UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown

May 4 2004

JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS, individually and on behalf of a Class of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

v.
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY; CHARLES J. MCRAY, individually and in his official capacity as Acting Director of the MIAMIDADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, CAPTAIN B. FULLER, Individually and in her official capacity as the Facility Supervisor of the Women’s Detention Center, ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO, individually and in his official capacity as Facility Supervisor of the Pre-Trial Detention Center; and MIAMIDADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT OFFICERS JANE DOEs 1 THROUGH 150;

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Defendants.

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Pursuant to agreement of the parties to file this Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs, individually, and as representatives of a class of persons similarly situated, sue Defendants and allege:

1 of 20

21/wc

INTRODUCTION 1. Females, non-felony arrestees in Miami-Dade County are routinely subjected to dehumanizing invasive strip and visual body cavity searches upon arrival at the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, prior to First Appearance, despite such blanket strip searches violating state and federal law. 2. The blanket strip searches are particularly reprehensible as they appear, upon information and belief, to be reserved only for females. 3. Unless enjoined and restricted, upon information and belief, Defendants will maintain their policy and practice of illegally subjecting pre-first appearance, non-felony, female arrestees charged with non-violent, non-drug and non-weapons related offenses to illegal strip and visual body cavity searches.
JURISDICTION 4. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1988, and the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Jurisdiction is founded upon 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1343(a)(3) and (4) and the aforementioned statutory and constitutional provisions.
PARTIES 5. Plaintiffs, including JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, AMANDA WELLS, and all those similarly situated, are, and at all material times herein, were arrested and subjected to strip and visual body cavity searches at the MiamiDade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center. 6. Defendant MIAMI-DADE COUNTY is, and at all material times referred to herein, was, a political division of the state of Florida, that maintained or permitted an official policy or
- 2 -
2 of 20

custom or practice causing or permitting the occurrence of the types of wrongs complained of herein, which wrongs damaged Plaintiffs as herein alleged.
7. Defendant MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, through the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitation Department, manages and operates the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, where the wrongs complained of herein occurred.
8. Defendant CHARLES J. MCRAY is, and at all material times referred to herein, was the Acting Director of the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitation Department, responsible for administering the jail facilities in which the wrongs complained of herein occurred, and for making, overseeing, and implementing the policies, practices, and customs challenged herein relating to the operation of the County’s jail facilities. He is sued in his individual and official capacities.
9. Defendant ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO is the Facility Supervisor at the MiamiDade County Pre-Trial Detention Center, responsible for making, overseeing, and implementing the policies, practices and customs challenged herein relating to the operation of the Pre-Trial Detention Center. He is sued in his individual and official capacities.
10. Defendant CAPTAIN M. FULLER is the Facility Supervisor at the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, responsible for making, overseeing, and implementing the policies, practices and customs challenged herein relating to the operation of the Pre-Trial Detention Center. She is sued in her individual and official capacities.
11. Defendants MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT OFFICERS JANE DOEs 1 through DOE 150, sued herein by their fictitious
- 3 -
3 of 20

names, are all Correctional Officers who, as part of their duties at the Pretrial Detention Center, subjected Plaintiffs to pre-first appearance strip and visual body cavity searches without first having, and recording in writing, a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons. They are sued in their individual capacity.
12. At all material times mentioned herein, each of the Defendants was acting under the color of law, to wit, under color of statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs and usages of the state of Florida, the COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE, and/or the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitation Department.
CLASS CLAIMS 13. The named Plaintiffs bring this suit as a class action, pursuant to the provisions of Rule 23(b)(2) & (3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for injunctive and declaratory relief, and for monetary damages, on behalf of a class of all persons similarly situated. 14. The class of Plaintiffs consists of all women arrested on non-felony charges who, within the applicable four year statute of limitations, and continuing to this date, were subjected by Defendants to pre-first appearance strip and/or visual body cavity searches at the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center, the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, or any other jail facility operated by Defendant Miami-Dade County, without Defendants having, and recording in writing, a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons. 15. The Plaintiff class consists of an unknown but large number of individuals, numbering in the thousands, so that joinder of all members is impracticable. 16. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that Defendants have the
- 4 -
4 of 20

ability to identify all such similarly situated Plaintiffs, specifically those who, while in Defendants’ custody at any time during the applicable statute of limitations, were subjected to strip and/or visual body cavity searches prior to first appearance without Defendants first having, and recording, a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons.
17. There are questions of fact common to the class including, but not limited to: (1) where Defendants routinely subject all females arrested to strip and/or visual body cavity searches prior to first appearance if they intend such persons to be housed at the Women’s Detention Center and the Pretrial Detention Center; (2) whether only females – not males – are subjected to the strip and/or visual body cavity search; (3) whether persons are subjected to strip and/or visual body cavity searches prior to first appearance without their being any particularized reasonable suspicion, based on specific or articulable facts, to believe any particular arrestee has concealed drugs, weapons, and/or contraband in bodily cavities which could be detected by means of a strip and/or visual body cavity search; and (4) whether the strip and/or visual body cavity searches are conducted in an area of privacy so that the searches cannot be observed by persons not participating in the searches, or whether the strip and/or visual body cavity searches are conducted in areas where they may be observed by persons not participating in the searches.
18. There are questions of law common to the class, including, but not limited to: (1) whether Defendants may perform strip and/or visual body cavity searches on persons prior to their first appearance without particularized reasonable suspicion, based on specific or articulable facts, to believe any particular arrestee has concealed drugs, weapons and/or contraband, which would likely be discovered by a visual body cavity search; (2) whether Defendants may perform strip
- 5 -
5 of 20

and/or visual body cavity searches on females when they do not subject males to similar searches; (3) whether strip and/or visual body cavity searches may be conducted in areas where the search can be observed by people not participating in the search without violating Plaintiff’s federal constitutional rights; and (4) whether or not Defendants’ strip and visual body cavity search policy and procedure is in accordance with the federal constitution.
19. The claims of the representative Plaintiffs are typical of the class. Plaintiffs were searched, prior to first appearance, without reasonable suspicion that a strip or visual body cavity search would produce drugs, weapons or contraband (and without the facts supporting any such suspicion being articulated in a supervisor approved document). Representative Plaintiffs have the same interests and suffered the same type of injuries as all of the other class members. Plaintiffs’ claims arose because of Defendants’ policy, practice, and custom of subjecting arrestees to strip and visual body cavity searches before first appearance without having, and recording in writing, a reasonable suspicion that the search would be productive of contraband or weapons. Plaintiffs’ claims are based upon the same legal theories as the claims of the class members. Each class member suffered actual damages as a result of being subjected to a visual body cavity search. The actual damages suffered by representative Plaintiffs are similar in type and amount to the actual damages suffered by each class member.
20. The representative Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the class interest. Plaintiffs’ interests are consistent with and not antagonistic to the interests of the class. They have a strong personal interest in the outcome of this action and have no conflicts of interest with members of the Plaintiff class. The named Plaintiffs were all subjected to strip and visual body cavity searches without legal justification. As long as the policies, practices and customs of the
- 6 -
6 of 20

Defendants continue to permit dehumanizing invasive strip and visual body cavity searches, the named Plaintiffs, and the class they represent, are and will remain at high risk of being subjected to searches in clear violation of established constitutional rights.
21. The named Plaintiffs are represented by experienced counsel who specialize in civil rights litigation.
22. The prosecutions of separate actions by individual members of the class would create a risk that inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the class would establish incompatible standards of conduct for the parties opposing the class.
23. The prosecutions of separate actions by individual members of the class would create a risk of inconsistent adjudications with respect to individual members of the class which would, as a practical matter, substantially impair or impede the ability of the other members of the class to protect their interests.
24. The Defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to the class, thereby making appropriate the final injunctive or declaratory relief with respect to the class as a whole.
25. A class action is superior to all other available methods for the fair and equitable adjudication of the controversy between the parties. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that the interests of members of the class in individually controlling the prosecution of a separate action is low in that most class members would be unable individually to prosecute any action at all. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that most members of the class will not be able to find counsel to represent them. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that it is desirable to concentrate all litigation in one forum because all of the claims arise in the same location. It will promote judicial efficiency to resolve
- 7 -
7 of 20

the common questions of law and fact in one form, rather than in multiple courts. 26. The strip and visual body cavity searches to which Plaintiffs and all those similarly
situated are subjected are violations of clearly established constitutional rights that are over before they can be challenged in court because all Plaintiffs are released prior to or at first appearance (normally within the first 48 hours of incarceration).
27. The strip and visual body cavity searches to which Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated are subjected are violations of clearly established constitutional rights for which no challenge is possible prior to the violation occurring because the time period between arrest and search is so short and because no Plaintiff has the opportunity between arrest and search to retain counsel or seek judicial review.
28. The strip and visual body cavity searches to which Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated are subjected are violations of clearly established constitutional rights which occur as the result on the established and on-going policy, practice and custom of the Defendants and for which monetary damages after-the-fact is not suitable long-term relief.
29. The strip and visual body cavity searches to which Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated are subjected have continued since the date this lawsuit was originally filed, on March 5, 2004, and in all likelihood will continue, absent class certification and injunctive relief as requested in this Complaint.
30. Absent class injunctive relief, there is no reason to believe that Defendants’ violation of clearly established constitutional rights will not continue and that Plaintiff class members, as the class is defined in this complaint, will most certainly be subjected to a constitutionally infirm strip and visual body cavity search.
- 8 -
8 of 20

31. Because of the time and setting in which the Defendants violate clearly established constitutional rights, injunctive relief on behalf of the class is appropriate because the illegal policy, practice and custom of the Defendants is capable of repetition but evading judicial review if declaratory and injunctive relief is not provided.
FACTS A. JUDITH HANEY
32. Plaintiff, JUDITH HANEY is, and at all times material hereto was, a resident of the city of Oakland, California.
33. On or about November 21, 2003, Plaintiff JUDITH HANEY was sitting on the sidewalk across from the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center (hereinafter referred to as the “Detention Center”), along with three other women and three men, when they were arrested allegedly for “failing to disburse” and taken across the street to the Detention Center to be booked. Plaintiff HANEY and the other women arrested were separated from the males and, one at a time, taken to a separate area where each woman was made fully to disrobe, placing each of her items of clothing on a table, then to bend over, exposing her anus and vaginal area for inspection by Defendants and then made to squat and to “hop like a bunny” three times before being permitted to put her own clothes back on.
34. When Plaintiff HANEY was naked, Defendant JANE DOE 1 noticed a naval piercing and ordered Plaintiff HANEY to remove it. When Plaintiff HANEY was unable to remove the navel ring, JANE DOE 1 obtained a wire cutter and clipped it off. During the entire time Plaintiff HANEY was standing naked in an area with the door open and with people passing by who could freely observe her.
- 9 -
9 of 20

35. Over the next several hours, Plaintiff HANEY and others were transported in paddy wagons to various locations finally arriving at the Turner-Gilford-Knight Miami Detention Center (hereinafter referred to as “TGK”) where she was again processed and held in various holding tanks until she was released after approximately 35 hours.
36. On or about February 5, 2004, all charges against Plaintiff HANEY and others arrested with her were dismissed.
37. Plaintiff HANEY is a 50 year old management employee of Genetech Corporation. She was humiliated and embarrassed by being subjected to the aforementioned visual body cavity search and by being required to stand, naked, for any passerby to observe. She suffered mental and emotional distress as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions in depriving her of rights secured to her by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. B. LIAT MAYER
38. Plaintiff LIAT MAYER is, and at all times material hereto, was a resident of Brooklyn, New York.
39. On or about November 21, 2003, Plaintiff MAYER was seated on the sidewalk across from Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center with three other women, including JUDITH HANEY, and three men, when they were arrested allegedly for “failing to disburse” and taken across the street to the Detention Center to be booked.
40. Plaintiff MAYER and the other women with whom she was arrested were separated from the males and, one at a time, taken to a separate area where each women was made fully to disrobe, placing each of her items of clothing on the table, then to bend over, exposing her anus and vaginal area for inspection by Defendants and then made to squat and to “hop like a bunny”
- 10 -
10 of 20

three times before being permitted to put her own clothes back on. 41. While Plaintiff MAYER was naked, Defendant JANE DOE 2, left the door to the area
where the search was being conducted open so that Plaintiff MAYER could be and was observed naked as people passed by and freely observed her.
42. Over the next several hours, Plaintiff MAYER and others were transported in paddy wagons to various locations around Miami and finally delivered to TGK where she was again processed and held in various holding tanks until being released approximately 35 hours later.
43. On or about February 5, 2004, all charges against Plaintiff MAYER were dismissed. 44. Plaintiff MAYER is a student who was humiliated, embarrassed and suffered mental and emotional distress as a result of being subjected to the aforementioned visual body cavity search and by being required to stand, naked, for any passerby to observe. She suffered these and other damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions in depriving her of rights secured to her by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. C. JAMIE LOUGHNER 45. Plaintiff JAMIE LOUGHNER is thirty-nine (39) years of age, and at all times material hereto was, a resident of Arlington, Virginia. 46. On or about November 20, 2003, Plaintiff LOUGHNER was arrested and later charged with two misdemeanors, resisting arrest without violence and failure to obey a lawful order. Plaintiff LOUGHNER was then taken to TGK where she was given a pat down search. 47. Two days later, on Saturday, November 22, 2003, Plaintiff LOUGHNER was transported from TGK to the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, along with seven (7) other women.
- 11 -
11 of 20

48. Upon arrival at the Women’s Detention Center, Plaintiff LOUGHNER was placed in one of the cubicles found near the entrance area. Plaintiff LOUGHNER was told to fully disrobe and placed her clothes on a seat. She was then told while fully nude to bend over, exposing her anus and vaginal area for inspection by Defendant JANE DOE 3 and then told to squat, cough and then to bend over and spread her buttocks and vagina (hereinafter “privates”) for a visual inspection. She was then told to cough again while bent over with her privates pointed at Defendant JANE DOE 4, and to “open up [privates] wider” and to “shake it.”
49. This strip and body cavity search procedure occurred with two guards present, Defendant JANE DOE 3 who gave Plaintiff LOUGHNER instructions and inspected her privates, and Defendant JANE DOE 4 who witnessed the strip search procedure. Plaintiff LOUGHNER was then allowed to put her own clothes back on.
50. Plaintiff LOUGHNER could see one of the other women detainees in the cubicle opposite her during the entire strip search procedure.
51. Plaintiff LOUGHNER was released from Jail November 25, 2003. Her criminal charges were later dropped and have not been refiled.
52. The strip search and body cavity exam Plaintiff LOUGHNER experienced was humiliating and embarrassing, and left her mortified.
53. Plaintiff LOUGHNER has suffered mental and emotional distress as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions in depriving her of rights secured to her by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. D. DARCY SMITH
54. Plaintiff DARCY SMITH is twenty-nine (29), and at all times material hereto, was a
- 12 -
12 of 20

resident of Aventura, Florida. 55. On or about March 17, 2004, at approximately 12:30 a.m., Plaintiff SMITH was arrested
by the City of Aventura Police for misdemeanor battery after allegedly getting into an altercation with her roommate.
56. Plaintiff SMITH was taken from her home by the City of Aventura Police Department to a holding cell at the City of Aventura Police Department. About 3 a.m. on or about March 17, 2004 she was transported to the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center where she was booked and finger-printed. At around 1:00 p.m. on or about March 17, 2004, she was taken to the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center and taken to a holding cell. Shortly thereafter Plaintiff SMITH was instructed to remove her bra and flip-flops. She was then taken to a separate area where she was made to fully disrobe, placing each of her items of clothing on the table, then instructed to bend over, exposing her anus and vaginal area for inspection by Defendant JANE DOE 5 and then made to squat, cough, and before being permitted to put her own clothes back on. She was then given a jumpsuit and sheets.
57. While Plaintiff SMITH was naked, Defendant JANE DOE 5, left open the door to the area where the search was being conducted so that Plaintiff SMITH could be seen and observed naked if anyone passed by.
58. At approximately 5:30 a.m., March 18, 2004, Plaintiff SMITH and others were transported in paddy wagons to the Miami-Dade County’s Pretrial Detention Center for first appearance at around 2:00 p.m. She was released from the Pretrial Detention Center at approximately 7:00 p.m., on March 18, 2004.
59. Plaintiff SMITH is a hair stylist who was humiliated, embarrassed and suffered mental
- 13 -
13 of 20

and emotional distress as a result of being subjected to the aforementioned visual body cavity search and by being required to stand naked for any passerby to observe. She suffered these and other damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions in depriving her of rights secured to her by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. D. AMANDA WELLS
60. Plaintiff AMANDA WELLS is forty-two (42) years of age, and at all times material hereto was, a resident of Miami Beach, Florida.
61. On Friday, April 23, 2004, Plaintiff WELLS was arrested around 5 p.m. for an outstanding bench warrant for failure to appear on an earlier misdemeanor charge of resisting arrest without violence. Plaintiff WELLS was then taken to TGK where she was pat searched and held on a bus for 4 to 5 hours. She was then transported at around 10 p.m. to the Miami-Dade County PreTrial Detention Center along with three (3 ) other women and about ten (10) men to wait for first appearance.
62. Plaintiff WELLS and the other women transported with her were separated from the males and, one at a time, taken to a separate area where each woman was made fully to disrobe, placing each of her items of clothing on a table, then to bend over, exposing her anus and vaginal area for inspection by Defendants and then made to squat and to “hop like a bunny” three times before being permitted to put her clothes back on. There was never any privacy and anyone walking by could view her in the nude as the strip search procedure was performed.
63. This strip and body cavity search procedure at the Detention Center occurred with Defendant JANE DOE 6 present who gave Plaintiff WELLS instructions and inspected her privates. Plaintiff WELLS was then allowed to put her own clothes back on.
- 14 -
14 of 20

64. Plaintiff WELLS could see one of the other women detainees in the cubicle opposite her during the entire strip search procedure.
65. Plaintiff WELLS was released from Detention Center at 10 a.m. on Saturday, April 24, 2004.
66. The strip search and body cavity exam Plaintiff WELLS experienced was humiliating and embarrassing, and left her mortified.
67. Plaintiff WELLS has suffered mental and emotional distress as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions in depriving her of rights secured to her by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
COUNT ONE (Violation of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution
on Behalf of Plaintiffs and All Persons Similarly Situated) 68. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege paragraphs one (1) through sixty-seven (67) as though fully set forth herein. 69. The strip and visual body cavity searches to which Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated were subjected were performed pursuant to policies, practices, and customs of named Defendants and the individual correctional officers sued herein by the fictitious names JANE DOEs 1 through 150. 70. The searches complained of herein were performed without regard to the nature of the alleged offenses for which Plaintiffs had been arrested, without regard to whether or not Plaintiffs were eligible for release at First Appearance, and without regard to whether or not Plaintiffs were eligible for and/or were released on their own recognizance.
- 15 -
15 of 20

71. The searches complained of herein were performed without Defendants having a reasonable belief that the Plaintiffs so searched possessed weapons or contraband or that there existed facts supporting a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches would produce contraband.
72. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that Defendants routinely follow a policy, practice, and custom of requiring pre-first appearance female detainees, including those processed at the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, to strip naked and to submit to visual body cavity searches without having, and recording in writing, a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches will be productive of contraband or weapons.
73. In searching the Plaintiffs as alleged, Defendant DOEs acted in accordance with the policy, practice and customs of Defendants MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, MCRAY, ALADRO and FULLER.
74. Strip and body cavity searches, as alleged in this Complaint, are done as a matter of routine, and are authorized, permitted and encouraged, in accordance with the established policies, practices and customs of Defendant MIAMI-DADE COUNTY.
75. Defendants MCRAY, ALADRO and FULLER authorize, permit, facilitate, encourage, and acquiesce in the behavior of their subordinates, who routinely conduct strip and visual body cavity searches of females, as alleged in this Complaint.
76. Individual named Defendants herein are personally responsible for the promulgation and continuation of the strip search policy, practice, and custom pursuant to which Plaintiffs herein and all those similarly situated, were subjected to the searches complained of herein.
- 16 -
16 of 20

77. Defendants’ policies, practices, and customs regarding the strip and visual body cavity searches complained of herein violated Plaintiffs’ rights under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, and violated said Plaintiffs’ rights to due process and privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment, and directly and proximately damaged Plaintiffs as herein alleged, entitling Plaintiffs to recover damages for said constitutional violation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
78. As a result of being subjected to the strip and visual body cavity searches complained of herein, each of the Plaintiffs suffered physical, mental and emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and the violation of due process of law and federal constitutional rights, and is entitled to recover damages according to proof.
COUNT TWO (Violation of Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, 42 U.S.C. § 1983,
on Behalf of Plaintiffs and All Persons Similarly Situated) 79. Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs one (1) through seventy-eight (78) as though fully set forth herein. 80. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and on that basis allege that Defendants, pursuant to policy and procedure, discriminate against women by selecting female pretrial arrestees for strip and visual body cavity searches but do not subject males arrested for similar crimes to these humiliating and invasive unconstitutional strip searches. 81. By selecting females for strip and visual body cavity searches only, Defendants discriminate against Plaintiffs on the basis of their sex and deny to them the equal protection of the laws guaranteed to them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
- 17 -
17 of 20

82. Defendants’ policies, practices, and customs regarding subjecting female pretrial arrestees to strip and visual body cavity searches while not requiring male pretrial arrestees to undergo the same or similar procedure violates Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment right to the equal protection of the laws and directly and proximately damaged Plaintiffs as herein alleged, entitling Plaintiffs to recover damages for said constitutional violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in addition to other damages.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF A. For declaratory and injunctive relief declaring illegal and enjoining, preliminarily and permanently, Defendants’ policies, practices, and customs of subjecting female, non-felony, pre-first appearance detainees to strip and visual body cavity searches without having and recording in writing a reasonable suspicion that such searches would be productive of contraband or weapons; B. For declaratory and injunctive relief declaring illegal and enjoining, preliminarily and permanently, the policy of selectively subjecting female, non-felony, pre-first appearance detainees to strip and visual body cavity searches while not so subjecting male pre-first appearance detainees to such searches; C. Certification of this action as a class action, designation of Plaintiffs as class representatives and counsel as class counsel; D. For compensatory, general, and special damages for each representative and for each member of the class of Plaintiffs, as against all Defendants; E. Exemplary damages as against all of the individual Defendants in an amount sufficient to deter and to make an example of those Defendants; F. Attorneys’ fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988; and
- 18 -
18 of 20

19 of 20

G. The cost of this suit and such other relief as the court finds just and proper.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Plaintiffs demand trial by jury as to all issues triable as a right before a jury.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark E. Merin, Esq. Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild, Esq.
Law Office of Mark E. Merin 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 916/443-6911 - Telephone 916/447-8336 - Facsimile mark@markmerin.com - E-mail
Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq.
Casper, Meadows & Schwartz 2121 N California Boulevard, Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 947-1147 - Telephone (925) 947-1131 - Facsimile schwartz@cmslaw.com - E-mail
Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Peter M. Siegel, Esq.
Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Blvd. Miami, FL 33131-2310 305/358-2081 - Telephone 305/358-0910 - Facsimile rcberg@bellsouth.net - E-Mail
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
/s/ Mark E. Merin, Esq.
- 19 -

Calif. SBN 043849
/s/ Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Florida Bar No. 0318371 Certificate of Service I hereby certify that a copy of this document was sent to Richard B. Rosenthal, Esq. and Jeffrey Ehrlich, Esq., Assistant County Attorneys, Miami-Dade County Attorney, 111 Northwest 1st Street, Suite 2810, Miami, Florida 33128, by First Class U.S. Mail on May 4, 2004.
/s/ Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq.

C:\WP\HANEY\SAC_JH.WPD 20 of 20

- 20 -

 
 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 1 of 41

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown

Apr 13 2005

JUDITH HANEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.
STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT
Plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS, individually and on behalf of the settlement class defined herein, and Defendants MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, CHARLES J. MCRAY, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS DEPARTMENT, CAPTAIN B. FULLER, ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO (hereinafter referred to as “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby submit the following Stipulation of Settlement.
I. RECITALS On March 5, 2004, original named Plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER and JAMIE LOUGHNER, on behalf of themselves and all persons similarly situated, filed a complaint in the above-captioned matter in which they challenged, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, certain practices of Defendants including the strip search of certain detainees, prior to first appearance, and

1 of 41

53/gz

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 2 of 41
sought damages and declaratory and injunctive relief. The complaint was subsequently amended to add named representative Plaintiffs DARCY SMITH and AMANDA WELLS.
The parties entered into extensive discovery which included exchange of documents, preparation of and responses to request for production of documents, interrogatories, and depositions.
On August 11, 2004, Defendants issued a memorandum designed to conform strip search practices to pre-existing policies and initiated a process to examine and evaluate all of its strip search policies. Copies of revised policies relating to the strip search of pre-first appearance detainees are attached hereto as Exhibit “1”.
On July 12, 2004, Judge Jordan issued an order scheduling a mediation conference to be held beginning February 7, 2005, with retired Circuit Court Judge Gerald T. Wetherington. The parties attended the mediation and, following two (2) days of meetings, agreed to this Stipulation of Settlement which, subject to the approval of the Court, settles this action in the manner and upon the terms set forth below and fully resolves the dispute.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the Parties, as follows:
II. DEFINITIONS 1. “Administrator” means Settlement Services, Inc., to be appointed by the Court to review and determine the validity and amount of claims submitted by Settlement Class Members (“SCMs”), according to the procedures set forth herein.

2 of 41

- 2 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 3 of 41
2. The “Bar Date” is the date established by the Court by which any SCM who wishes to receive payment pursuant to the Stipulation of Settlement must file his/her Claim Form(s), objections to this Stipulation of Settlement, or request to be excluded from the class (opt-out).
3. “Charge List” means the list of charges attached hereto as Exhibit “2”. 4. The “Claim Form” is the form required to be used to make a claim for payment under this settlement. A copy of the proposed Claim Form is attached as Exhibit “3”. 5. “Class Counsel” means, collectively, The Law Office of Mark E. Merin, Mark E. Merin, attorney; Casper, Meadows & Schwartz, Andrew C. Schwartz, attorney; and the Florida Justice Institute, Inc., Randall C. Berg, Jr., attorney. 6. The “Class Notice” means the notice in a form substantially similar to that attached hereto as Exhibit “4” (Notice by Mail); such other summary notice(s) to be published in newspapers serving Miami-Dade, Broward and Monroe counties, and posted in all Miami-Dade Correctional facilities; and radio and television messages to be transmitted over stations serving Miami-Dade, Broward and Monroe counties. 7. The “Class Period” is March 5, 2000, through February 28, 2005, except that the offensive practices giving rise to liability to sub-groups within the class may have terminated during the Class Period. 8. The “Database” is the information to be provided in hard copy and/or electronic form by the Defendant Miami-Dade County to the Administrator and Class Counsel which includes, to the extent practicable, the name, last known addresses, date of birth, Social Security Number, date(s) of arrest and charge(s) of all SCMs arrested during the Class Period; dates of arrests prior to the Class Period (if any); date(s) of booking(s), housing(s) and first appearance(s) of each member of
- 3 -
3 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 4 of 41
the class booked at any facility operated by the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitations Department.
9. The “Effective Date” means the date upon which a judgment entered by the Court approving the Stipulation of Settlement becomes final. The judgment will be deemed final only upon expiration of the time to appeal or, if a Notice of Appeal is filed, upon exhaustion of all appeals and petitions for writ of certiorari.
10. “Non-VDW Misdemeanor Offense” means a misdemeanor, infraction, or ordinance arrest charge not listed on the Charge List.
11. “VDW Misdemeanor Offense” means any misdemeanor arrest charge which does appear on the Charge List.
12. An “Opt-Out” is any potential Settlement Class Member who files a timely request for exclusion as specified in Paragraph 44.
13. “Released Persons” means the Defendants and their predecessors, successors, and/or assigns, together with past, present, and future officials, employees, representatives, attorneys and/or agents of the COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE.
14. The “Settlement Class” means all of those persons who are members of any of the following defined sub-classes who, during the Class Period identified in Paragraph 7 above, were arrested and strip searched prior to making a first appearance at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Center:
a. All females arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons who were transported to the Women’s Detention Center and who were strip searched prior to their
- 4 -
4 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 5 of 41
first appearance, excluding females strip searched on “probable cause” reported in writing on an incident form; and b. All females arrested on charges relating to prostitution included on the list of prostitution charges attached hereto as Exhibit “5”, who were strip searched prior to first appearance from March 5, 2000, until February 8, 2005, when the practice of strip searching all females charged with prostitution was officially terminated; and c. All persons arrested on felony charges or charges relating to violence, drugs or weapons who were strip searched, prior to their first appearances, without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a supervising officer from March 5, 2000, until February 28, 2005, the date when the policy of strip searching detainees prior to obtaining a written authorization was terminated. 15. A “Settlement Class Member” (“SCM”) means any member of the Settlement Class including representatives, successors and assigns, who does not file a valid and timely Request for Exclusion as provided in Paragraph 44 of this Stipulation of Settlement. 16. “Special Master” shall mean the MAGISTRATE JUDGE Stephen Brown of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, appointed by the Court to preside over this Stipulation of Settlement. The Special Master shall have power to make decisions in all matters pertaining to administration and enforcement of the Stipulation of Settlement, subject to review by the Court upon request of any party.

5 of 41

- 5 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 6 of 41
17. This Stipulation of Settlement is for settlement purposes only, and neither the fact of, nor any provision contained in this Stipulation of Settlement or its exhibits, nor any action taken hereunder shall constitute, be construed as, or be admissible in evidence as any admission of the validity of any claim or any fact alleged by Plaintiffs or SCMs in this action or in any other pending action or of any wrongdoing, fault, violation of law, or liability of any kind on the part of Defendants or admission by Defendants of any claim or allegation made in this action or in any other action, nor as an admission by any of the Plaintiffs, SCMs or Class Counsel of the validity of any fact or defense asserted against them in this action or in any other action. Defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing and deny any liability to Plaintiffs or to any other class members. The parties have agreed that, in order to avoid long and costly litigation, this controversy should be settled pursuant to the terms of this settlement, subject to the approval of the Court.
III. TERMS AND EFFECT OF STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT 18. The parties agree solely for the purposes of this settlement and implementation that the within action shall proceed as a class action, with the Settlement Class as defined in Paragraph 14, and that attorneys for the Class are Class Counsel defined in Paragraph 5; but if such settlement fails to be approved or otherwise fails of consumption, then this Stipulation of Settlement is hereby withdrawn. 19. SCMs who comply with the requirements set forth in this Stipulation of Settlement will be paid specified sums determined by the procedures set forth herein in full satisfaction of all claims.

6 of 41

- 6 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 7 of 41
20. The Stipulation of Settlement, as of the Effective Date, resolves in full all claims against the Released Persons by all of the SCMs, including the named Plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS involving violation of their Fourth Amendment rights, their Fourteenth Amendment rights, or of any other federal, state or local law, regulation, duty, or obligation which are based upon or could be based upon or arise from the facts alleged in Case No. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown filed in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division. When the Stipulation of Settlement is final, as of the Effective Date, all SCMs, including the named Plaintiffs, hereby release all such claims.
21. The Parties agree that the Court, by preliminarily approving the Stipulation of Settlement, will be certifying the class as defined in Paragraph 14, as the Settlement Class, subject to final approval of the Settlement at the fairness hearing and that the Court shall retain exclusive and continuing jurisdiction of the action, Parties, SCMs, Special Master and the Administrator to interpret and enforce the terms, conditions and obligations under this agreement.
22. As of the Effective Date of this Stipulation of Settlement, the SCMs, including the named Plaintiffs, hereby waive any and all rights to pursue, initiate, prosecute, or commence any action or proceeding before any court, administrative agency or other tribunal, or to file any complaint with regard to acts of commission or omission by the Released Persons respecting such SCMs with respect to any strip search by Defendants prior to their first appearance which occurred during the Class Period.
23. This Stipulation of Settlement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Parties hereto regarding the subject matter of the instant proceeding, and no oral agreement
- 7 -
7 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 8 of 41
entered into at any time nor any written agreement entered into prior to the execution of this Stipulation shall be deemed to exist, or to bind the Parties hereto, or to vary the terms and conditions contained herein, except as expressly provided herein.
24. Each SCM shall be deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court. 25. No Opt-Out shall share in any monetary benefits provided by this Stipulation of Settlement. 26. This agreement is subject to and conditioned upon the final approval of this Stipulation of Settlement and the issuance of the final order and judgment of dismissal by the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, providing the below specified relief, which relief shall be pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Stipulation of Settlement and the Parties’ performance of their continuing rights and obligations hereunder. The order and judgment will be deemed final only upon expiration of the time to appeal, or if a Notice of Appeal is filed, upon exhaustion of all appeals and petitions for writs of certiorari. Such final order and judgment shall:
a. Dismiss with prejudice all complaints in the action as to the Released Persons;
b. Order that all SCMs are enjoined from asserting against any Released Person, any and all claims which the SCMs had, has, or may have in the future arising out of the facts alleged in the Complaint;
c. Release each Released Person from the claims which any SCMs has, had, or may have in the future, against such Released Person arising out of the facts alleged in the Complaint;
- 8 -
8 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 9 of 41
d. Determine that this Stipulation of Settlement is entered into in good faith, is reasonable, fair and adequate, and in the best interest of the Class; and
e. Reserve the Court’s continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over the Parties to this Stipulation of Settlement, including Defendants and all SCMs, to administer, supervise, construe and enforce the Stipulation of Settlement in accordance with the terms for the mutual benefit of all the Parties.
27. Plaintiffs will take all necessary and appropriate steps to obtain preliminary approval of the Stipulation of Settlement, final approval of the Settlement, and dismissal of the action with prejudice. If the Court finally approves this Stipulation of Settlement, and if there is an appeal from such decision, the Defendants will not oppose Plaintiffs’ efforts to defend the Stipulation of Settlement.
IV. RESOLUTION AND PAYMENT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES 28. The settlement amount which shall be used to pay all claims of SCMs, administrative costs and attorney fees shall not be more than $6,250,000.00 (Six Million, Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars). The total settlement amount will be distributed as follows: (1) up to $4,550,000.00 (Four Million, Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) will be allocated to pay verified claims; (2) $1,000,000.00 (One Million Dollars) will be allocated to attorneys’ fees; (3) up to $100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand Dollars) will be allocated to pay itemized costs and expenses incurred by Class Counsel in the prosecution of this case; (4) $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) will be allocated for payment of representative Plaintiffs’ claims; and (5) up to $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) will be allocated to cover the costs of claims administration to
- 9 -
9 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 10 of 41
provide notice to the class and to process and to administer the settlement of class members’ claims. Within 30 days of preliminary approval by the United States District Court of the terms of this Stipulation of Settlement, Defendants will certify that they have sufficient funds available to them or on deposit to satisfy fully the terms of this Stipulation of Settlement. If the total amount of all verified claims exceeds the amount of $4,550,000.00 (Four Million, Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars), the amount payable to SCMs for each claim shall be reduced proportionately so that the entire amount, but no more than $4,550,000.00 (Four Million, Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) is paid out to SCMs.
29. The payment of $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) for the representative Plaintiffs shall be paid by check made out to the client trust account of the Law Office of Mark E. Merin. The Law Office of Mark E. Merin will acknowledge receipt of such payment and deliver to Defendants’ counsel a list showing how the $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) is allocated among representative Plaintiffs who may include additional persons who have executed retainer agreements with Class Counsel but who were not formally added as named Plaintiffs, and, if any of such funds are not distributed by the Bar Date, such funds shall be returned to Defendants and added to the amount available for payment of SCMs’ claims. The $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) check shall be delivered within 10 days of the Effective Date.
30. The parties agree to make an application to the Court to appoint the Administrator as officer of the Court for the purpose of implementing the terms of this Stipulation of Settlement. The Administrator shall be subject to judicial immunity to the fullest extent permitted by law.

10 of 41

- 10 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 11 of 41
V. PROCEDURES FOR RECEIVING PAYMENT UNDER THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 31. All female SCMs who were strip searched following arrests on charges relating to prostitution prior to their first appearance and all female SCMs who were strip searched at the Women’s Correctional Center prior to their first appearance after having been arrested on charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons, shall be entitled to receive a payment of a minimum of $1,000.00 (One Thousand Dollars) in full satisfaction of their claims, except as provided in Paragraph 38 of this Stipulation of Settlement. 32. All SCMs other than those identified in Paragraph 31 above, who were strip searched without the person performing the strip search having first received a written authorization to perform the search signed by a supervising officer on duty shall, upon filing of a completed and executed Claim Form, be entitled to receive the sum of $10.00 (Ten Dollars) in full satisfaction of all claims. 33. The Administrator shall determine whether or not a person who has submitted a Claim Form is an SCM and shall reject claims by persons who are not SCMs. 34. All SCMs will receive payments specified herein for each incident in which they were strip searched, following a qualifying arrest within the Class Period prior to their first appearances. 35. Any SCM who fails to submit a Claim Form completed in accordance with the instructions contained therein by the Bar Date or any other Court mandated extension, shall be forever barred from receiving any payment pursuant to the Stipulation of Settlement. Such SCM
- 11 -
11 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 12 of 41
shall in all other respects be bound by all of the terms of the Stipulation of Settlement, and the judgment entered herein, including but not limited to the release of all Released Persons of all claims resolved herein.
36. The Administrator will determine the dollar amount of each payment to an eligible SCM based upon the Administrator’s review of the SCMs’ responses to questions on the Claim Form, subject to reduction as set forth in Paragraph 38.
37. All female SCMs who qualify for payment, other than for reason of the absence of a prior written authorization for a strip search, shall be entitled to payment as set forth below, in addition to the basic $1,000.00 (Thousand Dollar) payment for each qualifying strip search following a fresh arrest during the Class Period:
a. A female SCM who was under 21 or over 60 at the time of a qualifying strip search shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars);
b. A female SCM who was menstruating during the time she was strip searched shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars);
c. An SCM who was more than two months pregnant at the time she was subjected to a strip search shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars);
d. A female SCM who had a significant physical or mental disability (such as unsightly scarring, amputation or malformation or a medically diagnosed psychiatric condition) at the time she was strip searched shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars); and

12 of 41

- 12 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 13 of 41
e. A female SCM who was arrested and strip searched for the first time in her life during the Class Period shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars). VI. REDUCTION OF AWARDS
38. The amounts payable to a female SCM, other than one solely entitled to payment hereunder because of the absence of prior written authorization for a strip search, shall be subject to the following reduction:
a. In the event that an SCM, prior to being strip searched during the Class Period, had served a term in a state prison, the award will be reduced by Fifty Percent (50%) and the fact of prior incarceration in a state prison shall be reported to the SCM when the payments are distributed and the SCM given 15 days within which to challenge the determination of prior imprisonment with written evidence filed under penalty of perjury.
b. Counsel for the respective parties will review the evidence submitted within 15 days of its receipt and determine whether the reduction will be reversed or upheld. If the parties cannot agree, evidence offered by the SCM will be submitted to the Special Master within 10 days for final decision which shall be rendered by the Special Master within 10 days of receipt of relevant evidence.
c. The Claims Administrator will make an initial determination if an SCM who has timely submitted a valid claim had previously been incarcerated
- 13 -
13 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 14 of 41
in a state prison by obtaining from Defendants access to a Database against which the names of SCMs returning valid verified Claim Forms may be electronically compared. If such Database is not provided within thirty (30) days of submission by the Claims Administrator of the list of qualified SCMs, no reductions will be made. 39. There shall not be any 50% reduction for a prior incarceration in a state prison for those persons strip searched without the prior written authorization of a supervising officer on duty.
VII. GENERAL CLAIM PROCEDURES 40. To receive payment, an SCM shall be required to submit to the Claims Administrator an executed Claim Form signed under penalty of perjury with questions completed in accordance with the instructions provided. All Claim Forms must be submitted by the Bar Date unless such period is extended by order of the Court. 41. The Claim Form shall be submitted by first class mail and shall be deemed submitted upon the date of the postmark thereon. 42. SCMs who submit claims and whose names appear on the Database will be paid by mail at the address specified on the Claim Form. 43. The representative Plaintiffs shall be deemed fully compensated by the distribution for them to Class Counsel of $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) and shall not be permitted or required to submit Claim Forms. In the event that there is a proportional reduction of claims because claims valued at more than $4,550,000.00 (Four
- 14 -
14 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 15 of 41
Million Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) were submitted, the $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) allocated for the named representatives will not be reduced.
VIII. EXCLUSION FROM THE SETTLEMENT CLASS 44. Any potential SCM who wishes to be excluded from the Settlement Class must file a request to be excluded from the class with the Clerk of the Court, on or before the Bar Date or as the Court may otherwise direct. Named Plaintiffs and others identified to Defendants’ counsel who executed retainer agreements and will receive a portion of the funds allocated for the representative Plaintiffs will not request exclusion pursuant to this paragraph. 45. Any potential SCM who does not timely file a Request for Exclusion shall conclusively be deemed to have become an SCM and to be bound by this Stipulation of Settlement and all subsequent proceedings, orders, and judgments herein. 46. Any SCM who does not elect to be excluded from the Settlement Class may, but need not, enter an appearance through his or her own attorney. SCMs who do not enter an appearance will be represented by Class Counsel.
IX. OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT 47. Any SCM who does not elect to be excluded form the Settlement Class may, but need not, submit comments or objections to the proposed settlement. The Court will enter an appropriate order setting forth the procedure for SCMs to submit comments or objections to the proposed settlement.

15 of 41

- 15 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 16 of 41
X. ATTORNEYS FEES 48. Class Counsel shall receive a total award of $1,000,000.00 (One Million Dollars) for attorney fees and up to an additional $100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand Dollars) for itemized costs and expenses incident to prosecution of this action including any fees and costs incurred in seeking final approval of this Stipulation of Settlement and the defense thereof in any court or jurisdiction. Payment will be made within thirty (30) of the Effective Date by check delivered to Class Counsel, c/o Florida Justice Institute, 2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-2310 , made payable jointly to the Florida Justice Institute, Law Office of Mark E. Merin and Casper, Meadows & Schwartz. This award is subject to the approval of the Court.
XI. NOTICE 49. Notice to SCMs defined in Paragraphs 14(a) and 14(b) shall be by first class mail, postage prepaid, to all individuals whose addresses are on record in the Inmate Profile System (IPS) or in the Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) maintained by Defendants or to such other, better addresses identified by the Administrator. Both Parties and the Administrator will exercise their best efforts to update and to verify addresses, including but not limited to addresses of SCMs who are incarcerated. This paragraph shall not limit further appropriate efforts to provide notice. Notice to SCMs defined in Paragraph 14(c) shall be by notice specified in Paragraph 50.

16 of 41

- 16 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 17 of 41

50. The Administrator shall cause to be published in English, Spanish and Creole languages, in _______________, ____________________ and _________________ newspapers once a week in each of two consecutive weeks notices in a form and manner agreed to by the Parties describing this settlement, the claims procedure and the procedure to object and/or to Opt-Out of the settlement. Notices in a form to be agreed to by the parties shall also be posted in all Miami-Dade Correctional facilities. If the Parties cannot agree, the Court will determine the content of the published notice.
51. Announcements summarizing the proposed settlement in English, Spanish and Creole will be made on the following radio stations at least three times during a week, during two successive weeks: (Stations) ___________________, _______________________ and __________________.
XII. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS 52. All reasonable costs incurred in the administration of this Stipulation of Settlement including, but not limited to, the fees of the Administrator, costs of disseminating notice to class members, by mail, publication, or other means agreed to by the Parties, costs of receiving and evaluating claims, including the cost of distribution of the monetary payments to the class members, fees, if any, of the Special Master, and any additional ancillary administration fees will be paid up to the total amount of $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) allocated for these expenses. 53. Following preliminary Court approval of the Stipulation of Settlement, the Administrator shall submit bi-weekly invoices to Class Counsel for services rendered and for expense reimbursement. All invoices will indicate the dates upon which services were

17 of 41

- 17 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 18 of 41

performed, the titles of the employees performing the services, the number of hours of worked by each title on each date, the hourly rate for each such title, and the total fee for the services performed. The hourly rates shall be in accordance with the agreement between the Parties and the Claims Administrator.

Dated: April 13, 2005

Respectfully submitted,

Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Peter M. Siegel, Esq. Cullin A. O’Brien, Esq. Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131-2310 305-358-2081 305-358-0910 (FAX) E-mail: rcberg@bellsouth.net

Mark E. Merin, Esq. Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild, Esq. Law Office of Mark E. Merin 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 916-443-6911 916-447-8336 (FAX) E-mail: mark@markmerin.com

Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. Casper, Meadows & Schwartz 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925-947-1147 925-947-1131 (FAX) E-mail: schwartz@cmslaw.com

Attorneys for the Plaintiffs

By:

/s/

Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq.

Florida Bar No. 0318371

Dated: April 13, 2005

Respectfully submitted,

Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq. Susan Torres, Esq. Assistant County Attorneys 111 N.W. First Street, Suite 2810 Miami, FL 33128-1993 305-375-1515 305-375-5634 (FAX) E-mail: ehrlich@miamidade.gov

Attorneys for Defendants

By:

/s/

Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 51561

18 of 41

- 18 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 19 of 41
19 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 20 of 41
20 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 21 of 41
21 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 22 of 41
22 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 23 of 41
23 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 24 of 41
24 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 25 of 41
25 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 26 of 41
26 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 27 of 41
27 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 28 of 41
28 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 29 of 41
29 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 30 of 41
30 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 31 of 41
31 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 32 of 41
32 of 41

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 33 of 41

EXHIBIT 3
33 of 41

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 34 of 41
CLAIM FORM

MIAMI-DADE STRIP SEARCH LAW SUIT CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM (HANEY, ET AL. V. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, ET AL.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, SO. DIST. OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION, CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-JORDAN/BROWN

FILL OUT THIS FORM IF:

(1) YOU ARE A FEMALE AND WERE ARRESTED ON A CHARGE RELATING TO PROSTITUTION BETWEEN MARCH 5, 2000, AND FEBRUARY 8, 2005, AND WERE STRIP SEARCHED AT THE MIAMI-DADE PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CENTER WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE PRIOR TO A FIRST APPEARANCE;

A N D /O R

(2) YOU ARE A FEMALE AND WERE ARRESTED ON A MISDEMEAN OR (OR INFRACTION OR ORDINANCE VIOLATION) NOT INVOLVING VIOLENCE, DRUGS, OR WEAPONS AND WERE STRIP SEARCHED AT THE MIAMI-DADE PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CEN TER OR THE MIAMI-DADE WOM EN’S DETENTION CENTER WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE, PRIOR TO A FIRST APPE ARANCE B ETW EEN M ARCH 5, 2000, AND AUGU ST 11, 2004, (ALL MEMBERS OF THIS CLASS WHO QUALIFY WILL RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF $1,000) UNLESS REDUCED BY 50% FOR HAVING PREVIOUSLY SERVED TIM E IN STATE PRISON;

OR

(3) YOU WERE ARRESTED ON A FELONY OR A CHARGE INVOLVING VIOLENCE, DRU GS OR W EAPON S, AND W ER E STR IP SEA RCHE D, B EFORE YOUR FIRST APPEARANCE, AT A MIAMI-DADE DETENTION CENTER BETWEEN MARCH 5, 2000, TO FEBRUARY 28, 2005, (ALL MEMBERS OF THIS CLASS WHO QUALIFY WILL BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE A PAYM ENT OF $10.00).

You must complete and submit this claim form no later than September 1, 200 5, to qualify for payment from settlement of this class action strip search case against Miami-Dade County and others. If you do not return a com pleted claim form by the due date you will receive no money from the settlement.

CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM

________________________(Bar Code) Name Address City, State, Zip Code Phone #: FL. Driver’s License No.
Social Security Number: Date of Birth:

Claim No._____________________________________ Please enter your correct name, and address here if it does not appear to the left. Name: ______________________________________________ Address:_____________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________

--------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------
W ere you arrested and strip searched prior to first appearance at a M iami-Dade Detention Center at any time between March 5, 2000, and February 28, 2005?

Yes No


If you answered “yes” to the above, or you are unsure of the date, please continue to answer the questions below.

Note: Not all persons strip searched at a Miami-Dade Detention Center during the class period (March 5, 2000 to February 28, 2005) will be entitled to payment. If you were charged with a crime involving drugs, weapons or violence, you will be entitled only to a payment of $10.00 for each pre-first appearance strip search following an arrest during the class period. Eligibility will be based solely on records maintained by the Miami-Dade County Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations.

CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM
34 of 41

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 35 of 41
Use the return envelope (or any other envelope) and mail the completed claim form to: Class Claim Administrator: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

Answer each of the following questions by placing a check in the “yes” or “no” box at the end of the question. The amount of money you receive under this claims process will be based solely on the answers to questions you provide. CAUTION – THESE ANSWERS ARE GIVEN UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY.

Questions

1.

Did you have a significant physical disability (such as scarring, amputation, malformation

or disfigurement) or a mental disability (such as a medically diagnosed psychiatric condition)

at the time of any pre-first appearance strip search?

Yes No


2.

W ere you menstruating during the strip search?



3.

Were you more than two months pregnant during the strip search? If so, did you carry your child

to term? Yes ___ or No ___. If Yes, state name________________ and date of birth___________.



CRIMINAL FRAUD W ILL RESULT IN DENIAL OF YOUR CLAIM.

I DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAW S OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT THE ABOVE IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

DATED: _______________________

SIGNATURE:__________________________________________________________

The information given here is private and will remain confidential, subject to the provisions of Florida’s Public Records Act, which may require the disclosure of information provided. If you have any questions about this lawsuit, write to the Claims Administrator at Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thom asville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308, or visit the website at www.___________________________.

THIS CLAIM FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND RETURNED WITH A POSTMARK NO LATER THAN SEPTEMBER 1, 2005.

If you would like your settlement check mailed to an address other than that on the first page of the Claim Form, provide it here: (Address if different) to which settlement check should be mailed:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM
35 of 41

Page 2 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 36 of 41

EXHIBIT 4
36 of 41

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 37 of 41 NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

If you were arrested and booked at a Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and strip-searched before your first appearance between March 5, 2000 and February 28, 2005,
you may be entitled to monetary compensation under a class action settlement.

There is presently pending a lawsuit filed as a class action in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division. The parties have proposed a Settlement which, if it receives final approval, will provide that certain persons subject to prefirst appearance strip searches at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Centers will receive money. Records of the M iami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitations Department show that you may have been subjected to a strip search after an arrest and before your first appearan ce. T o receive monetary compe nsation in this pending settlement, you must fill out and mail a claim form.
If You Wish to Claim Monetary Compensation, Obtain, Fill out and Mail the Claim Form as Soon as Possible but No Later than September 1, 2005.
For more information, please read this notice.

PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE NOTICE CAREFULLY. YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE A PAYMENT.

There is now pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, an action filed as a class action on behalf of persons allegedly illegally strip searched by Miami-Dade County employees between March 5, 2000, and February 28, 2005. A Stipulation of Settlement, approved preliminarily by the Court, defines the class and sub-classes included in this settlement as follows:

a.

All females arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or

weapons who were transported to the Wo men’s Detention Center and strip searched prior to their first appearance,

except persons strip searched at the Women’s Detention Center on “probable cause” reported in writing on an

incident form; and

b.

All females arrested on charges relating to prostitution from March 5, 20 00, until February 8, 2005, when the

practice of strip searching all persons charged with prostitution was officially terminated; and

c.

All persons arrested a felony or on charges relating to violence, drugs or weapons who were strip searched, prior to

their first appearances, without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a

supervising officer from March 5, 200 0, until February 28, 2005 , the date when the policy of strip searching

detainees prior to obtaining a written authorization was terminated.

You have received this Notice either because Miami-Dade Co unty records indicate that you may be in the class or you contacted the Claims Administrator. W hether or not you qualify as a class member will be based solely upon the Miami-Dade Co unty records. If these records do not contain your name and show you to be within the definition of the class, you will not qualify.

This Notice is to inform you that a settlement has been proposed in this action and that, as a potential class member, your rights may be affected by the settlement. This Notice also summarizes the terms and effect of the proposed settlement, what you can do to participate in it, how you may obtain money under the settlement and what you must do if you choose to exclude yourself from the class.

SU M MA RY OF TH E PR OPO SED TER M S

A Settlement Agreement (“Settlement”) was entered into after intensive negotiations between the parties, conducted with the assistance of a third party mediator. The Parties are requesting that the Court approve the Settlement.

A. Parties to the Settlement.

The parties to the Settlement are the Plaintiffs named in Haney, et al v. M iami-Dade County, et al., United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516-Civ Jordan/Brown filed on behalf of themselves and the Settlement Class, and various defendants including the Miami-Dade County and Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitations Department. Counsel for the class are Mark E. Merin, The Law Office of Mark E. Merin, 2001 P Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; Andrew C. Schwartz, Casper, Meadows & Schwartz, 2121 N California Boulevard, Suite 1020, Walnut Creek, CA 94596; and Randall C. Berg, Jr., Florida Justice Institute, Inc., 2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-2310.

37NoOTf I4C1E OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page 1 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 38 of 41

B. Defendants Do Not Admit Any Liability

Plaintiffs allege that the acts and/or omissions which are the subject of the claims covered by this action (strip searches) violated various state and federal laws. Defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing and deny any liability to plaintiffs or to any other class members. The p arties have agreed that, in order to avoid long and costly litigation, this controversy should be settled pursuant to the terms of the settlement as described in this Notice, subject to the approval of the Court.

C.

M onetary Terms of Settlement

1.

Payment of Claims

Defendants shall pay a maximum of $4,550,000.00 under the terms of the settlement which will referred to as the Class Fund.

In addition to funds reserved for the payment of Class Claims, Class Counsel will receive, subject to approval of the Court, a fee of $1,000,000.00 as attorney’s fees and up to $100,000.00 for reimbursement of itemized costs and expenses. Up to $300,000.00 will be available for the costs of claim administration.

2.

Payment to Representative Plaintiffs

Under the terms of the settlement, representative plaintiffs and those who had entered into retainer agreements with the class counsel will receive a total of $300,000.00 to be allocated among them.

3.

Payment to Class Members Who File Claims

Mo ney for the class will be paid out based on a distribution formula, subject to payments being proportionately reduced if the total value of verified claims exceeds $4,550,000.00. Pursuant to that distribution formula all women arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons, who were transported to the W omen’s Detention Center and strip searched there prior to their first appearance will receive a minimum of $1,000.00 (One Thousand Dollars) (subject to possible reduction) and increments of $500.00 based on answers to questions on a claim form to be submitted under penalty of perjury. For each qualifying strip search following a fresh arrest during the claims period, each such claimant will receive an additional $1,000.00.

All women arrested on charges relating to prostitution during the period from March 5, 2000, to February 8, 2005, will receive a minimum of $1,000.00 (subject to reduction) for each strip search prior to first appearance during the claims period and additional increments based on answers to claim form questions to be submitted under penalty of perjury.

All persons arrested on charges relating to violence, drugs, or weapons who were strip searched, prior to their first appearance, without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a supervising officer during the period from M arch 5, 2000, to February 28, 2005, will be entitled to receive a payment of $10.00, if they timely submit a claim form. Read the rest of this Notice to find out how to get a claim form.

D.

Strip Search Policy

Defendants will not strip search persons prior to first appearance, unless prior written authorization for the strip search has been obtained from a supervising officer. Defendants will not strip search, prior to first appearances, persons charged with offenses relating to prostitution or those arrested on infractions or ordinance violations or misdemeanors not involving violence, drugs, or weapons, without reasonable suspicion that a strip search would be productive of contraband or weapons.

E.

Your O ptions as a Class Memb er

1.

Be Bound by, and Participate in the Settlement.

To qualify for a payment, you must send in a completed Claim Form to the Claims Administrator. If you receive a notice by First Class Mail, a Claim Form will be included in the notice package. You can also get a Claim Form by: (1) calling this toll free number: [800-Number]; (2) visiting the web site, [web site]; or (3) writing the Claims Administrato r at: Ha ney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims A dmin istrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

You have until September 1, 2005, to submit a claim or to opt -out of the settlement. Mail your completed Claim Form to: Ha ney , et al. Strip Sea rch C lass Action, c/o Claims Ad ministrato r, Settlemen t Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

38 of 41
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page 2 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 39 of 41
Remem ber, if you do not submit a Claim Form, you cannot get a payment. If you submit a claim form, you will be bound by the settlement and receive money (if you are a class member). If you do not submit a claim form but do not exclude yourself from the class (as explained in the next paragraph), you will be bound by the terms of the Settlement and dismissal entered in this case, but you will not receive any money.

By participating in this Settlement you will be waiving all your rights to all claims up to and including February 28, 2005, related to strip searches at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Centers, even those of which you are not presently aware.

2.

Exclude Yourself From the Class

You do not have to take part in the Settlement or be a member of the class. This is called “excluding” yourself. If you exclude yourself, you can not get a payment and you can not object to the Settlement. Any Court orders will not apply to you. To exclude yourself, you must sign a request for exclusion letter that states that you want to be excluded from Haney, et al. v. Miami-Dade County, et. al., United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516CIV Jordan/Brown. Your exclusion letter must be mailed and postmarked before September 1, 2005, to: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thom asville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

If you do not follow these instructions properly, you will lose your right to exclude yourself. If you exclude yourself, you cannot get any money from the Settlement of this case and you cannot tell the Court you do not like the Settlement (which is called “objecting”). If you exclude yourself, you are no longer part of the class or the Settlement. But you can sue or be part of a different lawsuit about the claims in this case.

E.

Fairness Hearing and Process for Objections.

A fairness hearing will be held on September 22, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, 301 N. Miami Avenue, Courtroom 8, Miami, Florida. If you are a class member and do not exclude yourself, you can tell the Court you do not like the Settlement or some part of it at this hearing. This is called objecting to the Settlement. For example, you can say you do not think the Settlement is fair or adequate. The Court will consider your views.

To object, you must send a letter to the court that contains all of the following:

1.

The name and title of the lawsuit, Haney, et al. v. Miami-Dade County, et al., United States District Court, Southern

District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516 CIV Jordan/Brown;

2.

A statement of each objection you have and the facts that support the objections;

3.

A description of any law or case supporting the objections;

4.

A statement on whether or not you or your lawyer will ask to appear at the Fairness Hearing to talk about your

objections, and, if so, how long you will need to present your objections; and

5.

Copies of any documents you or your lawyer will present at the Fairness Hearing.

At the hearing on the proposed settlement, the Court may schedule further hearings without further notice to the class. The matters considered at such future hearings may include, but shall not be limited to, further consideration of the fairness and adequacy of the proposed settlement, the determination of the settlement of individual claims filed by class members, consideration of the request for attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses to class counsel, and the form and entry of the final judgment of dismissal in the event the proposed settlement is approved by the court.

Individually, or through counsel, any class member has the right to object to the proposed Settlement as a whole, to the amount of attorneys’ fees and costs of Class Counsel, or to any portion of either. ANY SUCH OBJECTIONS MUST BE FILED IN WRITING ON OR BEFORE SEPTEM BER 1, 2005, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, MIAMI DIVISION, 301 N. MIAMI AVENUE, COURTROOM 8, MIAMI, FLORIDA, ATTENTION: CLERK, RE: HANEY, ET AL. V. M IAM I-DADE COU NT Y, ET AL., CASE NO . 04-20516-CIV JORD AN/B ROW N. If you wish to appear and p resent your objections at the fairness hearing, you must also submit a Notice of Intention to Appear that identifies the case, contains your name and address, and explains the reason the appearance is desired. The Notice of Intention to Appear and any objections must be filed with the Court on or before Septemb er 1, 2 005 . You may be represented by your own attorney. If you are to be represented by an attorney at the hearing, his or her name, address and telephone number must be included in the Notice of Intention to Appear as well.

39 of 41
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page 3 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 40 of 41
A co py of the Statem ent of O bjec tion and/or No tice of Intention to App ear must also b e mailed to: Florida Justice Institute, Inc., 2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-2310 and Dade County Attorney’s Office, Metro Dade Center, 111 NW 1st St, Suite 2 810 , Miami, FL 331 28-1 993 AT TN : Jeffrey P . Ehrlich.

F.

How to Obtain Further Information

For additional information regarding the Settlement and Claim Form, or a copy of the Settlement Agreement, Claim Form or Class Counsel’s A pplication for Attorney’s Fees, you o r your counsel should contact: Ha ney , et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308. You may also check the Class Administrato r’s website at [we b add ress] or call [800 N umber]. You may also obtain detailed information about the case by examining the Court file located in the office of the Clerk of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, 301 N. Miami Avenue, Courtroom 8, Miami, Florida.

G.

Court Approval.

Although the C ourt has reviewed the proposed Settlement, no de cision has been, or will be, reached by the Cou rt, until the Fairness Hearing. This Notice does not indicate that the Court has approved the Settlement.

40 of 41
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page 4 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 41 of 41 PROSTITUTION CHARGE LIST

Statute

Description

16-16

PROSTITUTION/MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE

21-36(A) SOLICITATION OF BUSINESS/SIDEWALK/COUNTY ORDINANCE

21-42

OBSCENE MATERIAL/PERFORMANCE VIOLATION/COUNTY ORD

21-81(A) LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS BEHAVIOR/COUNTY ORDINANCE

21-81(A) PROSTITUTION/COUNTY ORDINANCE

30-12

OBSTRUCT STREET BY SOLICITING/COUNTY ORDINANCE

30-12

OBSTRUCT STREET BY SOLICITING/MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE

316.2045(2) OBSTRUCTING TRAFFIC/SOLICI W/O PERMIT/PEDESTRIAN

384.24

SEXUALLY TRANSMISSIBLE DISEASES/UNLAWFUL ACTS

384.24(2) HIV INFECTED/SEX W/ANOTHER/UNINFORMED/ATTEMPT

46-10

PROSTITUTION ORDINANCE/MIAMI ORDINANCE

480.01(2)(C) MASSAGE PARLOR/IMPROPER FACILITIES

480.02(1)(A) MASSAGE/PRACTICE WITHOUT CERTIFICATION

480.047

MASSAGE/PRACTICE WITHOUT A LICENSE

480.047

MASSAGE/PRACTICE WITHOUT A LICENSE

796.01

HOUSE OF ILL FAME/KEEP

796.06

PROSTITUTION/RENT SPACE TO BE USED FOR

796.06

PROSTITUTION/RENT SPACE TO BE USED FOR

796.06

PROSTITUTION/RENT SPACE TO BE USED FOR

796.07(2)(A) PROSTITUTION/MAINTAIN A HOUSE OF

796.07(2)(B) PROSTITUTION/OFFER TO SECURE ANOTHER FOR

796.07(2)(C) PROSTITUTION/RECEIVE ANOTHER FOR

796.07(2)(D) PROSITUTION/DIRECT ANOTHER TO PLACE OF

796.07(2)(E) PROSTITUTION/COMMIT, ENGAGE IN

796.07(2)(E) PROSTITUTION/COMMIT, ENGAGE IN/SECOND CONVICTION

796.07(2)(E) PROSTITUTION/SECOND VIOLATION

796.07(2)(F) PROSTITUTION/PROCURE/SOLICIT/INTICE

796.07(2)(F) PROSTITUTION/SOLICIT ANOTHER TO COMMIT

796.07(2)(G) PROSTITUTION/ENTERING, REMAINING IN A PLACE OF

796.07(2)(H) PROSTITUTION/AID OR ABET

796.07(2)(I) PROSTITUTION/PURCHASE SERVICES

796.07(3)(A) PROSTITUTION/COMMIT, ENGAGE IN

796.07(3)(B) PROSTITUTION/SOLICIT ANOTHER TO COMMIT

796.07(3)(C) PROSTITUTION/ENTERING, REMAINING IN A PLACE OF

796.07(3)(D) PROSTITUTION/AID OR ABET

796.07(3)(E) PROSTITUTION/PURCHASE SERVICES

796.07(4)(C) PROSTITUTION/3RD OR SUBSEQUENT VIOLATION

796.08

PROSTITUTION/SEXUALLY TRANSMISSIBLE DISEASE

798.02

LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS BEHAVIOR

800.02

UNNATURAL AND LASCIVIOUS ACT

800.03

INDECENT EXPOSURE

Type L C C C C C L M M M L M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M F M M M M

41 of 41

1

4/11/2005

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
CASE NO. 04-20S16-CIV-Jordan/Brown
JUDITH HANEY, L1AT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS, individuaHy and on behalf of a Class of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.

___

..I

/- ,Li:, I»)~ 'l.r.

1 ; aU)

1 ,"·'d ,': .,' '." '. , . fRr<. L·, ."; .1. 1 r.

"-'~_ nr "

~:i·,·.',

CLOSED
cIVIL
CASE

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY; CHARLES J. MCRAY, individually and In his official capacity as Acting Director of the MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATJON DEPARTMENT, CAPTAIN B. FULLER, Individually and in her official capacity as the Facility Supervisor ofthe Women's Detention Center, ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO, individually and in his official capacity as Facility Supervisor of the Pre-Trial Detention Center; and MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT OFFICERS JANE DOEs 1 THROUGH 150;

Defendants.
'rofl.-
~AGREED ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

This matter came On for a fairness Hearing on September 23, 2005. as set forth in the Order entered April 18, 2005. Plaintiff Class was represented by Class Counsel Mark E, Merin of the Law Office of Mark E. Merin and Randall C. Berg, Jr, ofthe Florid~l Justice Institute; Defendants were represented by Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Assistant County Attorney.

I
30f8

After considering the submissions of the parties, including the Stipulated Motion for Preliminary Approval of Provisional Settlement Class and Settlement of Class Action, together with the extensive exhibits attached thcreto; the unopposed Application of Class Counsel for Approval of Stipulated Attorney's Fees and Reimbursement of Costs; the Parties' Joint Submission in Support of Final Approval of Stipulated Settlement; the Submission from the Class Claims Administrator; and the Arguments of Counsel, it is hereby
ORDERED, and ADJUDGED AS FOLLOWS: 1. On April 18, 2005, this Court entered its Order preliminarily approving settlement of the above-captioned class action. Since the entry ofthe Court's preliminary Order, in accordance with the Stipulation of Settlement as proved to the satisfaction of the Court, the requisite notice of Settlement, with opt-out and objection information, was published in the New Times (May 26, 2005, June 2, 2005, and June 9, 2005), the Miami Herald (June 1,2005, and Junc 4, 2005), El Nuevo Herald (June I, 2005, and June 4, 2005, in Spanish), the Soulh Florida Sun-Sentell/ial (May 30, 2005, and June 4, 2005), the Miami Times (June 8, 2005, and June 15,2005), and the Key West Citizen (June I, 2005, and June 4, 2005), broadcast by radio in three languages on WHYI FM 100.7 (Anglo), WPOW FM 96.5 (urban), WEDR FM 99.1 (Urban). WRTO FM 98.3 (Hispanic), WXDJ FM 95.7 (Hispanic), and WJCC 1700 (Creole); and notice of the Settlement and approved claim forms were posted by First Class U.S. Mail to the last known address of each person in groups one and two of the settlement class. Both the published notice and the mailed notice specified that claim fonns had to be delivered to the Claims Administrator, post marked not later than September 1,2005. 2. Both the published and mailed notices specified that any person who chose to object to the Settlement, either personally or through counsel, and desired to appear at the Fairness
40fS

Hearing, was required to submit a Notice of Intention to Appear, together with written arguments
.,... in support of any objection, by September I, 2005. No written objections were received by the
Court. Furthermore, although oppoltunity was given by the Court to voice objections at the time of the Fairness Hearing, no objections were stated by any member of the class or representative of any such class member.
3. The Court is satisfied from all of the memoranda oftaw, declarations, and exhibits
submitted to the Court, that the Stipulation of Settlement is, and the Court now finds, that the Stipulation of Settlement is fair and finally approves it as such. The Stipulation of Settlement is incorporated herein by this reference as if set out in full.
4. The members of the settlement class include all of the following:
a. All females arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor
charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons who were transported to the Women's Detention Center and strip searched prior to their first appearance from March 5, 2000, until April I J, 2004, excluding females strip searched on "probable cause" reported in writing on an incident form; and b. All females arrested on charges relating to prostitution included on the list ofproslitution charges attached as Exhibit 5 to the Stipulation of Settlement, who were strip searched prior to first appearance from March 5,2000, until February 8, 2005, when the practice of strip searching all females charged with prostitution was officially terminated; and c. All persons arrested felony charges or on charges relating to violence, drugs or weapons who were strip searched, prior to their first appearances,

..... M("'~f A",,,, W'c;,A!:.t,;.f< oltd ~ ,,~~')

50lS

Sc.1Hc.""t>'l+· ~I!-\ 1M~ hr.;" \J dcffl:sr...> ~'"

without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a supervising officer from March 5, 2000, until February 28,2005, the date when the policy of strip searching detainees prior to obtaining a written authorization was terminated. 5. Persons who previously commenced civil litigation challenging the legality of any strip search at Miami-Dade Department of Corrections and Rehabilitationjails during the class period and have prevailed, settled or had their oomplaints denied on their merits, and persons who have given timely notice of their election to be excluded from the settlement class are not included in the settlement class. 6. With the exception ofany individuals who submitted timely requests to the Court to opt-out ofthe Stipulation of Settlement (the Court is not aware of any such requests), all claims and complaints of the named representative plaintiffs, together with all persons in the settlement class, are now dismissed with prejudice as to all of the Released Persons defined to include the defendants and their predecessors, successors, and/or assigns, together with past, present and future officials, employees, representatives, attorneys and/or agents of the COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE. Claims and complaints of such persons are now forever barred, and all settlement class members are enjoined from asserting against any Released Person or persons any and all claims which the settlement class members had, have, or may have in the future arising out of the facts alleged in the Complaint. 7. Each Released Person is released from the claims which any settlement class member has had or may in the future have against any such Released Person arising out of the facts in the Complaint.
6018

8. This Court explicitly finds that the Stipulation of Settlement, which is now made final by this Judgment, was entered into in good faith, is reasonable, fair and adequate, and is in the best interest of the Class. The Court expressly approves payment to Class Counsel the Law Office of Mark E. Merin, Caspers, Meadows, Schwartz & Cook, and the Florida Justice Institute, Inc. of the amount of One Million Dollars ($1.0 million) as and for attorney's fees for the representation of the settlement class members herein, to be paid as provided in the Stipulation of Settlement, together with costs not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars (S I00,000) itemized by Class Counsel and submitted to defendants for review.
9. The Court further explicitly approves payment from the payment fund of a total of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000) to be divided among the representative plaintiffs, as specified in the Stipulation of Settlement. The Court finds the amount is fair and adequate in view of the damages suffered by the representative plaintiffs and the efforts they expended in litigating this case in the several years since the underlying events occurred which gave rise to the filing of the Complaint.
10. Pursuant to the Stipulation of Settlement, defendants have allocated Six Million, Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($6.25 million) to pay verified claims, the representative plaintiffs, Class Counsel, the Claims Administrator, and to reimburse Class Counsel's costs. Claims have been submitted to and, in accordance with the claims processing procedure specified in the StipUlation of Settlement, will be reviewed, valued, and paid by the Claims Administrator as soon as practicable following the effective date of this Judgment, meaning the date il is entered and becomes final. The Judgement will be deemed final only upon the expiration of the time to appeal or, ifa Notice of Appeal is filed, upon exhaustion of all appeals and petitions [or Writ of Certiorari.
70U

II. The Court reserves continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over the parties in this

action, including defendants and all settlement class members, to administer, supervise, and

construe and enforce the settlement in accordance with the tenus for the mutual benefit of all of

the parties.

12, It is further ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Complaint in this action be

dismissed with prejudice and that Judgment be and the same hereby is entered pursuant to the

terms of this Order.

'"" d~ of (.Ic~1ou

Done and Ordered in Miami, Florida, Miami-Dade County this 23,,1 day 01 Septemfier,

2005.

copies to: all counsel of record

Honorable Adalberto lordan United States District Court Judge

B 018

Pa~,,6 of6

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown~ \.0( <.E:ltl
JUDITH HANEY, LlAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS, individually and on behalf of a Class of an others similarly situated,
PlaintifJ];, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et aI.,
Defendants.
ORDER FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION
WHEREAS, plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH and AMANDA WELLS, by and through attorneys, and defendants MIAMIDADE COUNTY, CHARLES J. MCCRAY, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS DEPARTMENT, CAPTAIN B. FULLER, and ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO, by and through their attorneys, have entered into a Stipulation of Settlement intending to resolve all claims raised in this class action pending in this Court;
WHEREAS, the Stipulation of Settlement, together with the supporting materials, sets forth the tenus and conditions for a proposed settlement and dismissal with prejudice of the pending class action against all defendants;

WHEREAS, the Court has before it and has reviewed the parties' Stipulated Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement of Class Action together with Stipulation of Settlement and supporting materials; and
WHEREAS, the Court is satisfied that the tenns and conditions set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement were the result of good faith, arms length settlement negotiations between competent and experienced counsel for both plaintiffs and defendants, after mediation ordered by this Court before Retired Circuit Court Chief Judge Gerald T. Wetherington;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: I. PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AND APPROVAL OF
SETTLEMENT CLASS 1. The tenus of the Stipulation of Settlement are hereby preliminarily approved, subject to further consideration thereof at the Fairness Hearing provided for below. The Court fmds that the settlement is sufficiently within the range of reasonableness and that notice of the proposed settlement should be given as provided in this Order. 2. The Court hereby orders that the proposed Third Amended Complaint, submitted as Exhibit 3 to the Stipulated Motion for Preliminarily Approval of Provisional Settlement Class and Settlement of Class Action, shall be filed and the previous answer of defendants to the Second Amended Complaint shall be deemed an answer to the Third Amended Complaint with the further provision that any additional allegation in the Third Amended Complaint not included in the Second Amended Complaint shall be deemed denied. 3. The Court hereby orders that the class of persons defmed in Paragraph 14 of the Stipulation of Settlement filed and incorporated by reference herewith is certified as a Provisional Settlement Class.
- 2-

4. The Court further conditionally finds that plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT

MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS are adequate class

representatives for the Settlement Class.

5. The Court further fmds that plaintiffs' counsel Mark E. Merin of the Law Office

of Mark E. Merin, Andrew C. Schwartz of the law office of Casper Meadows & Schwartz, and

Randall C. Berg, Jr., of the Florida Justice Institute, Inc. are adequate class counsel.

6.

... The Court approves the Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action Strip

Search Case attached hereto as Exhibit A and further approves the method by which notice is

proposed to be given.

7. If, pursuant to the tenns of the Stipulation of Settlement, the settlement is not

consummated, the conditional certification of the Settlement Class and preliminary approval of

the Stipulation of Settlement shall be void and the parties shall have reserved all of the rights to

continue with any litigation or further mediation or settlement discussions.

8. The Bar Date, as defined in paragraph 2 of the Stipulation of Settlement, shall be

September 1, 2005.

11 NOTICE TO SETTLEMENT CLASS MEMBERS, APPROVAL OF CLASS COUNSEL, AND EMPLOYMENT OF CLASS CLAIM ADMINISTRATOR

9. Counsel for the class ("class counsel") are as follows:

Mark E. Merin, Esq. Law Office of Mark E Merin P.O. Box 255428 Sacramento, CA 95865 (916) 443-6911 - Telephone (916) 447-8336 - Facsimile office@markmerin.com- E-mail

-3-

Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. Casper, Meadows & Schwartz 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 947-1147 - Telephone (925) 947-1131 - Facsimile schwartz@cmslaw.com - E-mail
Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131-2310 (305) 358-2081 - Telephone (305) 358-0910 - Facsimile rcberg@bellsouth.net - E-mail
10. Counsel for defendants are as follows:
Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq. Susan Torres, Esq. Assistant County Attorneys 111 N.W. First Street, Suite 2810 Miami, FL 33128-1993 (305) 375-1515 - Telephone (305) 375-5634 - Facsimile ehrlich@miarnidade.gov - E-mail
11. Class Claims Administrator is as follows:
Settlement Services, Inc. Mark Patton, Projects Coordinator 2032-D Thomasville Road Tallahassee, FL 32308 (850) 385-1551 - Telephone (850) 385-6008 - Facsimile mpatton@nettal1y.com- E-mail
12. Beginning no later than June 1,2005, counsel for the parties acting with the Class
Claims Administrator shall cause to be disseminated the Notice and Claim FOnTI, substantially in
the form attached as Exhibits A and B hereto, in the manner set forth in paragraphs 49 through 51
of the Stipulation of Settlement. Such summary notice as the parties agree will be published in
-4-

accordance with the tenns of the settlement and announcements summarizing the proposed settlement shall be made on such radio stations as the parties agree as provided in paragraph 51 of the Stipulation of Settlement. Class members will have up to and including September 1, 2005, in which to opt out of this settlement, to object to the settlement or to file claims. Prior to the Faimess Hearing, the Claims Administrator shall file and serve a sworn statement attesting to compliance with the provisions of this paragraph.
13. The notice to be provided as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement is hereby found to be the best means practicable of providing notice under the circumstances and, when completed, shall constitute due and sufficient notice of the proposed settlement and the Fairness Hearing to all persons and entities affected by andlor entitled to participate in the settlement, in full compliance with applicable statutes, due process, the Constitution of the United States, and other applicable laws. The notices are accurate, objective, infonnative and provide class members with all of the infonnation necess8.1Y to make an infonneddecision regarding their participation in the settlement and its fairness.
14. Counsel for the respective parties are authorized to retain Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308, as Class Claims Administrator in accordance with the Stipulation of Settlement and this Order. III. REQUESTS FOR EXCLUSION FROM THE SETTLEMENT CLASS
15. Any member of the Settlement Class who wishes to be excluded ("opt out") from the Settlement Class must send a written request for exclusion to the Court, so that it is received by the Court at the address indicated in the mailed and published Notice on or before the Bar Date. The request for exclusion shall fully comply with requirements set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement. Members of the Settlement Class may not exclude themselves by filing requests
-5 -

for exclusion as a group or class, but must in each instance individually and personally execute a

request for exclusion and timely transmit it to the Court.

16. Any member of the Settlement Class who does not properly and timely request

exclusion from the Settlement Class shall be bound by all of the terms and provisions of the

Stipulation of Settlement, including but not limited to the releases, waivers and covenants

described in the Stipulation of Settlement, whether or not such person objected to the settlement

and whether or not such person made a claim upon or participated in the Settlement Fund created

pursuant to the Stipulation of Settlement.

IV. THE FAIRNESS HEARING

+..0-. 17. A hearing on fInal approval, the "Fairness Hearing," is hereby scheduled to be

F...~olt.::l

~ \

\.II 'OU

held before this Court on Tlnttaaa;:" September*, 2005, at~.m., to consider the fairness,

reasonableness, and adequacy ofthe proposed settlement, the dismissal with prejudice of these

class action complaints with respect to the released parties herein, and the entry of fInal judgment

in the class action. Class counsel's application for award of attorney's fees and costs shall be

heard at the time of the Fairness Hearing.

18. The date and time ofthe Fairness Hearing shall be set forth in the Notice, but the

Fairness Hearing shall be subject to adjourmnent by the Court without further notice to the

members of the Settlement Class other than that which may be issued by the Court.

19. Any person who does not elect to be excluded from the Settlement Class may, but

need not, enter an appearance through his or her own attorney. Settlement Class members who

do not enter an appearance through their own attorneys will be represented by class counsel.

20. Any person who does not elect to be excluded from the Settlement Class may, but

need not, submit comments or objections to the proposed settlement. Any class member may

-6-

object to the proposed settlement, entry ofthe final order and judgment approving the settlement, and class counsel's application for fees and expenses by filing and serving a written objection.
21. Any class member making the objection (an "objector") must sign the objection personaIIy. Any objection must state why the objector objects to the proposed settlement and provide the basis to support such position. If an objector intends to appear personally at the Fairness Hearing, the objector must include Witll the objection a notice of the'objector's intent to
appear at the hearing. 22. Objections, along with any notice of intent to appear, must be filed with the Court
no later than September I, 2005. If counsel is appearing on behalf of more than one class member, counsel must identify each such class member and each class member must have
complied with the requirements of this order. These documents must be filed with the clerk of the Court at the following address: United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Judge Adalberto Jordan, 301 North Miami Avenue, 8th Floor, Miami, Florida 33128.
23. Objections, along with any notice of intent to appear, must also be mailed to class
counsel and counsel for defendants at the addresses listed below: Counsel for the class ("class counsel") is as foIIows: Class Counsel c/o RandaII C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131-2310 (305) 358-2081 - Telephone (305) 358-0910 - Facsimile rcberg@bellsouth.net - E-mail
-7-

Counsel for defendants are as follows: Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq. Susan Torres, Esq. Assistant County Attorneys III N.W. First Street, Suite 2810 Miami, FL 33128-1993 (305) 375-1515 - Telephone (305) 375-5634 - Facsimile ehrlich@miamidade.gov - E-mail
24. Only class members who have filed and served valid and timely notices of objection shall be entitled to be heard at the Fairness Hearing. Any class member who does not timely file and serve an objection in writing to the settlement, entry of final order and judgment, or to class counsel's application for fees and expenses, in accordance with the procedure set forth in the class notice and mandated in the order, shall be deemed to have waived any such objection by appeal, collateral attack, or otherwise.
25. Persons wishing to be heard at the Faimess Hearing are required to file written connnents or objections and indicate in their written comments or objections their intention to appear at the Faimess Hearing. Settlement Class members need not appear at the hearing or take any other action to indicate their approval.
26. All members of the Settlement Class who do not personally and timely request to be excluded from the class are enjoined from proceeding against the defendants until such time as the Court renders a final decision regarding approval of the settlement and, if the settlement is approved, enters final judgment as provided in the Stipulation of Settlement. V. OTHER PROVISIONS
27. Upon approval of the settlement provided for in the Stipulation of Settlement, each and every term and provision shall be deemed incorporated herein as if expressly set forth
- 8-

and shall have the full force and effect of an order of this Court.
Ted k\e\;' ~.A..-
28. Magistrate Judge Sle,eft Brewft of the' &ited States District Court is hereby appointed to serve as Special Master to review and resolve certain disputes pursuant to the terms of the Stipulation of Settlement.
29. All reasonable costs incurred in notifying members of the Settlement Class as well as administering the Stipulation of Settlement shall be paid as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: ,Ae'il \t,( ,2005
HON.ADALBERT JORDAN U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
-9-

EXHIBIT A ORDER FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

If yon were arrested and booked at a Miami-Dade Connty Pre-Trial Detention Center and strip-searched before yonr first appearance between March 5, 2000 and February 28, 2005,
yon may be entitled to monetary compensation nnder a class action settlement.

There is presently pending a lawsuit filed as a class action in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division. The parties have proposed a Settlement which, if it receives final approval, will provide that certain persons subj eet to prefirst appearance strip searches at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Centers will receive money. Records of the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitations Department show that you may have been subjected to a strip search after an arrest and before your first appearance. To receive monetary compensation in this pending settlement, you must fill out and mail a claim form.
If You Wish to Claim Monetary Compensation! Obtain, Fill out and IVlaH the Claim Form as Soon as Possible but No Later than September 1,2005.
For more information, please read this notice.

PLEASE READ TillS ENTIRE NOTICE CAREFULLY. YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE A PAYMENT.

There is now pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, an action filed as a class action on behalf of persons allegedly illegally strip searched by Miami-Dade County employees between March 5, 2000, and February 28, 2005. A Stipulation of Settlement, approved preliminarily by the Court, defines the class and sub-classes included in this settlement as follows:

a.

All females arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or

weapons who were transported to the Women's Detention Center and strip searched prior to thcir first appearance,

except persons strip searched at the Women '.s Detention Center on "probable cause" reported in writing on an

incident form; and

b.

All females arrested on charges relating to prostitution from March 5, 2000, until February 8,2005, when the

practice of strip searching all persons charged with prostitution was officially terminated; and

c.

All persons arrested a felony or on charges relating to violence, dlUgs or weapons who were strip searched, prior to

their first appearances, without a written authorization for the strip search baving been first obtained from a

supervising officer from March 5, 2000, until February 28, 2005, the date when the policy of strip searching

detainees prior to obtaining a written authorization was terminated.

You have received this Notice either because Miami-Dade County records indicate that you may be in the class or you contacted the Claims Administrator. Whether or not you qualify as a class member will be based solely upon the Miami-Dade County records. If these records do not contain your name and show you to be within the definition of the class, you will not qualify.

This Notice is to inform you that a settlement has been proposed in this action and that, as a potential class member, your rights may be affected by the settlement. This Notice also summarizes the terms and effect of the proposed settlement, what you can do to participate in it, how you may obtain money under the settlement and what you must do if you choose to exclude yourself from the class.

SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED TERMS

A Settlement Agreement ("Settlement") was entered into after intensive negotiations between the parties, conducted with the assistance of a third party mediator. The Parties are requesting that the Court approve the Settlement.

A. Parties to the Settlement.

The parties to the Settlement are the Plaintiffs named in Haney, et al v. Miami-I?~~~.County, et aI., United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-205J6-Civ Jordan/~'tiled on behalf of themselves and the Settlement Class, and various defendants including the Miami-Dade County and Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitations Department. Counsel for the class are Mark E. Merin, The Law Office of Mark E. Merin, 2001 P Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; Andrew C. Schwartz, Casper, Meadows & Schwartz, 2121 N California Boulevard, Suite 1020, Walnut Creek, CA 94596; and Randall C. Berg, Jr., Florida Justice Institute, Inc" 2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-23 10.

NonCE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF a.ASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page 1 of4

B. Defendants Do Not Admit Any Liability

Plaintiffs allege that the acts andlor omissions which are the subject of the claims covered by this action (strip searches) violated -various state and federal laws. Defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing and deny any liability to plaintiffs or to any other class members. The parties have agreed that, in order to avoid long and costly litigation, this controversy should be settled pursuant to the terms of the settlement as described in this Notice, subject to the approval of the Court.

C.

Monetary Terms of Settlement

1.

Payment of Claims

Defendants shall pay a maximum of $4,550,000.00 under the terms of the settlement which will referred to as the Class Fund.

In addition to funds reserved for the payment of Class Claims, Class Counsel will receive, subject to approval of the Court, a fee of$I,OOO,OOO.OO as attorney's fees and up to $100,000.00 for reimbursement of itemized costs and expenses. Up to $300,000.00 will be available for the costs of claim administration.

2.

Payment to Representative Plaintiffs

Under the terms of the settlement, representative plaintiffs and those who had entered into retainer agreements with the class counsel will receive a total of$300,000.00 to be allocated among them.

3.

Payment to Class Members Who File Claims

Money for the class will be paid out based on a distribution formula, subj"ect to payments being proportionately reduced if the total value of verified claims exceeds $4,550,000.00. Pursuant to that distribution formula all women arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons, who were transported to the Women's Detention Center and strip searched there prior to their first appearance will receive a minimum of $1 ,000.00 (One Thousand Dollars) (subject to possible reduction) and increments of $500.00 based on answers to questions on a claim form to be submitted under penalty of perjury. For each qualifying strip search following a fresh arrest during the claims period, each such claimant will receive an additional $1,000.00.

All women arrested on charges relating to prostitution during the period from March 5, 2000, to February 8, 2005, will receive a minimum of $1 ,000.00 (subject to reduction) for each strip search prior to first appearance during the claims period and additional increments based on answers to claim form questions to be submitted under penalty of perjury.

All persons arrested on charges relating to violence, drugs, or weapons who were strip searched, prior to their first appearance, without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a supervising officer during the period from March 5,2000, to February 28,2005, will be entitled to receive a payment of$10.00, if they timely submit a claim form. Read the rest of this Notice to find out how to get a claim fonn.

D.

Strip Search Policy

Defendants will not strip search persons prior to first appearance, unless prior written authorization for the strip search has been obtained from a supervising officer. Defendants will not strip search, prior to first appearances, persons charged with offenses relating to prostitution or those arrested on infractions or ordinance violations or misdemeanors not involving violence, drugs, or weapons, without reasonable suspicion that a strip search would be productive of contraband or weapons.

E.

Your Options as a Class Member

1.

Be Bound by. and Participate in the Settlement.

To qualify for a payment, you must send in a completed Claim Form to the Claims Administrator. If you receive a notice by First Class Mail, a Claim Form will be included in the notice package. You can also get a Claim Form by: (1) calling this toll free number: (SOO-Number}; (2) visiting the website, [web site]; or (3) writing the Claims Administrator at: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, clo Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

You have until September 1, 2005, to submit a claim or to opt -out of the settlement. Mail your completed Claim Form to: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, clo Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

NonCE OF PROPOSED SETTlLMENT OF Q.ASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

PageZof4

Remember, if you do not submit a Claim Form, you cannot get a payment. If you submit a claim form, you will be bound by the settlement and receive money (if you are a class member). If you do not submit a claim form but do not exclude yourself from the class (as explained in the next paragraph), you will be bound by the terms of the Settlement and dismissal entered in this case, but you wilI not receive any money.

By participating in this Settlement you will be waiving all your rights to all claims up to and including February 28, 2005, related to strip searches at the M iami~Dade Pre-Trial Detention Centers, even those of which you are not presently aware.

2.

Exclude Yourself From the Class

You do not have to take part in the Settlement or be a member of the class. This is called "excluding" yourself. If you exclude
yourself, you can not get a payment and you can not obj ect to the Settlement. Any Court orders will not apply to you. To
exclude yourself, you must sign a request for exclusion letter that states that you want to be excluded from Haney, et a1. v.
Miami-Dade CPJIP.!Y., et. aI., United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516-
CIV JordanJ~\"Vour exclusion letter must bemailedandpostmarkedbeforeSeptemberl.2005.to: Hanev. et al. Strip Searcb Class Action, clo Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, [nc., 2032-D Thorn asville Road, Tallahassee,
Florida 32308.

If you do not follow these instructions properly, you will lose your right to exclude yourself. If you exclude yourself, you cannot get any money from the Settlement of this case and you cannot tell the Court you do not like the Settlement (which is called "objecting"). If you exclude yourself, you are no longer part of the class or the Settlement. But you can sue or be part of a different lawsuit about the claims in this case.

Fairness Hearing and Process for Objections.

"to'1

It> : bO

A fairness hearing will be held on September-2:-r, 2005, at ~.m., at the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida,

Miami Division, 301 N. Miami Avenue, Courtroom 8, Miami, Florida. If you are a class member and do not exclude yourself, you can

tell the Court you do not like the Settlement or some part of it at this hearing. This is called objecting to the Settlement. For example,

you can say you do not think the Settlement is fair or adequate. The Court will consider your views.

To obj ect, you must send a letter to the court that contains all of the following:

1.

The name and title of the lawsuit, Haney, et al. v. Miami-Dade County, et a1., United States District Court, Southern

District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516 CIV J ordan/~
Kle\ ..

2.

A statement of each objection you have and the facts that support the objections;

3.

A description of any law or case supporting the objections;

4.

A statement on whether or not you or your lawyer will ask to appear at the Fairness Hearing to talk about your

objections, and, if so, how long you will need to present your objections; and

5.

Copies of any documents you or your lawyer will present at the Fairness Hearing.

At the hearing on the proposed settlement, the Court may schedule further hearings without further notice to the class. The matters considered at such future hearings may include, but shall not be limited to, further consideration of the fuirness and adequacy of the proposed settlement, the determination of the settlement of individual claims filed by class members, consideration of the request for attorneys' fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses to class counsel, and the form and entry of the final judgment of dismissal in the event the proposed settlement is approved by the court.

Individually, or through counsel, any class member has the right to object to the proposed Settlement as a whole, to the amount of attorneys' fees and costs of Class Counsel, or to any portion of either. ANY SUCH OBJECTIONS MUST BE FILED IN WRITING ON OR BEFORE SEPTEMBER 1, 2005, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, MIAMI DIVISION, 301 N. MIAMI AVENUE, COURTROOM 8, MIAMI, FLORIDA, ATTENTION: CLERK, RE: HANEY, ET AL. V. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, ET AL., CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV JORDAN/B~I\\"'\:J If you wish to appear and present your objections at the fairness hearing, you must also submit a Notice of Intention to Appear t4ji£ndentifies the case, contains your name and address, and explains the reason the appearance is desired. The Notice ofIntention to Appear and any objections must be filed with the Court on or before September 1,2005. You may be represented by your own attorney. lfyou are to be represented by an attorney at the hearing, his or her name, address and telephone number must be included in the Notice ofIntention to Appear as well.

NOTICE OF PROPOSED SE111.EMENT OF Q.ASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page30f4

A copy of the Statement of Objection andlor Notice oflntention to Appear must also be mailed to: Florida Justice Institute, Inc., 2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-2310 and Dade County Attorney's Office, Metro Dade Center, III NW 1S! St, Suite 2810, Miami, FL 33128-1993 ATTN: Jeffrey P. Ehrlich.
How to-Obtain Further Information
For additional information regarding the Settlement and Claim Form, or a copy of the Settlement Agreement, Claim Form or Class Counsel's Application for Attorney's Fees, you or your counsel should contact: Hanev. et al. Strip Search Class Action, clo Claims Administrator, Settlement Servlces, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308. You may also check the Clas's Administrator's website at [web address] or call [800 Number1. You may also obtain detailed information about the case by examining the Court file located in the office of the Clerk of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, 301 N. Miami Avenue, Courtroom 8, Miami, Florida.
Court Approval.
Although the Court has reviewed the proposed Settlement, no decision has been, or will be, reached by the Court, until the Fairness Hearing. This Notice does not indicate that the Court has approved the Settlement.

NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTIEMEh'T OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page4of4

EXHIBIT B ORDER FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

CLAIM FORM

MIAMI-DADE STRIP SEARCH LAWSUIT CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM (HANEY, ET AL. V. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, ET AL.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, SO. DIST. OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION, CASE NO. 04-20S16-CIV-JORDAN/BRQWN

FILL OUT THIS FORM IF:

Y\L€ltl

(1) YOU ARE A FEMALE AND WERE ARRESTED ON A CHARGE RELATING TO PROSTITUTION BETWEEN MARCH 5,2000, AND FEBRUARY 8, 2005, ANI) WERE STRIP SEARCHED AT THE MIAMI-DADE PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CENTER WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE PRIOR TO A FIRST APPEARANCE;

AND/OR

(2) YOU ARE A FEMALE AND WERE ARRESTED ON A MISDEMEANOR (OR INFRACTION OR ORDINANCE VIOLATION) NOT INVOLVING VIOLENCE, DRUGS, OR WEAPONS AND WERE STRIP SEARCHED AT THE MIAMI-DADE PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CENTER OR THE MIAMI-DADE WOMEN'S DETENTION CENTER WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE, PRIOR TO A FIRST APPEARANCEBETWEEN MARCH 5, 2000, AND AUGUST 11,2004, (ALL MEMBERS OF THIS CLASS WHO QUALIFY WILL RECEIVE AMINIMUM OF $1,000) UNLESS REDUCED BY 50% FOR HAVING PREVIOUSLY SERVED TIME IN STATE PRISON;

OR

(3) YOU WERE ARRESTED ON A FELONY OR A CHARGE INVOLVING VIOLENCE, DRUGS OR WEAPONS, AND WERE STRIP SEARCHED, BEFORE YOUR FIRST APPEARANCE, AT A MIAMI-DADE DETENTION CENTER BETWEEN MARCH 5, 2000, TO FEBRUARY 28,2005, (ALL MEMBERS OF THIS CLASS WHO QUALIFY WILL BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE A PAYMENT OF $10.00).

You must complete and submitthis claim form no later than September 1,2005, to qualify for payment from settlement ofthis class action strip search case against Miami-Dade County and others. If yon do not return a completed claim form by the due date you will receive!!Q money from the settlement.

CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM

Name Address City, State, Zip Code Phone #: FL. Driver's License No.

(Bar Code)

Claim No _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _: -__:--:-_ Please enter your ~ name, and address here if it does not
app ear to the left. Name: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____
Address:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Social Security Number: Date of Birth:

-------- *--------*--------*--------*--------*-------- *--------

Were you arrested and strip searched prior to first appearance at a Miami-Dade Detention Center at any time between March 5, 2000, and February 28, 2005?

Yes No
o o

If you answered "yes" to the above, or you are unsure of the date, please continue to answer the questions below.

Note: Not all persons strip searched at a Miami-Dade Detention Center during the class period (March 5, 2000 to February 28,2005) will be entitled to payment. If you were charged with a crime involving drugs, weapons or violence, you will be entttled only to a payment of $10.00 for each pre-first appearance strip search foHowing an arrest during the class period, Eligibility will be bas ed solely on records maintained by the Miami-Dade County Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations,

CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM

Page 1 of2

Use the return envelope (orany other envelope) and mail the completed claim form to: Class Claim Administrator: Haney, ct al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Admini.strator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308 .

................... Answer each of the foll owing questions by placing a check in the "yes" or "no" box at the end of the question. The amount of money you receive unde r this claims process will be based solely on the answers to questions you provide. CAUTION - THESE ANSWERS ARE GIVEN UNDER PElI'ALTY OF PERJURY.

Questions

1.

Did you have a significant physical disability (such as scarring, amputation, malformation

or disfigurement) or a mental disability (such as a medically diagnosed psychiatric condition)

at the time of any pre-first appearance strip search?

2.

Were you menstruating during the strip search?

Yes No
o o o o

3.

Were you more than two months pregnant during the strip search? Ifso, did you carry your child

to tenn? Yes __ or No _ . If Yes, state name_ _ _ _ _ _ and date ofbirth_ _ _ _ .

o o

CRIMINAL FRAUD WILL RESULT IN DENIAL OF YOUR CLAIM.

I DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT THE ABOVE IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

DATED:

SlGNATURE:_ _ _.

The information given here is private and will remain confidential, subject to the provisions of Florida's Public Records Act, which may require the disclosure of information provided. If you have any questions about this lawsuit, write to the Claims Administrator at Haney. et a1. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308, or visit the website at www._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

THIS CLAIM FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND RETURNED WITH A POSTMARK NO LATER THAN SEPTEMBER 1, 2005.

If you would like your settlement check mailed to an address other than that on the first page of the Claim Form, provide it here: (Address if different) to which settlement check should be mailed:

CLASS ACfION CLAIM FORM

Page2of2

Kari

From: E-File_FLSD@fisd.uscourts.gov

Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 9:45 AM

To:

rcberg@bellsouth.net

Subject: Fw: The attached electronic order you submitted has been received.

See information listed below. Thank you

--~~ Forwarded by E-File FLSD/FLSD/11/USCOURTS on 041131200512:46 PM ----

II

Ticket EFFL-6BEMNC

II Date: 04/13/2005

Page 1 of 1
II II

Dear Counsel:
Subject: The attached electronic order you submitted has been received. Thank you for using our e-filing system.
CM/ECF COMING EARLY 2006
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida is planning to implement the Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) system in early 2006. CM/ECF will provide full electronic noticing via e-mail and user friendly electronic case filing features similar to this system. CM/ECF will replace the e-fil ing system and FaxBack. Therefore attorneys will be asked to register for CM/ECF at some point later this year. Please view our website at www.fisd.uscourts.gov to keep current with CM/ECF developments.
This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Infonnation contained in this email message and its attachments may be
privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to
this message and then delete it from your system.

4/13/2005

 
 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 1 of 45

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown

Apr 13 2005

JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS, individually and on behalf of a Class of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.

STIPULATED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF PROVISIONAL SETTLEMENT CLASS AND SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION
I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs herein, five individuals representing themselves and all others similarly situated in an action filed as a class action, by and through their counsel, Mark E. Merin of the Law Office of Mark E. Merin, Andrew C. Schwartz of the law firm Casper, Meadows & Schwartz, and Randall C. Berg, Jr., of the Florida Justice Institute, Inc., jointly move with defendants herein, Miami-Dade County, Charles J. McCray, Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitations Department, Captain B. Fuller, and Acting Captain M. Aladro, by and through their counsel, Jeffrey Ehrlich and Susan Torres, Assistant County Attorneys, Miami-Dade County Attorney, for this Court’s preliminary approval of the class action settlement and issuance of an Order for Preliminary Approval of Settlement of Class Action (a proposed form of

1 of 45

49/gz

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 2 of 45

the Order is attached hereto as Exhibit 1) so that notice may be given to the class and a fairness hearing on the proposed settlement scheduled with distribution of the settlement funds if the Court approves the settlement at that fairness hearing.
Judicial preliminary approval is appropriate where a case settles as a class action before certification. (Manuel for Complex Litigation, 4th Ed., ¶ 21.132.) In such instances, the parties typically present to the Court, along with their motion for preliminary approval of settlement, their plan for notifying the class and providing an opportunity for class members to opt out.
II. STATEMENT OF FACTS/HISTORY OF LITIGATION A. Facts
Plaintiffs filed their Class Action Complaint alleging they were unconstitutionally strip searched following arrest for minor offenses and prior to their first appearances. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants typically booked females at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Center and transported those not cited or bailed out to the Women’s Detention Center to be held overnight and returned to the Pre-Trial Detention Center for their first appearances. Plaintiffs further alleged that defendants’ practice and de facto policy was to strip search all women upon arrival at the Women’s Detention Center to be held pending first appearance regardless of the charges on which they were arrested and regardless of whether or not they had been previously strip searched at the Pre-Trial Detention Center. No records of the strip searches at the Women’s Detention Center were maintained. Despite the requirement of Florida Statute 901.211 that no person arrested on a minor offense be strip searched prior to first appearance without the specific written authorization of a supervising officer, no such required prior authorizations were obtained.

2 of 45

- 2 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 3 of 45
Females arrested on charges relating to prostitution, whether or not they were cited or bailed out prior to first appearance, were routinely strip searched at the Pre-Trial Detention Center pursuant to defendants’ written policy.
Males arrested and booked at the Pre-Trial Detention Center were subjected to routine strip searches only if the charges on which they were arrested involved violence, drugs or weapons.
After conducting discovery on plaintiffs’ allegations, the parties opened negotiations for a comprehensive resolution of this litigation, including compensation to persons who may have been strip searched illegally, and revisions of jail strip search practices.
The Stipulation of Settlement, attached hereto as Exhibit 2, the result of those negotiations, defines a “Settlement Class”, provides methods to notify members of the class of the terms of the proposed settlement, and entitlement to receive compensation under the settlement, to object to the settlement at a Fairness Hearing before this Court, or to opt out of the settlement.
III. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE LAW A. Federal Law
In 1979, the United States Supreme Court in Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 99 S.Ct. 1861, 60 L.Ed.2d 449 (1979) held that custodial strip searches are subject to a balancing test which weighs the privacy interest of the person to be searched against the legitimate security interests of the institution. Following Bell v. Wolfish, courts considering the issue have applied objective standards to determine the reasonableness of strip searches of pre-trial detainees. In Skurstenis v. Jones, 236 F.3d 678, 682 (11th Cir. 2000), for instance, the court held that a blanket strip search policy violated the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution because it did not
- 3 -
3 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 4 of 45
require reasonable suspicion as a predicate to strip searching newly admitted detainees. In Wilson v. Jones, 251 F.3d 1340 (11th Cir. 2001) the court held that the strip search of
plaintiff Wilson who was arrested for driving under the influence and strip searched pursuant to a policy which required a “complete search” prior to admission into the general population violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. Likewise, the policy which authorized the search, without reasonable suspicion, violated the Fourth Amendment. In so holding, the Eleventh Circuit acknowledged that a host of other Circuits “addressing this issue have held similar policies unconstitutional.” See, e.g., Roberts v. Rhode Island, 239 F.3d 107 (1st Cir. 2001); Chapman v. Nichols, 989 F.2d 393 (10th Cir. 1993); Fuller v. M.G. Jewelry, 950 F.2d 1437 (9th Cir. 1991); Masters v. Crouch, 872 F.2d 1248 (6th Cir. 1989); Watt v. City of Richardson Police Department, 849 F.2d 195 (5th Cir. 1988); Webber v. Dell, 804 F.2d 796 (2nd Cir. 1986); Jones v. Edwards, 770 F.2d 739 (8th Cir. 1985); Mary Beth G. v. City of Chicago, 723 F.2d 1263 (7th Cir. 1983).
The Fourteenth Amendment provides that states shall not deny “any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, ¶ 1. Where States make gender-based classifications, there is a “real danger that government policies that professedly are based on reasonable considerations in fact may be reflective of ‘archaic and over broad’ generalizations about gender or based on ‘outdated misconceptions concerning the role of females in the home rather than in the marketplace and world of ideas’.” J.E.B. v. Ala. ex rel. T.B., 511 U.S. 127, 135 (1994).
The strip search of females charged with minor offenses not involving violence, drugs or weapons who were held prior to first appearance, while males in similar situation are not strip searched, violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Ford v. Suffolk
- 4 -
4 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 5 of 45
County, 154 F.Supp.2d 131, 151 (D. Mass. 2001); Mary Beth G. v. City of Chicago, 723 F.2d 1263 (7th Cir. 1983). B. Florida State Law
Section 901.211, Florida Statutes, defines “strip search” as “having an arrested person remove or arrange some or all of his or her clothing so as to permit a visual or manual inspection of the genitals; buttocks; anus; breasts, in the case of a female; or undergarments of such person.” The statute prohibits the strip search of any person arrested for “a traffic, regulatory, or misdemeanor offense, except in a case which is violent in nature, which involves a weapon, or which involves a controlled substance” unless “there is probable cause to believe that the individual is concealing a weapon, a controlled substance, or stolen property” or “a judge at first appearance has found that the person arrested cannot be released either on recognizance or bond and thereafter shall be incarcerated in the county jail.” Importantly, “no law enforcement officer shall order a strip search within the agency or facility without the written authorization of the supervising officer on duty.”
Florida courts have held that the appropriate remedy for a strip search in violation of Fla. Stat. § 901.211 is the suppression of evidence obtained by the unlawful search and, possibly, a civil suit for damages. Perry v. State, 846 So.2d 584 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).
The Fourteenth Amendment provides that “[no State shall] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1. State laws that mandate behavior by state officials implicate the Fourteenth Amendment, in that “[explicit,] mandatory language in connection with requiring specific substantive predicates demands a conclusion that the State has created a protected liberty interest.” Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460, 471-472 (1983). Put differently, “a State creates a protected liberty interest by placing substantive
- 5 -
5 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 6 of 45
limitations on official discretion.” Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 249 (1983); See also Chandler v. Baird, 926 F.2d 1057, 1060-1061 (11th Cir. 1991) (“A state may, however, create a liberty interest which is protected by the Due Process Clause, and does so by placing substantive limitations on official discretion.”) (citations omitted). Use of the words “shall,” “must,” or “will” in a state statute that deal with official behavior is primae facie evidence of an enforceable 14th Amendment liberty interest. Hewitt, 459 U.S. at 471-472.
Section 901.211(2), Florida Statutes, explicitly limits the discretion of Florida law enforcement officers. The law states that “[n]o person arrested for a traffic, regulatory, or misdemeanor offense . . . shall be strip searched” unless the alleged crime is violent in nature or involves a weapon or controlled substance, unless there is probable cause to believe that the arrestee is concealing a weapon, a controlled substance, or stolen property, or unless a judge at first appearance has found that the person arrested cannot be released either on recognizance or bond. Thus, traffic, regulatory, or misdemeanor arrestees have a right not to be strip searched unless specific conditions precedent are met. Since Florida Statute § 901.211(2) puts a substantive limit on the discretion of Florida law enforcement officers in conducting strip searches, a liberty interest is created that is enforceable under the 14th Amendment.
Section 901.211(5), Florida Statutes, also states that “[n]o law enforcement officer shall order a strip search within the agency or facility without obtaining the written authorization of the supervising officer on duty.” There is no discretion here either. The law enforcement officer must have the written authorization of the supervising officer on duty to conduct the strip search. Thus, plaintiff’s contend that because Florida Statute § 901.211(5) puts a substantive limit on the discretion of Florida law enforcement officers in conducting strip searches, there is a liberty interest that is enforceable under the 14th Amendment. Defendants dispute this point of law.
- 6 -
6 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 7 of 45

C. Federal Class Action Law: Class action certification under Federal Rule 23 has been the preferred method for dealing
with cases challenging blanket jail pre first appearance strip search policies. See, Smith v. Montgomery County, 573 F.Supp. 604 (Dist. MD 1983); Mack v. Suffolk County, 191 F.R.D. 16 (Dist. Mass 2000); Nielsen v. York County, 219 F.R.D. 19 (Dist. ME 2003); Tardiff v. Knox County, 218 F.R.D. 332 (Dist. ME 2003); Doe v. Calumet City, Illinois, 128 F.R.D. 93 (ND Ill. 1989); Mary Beth G v. City of Chicago, 723 F.2d 1263, 1267, fn.2 (7th Cir. 1983); Maneely v. City of Newburgh, 208 F.R.D. 69 (SD NY 2002).
On April 9, 2004, the First District Court of Appeal in Tardiff v. Knox County, et al., consolidated with Nielsen v. York County, et al., upheld the certification of two blanket strip search cases under Federal Rule 23(b)(3). (365 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2004).)
The advantages of certification in blanket strip search cases is manifest where the common issues of law or fact predominate over individual issues. In this class action case before this Court for preliminary approval of the proposed class settlement, the benefits to the parties include, for defendants, a complete settlement of all claims of persons in the class with claims for damages arising during the period from March 5, 2000, through February 28, 2005, and obtaining res judicata effect of the settlement. For plaintiffs, the settlement of the class action provides a fund adequate to pay claims of all those persons submitting the requisite claim form who were strip searched in violation of federal law or strip searched without the prior written authorization required by Florida state law, at or above the minimum payment to which they would be otherwise entitled if they had established their individual entitlement to damages under the relevant law, without the consumption of time and uncertainty litigation entails.

7 of 45

- 7 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 8 of 45
IV. OUTLINE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT A. Purpose:
The purpose of the proposed settlement is fully and finally to resolve all claims for damages which any person strip searched in violation of state or federal law at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Center and the Women’s Detention Center, prior to first appearance, during the period from March 5, 2000, through February 28, 2005, might have; to provide adequate compensation for each such person; to ensure that defendants, once the settlement funds have been distributed, shall be fully and finally relieved of all further liability to any persons in the class and bound by the Court’s final judgment; and to provide a mechanism by which persons wishing to opt out of the proposed settlement, either to abandon their claims or to prosecute them on their own behalf, or to challenge the fairness of the proposed settlement, may do so.
To accomplish the above-stated purposes, the parties entered into negotiations, facilitated by retired Circuit Court Chief Judge Gerald T. Wetherington, acting as mediator, and negotiated the stipulated settlement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “2”.
The principle provisions of the attached settlement are the following: B. Description of Class Members
The settlement class is divided into three sub-classes defined as follows: Subclass A: All females arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges, not involving violence, drugs or weapons, who were transported to the Women’s Detention Center and who were strip searched prior to their first appearance, excluding females strip searched on “probable cause” reported in writing on an incident form1;
1 Preliminary queries to the database maintained by the Miami-Dade C ounty Corrections and Rehabilitations Department indicate there may be approximately 10,000 claims in this sub-class.
- 8 -
8 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 9 of 45
Subclass B: All females arrested on charges relating to prostitution included on the list of prostitution charge attached as an exhibit to the Stipulation of Settlement, who were strip searched prior to first appearance from March 5, 2000, until February 8, 2005, when the practice of strip searching all females charged with prostitution was officially terminated2; and
Subclass C: All persons arrested on felony charges or on charges relating to violence, drugs or weapons who were strip searched, prior to their first appearances, without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a supervising officer from March 5, 2000, until February 28, 2005, the date when the policy of strip searching detainees prior to obtaining a written authorization was terminated3.
Subclass A is intended to include all women who were strip searched pursuant to a blanket policy which provided that all women arriving at the Women’s Detention Center and held prior to their first appearance were strip searched regardless of the charges on which they were arrested, and regardless of whether they had been previously strip searched at the Pre-Trial Detention Center.
The subclass defined in paragraph B above is intended to include all women charged with prostitution offenses but not felony offenses or misdemeanor offenses including violence, drugs or weapons, who were strip searched pursuant to a policy which provided for the strip search of person charged with prostitution offenses who were booked at the Pre-Trial Detention Center.
The subclass defined in paragraph C above is intended to include all persons charged with offenses which made them subject to legal strip searches who were strip searched without prior
2 Preliminary queries to the defendants’ database indicates there are approximately 2,000 claims in this sub-class.
3 Preliminary queries to the database indicates there may be as many as 100,000 claims in this sub-class.
- 9 -
9 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 10 of 45

written authorization from a supervising officer as required by Florida Statute 901.211. The class definition, by Stipulation of Settlement, has been expanded from that described
in the First Amended Complaint to include all persons arrested on charges relating to violence, drugs or weapons, including felonies, who were strip searched prior to their first appearance without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a supervising officer because persons in that group, while they were subject to strip search under present law, were strip searched without the prior written authorization required by Florida statutes. A proposed Third Amended Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit 3 which the parties stipulate may be filed, with all new matter they deemed denied by defendants. C. Compensation provided by settlement:
The Stipulation of Settlement provides that all females who were strip searched following arrests on charges relating to prostitution, prior to their first appearance, and all females who were strip searched at the Women’s Detention Center prior to their first appearance after having been arrested on charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons, will be entitled to receive a minimum payment of $1,000 and additional payments as follows: $500 if they were under 21 or over 60 at the time of a strip search; $500 if they were menstruating at the time of a strip search; $500 if they were more than two months pregnant at the time of the strip search; $500 if they had a significant physical or mental disability at the time of a strip search; and $500 if the strip search during the class period was the first time in the claimant’s life that she was arrested and strip searched.
The awards specified in the settlement agreement for these subclasses of females will be reduced by 50% for any female who had previously been incarcerated in a state prison.

10 of 45

- 10 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 11 of 45
Each person who was strip searched legally, but without the requisite prior written authorization to perform the search signed by a supervising officer on duty, shall be entitled to receive the sum of $10 in full satisfaction of all of his or her claims. D. Process for Claims Submission
Following preliminary approval of the proposed settlement by this Court, the parties, through a retained firm4 specializing in class action claim administration, will notify the class members of the terms of the proposed settlement and make claim forms available to be completed and returned within the specified 90 day period. The notice and claim form, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibits 4 and 5, will direct the claimant to answer questions on the form which will determine the amount of compensation the claimant will receive. The claimant’s responses are supplemental to information contained in the database which will be used to determine eligibility for payment and entitlement to certain additional payments. Additionally, a database will also be used to apply the 50% reduction factor based on prior incarceration in state prison.
The Claims Administrator will mail the notice and claim form, by first class mail, to the last known address of each claimant in subclasses A and B and will publish a summary form of the notice in newspapers specified in the Stipulation of Settlement during a two week period and will make repeated radio announcements of the settlement on radio stations specified in the Stipulation of Settlement during the same time period. The notices and announcements will provide information as to how claim forms may be received and submitted. Notices describing the settlement and claims procedure will be posted in all Miami-Dade Correctional Facilities.
4 The parties have agreed that Settlement Services, Inc., Tallahesse, Florida, will act as Claims Administrator and are requesting the Court appoint such firm for that purpose.
- 11 -
11 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 12 of 45

The Claims Administrator will remail notices and claim forms to addresses specified on returned undelivered mail and, if first class mail is returned a second time, will make additional efforts to locate claimants using additional sources of addresses available to them.
Claim forms will be available to be downloaded from a website established by the Claims Administrator and may be requested by calling a toll-free number established for that purpose by the Claims Administrator.
All notices, claim forms, publications and announcements will be made in English, Spanish and Creole languages.
Claim forms received by the Claims Administrator and postmarked by the Bar Date for submission of claims will be examined. Based on the answers provided by the claimant and following comparison with database information, the Claims Administrator will determine the dollar value to be assigned to each claim. The applicability of the 50% reduction factor will be determined based on information provided to the Claims Administrator by defendants. E. Opt Outs
In the notice to members of the class delivered by First Class Mail, published in newspapers and broadcast on radio, information will be provided as to how persons choosing to “opt out” of the class may do so. F. Settlement Funds for Claimants
Defendants have agreed to make up to $4,550,000.00 (Four Million, Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) available for the payment of claims submitted during the claims period. If the total of all approved claims exceeds the funds available, payments to claimants will be reduced proportionately and the entire fund exhausted.

12 of 45

- 12 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 13 of 45
G. Payment for Claims Administration Defendants will pay up to $300,000.00 to cover costs relating to claims administration.
Negotiations have concluded with Settlement Services, Inc., a class Claims Administrator, who has agreed to provide services relating to notification to claimants, receipt of class claim forms, review and valuation of claims, documentation of actions taken, and preparation of periodic and final accountings. The Claims Administrator has agreed to cap the cost of these services at an amount less than the total amount allocated for these services. H. Attorneys’ Fees
Defendants have agreed, subject to approval of the Court, to pay a total of $1,000,000.00 (One Million Dollars) for attorneys fees and up to an additional $100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand Dollars) for itemized costs and expenses incident to the prosecution of this action including any fees and costs incurred in seeking final approval of the Stipulation of Settlement and the defense thereof in any Court or jurisdiction. This amount is 16% of the total settlement which is within the range of attorneys fees awarded in similar cases and substantially less than the 33a% specified in class counsel contingency fee agreement with representative plaintiffs. I. Payment to Representative Plaintiffs
Defendants will pay $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) to representative plaintiffs who may include additional persons who have executed retainer agreements with class counsel but who were not formally added as named plaintiffs. This amount will not be subject to proportional reduction in the event the entire fund available for claims payments is exhausted. J. The Settlement is Fair and an Appropriate Method to Resolve this Litigation
The parties are in the process of querying the defendants’ database to determine the names of each potential claimant in the three subclasses. It is estimated that 12,000 persons may
- 13 -
13 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 14 of 45

be in subclasses A and B and that as many as 100,000 may be in subclass C. Based on experience with similar class action settlements, it is anticipated that 1,000 to 2,000 claims will be submitted by persons in subclasses A and B and approximately 5,000 claims will be submitted by persons in subclass C.
The settlement is structured to compensate persons illegally strip searched in subclasses A and B with a minimum of $1,000.00 (subject to a 50% reduction for prior incarceration in state prison). Persons who were particularly vulnerable to adverse effects from such strip searches based on their age, disability, pregnancy, menstruation, or first arrest/strip search experience, may receive increments bringing their awards up to $3,000.00.
Persons in subclass C, those who suffered only a technical violation of the state statute requiring prior written authorization even for a justified strip search, will be adequately compensated by a $10.00 payment.
These settlement amounts are well within the range of settlements paid to members of similar class action strip search cases. K. Advantages of Settlement
Many of the persons entitled to compensation under this settlement would have difficulty establishing that the damages they suffered exceeded the amounts they will receive under this settlement. Because the value of each claim is minimal in the absence of this class action settlement, few persons would be expected to come forward to file their own challenges to defendants’ strip search policies and procedures and would receive no compensation.
On the other hand, if the matter is not settled and were to proceed through litigation to trial, multiple trials could take years to complete and appeals thereafter would delay ultimate

14 of 45

- 14 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 15 of 45

satisfaction of any judgments for several more years making settlement and resolution, as provided in the accompanying documents, desirable, appropriate and just.
V. CONCLUSION For all of the reasons stated herein, represented in the attached documents, and presented at the hearing of this request for preliminary approval of the settlement, the parties jointly request the Court to sign the accompanying order to give preliminary approval to the stipulation of settlement, and to appoint Magistrate Judge Steven Brown as a special master, and to designate Settlement Services, Inc. as the Claims Administrator, so that the process of notifying the class members, receiving and reviewing the claims, finally approving the settlement and effectuating the settlement can proceed.

Dated: April 12, 2005
Respectfully submitted,
Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Peter M. Siegel, Esq. Cullin A. O’Brien, Esq. Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131-2310 305-358-2081 305-358-0910 (FAX) E-mail: rcberg@bellsouth.net

Dated: April 12, 2005
Respectfully submitted,
Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq. Susan Torres, Esq. Assistant County Attorneys 111 N.W. First Street, Suite 2810 Miami, FL 33128-1993 305-375-1515 305-375-5634 (FAX) E-mail: ehrlich@miamidade.gov

Mark E. Merin, Esq. Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild, Esq. Law Office of Mark E. Merin 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 916-443-6911 916-447-8336 (FAX) E-mail: mark@markmerin.com
15 of 45

Attorneys for Defendants

By:

/s/

Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 51561

- 15 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 16 of 45

Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. Casper, Meadows & Schwartz 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925-947-1147 925-947-1131 (FAX) E-mail: schwartz@cmslaw.com

Attorneys for the Plaintiffs

By:

/s/

Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq.

Florida Bar No. 0318371

16 of 45

- 16 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 17 of 45
EXHIBIT 1 STIPULATED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT
17 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 18 of 45
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown
JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS, individually and on behalf of a Class of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants. ORDER FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION
WHEREAS, plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH and AMANDA WELLS, by and through attorneys, and defendants MIAMIDADE COUNTY, CHARLES J. MCCRAY, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS DEPARTMENT, CAPTAIN B. FULLER, and ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO, by and through their attorneys, have entered into a Stipulation of Settlement intending to resolve all claims raised in this class action pending in this Court;
WHEREAS, the Stipulation of Settlement, together with the supporting materials, sets forth the terms and conditions for a proposed settlement and dismissal with prejudice of the pending class action against all defendants;
18 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 19 of 45

WHEREAS, the Court has before it and has reviewed the parties’ Stipulated Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement of Class Action together with Stipulation of Settlement and supporting materials; and
WHEREAS, the Court is satisfied that the terms and conditions set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement were the result of good faith, arms length settlement negotiations between competent and experienced counsel for both plaintiffs and defendants, after mediation ordered by this Court before Retired Circuit Court Judge Gerald T. Wetherington;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: I. PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AND APPROVAL OF
SETTLEMENT CLASS 1. The terms of the Stipulation of Settlement are hereby preliminarily approved, subject to further consideration thereof at the Fairness Hearing provided for below. The Court finds that the settlement is sufficiently within the range of reasonableness and that notice of the proposed settlement should be given as provided in this Order. 2. The Court hereby orders that the proposed Third Amended Complaint, submitted as Exhibit 3 to the Stipulated Motion for Preliminarily Approval of Provisional Settlement Class and Settlement of Class Action, shall be filed and the previous answer of defendants to the Second Amended Complaint shall be deemed an answer to the Third Amended Complaint with the further provision that any additional allegation in the Third Amended Complaint not included in the Second Amended Complaint shall be deemed denied. 3. The Court hereby orders that the class of persons defined in Paragraph 14 of the Stipulation of Settlement filed and incorporated by reference herewith is certified as a Provisional Settlement Class.

19 of 45

- 2 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 20 of 45
4. The Court further conditionally finds that plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS are adequate class representatives for the settlement class.
5. The Court further finds that plaintiffs’ counsel Mark E. Merin of the Law Office of Mark E. Merin, Andrew C. Schwartz of the law office of Casper Meadows & Schwartz, and Randall C. Berg, Jr., of the Florida Justice Institute, Inc. are adequate class counsel.
6. The Court approves the Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action Strip Search Case attached hereto as Exhibit A and further approves the method by which notice is proposed to be given.
7. If, pursuant to the terms of the Stipulation of Settlement, the settlement is not consummated, the conditional certification of the settlement class and preliminary approval of the Stipulation of Settlement shall be void and the parties shall have reserved all of the rights to continue with any litigation or further mediation or settlement discussions.
8. The Bar Date, as defined in paragraph 2 of the Stipulation of Settlement, shall be September 1, 2005. II. NOTICE TO SETTLEMENT CLASS MEMBERS, APPROVAL OF CLASS
COUNSEL, AND EMPLOYMENT OF CLASS CLAIM ADMINISTRATOR 9. Counsel for the class (“class counsel”) are as follows:
Mark E. Merin, Esq. Law Office of Mark E. Merin P.O. Box 255428 Sacramento, CA 95865 (916) 443-6911 - Telephone (916) 447-8336 - Facsimile office@markmerin.com - E-mail

20 of 45

- 3 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 21 of 45
Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. Casper, Meadows & Schwartz 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 947-1147 - Telephone (925) 947-1131 - Facsimile schwartz@cmslaw.com - E-mail
Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131-2310 (305) 358-2081 - Telephone (305) 358-0910 - Facsimile rcberg@bellsouth.net - E-mail
10. Counsel for defendants is as follows:
Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq. Susan Torres, Esq. Assistant County Attorneys 111 N.W. First Street, Suite 2810 Miami, FL 33128-1993 (305) 375-1515 - Telephone (305) 375-5634 - Facsimile ehrlich@miamidade.gov - E-mail
11. Class Claims Administrator is as follows:
Settlement Services, Inc. Mark Patton, Projects Coordinator 2032-D Thomasville Road Tallahassee, FL 32308 (850) 385-1551 - Telephone (850) 385-6008 - Facsimile mpatton@nettally.com - E-mail
12. Beginning no later than June 1, 2005, counsel for the parties acting with the Class
Claims Administrator shall cause to be disseminated the Notice and Claim Form, substantially in
the form attached as Exhibits A and B hereto, in the manner set forth in paragraphs 49 through 51
of the Stipulation of Settlement. Such summary notice as the parties agree will be published in
- 4 -
21 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 22 of 45
accordance with the terms of the settlement and announcements summarizing the proposed settlement shall be made on such radio stations as the parties agree as provided in paragraph 51 of the Stipulation of Settlement. Class members will have up to and including September 1, 2005, in which to opt-out of this settlement, to object to the settlement or to file claims. Prior to the Fairness Hearing, the Claims Administrator shall file and serve a sworn statement attesting to compliance with the provisions of this paragraph.
13. The notice to be provided as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement is hereby found to be the best means practicable of providing notice under the circumstances and, when completed, shall constitute due and sufficient notice of the proposed settlement and the Fairness Hearing to all persons and entities affected by and/or entitled to participate in the settlement, in full compliance with applicable statutes, due process, the Constitution of the United States, and other applicable laws. The notices are accurate, objective, informative and provide class members with all of the information necessary to make an informed decision regarding their participation in the settlement and its fairness.
14. Counsel for the respective parties are authorized to retain Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308, as Class Claims Administrator in accordance with the Stipulation of Settlement and this Order. III. REQUESTS FOR EXCLUSION FROM THE SETTLEMENT CLASS
15. Any member of the settlement class who wishes to be excluded (“opt out”) from the settlement class must send a written request for exclusion to the Court, so that it is received by the Court at the address indicated in the mailed and published Notice on or before the Bar Date. The request for exclusion shall fully comply with requirements set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement. Members of the settlement class may not exclude themselves by filing requests
- 5 -
22 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 23 of 45
for exclusion as a group or class, but must in each instance individually and personally execute a request for exclusion and timely transmit it to the Court.
16. Any member of the settlement class who does not properly and timely request exclusion from the settlement class shall be bound by all of the terms and provisions of the Stipulation of Settlement, including but not limited to the releases, waivers and covenants described in the Stipulation of Settlement, whether or not such person objected to the settlement and whether or not such person made a claim upon or participated in the Settlement Fund created pursuant to the Stipulation of Settlement. IV. THE FAIRNESS HEARING
17. A hearing on final approval, the “Fairness Hearing,” is hereby scheduled to be held before this Court on Thursday, September 22, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., to consider the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the proposed settlement, the dismissal with prejudice of these class action complaints with respect to the released parties herein, and the entry of final judgment in the class action. Class counsel’s application for award of attorney’s fees and costs shall be heard at the time of the Fairness Hearing.
18. The date and time of the Fairness Hearing shall be set forth in the Notice, but the Fairness Hearing shall be subject to adjournment by the Court without further notice to the members of the settlement class other than that which may be issued by the Court.
19. Any person who does not elect to be excluded from the settlement class may, but need not, enter an appearance through his or her own attorney. Settlement class members who do not enter an appearance through their own attorneys will be represented by class counsel.
20. Any person who does not elect to be excluded from the settlement class may, but need not, submit comments or objections to the proposed settlement. Any class member may
- 6 -
23 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 24 of 45

object to the proposed settlement, entry of the final order and judgment approving the settlement,
and class counsel’s application for fees and expenses by filing and serving a written objection.
21. Any class member making the objection (an “objector”) must sign the objection
personally. Any objection must state why the objector objects to the proposed settlement and
provide the basis to support such position. If an objector intends to appear personally at the
Fairness Hearing, the objector must include with the objection a notice of the objector’s intent to
appear at the hearing.
22. Objections, along with any notice of intent to appear, must be filed with the Court
no later than September 1, 2005. If counsel is appearing on behalf of more than one class
member, counsel must identify each such class member and each class member must have
complied with the requirements of this order. These documents must be filed with the clerk of
the Court at the following address: United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Judge Adalberto Jordan, 301 North Miami Avenue, 8th Floor, Miami, Florida
33128.
23. Objections, along with any notice of intent to appear, must also be mailed to class
counsel and counsel for defendants at the addresses listed below:
Counsel for the class (“class counsel”) is as follows:
Class Counsel c/o Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131-2310 (305) 358-2081 - Telephone (305) 358-0910 - Facsimile rcberg@bellsouth.net - E-mail

24 of 45

- 7 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 25 of 45
Counsel for defendants is as follows: Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq. Susan Torres, Esq. Assistant County Attorneys 111 N.W. First Street, Suite 2810 Miami, FL 33128-1993 (305) 375-1515 - Telephone (305) 375-5634 - Facsimile ehrlich@miamidade.gov - E-mail
24. Only class members who have filed and served valid and timely notices of objection shall be entitled to be heard at the Fairness Hearing. Any class member who does not timely file and serve an objection in writing to the settlement, entry of final order and judgment, or to class counsel’s application for fees and expenses, in accordance with the procedure set forth in the class notice and mandated in the order, shall be deemed to have waived any such objection by appeal, collateral attack, or otherwise.
25. Persons wishing to be heard at the Fairness Hearing are required to file written comments or objections and indicate in their written comments or objections their intention to appear at the Fairness Hearing. Settlement class members need not appear at the hearing or take any other action to indicate their approval.
26. All members of the settlement class who do not personally and timely request to be excluded from the class are enjoined from proceeding against the defendants until such time as the Court renders a final decision regarding approval of the settlement and, if the settlement is approved, enters final judgment as provided in the Stipulation of Settlement. V. OTHER PROVISIONS
27. Upon approval of the settlement provided for in the Stipulation of Settlement, each and every term and provision shall be deemed incorporated herein as if expressly set forth
- 8 -
25 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 26 of 45
and shall have the full force and effect of an order of this Court. 28. Magistrate Judge Steven Brown of the United States District Court is hereby
appointed to serve as Special Master to review and resolve certain disputes pursuant to the terms of the Stipulation of Settlement.
29. All reasonable costs incurred in notifying members of the settlement class as well as administering the Stipulation of Settlement shall be paid as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement.
IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: _____________, 2005
__________________________________________ HON. ADALBERTO JORDAN U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

26 of 45

- 9 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 27 of 45
EXHIBIT 2 STIPULATED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT
27 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 28 of 45
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown
JUDITH HANEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.
STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT
Plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS, individually and on behalf of the settlement class defined herein, and Defendants MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, CHARLES J. MCRAY, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS DEPARTMENT, CAPTAIN B. FULLER, ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO (hereinafter referred to as “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby submit the following Stipulation of Settlement.
I. RECITALS On March 5, 2004, original named Plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER and JAMIE LOUGHNER, on behalf of themselves and all persons similarly situated, filed a complaint in the above-captioned matter in which they challenged, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, certain practices of Defendants including the strip search of certain detainees, prior to first appearance, and
28 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 29 of 45
sought damages and declaratory and injunctive relief. The complaint was subsequently amended to add named representative Plaintiffs DARCY SMITH and AMANDA WELLS.
The parties entered into extensive discovery which included exchange of documents, preparation of and responses to request for production of documents, interrogatories, and depositions.
On August 11, 2004, Defendants issued a memorandum designed to conform strip search practices to pre-existing policies and initiated a process to examine and evaluate all of its strip search policies. Copies of revised policies relating to the strip search of pre-first appearance detainees are attached hereto as Exhibit “1”.
On July 12, 2004, Judge Jordan issued an order scheduling a mediation conference to be held beginning February 7, 2005, with retired Circuit Court Judge Gerald T. Wetherington. The parties attended the mediation and, following two (2) days of meetings, agreed to this Stipulation of Settlement which, subject to the approval of the Court, settles this action in the manner and upon the terms set forth below and fully resolves the dispute.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the Parties, as follows:
II. DEFINITIONS 1. “Administrator” means Settlement Services, Inc., to be appointed by the Court to review and determine the validity and amount of claims submitted by Settlement Class Members (“SCMs”), according to the procedures set forth herein.

29 of 45

- 2 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 30 of 45
2. The “Bar Date” is the date established by the Court by which any SCM who wishes to receive payment pursuant to the Stipulation of Settlement must file his/her Claim Form(s), objections to this Stipulation of Settlement, or request to be excluded from the class (opt-out).
3. “Charge List” means the list of charges attached hereto as Exhibit “2”. 4. The “Claim Form” is the form required to be used to make a claim for payment under this settlement. A copy of the proposed Claim Form is attached as Exhibit “3”. 5. “Class Counsel” means, collectively, The Law Office of Mark E. Merin, Mark E. Merin, attorney; Casper, Meadows & Schwartz, Andrew C. Schwartz, attorney; and the Florida Justice Institute, Inc., Randall C. Berg, Jr., attorney. 6. The “Class Notice” means the notice in a form substantially similar to that attached hereto as Exhibit “4” (Notice by Mail); such other summary notice(s) to be published in newspapers serving Miami-Dade, Broward and Monroe counties, and posted in all Miami-Dade Correctional facilities; and radio and television messages to be transmitted over stations serving Miami-Dade, Broward and Monroe counties. 7. The “Class Period” is March 5, 2000, through February 28, 2005, except that the offensive practices giving rise to liability to sub-groups within the class may have terminated during the Class Period. 8. The “Database” is the information to be provided in hard copy and/or electronic form by the Defendant Miami-Dade County to the Administrator and Class Counsel which includes, to the extent practicable, the name, last known addresses, date of birth, Social Security Number, date(s) of arrest and charge(s) of all SCMs arrested during the Class Period; dates of arrests prior to the Class Period (if any); date(s) of booking(s), housing(s) and first appearance(s) of each member of
- 3 -
30 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 31 of 45
the class booked at any facility operated by the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitations Department.
9. The “Effective Date” means the date upon which a judgment entered by the Court approving the Stipulation of Settlement becomes final. The judgment will be deemed final only upon expiration of the time to appeal or, if a Notice of Appeal is filed, upon exhaustion of all appeals and petitions for writ of certiorari.
10. “Non-VDW Misdemeanor Offense” means a misdemeanor, infraction, or ordinance arrest charge not listed on the Charge List.
11. “VDW Misdemeanor Offense” means any misdemeanor arrest charge which does appear on the Charge List.
12. An “Opt-Out” is any potential Settlement Class Member who files a timely request for exclusion as specified in Paragraph 44.
13. “Released Persons” means the Defendants and their predecessors, successors, and/or assigns, together with past, present, and future officials, employees, representatives, attorneys and/or agents of the COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE.
14. The “Settlement Class” means all of those persons who are members of any of the following defined sub-classes who, during the Class Period identified in Paragraph 7 above, were arrested and strip searched prior to making a first appearance at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Center:
a. All females arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons who were transported to the Women’s Detention Center and who were strip searched prior to their
- 4 -
31 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 32 of 45
first appearance, excluding females strip searched on “probable cause” reported in writing on an incident form; and b. All females arrested on charges relating to prostitution included on the list of prostitution charges attached hereto as Exhibit “5”, who were strip searched prior to first appearance from March 5, 2000, until February 8, 2005, when the practice of strip searching all females charged with prostitution was officially terminated; and c. All persons arrested on felony charges or charges relating to violence, drugs or weapons who were strip searched, prior to their first appearances, without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a supervising officer from March 5, 2000, until February 28, 2005, the date when the policy of strip searching detainees prior to obtaining a written authorization was terminated. 15. A “Settlement Class Member” (“SCM”) means any member of the Settlement Class including representatives, successors and assigns, who does not file a valid and timely Request for Exclusion as provided in Paragraph 44 of this Stipulation of Settlement. 16. “Special Master” shall mean the MAGISTRATE JUDGE Stephen Brown of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, appointed by the Court to preside over this Stipulation of Settlement. The Special Master shall have power to make decisions in all matters pertaining to administration and enforcement of the Stipulation of Settlement, subject to review by the Court upon request of any party.

32 of 45

- 5 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 33 of 45
17. This Stipulation of Settlement is for settlement purposes only, and neither the fact of, nor any provision contained in this Stipulation of Settlement or its exhibits, nor any action taken hereunder shall constitute, be construed as, or be admissible in evidence as any admission of the validity of any claim or any fact alleged by Plaintiffs or SCMs in this action or in any other pending action or of any wrongdoing, fault, violation of law, or liability of any kind on the part of Defendants or admission by Defendants of any claim or allegation made in this action or in any other action, nor as an admission by any of the Plaintiffs, SCMs or Class Counsel of the validity of any fact or defense asserted against them in this action or in any other action. Defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing and deny any liability to Plaintiffs or to any other class members. The parties have agreed that, in order to avoid long and costly litigation, this controversy should be settled pursuant to the terms of this settlement, subject to the approval of the Court.
III. TERMS AND EFFECT OF STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT 18. The parties agree solely for the purposes of this settlement and implementation that the within action shall proceed as a class action, with the Settlement Class as defined in Paragraph 14, and that attorneys for the Class are Class Counsel defined in Paragraph 5; but if such settlement fails to be approved or otherwise fails of consumption, then this Stipulation of Settlement is hereby withdrawn. 19. SCMs who comply with the requirements set forth in this Stipulation of Settlement will be paid specified sums determined by the procedures set forth herein in full satisfaction of all claims.

33 of 45

- 6 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 34 of 45
20. The Stipulation of Settlement, as of the Effective Date, resolves in full all claims against the Released Persons by all of the SCMs, including the named Plaintiffs JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS involving violation of their Fourth Amendment rights, their Fourteenth Amendment rights, or of any other federal, state or local law, regulation, duty, or obligation which are based upon or could be based upon or arise from the facts alleged in Case No. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown filed in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division. When the Stipulation of Settlement is final, as of the Effective Date, all SCMs, including the named Plaintiffs, hereby release all such claims.
21. The Parties agree that the Court, by preliminarily approving the Stipulation of Settlement, will be certifying the class as defined in Paragraph 14, as the Settlement Class, subject to final approval of the Settlement at the fairness hearing and that the Court shall retain exclusive and continuing jurisdiction of the action, Parties, SCMs, Special Master and the Administrator to interpret and enforce the terms, conditions and obligations under this agreement.
22. As of the Effective Date of this Stipulation of Settlement, the SCMs, including the named Plaintiffs, hereby waive any and all rights to pursue, initiate, prosecute, or commence any action or proceeding before any court, administrative agency or other tribunal, or to file any complaint with regard to acts of commission or omission by the Released Persons respecting such SCMs with respect to any strip search by Defendants prior to their first appearance which occurred during the Class Period.
23. This Stipulation of Settlement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Parties hereto regarding the subject matter of the instant proceeding, and no oral agreement
- 7 -
34 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 35 of 45
entered into at any time nor any written agreement entered into prior to the execution of this Stipulation shall be deemed to exist, or to bind the Parties hereto, or to vary the terms and conditions contained herein, except as expressly provided herein.
24. Each SCM shall be deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court. 25. No Opt-Out shall share in any monetary benefits provided by this Stipulation of Settlement. 26. This agreement is subject to and conditioned upon the final approval of this Stipulation of Settlement and the issuance of the final order and judgment of dismissal by the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, providing the below specified relief, which relief shall be pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Stipulation of Settlement and the Parties’ performance of their continuing rights and obligations hereunder. The order and judgment will be deemed final only upon expiration of the time to appeal, or if a Notice of Appeal is filed, upon exhaustion of all appeals and petitions for writs of certiorari. Such final order and judgment shall:
a. Dismiss with prejudice all complaints in the action as to the Released Persons;
b. Order that all SCMs are enjoined from asserting against any Released Person, any and all claims which the SCMs had, has, or may have in the future arising out of the facts alleged in the Complaint;
c. Release each Released Person from the claims which any SCMs has, had, or may have in the future, against such Released Person arising out of the facts alleged in the Complaint;
- 8 -
35 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 36 of 45
d. Determine that this Stipulation of Settlement is entered into in good faith, is reasonable, fair and adequate, and in the best interest of the Class; and
e. Reserve the Court’s continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over the Parties to this Stipulation of Settlement, including Defendants and all SCMs, to administer, supervise, construe and enforce the Stipulation of Settlement in accordance with the terms for the mutual benefit of all the Parties.
27. Plaintiffs will take all necessary and appropriate steps to obtain preliminary approval of the Stipulation of Settlement, final approval of the Settlement, and dismissal of the action with prejudice. If the Court finally approves this Stipulation of Settlement, and if there is an appeal from such decision, the Defendants will not oppose Plaintiffs’ efforts to defend the Stipulation of Settlement.
IV. RESOLUTION AND PAYMENT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES 28. The settlement amount which shall be used to pay all claims of SCMs, administrative costs and attorney fees shall not be more than $6,250,000.00 (Six Million, Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars). The total settlement amount will be distributed as follows: (1) up to $4,550,000.00 (Four Million, Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) will be allocated to pay verified claims; (2) $1,000,000.00 (One Million Dollars) will be allocated to attorneys’ fees; (3) up to $100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand Dollars) will be allocated to pay itemized costs and expenses incurred by Class Counsel in the prosecution of this case; (4) $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) will be allocated for payment of representative Plaintiffs’ claims; and (5) up to $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) will be allocated to cover the costs of claims administration to
- 9 -
36 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 37 of 45
provide notice to the class and to process and to administer the settlement of class members’ claims. Within 30 days of preliminary approval by the United States District Court of the terms of this Stipulation of Settlement, Defendants will certify that they have sufficient funds available to them or on deposit to satisfy fully the terms of this Stipulation of Settlement. If the total amount of all verified claims exceeds the amount of $4,550,000.00 (Four Million, Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars), the amount payable to SCMs for each claim shall be reduced proportionately so that the entire amount, but no more than $4,550,000.00 (Four Million, Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) is paid out to SCMs.
29. The payment of $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) for the representative Plaintiffs shall be paid by check made out to the client trust account of the Law Office of Mark E. Merin. The Law Office of Mark E. Merin will acknowledge receipt of such payment and deliver to Defendants’ counsel a list showing how the $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) is allocated among representative Plaintiffs who may include additional persons who have executed retainer agreements with Class Counsel but who were not formally added as named Plaintiffs, and, if any of such funds are not distributed by the Bar Date, such funds shall be returned to Defendants and added to the amount available for payment of SCMs’ claims. The $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) check shall be delivered within 10 days of the Effective Date.
30. The parties agree to make an application to the Court to appoint the Administrator as officer of the Court for the purpose of implementing the terms of this Stipulation of Settlement. The Administrator shall be subject to judicial immunity to the fullest extent permitted by law.

37 of 45

- 10 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 38 of 45
V. PROCEDURES FOR RECEIVING PAYMENT UNDER THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 31. All female SCMs who were strip searched following arrests on charges relating to prostitution prior to their first appearance and all female SCMs who were strip searched at the Women’s Correctional Center prior to their first appearance after having been arrested on charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons, shall be entitled to receive a payment of a minimum of $1,000.00 (One Thousand Dollars) in full satisfaction of their claims, except as provided in Paragraph 38 of this Stipulation of Settlement. 32. All SCMs other than those identified in Paragraph 31 above, who were strip searched without the person performing the strip search having first received a written authorization to perform the search signed by a supervising officer on duty shall, upon filing of a completed and executed Claim Form, be entitled to receive the sum of $10.00 (Ten Dollars) in full satisfaction of all claims. 33. The Administrator shall determine whether or not a person who has submitted a Claim Form is an SCM and shall reject claims by persons who are not SCMs. 34. All SCMs will receive payments specified herein for each incident in which they were strip searched, following a qualifying arrest within the Class Period prior to their first appearances. 35. Any SCM who fails to submit a Claim Form completed in accordance with the instructions contained therein by the Bar Date or any other Court mandated extension, shall be forever barred from receiving any payment pursuant to the Stipulation of Settlement. Such SCM
- 11 -
38 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 39 of 45
shall in all other respects be bound by all of the terms of the Stipulation of Settlement, and the judgment entered herein, including but not limited to the release of all Released Persons of all claims resolved herein.
36. The Administrator will determine the dollar amount of each payment to an eligible SCM based upon the Administrator’s review of the SCMs’ responses to questions on the Claim Form, subject to reduction as set forth in Paragraph 38.
37. All female SCMs who qualify for payment, other than for reason of the absence of a prior written authorization for a strip search, shall be entitled to payment as set forth below, in addition to the basic $1,000.00 (Thousand Dollar) payment for each qualifying strip search following a fresh arrest during the Class Period:
a. A female SCM who was under 21 or over 60 at the time of a qualifying strip search shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars);
b. A female SCM who was menstruating during the time she was strip searched shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars);
c. An SCM who was more than two months pregnant at the time she was subjected to a strip search shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars);
d. A female SCM who had a significant physical or mental disability (such as unsightly scarring, amputation or malformation or a medically diagnosed psychiatric condition) at the time she was strip searched shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars); and

39 of 45

- 12 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 40 of 45
e. A female SCM who was arrested and strip searched for the first time in her life during the Class Period shall receive an additional $500.00 (Five Hundred Dollars). VI. REDUCTION OF AWARDS
38. The amounts payable to a female SCM, other than one solely entitled to payment hereunder because of the absence of prior written authorization for a strip search, shall be subject to the following reduction:
a. In the event that an SCM, prior to being strip searched during the Class Period, had served a term in a state prison, the award will be reduced by Fifty Percent (50%) and the fact of prior incarceration in a state prison shall be reported to the SCM when the payments are distributed and the SCM given 15 days within which to challenge the determination of prior imprisonment with written evidence filed under penalty of perjury.
b. Counsel for the respective parties will review the evidence submitted within 15 days of its receipt and determine whether the reduction will be reversed or upheld. If the parties cannot agree, evidence offered by the SCM will be submitted to the Special Master within 10 days for final decision which shall be rendered by the Special Master within 10 days of receipt of relevant evidence.
c. The Claims Administrator will make an initial determination if an SCM who has timely submitted a valid claim had previously been incarcerated
- 13 -
40 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 41 of 45
in a state prison by obtaining from Defendants access to a Database against which the names of SCMs returning valid verified Claim Forms may be electronically compared. If such Database is not provided within thirty (30) days of submission by the Claims Administrator of the list of qualified SCMs, no reductions will be made. 39. There shall not be any 50% reduction for a prior incarceration in a state prison for those persons strip searched without the prior written authorization of a supervising officer on duty.
VII. GENERAL CLAIM PROCEDURES 40. To receive payment, an SCM shall be required to submit to the Claims Administrator an executed Claim Form signed under penalty of perjury with questions completed in accordance with the instructions provided. All Claim Forms must be submitted by the Bar Date unless such period is extended by order of the Court. 41. The Claim Form shall be submitted by first class mail and shall be deemed submitted upon the date of the postmark thereon. 42. SCMs who submit claims and whose names appear on the Database will be paid by mail at the address specified on the Claim Form. 43. The representative Plaintiffs shall be deemed fully compensated by the distribution for them to Class Counsel of $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) and shall not be permitted or required to submit Claim Forms. In the event that there is a proportional reduction of claims because claims valued at more than $4,550,000.00 (Four
- 14 -
41 of 45

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 42 of 45
Million Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) were submitted, the $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) allocated for the named representatives will not be reduced.
VIII. EXCLUSION FROM THE SETTLEMENT CLASS 44. Any potential SCM who wishes to be excluded from the Settlement Class must file a request to be excluded from the class with the Clerk of the Court, on or before the Bar Date or as the Court may otherwise direct. Named Plaintiffs and others identified to Defendants’ counsel who executed retainer agreements and will receive a portion of the funds allocated for the representative Plaintiffs will not request exclusion pursuant to this paragraph. 45. Any potential SCM who does not timely file a Request for Exclusion shall conclusively be deemed to have become an SCM and to be bound by this Stipulation of Settlement and all subsequent proceedings, orders, and judgments herein. 46. Any SCM who does not elect to be excluded from the Settlement Class may, but need not, enter an appearance through his or her own attorney. SCMs who do not enter an appearance will be represented by Class Counsel.
IX. OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT 47. Any SCM who does not elect to be excluded form the Settlement Class may, but need not, submit comments or objections to the proposed settlement. The Court will enter an appropriate order setting forth the procedure for SCMs to submit comments or objections to the proposed settlement.

42 of 45

- 15 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 43 of 45
X. ATTORNEYS FEES 48. Class Counsel shall receive a total award of $1,000,000.00 (One Million Dollars) for attorney fees and up to an additional $100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand Dollars) for itemized costs and expenses incident to prosecution of this action including any fees and costs incurred in seeking final approval of this Stipulation of Settlement and the defense thereof in any court or jurisdiction. Payment will be made within thirty (30) of the Effective Date by check delivered to Class Counsel, c/o Florida Justice Institute, 2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-2310 , made payable jointly to the Florida Justice Institute, Law Office of Mark E. Merin and Casper, Meadows & Schwartz. This award is subject to the approval of the Court.
XI. NOTICE 49. Notice to SCMs defined in Paragraphs 14(a) and 14(b) shall be by first class mail, postage prepaid, to all individuals whose addresses are on record in the Inmate Profile System (IPS) or in the Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) maintained by Defendants or to such other, better addresses identified by the Administrator. Both Parties and the Administrator will exercise their best efforts to update and to verify addresses, including but not limited to addresses of SCMs who are incarcerated. This paragraph shall not limit further appropriate efforts to provide notice. Notice to SCMs defined in Paragraph 14(c) shall be by notice specified in Paragraph 50.

43 of 45

- 16 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 44 of 45

50. The Administrator shall cause to be published in English, Spanish and Creole languages, in _______________, ____________________ and _________________ newspapers once a week in each of two consecutive weeks notices in a form and manner agreed to by the Parties describing this settlement, the claims procedure and the procedure to object and/or to Opt-Out of the settlement. Notices in a form to be agreed to by the parties shall also be posted in all Miami-Dade Correctional facilities. If the Parties cannot agree, the Court will determine the content of the published notice.
51. Announcements summarizing the proposed settlement in English, Spanish and Creole will be made on the following radio stations at least three times during a week, during two successive weeks: (Stations) ___________________, _______________________ and __________________.
XII. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS 52. All reasonable costs incurred in the administration of this Stipulation of Settlement including, but not limited to, the fees of the Administrator, costs of disseminating notice to class members, by mail, publication, or other means agreed to by the Parties, costs of receiving and evaluating claims, including the cost of distribution of the monetary payments to the class members, fees, if any, of the Special Master, and any additional ancillary administration fees will be paid up to the total amount of $300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) allocated for these expenses. 53. Following preliminary Court approval of the Stipulation of Settlement, the Administrator shall submit bi-weekly invoices to Class Counsel for services rendered and for expense reimbursement. All invoices will indicate the dates upon which services were

44 of 45

- 17 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 49-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 45 of 45

performed, the titles of the employees performing the services, the number of hours of worked by each title on each date, the hourly rate for each such title, and the total fee for the services performed. The hourly rates shall be in accordance with the agreement between the Parties and the Claims Administrator.

Dated: April 12, 2005

Respectfully submitted,

Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Peter M. Siegel, Esq. Cullin A. O’Brien, Esq. Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131-2310 305-358-2081 305-358-0910 (FAX) E-mail: rcberg@bellsouth.net

Mark E. Merin, Esq. Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild, Esq. Law Office of Mark E. Merin 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 916-443-6911 916-447-8336 (FAX) E-mail: mark@markmerin.com

Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. Casper, Meadows & Schwartz 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925-947-1147 925-947-1131 (FAX) E-mail: schwartz@cmslaw.com

Attorneys for the Plaintiffs

By:

/s/

Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq.

Florida Bar No. 0318371

Dated: April 12, 2005

Respectfully submitted,

Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq. Susan Torres, Esq. Assistant County Attorneys 111 N.W. First Street, Suite 2810 Miami, FL 33128-1993 305-375-1515 305-375-5634 (FAX) E-mail: ehrlich@miamidade.gov

Attorneys for Defendants

By:

/s/

Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 51561

45 of 45

- 18 -

 
 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 1 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown

Dec 20 2004

JUDITH HANEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.
AGREED MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER Plaintiffs and Defendants, by and through their respective counsel, jointly move to modify the Court’s Order Setting Schedule issued June 8, 2004.
INTRODUCTION On May 1, 2004, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint alleging they were all strip searched illegally by Defendants at various detention centers operated by Defendants following being arrested on minor crimes and before their first appearances. Plaintiffs included class claim allegations and indicated they would request certification of the action as a class action. On May 28, 2004, defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief. On June 8, 2004, this Court issued its Order Setting Schedule, requiring mediation, and referring certain motions to the magistrate judge. That schedule set the matter for a two week trial beginning August 22, 2005, and established other dates including the following: August 2, 2004: All motions to amend pleadings or join parties are filed. January 3, 2005: Parties exchange expert witness summaries and reports required by

1 of 10

38/gz

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 2 of 10

Local Rule 16.1.K

February 1, 2005: Parties exchange rebuttal expert witness summaries and reports required by Local Rule 16.1.K

March 1, 2005:

All discovery, including expert discovery, is completed.

March 15, 2005: Parties to have completed mediation.

April 15, 2005:

All pre-trial motions other than motions in limine are filed.

May 16, 2005:

Parties to submit joint pre-trial stipulation and proposed jury instructions

The parties have proceeded diligently, have exchanged documents, and have taken deposition of one of the Plaintiffs and eight correctional officers employed by Defendants. Based on information disclosed in those depositions, Plaintiffs will soon notice the depositions of additional employees of Defendants, have served additional requests for production of documents, and have served interrogatories designed to determine the number of persons in the class Plaintiffs seek to represent. Defendants have noticed the depositions of the remaining Plaintiffs.
The parties have also agreed to attempt to resolve this dispute through mediation, and that mediation is now scheduled to begin February 7, 2005. In order to promote the resolution of this dispute and, if not resolved, to properly present it for trial, the parties jointly propose a modification of the Order Setting Schedule. A copy of a proposed modified Order Setting Schedule is attached as Exhibit A.
A. Proposed Modification of Order Setting Schedule The Order Setting Schedule issued on June 8, 2004, set the matter for a two week jury trial to begin on August 22, 2005, and established a series of other dates which, by this motion, the parties

- 2 -

2 of 10

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 3 of 10
are jointly requesting the court to modify. Counsel have agreed that the complaint may be modified to clarify Plaintiffs’ legal position
that a violation of the Florida State Statute restricting strip search of arrestees prior to first appearance constitutes a recognition of a liberty interest which cannot be denied without due process. The parties also agree that all such motions to amend pleadings may be filed on or before March 1, 2005.
Because the parties are pursuing resolution of this dispute through mediation and believe that, if mediation is not successful, the nature, identity and necessity of expert witnesses may be affected by the Court’s ruling on various anticipated motions, the parties agree that exchange of expert witness summaries and reports should be deferred to April 1, 2005, and the exchange of rebuttal expert witness summaries and reports required on or before May 2, 2005.
Since the nature and scope of discovery will depend upon the Court’s ruling on Plaintiffs’ anticipated motion for class certification, the parties agree that discovery, including expert witness discovery, should be held open until July 1, 2005, and that all pre-trial motions, other than motions in limine should be filed by August 15, 2005.
The parties agree that the two week trial should be continued from August 22, 2005, to begin on or after December 5, 2005 (consistent with the Court’s calendar), with calendar call to be held on or after November 29, 2005, and all joint pre-trial stipulations and proposed jury instructions to be filed by September 15, 2005.
All other provisions of the June 8, 2004, Order Setting Schedule would remain as originally ordered.
This joint motion is supported by the affidavit of Mark E. Merin, one of the attorneys for
- 3 -
3 of 10

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 4 of 10

plaintiffs, attached hereto. Dated: December 20, 2004

Respectfully submitted,
Mark E. Merin, Esq. Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild, Esq. Law Office of Mark E. Merin 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 916/443-6911 - Telephone 916/447-8336 - Facsimile mark@markmerin.com - E-mail
Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. Casper, Meadows & Schwartz 2121 N California Boulevard, Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 947-1147 - Telephone (925) 947-1131 - Facsimile schwartz@cmslaw.com - E-mail
Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Peter M. Siegel, Esq. Cullin O’Brien, Esq. Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Blvd. Miami, FL 33131-2310 305/358-2081 - Telephone 305/358-0910 - Facsimile rcberg@bellsouth.net - E-Mail
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
_______s/_______________________ Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Florida Bar No. 0318371

4 of 10

- 4 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 5 of 10

Dated: December 20, 2004

Respectfully submitted,
Robert A. Ginsburg, Miami-Dade County Attorney Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Assistant County Attorney Miami-Dade County Attorney's Office 111 NW First Street, Suite 2810 Miami, Florida 33128 305/375-5744 - Telephone 305/375-5611 - Facsimile ehrlich@miamidade.gov - E-Mail
Attorneys for Defendants

________s/____________________________ Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq. Florida Bar No. 51561

5 of 10

- 5 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 6 of 10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown
JUDITH HANEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.
DECLARATION OF MARK E. MERIN IN SUPPORT OF AGREED MOTION FOR ORDER TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER I, Mark E. Merin, under penalty of perjury, do declare and say: 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the state of California and before the Federal District Courts in the state of California, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, and the United States Supreme Court. I have also been specially admitted, pro hac vice, to appear before this Court as counsel for Plaintiffs. 2. The Complaint alleges that Defendants illegally strip searched females arrested for minor crimes at various facilities maintained and operated by Defendants prior to their first appearances. At the time the First Amended Complaint was filed on May 1, 2004, Plaintiffs and their counsel had very little information about the policies, practices and procedures challenged by this Complaint, other than the experiences of Plaintiffs themselves. 3. Even before the scheduling order was issued on June 8, 2004, Defendants had moved to dismiss Plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief, a motion that was not denied until August 24,
6 of 10

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 7 of 10
2004, after the specified date in the scheduling order for motions to amend pleadings or join parties had expired.
4. While the parties were directed to attempt to pursue mediation, dates for the exchange of expert witness summaries and reports were established in January and February, prior to the earliest date when mediation could have been initiated.
5. The parties have diligently discovered the case and have exchanged documents and taken the depositions of eight of Defendants correctional officer employees, and one of the representative Plaintiffs. Additionally, depositions have now been scheduled of other witnesses whose identity and significance was discovered during the depositions of other witnesses, and further document production request and interrogatories served. Defendants have noticed the deposition of additional plaintiffs and those depositions will proceed in January 2005.
6. The scheduling order previously established is, in light of the nature and complexity of this case, unrealistic and virtually impossible to meet given the legal and factual complexity of the case and its final determination affected by court rulings on motions which have not yet been presented, specifically plaintiffs’ anticipated motion for class certification.
7. The parties have worked cooperatively and are now embarking on a good faith attempt to resolve the matter through mediation scheduled for February 7 and 8, 2005. In order for resources to be focused most advantageously on achieving results in the mediation, the parties have met and conferred and jointly agree that the scheduling order should be modified as set out in this agreed motion and the accompanied proposed order to allow the parties to focus on mediation and, thereafter, if necessary, to move the matter toward trial following completion of discovery and preparation and disclosure of expert witnesses.
- 2 -
7 of 10

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 8 of 10
I declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct and that this Declaration was executed this 20th day of December 2004, in Sacramento, California.
___________s/__________________ Mark E. Merin

8 of 10

- 3 -

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 9 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown

JUDITH HANEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.

[PROPOSED] ORDER MODIFYING PREVIOUS SCHEDULING ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the parties’ Agreed Motion to Modify the Scheduling

Order of June 8, 2004. The Court having reviewed the Agreed Motion and being otherwise

advised in the premises finds good cause appearing from the Agreed Motion submitted by

counsel for the parties, and therefore this Court’s prior Order Setting Scheduling of June 8, 2004

is modified to provide as follows:

The case is set for trial during the Court’s two week trial calendar beginning on

December 5, 2005. Calendar call will be held at 9:00 a.m. on November 29, 2005, in Courtroom

Eight of the United States Courthouse, 301 N. Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida. No pre-trial

conference will be held unless a party requests one no later than 30 days prior to the calendar call

or the Court determines that one is necessary. The parties shall adhere to the following modified

schedule:

March 1, 2005:

All motions to amend the pleadings other than to add additional parties

9 of 10

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 38-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2004 Page 10 of 10

April 1, 2005:

Parties to exchange expert witness summaries and reports required by Local Rule 16.1.K.

May 2, 2005:

Parties to exchange rebuttal expert witness summaries and reports required by Local Rule 16.1.K.

July 1, 2005:

All discovery, including expert discovery, is completed.

August 15, 2005: All pre-trial motions other than motions in limine are to be filed.

September 15, 2005: Parties to submit joint pre-trial stipulation and proposed jury instructions.

All other provisions of the June 8, 2004, Order Setting Schedule shall remain as
previously ordered.
DONE AND ORDERED in chambers in Miami, Florida, this ____ day of December
2004.
_________________________________ Adalberto Jordan United States District Judge
cc: Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Esq. Mark E. Merin, Esq. Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq.

2 of 2
10 of 10

 
 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 42-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/11/2005 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DNISION
CASE NO.: 04-20516-CN-Jordan/Brown

JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, JAMIE LOUGHNER, DARCY SMITH, and AMANDA WELLS, individually and on behalf of a Class of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

·. ')

vs.

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY; CHARLES J. MCRAY, individually and in his official capacity as Acting Director of the MIAMIDADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, CAPTAIN B. FULLER, Individually and in her official capacity as the Facility Supervisor ofthe Women's Detention Center, ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO, individually and in his official capacity as Facility Supervisor of the Pre-Trial Detention Center; and MIAMIDADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS And REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT OFFICERS JANE DOES 1 THROUGH 150;

Defendants.
--------------------------------~/

MEDIATION REPORT The undersigned mediator hereby reports that after a good faith mediation conference on February 71h and 81\ 2005, at which the parties and their representatives with full settlement authority and with respect to Miami-Dade County, representatives with authority to recommend a settlement to the Miami-Dade County Commission and their respective attorneys were present. ' ) /
>-~-

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 42-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/11/2005 Page 2 of 2

CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-Jordan/Brown

After a good faith effort, the parties agreed to a settlement proposed requiring approval by the Miami-Dade County Commission.

WETHERINGTON, KLEIN & HUBBART, P.A. ONE BISCAYNE TOWER, SUITE 2930 2 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEYARD MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 TELEPHONE: 305-374-0650
: 305-374-4933
---
GERALD T. WE HERINGTON MEDIATOR

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was sent

L ~

via U.S. mail on this

day of February, 2005 to the following parties: Mark E. Merin, Esq.,

Law Office ofMark E. Merin, 2001 P Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95814; Randall C.

Berg, Jr., Esq.. and Peter M. Siegel, Esq., Florida Justice Institute, Inc., 2870 Wachovia Financial

Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-231 0; and Richard B. Rosenthal, Esq. and

Jeffrey Ehrlich, Esq., Assistant County Attorneys, Miami-Dade County, 111 N. W. First Street,

Suite 2810, Miami, FL 33128.

Gerald T. Wetherington Mediator

2

 
 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 37-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2004 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-JORDAN/BROWN !-/·(

JUDTIH HANEY, et al.,

)

Plaintiffs

) )

vs.

)

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et al.,

) )

Defendants

)

)

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner, Darcy Smith, and Amanda Wells, individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated, sue Miami-Dade County and various individual defendants, for subjecting them to strip and visual body cavity searches, in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as monetary damages, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988. Miami-Dade County has moved to dismiss the claims for injunctive relief, arguing that the plaintiffs lack standing to seek injunctive relief. For the reasons stated below, the defendants' motion to dismiss [D.E. 23] is DENIED.
I. STANDARD OF REVIEW The defendants' motion to dismiss should not be granted unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiffs could prove no set of facts in support oftheir claims which would entitle them to relief. See Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957). I must take the allegations of the plaintiffs' complaint as true and must read the complaint to include any theories on which they can recover. See Lindner v. Portocarrero, 963 F. 2d 332, 334-36 (11th Cir. 1992). A dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) "is viewed with disfavor and rarely granted. " Brooks v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield ofFlorida, Inc., 116F. 3d 1364, 1368-69 (11th Cir. 1997) (citing Madison v. Purdy, 410 F. 2d 99, 100 (5th Cir. 1969); International Erectors, Inc. v. Wilhoit Steel Erectors & Rental Service, 400 F. 2d 465, 471 (5th Cir. 1968) ("Dismissal of a claim on the basis ofbarebone pleadings is a precarious disposition with a high mortality rate.")). Rule 12(b)(6) permits the dismissal of a complaint on a dispositive issue of law only when no construction of the factual allegations of the complaint can support the cause of action. See Executive 100, Inc. v. Martin County, 922 F.2d 1536, 1539 (11th Cir. 1991).

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 37-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2004 Page 2 of 4
In addition, where injunctive relief is sought, the plaintiffs must demonstrate that they face a real and immediate threat of future injury resulting from a similar encounter with the defendants. See City ofLos Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 107-8 (1983) (holding that plaintiffs standing to enjoin use of chokeholds by police officers hinged on "whether he was likely to suffer future injury from the use of chokeholds by police officers"). At the motion to dismiss stage, "[a court] must evaluate standing based on the facts alleged in the complaint, and ...may not 'speculate concerning the existence of standing or "piece together support for the plaintiff.""' See Shatz v. Cates, 256 F.3d 1077, 1080 (11th Cir. 2001) (citing Cone Corp. v. Florida Department a/Transportation, 921 F.3d 1190, 1210 (11th Cir. 1991)). However, at this stage, courts'" presum[e] that general allegations embrace those specific facts that are necessary to support the claim."' See Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 561 (1992) (citing Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation, 497 U.S. 871, 889 (1990)) (distinguishing between the varying levels ofproofrequired to establish standing at different stages oflitigation: "In response to a summaryjudgment motion, however, the plaintiffcan no longer rest on such 'mere allegations,' but must 'set forth' by affidavit or other evidence 'specific facts,' Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 56(e), which for purposes ofthe summary judgment motion will be taken to be true. And at the final stage, those facts (if controverted) must be 'supported adequately by the evidence adduced at trial."').
II. ANALYSIS The plaintiffs seek injunctive reliefenjoining strip and visual body cavity searches, conducted on all pre-first appearance, non-felony female detainees, without a reasonable suspicion that such searches would reveal or disclose contraband or weapons. The defendants argue that, under Lyons, the plaintiffs lack standing to seek such relief unless there is a substantial likelihood that they will be injured in a similar way in the future. In Lyons, the Supreme Court held that the plaintiff- who alleged that he had been subjected to a chokehold by officers ofthe Los Angeles Police Departmentlacked standing to enjoin police use of chokeholds because the probability of future injury was "merely conjectural or hypothetical": In order to establish an actual controversy in this case, Lyons would have had not only to allege that he would have another encounter with the police but also to make the incredible assertion either, (1) that all police officers in Los Angeles always
2

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 37-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2004 Page 3 of 4
choke any citizen with whom they have an encounter ... or, (2) that the City ordered or authorized police officers to act in such a manner.
Lyons, 461 at 105-06. The Supreme Court specifically noted that the plaintifffailed to allege that chokeholds were applied to every person stopped by the LAPD, regardless of the circumstances. In contrast, the plaintiffs in this case allege that all pre-first appearance, nonfelony female detainees are subject to strip and body cavity searches upon arrest. The current named plaintiffs encompass three out-of-state visitors arrested for civil disobedience in connection with the FTAA protests, an Aventura resident arrested for misdemeanor battery, and a Miami Beach resident arrested for resisting arrest without violence. The last two plaintiffs were added after this suit was filed on March 5, 2004, and their arrests and strip searches took place on March 17, 2004, and April 23, 2004, respectively. Cf id. at 108 (finding that the odds that Lyons would be stopped for a traffic violation and subjected to a chokehold were insufficient to establish standing where five months had passed between Lyons' encounter with the police and the filing of the complaint and no other encounters between Lyons and the police had taken place). Additionally, this case is a potential class action.
The Eleventh Circuit has not ruled, post-Lyons, on the specific issue ofwhen, ifever, a plaintiffhas standing to seek injunctive reliefwith regard to allegedly unconstitutional strip searches. The Eleventh Circuit has, however, applied Lyons in other contexts, and found that the plaintiffs had standing to seek injunctive relief. See 31 Foster Children v. Bush, 329 F. 3d 1255, 1266 (11th Cir.2003) (holding that foster care children had standing to seek injunctive relief challenging systemic deficiencies in the system: "when the threatened acts that will cause injury are authorized or part of a policy, it is significantly more likely that the injury will occur again"); Church v. City ofHuntsville, 30 F.3d 1332, 1339 (11th Cir. 1994) (homeless persons had standing to seek an injunction against the City of Huntsville to prevent the City and its employees from harassing, intimidating, detaining, and arresting them solely because they were homeless). In 31 Foster Children, the Eleventh Circuit held that, under Lyons, the foster care children could seek injunctive relief for acts that were authorized or part of a policy:
3

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 37-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2004 Page 4 of 4

As Lyons illustrates, future injury that depends on either the random or unauthorized acts of a third party is too speculative to satisfy standing requirements. However, when the threatened acts that will cause injury are authorized or part of a policy, it is significantly more likely that the injury will occur again.

31 Foster Children, 329 F.3d at 1266.

The plaintiffs allege that there is a policy ofconducting strip and body cavity searches

on all pre-first appearance, non-felony female detainees. I assume that the plaintiffs'

allegations are true, as I am required to do when considering a motion to dismiss. Therefore,

there is a substantial likelihood that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated will be injured

in the future.

Ill. CONCLUSION

In sum, the plaintiffs have standing, at this stage of the litigation, to seek injunctive

relief enjoining strip and body cavity searches on. The defendants' motion to dismiss the

claim for injunctive relief is DENIED. The defendants are free, of course, to raise the

standing issue at the summary judgment stage.

d~ay DONE and ORDERED in chambers in Miami, Florida, this -z....

of August, 2004.

Copy to:

All counsel of record Magistrate Judge Brown

Adalberto Jor n United States District Judge

4

 
 Rpr 11 2005 17=32 P.02 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 20 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

SUBJECT: FRISK AND STRIP SEARCH PROCEDURES
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 16, 2005
SUPERSEDES: JANUARY 24, 2000 RELATED ACA STANDARDS: ALDF-2A20, 4ALDF-2A-24, 4-ALDF-2C-01, 4-ALDF2C-03 thru 05; and 2-C0-4A-01 RELATED REFERENCES: F.S.S. 901.21; 901.211; 951.22; Florida Model Jail Standards 4.02; 4.04.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. POLICY II. DEFINITIONS Ill. GENDER CONSIDERATIONS IV. PROCEDURES
A. Personal Protective Equipment
B. When to conduct a Frisk Search
C. Specific Steps for Conducting a Frisk Search D. Contraband E. When to Conduct a Strip Search F. Documentation of a Strip Search G. Specific Steps for Strip Searching Male Inmates H. Specific Steps for Strip Searching Female Inmates I. Body Cavity Search J. Visitor's Search V. CROSS REFERENCES VI. REVOCATION
I. POLICY
It is the policy of the Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Department (MDCR) to have procedures and practices governing searches of persons to detect and deter the introduction, fabrication, possession, and conveyance of contraband entering into any MDCR detention facility. Staff and inmates are advised of the prohibitions against contraband. Searches will be performed on an ongoing basis, in accordance with section 901.211 of the Florida Statutes, for security reasons, control of contraband, and staff and inmate safety.
Page 1 of 13
20 of 41

Rpr 11 2005 17=32 P.03 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 21 of 41

MIAMI~DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

II. DEFINITIONS
A. FRISK SEARCH
The inspection by sight, touch, and electronic scanning device of an individual's clothed body, outer clothing, and possessions, to include footwear, pockets, hats, hair, wigs, mouth, nose, and ears.
B. FIRST APPEARANCE
The inmate's appearance before a judge within 24 hours of arrest.
C. STRIP SEARCH
Having an arrested person remove or arrange some or all of his or her clothing so as to permit a visual and/or manual inspection of the genitals; buttocks; anus; breast, in the case of a female; or undergarments of such person.
D. BODY CAVITY SEARCH
A visual, manual, and/or instrument inspection of an inmate's orifices conducted only by trained medical personnel.
E. PROBABLE CAUSE
Known facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe a strip search is justified.
F. REASONABLE SUSPICION
Known facts and circumstances, and rational inferences from those known facts and circumstances, that would lead a reasonable person to suspect a strip search is justified.

21 of 41

Page 2 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17:33 P.04 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 22 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

Ill. GENDER CONSIDERATIONS
A. FRISK SEARCH
1. Female inmates shall be frisk searched by female officers except in emergency situations.
2. Male inmates may be frisk searched by either male or female officers. However, if a male officer is available for the frisk search of a male inmate, he will conduct the frisk search.
B. STRIP SEARCH
1" It is mandatory that staff of the same gender as the inmate performs the strip search.
2. In an emergency, an officer of the opposite gender may be present during a strip search. The shift supervisor/commander will be notified and will make an addendum to the MDCR Incident Report detailing the specifics of the situation.
IV. PROCEDURES
A. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT
Each officer conducting a strip or frisk search will wear double gloves. All gloves,
after each usage, will be disposed of in a biohazard bag (red) or receptacle. For additional information, see Departmental Standard Operating Procedure (DSOP) #6-014, "Communicable Disease- Exposure Control Plan"
B. WHEN TO CONDUCT A FRISK SEARCH
All arrested persons will be frisk searched prior to entry into the secured areas of a
facility when being admitted into the jail system_ Other circumstances that warrant a frisk search of an inmate include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Inmates entering or exiting their assigned housing areas;
2. Prior to and after recreation; law library; religious, educational and work programs; clinic visits or any activity within the confines of the facility;
Page 3 of 13
22 of 41

Rpr 11 2005 17:33 P.OS Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 23 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11.022

23 of 41

3. After a cell or housing unit search;
4. During a shakedown;
5. When being transported;
6. At any other time the officer believes such a search is warranted.
C. SPECIFIC STEPS FOR CONDUCTING A FRISK SEARCH
1. Instruct the inmate to remove all items from his/her pockets and turn the pockets inside out. Have the inmate remove shoes, socks/stockings, hat, jacket, coat, belt, and sweater. If the inmate is wearing hair curlers, a wig, removable hairpiece, or other removable ornaments in the hair, have the inmate remove these items.
2. Instruct the inmate to run his/her fingers through the hair. The officer should then run his/her fingers through the inmate's hair, looking for any hidden contraband.
3. Instruct the inmate to stand still with his/her feet a part and arms extended forward. Have the inmate lean forward against an object, (i.e., a wall, desk, etc.), so that the arms support the body weight. The arms and feet should be far enough apart from the wall and spread in a manner that puts the inmate slightly off balance. This is to lessen the possibility of a physical move or an attempt by the inmate to assault the frisking officer.
4. Search the individual from the back.
5. The officer will carefully feel the collar of the shirt/blouse/sweater, etc., with the fingers. checking for any item that may be concealed there. During the search, officers should use universal precautions and be cognizant that inmates routinely conceal syringes on their person.
6. Using the hand, the officer will carefully feel down the shirt front and shirt back, checking the pockets, and stopping at the belt line. For females, the officer will pull the bra away from the body and shake the bra in order to dislodge any items that may be hidden. The officer will check under the inmate's breasts with their fingers. At no time will the palm of the hand cup the breast For any pockets that cannot be turned out. the officer will isolate the items in the pockets and remove the item by holding the pocket open and
Page 4 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17:33 P.06 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 24 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

pulling the pocket I ining u pward u ntil the i terns can be seen and removed. During any search. officers should avoid placing their hands into any area, which cannot be visually inspected.
7. The officer will run the hands over the shoulders, arms, and under the armpits. Then, the officer with the cup of the hands will feel down each arm to the cuff of the shirt.
a. Using the fingers, the officer will check inside of the waistband.
9. The officer will run the hands over the buttocks and the lower abdominal area.
10. Using the web of the hand, the officer will run the hands around each thigh until the web of the hands meet between the inner thigh and the groin area. Using the back of the hand, the officer will search from the lower abdomen over the buttocks checking for contraband that may be concealed. The officer, keeping their head above their shoulders will run the hands down the inmate's pant leg to the foot of each leg.
11. The officer will have the inmate stand erect and face him/her at a distance of more than an arm's length. The inmate's mouth, nose, ears, hands, feet and between the fingers and toes will be checked. If the inmate has any removable dental work, (i.e., denture, partial denture), have the inmate remove these items for inspection and keep the item in his/her hand.
12. Search all remaining property (i.e., socks, shoes, jacket) the inmate has in his/her possession. All unauthorized items will be placed in the inmate's property for storage. All cigarettes and other contraband will be disposed of according to established procedures.
13. If an inmate has a removable splint, cast, prosthesis, artificial eye, or if an inmate is protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines, the following steps will be taken:
a. Removable splints - have the inmate remove the splint, check the area and the splint, and return splint to the inmate. (This shall be conducted in the presence of a Corrections Health Services [CHS] medical staff member):

24 of 41

Page 5 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17=34 P.O? Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 25 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

25 of 41

b. Cast - use a hand-held metal detector to scan the cast area. A tongue depressor may be used to check a short distance down the cast if necessary;
If more than one finger can be placed between the cast and the skin of the inmate, the inmate will be taken to the clinic. If an item is detected in the cast while conducting the frisk search, the inmate will be taken to the clinic immediately after the frisk search is completed. Medical staff will determine if the inmate should be sent for an x-ray of the cast and/or removal of the item.
c. Prosthesis ~ have the inmate remove the prosthesis, check the prosthesis for contraband and return it to the inmate:
d. Artificial eye - if the inmate has an artificial eye, the inmate will be escorted to the clinic where only medical staff will remove the eye;
e. Upon completion of the frisk search, direct/escort the inmate to an area where he/she cannot commingle with other inmates who have not been frisk searched.
D. CONTRABAND
If during the frisk/strip search process contraband is discovered, it will be processed in accordance with D SOP 18-005, "Inmate Personal Property Control and Inventory," or if during the intake process, in accordance with DSOP 18-006 "Intake Procedures."
E. WHEN TO CONDUCT A STRIP SEARCH
Inmates charged with weapon violations, violent crimes, or possession of controlled substances will be strip searched during the intake process.
Inmates must be strip searched one at a time. All strip searches must be conducted out of the view of persons not conducting the strip search, out of the view of other inmates. and in an area designated for this purpose to provide maximum privacy for the inmate. Prior to the strip search, the area will be checked for contraband.
Upon intake, if the officer believes a felony inmate based on reasonable suspicion, or a misdemeanor inmate based on probable cause. is concealing a weapon,
Page 6 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17=34 P.OS Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 26 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

controlled substance, or contraband, and a frisk search is not sufficient to discover the weapon. controlled substance, or contraband. then the inmate shall be strip searched. This may be based on the officer's familiarity with the inmate's history, conversations with the arresting officer or inmate, or a review of the arrest affidavit. The decision to strip search an inmate shall be made without regard to the inmate's gender. Inmates will not be strip searched randomly or as harassment.
Inmates may also be strip searched under the following conditions:
1. Housed in general population, and there is reasonable belief that the inmate may be in possession of an item of contraband;
2. When a judge at first appearance has found that the person arrested cannot be released either on recognizance or bond and, therefore, must be incarcerated, a strip search shall be performed prior to assignment of the inmate to any housing unit/cell at any departmental facility;
3. Newly transported from other non-departmental correctional facilities as part oft he intake procedures prior to being assigned to any general population unit/cell at any departmental facility;
4. Returning from an unescorled furlough will be strip searched before returning to general inmate population;
5. After the completion of a contact visit;
6. Each trusty returning to a facility from a work detail or assignment;
7. When reasonable suspicion exists that the inmate is suicidal in accordance with D50P 1Z-005, "Recognizing and ;supervising Mentally Ill lnmate;s,Section V_B.2.
F. DOCUMENTATION FOR CONDUCTING A STRIP SEARCH
1. Written authorization must be obtained from the on-duty rear lobby supervisor or other designated on-duty supervisor prior to strip searching an inmate, except when the health and safety of the inmate or others, or the security of the facility, is in immediate jeopardy.

26 of 41

Page 7 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17:35 P.09 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 27 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

2. The rear lobby supervisor or the designated supervisor will record all strip searches conducted on the Intake Strip Search Tracking Authorization Form and the inmate's jail card.
3. The booking desk supervisor or designee will ensure all jail cards are stamped with the strip search authorization stamp prior to the jail card being given to the rear lobby/intake officer for completion during the booking process.
4. The officer conducting the strip search and the authorizing supervisor will complete the strip search authorization section on the inmate's jail card. In the event the authorizing supervisor and or/officer conducting the strip search is not available to complete the strip search authorization section of the jail card, the on-duty supervisor or designated supervisor will record the information from the Intake Strip Search Tracking Authorization Form and complete the area noted for the Recording Supervisor_
5. If the inmate is not strip searched, the rear lobby !intake officer completing the booking process of the inmate shall note this in the strip search authorization section on the inmate's jail card.
6. In the event a strip search is conducted prior to obtaining the on-duty supervisor's written authorization. the officer conducting the search shall generate an MDCR incident report and the reason for proceeding without a supervisor's authorization shall be noted.

G. SPECIFIC STEPS FOR STRIP SEARCHING MALE INMATES
1. There will be no physical contact with the inmate during any strip search, except to check the hair. when necessary. The inmate must not be allowed to eat, drink, or move from place to place during the strip search process;
2. The inmate will be instructed to bend over and vigorously run his fingers through his hair, which should dislodge any matter that may be hidden there. When the officer is satisfied that there is no danger, the officer may examine the inmate's hair;
3. While standing more than an arm's length from the officer, the officer will instruct the inmate to remove all clothing including socks, shoes, etc;

27 of 41

Page 8 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17:35 P.10 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 28 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

28 of 41

4. The inmate will then be instructed to turn around and face the officer. He will then be instructed to place his hands in such a manner that the hands and between the fingers can be inspected:
5. The inmate will be instructed to open his mouth, raise his tongue, and tilt his head back so that his nostrils can be checked. He will be instructed to turn his head from side to side affording the officer the ability to check the inmate's ears for the purpose of detecting contraband. The officer should also conduct a visual assessment at this time to check for blood (flowing or dried) or fluids coming from the inmate's ears. The entire front surface of the inmate will be visually checked;
6. The inmate will be instructed to lift his genitals in such a way that the officer can visually check this area;
7. The officer will instruct the inmate to remove any body piercing objects (nose, tongue, navel, eye, etc.). In the event an inmate is unable to remove a bodypiercing object, he will be examined by the CHS medical staff. In some instances, the CHS staff may determine that a body piercing is bonded and may not be removed;
8. The inmate will be instructed to turn around, and the entire back surface of
the inmate will be visually checked;
9. The inmate will be instructed to bend forward at the waist as far as he can without falling over. He will then be told to reach behind himself with both hands and separate his buttocks for the purpose of exposing any items he may have placed there with the intent to conceal;
10. After returning to a standing position and while still facing away from the officer, the inmate will be instructed to lift each foot independently to display the soles of his feet. He will be instructed to spread his toes so that a visual check can be conducted;
11. All clothing will be inspected by feeling every item. All pockets will be checked. All shoes, shoe linings, heels, soles, etc., will be checked for contraband;
12. The inmate will be allowed to put his clothing back on and will be escorted out of the strip search area to a n a rea where he cannot come in contact with other inmates who have not been strip searched;
Page 9 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17:35 P.11 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 29 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

13. The officer will check the area for any contraband, which might have been disposed of by the inmate.
H. SPECIFIC STEPS FOR STRIP SEARCHING FEMALE INMATES
1. There will be no physical contact with the inmate during any strip search, except to check the hair, when necessary. The inmate must not be allowed to eat, drink, or move from place to place during the strip search process;
2. The inmate will be instructed to bend over and vigorously run her fingers through her hair, which should dislodge any matter that may be hidden in the hair. When the officer is satisfied that there is no danger, the officer may examine the inmate's hair;
3. While standing more than an arm's length from the officer, the inmate will be instructed to remove all clothing including socks, shoes, etc.;
4. The inmate will be instructed to turn around and face the officer. She will be instructed to place her hands in such a manner that the hands and between the fingers can be inspected;
5. The inmate will be instructed to open her mouth, raise her tongue, and tilt her head back so that her nostrils can be checked. She will then be instructed to turn her head from side to side affording the officer the ability to check the inmate's ears for the purpose of detecting contraband. The officer should also conduct a visual assessment at this time to check for blood (flowing or dried) or fluids coming from the inmate's ears. The entire front surface of the inmate will be visually checked;
6. The inmate will be instructed to I ift herb reasts sot hat the a rea under her breasts is exposed;
7. The officer will instruct the inmate to remove any body piercing objects (nose, tongue, navel, eye, etc.). In the event an inmate is unable to remove a bodypiercing object, she will be examined by the CHS medical staff. In some instances, the CHS staff may determine that a body piercing is bonded and may not be removed;
8. The inmate will be instructed to turn around and the entire back surface of the
inmate will be visually checked;

29 of 41

Page 10 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17:36 P.12 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 30 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

9. The inmate will be instructed to squat with the feet apart, then bounce and cough several times to dislodge any hidden contraband. When returning to the standing position, the inmate will be asked to bend forward at the waist as far as she can without falling over. The inmate must reach behind herself with both hands and separate her buttocks for the purpose of exposing any items that she may have placed there with the intent to conceal;
10. While standing and still facing away from the officer, the inmate will be instructed to lift each foot independently to display the soles of her feet. The inmate will be instructed to spread her toes so that a visual check can be conducted;
11. The inmate will be instructed to turn around and face the officer. She will be instructed to place her hands in such a manner that the hands and between the fingers can be inspected;
12. All clothing will be inspected by feeling every item. All pockets will be checked. All footwear, footwear lining, heels, soles, seams, and waistbands, etc., will be thoroughly checked for contraband;
13. The inmate will be instructed to put her clothing back on and will be escorted out of the strip search area to an area where she cannot come in contact with other inmates who have not been strip searched;
14. The officer will check the area for contraband, which might have been disposed of by the inmate.
I. BODY CAVITY SEARCH
The facility supervisor or designee must authorize a body cavity search. All body cavity searches must be done in private and only licensed medical staff shall conduct a body cavity search. The inmate will be kept isolated until the CHS medical staff completes the body cavity search. A body cavity search shall only be made for probable cause, (i.e. when the officer conducting the strip search sees or suspects that the inmate may be concealing an object in a body cavity). The officer will request a body cavity search if it is determined that the inmate is concealing an object and refuses to remove it. An incident report will be generated and approved by the shift supervisor/ commander.

30 of 41

Page 11 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17:36 P.13 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 31 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

J. VISITOR'S SEARCH
All visitors who enter the security perimeter of any Department facility may be subject to a frisk/strip search. For specific procedures see DSDP 11-031 "Searching and Detaining Non-Inmates".
V. CROSS REFERENCES
Departmental Standard Operating Procedure #11-019, "Contraband Detection Procedures."
Departmental Standard Operating Procedure #12-005, "Recognizing and Supervising Mentally Ill Inmates."
Departmental Standard Operating Procedures #11-031, "Searching and Detaining NonInmates."
Departmental Standard Operating Procedure, #18-005 "Intake Personal Property Control and Inventory."
Departmental Standard Operating Procedures #18-006, "Intake Procedures."
Procedural Directive: #D05-012 reference, DSDP #11-022, "Frisk and Strip Search Procedures."
VI. REVOCATION
None.

31 of 41

Page 12 of 13

Rpr 11 2005 17:36 P.14 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 32 of 41

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT

VOLUME NO. 11

D.S.O.P. NO. 11-022

Approved by:

Reviewed by:

Charles J. McRay, Director

Assistant County Attorney

FORMS/SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Department Incident Report Intake Strip Search Tracking Authorization Form

32 of 41

Page 13 of 13

 
 Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 34 of 41
CLAIM FORM

MIAMI-DADE STRIP SEARCH LAW SUIT CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM (HANEY, ET AL. V. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, ET AL.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, SO. DIST. OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION, CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV-JORDAN/BROWN

FILL OUT THIS FORM IF:

(1) YOU ARE A FEMALE AND WERE ARRESTED ON A CHARGE RELATING TO PROSTITUTION BETWEEN MARCH 5, 2000, AND FEBRUARY 8, 2005, AND WERE STRIP SEARCHED AT THE MIAMI-DADE PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CENTER WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE PRIOR TO A FIRST APPEARANCE;

A N D /O R

(2) YOU ARE A FEMALE AND WERE ARRESTED ON A MISDEMEAN OR (OR INFRACTION OR ORDINANCE VIOLATION) NOT INVOLVING VIOLENCE, DRUGS, OR WEAPONS AND WERE STRIP SEARCHED AT THE MIAMI-DADE PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CEN TER OR THE MIAMI-DADE WOM EN’S DETENTION CENTER WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE, PRIOR TO A FIRST APPE ARANCE B ETW EEN M ARCH 5, 2000, AND AUGU ST 11, 2004, (ALL MEMBERS OF THIS CLASS WHO QUALIFY WILL RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF $1,000) UNLESS REDUCED BY 50% FOR HAVING PREVIOUSLY SERVED TIM E IN STATE PRISON;

OR

(3) YOU WERE ARRESTED ON A FELONY OR A CHARGE INVOLVING VIOLENCE, DRU GS OR W EAPON S, AND W ER E STR IP SEA RCHE D, B EFORE YOUR FIRST APPEARANCE, AT A MIAMI-DADE DETENTION CENTER BETWEEN MARCH 5, 2000, TO FEBRUARY 28, 2005, (ALL MEMBERS OF THIS CLASS WHO QUALIFY WILL BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE A PAYM ENT OF $10.00).

You must complete and submit this claim form no later than September 1, 200 5, to qualify for payment from settlement of this class action strip search case against Miami-Dade County and others. If you do not return a com pleted claim form by the due date you will receive no money from the settlement.

CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM

________________________(Bar Code) Name Address City, State, Zip Code Phone #: FL. Driver’s License No.
Social Security Number: Date of Birth:

Claim No._____________________________________ Please enter your correct name, and address here if it does not appear to the left. Name: ______________________________________________ Address:_____________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________

--------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------
W ere you arrested and strip searched prior to first appearance at a M iami-Dade Detention Center at any time between March 5, 2000, and February 28, 2005?

Yes No


If you answered “yes” to the above, or you are unsure of the date, please continue to answer the questions below.

Note: Not all persons strip searched at a Miami-Dade Detention Center during the class period (March 5, 2000 to February 28, 2005) will be entitled to payment. If you were charged with a crime involving drugs, weapons or violence, you will be entitled only to a payment of $10.00 for each pre-first appearance strip search following an arrest during the class period. Eligibility will be based solely on records maintained by the Miami-Dade County Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations.

CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM
34 of 41

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 35 of 41

Use the return envelope (or any other envelope) and mail the completed claim form to: Class Claim Administrator: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

Answer each of the following questions by placing a check in the “yes” or “no” box at the end of the question. The amount of money you receive under this claims process will be based solely on the answers to questions you provide. CAUTION – THESE ANSWERS ARE GIVEN UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY.

Questions

1.

Did you have a significant physical disability (such as scarring, amputation, malformation

or disfigurement) or a mental disability (such as a medically diagnosed psychiatric condition)

at the time of any pre-first appearance strip search?

Yes No


2.

W ere you menstruating during the strip search?



3.

Were you more than two months pregnant during the strip search? If so, did you carry your child

to term? Yes ___ or No ___. If Yes, state name________________ and date of birth___________.



CRIMINAL FRAUD W ILL RESULT IN DENIAL OF YOUR CLAIM.

I DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAW S OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT THE ABOVE IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

DATED: _______________________

SIGNATURE:__________________________________________________________

The information given here is private and will remain confidential, subject to the provisions of Florida’s Public Records Act, which may require the disclosure of information provided. If you have any questions about this lawsuit, write to the Claims Administrator at Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thom asville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308, or visit the website at www.___________________________.

THIS CLAIM FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND RETURNED WITH A POSTMARK NO LATER THAN SEPTEMBER 1, 2005.

If you would like your settlement check mailed to an address other than that on the first page of the Claim Form, provide it here: (Address if different) to which settlement check should be mailed:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

CLASS ACTION CLAIM FORM
35 of 41

Page 2 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 36 of 41

EXHIBIT 4
36 of 41

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 37 of 41 NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

If you were arrested and booked at a Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and strip-searched before your first appearance between March 5, 2000 and February 28, 2005,
you may be entitled to monetary compensation under a class action settlement.

There is presently pending a lawsuit filed as a class action in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division. The parties have proposed a Settlement which, if it receives final approval, will provide that certain persons subject to prefirst appearance strip searches at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Centers will receive money. Records of the M iami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitations Department show that you may have been subjected to a strip search after an arrest and before your first appearan ce. T o receive monetary compe nsation in this pending settlement, you must fill out and mail a claim form.
If You Wish to Claim Monetary Compensation, Obtain, Fill out and Mail the Claim Form as Soon as Possible but No Later than September 1, 2005.
For more information, please read this notice.

PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE NOTICE CAREFULLY. YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE A PAYMENT.

There is now pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, an action filed as a class action on behalf of persons allegedly illegally strip searched by Miami-Dade County employees between March 5, 2000, and February 28, 2005. A Stipulation of Settlement, approved preliminarily by the Court, defines the class and sub-classes included in this settlement as follows:

a.

All females arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or

weapons who were transported to the Wo men’s Detention Center and strip searched prior to their first appearance,

except persons strip searched at the Women’s Detention Center on “probable cause” reported in writing on an

incident form; and

b.

All females arrested on charges relating to prostitution from March 5, 20 00, until February 8, 2005, when the

practice of strip searching all persons charged with prostitution was officially terminated; and

c.

All persons arrested a felony or on charges relating to violence, drugs or weapons who were strip searched, prior to

their first appearances, without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a

supervising officer from March 5, 200 0, until February 28, 2005 , the date when the policy of strip searching

detainees prior to obtaining a written authorization was terminated.

You have received this Notice either because Miami-Dade Co unty records indicate that you may be in the class or you contacted the Claims Administrator. W hether or not you qualify as a class member will be based solely upon the Miami-Dade Co unty records. If these records do not contain your name and show you to be within the definition of the class, you will not qualify.

This Notice is to inform you that a settlement has been proposed in this action and that, as a potential class member, your rights may be affected by the settlement. This Notice also summarizes the terms and effect of the proposed settlement, what you can do to participate in it, how you may obtain money under the settlement and what you must do if you choose to exclude yourself from the class.

SU M MA RY OF TH E PR OPO SED TER M S

A Settlement Agreement (“Settlement”) was entered into after intensive negotiations between the parties, conducted with the assistance of a third party mediator. The Parties are requesting that the Court approve the Settlement.

A. Parties to the Settlement.

The parties to the Settlement are the Plaintiffs named in Haney, et al v. M iami-Dade County, et al., United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516-Civ Jordan/Brown filed on behalf of themselves and the Settlement Class, and various defendants including the Miami-Dade County and Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitations Department. Counsel for the class are Mark E. Merin, The Law Office of Mark E. Merin, 2001 P Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; Andrew C. Schwartz, Casper, Meadows & Schwartz, 2121 N California Boulevard, Suite 1020, Walnut Creek, CA 94596; and Randall C. Berg, Jr., Florida Justice Institute, Inc., 2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-2310.

37NoOTf I4C1E OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page 1 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 38 of 41

B. Defendants Do Not Admit Any Liability

Plaintiffs allege that the acts and/or omissions which are the subject of the claims covered by this action (strip searches) violated various state and federal laws. Defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing and deny any liability to plaintiffs or to any other class members. The p arties have agreed that, in order to avoid long and costly litigation, this controversy should be settled pursuant to the terms of the settlement as described in this Notice, subject to the approval of the Court.

C.

M onetary Terms of Settlement

1.

Payment of Claims

Defendants shall pay a maximum of $4,550,000.00 under the terms of the settlement which will referred to as the Class Fund.

In addition to funds reserved for the payment of Class Claims, Class Counsel will receive, subject to approval of the Court, a fee of $1,000,000.00 as attorney’s fees and up to $100,000.00 for reimbursement of itemized costs and expenses. Up to $300,000.00 will be available for the costs of claim administration.

2.

Payment to Representative Plaintiffs

Under the terms of the settlement, representative plaintiffs and those who had entered into retainer agreements with the class counsel will receive a total of $300,000.00 to be allocated among them.

3.

Payment to Class Members Who File Claims

Mo ney for the class will be paid out based on a distribution formula, subject to payments being proportionately reduced if the total value of verified claims exceeds $4,550,000.00. Pursuant to that distribution formula all women arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons, who were transported to the W omen’s Detention Center and strip searched there prior to their first appearance will receive a minimum of $1,000.00 (One Thousand Dollars) (subject to possible reduction) and increments of $500.00 based on answers to questions on a claim form to be submitted under penalty of perjury. For each qualifying strip search following a fresh arrest during the claims period, each such claimant will receive an additional $1,000.00.

All women arrested on charges relating to prostitution during the period from March 5, 2000, to February 8, 2005, will receive a minimum of $1,000.00 (subject to reduction) for each strip search prior to first appearance during the claims period and additional increments based on answers to claim form questions to be submitted under penalty of perjury.

All persons arrested on charges relating to violence, drugs, or weapons who were strip searched, prior to their first appearance, without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a supervising officer during the period from M arch 5, 2000, to February 28, 2005, will be entitled to receive a payment of $10.00, if they timely submit a claim form. Read the rest of this Notice to find out how to get a claim form.

D.

Strip Search Policy

Defendants will not strip search persons prior to first appearance, unless prior written authorization for the strip search has been obtained from a supervising officer. Defendants will not strip search, prior to first appearances, persons charged with offenses relating to prostitution or those arrested on infractions or ordinance violations or misdemeanors not involving violence, drugs, or weapons, without reasonable suspicion that a strip search would be productive of contraband or weapons.

E.

Your O ptions as a Class Memb er

1.

Be Bound by, and Participate in the Settlement.

To qualify for a payment, you must send in a completed Claim Form to the Claims Administrator. If you receive a notice by First Class Mail, a Claim Form will be included in the notice package. You can also get a Claim Form by: (1) calling this toll free number: [800-Number]; (2) visiting the web site, [web site]; or (3) writing the Claims Administrato r at: Ha ney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims A dmin istrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

You have until September 1, 2005, to submit a claim or to opt -out of the settlement. Mail your completed Claim Form to: Ha ney , et al. Strip Sea rch C lass Action, c/o Claims Ad ministrato r, Settlemen t Service s, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

38 of 41
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page 2 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 39 of 41
Remem ber, if you do not submit a Claim Form, you cannot get a payment. If you submit a claim form, you will be bound by the settlement and receive money (if you are a class member). If you do not submit a claim form but do not exclude yourself from the class (as explained in the next paragraph), you will be bound by the terms of the Settlement and dismissal entered in this case, but you will not receive any money.

By participating in this Settlement you will be waiving all your rights to all claims up to and including February 28, 2005, related to strip searches at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Centers, even those of which you are not presently aware.

2.

Exclude Yourself From the Class

You do not have to take part in the Settlement or be a member of the class. This is called “excluding” yourself. If you exclude yourself, you can not get a payment and you can not object to the Settlement. Any Court orders will not apply to you. To exclude yourself, you must sign a request for exclusion letter that states that you want to be excluded from Haney, et al. v. Miami-Dade County, et. al., United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516CIV Jordan/Brown. Your exclusion letter must be mailed and postmarked before September 1, 2005, to: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thom asville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308.

If you do not follow these instructions properly, you will lose your right to exclude yourself. If you exclude yourself, you cannot get any money from the Settlement of this case and you cannot tell the Court you do not like the Settlement (which is called “objecting”). If you exclude yourself, you are no longer part of the class or the Settlement. But you can sue or be part of a different lawsuit about the claims in this case.

E.

Fairness Hearing and Process for Objections.

A fairness hearing will be held on September 22, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, 301 N. Miami Avenue, Courtroom 8, Miami, Florida. If you are a class member and do not exclude yourself, you can tell the Court you do not like the Settlement or some part of it at this hearing. This is called objecting to the Settlement. For example, you can say you do not think the Settlement is fair or adequate. The Court will consider your views.

To object, you must send a letter to the court that contains all of the following:

1.

The name and title of the lawsuit, Haney, et al. v. Miami-Dade County, et al., United States District Court, Southern

District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516 CIV Jordan/Brown;

2.

A statement of each objection you have and the facts that support the objections;

3.

A description of any law or case supporting the objections;

4.

A statement on whether or not you or your lawyer will ask to appear at the Fairness Hearing to talk about your

objections, and, if so, how long you will need to present your objections; and

5.

Copies of any documents you or your lawyer will present at the Fairness Hearing.

At the hearing on the proposed settlement, the Court may schedule further hearings without further notice to the class. The matters considered at such future hearings may include, but shall not be limited to, further consideration of the fairness and adequacy of the proposed settlement, the determination of the settlement of individual claims filed by class members, consideration of the request for attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses to class counsel, and the form and entry of the final judgment of dismissal in the event the proposed settlement is approved by the court.

Individually, or through counsel, any class member has the right to object to the proposed Settlement as a whole, to the amount of attorneys’ fees and costs of Class Counsel, or to any portion of either. ANY SUCH OBJECTIONS MUST BE FILED IN WRITING ON OR BEFORE SEPTEM BER 1, 2005, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, MIAMI DIVISION, 301 N. MIAMI AVENUE, COURTROOM 8, MIAMI, FLORIDA, ATTENTION: CLERK, RE: HANEY, ET AL. V. M IAM I-DADE COU NT Y, ET AL., CASE NO . 04-20516-CIV JORD AN/B ROW N. If you wish to appear and p resent your objections at the fairness hearing, you must also submit a Notice of Intention to Appear that identifies the case, contains your name and address, and explains the reason the appearance is desired. The Notice of Intention to Appear and any objections must be filed with the Court on or before Septemb er 1, 2 005 . You may be represented by your own attorney. If you are to be represented by an attorney at the hearing, his or her name, address and telephone number must be included in the Notice of Intention to Appear as well.

39 of 41
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page 3 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 40 of 41
A co py of the Statem ent of O bjec tion and/or No tice of Intention to App ear must also b e mailed to: Florida Justice Institute, Inc., 2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-2310 and Dade County Attorney’s Office, Metro Dade Center, 111 NW 1st St, Suite 2 810 , Miami, FL 331 28-1 993 AT TN : Jeffrey P . Ehrlich.

F.

How to Obtain Further Information

For additional information regarding the Settlement and Claim Form, or a copy of the Settlement Agreement, Claim Form or Class Counsel’s A pplication for Attorney’s Fees, you o r your counsel should contact: Ha ney , et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, Settlement Services, Inc., 2032-D Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308. You may also check the Class Administrato r’s website at [we b add ress] or call [800 N umber]. You may also obtain detailed information about the case by examining the Court file located in the office of the Clerk of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, 301 N. Miami Avenue, Courtroom 8, Miami, Florida.

G.

Court Approval.

Although the C ourt has reviewed the proposed Settlement, no de cision has been, or will be, reached by the Cou rt, until the Fairness Hearing. This Notice does not indicate that the Court has approved the Settlement.

40 of 41
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Page 4 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-20516-AJ Document 53-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/13/2005 Page 41 of 41 PROSTITUTION CHARGE LIST

Statute

Description

16-16

PROSTITUTION/MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE

21-36(A) SOLICITATION OF BUSINESS/SIDEWALK/COUNTY ORDINANCE

21-42

OBSCENE MATERIAL/PERFORMANCE VIOLATION/COUNTY ORD

21-81(A) LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS BEHAVIOR/COUNTY ORDINANCE

21-81(A) PROSTITUTION/COUNTY ORDINANCE

30-12

OBSTRUCT STREET BY SOLICITING/COUNTY ORDINANCE

30-12

OBSTRUCT STREET BY SOLICITING/MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE

316.2045(2) OBSTRUCTING TRAFFIC/SOLICI W/O PERMIT/PEDESTRIAN

384.24

SEXUALLY TRANSMISSIBLE DISEASES/UNLAWFUL ACTS

384.24(2) HIV INFECTED/SEX W/ANOTHER/UNINFORMED/ATTEMPT

46-10

PROSTITUTION ORDINANCE/MIAMI ORDINANCE

480.01(2)(C) MASSAGE PARLOR/IMPROPER FACILITIES

480.02(1)(A) MASSAGE/PRACTICE WITHOUT CERTIFICATION

480.047

MASSAGE/PRACTICE WITHOUT A LICENSE

480.047

MASSAGE/PRACTICE WITHOUT A LICENSE

796.01

HOUSE OF ILL FAME/KEEP

796.06

PROSTITUTION/RENT SPACE TO BE USED FOR

796.06

PROSTITUTION/RENT SPACE TO BE USED FOR

796.06

PROSTITUTION/RENT SPACE TO BE USED FOR

796.07(2)(A) PROSTITUTION/MAINTAIN A HOUSE OF

796.07(2)(B) PROSTITUTION/OFFER TO SECURE ANOTHER FOR

796.07(2)(C) PROSTITUTION/RECEIVE ANOTHER FOR

796.07(2)(D) PROSITUTION/DIRECT ANOTHER TO PLACE OF

796.07(2)(E) PROSTITUTION/COMMIT, ENGAGE IN

796.07(2)(E) PROSTITUTION/COMMIT, ENGAGE IN/SECOND CONVICTION

796.07(2)(E) PROSTITUTION/SECOND VIOLATION

796.07(2)(F) PROSTITUTION/PROCURE/SOLICIT/INTICE

796.07(2)(F) PROSTITUTION/SOLICIT ANOTHER TO COMMIT

796.07(2)(G) PROSTITUTION/ENTERING, REMAINING IN A PLACE OF

796.07(2)(H) PROSTITUTION/AID OR ABET

796.07(2)(I) PROSTITUTION/PURCHASE SERVICES

796.07(3)(A) PROSTITUTION/COMMIT, ENGAGE IN

796.07(3)(B) PROSTITUTION/SOLICIT ANOTHER TO COMMIT

796.07(3)(C) PROSTITUTION/ENTERING, REMAINING IN A PLACE OF

796.07(3)(D) PROSTITUTION/AID OR ABET

796.07(3)(E) PROSTITUTION/PURCHASE SERVICES

796.07(4)(C) PROSTITUTION/3RD OR SUBSEQUENT VIOLATION

796.08

PROSTITUTION/SEXUALLY TRANSMISSIBLE DISEASE

798.02

LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS BEHAVIOR

800.02

UNNATURAL AND LASCIVIOUS ACT

800.03

INDECENT EXPOSURE

Type L C C C C C L M M M L M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M F M M M M

41 of 41

1

4/11/2005

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT C MIAMI DMSION
CASE NO.

JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, and JAMIE LOUGHNER, individually and on behalf of a Class of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,
Vo

CLASS ACTION COMPLA

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY; CHARLES J.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED:,

MCRAY, individually and in his official

capacity as Acting Director of the MIAMI-

DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND

REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT,

CAPTAIN B. FULLER, Individually and in

her official capacity as the Facility

Supervisor of the Women’s Detention Center,

ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO,

individually and in his official capacity as

Facility Supervisor of the Pre-Trial Detention

Center; and MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION

DEPARTMENT OFFICERS DOES 1

THROUGH 150;

Defendants.

Plaintiffs, individually, and as representatives of a class of persons similarly situated, sue Defendants and allege:
INTRODUCTION Female arrestees in MIAMI-DADE COUNTY are routinely subjected to dehumanizing invasive strip and visual body cavity searches upon arrival at the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial

Detention Center and the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center even before they have been arraigned on any charges despite such blanket strip searches violating state and federal law.
The blanket strip searches are particularly reprehensible as they appear, upon information and belief, to be reserved only for females.
Unless enjoined and restricted, upon information and belief, Defendants will maintain their practice of illegally subjecting pre-arraignment female arrestees charged with non-violent, nondrug and non-weapons related offenses to illegal strip and visual body cavity searches condemned in the Eleventh Federal Circuit since at least 2001. [Wilson v. Jones, 251 F.3d 1340 (1 lm Cir. 2000).1
JURISDICTION 1. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1988, and the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Jurisdiction is founded upon 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1341(3) and (4) and the aforementioned statutory and constitutional provisions.
PARTIES 2. Plaintiffs, including JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, and JAMIE LOUGHNER, and all those similarly situated, are, and at all material times herein, were arrested within the period beginning four (4) years before November 21, 2003, and continuing to this date, and were subjected to strip and visual body cavity searches at the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center. 3. Defendant MIAMI-DADE COUNTY is, and at all material times referred to herein, was, a political division of the state of Florida, that maintained or permitted an official policy or
2

custom or practice causing or permitting the occurrence of the types of wrongs complained of herein, which wrongs damaged Plaintiffs as herein alleged.
4. Defendant MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, through the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitation Department, manages and operates the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, where the wrongs complained of herein occurred.
5. Defendant CHARLES J. MCRAY is, and at all material times referred to herein, was the acting director of the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitation Department, responsible for administering the jail facilities in which the wrongs complained of herein occurred, and for making, overseeing, and implementing the policies, practices, and customs challenged herein relating to the operation of the County’s jail facilities. He is sued in his individual and official capacities.
6. Defendant ACTING CAPTAIN M. ALADRO is the Facility Supervisor at the MiamiDade County Pre-Trial Detention Center, responsible for making, overseeing, and implementing the policies, practices and customs challenged herein relating to the operation of the Pre-Trial Detention Center. He is sued in his individual and official capacities.
7. Defendant CAPTAIN M. Fuller is the Facility Supervisor at the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, responsible for making, overseeing, and implementing the policies, practices and customs challenged herein relating to the operation of the Pre-Trial Detention Center. She is sued in her individual and official capacities.
8. Defendants MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT OFFICERS DOE 1 through DOE 150, sued herein by their fictitious names, are
-3-

all Correctional Officers who, as part of their duties at the Pretrial Detention Center, subjected Plaintiffs to pre-arraignment strip and visual body cavity searches without first having, and recording in writing, a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons. They are sued in their individual capacity.
9. At all material times mentioned herein, each of the Defendants was acting under the color of law, to wit, under color of statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs and usages of the state of Florida, the COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE, and/or the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitation Department.
FACTS A. JUDITH HANEY 10. Plaintiff, JUDITH HANEY is, and at all times material hereto was, a resident of the city of Oakland, California. 11. On or about November 21, 2003, Plaintiff JUDITH HANEY was sitting on the sidewalk across from the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center, along with three other women and three men, when they were arrested allegedly for "failing to disburse" and taken across the street to the Detention Center to be booked. Plaintiff HANEY and the other women arrested were separated from the males and, one at a time, taken to a separate area where each woman was made fully to disrobe, placing each of her items of clothing on a table, then to bend over, exposing her anus and vaginal area for inspection by Defendants and then made to squat and to "hop like a bunny" three times before being permitted to put her own clothes back on. 12. When PlaintiffHANE¥ was naked, Defendant JANE DOE 1 noticed a naval piercing and ordered Plaintiff HANEY to remove it. When Plaintiff HANEY was unable to remove the
-4-

navel ring, JANE DOE 1 obtained a wire cutter and clipped it off. During the entire time Plaintiff HANEY was standing naked in an area with the door open and with people passing by who could freely observe her.
13. Over the next several hours, Plaintiff HANEY and others were transported in paddy wagons to various locations finally arriving at the Turner-Gilford-Knight Miami Detention Center (hereinafter referred to as "TGK") where she was again processed and held in various holding tanks until she was released after approximately 35 hours.
14. On or about February 5, 2004, all charges against Plaintiff HANEY and others arrested with her were dismissed.
15. Plaintiff HANEY is a 50 year old management employee of Genetech Corporation. She was humiliated and embarrassed by being subjected to the aforementioned visual body cavity search and by being required to stand, naked, for any passerby to observe. She suffered mental and emotional distress as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions in depriving her of rights secured to her by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
16. Miami, Miami-Dade County, and the State of Florida, are aggressively seeking to have the City of Miami designated as the host city for the headquarters of the Free Trade Area of the America’s (hereinafter referred to as "FTAA"). If Miami is so designated, it is likely that Plaintiff HANEY will again demonstrate against its trade policies, will again be arrested, and will again be subjected to the unconstitutional strip and body cavity searches herein alleged.
B. LIAT MAYER 17. Plaintiff LIAT MAYER is, and at all times material hereto, was a resident of
-5-

Brooklyn, New York. 18. On or about November 21,2003, PlaintiffMAYER was seated on the sidewalk across
from Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center with three other women, including JUDITH HANEY, and three men, when they were arrested allegedly for "failing to disburse" and taken across the street to the Detention Center to be booked.
19. Plaintiff MAYER and the other women with whom she was arrested were separated from the males and, one at a time, taken to a separate area where each women was made fully to disrobe, placing each of her items of clothing on the table, then to bend over, exposing her anus and vaginal area for inspection by Defendants and then made to squat and to "hop like a bunny" three times before being permitted to put her own clothes back on.
20. While Plaintiff MAYER was naked, Defendant JANE DOE 2, left the door to the area where the search was being conducted open so that Plaintiff MAYER could be and was observed naked as people passed by and freely observed her.
21. Over the next several hours, Plaintiff MAYER and others were transported in paddy wagons to various locations around Miami and finally delivered to TGK where she was again processed and held in various holding tanks until being released approximately 35 hours later.
22. On or about February 5, 2004, all charges against Plaintiff MAYER were dismissed. 23. Plaintiff MAYER is a student who was humiliated, embarrassed and suffered mental and emotional distress as a result of being subjected to the aforementioned visual body cavity search and by being required to stand, naked, for any passerby to observe. She suffered these and other damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions in depriving her of rights secured to her by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
-6-

24. As a result of being subjected to the strip and visual body cavity searches complained of herein, each of the Plaintiffs suffered physical, mental and emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and the violation of due process of law and federal constitutional rights, and is entitled to recover damages according to proof.
25. Miami, Miami-Dade County, and the State of Florida, are aggressively seeking to have the City of Miami designated as the host city for the headquarters of the FTAA. If Miami is so designated, it is likely that Plaintiff MAYER will again demonstrate against its trade policies, will again be arrested, and will again be subjected to the unconstitutional strip and body cavity searches herein alleged.
C. JAMIE LOUGHNER 26. Plaintiff JAMIE LOUGHNER is thirty-nine (39) years of age, and at all times material hereto was, a resident of Arlington, Virginia. 27. On or about November 20, 2003, Plaintiff LOUGHNER was protesting at the Free Trade Area of the America’s (FTAA) talks near the Hotel Inter-Continental by holding a sign in an area reserved for protesters when a dispute arose between her and two police officers concerning her right to peacefully protest. She was arrested and later charged with two misdemeanors, resisting arrest without violence and failure to obey a lawful order. Plaintiff LOUGHNER was then taken to TGK where she was given a pat down search. 28. Two days later, on Saturday, November 22, 2003, Plaintiff LOUGHNER was transported from TGK to the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, along with seven (7) other women. 29. Upon arrival at the Women’s Detention Center, Plaintiff LOUGHNER was placed
7

in one of the cubicles found near the entrance area. Plaintiff LOUGHNER was told to fully disrobe and placed her clothes on a seat. She was then told while fully nude to bend over, exposing her anus and vaginal area for inspection by Defendants and then told to squat, cough and then to bend over and spread her buttocks and vagina (hereinafter "privates") for a visual inspection. She was then told to cough again while bent over with her privates pointed at the officer, and to "open up [privates] wider" and to "shake it."
30. This strip and body cavity search procedure occurred with two guards present, one who gave Plaintiff LOUGHNER instructions and inspected her privates, and the other who witnessed the strip search procedure. Plaintiff LOUGHNER was then allowed to put her own clothes back on.
31. Plaintiff LOUGHNER could see one of the other women detainees in the cubicle opposite her during the entire strip search procedure.
32. Plaintiff LOUGHNER was released from Jail November 25, 2003. Her criminal charges were later dropped and nolle prossed, and have not been refiled.
33. The strip search and body cavity exam Plaintiff LOUGHNER experienced was humiliating and embarrassing, and left her mortified.
34. Plaintiff LOUGHNER has suffered mental and emotional distress as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions in depriving her of rights secured to her by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
35. Miami, Miami-Dade County, and the State of Florida, are aggressively seeking to have the City of Miami designated as the host city for the headquarters of the FTAA. If Miami is so designated, it is likely that Plaintiff LOUGHNER will again demonstrate against its trade
-8-

policies, will again be arrested, and will again be subjected to the unconstitutional strip and body cavity searches herein alleged.
CLASS CLAIMS 36. The named Plaintiffs bring this suit as a class action, pursuant to the provisions of Rule 23(b)(2) & (3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for injunctive and declaratory relief on behalf of a class of all persons similarly situated. 37. The class of Plaintiffs consists of all women who, during the period beginning four (4) years before November 21, 2003, and continuing to this date, were subjected by Defendants to pre-arraignment strip and visual body cavity searches at the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center, the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, or any other jail facility operated by Defendant Miami-Dade County, without Defendants having, and recording in writing, a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons. 38. The Plaintiff class consists of an unknown but large number of individuals, numbering in the thousands, so that joinder of all members is impracticable. 39. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that Defendants have the ability to identify all such similarly situated Plaintiffs, specifically those who, while in Defendants’ custody at any time after November 21, 2000, were subjected to strip and/or visual body cavity searches prior to arraignment without Defendants first having, and recording, a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches would be productive of contraband or weapons. 40. There are questions of fact common to the class including, but not limited to: (1)
-9-

where Defendants routinely subject all females arrested to visual body cavity searches prior to arraignment if they intend such persons to be housed in the Pretrial Detention Center; (2) whether only females - not males - are subjected to the visual body cavity search at the Pretrial Detention Center; (3) whether persons are subjected to visual body cavity searches prior to arraignment without their being any particularized reasonable suspicion, based on specific or articulable facts, to believe any particular arrestee has concealed drugs, weapons, and/or contraband in bodily cavities which could be detected by means of a visual body cavity search; (4) whether the visual body cavity searches are conducted in an area of privacy so that the searches cannot be observed by persons not participating in the searches, or whether the visual body cavity searches are conducted in areas where they may be observed by persons not participating in the searches; and (5) whether the visual body cavity searches are reasonably related to Defendants’ penalogical interest to maintain the security of the Pretrial detention facility and whether or not there are less intrusive methods for protecting any such interest.
41. There are questions of law common to the class, including, but not limited to: (1) whether Defendants may perform visual body cavity searches on persons prior to their arraignment without particularized reasonable suspicion, based on specific or articulable facts, to believe any particular arrestee has concealed drugs, weapons and/or contraband, which would likely be discovered by a visual body cavity search; (2) whether Defendants may perform visual body cavity searches on females when they do not subject males to similar searches; (3) whether Defendants may perform visual body cavity searches on persons without first reasonably relating the use of the visual body cavity search to Defendants’ penalogical interest to maintain the security of the Pretrial Detention Center and determining if there is a less intrusive method to
-10-

protect that interest; (4) whether visual body cavity searches may be conducted in areas where the search can be observed by people not participating in the search without violating Plaintiff’s federal constitutional rights; and (5) whether or not Defendants’ strip search policy and procedure is in accordance with the federal constitution.
42. The claims of the representative Plaintiffs are typical of the class. Plaintiffs were searched, prior to arraignment, without reasonable suspicion that a strip or visual body cavity search would produce drugs, weapons or contraband (and without the facts supporting any such suspicion being articulated in a supervisor approved document). Representative Plaintiffs have the same interests and suffered the same type of injuries as all of the other class members. Plaintiffs’ claims arose because of Defendants’ policy, practice, and custom of subjecting arrestees to strip and visual body cavity searches before arraignment without having, and recording in writing, a reasonable suspicion that the search would be productive of contraband or weapons. Plaintiffs’ claims are based upon the same legal theories as the claims of the class members. Each class member suffered actual damages as a result of being subjected to a visual body cavity search. The actual damages suffered by representative Plaintiffs are similar in type and amount to the actual damages suffered by each class member.
43. The representative Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the class interest. Plaintiffs’ interests are consistent with and not antagonistic to the interests of the class. They have a strong personal interest in the outcome of this action and have no conflicts of interest with members of the Plaintiff class. The named Plaintiffs were all subjected to strip and visual body cavity searches without legal justification. As long as the policies, practices and customs of the Defendants continue to permit dehumanizing invasive strip and visual body cavity searches, the
-11-

named Plaintiffs, and the class they represent, are and will remain at high risk of being subjected to searches in clear violation of established constitutional rights.
44. The named Plaintiffs are represented by experienced counsel who specialize in civil rights litigation.
45. The prosecutions of separate actions by individual members of the class would create a risk that inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the class would establish incompatible standards of conduct for the parties opposing the class.
46. The prosecutions of separate actions by individual members of the class would create a risk of inconsistent adjudications with respect to individual members of the class which would, as a practical matter, substantially impair or impede the ability of the other members of the class to protect their interests.
47. The Defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to the class, thereby making appropriate the final injunctive or declaratory relief with respect to the class as a whole.
48. A class action is superior to all other available methods for the fair and equitable adjudication of the controversy between the parties. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that the interests of members of the class in individually controlling the prosecution of a separate action is low in that most class members would be unable individually to prosecute any action at all. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that most members of the class will not be able to find counsel to represent them. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that it is desirable to concentrate all litigation in one forum because all of the claims arise in the same location. It will promote judicial efficiency to resolve the common questions of law and fact in one form, rather than in multiple courts.
-12-

COUNT ONE (Violation of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution
on Behalf of Plaintiffs and All Persons Similarly Situated) 49. The strip and visual body cavity searches to which Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated were subjected were performed pursuant to policies, practices, and customs of named Defendants and the individual correctional officers sued herein by the fictitious names DOEs 1 through 150. 50. The searches complained of herein were performed without regard to the nature of the alleged offenses for which Plaintiffs had been arrested, without regard to whether or not Plaintiffs were eligible for prompt release and without regard to whether or not Plaintiffs were eligible for and/or were released on their own recognizance. Furthermore, the searches complained of herein were performed without Defendants having a reasonable belief that the Plaintiffs so searched possessed weapons or contraband or that there existed facts supporting a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches would produce contraband, and those facts being articulated and recorded in a supervisor-approved document. 51. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereupon allege, that Defendants routinely follow their policy, practice, and custom of requiring pre-arraignment female detainees, including those processed at the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and the Miami-Dade County Women’s Detention Center, to strip naked and to submit to visual body cavity searches without having, and recording in writing, a particularized reasonable suspicion that the searches will be productive of contraband or weapons. 52. In searching the Plaintiffs as alleged, Defendant DOEs acted in accordance with the policy, practice and customs of Defendants MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, MCRAY, ALADRO and
- 13-

FULLER. 53. Strip and body cavity searches, as alleged in this Complaint, are done as a matter of
routine, and are permitted and encouraged, in accordance with the established policies, practices and customs of Defendant, Miami-Dade County.
54. Defendants MCRAY, ALADRO and FULLER facilitate, encourage, and acquiesce in the behavior of their subordinates, who routinely conduct strip and visual body cavity searches of females, as alleged in this Complaint.
55. Individual named Defendants herein are personally responsible for the promulgation and continuation of the strip search policy, practice, and custom pursuant to which Plaintiffs herein and all those similarly situated, were subjected to the searches complained of herein.
56. Defendants’ policies, practices, and customs regarding the strip and visual body cavity searches complained of herein violated Plaintiffs’ rights under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, and violated said Plaintiffs’ rights to due process and privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment, and directly and proximately damaged Plaintiffs as herein alleged, entitling Plaintiffs to recover damages for said constitutional violation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for relief as hereunder appears. COUNT TWO
(Violation of Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, on Behalf of Plaintiffs and All Persons Similarly Situated)
57. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and on that basis allege that Defendants, pursuant to policy and procedure, discriminate against women by selecting female pretrial arrestees for strip and visual body cavity search but do not subject males arrested for similar crimes to these
- 14-

humiliating and invasive unconstitutional strip searches. 58. By selecting females for strip and visual body cavity searches only, Defendants
discriminate against Plaintiff on the basis of their sex and deny to them the equal protection of the laws guaranteed to them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
59. Defendants’ policies, practices, and customs regarding subjecting female pretrial arrestees to strip and visual body cavity searches while not requiring male pretrial arrestees to undergo the same or similar procedure violated Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment right to the equal protection of the laws and directly and proximately damaged Plaintiffs as herein alleged, entitling Plaintiffs to recover damages for said constitutional violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in addition to other damages.
Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for relief as hereunder appears. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
A. For declaratory and injunctive relief declaring illegal and enjoining, preliminarily and permanently, Defendants’ policies, practices, and customs of subjecting female pre-arraignment detainees to strip and visual body cavity searches without having and recording in writing a reasonable suspicion that such searches would be productive of contraband or weapons;
B. For declaratory and injunctive relief declaring illegal and enjoining, preliminarily and permanently, the policy of selectively subjecting female pre-arraignment detainees to strip and visual body cavity searches while not so subjecting male pre-arralgnment detainees to such searches;
C. Certification of this action as a class action, designation of Plaintiffs as class representatives and counsel as class counsel;
-15-

D. For compensatory, general, and special damages for each representative and for each

member of the class of Plaintiffs, as against all Defendants;

E. Exemplary damages as against all of the individual Defendants in an amount sufficient

to deter and to make an example of those Defendants;

F. Attorneys’ fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988; and

G. The cost of this suit and such other relief as the court finds just and proper.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Plaintiffs demand trial by jury as to all issues triable as a right before a jury.

Dated: March 5, 2004

Respectfully submitted,

Mark E. Merin, Esq. Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild, Esq. Law Office of Mark E. Merin 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 916/443-6911 - Telephone 916/447-8336 - Facsimile mark~,markmerin.com - E-mail

Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. Casper, Meadows & Schwartz 2121 N California Boulevard, Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 947-1147 - Telephone (925) 947-1131 - Facsimile schwartz~,cmslaw.com - E-mail

Randall C. Berg, Jr., Esq. Peter M. Siegel, Esq.
Florida Justice Institute, Inc. 2870 Wachovia Financial Center 200 South Biscayne Blvd.
Miami, FL 33131-2310 305/358-2081 - Telephone 305/358-0910 - Facsimile rcberg(~,bellsouth.net - E-Mail

-16-

I-IA NEY~.ompla5.wpd

Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
Mark E. Merin, Esq. SBN 043849~

~Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Haec Vice filed contemporaneously with this Complaint.
-17-

JS ~ trey. o3/99)

CIVIL COVER SHEET

Tl~e JS44 civil cover sheet and the Information c Ined herein neither replace nor suPplement the 1 and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by lOCal rul~. ~f court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conf,..,ice of the United states in September 1974, Is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of Initiating the civil docket sheet. ISEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.)

JUDITH HANEY, LIAT MAYER, and JAMIE LOUGHNER, individually and on behalf of a class of all others, etc.
(b) COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF A ameda

MIAMI-DA~E 6~4.1NTY,’~@I~ a .~;’,
(IN LK.S.

(C) ATZ[DRNEYS (R~, N~ME, ADDRESS, AND TE~EPHO’NI: U

ATTORNEYS {IF KNOWN)

Randall C. Be~, Jr., Florida JusUce Ins~tute, Inc., 2~ Sc ~ B~s~vne

Boulevard, su~e 2870, M~a~, FIOrl~a ~i~q - (SO5) ~5B-2( ~i

ID) CIRCLE COUNTY WHERE ACTION AROSE: (~MONROE, BROWARD, PALM BEACH, MARTIN, ST. LUCIE, INDIAN RIVER, OKEECHOBEE, HIGHLANDS

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION
1 U.S. Government Plaintiff
2 U.S. Government Defendant

(PLACE AN X IN ONE BOX ONLY)
X~ Federal Question (U.S. Government NOt a Party)
4 Diversity (Indicate Citizenship of Parties In Item Ill)

IlL CITIZRI~HIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES

(PLACE AN X IN ONE BOX

(For Diversity Cases Only)

FOR PLAINTIFF AND ONE BOX FOR DEFENDANT)

Citizen of This State

PTF DEF D1 ~1

Citizen of Another State o 2 ~ 2

Citizen or Subject of a ~ 3 ~ 3 Foreign Country

PTF DEF

Incorporated or Principal Place ~ 4 D 4

of Business in This State

Incorporated and Principal Race D 5 D 5

of Business in Another State

Foreign Nation

D6 ~6

IV. CAUSE OF ACTION (CITE THE U.S. CIVIL STATUTE UNDER WHICH YOU ARE FILING AND WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT C~ CAUSE)
DO NOT CITE JURISDICTIONAL STATUTES UNLESS DIVERSITY)

Iva. ~_ days estimated (for both sides) to try entire case.

NATURE OF SUIT (PLACE AN X ~N ONE BOX ONLY)

CONTRACT
~ 110 Insurance
n 120 Marine o 130 Miller ACt
~ 140 Negotiable Instru-
ment o 150 Recovery of Over-
payment & Enforcement of Judgment
[] 151 Medicare ACt [] 152 Recovery of
Defaulted Student
Loans (EXd. vets) ~ 15~ Recovery of Over-
payment of vet-
eran’s Benefits
D 160 Stockholders’ ~ 190 other contract
~ 195 Contract Product
LlablllW REAL PROPERTY ~ 210 Land condemnation
~ 220 Foreclosure ~ 230 Rent Lease & Elect.
~ 240 Torts to Land [] 245 Tort Product Llab. [] 290 All Other Real Prop.

PERSONAL INJURY
310 Airplane ~15 Airplane Product
Liability :~20 ASSaUlt, Libel & Slan-
der 330 Federal Employers’
Liability 340 Marine 345 Marine Product Lia-
bility 350 Motor Vehicle 355 Motor Vehicle PrOd-
uct LIability $60 Other Personal In-
Jury
CIVIL RIGHTS ~ 441 Voting ~ 442 Employment [] 443 Housing/Accom-
modations ~ 444 Welfare ~(440 Other CIvil Rights

PERSONAL INJURY
362 Personal mJury Medical Malpractice
355 Personal Injury PrOdUCt tlablllW
$68 As0estce PerSonal Injury Product Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY 570 other Fraud 371 Truth In Lending 380 Other Personal Pro-
perry Damage 385 Property Damage
Product LlablllW
PRllOllEI! PrrlTION$ 510 MOtions tO vacate
Sentence Habeas Corpus: 530 General 535 Death Penalty 540 Mandamus & Other 550 civil Rights

I:ORFEiTURE/PEN~LTY
610 Agriculture
620 Other Food & Drug
625 Drug Related Seizure Of Property 21
US(: 881
630 Uouor Laws 640 R.R. & Truck 650 Airline Regs 660 occupational
Safety/health
690 Other
LABOR
710 Fair Labor Standards ACt
720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations
730 Labor/Mgmt. Reporting & D~sclosure
Act 740 Railway Labor ACt 790 Other Labor LIUga-
Uon 791 Empl. Net. Inc. Secu-
rity Act

BANKR 422 ApPeal

nd Banking ~ : I ~ 4~mmerciaI/ICC

423 ~thdrawal ~ _.~ ~ 46~AePo~atlon

P~P~ ~I6HT~ ~_. ~ced’~and Corrupt

820 Copyrlgh~

~, < ~ganlzatlons

830 Paten~

~ 810 Selectl~ semite

840 Trademark ’.’,

850 Securities/commo-

SOCIAL SECURITY-

dities/Exchange

861 HIA (139Sfl

875 Customer Challenge

862 Black Lung (923)

12 USC 3410

863 DNWJDMAN (~.05)(g)

Bgl Agricultural ACts

864 ~[D Title ~1

892 Economic stabiliza-

865 RSI (405(g)

tion Act

F~L T~ SUITS 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff

893 Environ. Matters 894 Energy Allot. ACt

or Defendant)

895 Freedom of Info.

871 IRS- Third Party

900 Appeal of Fee De-

26 US(: 7609

termination Under

OTHER STATUTES

EQual Access to JUS-

400 State Reapportion-

tice

ment

950 Constitutionality of

410 Antitrust

state Statutes

890 Other Statutory

ACtions

Vl. ORIGIN

~,1 Original

[] 2 Removed from

Proceeding

State Court

B 3 Remanded from Appellate Court

(PLACE AN X IN ONE BOX ONLY)

Transferred from

~ 4 Reinstated or ~ 5 another district

Reopened

(specify)

~ 6 Multldistrict LIUgatlon

Appeal to District
Judge from ~ 7 Magistrate
Judgment

VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THiS IS A CLASS ACTION
COMPLAINT: "~NDER F.R.C.P, 23

DEMAND $

Check YES onN If demanded In complaint;
JURY DEMANDED: ~ YES ~ NO

VIII. RELATED (~S) (See Instructions):

DOCKET NUMBER

Randall C, Berg, Jr.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Receipt No. ~ Date Paid:
,

, _JM/Ifp:

 
 IF YOU WERE STRIP SEARCHED AT A MIAMI-DADE JAIL BETWEEN MARCH 5, 2000, AND FEBRUARY 28, 2005 YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO MONEY UNDER A CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
There is a proposed Settlement of a Class Action lawsuit, Haney, et al. v. Miami-Dade County, et al., Case No. 04-205, pending in the U.S. District Court, S.D. Florida, Miami. The lawsuit concerns the strip search policy and practices of the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitations Department.
What is the Litigation About?
Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants violated various federal and state laws by strip searching certain persons at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Center and the Women’s Detention Center between March 5, 2000, and February 28, 2005.
Who is Involved?
You may be a member of the Settlement Class if you were strip searched at the Pre-Trial Detention Center or the Women’s Detention Center prior to first appearance between March 5, 2000, and February 28, 2005. To see if you qualify for a payment you should check the website or call the toll free number below.
What are the Terms?
If you are a female who was arrested on a charge relating to prostitution or a misdemeanor charge not involving violence, drugs, or weapons, you will be entitled to a minimum payment of $1,000 (One Thousand Dollars), and as much as $3,000 (Three Thousand Dollars) depending on your age and other factors, for each illegal strip search subject to your payment being reduced by 50% if you had previously served a term in a state prison.
If you were arrested on a felony or a non-felony charge involving violence, drugs or weapons and were strip searched prior to first appearance you will be entitled to receive a payment of $10 (Ten Dollars).
Up to $4.55 Million will be available to satisfy claims under this settlement subject to payments being proportionately reduced if the total value of verified claims exceeds $4.55 million. Class Counsel will apply to the Court for an agreed fee of $1 Million plus up to $100,000 (One Hundred Thousand Dollars) for reimbursement for actual expenses. Representative plaintiffs will collectively share $300,000 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars), and $300,000 (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars) will be reserved for Claim Administrator expenses, for a possible total of $6.25 Million.
For more information or to receive a claim form, consult the website or call the toll free number below.
What are My Legal Rights?
If you wish to share in the Settlement Fund you must file a claim as discussed below. If the Court approves the Proposed Settlement, you will receive a payment if you qualify. You will also be bound by all of the Court’s orders. This means you will drop any claims you may have against the Defendants covered by this Settlement.
If you wish to file a claim you must complete a Claim Form. You can get a Claim Form by contacting the Claims Administrators, in writing, at the address or website given below, or by calling the toll free number. Claim Forms must be signed and post-marked no later than September 1, 2005.
If you do not wish to be a member of the Settlement Class, you must sign a Request for Exclusion letter as outlined in the Stipulation of Settlement and Notice which you can download from the website or get from the Claims Administrator. Your Request for Exclusion must be filed with the Court no later than September 1, 2005.
When Will the Settlement be Approved?
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida will hold a Fairness Hearing to decide if the proposed settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate at 10:00 a.m. on September 23, 2005, at the U.S. District Court, 301 North Miami Avenue, 8th Floor Courtroom, Miami, Florida 33128. At the hearing the Court will also consider whether Class Counsel’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs are fair, reasonable, and adequate.
If you remain a member of the Settlement Class you or your counsel have the right to appear before the Court and to object to the Settlement. However, in order to object, you must file a written objection, as outlined in the Stipulation of Settlement. Objections must be filed with the Court by September 1, 2005.
FOR INFORMATION ON THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT, YOUR RIGHTS, AND A COPY OF THE NOTICE: Visit: www.MiamiStripSearch.com or Call Toll Free: 1-877-43-STRIP (877-437-8747) or Write: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, P.O. Box 11190, Tallahassee, Florida 32302-3190.
PLEASE DO NOT CALL THE COURT

 
 NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION STRIP SEARCH CASE

Ifyou were arrested and booked at a Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center and strip-searched before your t1rst appearance between March 5, 2000 and February 28, 2005,
you may be entitled to monetary compensation under a class action settlement.

There is presently pending a lawsuit filed as a class action in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division. The parties have proposed a Settlement which, if it receives fmal approval, will provide that certain persons subject to preftrst appearance strip searches at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Centers will receive money. Records of the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitations Department show that you may have been subjected to a strip search after an arrest and before your fIrst appearance. To receive monetary compensation in this pending settlement, you must fill out and mail a claim form.
IfYou Wish to Claim Monetary Compensation, Obtain, Fill out and Mail the Claim Form as Soon as Possible but No Later than September 1,2005.
For more information, please read this notice.

PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE NOTICE CAREFULLY. YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE A PAYMENT.

There is now pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, an action filed as a class action on behalf ofpersons allegedly illegally strip searched by Miami-Dade County employees between March 5, 2000, and February 28, 2005. A Stipulation of Settlement, approved preliminarily by the Court, defmes the class and sub-classes included in this settlement as follows:

a.

All females arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or

weapons who were transported to the Women's Detention Center and strip searched prior to their ftrst appearance,

except persons strip searched at the Women's Detention Center on "probable cause" reported in writing on an

incident form; and

b.

All females arrested on charges relating to prostitution from March 5, 2000, until February 8, 2005, when the

practice of strip searching all persons charged with prostitution was officially terminated; and

c.

All persons arrested on a felony or on charges relating to violence, drugs or weapons who were strip searched, prior

to their ftrst appearances, without a written authorization for the strip search having been ftrst obtained from a

supervising officer from March 5, 2000, until February 28, 2005, the date when the policy of strip searching

detainees prior to obtaining a written authorization was terminated.

You have received this Notice either because Miami-Dade County records indicate that you may be in the class or you contacted the Claims Administrator. Whether or not you qualify as a class member will be based solely upon the Miami-Dade County records. If these records do not contain your name and show you to be within the defmition of the class, you will not qualify.

This Notice is to inform you that a settlement has been proposed in this action and that, as a potential class member, your rights may be affected by the settlement. This Notice also summarizes the terms and effect of the proposed settlement, what you can do to participate in it, how you may obtain money under the settlement and what you must do if you choose to exclude yourself from the class.

SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED TERMS

A Settlement Agreement ("Settlement") was entered into after intensive negotiations between the parties, conducted with the assistance of a third party mediator. The Parties are requesting that the Court approve the Settlement.

A. Parties to the Settlement.

The parties to the Settlement are the Plaintiffs named in Haney, et al v. Miami-Dade County, et aI., United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516-Civ Jordan/Klein filed on behalf of themselves and the Settlement Class, and various defendants including the Miami-Dade County and Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitations Department. Counsel for the class are Mark E. Merin, The Law Office of Mark E. Merin, 2001 P Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; Andrew C. Schwartz, Casper, Meadows & Schwartz, 2121 N California Boulevard, Suite 1020, Walnut Creek, CA 94596; and Randall C. Berg, Jr., Florida Justice Institute, Inc., 2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-2310.

Page 1 of4

B. Defendants Do Not Admit Any Liability

Plaintiffs allege that the acts and/or omissions which are the subject of the claims covered by this action (strip searches) violated various state and federal laws. Defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing and deny any liability to plaintiffs or to any other class members. The parties have agreed that, in order to avoid long and costly litigation, this controversy should be settled pursuant to the tenns of the settlement as described in this Notice, subject to the approval of the Court.

C.

Monetary Terms of Settlement

1.

Payment of Claims

Defendants shall pay a maximum of $4,550,000.00 under the terms of the settlement which will referred to as the Class Fund.

In addition to funds reserved for the payment of Class Claims, Class Counsel will receive, subject to approval of the Court, a fee of $1,000,000.00 as attorney's fees and up to $100,000.00 for reimbursement of itemized costs and expenses. Up to $300,000.00 will be available for the costs of claim administration.

2.

Payment to Representative Plaintiffs

Under the tenns of the settlement, representative plaintiffs and those who had entered into retainer agreements with the class counsel will receive a total of$300,000.00 to be allocated among them.

3.

Payment to Class Members Who File Claims

Money for the class will be paid out based on a distribution fonnula, subject to payments being proportionately reduced if the total value of verified claims exceeds $4,550,000.00. Pursuant to that distribution fonnula all women arrested on municipal ordinance, infraction or misdemeanor charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons, who were transported to the Women's Detention Center and strip searched there prior to their first appearance will receive a minimum of$I,OOO.OO (One Thousand Dollars) (subject to possible reduction) and increments of$500.00 based on answers to questions on a claim fonn to be submitted under penalty ofperjury. For each qualifying strip search following a fresh arrest during the claims period, each such claimant will receive an additional $1,000.00.

All women arrested on charges relating to prostitution during the period from March 5, 2000, to February 8, 2005, will receive a minimum of$l,OOO.OO (subject to reduction) for each strip search prior to first appearance during the claims period and additional increments based on answers to claim fonn questions to be submitted under penalty of perjury.

All persons arrested on charges relating to violence, drugs, or weapons who were strip searched, prior to their first appearance, without a written authorization for the strip search having been first obtained from a supervising officer during the period from March 5,2000, to February 28,2005, will be entitled to receive a payment of$10.00, if they timely submit a claim fonn. Read the rest of this Notice to [rod out how to get a claim fonn.

D.

Strip Search Policy

Defendants will not strip search persons prior to first appearance, unless prior written authorization for the strip search has been obtained from a supervising officer. Defendants will not strip search, prior to first appearances, persons charged with offenses relating to prostitution or those arrested on infractions or ordinance violations or misdemeanors not involving violence, drugs, or weapons, without reasonable suspicion that a strip search would be productive of contraband or weapons.

E.

Your Options as a Class Member

1.

Be Bound by, and Participate in the Settlement.

To qualify for a payment, you must send in a completed Claim Fonn to the Claims Administrator. If you receive a notice by First Class Mail, a Claim Fonn will be included in the notice package. You can also get a Claim Fonn by: (1) calling this toll free number: 877-43-STRIP [(877) 437-8747]; (2) visiting the website www.miamistripsearch.com; or (3) writing the Claims Administrator at: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, PO Box 11190, Tallahassee, Florida 32302-3190.

You have until September 1, 2005, to submit a claim or to opt -out of the settlement. Mail your completed Claim Fonn to: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, PO Box 11190, Tallahassee, Florida 32302-3190.

Page 2 of4

Remember, if you do not submit a Claim Form, you cannot get a payment. If you submit a claim form, you will be bound by the settlement and receive money (if you are a class member). If you do not submit a claim form but do not exclude yourself from the class (as explained in the next paragraph), you will be bound by the terms of the Settlement and dismissal entered in this case, but you will not receive any money.

By participating in this Settlement you will be waiving all your rights to all claims up to and including February 28, 2005, related to strip searches at the Miami-Dade Pre-Trial Detention Centers, even those of which you are not presently aware.

2.

Exclude Yourself From the Class

You do not have to take part in the Settlement or be a member of the class. This is called "excluding" yourself. If you exclude yourself, you can not get a payment and you can not object to the Settlement. Any Court orders will not apply to you. To exclude yourself, you must sign a request for exclusion letter that states that you want to be excluded from Haney, et al. v. Miami-Dade County, et. aI., United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 0420516-CIV Jordan/Klein. Your exclusion letter must bemailedandpostmarkedbeforeSeptember1.2005.to: Haney, et al. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, PO Box 11190, Tallahassee, Florida 32302-3190.

If you do not follow these instructions properly, you will lose your right to exclude yourself. If you exclude yourself, you cannot get any money from the Settlement of this case and you cannot tell the Court you do not like the Settlement (which is called "objecting"). If you exclude yourself, you are no longer part of the class or the Settlement. But you can sue or be part of a different lawsuit about the claims in this case.

F.

Fairness Hearing and Process for Objections.

A fairness hearing will be held on September 23,2005, at 10:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, 301 N. Miami Avenue, Courtroom 8, Miami, Florida. If you are a class member and do not exclude yourself, you can tell the Court you do not like the Settlement or some part of it at this hearing. This is called objecting to the Settlement. For example, you can say you do not think the Settlement is fair or adequate. The Court will consider your views.

To object, you must send a letter to the court that contains all of the following:

1.

The name and title of the lawsuit, Haney, et aI. v. Miami-Dade County, et aI., United States District Court, Southern

District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 04-20516 CIV Jordan/Klein;

2.

A statement of each objection you have and the facts that support the objections;

30

.A,. description of a.."'lY lav/ or case supporting the objections;

4.

A statement on whether or not you or your lawyer will ask to appear at the Fairness Hearing to talk about your

objections, and, if so, how long you will need to present your objections; and

5.

Copies of any documents you or your lawyer will present at the Fairness Hearing.

At the hearing on the proposed settlement, the Court may schedule further hearings without further notice to the class. The matters considered at such future hearings may include, but shall not be limited to, further consideration of the fairness and adequacy of the proposed settlement, the determination of the settlement of individual claims filed by class members, consideration of the request for attorneys' fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses to class counsel, and the form and entry of the [mal judgment of dismissal in the event the proposed settlement is approved by the court.

Individually, or through counsel, any class member has the right to object to the proposed Settlement as a whole, to the amount of attorneys' fees and costs of Class Counsel, or to any portion of either. ANY SUCH OBJECTIONS MUST BE FILED IN WRITING ON OR BEFORE SEPTEMBER 1, 2005, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, MIAMI DIVISION, 301 N. MIAMI AVENUE, COURTROOM 8, MIAMI, FLORIDA, ATTENTION: CLERK, RE: HANEY, ET AL. V. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, ET AL., CASE NO. 04-20516-CIV JORDANIKLEIN. If you wish to appear and present your objections at the fairness hearing, you must also submit a Notice of Intention to Appear that identifies the case, contains your name and address, and explains the reason the appearance is desired. The Notice ofIntention to Appear and any objections must be filed with the Court on or before September 1, 2005. You may be represented by your own attorney. If you are to be represented by an attorney at the hearing, his or her name, address and telephone number must be included in the Notice of Intention to Appear as well.

Page3 of4

A copy of the Statement of Objection and/or Notice of Intention to Appear must also be mailed to: Florida Justice Institute, Inc.,
2870 Wachovia Financial Center, 200 South Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131-2310 and Dade County Attorney's Office, Metro Dade Center, 111 NW 1st St, Suite 2810, Miami, FL 33128-1993 ATTN: Jeffrey P. Ehrlich.

G.

How to Obtain Further Information

For additional information regarding the Settlement and Claim Form, or a copy of the Settlement Agreement, Claim Form or Class Counsel's Application for Attorney's Fees, you or your counsel should contact: Haney, et a!. Strip Search Class Action, c/o Claims Administrator, PO Box 11190, Tallahassee, Florida 32302-3190. You may also check the Class Administrator's website at www.miamistripsearch.com or call 877-43-STRIP [(877) 437-8747]. You may also obtain detailed information about the case by examining the Court file located in the office of the Clerk of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, 301 N. Miami Avenue, Courtroom 8, Miami, Florida.

H.

Court Approval.

Although the Court has reviewed the proposed Settlement, no decision has been, or will be, reached by the Court, until the Fairness Hearing. This Notice does not indicate that the Court has approved the Settlement.

Page 4 of4

 
 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 1 of 13

U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (Miami) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:04-cv-20516-AJ

CLOSED, EGT

Haney, et al v. Miami-Dade County, et al Assigned to: Judge Adalberto Jordan Demand: $0 Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff
Judith Haney

Date Filed: 03/05/2004 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question
represented by Andrew C. Schwartz Casper Meadows & Schwartz 2121 N California Boulevard Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925-947-1147 Fax: 947-1131 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild Mark E. Merin 2001 P Street Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 916-443-6911 Fax: 447-8336 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark E. Merin Mark E. Merin 2001 P Street Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 916-443-6911 Fax: 447-8336 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Randall Challen Berg, Jr. Florida Justice Institute 100 SE 2nd Street 4320 Bank of America Tower Miami, FL 33131-2309 305-358-2081 Fax: 358-0910

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 2 of 13

Plaintiff Liat Mayer
Plaintiff Jamie Loughner individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated

Email: rcberg@bellsouth.net LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Andrew C. Schwartz (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark E. Merin (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Randall Challen Berg, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Andrew C. Schwartz (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Andrew Z. Schwartz Foley Hoag 155 Seaport Boulevard World Trade Center West Boston, MA 02210-2170 617-832-1000 Fax: 832-7000 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark E. Merin (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 3 of 13

Plaintiff All Plaintiffs Plaintiff Ann Martin
V. Defendant Miami-Dade County

Randall Challen Berg, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Hugh L. Koerner Hugh L Koerner PA 3475 Sheridan Street Sheridan Executive Centre Suite 208 Hollywood, FL 33021 US 954-522-1235 Fax: 522-1176 Email: hlkpa@fdn.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Jeffrey Paul Ehrlich Dade County Attorney's Office Metro Dade Center 111 NW 1st Street Suite 2810 Miami, FL 33128-1993 305-375-5151 Fax: 375-5611 Email: ehrlich@miamidade.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard Brian Rosenthal Richard B. Rosenthal 169 E Flagler Street Suite 1422 Miami, FL 33133 305-779-6097 Fax: 779-6095 Email: rbr@rosenthalappeals.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Susan Torres

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 4 of 13

Defendant Miami-Dade County Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations Charles J. McRay, individually and in his official capacity as Acting Director
Defendant Women's Detention Center Captain B. Fuller, individually and in her official capacity as the Facility Supervisor
Defendant Pretrial Detention Center Acting Captain M. Aladro, individually and in his official capacity as Facility Supervisor
Defendant Does Miami-Dade COunty Corrections and Rehabilitation Department Officers Does 1 through 150
Defendant All Defendants
Plaintiff Darcy Smith
Plaintiff Amanda Wells

Dade County Attorney's Office Metro Dade Center 111 NW 1st Street Suite 2810 Miami, FL 33128-1993 305-375-5151 Fax: 375-5634 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Randall Challen Berg, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Randall Challen Berg, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 5 of 13

V. Defendant Charles J. McRay individually
Defendant Captain B. Fuller Individually
Defendant Acting Captain Aladro M. Individually

represented by Susan Torres (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Susan Torres (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Susan Torres (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 03/05/2004
03/05/2004 03/05/2004 03/05/2004 03/05/2004 03/05/2004
03/05/2004 03/05/2004
03/05/2004

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT filed; FILING FEE $150.00 RECEIPT # 897694 ; Magistrate Judge Stephen T. Brown (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2004)

2 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Miami-Dade County (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2004)

3 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Miami Dade Rehab (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2004)

4 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Women's Detention (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2004)

5 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Pretrial Detention (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2004)

6 MOTION by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner (Attorney ) for JeffreyI. Schwarzschild to appear pro hac vice (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2004)

Filing Fee Paid; FILING FEE $ 75.00 RECEIPT # 897699 (for motion to appear pro hac vice - DE6) (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2004)

7 MOTION by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner (Attorney ) for Mark E. Merin to appear pro hac vice (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2004)

Filing Fee Paid; FILING FEE $ 75.00 RECEIPT # 897696 i (for motion to appear pro hac vice - DE7) (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2004)

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 6 of 13

03/09/2004 03/09/2004 03/10/2004 03/10/2004 03/10/2004 03/10/2004 03/10/2004 03/16/2004 03/18/2004 03/18/2004 03/22/2004
04/12/2004 04/23/2004

8 ORDER granting [7-1] motion for Mark E. Merin to appear pro hac vice ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 3/5/04) [EOD Date: 3/10/04] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/10/2004)
9 ORDER granting [6-1] motion for JeffreyI. Schwarzschild to appear pro hac vice ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 3/5/04) [EOD Date: 3/10/04] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/10/2004)
10 MOTION by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner (Attorney ) for Andrew Z. Schwartz to appear pro hac vice (cj, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/10/2004)
Filing Fee Paid; FILING FEE $ 75.00 RECEIPT # (cj, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/10/2004)
11 RETURN OF SERVICE executed for Women's Detention by serving on 3/8/04 Answer due on 3/29/04 for Women's Detention (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/11/2004)
12 RETURN OF SERVICE executed for Miami-Dade County by serving Alex Penelas on 3/5/04 Answer due on 3/25/04 for Miami-Dade County (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/11/2004)
13 RETURN OF SERVICE executed for Pretrial Detention by serving Acting Captain M. Aladro on 3/8/04 Answer due on 3/29/04 for Pretrial Detention (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/11/2004)
14 ORDER granting [10-1] motion for Andrew Z. Schwartz to appear pro hac vice ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 3/16/04) [EOD Date: 3/17/04] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/17/2004)
15 RETURN OF SERVICE executed for Miami Dade Rehab on 3/15/04 Answer due on 4/5/04 for Miami Dade Rehab (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/19/2004)
16 Agreed-to MOTION by Miami-Dade County (Attorney Richard Brian Rosenthal, Jeffrey Paul Ehrlich) to extend time to respond to the complaint (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/19/2004)
17 ORDER granting [16-1] motion to extend time to respond to the complaint reset answer due for 4/12/04 for Does, for Pretrial Detention, for Women's Detention, for Miami Dade Rehab, for Miami-Dade County ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 3/22/04) [EOD Date: 3/23/04] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/23/2004)
18 MOTION by Miami-Dade County, Miami Dade Rehab, Women's Detention, Pretrial Detention (Attorney ) to dismiss claims for injunctive relief (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2004)
19 MOTION with memorandum in support by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner to strike [18-1] motion to dismiss claims for injunctive relief certificate of pre-filing conference (cj, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/26/2004)

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 7 of 13

05/01/2004 05/04/2004 05/20/2004 05/27/2004 05/28/2004 06/04/2004
06/08/2004 06/08/2004 06/08/2004

20 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner , (Answer due 5/11/04 for Does, for Pretrial Detention, for Women's Detention, for Miami Dade Rehab, for Miami-Dade County ) amending [1-1] complaint; Jury Trial Demand (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/03/2004)
21 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner , (Answer due 5/14/04 for Does, for Pretrial Detention, for Women's Detention, for Miami Dade Rehab, for Miami-Dade County ) amending [20-1] amended complaint adding Darcy Smith, Amanda Wells, Charles J. McRay, B. Fuller, Aladro M. (wc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/05/2004)
22 MOTION by Miami-Dade County, Miami Dade Rehab, Women's Detention, Pretrial Detention, Charles J. McRay, B. Fuller, Aladro M. to extend time to respond second amended complaint (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/21/2004)
23 MOTION by Miami-Dade County, Miami Dade Rehab, Women's Detention, Pretrial Detention, Does, Charles J. McRay, B. Fuller, Aladro M. to dismiss request for injunctive relief in their second amended complaint (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/28/2004)
24 Scheduling Conference Report with attached joint proposed scheduling order by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner, Miami-Dade County, Miami Dade Rehab, Women's Detention, Pretrial Detention, Does, Darcy Smith, Amanda Wells, Charles J. McRay, B. Fuller, Aladro M. (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/28/2004)
25 ORDER setting answer to second amended complaint for 6/9/04 for Aladro M., for B. Fuller, for Charles J. McRay, for Does, for Pretrial Detention, for Women's Detention, for Miami Dade Rehab, for MiamiDade County granting nunc pro tunc [22-1] motion to extend time to respond second amended complaint, denying [19-1] motion to strike [181] motion to dismiss claims for injunctive relief, denying [18-1] motion to dismiss claims for injunctive relief ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 6/3/04) [EOD Date: 6/4/04] (hd, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/04/2004)
26 ORDER setting Schedule, Requiring Mediation and Referring Certain Motions to Magistrate Judge Jury trial set for 8/22/05; Calendar call set for 9:00 8/16/05; Discovery cutoff 3/1/05 ; Deadline for filing of all motions by 4/15/05; Pretrial Stipulation due on or before 5/16/05 ( Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 6/8/04 for Adalberto Jordan) [EOD Date: 6/9/04] CCAP (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/09/2004)
26 ORDER referring case to mediation. 15 days to appoint mediator ( Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 6/8/04 for Adalberto Jordan) [EOD Date: 6/9/04] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/09/2004)
26 ORDER REFERRING DISCOVERY MATTERS to Magistrate Judge Stephen T. Brown ( Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 6/8/04 for Adalberto Jordan) CCAP [EOD Date: 6/9/04] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/09/2004)

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 8 of 13

06/09/2004 06/15/2004
06/16/2004 06/24/2004
06/29/2004 07/08/2004 07/12/2004 07/30/2004 08/02/2004 08/10/2004
08/24/2004 12/20/2004 01/03/2005

27 Answer and affirmative defenses by Miami-Dade County, Charles J. McRay, B. Fuller, Aladro M. (Attorney Susan Torres), (hd, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/10/2004)
28 RESPONSE in opposition by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner, Darcy Smith, Amanda Wells to [23-1] motion to dismiss request for injunctive relief in their second amended complaint (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/16/2004)
29 NOTICE of withdrawal of counsel by Richard B. Rosenthal, Esq. by Miami-Dade County (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/17/2004)
30 REPLY by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner, Miami-Dade County, Miami Dade Rehab, Women's Detention, Pretrial Detention, Charles J. McRay, Aladro M. to response to [23-1] motion to dismiss request for injunctive relief in their second amended complaint (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/25/2004)
31 NOTICE of non-consent to Magistrate Judge by All Defendants, All Plaintiffs (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/30/2004)
32 NOTICE of filing attached order scheduling mediation by All Defendants, All Plaintiffs (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/09/2004)
33 ORDER SCHEDULING MEDIATION before Mediator: Gerald T. Wetherington for 2/7/05 at 10:30 ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 7/12/04) [EOD Date: 7/13/04] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/13/2004)
34 MOTION by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner (Attorney ) to extend time to respond to discovery on Smith, Loughner and Wells (cj, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/03/2004)
35 RESPONSE by Miami-Dade County to [34-1] motion to extend time to respond to discovery on Smith, Loughner and Wells (hd, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/03/2004)
36 ORDER granting [34-1] motion to extend time to respond to discovery on Smith, Loughner and Wells through and including 8/23/04 ( Signed by Magistrate Stephen T. Brown on 8/10/04) [EOD Date: 8/11/04] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/11/2004)
37 ORDER denying [23-1] motion to dismiss request for injunctive relief in their second amended complaint (Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 08/24/04) [EOD Date: 8/26/04] (ra, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/26/2004)
38 Agreed MOTION by All Plaintiffs, All Defendants to amend [26-1] Scheduling order (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/21/2004)
39 ORDER as to [38-1] motion to amend [26-1] Scheduling order reset Jury trial for 12/5/05 before Judge Adalberto Jordan , reset calendar call for 9:00 11/29/05 before Judge Adalberto Jordan , reset motion filing deadline for 8/15/05 , reset discovery deadline for 7/1/05 , reset pretrial stipulation due for 9/15/05 ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 1/3/05) [EOD Date: 1/4/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/04/2005)

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 9 of 13

01/03/2005
01/06/2005 02/10/2005 02/16/2005 03/14/2005 03/16/2005 04/05/2005
04/05/2005 04/06/2005 04/06/2005 04/12/2005 04/13/2005 04/13/2005 04/13/2005

40 ORDER MODIFYING PREVIOUS SCHEDULIN ORDER reset Jury trial for 12/12/05 before Judge Adalberto Jordan , reset calendar call for 9:00 12/6/05 before Judge Adalberto Jordan ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 1/3/05) [EOD Date: 1/4/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/04/2005)
41 RE-NOTICE of Scheduling Mediation Hearing on 02/07/05 at 9:00 a.m. (bb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/07/2005)
42 FINAL report of Mediator. Disposition: SETTLED (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/11/2005)
43 ORDER Requiring Stipulation of Dismissal with prejudice no later than 3/15/05 ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 2/16/05) [EOD Date: 2/17/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/17/2005)
44 Joint STATUS REPORT regarding settlement by All Defendants, All Plaintiffs (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/14/2005)
45 ORDER Regarding Settlement, parties shall file a status report regarding settlement no later than 4/8/05 ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 3/15/05) [EOD Date: 3/17/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/17/2005)
46 ORDER/Certification Regarding Referred Case pursuant to Administrative Order # 2005-9, the above-captioned case has no pending, fully briefed, referred motions and is ready for reassignment to Magistrate Judge Theodore Klein ( Signed by Magistrate Stephen T. Brown on 4/4/05) [EOD Date: 4/6/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/06/2005)
Magistrate identification: Magistrate Judge Theodore Klein (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/06/2005)
47 Joint STATUS REPORT regarding settlement by All Plaintiffs, All Defendants (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/06/2005)
47 MOTION by All Plaintiffs, All Defendants (Attorney ) for Hearing to preliminarily approve settlement (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/06/2005)
48 ORDER/Notice of Hearing set settlement conference for 9:00 4/18/05 before Judge Adalberto Jordan ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 4/12/05) [EOD Date: 4/13/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2005)
49 Stipulated MOTION by All Plaintiffs for preliminary approval of provisional settlement class and settlement of class action (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2005)
50 Stipulated MOTION by All Plaintiffs for preliminary approval of provisional settlement class and settlement of class action (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2005)
51 Stipulated MOTION by All Plaintiffs for preliminary approval of provisional settlement class and settlement of class action (gz, Deputy

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 10 of 13

04/13/2005 04/13/2005 04/13/2005 04/18/2005 04/18/2005 04/18/2005 04/18/2005
04/18/2005
05/10/2005 05/24/2005
09/06/2005 09/06/2005 09/06/2005 09/06/2005

Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2005)
52 Stipulated MOTION by All Plaintiffs for preliminary appproval of provisional settlement class and settlement of class action (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2005)
53 STIPULATION of settlement by All Plaintiffs (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2005)
54 STIPULATION of settlement by All Plaintiffs (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2005)
55 Minutes of settlement hearing held before Judge Adalberto Jordan on 4/18/05; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Francine Salopek (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/19/2005)
Settlement conference held before Judge Adalberto Jordan (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/19/2005)
56 ORDER for Preliminary Approval of Settlement of class action ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 4/18/05) [EOD Date: 4/19/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/19/2005)
57 Third AMENDED COMPLAINT by All Plaintiffs , (Answer due 4/28/05 for Miami-Dade County, for Miami Dade Rehab, for Women's Detention, for Pretrial Detention ) amending [1-1] complaint (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/19/2005)
58 ORDER of Magistrate Judge Reassignment in accordance with Administrative Order 2005-9, the case is reassigned to United States Magistrate Judge Theodore Klein. ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 4/18/05) [EOD Date: 4/20/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/20/2005)
59 JOINT MOTION by All Defendants, All Plaintiffs to release social security numbers to class counsel and claims administrators (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/10/2005)
60 ORDER granting [59-1] joint motion to release social security numbers to class counsel and claims administrators ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 05/24/05) [EOD Date: 5/25/05] (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/25/2005)
61 APPLICATION/MOTION by All Plaintiffs (Attorney ) for approval of stipulated attorney fees and reimbursement of costs (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/07/2005)
62 Notice of filing exhibits to: [61-1] motion for approval of stipulated attorney fees and reimbursement of costs by All Plaintiffs (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/07/2005)
63 Notice of filing ehibits to: [61-1] motion for approval of stipulated attorney fees and reimbursement of costs by All Plaintiffs (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/07/2005)
64 Notice of filing exhibits to: [61-1] motion for approval of stipulated

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 11 of 13

09/07/2005
09/16/2005 09/20/2005 09/20/2005 09/21/2005 09/22/2005 09/23/2005
09/23/2005 09/23/2005 09/24/2005 10/07/2005 10/07/2005 10/07/2005 11/07/2005

attorney fees and reimbursement of costs by All Plaintiffs (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/07/2005)
65 Joint submission supporting final approval of stipulated settlement by Miami-Dade County, Miami Dade Rehab, Women's Detention, Pretrial Detention, Does, Charles J. McRay, B. Fuller, Aladro M., All Defendants, All Plaintiffs (hd, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/09/2005)
66 NOTICE of filing proposed agreed order and judgment of dismissal by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner (ra, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/22/2005)
67 MOTION by All Plaintiffs (Attorney ) to opt-out of class action settlement out of time re Ana Martin (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/22/2005)
70 NOTICE of attorney appearance for Ann Martin by Hugh L. Koerner (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/26/2005)
68 Notice of filing MARK PATTON AFFIDAVIT by All Plaintiffs Re: [651] Joint submission supporting final approval of stipulated settlement (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2005)
69 MEMORANDUM by All Defendants in opposition to [67-1] motion to opt-out of class action settlement out of time re Ana Martin (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/26/2005)
71 ORDER Reply to Response to Motion reset to 9/28/05 for [67-1] motion to opt-out of class action settlement out of time re Ana Martin ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 09/23/05) [EOD Date: 9/26/05] (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/26/2005)
Fairness/Status conference held before Judge Adalberto Jordan (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/26/2005)
72 Minutes of Fairness hearing held before Judge Adalberto Jordan on 09/23/05; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: David (illegible) (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/26/2005)
73 REPLY by Ann Martin to response to [67-1] motion to opt-out of class action settlement out of time re Ana Martin (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/27/2005)
74 ORDER denying [67-1] motion to opt-out of class action settlement out of time re Ana Martin ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 10/07/05) [EOD Date: 10/11/05] (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/11/2005)
75 AGREED ORDER and judgment of dismissal ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 10/06/05) [EOD Date: 10/11/05] (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/11/2005)
CASE CLOSED. Case and Motions no longer referred to Magistrate. (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/11/2005)
76 NOTICE OF APPEAL by Ann Martin of [74-1] order EOD Date:

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 12 of 13

11/07/2005 12/01/2005 12/09/2005 12/19/2005 02/17/2006 02/21/2006 04/13/2006 04/21/2006
04/25/2006 04/25/2006 05/05/2006 10/03/2006
10/31/2006

10/11/05; Filing Fee: $ 255.00; Receipt #: 930105 Copies to USCA and Counsel of Record. (pc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/09/2005)
Certified copies of Notice of Appeal, Docket, and Order under appeal to USCA: [76-1] appeal by Ann Martin as to Ann Martin (pc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/09/2005)
77 Transcript Information Form re: as to Ann Martin [76-1] appeal by Ann Martin . No transcript requested. (hh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/02/2005)
78 NOTICE of Receipt of Notice of Appeal Transmittal Letter from USCA on 11/14/05 as to Judith Haney Re: [76-1] appeal by Ann Martin USCA NUMBER: 05-16266-J (pc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/12/2005)
79 NOTICE of Change of Address of attorney by Judith Haney, Liat Mayer, Jamie Loughner (bs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/20/2005)
80 MOTION by All Plaintiffs for Cullin A. O'Brien to withdraw as attorney (dg, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/17/2006)
81 ORDER granting [80-1] motion for Cullin A. O'Brien to withdraw as attorney ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 02/17/06) [EOD Date: 2/22/06] (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/22/2006)
82 JOINT MOTION by All Plaintiffs, All Defendants to permit the release of Social Security numbers and additional class member information to Wachovia Financial Institution (ra, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/14/2006)
83 ORDER granting [82-1] joint motion to permit the release of Social Security numbers and additional class member information to Wachovia Financial Institution ( Signed by Judge Adalberto Jordan on 04/20/06) [EOD Date: 4/24/06] (sk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/24/2006)
84 Certificate of readiness as to Ann Martin transmitted to USCA Re: [76-1] appeal by Ann Martin USCA NUMBER: 05-16266-J (pc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/25/2006)
Transmitted record on appeal as to Ann Martin to U.S. Court of Appeals: (Atlanta/Office) Consisting of (3) Volumes of Pleadings in re: [76-1] appeal by Ann Martin (pc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/25/2006)
85 Acknowledgement of Receipt of COR/ROA from USCA on 4/17/06 in re: appeal by Judith Haney (pc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/10/2006)
86 MANDATE OF USCA (certified copy)affirming judgment/order of the district court with court's opinion; Bill of Costs are hereby taxed in the amount of $50.40 against Appellant and are payable directly to Appellee [76-1] appeal Mandate Issued Date: 9/28/06; USCA Appeal #: 05-16266JJ; Copy to Judge. (nc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/03/2006)
87 Appeal Record Returned: (Miami/Records) Consisting of (3) Volumes of Pleadings 76 Notice of Appeal (pc) (Entered: 11/07/2006)

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

Page 13 of 13

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

06/21/2007 13:23:01

PACER Login: hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 1:04-cv-20516-AJ

Billable Pages: 7

Cost:

0.56

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?266371089341188-L_923_0-1

6/21/2007

 
 Statement of Judy Haney to the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons
April 19, 2005
Introduction
Good morning. I’d like to thank the Commission for inviting me to speak today regarding my personal experience of being strip-searched in Miami-Dade County.
I am the lead plaintiff in a federal class action suit filed against Miami-Dade County in March 2004 for the unconstitutional and unlawful practice of strip searching and visually inspecting the body cavities of women arrested for non-violent, non-drug or weapons related misdemeanors in Miami-Dade County Detention Facilities.
I am here to speak to you today about the details of my strip search, what it felt like, why I filed a class action suit, and what we discovered about Miami-Dade’s practice of strip searching women prior to first arraignment.
What I hope the Commission will understand at the end of my testimony is that the type of strip search that I and thousands of women experienced was about humiliation and control, not about safety — just as rape is about violence and not about sex. I also hope that the Commission will understand that the people most likely to be subjected to this unconstitutional and unlawful abuse are very rarely privileged to seek a remedy. Finally, this practice is not limited to a county in South Florida but happens across the country.
Personal Account of Being Strip Searched
On November 21, 2003, during the FTAA protests, I was arrested for Failure to Obey during a jail solidarity rally in front of the Miami-Dade County Pre-Trial Detention Center. Since I and the others I was arrested with were already in front of the jail, the police were able to arrest us and march us over to the Detention Center about 100 yards away, where the police handed us over to corrections officers for processing.
We went through the routine process of giving our names, having our pictures taken, being frisked and asked to empty our pockets and so forth. Then they marched me and the three other women I was arrested with into a hallway and sat us down on a bench. I thought we were just sitting waiting to experience the next dull aspect of being “processed.”
1

The hallway was not that long, with doors on either end and several doors that appeared to open into small rooms. There were three female corrections officers in the hallway with us. They opened one door and removed a woman from that room and moved her to the room farthest from us. Then one of the guards took the first woman from my group into the room. I heard the guard tell her to remove her clothes. Hearing that startled and surprised me. We had not done anything that involved drugs or weapons; we were behaving peacefully and had been compliant with the requests of the corrections officers during the booking process. There had been no indication during our arrest and subsequent frisking and processing that the police or corrections officers considered us a threat in any way.
I leaned over to the young woman to my left and said in a very quiet voice, “Are they strip searching us? That’s unconstitutional.” I’m not sure I’d even taken a breath when the guard standing nearest came over to me and in a very severe tone asked, “Are you refusing?”
What happened next happened very quickly, but in my mind I had a lot to consider. I knew that the likelihood was close to zero that if I responded, “Yes, I’m refusing — this is an unreasonable search and is unconstitutional,” that the guard would say, “Oh, all right — we won’t do it then.” I did know from the experience of individuals that have been in similar situations and had refused to be strip searched that the price of refusal could be high.
A friend of mine in a similar situation in San Francisco refused to be strip searched, and she told me that the authorities responded by putting her in what I understand to be called a “cold room.” Her clothes were removed without her cooperation, and she was put naked in a bare room with a hole for a toilet and nothing to cover her except a small dirty mat that looked a little like a baseball catcher’s vest. The lights were bright, and there was a window looking into the room so that any one passing by could see her sitting there naked. It had a metal door and someone came by I think every 15 minutes to bang on it; their story was that she was behaving strangely and needed to be in that room for her “safety.”
With her story in my mind, I had a brief moment to consider — was I ready to go through that? If I refused, would they punish not only me, but the women arrested with me? While I was considering what I would do, the other women on the bench responded to the guard for me — saying in unison “No, she’s not refusing.” This all happened very quickly, and I knew that I wasn’t ready to risk the possible consequences of refusing to be strip searched as well as putting the other women in jeopardy.
2

When it came my turn to be strip searched, the guard led me into the same small room the others had been in; it was approximately 6’ x 8’ and had a bench along one wall. The guard stood in the doorway and ordered me to stand facing her and to remove my clothing piece by piece. As I did so, I handed a piece of clothing to her; she told me to put it on the bench. I started to fold my clothing and put it on the bench. She told me not to do that — just to drop my clothing on the bench. I proceeded to remove each piece of clothing and drop each piece on the bench. While I was removing my clothes, the guard continued to stand at the door and watched as another guard stood behind her in the hallway, also watching me.
I go into this detail because it’s important to understand that this is not the doctor’s office, the gym, or the spa. It is a highly controlled process in which every movement is controlled by a person who has the authority of force over you. There is no consent, no agency.
After I removed all my clothes, the guard told me to turn around, bend all the way over, and spread my cheeks. I’m not sure that I can really convey the emotional and physical complexity of the situation. Bending over and “spreading my cheeks” exposed my genitalia and anus to a complete stranger, who had physical authority over me, so that she could visually inspect my body cavities. The only way I could cope with this was to stay very focused in my head and just separate from my body. The feeling was sort of like floating while also feeling like a big lump.
The guard’s next set of instructions were to squat — and then — to hop like a bunny. Remember, I’m still “spreading my cheeks,” so I can’t use my arms to balance or assist me in the hopping process. Hopping-like-a-bunny was physically very difficult for me to do since I’ve had bad knees for over thirty years. I didn’t do it to the guard’s liking, so I had to do it over several times — even though I explained to her that I physically couldn’t do it. When that process was complete, the guard then told me to turn around and to remove my navel piercing. I explained that it was unlikely that I would be able to remove it since it wasn’t made to be removed. Using a threatening tone of voice she told me to remove it or she would “cut it out.” I tried to remove it, but I just couldn’t unscrew the jewel. The guard then left and returned with large clippers and cut the navel ring off me. She then told me to put my clothes back on.
I stood, bent over, and hopped naked under orders and in view of at least two guards in a small room with a door open to a hallway that passersby could see in for about 10 to 15
3

minutes. My genitalia and anus were exposed and viewable to anyone passing through the hallway for over 5 minutes. I would ask the Commissioners to take a moment and imagine what that feels like.
The Class Action Suit
After getting out of jail on bail 36 hours later, I spoke with the men who were arrested at the same time and inquired if they had been strip searched — they had not. This is when I started to believe that I would consider legal action against the county. To perform an unreasonable strip search which in effect is visual rape is outrageous enough, but to do it to women only and not to men arrested on the same minor non-violent charge revealed the practice to be doubly unjust.
I did additional research and discovered that Florida state law had specific guidelines regarding strip-searches, none of which were followed in my case or in the case of the women arrested with me. At this point, I spoke with other activists who’d had similar experiences and who referred me to an attorney who specialized in these types of cases. I retained the law offices of Mark Merin of California and then later added Randall Berg of the Florida Justice Institute.
After filing the complaint, my attorneys discovered that indeed women arrested for minor offenses, which were not drug or weapons related, were routinely strip searched prior to first arraignment and that men were not subject to the same process. Additionally, they discovered that the practice had been going on for seven years despite being in violation of state and federal law. The reason Miami-Dade gave for engaging in this was that, due to overcrowding, they were housing pre-arraignment arrestees with the general population, and they were concerned about contraband. However, Miami-Dade did no study prior to instituting the policy that would indicate that strip searching pre-arraignment misdemeanants would reduce contraband in the jail.
A Widespread Practice
During the process of the suit, we identified a potential class size of ten- to twenty-thousand women who were subjected to these dehumanizing searches over a four year time period. Yet we know that the practice lasted seven years. That means that it is likely that over 20,000 women were subjected to these searches. These women may be elderly, physically or
4

mentally disabled, menstruating, or pregnant while they were forced to expose themselves and hop around. The other thing that my attorneys discovered that I think it’s important that the Commission know, is that prior to filing the complaint, no one knew about this practice. My attorneys, the Florida Justice Institute, a firm that deals specifically in prisoner’s rights, had not known about the practice, and public defenders in Miami-Dade didn’t know about the practice. If we hadn’t filed the lawsuit, this practice would most likely be continuing today. Miami-Dade has stopped strip searching pre-arraignment misdemeanants, as has Sacramento, San Francisco, and New York City. But it took class action lawsuits to make that happen. These searches happen on the door step of the prison system, not deep inside. If this level of humiliation is happening to pre-arraignment misdemeanants, what’s happening to the women who are deeper inside the system?
5

 
 Haney v. Miami-Dade County, 194 Fed.Appx. 715 (2006)

194 Fed.Appx. 715 This case was not selected for publication in the
Federal Reporter. Not for Publication in West’s Federal Reporter See
Fed. Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 generally governing citation of judicial decisions issued on or after Jan. 1, 2007. See also Eleventh Circuit Rules 36-2, 36-3. (Find CTA11 Rule 36-2 and Find CTA11
Rule 36-3) United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.
Judith HANEY, et al., Plaintiffs, Ann Martin, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, et. al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 05-16266 | Non-Argument Calendar. | Aug. 30, 2006.
Attorneys and Law Firms
Hugh L. Koerner, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Craig Edward Leen, Miami-Dade County Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, for Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. D.C. Docket No. 04-20516-CV-AJ.
Before TJOFLAT, ANDERSON and BARKETT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion
PER CURIAM:
*1 Ann Martin, a plaintiff in instant class action suit, appeals from the district court’s denial of her motion, filed after the bar date, to opt out of a class action settlement in the above entitled matter. Martin argues that the district court abused its discretion in determining that she was a member of the class, and in denying her motion to opt out despite the fact that, according to Martin, the defendants would not be prejudiced by the relief if the court permitted her to opt out after the bar date.
Martin has specifically referred to herself as a “class member” in her pleadings in the instant case, and her failure to opt out of the class settlement before the bar date was not a result of any form of excusable neglect. Both Martin and her legal counsel were aware of the relevant bar date and simply failed to execute the necessary procedures to opt out of the class settlement. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Ms. Martin’s untimely motion to opt out of the class settlement. The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
Parallel Citations
2006 WL 2494412 (C.A.11 (Fla.))
	  

1