Federal court certifies a class action lawsuit on behalf of all residents of a city allegedly falsely arrested and maliciously prosecuted for alleged violations of a loitering law after that law had been declared unconstitutional. Casale v. Kelly, #08 Civ. 2173, 2009 U.S. Dist. Lexis 50304 (S.D.N.Y.).
     Federal court certifies class action status for lawsuit brought by former Chicago post-arrest detainees who claimed that they were subject to improperly long interrogation room confinement, deprived of sleep accommodations, and held for over 48 hours before receiving a probable cause hearing. Dunn v. City of Chicago, No. 04-C-6804, 231 F.R.D. 367 (N.D. Ill. 2005). [N/R]
     Certification of class action challenging City of Chicago's past procedures for retrieval of property seized during custodial arrests upheld, despite apparent change in policy and city's attempt to make the case moot by returning $172 in funds seized from the two named representative plaintiff arrestees. Plaintiffs sought, in addition to return of funds, interest, compensatory damages, and attorneys' fees. Gates v. Towery, No. 05-1079, 2005 U.S. App. Lexis 25677 (7th Cir.). [2006 LR Jan]
     Federal trial court declines to certify class action on behalf of former arrestees in homicide cases who were detained, never charged, and then released. In case claiming that city has a long-standing policy of making arrests without probable cause in homicide cases, court finds that proposed class did not meet the requirement that questions of law or fact common to members of the class predominate over issues affecting only individual members or that a class action is a superior method for the fair and efficient resolving of the claims. Abby v. City of Detroit, 218 F.R.D. 544 (E.D. Mich. 2003). [N/R]
     Neighborhood residents allegedly detained and searched by officers en masse following basketball tournament were properly certified as a class in a federal civil rights lawsuit challenging the actions as unlawful and seeking damages. The fact that individual plaintiffs might claim differing amounts of damage did not support the defendants' motion for decertification. Williams v. Brown, 214 F.R.D. 484 (N.D. Ill. 2003). [N/R]
     In a class action lawsuit against a city and two of its officers, claiming racially discriminatory law enforcement practices, African-American advocacy organization would be permitted to withdraw as class representative when a civil liberties organization would continue to adequately represent the class. In Re: Cincinnati Policing, No. C-1-99-3170, 214 F.R.D. 221 (S.D. Ohio 2003). [N/R]
      In federal civil rights lawsuit brought by Native American anti-gambling demonstrators alleging that state officials violated their right to equal protection by not providing them with police protection on the reservation, the plaintiffs' motion for class action certification was not "untimely" despite being filed more than ten years after the lawsuit was begun, since the trial was still not "imminent," and there had been no rulings on the actual merits of the claims in the case. Court also rules that the allegations in the complaint satisfied the requirements for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Pyke v. Cuomo, 209 F.R.D. 33 (N.D.N.Y. 2002).[N/R]