article: On June 5, 2017, a male Louisiana detainee filed this class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. He had been arrested and detained after being charged with felony theft and was unable to post the $375 bond to a for-profit bonding agent to clear his $3000 bail. The plaintiff sued the Sheriff, County Commissioner, and Chief Judge for the 15th Judicial District of Louisiana under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 2201. Represented by Civil Rights Corps, MacArthur Justice Center, and Loyola University School of Law, the plaintiff sought to represent a class of all arrestees who were or would be detained in that state district--which covered Acadia, Lafayette, and Vermillon Parishes--for any amount of time after an arrest because they were unable to pay money bail. He claimed that the district scheme of setting bail amounts without further inquiry into a person's ability to pay violated his Due Process and Equal Protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. He sought an injunction, declaratory relief, and attorney's fees and costs. This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Patrick Hanna and Judge Robert G. James. Judge James recused himself and the case was reassigned to Judge Elizabeth E. Foote. The defendants filed motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. They also argued that the claim was moot because the plaintiff was no longer in jail. On July 20, the case was stayed as the parties engaged in settlement talks under Judge Hanna's orders. After several months of unsuccessful settlement talks, the stay was lifted even though settlement discussions continued. The defendants claimed there was nothing to settle and the plaintiff claimed irreparable harm was ongoing. On December 6, 2017, Judge Hanna filed a Report and Recommendation in response to the Commissioner's motion to dismiss. The report recommended that the motion should be granted with respect to plaintiff's equal protection claims and due process claims against the County Judge. The Judge also recommended that the motion be denied to the extent that it requested dismissal of due process claims against the Commissioner. On December 11, 2017, Judge Hanna filed a second Report and Recommendation in response to the Sheriff's motion to dismiss. The report recommended the motion be denied with respect to subject matter jurisdiction claims because the claim was not moot and Younger abstention did not apply. However, the plaintiff had requested relief that could not be granted, and so Judge Hanna recommended dismissal. The plaintiff objected to both of these reports and sought oral argument before Judge Foote. On January 12, 2018, Judge Foote granted a hearing. On February 14, 2018, the plaintiff and an intervenor filed a motion to intervene or to consolidate the case with the intervenor's individual case, 6:18-cv-00159, with this case. On February 26, the plaintiff filed a motion to amend the complaint with opposition, which was granted later by Judge Foote. Judge Foote adopted partially the second Report and Recommendations and denied the Sheriff’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction on March 6, 2018. 2018 WL 1188077. On March 8, Judge Hanna denied the plaintiff’s motion to certify class without prejudice. 2018 WL 1221119. On March 9, the plaintiff filed the first supplemental class-action complaint to allege material facts that have arisen since the original complaint on June 5, 2017. Specifically, the Sheriff revised his policies and procedures governing the Sheriff’s Tracking Offender Program (S.T.O.P), which determines a detainee’s eligibility for these programs. On March 27, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss the supplemental complaint and original complaint for failure to state a claim. Discovery then followed. On April 12, Judge Foote granted the plaintiff’s motion to intervene and denied the motion to consolidate cases. On June 28, 2018, the defendant filed a motion for sanction regarding the plaintiff’s supplemental complaint. On August 28, 2018, Judge Hanna filed a Report and Recommendations. She recommended that the Sheriff’s motion to dismiss filed on March 27 should be granted in part and denied in part, and that the re-urged first motion to dismiss the original complaint should be granted. 2018 WL 6036911. The next day, Judge Hanna filed an additional Report and Recommendations, recommending that the motion for sanctions be denied. 2018 WL 6028683. On October 26, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment against the Sheriff but later withdrew this motion. On the same day, the defendants also filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims. The plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment again on October 30. On November 9, this case was reassigned to Judge Terry A. Doughty. On November 14, Judge Doughty adopted the Report and Recommendation of Judge Hanna, granting the motion to dismiss the supplemental complaint and original complaint pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6). The plaintiffs’ claims against the Sheriff were dismissed without prejudice. 2018 WL 5993879. Furthermore, Judge Doughty adopted the second Report and Recommendation and denied the motion for sanctions. 2018 WL 5987022. On December 3, 2018, Judge Doughty denied both the plaintiffs’ and defendants’ motions for summary judgment and the parties were required to file pre-trial memoranda. 2018 WL 6314730. Bench trial was held on August 6, 2019 and the parties were asked to file post-trial briefs. The plaintiffs filed their brief on September 20 and the defendants filed their brief on December 3. The case is ongoing.
summary: The plaintiff filed a class action on behalf of all arrestees who are or will be detained for any amount of time after an arrest because they are unable to pay money bail. Under a § 1983 action, he claimed that a wealth-based post-arrest detention policy violates equal protection and due process under the 14th amendment by jailing the poor for no reason other than their poverty.