On April 5, 2011, several homeless individuals filed this lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Plaintiffs sued the City of Los Angeles under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, alleged that the City violated their Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process rights when it seized and destroyed their personal possessions. Plaintiffs sought a temporary restraining order, preliminary and permanent injunction, declaratory judgment that plaintiffs' rights were violated by the defendant, monetary damages, and attorneys’ fees.
On April 22, 2011, the court filed an order granting a temporary restraining order against the City. 2011 WL 1533070. This was followed by a preliminary injunction, granted by the court on June 23, 2011. 797 F.Supp.2d 1005.
The City responded with several appeals over the next few years. On July 25, 2011, the City appealed the order for preliminary injunction. After first ordering the parties to explore the possibility of mediation, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the City’s appeal. 693 F.3d 1022.
On April 29, 2013, the City filed an ex parte application for an order modifying the preliminary injunction to conform with the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Essentially, the City had a problem with the language in the preliminary injunction. While the injunction issued by the trial court prohibited the City from seizing property, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals used language in their denial that prohibited the City from performing the combined act of seizing and destroying property. The City wanted this narrower language construed in the injunction. On June 17, 2013, the trial court denied the application, saying that the City failed to identify any change in law or circumstances that would support a modification.
On July 17, 2013, the City again appealed in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, this time about the trial court’s denial of modification of preliminary injunction. The City later decided they would not pursue this appeal and filed a motion to dismiss it, which was granted by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on April 1, 2014. Back in trial court, Plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment on April 20, 2014, which the court denied on July 24, 2017. 2014 WL 12693524.
On December 15, 2015, after several settlement conferences, the parties filed a joint notice of tentative settlement. The City agreed to pay $822,000 plus attorneys’ fees to settle the case. Though this settlement is not found in the pleadings, please see
this LA Times article regarding the settlement. On July 25, 2016, the court issued an order dismissing the action with prejudice against the City. This case established precedent that the Los Angeles Police Department cannot “summarily [destroy] the property of homeless individuals without notice.” 693 F.3d 1022.
Katie Chan - 10/06/2017
compress summary
