University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse

Here are the cases added to the Clearinghouse, or updated, over the past 90 days:


CASE ADDITIONS
December 7, 2017
Doe v. Harris
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-05713-TEH (N.D. Cal.)
FA-CA-0008
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (FA-CA-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 7, 2017
Stinson Electric, Inc. v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 0:14-cv-00830-PJS-HB (D. Minn.)
FA-MN-0008
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (FA-MN-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 7, 2017
Amadei v. Duke
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-05967-NGG-VMS (E.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0059
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0059)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 3, 2017
State of Oklahoma v. FCC
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: CC Docket No. 16-1057 (No Court)
PC-DC-0030
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-DC-0030)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 1, 2017
Jewish Family Service of Seattle v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-01707-JLR (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0036
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0036)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 30, 2017
Saieg v. City of Dearborn
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 2:09-cv-12321 (E.D. Mich.)
FA-MI-0001
This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case was filed on June 16, 2006 against the City of Dearborn and its Chief of Police in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The plaintiff alleged that by disallowing him from passing out leaflets at the Arab International Festival, the defendants violated is First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights. On June 7, 2010 the District Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, however on May 26, 2011, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed, holding that the restrictions on leafleting did not serve a substantial government interest, and even if it did, the plan was not narrowly tailored to achieve such an interest. On remand, the District Court judge granted an injunction and awarded the plaintiff nominal damages and attorney's fees.
View Case Detail (FA-MI-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 29, 2017
Breen v. Mineta
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:05-cv-00654-RWR (D.D.C.)
EE-DC-0040
This case was brought by current and former employees of the Federal Aviation Administration who were 40 years old or older against the Administrator of the FAA and the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, back pay and benefits, front pay, record correction, and attorney fees, alleging that the FAA and DOT discriminated against them by targeting their jobs for outsourcing and terminating their federal employment in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-DC-0040)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 28, 2017
Moussouris v. Microsoft Corporation
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:15-cv-01483 (W.D. Wash.)
EE-WA-0132
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-WA-0132)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 27, 2017
U.S. v. Robertson County (TN)
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:13-cv-00392 (M.D. Tenn.)
JC-TN-0007
After Robertson County failed to adequately respond to a 2011 DOJ letter that found its jail was in violation of the Constitution, on April 26, 2013 the Attorney General filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. The plaintiff sued Robertson County under Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), 42 U.S.C. §1997. The plaintiff alleged that the RCDF violated prisoners’ Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights by exhibiting deliberate indifference to inmates’ health and safety by not implementing adequate suicide prevention tactics and lacking an overall strategy to assist inmates with mental health illnesses. On April 30, 2013 the parties settled, and status reports regarding compliance are ongoing.
View Case Detail (JC-TN-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 27, 2017
Perez-Farias v. Global Horizons, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:05-cv-3061 (E.D. Wash.)
EE-WA-0118
On July 12, 2005, three U.S. farm works from Yakima Valley who were illegally denied or terminated from agricultural employment brought this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington against Global Horizons, Green Acre Farms, and Valley Fruit Orchards under the Migrants and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1801, the Farm Labor Contractors Act, 42 U.S.C § 1981 and the Washington Law Against Discrimination. The parties agreed to go to trial, and after years of litigation the plaintiffs received a judgment in their favor under FLCA, as well as attorneys fees, for both trial and appellate legal work. In January 2014, the Court granted the plaintiffs' motion for incentive payments. There has been no further movement in the case.
View Case Detail (EE-WA-0118)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 26, 2017
Bravo v. Board of County Commissioners for the County of Doña Ana
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 6:08-cv-00010-MV-LCS (D.N.M.)
JC-NM-0011
This class action was brought on behalf of people with mental disabilities arrested and detained in the Doña Ana County Detention Center (“DACDC”), to redress violations of their constitutional rights, the ADA, and the Rehabilitation Act. After two years of settlement talks, the parties reached a settlement agreement..
View Case Detail (JC-NM-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 26, 2017
Abdi v. Duke
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00721-EAW (W.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0058
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0058)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 26, 2017
United States v. State of North Carolina
Case Category: Public Accomm./Contracting
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-00425 (M.D. N.C.)
PA-NC-0004
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PA-NC-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 23, 2017
Government Accountability Project v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02518-CRC (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0040
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0040)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 20, 2017
National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02448 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0039
On Nov. 13, 2017, several immigrant rights' organizations sued ICE under FOIA, seeking records on a mass immigration enforcement operation called "Operation Mega," planned for Sept. 2017, or related operations. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0039)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 19, 2017
Hickox v. Christie
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:15-cv-07647 (D.N.J.)
PN-NJ-0008
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-NJ-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 19, 2017
P.K. v. Tillerson
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01533-TSC (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0031
On August 3, 2017 the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee, the ACLU, and the National Immigration Law Center filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The lawsuit challenged the State Department's practice of denying immigrant visas to diversity lottery winners from countries affected by President Trump's March 6 Executive Order (EO). The diversity visa program awards visas to nationals from countries that have historically sent low numbers of immigrants to the United States. On Mar. 6, 2017 President Trump issued an EO that barred entry to nationals from six majority-Muslim countries - Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, and Yemen. Litigation ensued immediately, and the lower courts initially enjoined the government from implementing the order (see IRAP v. Trump and Hawaii v. Trump). However, on Jun. 26, the Supreme Court stayed the nationwide injunctions and allowed the order to become effective, except as it applied to immigrants who could establish a "bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States." Plaintiffs were nationals from countries affected by the EO who had been selected as diversity visa lottery winners for FY2017 but could not establish a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States. By statute, the State Department was required to issue visas to 2017 winners by Sept. 30; winners whose visas were not issued by that deadline lost their slots in the program. In their complaint, plaintiffs alleged that "nevertheless, the State Department has adopted a policy directing consular officials to deny diversity visas to nationals from the countries barred from entry by the Executive Order." The complaint argued that this practice violated the Administrative Procedure Act and "statutes and regulations requiring the issuance of immigrant visas to diversity visa lottery winners who are statutorily eligible." Plaintiffs also argued that defendants' practice conflated entry with visa issuance. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief as well as a write of mandamus requiring consular officials to issue plaintiffs' immigrant visas. Alternatively, plaintiffs requested that the court order the State Department to reserve any unused FY2017 visa numbers for processing following any decision by the Supreme Court's in IRAP v. Trump.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0031)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 19, 2017
Knox v. Westly
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:05-cv-02198-MCE-KJM (E.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0332
This case was brought by California state employees against the California State Employees Association, Local 1000, Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC claiming unlawful deduction of membership fees for political use. After an appeal to the US Supreme Court, the case was decided in favor of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs were awarded a refund of the money inappropriately used for political purposes, with interest, as well as nominal damages and attorney's fees.
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0332)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 17, 2017
Keels v. The GEO Group, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:15-cv-06261 (E.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0290
On October 30, 2015, the plaintiff, a job applicant with a criminal record, filed this class action lawsuit against two defendants, a company specializing in privatized corrections and the consumer reporting agency that supplied consumer reports to the company, under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1681. The plaintiff alleged that the company routinely rejected job applicants based on information contained in background check reports in violation of the FCRA.
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0290)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 17, 2017
United States v. Marion Superior Court
Case Category: Juvenile Institution
Trial Docket: 1:08-CV-0460-LJM-TAB (S.D. Ind.)
JI-IN-0007
On April 9th, 2013, the United States filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Individuals with Disabilities Enforcement Act against the Marion Superior Court, which was responsible for operating the Marion Superior Court Juvenile Detention Center (MSCJDC), for violating the federal statutory and constitutional rights of youths detained at MSCJDC. The plaintiff alleged that MSCJDC failed to protect youths from harm and did not provide required special education programs for youths with disabilities. The parties agreed to a three-year joint settlement agreement to improve MSCJDC's operation. After the three-year period, the parties agreed that the defendant had substantially complied with the provisions of the settlement agreement, so Judge Larry J. Mckinney dismissed the lawsuit on May 2nd, 2011. The case has now ended.
View Case Detail (JI-IN-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 16, 2017
Mayer v. Driver Solutions, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:10-cv-01939 (E.D. Pa.)
EE-PA-0250
On April 30, 2010, the plaintiff, an African American job applicant with a felony criminal record, filed this class action lawsuit against the defendants, a company and its affiliates which specialized in training truck drivers and placing them with trucking companies. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants refused to procure placement for applicants with a felony conviction, and because of this practice, disparately impacted African American and Latino applicants. The parties settled on August 17, 2012.
View Case Detail (EE-PA-0250)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 16, 2017
Holland v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 2:13-cv-15487 (S.D. W. Va.)
FA-WV-0001
On June 24, 2013, a for-profit corporation filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia under the First Amendment, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Administrative Procedure Act against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The plaintiff asked the court to rule that the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) contraception insurance mandate was unconstitutional. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, and upon the joint stipulation of the parties, the court ordered that the defendants were enjoined from enforcing the contraceptive coverage requirement or imposing any fees or penalties for noncompliance.
View Case Detail (FA-WV-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 16, 2017
Beckwith v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 13-cv-648 (M.D. Fla.)
FA-FL-0005
On March 12, 2013, a for-profit corporation filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida under the First Amendment, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Administrative Procedure Act against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The plaintiff asked the court to rule that the Affordable Care Act's contraception insurance mandate was unconstitutional. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, and upon the joint stipulation of the parties, the court ordered that the defendants were enjoined from enforcing the contraceptive coverage requirement.
View Case Detail (FA-FL-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 16, 2017
The Protect Democracy Project v. U.S. Department of Energy
Case Category: Presidential Authority
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00779 (D.D.C.)
PR-DC-0001
In 2017, a nonprofit organization filed this complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiff requested FOIA compliance from the U.S. Department of Energy to produce records concerning Presidential Transition Team questionnaires about climate change, and personnel changes, assignments, and related policies. Defendant began production after the FOIA required deadline. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PR-DC-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 15, 2017
Jamal v. Kane
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:14-cv-02148 (M.D. Pa.)
PC-PA-0037
Incarcerated prisoners, Prison Radio, Human Rights Coalition, a network of educators, and Prison Legal News, filed these two consolidated lawsuits in the Middle District of Pennsylvania under 42 U.S.C.§ 1983 and Pennsylvania state law. The plaintiffs claimed that the Penn. Revictimization Relief Act--which banned certain public speeches by those convicted of crimes--violated their free speech rights. The District Court agreed, striking down the law on April 2015.
View Case Detail (PC-PA-0037)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 13, 2017
Caliste v. Cantrell
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-06197 (E.D. La.)
CJ-LA-0008
On June 27, 2017, pre-trial detainees at the Orleans Parish Sheriff’s office filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana against the magistrate judge of the Criminal District Court alleging unlawful bail setting practices. Plaintiffs claimed that defendant violated the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause by keeping them in jail post-arrest when they cannot afford the bail set by defendant. Plaintiffs further claimed that defendant violated the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause by holding a dual role of determining pre-trial release conditions and managing the courts finances, thereby creating an institutional conflict of interest and depriving plaintiffs of a neutral tribunal. Defendant moved to dismiss the case twice. As of November 16, 2017, this case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-LA-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 12, 2017
Gumm v. Jacobs
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 5:15-cv-00041-MTT-CHW (M.D. Ga.)
PC-GA-0020
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-GA-0020)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 12, 2017
The New York Times v. United States Department of Justice
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-06990-WHP (S.D.N.Y.)
NS-NY-0019
In October 2011, the New York Times Company (NYT) and one of its reporters filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 5 U.S.C. § 552. The NYT and its reporter sought the release of a report received by congressional intelligence committees from the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence on the intelligence collection authorities that had been authorized under USA Patriot Act Section 215 and had been subject to expire under USA Patriot Act Section 224 before their renewal without amendment. In May 2012, the District Court held that the DOJ had properly withheld the report in its entirety under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(1) and 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3).
View Case Detail (NS-NY-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 10, 2017
DePaola v. Virginia Department of Corrections
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 7:14-cv-00692-JPJ-RSB. (W.D. Va.)
PC-VA-0022
On December 19, 2014, three Virginia prisoners placed in administrative segregation at Red Onion State Prison, filed this pro-se lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. They brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Eighth Amendment. They sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as money damages. The plaintiffs claimed that the VDOC Operating Procedure 830.A, (a self-described Segregation Reduction Step-Down Program designed to help prisoners progress in stages toward a return to the general prison population), violated plaintiffs’ rights. On September 28, 2016, Judge James P. Jones granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgement. On October 6, 2016, the plaintiff appealed the district court’s September 28th ruling to the Fourth Circuit and the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PC-VA-0022)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 10, 2017
Public Citizen, Inc. v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential Authority
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00253 (D.D.C.)
PR-DC-0002
The Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief with regard to President Trump's Executive Order 13771 on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs. This case was initiated on February 8, 2017 and filed in the District Court for D.C.. The case is still pending.
View Case Detail (PR-DC-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 8, 2017
Tevyaw v. Colvin
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:14-cv-00425 (D.R.I.)
PB-RI-0001
On September 29, 2014, the surviving widow of a same-sex marriage filed a lawsuit in the District of Rhode Island, U.S. District Court, against the Social Security Administration (SSA). The plaintiff asked the court to affirm that the she met the marriage requirements, declare that a person previously married to someone of the same sex meets the SSA marriage requirements (so long as the courts of the state the individual resides in would find that the marriage valid), declare that the plaintiffs marriage would have been recognized by Rhode Island, enjoin the defendant to process the plaintiff's application for widow's and lump sum death benefits, and to award the plaintiffs any attorney's fees or costs of suit. In a private settlement in December 2014, the plaintiff received back benefits from SSA.
View Case Detail (PB-RI-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 8, 2017
D.H. v. Moss Point School District
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00466-HSO-RHW (S.D. Miss.)
ED-MS-0003
Represented by the Southern Poverty Law Center, on December 17, 2013, a lesbian student sought injunctive relief and damages against Moss Point School District, alleging that the District discriminated against her based on her gender expression and sexual orientation. The parties settled on January 27, 2015. Within the settlement, the District agreed to reform its anti-bullying and discrimination policies as well as its procedures for addressing harassment complaints. The court retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.
View Case Detail (ED-MS-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 8, 2017
Roman Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis v. Burwell
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 4:13-cv-02300 (E.D. Mo.)
FA-MO-0012
On November 14, 2013, the Archdiocese of St. Louis and its affiliated non-profit charities revived their dismissed claim in the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Missouri against the Federal Government challenging provisions of the Affordable Care Act, as amended on June 28, 2013, extending universal contraception coverage in employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Plaintiffs contended that this mandatory contraception coverage violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On June 30, 2014, plaintiffs were granted a preliminary injunction that prevents the government from enforcing the contraception mandate against them. The government appealed the injunction and as of March 2017, the case remains in abeyance in light of the pending Supreme Court decision.
View Case Detail (FA-MO-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 8, 2017
Brown v. Bush
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:98-cv-00673 (S.D. Fla.)
PB-FL-0001
This case was brought in 1998 by the class of individuals confined to Florida's four state institutions for people with developmental disabilities, alleging failure to habilitate. The parties reached an agreement involving provision of community based services and closure of at least two residential facilities in 2003. On July 2, 2007, the case was dismissed on joing motion in which the parties agreed that the state had substantially complied with the Settlement Agreement.
View Case Detail (PB-FL-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 8, 2017
Randy Reed Automotive v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 5:13-cv-06117 (W.D. Mo.)
FA-MO-0010
On October 8, 2013, a for-profit corporation filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri under the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Administrative Procedure Act against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The plaintiff asked the court to rule that the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) contraception insurance mandate was unconstitutional. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the court ordered that the defendants were permanently enjoined from enforcing the contraceptive coverage requirement or imposing any fees or penalties for noncompliance.
View Case Detail (FA-MO-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 8, 2017
Sioux Chief MFG. Co, Inc. v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 4:13-cv-00036-ODS (W.D. Mo.)
FA-MO-0009
On January 14, 2013, Catholic business owners filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri under the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ("RFRA"), and the Administrative Procedures Act ("APA"), against the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury as well as those agencies' secretaries in their official capacities. The plaintiff asked the court to rule that the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) contraception insurance mandate was unconstitutional. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the court enjoined the defendants from enforcing the contraceptive coverage requirement or imposing any fees or penalties for noncompliance.
View Case Detail (FA-MO-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 8, 2017
Hall v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 0:13-cv-00295-JRT-LIB (D. Minn.)
FA-MN-0006
On February 5, 2013, the Catholic owner of a corporation and the corporation itself filed a lawsuit seeking an exemption from the ACA's contraception mandate under the APA, RFRA, and First and Fifth Amendments. The plaintiff asked the court to rule that the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) contraception insurance mandate was unconstitutional. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, and upon the joint stipulation of the parties, the court ordered that the defendants were enjoined from enforcing the contraceptive coverage requirement or imposing any fees or penalties for noncompliance.
View Case Detail (FA-MN-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 7, 2017
Trustees of Princeton University v. U.S.A.
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02325 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0038
This suit, brought on November 3, 2017, challenges President Trump's revocation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). The plaintiffs are the Trustees of Princeton University, Microsoft Corporation, and a DACA recipient currently attending Princeton University as an undergraduate. The plaintiffs benefited from and relied upon DACA in various ways, and they argued that its termination violates the Administrative Procedure Act, as well as Fifth Amendment equal protection and due process. The plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0038)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 6, 2017
In re [Redacted] a U.S. Person
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: PR/TT 2016 (FISC)
NS-DC-0104
FISCR concludes that courts can issue orders approving pen register and trap and trace devices that collect post-cut-through digits and that such collection is constitutional.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0104)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 6, 2017
Lawler v. City of New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-05843-RWS (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0034
In July 2012, a New York resident filed a complaint alleging that New York Police Department officers violated her constitutional and commonlaw rights by use of unreasonable force. On November 30, 2012, the case was consolidated with other "Occupy Wall Street" cases arising from the same incident. The parties reached a settlement in 2015.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0034)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 6, 2017
Crisp v. City of New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-5842-RWS (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0035
In 2012, a resident of New York who was arrested while participating in a the Occupy Wall Street protest filed a lawsuit against the city of New York. The plaintiff alleged that his first, fourth, and fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when a New York City police officer peppersprayed him while he was protesting. The parties reached a settlement in 2015.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0035)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 6, 2017
The Protect Democracy Project v. U.S. Department of Justice
Case Category: Presidential Authority
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00842 (D.D.C.)
PR-DC-0003
Plaintiff, The Democracy Project, Inc., filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking injunctive relief against Defendants Department of State, Department of Defense, and the Department of Justice under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552. The Court granted a preliminary injunction for the production of all documents related to President Trump's legal justifications for his order of the April 6, 2017 Tomahawk cruise missile strikes against a Syrian-government airbase. The Plaintiff contests the sufficiency of this production and litigation is still ongoing.
View Case Detail (PR-DC-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 6, 2017
Elliot v. City of New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 12-cv-0992 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0043
On February 8, 2012 Two Occupy Wall Street protesters sued in the Southern District of New York for being pepper sprayed by a high-ranking police officer. On June 30, 2015, both parties settled and plaintiff received damages.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0043)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 4, 2017
Chhoeun v. Marin
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 8:17-cv-01898 (C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0108
Two individuals filed this class action suit challenging the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") for arbitrarily and unlawfully detaining them. The plaintiffs represented Cambodian refugees living in the U.S. since they escaped the violence of the Khmer Rouge regime. As of October 2017, these refugees were subject to ICE raids and detentions. The plaintiffs argue that ICE violated the Immigration and Nationality Act by revoking their release from its custody unlawfully and contrary to established procedures, and by detaining them unlawfully when removal was not reasonably foreseeable and without individualized determinations of danger and flight risk. They seek declaratory and injunctive relief.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0108)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 2, 2017
Bick Holdings Inc. v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 4:13-cv-00462-AGF (E.D. Mo.)
FA-MO-0008
A for-profit company sought an exception to the Affordable Care Act's mandate requiring employers to provide health insurance coverage of contraception because it violates the owner's religious beliefs. The case was stayed pending other cases involving the same legal issues and the same defendant. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the parties submitted a consent judgment permanently enjoining the defendants from enforcing the mandate, which was signed on November 18, 2014.
View Case Detail (FA-MO-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 2, 2017
Doboszenski & Sons, Inc. v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 0:13-cv-03148 (D. Minn.)
FA-MN-0007
On November 14, 2013, a for-profit corporation filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota under the First Amendment, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Administrative Procedure Act against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The plaintiff asked the court to rule that the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) contraception insurance mandate was unconstitutional. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, and upon the joint stipulation of the parties, the court ordered that the defendants were enjoined from enforcing the contraceptive coverage requirement or imposing any fees or penalties for noncompliance.
View Case Detail (FA-MN-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 2, 2017
Lindsay v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-01210 (N.D. Ill.)
FA-IL-0009
On February 14, 2013, the Catholic managing partner of a law firm and the law firm itself filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois under the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ("RFRA"), and the Administrative Procedures Act ("APA"), against the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury. After the Supreme Court's decisions in Hobby Lobby and Conestoga on June 30, 2014, which also involved parties seeking religious exemption from the Affordable Care Act's ("ACA") contraceptive requirement, the parties in this case reached a joint agreement that judgment should be entered in favor of the plaintiffs on their RFPA claim. The defendants were permanently enjoined from requiring the plaintiffs to provide their employees with health coverage for contraceptive methods.
View Case Detail (FA-IL-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 1, 2017
Doe v. Anoka-Hennepin School District
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 0:11-cv-01999-JNE-SER (D. Minn.)
ED-MN-0001
Five students sued their school district under the Fourteenth Amendment, discrimination on the basis of sex in violation of Title IX, and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act. Plaintiffs alleged that the defendant perpetuated and enforced sexual orientation and sex-based stereotypes through its policies and practices, and that said policies prevented school officials from responding adequately to anti-LGBT bullying. The parties negotiated a five-year consent decree requiring the school district to revise its policies and appropriately respond to student harassment, and the defendant's insurer paid $270,000 to the plaintiffs.
View Case Detail (ED-MN-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 1, 2017
Right to Life Michigan v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-01202-RJJ (W.D. Mich.)
FA-MI-0015
On November 4, 2013, Right to Life of Michigan ("Right to Life") filed A U.S. District Court lawsuit in the Southern District of Michigan against the Federal Government seeking the court to grant a preliminary and permanent injunction against enforcement of provisions of the Affordable Care Act ("ACA") extending universal contraception coverage to employer-sponsored private health insurance coverage. Citing recent binding Sixth Circuit precedent, the court dismissed the plaintiff's suit and entered judgement for the defendant on October 21, 2015.
View Case Detail (FA-MI-0015)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 31, 2017
Protect Democracy Project v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02118-RDM (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0036
On Oct. 13, 2017, the Protect Democracy Project sued DHS, CBP, OMB, and OPM in D.D.C. under FOIA. Plaintiff sought disclosure of agency records on the government's policies and plans to hire thousands of additional CBP and ICE immigration enforcement agents, pursuant to Trump's EO 13767 and 13678.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0036)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 29, 2017
Zakzok v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02969-GLR (D. Md.)
IM-MD-0007
This is a lawsuit filed against Section 2 of President Trump’s Sep. 24, 2017 Proclamation ("Executive Order #3" or "EO-3") barring travel to the United States from six Muslim-majority countries. The plaintiffs are US citizens or permanent residents who will not be able to reunite with their family members or who otherwise claim injury as a direct result of EO-3. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief: they asked the court to enjoin defendants nationwide from enforcing Section 2 of EO-3 across the nation.
View Case Detail (IM-MD-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 29, 2017
Protect Democracy Project v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02202-RDM (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0035
On Oct. 24, 2017, the Protect Democracy Project sued DHS and CBP in D.D.C. under FOIA. Plaintiff sought disclosure of agency records on the extent to which defendants cooperate with armed private militia groups along the U.S.-Mexico border. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0035)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 29, 2017
ACLU v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential Authority
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01351 (D.D.C.)
PR-DC-0006
Plaintiff ACLU filed this suit for mandamus and declaratory relief against President Trump, Vice-President Pence, and the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging violations of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The court denied the Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, claiming that jurisdiction for mandamus relief did not exist. The action is currently stayed pending review of materials in Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law v. Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, et al.
View Case Detail (PR-DC-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 27, 2017
Unite Oregon v. Trump [administratively closed]
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-00179 (D. Or.)
IM-OR-0005
This action, filed on Feb. 1, 2017, challenged President Trump’s travel ban EO. The plaintiff was Unite Oregon, a nonprofit organization with immigrant and refugee members from the enumerated countries; ACLU Oregon was counsel. This case was administratively stayed in June 2017.
View Case Detail (IM-OR-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 26, 2017
Blumenthal v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential Authority
Trial Docket: 17-cv-01154 (D.D.C.)
PR-DC-0004
30 U.S. Senators and 171 members of the U.S. House of Representatives filed this lawsuit against President Trump in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on June 14, 2017. The Plaintiffs alleged that President Trump violated the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution and sought declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent further violations. President Trump filed a motion dismiss the Plaintiff's amended complaint on September 15, 2017. The motion is currently pending.
View Case Detail (PR-DC-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2017
Hagig v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00289 (D. Colo.)
IM-CO-0010
This action, filed on Jan. 31, 2017 in D.Colo. by a Libyan LPR, challenged President Trump’s Jan. 27 EO travel ban which would affect plaintiff's ability to travel outside the U.S. Litigation continued over the subsequent months as the administration revised the ban. Since June 2017, this case has been stayed, pending the outcome of the Hawaii and IRAP cases in SCOTUS.
View Case Detail (IM-CO-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2017
Wagafe v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-00094 (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0031
This suit challenges USCIS's interpretation of Trump's travel-ban EO and its CAARP application review program, alleging unlawful delays and denials of Muslims' adjustment of status and naturalization applications of Muslims. The Court certified two nationwide classes. Discovery is underway and a trial is set for Sept. 2018.
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0031)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2017
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01907-CRC (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0032
On Sept. 18, 2017, the NAACP in its organizational capacity sued DHS for ending DACA, affecting plaintiff's DACA-recipient members. Plaintiff alleged that the termination was unlawful under Due Process and the APA. Several labor unions have joined as co-plaintiffs. A hearing on the motion to dismiss will be held on Jan. 31, 2018.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0032)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2017
Doe v. Wood County Board of Education
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 6:12-cv-04355 (S.D. W. Va.)
ED-WV-0001
On August 15, 2012, a mother and her three minor daughters filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia against the Wood County Board of Education and Van Devender Middle School. The plaintiffs sought declaratory, injunctive and monetary relief, alleging that the School's single-sex education program approved by the Board violated the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. On July 3, 2013 the parties entered a Consent Decree, awarding the plaintiffs money for damages and attorneys' fees, as well as prohibiting the defendant from having certain single-sex activities for five years. The Consent Decree and the Court's injunction will end on July 4, 2018.
View Case Detail (ED-WV-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2017
Daniel Medford v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 13-cv-01726 (D. Minn.)
FA-MN-0005
A for-profit company sought an exception to the Affordable Care Act's mandate requiring employers to provide health insurance coverage of contraception because it violates the owner's religious beliefs.
View Case Detail (FA-MN-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2017
G.G. v. Hickenlooper
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-00428 (D. Colo.)
CJ-CO-0002
On February 22, 2016, individuals with mental illness and/or in need of addiction and substance abuse services who were exiting jails, prisons, nursing homes, mental health institutes, or who were currently homeless, filed this class-action complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. They brought claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and Title XIX of the Social Security Act. The plaintiffs sought a permanent injunction requiring to require defendants to ensure housing, treatment and other services were brought to scale to meet the needs of the class. On July 31, 2016, the plaintiffs moved to voluntarily dismissed the case against the plaintiffs. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (CJ-CO-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2017
Rafferty v. Doar
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-01410 (S.D.N.Y.)
PB-NY-0031
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PB-NY-0031)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 23, 2017
Harris v. Wayne County Airport Authority
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-13630 (E.D. Mich.)
DR-MI-0006
On September 19, 2014, two physically disabled individuals filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") against the Wayne County Airport Authority ("WCAA") alleging that WCAA was violating the ADA in relocating several buses to an inaccessible and dangerously congested transportation center. On October 17, 2014, the parties reached a settlement agreement that would make the transportation center safer for disabled individuals. In 2015, the plaintiffs alleged WCAA had not met the terms of the settlement agreement and filed a motion to enforce the agreement. The court, finding that the defendant had not violated the agreement, denied the plaintiff's motion and dismissed the case with prejudice. 2015 WL 4611376.
View Case Detail (DR-MI-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 23, 2017
Electronic Frontier Foundation v. Department of Justice
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:10-cv-00755-CKK (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0088
In 2010, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a non-profit focused on civil liberties issues relating to technology, filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiff alleged that the Department of Justice (DOJ), specifically the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), had wrongly withheld records the plaintiff requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) pertaining to three expiring provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). After an initial conference between the parties ordered by District Judge Coleen Kollar-Kotelly, the parties worked out a schedule for the processing and release of all responsive documents to plaintiff's FOIA request. However, even after the defendant released all 1,700 pages of requested documents to the plaintiff, the parties still disputed over six remaining pages pertaining to statistical information of the FBI's use of the expiring provisions via cross-motions for summary judgment. Ultimately, the defendant released the remaining six pages to the plaintiff and the parties settled over the plaintiff's attorneys' fees, with the defendant agreeing to pay the plaintiff $4,000. The case was then dismissed on June 16th, 2011.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0088)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 23, 2017
DOJ Investigation of Missoula County Attorney’s Office
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 9:14-cv-00038-DLC (D. Mont.)
CJ-MT-0003
This DOJ pattern or practice investigation into the Missoula County Attorney's Office found that the MCAO failed to adequately investigate and prosecute alleged sexual assaults against women, due to gender discrimination in violation of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 and the anti-discrimination provisions of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. The matter led to an out-of-court settlement on June 10, 2014, setting out substantial reforms for the County Attorney's Office, with an oversight role played chiefly by the Montana Attorney General's office.
View Case Detail (CJ-MT-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 23, 2017
Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition v. Abercrombie & Fitch
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 1:09-cv-02757-WYD-KMT (D. Colo.)
DR-CO-0020
In 2013, individuals who use wheelchairs and an organization representing their interests filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado to challenge the inaccessible design of elevated entrances in Hollister stores. The District Court initially held for the plaintiffs, but in 2015, the U.S. Circuit Court for the 10th Circuit reversed, holding that the defendant's stores did not violate the ADA. On remand, the parties came tp a settlement agreement that included injunctive relief and attorney's fees for the plaintiff.
View Case Detail (DR-CO-0020)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 23, 2017
Gonzales v. City of Austin
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:15-cv-00956 (W.D. Tex.)
CJ-TX-0012
In 2015, an indigent single mother filed this Civil Rights Act of 1871 complaint in the District Court for the Western District of Texas (Austin Division). Plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming that the city's policy of jailing those too poor to pay their traffic ticket fines violated fundamental rights to due process, equal protection and counsel. The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, finding that a magistrate judge's application of discretionary rules cannot constitute municipal policy. The case closed in March 2016.
View Case Detail (CJ-TX-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 22, 2017
Devitri v. Cronen
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-11842 (D. Mass.)
IM-MA-0011
On Sept. 25, 2017, a group of Christian Indonesian nationals living in the United States and threatened with imminent removal filed this suit against the DHS and ICE's Boston and Manchester Field Offices. The court issued a TRO, enjoining defendants from removing all named plaintiffs from the United States. Defendants appealed to the 1st Circuit.
View Case Detail (IM-MA-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 22, 2017
Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-12022 (D. Mass.)
IM-MA-0013
On Oct. 17, 2017, Massachusetts, DC, California, Hawai'i, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, New York, Oregon, and Washington, sued DHS, ICE, USCIS, and CBP under FOIA, seeking agency records on federal immigration enforcement activities within the respective States. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-MA-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 22, 2017
Immigrant Legal Resource Center v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-06029 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0107
This FOIA suit was filed filed on October 20, 2017. The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) sought the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to release records related to sanctuary cities. Specifically, ILRC wanted information related to "whether and to what extent city and county law enforcement agencies agree to assist in ICE’s detention and deportation efforts against immigrants living in the United States." The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0107)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 20, 2017
Garza v. Hargan
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02122-TSC (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0034
On Oct. 13, 2017, a pregnant unaccompanied minor in immigration custody sued DHHS and component agencies in D.D.C. Plaintiff received a TRO on Oct. 18 and after appeals in D.C.Cir., an amended TRO on Oct. 24, ordering defendants to allow her to be transported for an abortion, which she had on Oct. 25. Class certification is pending. Defendants sought SCOTUS cert.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0034)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 20, 2017
Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Department of Justice
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-01961-KBJ (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0084
In December 2013, Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against the National Security Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 5 U.S.C. § 552. EPIC sought the processing of its expedited FOIA request for the release of semiannual reports and information submitted to Congressional committees on surveillance devices and the records that DOJ used to prepare these submissions. In March, May, and August 2014, DOJ released to the EPIC twenty-five semiannual reports and fifty other documents relating to its FOIA request but withheld other documents in full and portions of the released documents. In February 2016, the District Court held that DOJ had had failed to establish with sufficient specificity its justifications for the withholdings. In March 2016, DOJ released to EPIC previously withheld portions of seventy-three pages from five semiannual reports but redacted portions of these pages that it had previously released as unredacted in 2014.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0084)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 17, 2017
Carson v. Heigel
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:16-cv-00045-MGL (D.S.C.)
PB-SC-0005
In 2016, a same-sex married couple filed this Civil Rights Act of 1871 complaint in the District Court of South Carolina (Columbia Division). Plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming violations of their fundamental right to marry and other protected liberties related to the differential treatment of birth records for children with same-sex married parents. Summary Judgment was granted in favor of the Plaintiffs and a consent decree entered ordering South Carolina to make changes to the policies of their birth-record keeping, as well as the issuance of corrected birth certificates to the Plaintiffs and all who qualified under the new policies and requested such a correction. The parties reached an undisclosed settlement for attorney’s fees and the case closed in June 2017.
View Case Detail (PB-SC-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 17, 2017
Reed-Veal v. Encinia
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 4:15-cv-02232 (S.D. Tex.)
JC-TX-0025
On August 4, 2015, plaintiff filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The plaintiff sued the Texas Department of Public Safety (TDPS), Waller County, and several employees of the Waller County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code sections 71.002-004 and 71.021. On October 31, 2016, the parties filed a Joint Order of Dismissal after reaching an out of court settlement wherein the plaintiff received $1.9 million and the case was dismissed on November 1, 2016.
View Case Detail (JC-TX-0025)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 16, 2017
Iranian Alliances Across Borders v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 8:17-cv-02921-GJH (D. Md.)
IM-MD-0005
On October 2, 2017 the Iranian Alliances Across Borders filed this complaint on behalf of a group of plaintiffs of Iranian descent. The suit challenges President Trumps Sept. 24 Proclamation indefinitely restricting travel from the following eight countries: Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen. Otherwise known as EO-3, the proclamation was the President's third attempt to restrict travel from particular countries. The first attempt was by and Executive Order (EO) issued in Jan. 2017. In response to that order, a slew of litigation ensued. That litigation, and the decisions it led to, eventually led the President to issue a new, revised order. However, the litigation continued, and in September President issued his proclamation just as the second EO was about to expire. In response to that proclamation, and alongside other suits challenging the EOs, plaintiffs filed their complaint in the Maryland District Court. Judge Chuang was assigned to the case. In their complaint, plaintiffs alleged that the proclamation targeted and discriminated against Muslims and that it violated the Immigration and Nationality Act by discriminating based on national origin. Plaintiffs also alleged that the order violated the First Amendment's Establishment and Free Speech Clauses and the Fifth Amendment's Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. As relief, plaintiffs requested a nationwide injunction barring the government from enforcing the new order.
View Case Detail (IM-MD-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-00557-SM-DEK (E.D. La.)
IM-LA-0011
On Apr. 20, 2011, the EEOC filed suit against Defendant Signal International, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In December 2015, the EEOC announced that the parties had reached a settlement for all 11 cases. Signal was to pay $5 million to 476 guestworkers harmed by its conduct.
View Case Detail (IM-LA-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Achari v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:13-cv-06218 (E.D. La.)
IM-LA-0012
On May 21, 2013, 33 Indian guestworkers filed suit in S.D. Miss. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme. After consolidation with other cases, a jury trial was scheduled for July 2015, but the parties settled. The Court closed this case in May 2017, without prejudice.
View Case Detail (IM-LA-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Chakkiyattil v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:13-cv-06219 (E.D. La.)
IM-LA-0013
On Aug. 7, 2013, 28 Indian guestworkers filed suit in S.D. Miss. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme. In Oct. 2013, the court transferred this case to E.D.La where it was consolidated with the Achari lead case.
View Case Detail (IM-LA-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Krishnakutty v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:13-cv-06220 (E.D. La.)
IM-LA-0014
On Aug. 7, 2013, two Indian guestworkers filed suit in S.D. Miss. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme. In Oct. 2013, the court transferred this case to E.D.La where it was consolidated with the Achari lead case.
View Case Detail (IM-LA-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program v. SafetyNet Youth, Inc.
Case Category: Mental Health (Facility)
Trial Docket: 2:13-cv-00519-CG-B (S.D. Ala.)
MH-AL-0002
In the Southern District of Alabama in October 2013, the Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program brought this lawsuit against SafetyNet, Inc., claiming that the defendant had failed to allow the plaintiff access to its facilities as required by the Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness Act of 1986 (PAIMI), the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (PADD Act), and the Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights Program of 1993 (PAIR). In December 2013, the defendant filed a third-party complaint against the Alabama Department of Human Resources. After all three parties moved for summary judgment, on December 12, 2014,the court granted the plaintiff’s motion, holding that the defendant was required to grant the plaintiff access to its facilities by law and awarding injunctive and declaratory relief to the plaintiff.
View Case Detail (MH-AL-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Thomas v. Kent
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-08013-FMO-AGR (C.D. Cal.)
PB-CA-0048
In 2014, individuals with disabilities receiving Medicaid-funded care at their homes filed this lawsuit against the California Department of Health Care Services in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging that they were at risk for institutionalization in violation of the Americans with Disability Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. After over 2 years of discovery and multiple Statements of Interests filed by the United States, this case remains ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-CA-0048)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Singh v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-00732 (E.D. La.)
IM-LA-0016
On Oct. 15, 2013, two Indian guestworkers filed suit in S.D. Miss. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme. In Apr. 2014, the court transferred this case to E.D.La where it was consolidated with the Achari lead case.
View Case Detail (IM-LA-0016)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Samuel v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00323 (E.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0035
On May 21, 2013, 17 Indian guestworkers filed suit in E.D. Tx. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme. In July 2015, the Court ordered to stay the case due to Signal's bankruptcy, with status reports on the proceedings due every 120 days.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0035)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Joseph v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00324 (E.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0036
On May 21, 2013, 33 Indian guestworkers filed suit in E.D. Tx. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme. In July 2015, the Court ordered to stay the case due to Signal's bankruptcy, with status reports on the proceedings due every 120 days.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0036)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Meganathan v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00497 (E.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0037
On August 7, 2013, four Indian guestworkers filed suit in E.D. Tx. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme. In July 2015, the Court ordered to stay the case due to Signal's bankruptcy, with status reports on the proceedings due every 120 days.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0037)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Kambala v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00498 (E.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0038
On Aug. 7, 2013, 16 Indian guestworkers filed a lawsuit in E.D.Tx. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme by Defendant Signal International. In July 2015, the court stayed the case after Signal filed for bankruptcy. One defendant has settled and the stay remains in effect for the others.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0038)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2017
Marimuthu v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00499 (E.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0039
On Aug. 7, 2013, 10 Indian guestworkers filed a lawsuit in E.D. Tx. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme by Defendant Signal International. While discovery was underway, Signal filed for bankruptcy and the Court stayed this case pending bankruptcy proceedings.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0039)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 13, 2017
Rabin v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 3:16-cv-02276-JST (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0360
On April 27, 2016, the plaintiff, a certified public accountant over the age of forty, filed this class and collective action against PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). The defendant moved for a judgement on the pleadings and was denied. As of October 12, 2017, the parties remain engaged in discovery. The deadline for the motion for conditional certification of the ADEA collective class remains vacated. The next telephonic case management conference is scheduled for November 17, 2017.
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0360)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 13, 2017
Avitia v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:16-cv-04818-R-SK (C.D. Cal.)
JC-CA-0127
In June 2016, a deaf resident of California, together with the Greater Los Angeles Agency on Deafness, filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Plaintiffs alleged that the City of Santa Ana's failure to provide ASL interpreters or auxiliary aids to deaf and hard of hearing inmates at the city's jail violated Title II of the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and state law. In February 2017, the parties reached a settlement requiring Defendants to pay $140,000 in damages to Plaintiffs and to develop measures to ensure that deaf and hard of hearing jail inmates would receive appropriate accommodations and services. The case closed in May 2017.
View Case Detail (JC-CA-0127)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 13, 2017
National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty v. State of New York
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 2:04-cv-00705-ADS-ARL (E.D.N.Y.)
ED-NY-0017
Homeless children and their parents living in Suffolk County, New York, filed suit against various State and County agencies and fourteen school districts, alleging that they had been denied access to a free and appropriate public school education in violation of the McKinney Vento-Homelessness Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 11431-11435; New York Education Law § 3209; and various other laws and regulations thereunder. The Plaintiffs alleged that homeless children in Suffolk County were often turned away at the schoolhouse door, experienced significant delays in enrolling in public school, or were denied access to transportation or other basic services. The Plaintiffs reached three settlement agreements with the school district defendants, New York State defendants, and Suffolk County defendants, respectively.
View Case Detail (ED-NY-0017)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2017
Postawko v. Missouri Department of Corrections
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 16-cv-4219-NKL-P (W.D. Mo.)
PC-MO-0015
On July 14, 2016, inmates at the Missouri Department of Corrections filed this class action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Plaintiffs sued the MDOC under U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiffs claimed that Defendants failed to provide medically acceptable care to HCV+ inmates and sought declaratory and injunctive relief. Defendants filed a motion to oppose class certification, but on May 11, 2017, Chief Judge Laughrey granted the plaintiffs class certification. MDOC defendants also filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs complaint, but on May 11, Judge Laughrey denied defendant MDOC's motion to dismiss on the grounds that plaintiffs plausibly stated claims under both the Eighth Amendment and the American Disabilities Act.
View Case Detail (PC-MO-0015)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2017
Fowler v. Turco
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 15-cv-12298-NMG (D. Mass.)
PC-MA-0045
OnJUne 10,2015, inmates of the Massachusetts Department of Correction filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court District of Massachusetts. The plaintiffs sued the Massachusetts Partnership for Correctional Healthcare LLC (“MPCH”) and the Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Correction under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants have repeatedly shown deliberate indifference to the serious medical needs of plaintiffs and the members of the class also infected with the Hepatitis C virus. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, sought declaratory and injunctive relief for violations of their Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Discovery is ongoing with a trial date set for April 30, 2018.
View Case Detail (PC-MA-0045)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2017
Moussazadeh v. Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:07-CV-574 (S.D. Tex.)
PC-TX-0018
On October 12, 2005, an inmate of Eastham Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff sued the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), its executive director and the warden of the Eastham Unit under 42 U.S.C. §2000 and Texas State Code §110.001. The plaintiff alleged that the TDCJ and specifically the Eastham Unit have denied his access to a kosher diet, which he requires as part of his sincere religious belief. The plaintiff, represented by private counsel, sought preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, claiming violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). After a number of motions to dismiss and appeals, the parties eventually reached a private settlement agreement which was granted on March 31, 2017 wherein the plaintiff was transferred to a prison with access to a Jewish dietary program.
View Case Detail (PC-TX-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2017
U.S. v. State of Connecticut
Case Category: Mental Health (Facility)
Trial Docket: 3:09-CV-85 (D. Conn.)
MH-CT-0003
On January 20, 2009, the Department of Justice filed and settled a lawsuit with the State of Connecticut for practices at the Connecticut Valley Hospital, a state-run psychiatric facility, that violated the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997 (CRIPA). In the settlement, Connecticut agreed to a wide variety of practice changes and a period of supervised operation. On May 22, 2015, the Court approved the State’s notice of substantial compliance and motion to terminate the settlement agreement, however, news suggests that as late as mid-2017, patients at the Connecticut Valley Hospital continued to suffer from widespread abuse.
View Case Detail (MH-CT-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2017
Wood v. Ryan
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-01447-NVW (D. Ariz.)
CJ-AZ-0002
Several citizens and residents of Arizona subject to the death penalty brought suit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 against the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC) and several associated governmental employees. The plaintiffs argued that the ADC's lethal injection procedure violated their First Amendment right to access governmental proceedings, the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Eighth Amendment, and the Federal Supremacy Clause. The parties came to a stipulated agreement prohibiting the defendant from using certain chemicals for execution, among other limitation. The case is ongoing as an appeal continues in the Ninth Circuit as to first amendment issues.
View Case Detail (CJ-AZ-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2017
Remick v. Utah
Case Category: Indigent Defense
Trial Docket: 2:16-cv-00789 (D. Utah)
PD-UT-0001
A class-action lawsuit was brought against the State of Utah and the Attorney General of Utah under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants failed to provide constitutionally adequate legal representation to indigent adults accused of crimes in Utah’s District and Justice courts for which there is a possibility of incarceration.
View Case Detail (PD-UT-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 11, 2017
County of Santa Clara v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 5:17-cv-05813 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0106
This suit, brought on October 10, 2017, challenges President Trump's revocation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). The plaintiffs are Santa Clara County and a union representing thousands of county employees, and they seek to enjoin the government from ending the program. Not only do the DACA recipients stand to lose benefits and security they have relied upon, but the plaintiffs argued that their employers and communities stand to lose the benefits these recipients provide to them. As a result, the plaintiffs contended that revoking DACA violated Fifth Amendment due process and equal protection, and the Administrative Procedure Act. They seek equitable estoppel, injunctive relief, and declaratory judgment. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0106)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2017
Hacker v. Cain
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:14-cv-00063-JWD-EWD (M.D. La.)
PC-LA-0018
In 2014, a prisoner at Louisiana State Penitentiary who suffered from cataracts filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. Plaintiff alleged that the policy of delaying "elective surgery," failing to make reasonable work accommodations, and excluding prisoners with disabilities from beneficial prison programs violated the American with Disabilities Act and his Eighth Amendment rights. After filing his initial lawsuit, plaintiff received cataracts surgery, but the lawsuit continued over the broader discriminatory policies. The case went to a jury trial in 2017, which returned a verdict for the defendants. The jury said that plaintiff failed to prove that he suffered a disability under the ADA before his cataracts surgery and that the defendants did not violate his Eighth Amendment rights by delaying surgery and requiring him to do manual work despite his visual impairment. The plaintiff motioned for a new trial in March 2017. The case remains open and active.
View Case Detail (PC-LA-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2017
Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights (GLAHR) v. Alford
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-00757-WCO (N.D. Ga.)
IM-GA-0009
On March 9, 2016, the Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights (GLAHR) and students within the University System of Georgia filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. They alleged the students, who had been granted legal status under the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, were entitled to in-state tuition, and that the defendants had created an unconstitutional two-tiered system of residency in violation of the Supremacy Clause and the Equal Protection Clause. These proceedings have been stayed since February 16, 2017 as a parallel suit in the Georgia Supreme Court could answer the question of whether denying in-state tuition to DACA students violated state statutory law and Board of Regents policies. As DACA was recently rescinded by the Trump Administration, it is unclear how either case will proceed.
View Case Detail (IM-GA-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2017
T.H. v. Walcott
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-08777-JLC (S.D.N.Y.)
DR-NY-0015
In 2013, children with disabilities in New York City sued the New York Department of Education in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs allege that New York City Schools frequently misused emergency medical services to remove students with disabilities in non-emergency situations, in violation of federal disability laws, among other claims. In 2014, the parties reached a stipulated agreement that required the City change its policies and practices relating to its handling of children with disabilities and awarded monetary damages to the plaintiffs. The period of the stipulation agreement runs until June 30, 2018.
View Case Detail (DR-NY-0015)