002, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed this lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida under Title VII against Airguide Corporation and Pioneer Metals. The complaint alleged that Defendants had engaged in pervase sexual harassment and had retaliated against employees who had complained of the discriminatory practices, participated in the EEOC's investigation, or filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. In June 2004, the court entered the Consent Decree, which awarded Plaintiffs $1,000,000 and prohibited Defendants from violating Title VII. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-FL-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 21, 2013 |
|
Griego v. Oliver
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: (State Court)
PB-NM-0002
This case was filed on March 21, 2013, by four women (two couples) who seek New Mexico marriage licenses. They argue that the marriage statute does not bar same-sex marriage, and that the have a constitutional right to marriage equality under the state constitution's equal protection clause, due process clause, and other clauses. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-NM-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 21, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. AMELCO ELECTRIC SAN FRANCISCO, INC.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 3:06-cv-03008-CRB (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0013
In May 2006, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed this suit in the Northern District of California under Title VII against Amelco Electric S.F., Inc. and Amelco Corporation, claiming Amelco had discriminated against its employees because of the sex, race, and/or national origin. The parties settled on August 28, 2006, and plaintiffs were awarded $125,000. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0013) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 21, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. TYSON FOOD, INC.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:05-cv-01704-KOB (N.D. Ala.)
EE-AL-0081
In 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Alabama against Tyson Foods, Inc. Fourteen current and former African American employees at Tyson's Ashland, Alabama plant filed a lawsuit over the same issues, and the cases were consolidated. Plaintiffs claimed that Tyson had maintained racially segregated facilities and had subjected African American employees to a racially hostile work environment and retaliation and threats. On November 7, 2006, the parties settled and Plaintiffs received $871,000, while Tyson was required to institute anti-discrimination policies and programs at its Ashland plant. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-AL-0081) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 21, 2013 |
|
LAKE v. AK STEEL CORPORATION
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:03-cv-00517-DSC (W.D. Pa.)
EE-PA-0001
In April 2003, African American employees of AK Steel Corporation filed this suit in the Western District of Pennsylvania under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Plaintiffs claimed that AK Steel had engaged in race discrimination. This action was later consolidated with a case brought against the same defendant by the EEOC and another action brought by one of the named plaintiffs in this case. The parties settled in January 2007, and the plaintiffs were awarded $550,000. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-PA-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 21, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. ALLIED SIGNAL, INC.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 98-1409 PHX RCB (D. Ariz.)
EE-AZ-0003
In July 1998, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed this suit in the District of Arizona under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 against AlliedSignal. The EEOC, on behalf of a class of over 300 former employes aged forty or older, alleged that AlliedSignal had engaged in age discrimination during is force reduction between 1993 and 1994. The parties settled in November 1999, and the plaintiff class was awarded $8,000,000. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-AZ-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 21, 2013 |
|
EEOC v. Hugh O'Kane Electric
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 8:02-cv-02503-BEL (D. Md.)
EE-MD-0054
In July 2002, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed this suit in the District of Maryland under Titile VII against Hugh O'Kane Electric Co. (HOK). The EEOC accused HOK of discriminating against its employees based on race and national origin. The parties agreed to a settlement and a Consent Decree was signed in August 2003. Plaintiffs were awarded $1,100,000 and HOK was enjoined from engaging in discrimination against any person based on race or national origin. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-MD-0054) |
|
|
CASE STUDIES |
March 19, 2013 |
|
"Interview: William A. McCafferty, Chief of Steubenville Police Department (April 2005)"
Written: Apr. 1, 2005 (April 2005)
April 2005
By: Police Assessment Resource Center (Police Assessment Resource Center
Police Practices Review (April 2005)
Interview with the Chief of Police of Steubenville, Ohio, on the topic of the Consent Decree in U.S. v. City of Steubenville*
|
|
View Case Study Detail |
|
|
|
CASE STUDIES |
March 19, 2013 |
|
"Swann's Way: The School Busing Case and the Supreme Court"
Written: Apr. 17, 1986
By: Bernard Schwartz (NYU Law School Faculty)
(1986)
From the publisher:
Never has what goes on behind the red velour curtain--the give-and-take between the Supreme Court Justices in an important case--been described in such detail. Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education was the first case to decree extensive busing as part of a ...
|
|
View Case Study Detail |
|
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 19, 2013 |
|
Costelo v. Chertoff
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 8:08-cv-00688-JVS-SH (C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0059
Plaintiffs filed suit against the US Citizens and Immigration Services (USCIS) in 2008 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Plaintiffs, US citizens, claim that the USCIS failed to freeze the date of their child’s immigration visa petition by denying the application when the child breached the eligible age limit, in violation of the Child Status Protection Act. In 2012, the Ninth Circuit ruled for the Plaintiffs. In 2013, Defendants filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court. |
|
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0059) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 18, 2013 |
|
Benjamin v. Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:09-cv-01182-JEJ (M.D. Pa.)
PB-PA-0011
Individuals with developmental disabilities residing in Pennsylvania's ICF/MR institutions challenged policies that led to unnecessary institutionalization in violation of Olmstead. Although the parties reached a settlement agreement which would allow ICF/MR residents who desired community placement to transition to the community, the case remains open after a December 2012 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which allows developmentally disabled individuals who wish to continue residing in institutions to challenge the settlement. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-PA-0011) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 18, 2013 |
|
Trader Joe’s Point of Sale Agreement and Amendment
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: N/A (No Court)
DR-CA-0044
Three organizations representing the interests of the visually impaired entered negotiations with Trader Joe's to ensure such individuals did not have to divulge sensitive PIN numbers due to unusable keypads. Trader Joe's agreed to a roll out in stages of new tactile keypads in California Stores. |
|
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0044) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 18, 2013 |
|
United States v. Virginia
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-059 (E.D. Va.)
PB-VA-0003
The United States Department of Justice conducted an investigation pursuant to CRIPA and the ADA into the institutionalization of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Virginia. After finding systemic ADA violations, DOJ and Virginia entered into a settlement agreement which will increase community-based services and ultimately prevent unnecessary institutionalization. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-VA-0003) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 18, 2013 |
|
California First Amendment Coalition v. California Department of Correction
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: CV-96-01291-VRW (N.D. Cal.)
CJ-CA-0011
In 1996, nonprofit organizations whose members include journalists (California First Amendment Coalition and Society of Professional Journalists, Northern California Chapter), represented by the ACLU of Northern California and private counsel, sued officials at the San Quentin Prison and California ...
|
|
View Case Detail (CJ-CA-0011) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 18, 2013 |
|
Hollingsworth v. Perry
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:09-cv-02292-VRW (N.D. Cal.)
PB-CA-0029
On May 22, 2009, two same-sex couples who had been denied married licenses in California filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the State of California in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division. The plaintiffs claimed that California, by amending its constitution in 2008 to once again limit marriage to opposite-sex couples after opening the institution to same sex-couples earlier that year, had violated the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. On August 4, 2010, the District Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding no rational basis for the constitutional amendment. A three-member panel of the Ninth Circuit affirmed on narrower grounds on February 12, 2012, and denied a request for en banc review on June 5.
On December 7, 2012, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, agreeing to review the case. The questions on review are (1) whether the Equal Protection Clause makes unconstitutional California's definition of marriage as available only to different sex couples, and (2) whether the backers of Proposition 8 have standing to appeal the 9th Circuit decision striking it down. Argument is scheduled for March 2013. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-CA-0029) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 18, 2013 |
|
Ryan v. Walker
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 04-4635 (N.D. Ill.)
PC-IL-0025
Summary/Abstract not yet on record |
|
View Case Detail (PC-IL-0025) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 18, 2013 |
|
V.L. v. Wagner
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 4:09-cv-4668 (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0027
This 2009 lawsuit was filed as a challenge to California's planned coverage reductions under its In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program. A federal district court judge enjoined reductions in November 2009, finding that the proposed cuts were likely to violate federal law. When California enacted a new statutory provision to reduce its IHSS coverage in 2011, the court once again enjoined its implementation. In March 2013, the parties entered a settlement that allowed the state to implement much smaller and temporary coverage reductions. |
|
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0027) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 18, 2013 |
|
Joseph v. Hartz
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 80-0623 (D.N.M.)
CW-NM-0001
Plaintiff children, all placed in New Mexico’s foster care system, sought broad injunctive reform of New Mexico’s foster-care system. The case was filed in 1980, and a Consent Decree was ordered on September 23, 1983. The court ordered a stipulated exit plan in February 1998, which was revised in 2003 to focus on permanency planning for children placed in the state’s custody. In 2006, the court granted the parties' motion to dismiss with prejudice. |
|
View Case Detail (CW-NM-0001) |
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 18, 2013 |
|
Prison Legal News v. County of Sacramento
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:11-CV-00907 JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal.)
JC-CA-0065
Sacramento County jail officials refused to deliver the Prison Legal News to prisoners, claiming its staples and mailing stickers presented a hazard. The Court issued a preliminary injunction on March 8, 2012, ordering officials to deliver the publication to subscribers.
|
|
View Case Detail (JC-CA-0065) |
|
|
CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES |
March 14, 2013 |
|
A Place to Learn: The Development of a Free Appropriate Public Education for All Children -- PARC v. Commonwealth
Minnesota Governor's Council on Developmental Disabilities
The biggest breakthrough came in 1971. Attorney Thomas K. Gilhool represented the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (PARC v. Commonwealth) in a case that resulted in a landmark decision. The court affirmed the right to education at public expense and due ...
|
|
View Link Detail |
|
|
|
CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES |
March 14, 2013 |
|
Digital Storytelling: PARC vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Iowa State University CI 201 Digital Storytelling Assignment (Youtube)
Written: Nov. 8, 2012
By: Jourdan Moore
The story of PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, narrated by the father of a child with an intellectual disability.*
|
|
View Link Detail |
|
|
|
CASE ADDITIONS |
March 13, 2013 |
|
David C. v. Leavitt
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 93-CV-206C (D. Utah)
CW-UT-0001
On February 2, 1993, the children in the custody of Utah's Department of Human Services (DHS), represented by the National Center of Youth Law filed suit against DHS to improve the states child welfare services. The complaint addressed issues including placement, health and mental health services, investigations, case planning, case review, and permanency planning.
In August of 2002, the parties reached a settlement agreement adding more caseworker training, increasing caseworker hiring, and augmenting case funding. The "Milestone Plan" was twice amended, and in May 2007 the parties finalized an agreement to terminate the lawsuit. |
|
View Case Detail (CW-UT-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 13, 2013 |
|
Chapman v. Dell
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:09-cv-00311-JRN (W.D. Tex.)
EE-TX-0468
In 2008, four current and former female employees of Dell, Inc. filed a lawsuit against Dell under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Pay Act, and the Fair Labor Standards Act, in the Northern District of California. Plaintiffs sought class action certification, which was not granted. In December 2008, the case was transferred to the Western District of Texas. In July 2009, the parties reached a settlement agreement and the court dismissed the case with prejudice. The settlement agreement is not available. |
|
View Case Detail (EE-TX-0468) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 10, 2013 |
|
Brizuela v. Feliciano
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-00226-JBA (D. Conn.)
IM-CT-0009
Plaintiffs filed petition for writ of habeas corpus and suit against the Connecticut Department of Corrections for their continued detention due solely to an "immigration detainer" placed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in 2012. A settlement agreement laying out the criteria for release and/or continued detention was approved on March 5, 2013, and will expire on February 2, 2017. |
|
View Case Detail (IM-CT-0009) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 10, 2013 |
|
Sanchez v. U.S. Border Patrol
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-05378 (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0018
Plaintiffs, individuals stopped by Border Patrol in the Olympic Peninsula in Washington without reasonable suspicion other than their Hispanic appearance, filed suit in 2012 against the U.S. Border Patrol, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. Plaintiffs seek a requirement that Border Patrol document all stops, as well as training and testing of officers as to what "reasonable suspicion" entails. Litigation is currently stayed until March 15, 2013, in order to allow parties to engage in settlement negotiations. |
|
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0018) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 10, 2013 |
|
United States v. City of New Orleans
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-01924-SM-JCW (E.D. La.)
PN-LA-0001
After extensive investigation invited by the Mayor of New Orleans, the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division and New Orleans proposed a consent decree on July 24, 2012, to address nearly every aspect of policing in New Orleans. The decree was approved by the District Court on January 11, 2013. On February 8, 2013, the Court denied the City's motion to stay implementation of the consent decree; on May 24, 2013, it denied the City's motion to vacate. |
|
View Case Detail (PN-LA-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 10, 2013 |
|
Major League Baseball Web Accessibility
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: N/A (No Court)
DR-NY-0005
Major League Baseball entered negotiations with the National Council for the Blind and affiliates to increase access to their web-based services. The parties agreed in 2012 to apply the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 AA to their web services. |
|
View Case Detail (DR-NY-0005) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 5, 2013 |
|
Plata v. Brown / Coleman v. Brown Three-Judge Court
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:01-cv-1351 (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0057
SCOPE: This is a separate case record for the proceedings before the three-judge district court in Plata v. Brown (N.D. Cal.) (PC-CA-0018, see related cases, below) and Coleman v. Brown (E.D. Cal.) (PC-CA-0002, see related cases, below). That court includes Judge Thelton Henderson (from Plata), ...
|
|
View Case Detail (PC-CA-0057) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 5, 2013 |
|
L.S. v. Delia
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 5:11-cv-00354-FL (E.D.N.C.)
PB-NC-0003
Plaintiffs, individuals with developmental disabilities who receive home-based services under one of North Carolina's Medicaid waiver programs, challenge allegedly unreasonably and arbitrary reductions in their services under a new formula for calculating need. The District Court granted the Plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction in March 2012. The case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (PB-NC-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 4, 2013 |
|
Karsjens v. Minnesota Department of Human Services
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 0:11-cv-03659-DWF-JJK (D. Minn.)
CJ-MN-0002
Patients currently civilly committed in the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP) filed a lawsuit against the Minnesota Department of Health & Human Services and MSOP. They gained representation through the state bar's Pro Se Project, and filed a new complaint on March 15, 2012, seeking injunctive relief and damages. They alleged that defendants violated the Due Process Clause, the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Minnesota Constitution, and the Minnesota Civil Commitment and Treatment Act. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that the defendants failed to provide adequate treatment to the plaintiff class; punished class members instead of treating them; denied class members less restrictive alternative confinement, and incarcerated them under inhumane conditions; denied them religious freedom, free speech, and free association; and subjected them to unreasonable searches and seizures.
The Court certified this group as a class and approved an agreement that defendants would put in place certain protections against seizures of the plaintiffs' legal documents. On August 15, 2012, the Court ordered that the Minnesota Commissioner of Human Services create a Sex Offender Civil Commitment Advisory Task Force. The Court has since approved of individual appointments to that Task Force.
Litigation is ongoing.
|
|
View Case Detail (CJ-MN-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 4, 2013 |
|
Sharpe Holdings, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Servs.
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-00092 (E.D. Mo.)
FA-MO-0003
On December 12, 2012, Sharpe Holdings, Inc. and its owners filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Missouri against the Federal Government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)), and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, seek to enjoin enforcement of the contraception provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), contending that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On December 31, 2012, Magistrate Judge David Noce granted a temporary restraining order stopping the Federal Government from enforcing the contraception mandate until the Court determines the merits of the case, which is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (FA-MO-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 4, 2013 |
|
Ligon v. City of New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:12−cv−02274 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0014
New York City residents filed a lawsuit against the City of New York and the New York City Police Department. Plaintiffs challenged the city's "Operation Clean Halls" initiative, which they allege has lead to thousands of illegal stops, searches, citations, and arrests. They sought a declaration that the NYPD's practices are unlawful and an injunction against those practices. The plaintiffs asked for a class certification for all the residents of Clean Hall Buildings and their family, guests, and visitors, and for all individuals who have been or are likely to be unlawfully stopped or arrested as part of this program. Some plaintiffs in the class will overlap with the Floyd plaintiffs. There have been battles over discovery, but the Court allowed an evidentiary hearing regarding a preliminary injunction, and granted that injunction on January 8, 2013, ordering the NYPD to immediately cease performing trespass stops (in which a reasonable person would not feel free to terminate the encounter) outside TAP buildings in the Bronx without reasonable suspicion of trespass. Further remedies will be the topic of an additional hearing in conjunction with Floyd plaintiffs. |
|
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0014) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 4, 2013 |
|
Melendres v. Arpaio
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:07-cv-02513-GMS (D. Ariz.)
PN-AZ-0003
On December 12, 2007, Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the District of Arizona against the County of Maricopa and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. They claimed that defendants have engaged in a widespread pattern and practice of racial profiling and racially or ethnically discriminatory treatment against Latino persons in an attempt to find people who are in the United States illegally. Plaintiffs allege that defendants' pattern and practice of racial profiling goes beyond unlawful "sweeps" to include widespread, everyday targeting and mistreatment of drivers and passengers in Maricopa County who appear to be Latino.
The Court certified the class as "all Latino persons who, since January, 2007, have been or will be in the future, stopped, detained, questioned or searched by MCSO agents while driving or sitting in a vehicle on a public roadway or parking area in Maricopa County, Arizona." In May 2013, the Court found the MCSO in violation of the Constitution, and entered a permenent injunction forbidding racial profiling. The Court announced that it would further consider additional injunctive relief, so the case is ongoing. |
|
View Case Detail (PN-AZ-0003) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 4, 2013 |
|
Charles Schwab Website Accessibility Settlement Agreement
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: N/A (No Court)
DR-CA-0042
In 2010, a visually impaired individual entered negotiations to make Charles Schwab's website accessible to similarly-situated individuals. In October of 2011, the parties agreed that Charles Schwab should adhere with guidelines that provide tools to enable better web access. |
|
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0042) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 4, 2013 |
|
CVS Accessible Web Site and Point of Sale Agreement
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: N/A (No Court)
DR-RI-0001
Claimants, organizations interested in the visually impaired community, entered negotiations with CVS Caremark to install tactile keypads on credit card readers. In 2009, CVS agreed to install tactile keypads in stores across the country, allowing for the visually impaired to use a debit card without revealing their PIN to cashiers or anyone within earshot. |
|
View Case Detail (DR-RI-0001) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 3, 2013 |
|
Morrow v. City of Tenaha
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2-08-cv-288-TJW (E.D. Tex.)
PN-TX-0002
In July 2008, the plaintiffs sued the City of Tenaha under the Fourth Amendment (unreasonable search and seizure) and the Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection). They claimed that law enforcement officials in and around the City of Tenaha have developed an illegal practice of targeting, stopping, detaining, searching, and often seizing property from people who appear to be non-white or who are traveling with non-white passengers. The plaintiffs claimed that they have been victims of such stops and have been illegally seized of amounts up to $50,000 and have been falsely prosecuted or detained. The parties reached a preliminary settlement in August 2012. Their proposed consent decree includes: video and audio recordings of all stops; written documentation with details of the stop; no more dog searches in routine traffic stops; written and oral consent for a search; all asset forfeiture revenue must be donated to nonprofits or used for audio/video equipment or training; and use of an impartial monitor. On February 19, 2013, the Court granted preliminary approval of the consent decree. The Fairness Hearing will be held on April 22, 2013. |
|
View Case Detail (PN-TX-0002) |
|
|
CASE SUMMARIES |
March 3, 2013 |
|
Baker v. Katehi
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:12−cv−00450 (E.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0019
In November 2011, students of the University of California at Davis engaged in a nonviolent protest in the quad. The university told them to disperse. When they did not, campus police allegedly arrested them without probable cause and shot high-concentration pepper spray directly into their faces. Videos were taken of the incident and publicized nationally. In February 2012, twenty-one of the protestors filed suit against the Regents of the University of California and against campus police officers. Plaintiffs alleged violations of their free speech rights, unreasonable search and seizure, due process violations, and violations of state law. In August, the parties reached a settlement agreement. This agreement provided for damages; for ACLU review of university policies for two years; for a written apology; for academic and counseling support to the plaintiffs; and for attorneys' fees. On January 9, 2013, the Court approved of both the settlement class and the substance of the settlement. |
|
View Case Detail (PN-CA-0019) |
|
|
CASE STUDIES |
February 27, 2013 |
|
"The Pigford Cases: USDA Settlement of Discrimination Suits by Black Farmers"
Written: Aug. 15, 2012
By: Tadlock Cowen & Jody Feder (Congressional Research Service
(Congressional Research Service, Aug. 15, 2012)
On April 14, 1999, Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia approved a settlement agreement and consent decree in Pigford v. Glickman, a class action discrimination suit between the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and black farmers. The suit claimed that ...
|
|
View Case Study Detail |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
