1 IRELL & MANELLA LLP Andra Barmash Greene (I 23931)
2 agreene@ireU.com
Jm R. Sperber (243304)
3 jsperber@irel1.com Brinn Z. Bark (217514)
4 bbark@irelLcom Kenne111 R. Nielsen (248759) .
5 knielsen@ireJ1.com 840 NewQort Center Drive~ #400
6 NC\\.·Ip0l1 Beach; CA 92660-6324 Telephone: (949) 760·0991
7 Facsllnile: (949) 760-5200 8
9
10
11

ACLU FOUNDATION OF

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

Mark D. Rosenbaum (~940)

1 . mrosenbaumaqacIu-sc.etrg

'-.!I

Lh·9lrfik.Rini@fkacinlu(~2s4c4.o0r8g1)

~
<n:'~'::: i9

1313 W. 8th Street

,,,' ," n

Los Angeles, CA 900 7 :::~;;:, ""

Telephone: (213) 977 9500z~ ,;'; :..J

~8b~g~wjroii:j ~ Facsmrile: (213) 9771529~~;':: ~

Hector Villagra (1775 6) :;;': s

hvillagra@aclu-sc.org

-.

Belinda EScobosa Helzer (214178)

bescobosahelzer~yaclu~sc.org

2140 W. Chapmall Ave., Suite 209

Orange, CA 92868

Telephone: (714) 450-3962

Facsnnile: (714) 937-1018

12

ERWIN CHEMERINSKY (of counsel)

University of California, Irvine

13

School ofLaw

401 E. Peltason

14

Irvine CA 92697-8000

Telepf10ne: (949) 824-7722

15

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

16 Mark Slpprelle; Helene Ayres" Felipe Ruiz,

Robert Cannicnael, and Paul1shak

17

18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

20 MAYARREKSS' FIPEPLRIEPLELREi.l' i.HZ;ERLOENBEERT
21 CARMICHAEL; AND PAUL ISHAK,

22

Plaintiffs,

23

v.

24 CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH; THE

LAGUNA BEACH POLICE

25 26

CDOEPUANRCTILMOEFNTT'lfafnidCTITHYE

Cl'I'Y OF

LAGUNA BEACH,

27

Defendants.

28

Case NO.SACY..OB:01447 CJC (AGRx)
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF Fourth1Eighth, and Fourteenth Amenaments to the United States Constitution, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act

fREU. $ MAHaLLA LL? ;.. Rt?;$.~(.<ft't3t~~"4~--'Y
L,A'''''P;;.Y'~~~~I.~'\-~ r-n:b~Ao.w.~~ -OXpet~~

1976717

1

JURISDICTION

2

1. This Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

3 § 1331 (in that this case arises under the Constitution of the United States);

4 § 1343(a)(3) (in that it is brought to redress deprivations, under color of state

5 authority, of rights, privileges and immunities secured by the United States

6 Constitution); § 1343(a)(4) (in that it seeks to secure equitable relief under an Act of

7 Congress, specifically under Title II of the ADA, and under 42 U.S.C. § 1983); and

8 the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201(a) and 2202.

9

2. This Court has jurisdiction over Defendant City of Laguna Beach

10 ("Laguna" or "the City") because it is a political subdivision of the State of

11 California located in Orange County, Defendant Laguna Beach Police Department

12 ("LBPD") because it operates in Orange County and enforces the City's laws, and

13 the City Council of Laguna Beach ("City Council") because it is comprised of

14 elected officials who institute and implement the City's unlawful and discriminatory

15 policies.

16

VENUE

17

3. Venue is proper in the Central District of California under 28 U.S.C.

18 § 139I(b). Defendants are located in the Central District and all of the acts and/or

19 omissions complained of herein have occurred or will occur in this District.

20

SUMMARY OF THE COMPLAINT

21

4. Laguna is one of most affluent communities in the United States. Yet,

22 for all intents and purposes, Defendants have made it illegal to be homeless in

23 Laguna. Despite acknowledging that most of its homeless residents, like Plaintiffs,

24 are mentally and/or physically disabled, Laguna has unlawfully discriminated

25 against them. Laguna intentionally violates its homeless residents' constitutional

26 rights by criminalizing sleeping; conducting unwarranted and unjustified stops of

27 these residents that result in interrogations, demanding identification, running

28 warrant checks, and instituting unauthorized searches and arrest; selectively

IRELL & MANELLA LLP A Registered Lim~ed liability
Law Partnership Including Professional Corporations

1976727

- 1-

COMPLAINT

1 enforcing local ordinances and criminal laws against them; and thwarting their
'"
2 access to available basic social services.

3

5. Because of this unlawful and unconstitutional conduct of the City, the

4 LBPD, and the City Council, Plaintiffs bring this action for preliminary and

5 permanent injunctive relief and declaratory relief. This action is based upon the

6 rights secured to Plaintiffs by the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the

7 United States Constitution, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42

8 U.S.C. § 12132 (the "ADA").

9

PARTIES

10

Plaintiffs

11

6. Plaintiffs are chronically homeless residents ofLaguna. Each is

12 "homeless" within the meaning of federal law (Stewart B. McKinney Homeless

13 Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. § 11302), in that he or she is "without a fixed regular and

14 adequate night-time residence, or a person who resides in a ... place not ordinarily

15 used for sleeping accommodations, such as the streets, automobiles, abandoned

16 buildings, etc." Each homeless resident is also mentally and/or physically disabled.

17

Defendants .

18

7. Defendant Laguna is a municipal entity, organized as a charter city .

19 under the laws of the State of California, with the capacity to sue and be sued.

20 Defendant Laguna is the legal and political governmental entity responsible for the

21 actions of the LBPD, its officials, its agents, and its employees. Defendant Laguna

22 is sued in its own right and on the basis of the acts of its officials, agents, and

23 employees, including the LBPD.

24

8. Defendant LBPD provides law enforcement services in Laguna and

25 enforces Laguna's municipal code.

26

9. Defendant City Council consists of elected officials who institute and

27 implement Laguna's policies. It is responsible for enacting and repealing Laguna's

28 ordinances. The City Council is sued in its official capacity.

IRELL & MANELLA LLP A Registered Umited Liability
law Partnership Including Professional Corporations

1976727

COMPLAINT
-2-

1

10. Each of the acts complained of was undertaken and each violation of

2 Plaintiffs' rights occurred pursuant to the unlawful policies, practices, and customs

3 of Defendants.

4

11. Each Defendant was acting on behalf of Laguna or at the direction of

5 another Defendant on Laguna's behalf.

6

12. The acts of each Defendant were authorized, ratified, and/or condoned

7 by the relevant policy makers for Defendant Laguna.

8

13. Thus, each of the complained violations of law, were intentionally

9 committed by Defendants, their officials, agents, and employees, acting under color

10 oflaw.

11

STATEMENT OF FACTS

12

The Homeless Population In Laguna Beach Is Comprised Almost

13 Exclusively Of Chronically Homeless Residents Who Experience Long Term

14

Homelessness Due To Mental And/Or Physical Disabilities

15

14. The homeless population in Laguna is "[u]nique ... as compared to

16 other cities in Orange County [because it] almost exclusively meets the definition of

17 chronically homeless." (City of Laguna Beach Homeless Task Force Final

18 Recommendations ("Task Force Rpt.") at 4.) "Chronically homeless" is defmed as

19 "unaccompanied individuals with a mental or physical disability who experience

20 long term or repeated homelessness." (Id. at 3.)

21

15. Most, ifnot all homeless individuals living in Laguna, suffer from some

22 form of mental and/or physical disability, and may also struggle with drug and

23 alcohol addiction, as disability and addiction are two of the three most common

24 causes of homelessness in the Laguna popUlation. (Id. at 3-5.)

25

16. The LBPD has similarly concluded that mental illness is pervasive

26 among Laguna's homeless community. The Chief of the LBPD has been quoted as

27 estimating that half of the City's homeless residents "battle mental illness, most

28

IRELL & MANELLA LLP A Registered limited Uability
law Partnership Induellng Professional Corporalions

1976727

COMPLAINT
-3-

1 without acknowledging the problem." (Christa Woodall, Addressing Laguna

2 Beach's Homeless, O.C. Register, Sept. 5, 2007.)

3

.17. In fact, the City's Homeless Task Force ("Task Force") - which was

4 established by the City Council more than a year and a half ago to "analyze the

5 situation of homeless people in Laguna Beach" and to "prepare recommendations to

6 address and mitigate adverse behavioral issues related to the City's homeless

7 residents that were considered unacceptable to the residents, merchants, and local

8 government," and which also "provide[d] the City Council with a better

9 understanding ofhomelessness in Orange County and more specifically, in Laguna

10 Beach" _. concluded that most of Laguna's homeless community is chronically

11 homeless, suffering from mental and/or physical disabilities. (Task Force Rpt. at 3-

12 5.) The City Council completely adopted the Task Force's written Final

13 Recommendations, which were submitted by the Task Force before it was

14 disbanded.

15

18. This Task Force, whose members included the current Mayor of

16 Laguna and the former Mayor of Laguna, three Housing and Human Services

17 Committee Members and community representatives, along with the participation of

18 the Assistant City Manager and the City's Police Captain, reported that the

19 population of homeless individuals in Laguna ranges between 45 and 55 people.

20 (Id. at 4.) Thus, compared with the City's population of23,727 residents as reported

21 on its website, Laguna's homeless residents comprise approximately 0.2% of the

22 City's total population.

23

19. Nonetheless, the Task Force concluded that chronically homeless

24 persons in Orange County" [0]ften do not receive the mental health and medical care

25 that they need, they are not able to advocate on their own for the mainstream

26 benefits to which they are entitled and they are often passed by for consideration for

27 long term interventions that can lead to sustained life changes." (ld. at 4.) Given

28 these conditions and that the City's homeless community is mostly chronically

IRELL & MANELLA LLP A Registered Umited liability
law Partnership Including Proressional Corporations

1976727

COMPLAINT
-4-

l' homeless, the Task Force advised that these Laguna homeless individuals were

2 likely to remain homeless and in need of services.

3

20. "Unfortunately, there is an insufficient supply of emergency and

4 transitional shelter beds ... throughout Orange County. . .. Furthermore, only a

5 negligible portion of those beds are identified for the chronically homeless leaving

6 many with no other option but to sleep out of doors in locations not meant for

7 human habitation." (Task Force Rpt. at 3 (emphasis added))

8

21. In fact, in Laguna, there are no beds regularly available to the City's

9 homeless residents. Laguna offers no transitional or emergency shelter other than a

10 cold weather shelter that operates intermittently at certain religious organizations'

11 facilities from mid-December to mid-March: it provides only overnight relief on

12 those nights when the weather reaches what the City deems to be "extreme"

13 conditions; it operates a maximum of 40 nights given the current level of City

14 funding. On information and belief, the City has refused to accept privc,lte donations

15 that would increase the number ofnights the cold weather shelter could operate.

16

22. A private non-profit organization runs Friendship Shelter, which is

17 located south of the central business district of Laguna, offers thirty-one temporary

18 rehabilitative beds to qualifying Orange County residents; Placement at Friendship

19 Shelter is by invitation only, and there are numerous prerequisites, including a pre-

20 admission interview, calling daily to maintain a place on the waitlist, and a negative

21 test result to drug or alcohol use. Some Plaintiffs, like many of the City's

22 chronically homeless residents, do not qualify for the limited sleeping space

23 available at Friendship Shelter because the program is rehabilitative in nature and

24 requires residents to obtain regular employment or to secure government assistance,

25 and to engage in personal development workshops. Mental or physical disabilities

26 impede their ability to comply with these requirements.

27

23. Moreover, with more than 35,000 homeless individuals in Orange

28' County, only 3,400 shelter beds available throughout the entire County, and with no

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
A Registered Limited Uabllity law Partnership Induding Professional Corporations

1976727

COMPLAINT
-5-

1 other year-round shelters in south Orange County, Friendship Shelter has a

2 substantial waitlist for beds. As a result, Friendship Shelter's limited number of beds

3 does not remotely afford meaningful alternative sleeping accommodations to

4 Plaintiffs and other homeless individuals in Laguna.

5

24. In contrast to the gross lack ofresources the City allocates to assist its

.6 homeless residents, and the City's refusal to provide any necessary and sufficient

7 transitional housing and related services, Laguna is one of the wealthiest cities in the

8 country, with median home prices exceeding $1.5 million. As its website

9 demonstrates in text and by many photographs, Laguna defines itself as "unique in

10 Southern California" by reason of its "resort environment," "picturesque beaches,"

11 "art festivals," "village scale shopping district" and "blufftop walkways and tram

12 system." Laguna's "resident population enjoys the ambience provided by the sandy

13 beaches, canyons and coastal hills." Apparently, however, Plaintiffs and Laguna's

14 other homeless residents are prohibited from these areas, particularly to sleep, an

15 involuntary action and basic necessity of life.

16

Laguna Targets Its Chronically Homeless Community For Law

17

Enforcement Activities

18

25. Although the Task Force reported to the City Council that "[a]ctively

19 .discourag[ing] homeless people from remaining in the City" was an ineffective

20 solution to problems relating to homelessness in Laguna; pointed out that "[r]esearch

21 in various cities (New York, San Diego and others) has shown that providing

22 housing-with-services to chronically homeless people actually costs less than what is

23 spent when they are on the streets"; and concluded that "[a] successful strategy

24 requires that homeless people receive multiple services at a single location (a Multi

25 Service Center) which is closely linked with countywide available resources ...

26 [because it] integrates the many services required by the chronically homeless and

27 makes it possible for them to enlist in programs that deal with the underlying causes

28 of their homelessness," and although the City Council adopted the Task Force

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
A Regislered Umited liability law PartnerShip Induding Professional Corporations

1976727

COMPLAINT
-6-

1 recommendations nearly a year ago, Defendants have largely rejected those humane

2 and predictably efficacious recommendations in favor ofpolicies and practices that

3 continue to criminalize homelessness and discourage homeless individuals from

4 remaining in the City. (Task Force Rpt. at 7-8.)

5

26. Defendants' illegal policies and practices are directed at and motivated

6 by Plaintiffs' involuntary status of chronic homelessness which, for many of the

7 Plaintiffs, directly results from their mental and/or physical disabilities. Defendants'

8 inhumane and unconstitutional conduct includes:

9

• the criminalization of sleeping, an involuntary and necessary human

10

process, in all public places at night;

11

• the canvassing ofbeaches, parks, and other public places at night and in

12

the early morning to wake sleeping homeless persons for the purpose of

13

harassment, threat, and intimidation;

14

• . the selective enforcement oflocal ordinances and criminal laws directly

15

targeted against homeless persons;

16

• the conducting ofunwarranted and unjustified stops of homeless

17

persons that result in interrogations, demands for identification, warrant

18

checks, unauthorized searches oftheir persons, possessions, and

19

property, and arrests; and

20

• the confiscation ofproperty of homeless persons, including critical

21

ide~tification and other government documents.

22

27. Ultimately, in Laguna, City officials and law enforcement treat the

23 chronically homeless, including Plaintiffs, as if they are essentially outlaws,

24 assuming that they are involved in criminal activity, selectively enforcing local

25 ordinances and criminal laws so as to harass and intimidate these mentally and/or

26 physically disabled chronically homeless residents. Upon information and belief,

27 the City has adopted these practices to actively discourage homeless people from

28 remaining or residing in Laguna. However, this effort of selective pursuit and

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
A Registered Limited liability Law Partnership Including Proressional Corporations

1976727

COMPLAINT
-7-

1 prosecution has not reduced the City's homeless population. To the contrary, the

:2 number ofhomeless residents has grown.

3

28. Although LBPD officers use several different pretexts to carry out the

4 policies and practices described, one law principally relied upon is Laguna

5 Municipal Code § 18.04.020 (the "Anti-Sleeping Ordinance"), which makes

6 criminals of the chronically homeless. Laguna Municipal Code § 18.04.020 states:

7

No person shall pitch a tent or camp or sleep upon any beach,

8

park, public street, alley or passageway, or sleep in any automobile parked at any place within the city; provided that between the hours of

9

seven a.m. and seven p.m. it shall not be unlawful to sleep upon any

10

beach within the city.

11

29.· The time limits set by this ordinance deliberately target those who, as a

12 consequence of their disability and poverty, cannot otherwise obtain and maintain

13 housing. The LBPD conducts sweeps to locate sleeping chronically homeless

14 individuals. At times these enforcement sweeps result in the chronically homeless,

15 including some Plaintiffs, being startled from sleep multiple times on a given night

16 by groups of armed LBPD officers shining flashlights in their faces and demanding

17 identification. Earlier this year, the LBPD "Community Liaison Officer" was quoted

18 in the press as describing this practice as "hook and book." (Christa Woodall,

19 Officer Reaches Out as a Community Resource, O.C. Register, January 29,2008.)

20

30. Penalties for violating Municipal Code § 18.04.020 are substantial,

21 especially for chronically homeless individuals such as Plaintiffs. Section 18.04.020

22 provides for issuance of a citation, which includes a fine. Accrued citations or the

23 failure to appear at citation hearings can lead and have led to the issuance of an

24 arrest warrant and incarceration. An arrest for a homeless individual is particularly

25 devastating because it results not only in loss of liberty, but may also result in the

26 loss of all possessions, including warm clothing and critically important documents

27 necessary for identification and government benefits.

28

IRELL & MANELLA LLP A Registered limited liability
Law Partnership Induding Professional Corporations

1976727

COMPLAINT
-8-

1

Overall, Defendants' Efforts To Aid The Homeless Community Are A

2 Subterfuge, Focusing On Minimizing Homeless Persons' Impact On The City's

3

Image And Businesses, Rather Than Assisting Them

4

31. Since confronted with the defects of the City's constitutionally defective

5 ordinance, Defendants have not repealed it nor officially proposed a valid

6 replacement ordinance drafted to address any legitimate concern.

7

32. In early 2008, Defendants professed to stand down in their enforcement

8 of the City's unconstitutional ordinance. However, after a few months of generally

9 limiting the issuance of citations under the Anti-Sleeping Ordinance to Plaintiffs and

10 other homeless residents, Defendants resumed their practice ofharassing,

11 intimidating, and searching for sleeping homeless residents; including under the

12 Anti-Sleeping Ordinance and also other purported quality oflife citations.

13

33. In a stunning exercise that epitomized Defendants' apparent intentions

14 to perpetuate their discriminatory practices and violations of Plaintiffs' and

15 similarly-situated homeless residents' rights, just this spring, the City drafted and

16 calendared a grossly and patently offensive and unconstitutional revision to the

17 Anti-Sleeping Ordinance, but never brought that faCially defective ordinance to

18 public hearing. Instead, immediately before the recent City Council elections, the

19 City presented yet another constitutionally defective revision of its illegal ordinance.

20 After receiving public comment, which only expressed opposition to the City's

21 proposed revisions that continued to criminalize home1essness, the City Council

. 22 decided not to take any action on the draft. Instead, the City Council alluded to

23 forming a follow up committee on the issue, something it had previously promised

24 to do nearly a year ago.

25

34. Notably, Defendants have not rescinded or dismissed citations that

26 previously were issued under the admittedly unconstitutional Anti-Sleeping

27 Ordinance, leaving many of Plaintiffs' and other homeless individuals' citations

28 unresolved. For example, upon information and belief, a homeless resident was

'RELL & MANELLA LLP
A Registered limited Liability Law Partnership Including Professional Corporations

1976727

COMPLAINT
-9-

1 sentenced to a night in jail for failure to appear on an unresolved citation issued

2 under that ordinance during the so-called stand down.

:3

35. Ironically, Defendants designated a police officer rather than an actual

4 trained community outreach worker purportedly to address Plaintiffs' and other

.

.

5 chronically homeless residents' serious issues. Like all LBPD officers, this officer

6 .cannot offer Plaintiffs or other chronically homeless people living in Laguna any

7 meaningful assistance, as none is available in the City. Thus, during purported

8 welfare checks, which Defendants suggest are their effort to help Plaintiffs and other

9 chronically homeless residents, the LBPD routinely interrogates the City's homeless

10 residents - it does not offer assistance~ shelter, or an area where sleeping is

11 permitted.

12 Laguna Impedes And Obstructs The Limited Services And Support Systems

13

Volunteers Have Sponsored For And Offered To The City's

14

Chronically Homeless

15

36. Although Defendants acknowledge that many of the City's homeless

16 residents suffer from mental and/or physical disabilities, are impoverished, and have

17 few alternatives, upon information and belief, Defendants prevent volunteer and

18 support services from reaching these members of the community.

19

37. Due to the disabilities afflicting most Plaintiffs and other Laguna

20 homeless individuals, as well as some of these people's veteran status, aid and

21 support services already exist.

22

38. Still, Defendants refuse to assist the City's homeless residents in

23 securing these readily available benefits. Moreover, Defendants have interfered

24 with volunteers' efforts to help the City's homeless community access these benefits.

25 Thus, of the homeless residents who qualify for government assistance, only some

26 homeless residents are able to obtain that assistance, much of which is insufficient to

27 support the cost ofliving. (Task Force Rpt at 5.)

28

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
A Registered Umited Liability Law Partnership Induding Professional Corporations

1976727

-10-

COMPLAINT

1

39. Recently, Defendants threatened the viability of the only community

2 center that supports the City's homeless residents. Defendants withheld approval of

3 necessary permits for the center's relocation absent onerous and unilateral

4 conditions. The City had no legitimate reason to impede the effort of this small

5 outreach organization, which is run independently from the City.

6

40. Defendants also rejected the inclusion of a homeless outreach court in

7 the City, which would have allowed Laguna's homeless residents to address in a

8 meaningful way infractions issued against them by the City. Instead, the Assistant

9 City Manager testified and submitted to the City Council that "the staff feels that the

10 Tustin and Santa Ana locations are sufficient to meet our needs." This stance

11 reflects Defendants' apparent desire to ensure the intrinsic challenges of

12 homelessness are compounded for Plaintiffs and other chronically homeless people

13 living in Laguna.

14

Harassment And Intimidation Of Plaintiffs

15 Plaintiff Mark Sipprelle

16

41. Plaintiff Mark Sipprelle, a graduate of the Laguna public school system

17 and father of two children, is chronically homeless and lives in the City. Following

18 a separation from his wife and a severe and disabling foot injury that three surgeries

19 have not resolved and for which further surgery is too dangerous, Mr. Sipprelle

20 became homeless. He has been homeless for several years. Mr. Sipprelle struggles

21 to secure proper medical attention to treat the continuous painful nerve damage in

22 his foot, as medical services are unavailable to him in Laguna. Mr. Sipprelle

23 volunteers at the local, independently-run resource center and picks up tar on the

·24 City's beaches in an effort to give back to the community. He has slept in park trees

25 and often sleeps in public places. Mr. Sipprelle tries to wake before daylight so the

26 LBPD will not cite or interrogate him.

27

42. Mr. Sipprelle has several outstanding citations for sleeping issued by

28 LBPD officers under Municipal Code § 18.04.020. He has become anxious about

IRELL & MANELLA LLP A Registered Umiled Liability
law Partnership Including Professional Corporations

1976727

-11-

COMPLAINT

1 being discovered when sleeping, preventing him from getting a restful night's sleep.

2 He worries about enforcement of criminal laws and ordinances and harassment by

. 3 LBPD officers due to his chronic homeless status and the necessity that he sleep in

4 public places.

5 Plaintiff Helene Ayres

6

43. Plaintiff Helene Ayres is a sixty-five year-old Laguna native who

7 suffered a debilitating head injury as a child. Previously, Ms. Ayres, was an

8 accomplished dancer and a certified nurse assistant, and she once owned property in

9 Laguna. Now, she is chronically homeless.

10

44. Ms. Ayres sleeps in public because she has nowhere else to go. She has

11 been harassed by LBPD officers as a result of her chronic homeless status and the

12 necessity that she sleep in public places. Ms. Ayres believes her trust has been

13 betrayed by people in the City, including community leaders. Consequently, she

14 often retreats from contact with many people. Laguna has insufficient services to

15 address the conditions of chronic homelessness suffered by Ms. Ayres.

16 Plaintiff Felipe Ruiz

17

45. Plaintiff Felipe Ruiz suffers from epilepsy and is a chronically

18 homeless resident of Laguna. About three months ago, Mr. Ruiz, a forty-seven

19 year-old father of four children and grandfather of six children, lost his job at a

20 Laguna autobody repair shop where he had worked for several years. Mr. Ruiz

21 struggles to secure critical medical care to treat his epilepsy and stave off seizures,

22 which in the past have incapacitated him and left him disoriented for some time and

23 unable to recognize even his closest friends. His only income is from occasional

24 work he can secure and recycling aluminum cans.

25

46. Mr. Ruiz has slept under a tree in a park and still sleeps in public

26 because he has nowhere else to go. LBPD officers have repeatedly woken Mr. Ruiz

27 by shining flashlights in his face. Frequently, during these police wake-ups, Mr.

28 Ruiz has been interrogated and checked for warrants, and once had his possessions

IREll & MANELLA llP
A Registered Limned lIablllty Law Partnership Including Professional Corporations

1976727

-12-

COMPLAINT

1 searched without his consent. These frequent interruptions ofhis sleep have

2 exacerbated Mr. Ruiz's epilepsy, interfering with sleep that is critical to preventing

3 further epileptic seizures or minimizingtheir severity. For now, Mr. Ruiz has 4 managed to secure his necessary epilepsy medication because of the generosity of a

5 local volunteer who paid for his medical examination and expensive prescription 6 medication and because local volunteers have helped him travel to other cities where 7 free medical services are available. There are insufficient services in Laguna Beach

8 to address the conditions of chronic homelessness suffered by Mr. Ruiz. He fears 9 additional harassment by LBPD officers based on his status as chronically homeless

10 and the necessity that he sleep in public places.

11 Plaintiff Robert Carmichael

12

47. Plaintiff Robert Carmichael is a fifty-two year-old chronically homeless

13 resident of Laguna. He suffers from mental illness and/or several physical

14 impairments. Mr. Carmichael last worked as a tow truck driver, but currently is 15 unemployed. He is emaciated and frail. Mr. Carmichael has been hospitalized and 16 has been prescribed medications to treat his anxiety and/or depression. As a result 17 of an inner ear condition, he frequently loses his balance and falls, causing cuts, 18 abrasions, and sores. He has obtained a wheelchair, but recently was the victim of a

19 hit-and-run accident that has left him further weakened. Still, Mr. Carmichael must

20 devote considerable time and effort to locating places to sleep where he will be least

21 likely to be cited or harassed by LBPD officers.

22

48. LBPD officers, acting pursuant to the policies and practices described,

23 have issued multiple citations to Mr. Carmichael for violation of Municipal Code

24 § 18.04.020. He fears additional citations will be issued against him and he will be

25 further harassed by LBPD officers based on his chronic homeless status and because 26 he has no alternative but to sleep in public places. There are not sufficient services 27 in Laguna to address the conditions of chronic homelessness suffered by 28 Mr. Carmichael.

IRELL & MANELLA llP
A Registered Limited liability
law Partnership Including Professional Corporations

1976727

-13-

COMPLAINT

1 PlaintiffPaul Ishak

2

49. Plaintiff Paul Ishak is a thirty-two year-old chronically homeless Navy

3 veteran who resides in Laguna. Mr. Ishak suffers from mental illness and/or

4 physical disability. He receives benefits due to his military service, but the benefits

5 are not enough to maintain permanent housing and pay for food, utilities, and other

6 living expenses.

7

50. As a result, he repeatedly suffers long periods ofhomelessness. During

8 those times, Mr. Ishak fears enforcement of criminal laws and ordinances by LBPD

9 officers, and harassment as a consequence ofhis chronic homelessness and the

10 resulting necessity that he sleep in public places. From time to time he has been

11 able to find shelter, often because of the kindness of friends. These instances are

12 usually of fairly short duration. Currently, he is able to sleep under a roof.

13 However, there are not sufficient services available in Laguna to address the

14 conditions of chronic homelessness suffered by Mr. Ishak.

15 Laguna Beach Homeless Residents

16

51. Plaintiffs share these experiences with other chronically homeless

17 Laguna residents who have been the target of Defendants' effort to eradicate them

18 from the pristine beach community. They struggle on a daily basis to cope with

19 disabilities, some living with conditions that used to be managed with large doses of

20 mediation, still others dealing with conditions that while readily apparent have never

21 been treated; some seek comfort by keeping company with friends and

22 acquaintances, but others keep to themselves and avoid human contact. Regardless,

23 the members of Laguna's homeless community know from experience such as

24 having been woken from a sound sleep on a bench in a remote area of town with a

25 light shone and rifle pointed at one's face, or having been roused from harmless

26 sleep behind a tree in a park multiple times in one night, that it is not safe for them

27 to sleep in the City. For some, these intimidating wake-up calls can exacerbate the

28 symptoms and condition of their disabilities.

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
A Regi~tered Umited LiabiMy
Law Partnership Including Professional COrporations

1976727

-14-

COMPLAINT

1

52. For most homeless residents, Defendants' disparate enforcement against

2 them makes them anxious before they lie down to rest, albeit outdoors and without

3 protection from the elements, because they worry about being startled from sleep by

4 the LBPD. They are intimidated by armed officers in uniform questioning them,

5 shining lights in their eyes, and relaying their names over police radios. Laguna's

6 homeless residents believe they are not free to leave and must endure regular middle

7 of the night police interrogations.

8

53. It is well understood that homeless individuals often suffer from sleep

9 deprivation due to disturbed or fragmented sleep as well as simply an inadequate

10 amount of sleep. Sleep fragmentation is often related to external stimuli, such as

11 bright lights, loud noises, and intentional efforts by others to awaken or disturb

12 sleeping. It is widely documented that inadequate sleep has numerous adverse

13 health effects, including cognitive deficits such as impaired alertness and

14 concentration, increased risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity, and

15 depression. Indeed, small amounts of sleep loss, such as one hour per night over

16 many nights, have been shown to cause subtle cognitive effects, while more severe

17 sleep restriction for a week leads to profound cognitive deficits similar to those seen

18 in some stroke patients. Many mental and physical disabilities also are compounded

19 by inadequate sleep.

20

54. Recently, sleeping homeless have been woken with bright lights shone

21 in their faces by LBPD officers carrying weapons. Sometimes, the LBPD officers

22 point their weapons at the abruptly awoken residents. Questioning generally ensues,

23 including. a demand for identification. In some instances, belongings are searched

24 without permission.

25

55. Frequently, the LBPD runs the names of the homeless residents they

26 wake up from sleeping. If an outstanding warrant is not found, the homeless

27 residents might be cited for an infraction based upon the LBPD's searches of their
28

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
A Registered Umjted Liability Law Partnership Including Professional COrporations

1976727

-15-

COMPLAINT

1 persons or possessions; they might be told they cannot sleep there; or they might be

2 warned to move on.

3

56. Even ifnot explicitly told that they cannot sleep in a public area or to

4 move on, which many Laguna homeless residents have been and are told, Laguna's

5 homeless community hears Defendants' implicit message - The homeless are not

6 welcome in Laguna. For instance, if Plaintiffs or other similarly situated homeless

7 residents are not cited under § 18.04.020, upon information and belief, they know

8 LBPD officers still might issue citations against them under criminal or local law to

9 discourage them from sleeping in public and residing in Laguna.

10

57. Another result of being chronically homeless is that the LBPD

11 disparately tracks and pursues some Plaintiffs and other City homeless persons for

12 purported quality oflife offenses. Thus, homeless residents accumulate tickets for

13 crossing at designated areas when the signal flashes red or for extinguishing and

14 disposing of cigarette butts at the request ofLBPD.

15

58. For example, in one recent incident, an LBPD officer ordered a

16 homeless woman whom he was interrogating to extinguish her cigarette. When she

17 complied with the officer's order by smothering the cigarette, the officer promptly

18 cited her without warning. The citation carried with it a mandatory appearance

19 requirem~nt. When she arrived to court, she was told that she could either plead

20 guilty and pay a $366 fine, or she could plead not guilty and post a $366 bond in

21 order to contest the citation at trial. She chose the latter, but does not have the

22 means to post the required bond. She fears a warrant will issue for her arrest as a

23 result.

24

59. In another example, a homeless man, who had been routinely targeted

25 for citation by the LBPD and who was told not to enter a local park, was arrested

26 and jailed for violating that directive while sitting on the sidewalk adjacent to the

27 park waiting for a volunteer who was brining him a brown bag lunch.

28

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
A Registered limiled Liability law Partnership Including Professional Corporations

1976727

-16-

CQMPLAINT

1

60. Laguna's homeless residents also have been photographed by LBPD

2 officers in the middle of the night while sleeping and in the early morning while

3 attending a charity-sponsored breakfast. Like Plaintiffs, upon information and

4 belief, these homeless residents have not given the LBPD permission to photograph

5 them, and are startled and scared when woken by the LBPD's camera flash. Upon

6 information and belief, some Plaintiffs have been improperly photographed by the

7 LBPD.

8

61. Although Defendants appear to have, for the time being, curbed the

9 incessant written citations issued under the City's unconstitutional Anti-Sleeping

10 Ordinance, they disparately pursue Laguna's homeless residents with other citations

11 and continue to enforce the local Anti-Sleeping Ordinance without citation.

12

CAUSES OF ACTION

13

First Claim For Relief

14

(Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment,

15

Equal Protection; all Plaintiffs against all Defendants)

16

62. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference each and every

17 allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 61, herein, as if fully alleged.

18

63. The acts and omissions of Defendants, and each of them, as described

19 herein, violate the constitutional rights of Plaintiffs under the Equal Protection

20 Clause of the United States Constitution. The violations include deliberate and

21 selective enforcement of criminal laws, including Laguna Municipal Code §

22 18.04.020, to harass and intimidate impoverished and disabled persons with no

23 alternative but to sleep in public places. Defendants have no legitimate government

24 interests in the deliberate and selective enforcement of criminal laws against

25 impoverished and disabled homeless persons with no alternative but to sleep

26 somewhere in the City.

27

28

IRELL & MANELLA LLP A Registered limited liability
Law Partnership InCluding Proressional Corporations

1976727

-17-

COMPLAINT

1

Second Claim For Relief

2

(Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment,

3

Due Process; all Plaintiffs against all Defendants)

4

64. 'Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference each and every

5 allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 61, herein, as if fully alleged.

6

65. The acts and omissions of Defendants, and each of them, as described

7 herein, deny the constitutional rights of Plaintiffs under the Due Process Clause of

8 the United States Constitution. The violations deprive impoverished and disabled

9 persons the opportunity and ability to carry out the basic necessities oflife and

10· liberty such as sleeping, as well as to enjoy the right of free movement. Defendants'

11 harassment, threats, and citations against these homeless persons for remaining and

12 sleeping in the only place available, outdoors, violate Plaintiffs' due process rights.

13

Third Claim For Relief

14

(Violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments;

15

.all Plaintiffs against all Defendants)

16

66. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference each and every

17 allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 61, herein, as if fully alleged.

18

67. The acts and omissions of Defendants, and each of them, violate the

19 rights of all Plaintiffs to be free from actual or threatened cruel and unusual

20 punishment. By virtue of their involuntary status as homeless and disabled, and the

21 absence and insufficiency of shelter availability in Laguna, Plaintiffs have no way to

22 comply with the laws Defendants have sought and continue to seek to enforce

23 against them, in particular Laguna Municipal Code §18.04.020.

24

Fourth Claim For Relief

25

(Violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments;

26

all Plaintiffs against all Defendants)

27

68. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference each and every

28 allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 61, herein, as if fully alleged.

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
A Registered Umited Uability taw Partnership Induding Professional COrporations

1976727

-18-

COMPLAINT

1

69. The acts and omissions of Defendants, and each of them, violate the

2 rights of Plaintiffs to be free from illegal searches and seizures as guaranteed by the

3 Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

4

Fifth Claim For Relief

5

(Violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12132;

6

all Plaintiffs against all Defendants)

7

70. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference each and every

8 allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 61, herein, as if fully alleged.

9

71. In 1990, Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42

10 U.s.C.§§ 12101 -12181 ("ADA"), in order to secure and advance the civil rights of

11 people with disabilities. The Congressional intent in enacting the ADA is "the

12 elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities." (42 U.S.C.

13 § .l2101(b)(I).) Congress thus found that "historically, society has tended to isolate

14 and segregate individuals with disabilities," and that these forms of discrimination

15 "continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem." (42 U.S.C. § 12101(a)(2).)

16 It determined too that "the Nation's proper goals regarding individuals with

17 disabilities are to assure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent

18 living, and economic sufficiency for such individuals." (42 U.S.C. § 12101(a)(8).)

19

72. Title II of the ADA provides that "no qualified individual with a

20 disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be

21 denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be

22 subjected to discrimination by any such entity." (42 U.S.C. § 12132 (emphasis

23 added).)

24

73. The acts and omissions of Defendants, and each of them, including

25 harassment and intimidation, the issuance of reprimands and citations, and making

26 and threatening arrests for conduct, including sleeping in public places, which is not /

27 criminal, but the result of disability within the meaning of the ADA, violate the

28 rights of Plaintiffs under the ADA.

JRELl & MANELLA LLP A Registered Limiled liability
law Partnership Induding Professional Corporations

1976727

-19-

COMPLAINT

1

ACTUAL CONTROVERSY

2

74. There exists an actual controversy between Plaintiffs and Defendants as

3 to each and every Claim for Relief alleged herein. Plaintiffs have suffered and

4 continue to suffer ongoing and continuous injuries so long as the City continues its

5 practice of citing, harassing, and threatening homeless persons. These controversies

6 warrant judicial determinations. Absent relief from this Court, Plaintiffs will suffer

7 irreparable injury as a consequence of Defendants' unconstitutional and illegal acts

8 and omissions.
9 .

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

10

Plaintiffs request relief as follows:

11

1. A preliminary injunction and a permanent injunction, enjoining

12 Defendants, their officers, agents, and employees, from enforcing Laguna Municipal

13 Code § 18.04.020 against individuals who have no practical way to comply with it

14 by virtue of their homelessness, illness, or disability;

15

2. For a declaration that Defendants' past, present, and threatened future

16 actions violate Plaintiffs' rights to be free from cruel and unusual punishment under

17 the Constitution of the United States;

18

3. For a declaration that Defendants' past, present, and threatened future

19 actions violate Plaintiffs' rights to be free from equal protection violations under the

20 Constitution of the United States;

21

4. For a declaration that Defendants' past, present, and threatened future

22 actions violate Plaintiffs' rights to be free from due process violations under the

23 Constitution of the United States;

24

5. For a declaration that Defendants' past, present, and threatened future

25 actions violate Plaintiffs' rights to be free from illegal search and seizure under the

26 Constitution of the United States;

27

6. For a declaration that Defendants' past, present, and threatened future

28 actions violate Plaintiffs' rights to be free from discrimination under the ADA;

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
A Registered limited liability Law Partnership Including Professional Corporations

1976727

-20-

COMPLAINT

...._ .... ~ __ ... _. __ '. ~.' .• c·

.
",

.
._,.

. -. .
-'-'

.

..... :..

1

7. For costs of suit pursuant to. 2~ U.S.C. § 1920 and 42 U.S.C. § 1988, as

2 well as the analogous provisions of California law;

3

8. For attorneys' fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988; and

4

9. For such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.

5

6 Dated: December 23,2008 7
8. 9
10

IRELL & MANELLA LLP
By:4/-<L/; ~ I ~ araBaDiiash~J
. . Attorneys for Plaintiffs

11 Dated: December 23, 2008 12 13 14 15 . 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 . 24 25 26 27 28

ACLU FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN .CALIFORNIA
BY:~~ MarkD. Rosenbaum ~ Attorneys for Plaintiffs .

IRELL & MANELLA LLP .
ARegl6lerad llmtIed Ullblllly
low PMnOrsllip IncludIng Professional Corporollons

.1976727

COMPLAINT

 
 &DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

1 IRELL & MANELLA LLP Andra Barmash Greene (123931)
2 agreene@irell.com Jill R. SRerber (243304)
3 jsperber@irell.com Brian Z.'Bark (217514)
4 bbark@irell.com Kenneth R. Nielsen (248759)
5 knielsen@irell.com 840 NeW}Jort Center Drive, #400
6 Newj)ortBeach, CA 92660-6324
7 Telephone: (949) 760-0991 Facsimile: (949) 760-5200
8 ACLU FOUNDATION OF
9 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Mark D. Rosenbaum (59940)
l 0 mrosenbaum@aclu-sc.org Lori Rifkin (244081)
11 lritkin@aclu-sc.org
1313 W. 8th Street
12 Los Angeles, CA 900 17 Telephone: (213) 977-9500
13 Facslillile: (213) 977-5297

ACLU FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Hector Villagra (177586) hvillagra@aclu-sc.org Belinda BScobosa Helzer (214178) bescobosahelzer@aclu-sc.org 2140 W. Chapman Ave;; Suite 209 Orange, California 928o8 Telephone: (714) 450-3962 Facsimile: (714) 450-3969 ERWIN CHEMERINSKY (of counsel) University of California, Irvine School of Law 40 1 E. Peltason Irvine, California 92697-8000 Telepnone: (949) 824-7722

14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
15 RMoabrekrtSCipaprrmelilcen, aHeel laenndAPyaruels1sFhealkipe Ruiz,

16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18

MARK SIPPRELLE, HELENE 19 AYRES; FELIPE RUIZi ROBERT
CARMICHAEL; and PAUL ISHAK, 20

Case No. SACV 08-1447 CJC (AGRx)

Plaintiffs, 21

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

v. 22

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH; THE 23 LAGUNA BEACH POLICE
DEPARTMEN1). and THE CITY 24 COUNCIL OF 1HE CITY OF

[Honorable Cormac J. Carney]

LAGUNA BEACH, 25

Defendants. 26

27

28

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

1

2

Pursuant to the settlement reached on June 19, 2009 by and between

3 Plaintiffs Mark Sipprelle, Helene Ayres, Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, and Paul

4 Ishak ("Plaintiffs") on the one hand and Defendants City of Laguna Beach,

5 Laguna Beach Police Department, and the City Council ofthe City of Laguna

6 Beach ("Defendants") on the other hand, the terms ofwhich are memorialized in

7 the Settlement Agreement, a fully executed copy of which is attached hereto as

8 Exhibit 1, all claims by Plaintiffs against Defendants are hereby dismissed, with

9 prejudice.

10

The United States District Court for the Central District of California Judge

11 Cormac J. Carney will retain jurisdiction over this case for a term of three years to

12 enforce the settlement agreement, with the condition that no party may bring . ,

13 litigation to enforce the settlement without first providing the other side notice of

14 ~ny alleged violation and a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged violation.

15
d, 16 Dated: June 2009

Respectfully submitted,

17

18

19

20 Dated: June~5, 2009 .
21 22 23 24 25

ACLU FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
By: Mk~osenbaum Attorneys for Plaintiff

26

27

28

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'
EXHIBIT 1

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

This SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into by and between Plaintiffs ·Mark Sipprelle, Helene Ayres, Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, and Paul Ishak ("Plaintiffs") and the City of Laguna Beach, the Laguna Beach Police Department, and the City Council ofthe
City of Laguna Beach (collectively "Defendants"). Each Plaintiffand Defendant is a "Party" . and collectively, Plaintiffs and Defendants are the "Parties."

RECITALS

WHEREAS, on December 23, 2008, Plaintiffs filed a complaint (the "Complaint") against

Dl;lfendants in U.S. District Court (the •1\ction"). The Complaint alleges, among other things,

that Defendants' enforcement oi' Laguna Beach Municipal Code (hereinafter "LBMC") section

18.04.020 violated the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unus.ual punishment by

criminalizing the involuntary condition ofhomelessness.

.

WHEREAS, Defendants filed· an Answer to the Complaint that; among other things, denies all

allegations of wrongdoing.

·

WHEREAS, the Parties wish to avoid the costs, burdens, time and uncertainties associated with
protracted litigation and they desire to compromise and .settle their.differences, fully and
completely, on the terms set forth in this Agreement

NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable cOnsideration, including the mutual promises and . covenants herein, the Parties agree to settle their disputes on the following terms:

AGREEMENT
·1. Effective Date. The "Effective Date" .ofthis Agreement shall be the date upon which the. · last signatory Party executes this Agreement. ·

2. Effective Period..This agreement will remain in effect for three (3) years from the . Effective Date ("Effective Period"). ·

3. Laguna Beach Municipal Code.

A. The Parties acknowledge that on March 3, 2009, Defendant City Council of the

·City ofLaguna Beach adopted an ordinance repealing those portions ofLBMC section 18.04.020

relating to camping and sleeping in public. places within the City.

·

. . B. · For a period of three (3) years following the Effective Date ofthis Agreement, ···.····~tllilltS'1fgree to ·fbmish!'lal:nttffs'co~with-written·notice-atteasttl:llfty('30)'days·"'p..:ri""o"r"".·l""b"'·~"7
any City Council public meeting at which action is proposed to add or revise provisions of the La~ Beach Municipal Code pertaining to the prohibition of, or restriction on, camping or sleii'pmg in public places within the City.

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

C. Nothing in this Agreement shall prohibit Defendants (including their officers, employees and agents) from stopping, detaining, issuing citations or making arrests, or threatening to issue citations or make arrests, to persons reasonably believed to be in violation of the current provisions of Laguna Beach Municipal Code section 18.04.020 with respect to awnings, canopies, umbrellas, and other such covers.
4. Disposition ofPrior Arrests and Citations.

A. Plaintiffs intend, within twenty-one (21) days ofthe Effective Date ofthis Agreement, to move the Court for an order directing Defendants to seal, expunge or destroy permanently all records created on and afterJune 18, 2007 relating to arrests of or citations to
Plaintiffs and other persons for violation of the former provisions of Laguna Beach Municipal Code section 18.04.020 with regard to camping or sleeping onpublic property. Plaintiffs further intend to move the Court for an order directing Defendants to seal, expunge or destroy . permanently all records created on and after January 1, 2004 relating to arrests ofor citations to ·Plaintiffs, or any ofthem, for violation ofthe fonner proVisions of Laguna BeachMunicipal ·.Code section 18.04.020 with regard to camping or sleeping on public property. ·

B. Defendants agree not to oppose such motion by Plaintiffs, provided that the order . requested and obtained substantially confonns to the following:

i. · Defendants shall have thirty (30) days ofthe receipt ofthe order to · undertake and complete the sealing, expungement or destruction ofthe
described records and to furnish Plaintiffs' counsel with written notice of such completion.

ii. Defendants shall have thirty (30) days froin the receipt of the order to
request in writing to their City Attorney and the Orange County District Attorney that any copies ofthe described records in their possession either be sllaled, expunged or destroyed or be returned to the City. Such requests shall include a copyofthe Court's order. Defendants shall furnish Plaintiffs' counsel with a eopy of such requests imd any written response to such requests.

C. During the Effective Period ofthis Agreement, Defendants will not oppose the

petition to the Superior Co\lrt of Orange County ofany person to expunge a conviction,

occurring on or after December 23, 2006, of a yiolation qfthe former provisions of Laguna

.Beach Municipal Code section 18.04.020 with regard to camping or sleeping on public property. ·

Defendants will not oppose the petition of any Plaintiff to expunge a conviction, occurring on or

after January 1, 2004, of a violation ofthe former provisions ofLaguna Beach Municipal Code

section 18.04.020 with regard to camping or sleeping on public property.

..... . --~, ..;_.,_

---- .

· 5. California Penal Code section 647(e).

A. . Except as otherwise provided below, and for a period of two (2) years followfug the Effective.Date ofthis Agreement, Defendants agree to furnish Plaintiffs' counsel with written notice at least thirty (30) days prior to the City's resumption of enforcement of California Penal

1301053733-0551

-~·-·

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

Code section 647(e) with respect to lodging in any City public building, structure or place without the permission ofthe City.

B. Prior to such time as Defendants may determine to resume enforcement of

California Penal Code section 647(e), Defendants (including their officers, employees and

agents), except as otherwise provided below, shall not issue citations or make arrests, or threaten

to issue citations or make arrests, for violation of California Penal COde section 647(e) with

respect to lodging in any City public building, structure or place without the permission ofthe

City.

.

C. Prior to such time as Defendants may determine to resume enforcement of

California Penal COde section 647(e), Defendants(including their officers, employees and

agents), except as otherwise provided below, shall not rely on a violation of Ciilifornia Penal

Code 647(e) with respect to lodging in any City public building, structure or place without the

permission of the City for the purpose of establishing probable cause to believe that a person is·

engaged in or is about to engage in criminal activity.

·

D. Nothing in this Agreement shall prohibit Defendants (including their officers, employees and agents) from issuing citations or making arrests, or threatening to issue citations or make arrests, for violation ofCalifornia Penal Code section 647(e) with respect to lodging in any private building, structure or place within the City without the permission ofthe private .owner, or with respect to lodging in any bUilding, structure or place owned by a public entity other than the City without the pen:nl.ssion of that other public entity.

. E. Nothing in this Agreement shall prohibit Defendants (including their officers, employees and agents) from issuing citations. or making arrests, or threatening to issue citations or make arrests, for violation of California Penal Code seetion 647(e) with respect to lodging in · any City public building, structure or place without the permission ofthe City in circumstances presenting reasonable public health, safety and welfare concerns with respect to pos~ible harm or injury to persons and/or damage to property (e.g., fire hazard).

F. Nothing in this Agreement shall prohibit conseliSual encounters between. Defendants (including their officers, employees and agents) and persons who are reasonably believed to be in violation of California Penal Code section 647(e) with respect to lodging in any City public building, structUre or place without the permission of the City, provided that such . encounters are not used unlawfully for the purpose ofharassing or intimidating any such person, and provided further that Defendants shall have specific, articulable facts regarding a sleeping person's health, safety or welfare to justify awakening the person and initiating a consensual encounter.

G. · Nothing in this Agreement shall prohibit Defendants (including .their officers, ---·--·---, emptoye~Wmd~agents)1ium~pping;detaining; issuing.-itatiuns·onnakllig auestsror .. ---c~c.-.---c------·-- .
threatening to issue citations or make arrests, or taking .other law enforcement action when there is probabhfc:,luse to believe that a person is violating some local law or oth€,1" provision of state law.

·130/053733-0551
·";~_::_;._l~:.il5_!i)"~'c' -c-,::;:;-:c":c:::,:. '~"'·'·:::· ···

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

6. Dismissal ofAction.
A. Within seven (7) days of the Effectiv~ Date ofthis Agreement, Plaintiffs agreeto file a motion for voluntary dismissal ofthe Action with prejudice. _
B. Defendants acknowledge and agree that upon entry, such voluntary dismissal shall not operate as a bar or estoppel to any future legal proceedings arising from any acts or omissions of Defendants subsequent to the date of this Agreement. -
7. Enforcement ofthe Agreement.

A. Notwithstanding the voluntary dismissal of this Action, the Parties agree that the Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose ofenforcement ofthe terins ofthis Agreement.
B. The Court shall retain jurisdiction for the Effective Period ofthe Agreement.
C. No party may seek to enforce the Agreement Without first providing the other side notice ofanyalleged violation and a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged violation and - without meeting and conferring in good faith. '

8. - Attorneys' Fees.

A. Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date ofthis Agreement, Defendants agree

to pay, and Plaintiffs and their counsel agree to accept, the total sum of$9,000.00 to Plaintiffs

·for attorneys' fees incurred in cOnnection with the initiation, prosecution and resolution of the

· Action, including but not limited to the negotiation,·drafting and effectuation ofthis Agreement,

and any related proceedings, efforts and. activities that preceded the commencement ofthe

Action.

·

·

B. . Except as expressly provided above, the Parties and their re8pective counsel agree

to bear their own attorneys' fees, costs and other expenses incurred in connection with the

Wtiation, prosecution and resolution ofthe Action, including but not limited to the negotiation,

drafting and effectoation ofthis Agreement, and any related proceedings, efforts and activities

that preCeded the commencement ofthe Action.

-

· 9~ · Time of Essence. Time is ofthe essence with respect to each and every provision ofthis Agreement.

10. Full Settlement and Release. The Parties agree that this Agreement is in full settlement and release ofall claims outlined in the Complaint. ·

.

.

11. . Civil Code Section 1542. To the extent -that the foregoing release is a release to which

··5eetlon 1542-et'llle C~Viteoil;t'fapplies, it is tile nl1-entionot'llie1'11l'tleir1li.anll,e ··•__,,. ·

. foregoing release shall be effective as a bar to any and all actions, fees, damages, losses, clairtlS,

" liabilities and demands ofwhatsoever charaCter, nature and kind, known or unknown, suspected

- or unsuspected, related in any way to the Complaint<ir the litigation ofthe Action.

.... ...._.,;.:·... ~-.:.:...:__,,,.:

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

12. Non-Admission of Liability. This Agreement is entered into as a compromise of disputed. claims. This Agreement does not eonstitute, nor shall it be eonstrued as, an admission of any liability or wrongdoing by any party.

13. Notification. Any notice or communication to any Party permitted or required by this Agreement shall be made in writing, and shall be addressed to the following:
·A. Plaintiffs:

i. Andra Greene Irell & Manella, LLP 840 Newport Center Drive Suite400
··Newport Beach, CA92660 Facsimile: 949-760-5200

ii. Mark Rosenbaum ACLU Foundation.ofSouthern California . · l313 WestEightb Str.eet Los Angeles, CA 90017 Facsimile: 213-977-5297
B. Defendants:

.Philip Kohn
611 Anton BouleVard Suite 1400 . Costa Mesa, California 92626 Facsimile: 714-546-9035

14. Applicable law. The provisions of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State ofCalifornia.

15. . Counterparts. This Agreernentrnay be executed in separate counterparts, each ofwhich is deemed to be an original and all of which taken together constitute one and the same agreement.

16. · Facsimile Signatures. The signatures to this Agreement maybe evidenced by facsimile

copies reflecting the signatures hereto, and any such facsimile copy shall be sufficient to

evidence the signaturejust as ifit were an original signature.

·

~--------__J,?,_
. and

w_aiAniuiitthSotrliitavt.f.ieEaoclr!s_ihleldiis~ca!.dlu!llyl!_aeUxe:teluiotirinzgefduriesp~rgerseeenrtnaetinvteoonfbtlie:ihilaelnftoitfYanWeftnhtiftuyllreapurtelsioenn~tsftc.i

.

·

.

....•..

·------

bind it to each and every term and condition thereo£

18. Voluntary Action With Advice of Counsel: Each Party represents that it has been represented throughout all negotiations that preceded execJJtion ofthis Agreement by counsel of ·its own independentclroice. The Parties have entered intotb:isAgreem:enrfreely and vo1untarily· ··

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

· and after having consulted with legal counsel and having had the terms contained in this .
Agreement explained to each ofthem by counsel. The Parties have read, appreciate and understand the terms contained in this Agreement and are fully satisfied with those terms as set forth herein.

19. Entire Agreement Each of the Parties acknowledges that no person has made any promise, representation or warranty whatsoever, express or implied, not contained herein
concerning the subject matter hereof, to induce the execution of this Agreement, and each signatory hereby acknowledges that said signatory has not executed this Agreement in reliance upon any such promise, representation or warranty. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the Parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements between the Parties, either written or oral, on the subject hereof.

20. Modifications. There shall be no modifications or amendments to this Agreement unless they are in writing, signed by the Parties.

21. Severability Clause. If any provision or provisions ofthis Agreement shall be held to be invalid, illegal, unenforceable or in conflict with the law of any jurisdiction, the validity, legality and enforceability ofthe remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby .

. APPROVED ANI) AGREED:
,.
PLAINTIFFS

MARK SIPPRELLE

Dated: 01.. /D6 , 2009

By:

I

HELENE AYRES Dated: _ _ _ ___, 2009

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

FELIPERUIZ

Dated:---~--' 2009

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

I

ROBERT CARMICHAEL

. Dated: _ _ _ _ ___, 2009

By: _ _ _ _ _ _~---

1:301053733-0551

1009681.05 a{}5/1 5109

-6-

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

and after having consulted with legal counsel and having had the terms contained in this . Agreement explained to each ofthem by counsel.. The Parties have read, appreciate and · understand the terms contained in this Agreement and are fully satisfied with those terms as set forth herein.

19. Entire Agreement. Each of the Parties acknowledges that no person has made any promise, representation or warranty whatsoever, express or implied, not contained herein· concerning the subject matter hereof, to induce the execution ofthis Agreement, and each signatory hereby acknowledges that said signatory has not executed thisAgreement in reliance upon any such promise, representation or warranty..This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the Parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements .between the Parties, either written or oral, on the subject hereof.
20; Modifications. There shall be no modifications or amendments to this Agreement unless they are in writing, signed by the Parties.

21. Severability Clause. If any provision or provisions ofthis Agreement shall be held to be

invalid, illegal, unenforceable or in conflict with the law ofanyjurisdiction, the validity, legality

and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired

thereby.

·

APPROVED AND AGREED:

PLAINTIFFS

MARK SIPPRELLE Dated: _ _ _ ____, 2009

By. _ _ _ _ _ _~~-~-

DHaEtedL: EO~JeNXES .. A 2009

.

.

· FELIPE RUIZ

Dated: _ _ _ ___, 2009 ·

By.~~----.:...__ __

ROBERT CARMICHAEL

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

and after having consulted with legal counsel and having had the terms contained in this
Agreement explained to each ofthem by counsel. The Parties have read, appreciate and understand the terms contained in this Agreement and are fully satisfied with those terms as set forth herein.

19. Entire Agreement. Each ofthe Parties acknowledges that no person has made any promise, representation or warranty whatsoever, express or implied, not contained herein concerning the subject matter hereof, to induce the execution ofthis Agreement, and each signatory hereby acknowledges that said signatory has not executed this Agreement in reliance upon any such promise, representation or warranty. This Agreem\)nt constitutes the entire · understanding between the Parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements between the Parties, either written or oral, on the subject hereof.
20, Modifications. There shall be no modifications or amendments to this Agreement unless they are in writing, signed by the Parties.

21. Severability Clause. If any provision or provisions of thisAgreement shall be held to be invalid, illegal, unenforceable or in conflict with the law of any jurisdiction, the validity, legality and enforceability ofthe remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby.

APPROVED AND AGREED:

PLAINTIFFS

MARK SIPPRELLE

Dated: _ _ _ ___, 2009

By.~-----------

HELENE AYRES Dated: _ _ _ ___,2009

By."-----~-------

FELIPERUIZ
Dated: .s-·-)..."}-.

,2009

ROBERT CARMICHAEL

.·- . _____ _.,'
=- :,.1J3-0~!/0r5.3[7.3!3?-00-5~5~1:~~~~ ..:··-, --;.;.~·-'"·""· -·- '- ·:;""''''-~--,..'"'··~""·"'··-·ic;,---::.,,;.~---,;:.:._.:£:;.:;,:;-~ ......._..,.__"··· .,~__,-_ ·"~=-·=·"-· r;;:: ::s::::i·-iii--cio""'"";E"·;:,-

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,' 

and after having consulted with legal counsel and having had the terms contained in this Agreement explained to each ofthem by counsel. The Parties have read, appreciate and understand the tenns contained in this Agreement and are fully satisfied with those tenns as set forth herein.

19. Entire Agreement. Each ofthe Parties acknowledges thatno person has made any promise, representation or warranty whatsoever, express or implied, not contained herein concerning the subject matter hereof: to induce the execution ofthis Agreement; and each signatory hereby acknowledges that said signatory has not executed this. Agreement in reliance upon any such promise, representation or warranty. This Agreement constitutes the entire · understanding between the Parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements between the Parties, either written or oral, on the subject hereof.

20; Modifications. There shall be no modifications·or amendments to this Agreement unless

they are in writing, signed by the Parties.

·

21. Severability Clause. If any provision or provisions ofthis Agreement shall be held to be

invalid, illegal, unenforceable or in conflict with the law of any jurisdiction, the validity, legality

and enforceability ofthe remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired

thereby.

·

APPROVED AND AGREED:

PLAINTIFFS

MARK Sll'PRELLE Dated: _ _ _ ___, 2009

By: _ _ _ _ _c...,-_ _ __

HELENE AYRES Dated:-'-------> 2009
FELll'E RUIZ Dated:. _ _ _ ____, 2009 ·

By: _ _ _~-~----

ROBERT CARMICHAEL
----c-c.~~-'Tl~~-~oooo ••moou·-----~~~~~~·

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,' 

PAUL ISHAK

11 Dated: (,

, 2009

By:

DEFENDANTS: CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Dated:------> 2009

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

LAGUNA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT Dated: _ _ _ ____, 2009

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH

Dated: _ _ _ ___, 2009

By=---------'--

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Andra Greene
Mark Rosenbaum Counsel for Plaintiffs

PhilipKohn Counsel for Defendants

:..•.

I30/05373J-()5Sl .1009687.05 a05/15/09

-7-

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,' 
..

PAUL ISHAK ·Dated: _ _ _ _ _, 2009

By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

DEFENDANTS:

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH .

Dated: ;) - ('1

. '2009

By:~~~~~l

. LAGUNA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT

5"/l Dated:

q ,2009

By:~d~

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH ~

~II\ Dated: S

, 2009

7_ ,. By: -,-L v.tif="!"-..-1-iJD,~"¥ -'.-1«'·~.-""tt---

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Andra Greene
Mark Rosenbaum Counsel for Plaintiffs

Philip Kohn Counsel for Defendants

130/053733-0551

1009687.05 aOS/JS/09

-7-

. --.. ·. ·"·' ,_-._. -~------&----·D...V:. ·H·--··--·........F.Y&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,' 

PAUL ISHAK Dated: _ _ _ ___,2009

By._~~-----~----

DEFENDANTS:

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH

)-

Dated:._·- - - - - J : i 0 0 9

BY------~~------~

_____ ' LAGONABEACHPOLICEDBPAR'I'MBNT

· · ··Dated:

_·, 2009

By. _______-7_______

..

. CITY COUNCIL OFniB CITY OF LAGUNAB~CH ...

.. ·:.

Andra Greefie ...·.

Philip Kolm ·

.

j_ •••

Co1lll8el for D.efen~ts

Marlc Rosenbaum . Co~ei for Plaintiffs

=··"'···""·-··=··-=..·~.• ~..~.--- ..•
··..· ··:. ··.'"·;".·.·
~ ;?.". • ·.;-.... , r • • •

. ---··-·

~---..;:.:--::..~.:- .
. .

. .. -.~-

~---·-~·

....,._____ -~ ·.~ .

.·::i.:.

. .. ·-=t· •.

.. .

::.. ~--·.:...

. . ---~·--

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,' 

PAULISHAK Dated: _ _ _ ____, 2009

By:--'-~---~-'----

. Dl3FENDANIS: ·CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
Dated:..:.·-----' Z{)09

Bf. _ _ _ _ _~-----~

·. · ' :LAG'ONABEACHPOLICEDEPAR'I'MENT · · · ··Dated: _ _ _ __,· 2009

By. ______~~~----

·.... CITYCOUNCILOFT:HECJTYOFLAGUNAB~CH .

. D~: _ _ _ __, 200.9 .

By:_.--------

APPROVE!? AS TO FORM:

Ancira Greene
·.._ .. ·.~.c.---.-.·""' Mark Rosenbaum . Co~ei for Plaintiffs

PhilipKohn
,j_ • ' .
· CollllJlel for D~fen(Uints

. .. .... ~~-- ~;:__:,

\
. -~.

·.....

-· .....

- - - =..~-·- ·--~~-·=.-.,....,.,,.,;,:,,...,.,..,"'"""-"'"""--=···· ... :--:·-:---.,.

. ~... ·:-

... __

. . .'-~·:· ~
~- : .

.. ·. ----- .... -··-· -· ....y,,,,;, •••:...~=..... .:.. ...·. ---·-·· ········.-.·'·

-·~··;····--

- ·--------- ......-...-....

.,.!..;..:;:::.::;.:.;-•:.- ~ -~~:.....-....~- '• :

; ''~'"-""··

........

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

1 IRELL & MANELLA LLP Andra Barmash Greene (123931)
2 agreene@irell.com Jill R. Sperber (243304)
3 jsperber@irell.com Brian Z. Bark (217514)
4 bbark@irell.com Kenneth R. Nielsen (248759)
5 knielsen@irell.com 840 Newport Center Drive, #400
6 Newport Beach, CA 92660-6324
7 Telephone: (949) 760-0991 Facsimile: (949) 760-5200
8

ACLU FOUNDATION OF

9 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

10

Mark D. Rosenbaum (59940) mrosenbaum@aclu-sc.org

11

Lori Rifkin (244081) lrifkin@aclu-sc.org

12

1313 W. 8th Street Los Angeles, CA 90017

13

Telephone: (213) 977-9500 Facsimile: (213) 977-5297

ACLU FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Hector Villagra (177586) hvillagra@aclu-sc.org Belinda Escobosa Helzer (214178) bescobosahelzer@aclu-sc.org 2140 W. Chapman Ave., Suite 209 Orange, California 92868 Telephone: (714) 450-3962 Facsimile: (714) 450-3969 ERWIN CHEMERINSKY (of counsel) University of California, Irvine School of Law 401 E. Peltason Irvine, California 92697-8000 Telephone: (949) 824-7722

14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

15

Mark Sipprelle, Helen Ayres, Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael and Paul Ishak

16

17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

19

MARK SIPPRELLE, HELENE AYRES; FELIPE RUIZ; ROBERT

) )

20

CARMICHAEL; and PAUL ISHAK,

) )

21

Plaintiffs,

) )

22

v.

)

)

23 CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH; THE )

LAGUNA BEACH POLICE

)

24 DEPARTMENT; and THE CITY

)

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

)

25 LAGUNA BEACH,

)

)

26

Defendants.

)

)

27

)

)

28

)

Case No. SACV 08-1447 CJC (AGRx) ORDER DISMISSING CASE

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

&DVHFY&-&$*5'RFXPHQW)LOHG3DJHRI3DJH,'

1

ORDER

2

Pursuant to the settlement reached on June 19, 2009 by and between

3 Plaintiffs Mark Sipprelle, Helene Ayres, Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, and Paul

4 Ishak on the one hand (“Plaintiffs”), and Defendants City of Laguna Beach,

5 Laguna Beach Police Department, and City Council of the City of Laguna Beach

6 on the other hand (“Defendants”), all claims by Plaintiffs against Defendants are

7 hereby dismissed, with prejudice.

8

The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this case for a term of three years to

9 enforce the terms of the settlement agreement, with the condition that no party

10 may bring litigation to enforce it without first providing the other side notice of

11 any alleged violation and a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged violation.

12

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14

15

16 DATED: ____________
17

By: Judge Cormac J. Carney United States District Court

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

 
 Case 8:08-cv-01447-CJC-AGR Document 14 Filed 07/24/09 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:108

1 IRELL & MANELLA LLP Andra Barmash Greene (123931)
2 agreene@irell.com
Jill R. S2erber (243304) 3 jsperber(cV,irell.com
Brian Z.'Bark (217514) 4 bbark@,irell.com
Kenneth R. Nielsen (248759) 5 knielsen@irell.com
840 Newport Center Drive, #400 6 NewportBeach, CA
92660-6324 7 Telephone: (949) 760-0991
FacsImile: (949) 760-5200 8
ACLU FOUNDATION OF 9 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Mark D. Rosenbaum (59940) 10 mrosenbaum@,ac1u-sc.org
Lori Rifkin (244081 ) 11 Irifkin@,ac1u-sc.org
1313 W. 8th Street
12 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 977-9500
13 FacsImile: (213) 977-5297

ACLU FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Hector Villagra (177586) Belinda Esc6bosa Helzer (214178)
2hv1i4ll0agwra.@C,haacp1mu-ascn.oArgve., Suite 209
Orange, California 92868 Telepl1one: (714) 450-3962 FacsImile: (714) 450-3969
ERWIN CHEMERINSKY (of counsel) University of California, Irvine School of Law 401 E. Peltason Irvine, California 92697-8000 Telephone: (949) 824-7722

FILED - saU1HE1RIG1 GaUR!

CLERK, U.S. DIS

.

14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

-

Helene Ayres, Mark Sipprelle, Matthew Lang,

15 Robert Carmichael, Paul Ishak, and Kathryn Doe

16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18 HELENE AYRES; PAUL ISHAK;
19 FELIPE RUIZ; MARK SIPPRELLE;

Case No. SACV 08-1447 CJC (AGRx)

MATTHEW LANG; ROBERT

20 CARMICHAEL; AND KATHRYN DOE,
21

~ROPOSEBl ORDER OF XPUNGEMENT

Plaintiffs, 22

v. 23

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH; THE

24 LAGUNA BEACH POLICE

DEPARTMENT; LAGUNA BEACH 25 CHIEF OF POLICE; and THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

26 LAGUNA BEACH,

27

Defendants.

28

ORDER OF EXPUNGEMENT

Case 8:08-cv-01447-CJC-AGR Document 14 Filed 07/24/09 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:109

1

Good cause having been shown, IT IS ORDERED THAT Defendants shall:

2 (1) seal, expunge or destroy permanently all records created on and after June 18,

3 2007 relating to arrests of or citations to Plaintiffs and other persons for violation

4 of the former provisions of Laguna Beach Municipal Code section 18.04.020 with

5 regard to camping or sleeping on public property; and (2) seal, expunge or destroy

6 permanently all records created on and after January 1,2004 relating to arrests of

7 or citations to Plaintiffs, or any of them, for violation of the former provisions of

8 Laguna Beach Municipal Code section 18.04.020 with regard to camping or

9 sleeping on public property.

10

Defendants shall have thirty (30) days of the receipt of this order to

11 undertake and complete the sealing, expungement or destruction of the described

12 records and to furnish Plaintiffs' counsel with written notice of such completion.

13 Defendants also shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of this order to request

14 in writing to their City Attorney and the Orange County District Attorney that any

15 copies of the described records in their possession either be sealed, expunged or

16 destroyed or be returned to the City. Such requests shall include a copy of the

17 Court's order. Defendants shall furnish Plaintiffs' counsel with a copy of such

18 requests and any written response to such requests.

19

20 Dated: v;, /~ 20, 2£JpY'

"

;r

•

21

U.S. District urt Judge

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER OF EXPUNGEMENT

 
 Case 8:08-cv-01447-CJC-AGR Document 15 Filed 07/20/09 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:106

1 IRELL & MANELLA LLP Andra Barmash Greene (123931)
2 agreene@irell.com Jill R. Sperber (243304)
3 jsperber@irell.com Brian Z. Bark (217514)
4 bbark@irell.com Kenneth R. Nielsen (248759)
5 knielsen@irell.com 840 Newport Center Drive, #400
6 Newport Beach, CA 92660-6324
7 Telephone: (949) 760-0991 8 Facsimile: (949) 760-5200

9

ACLU FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

10

Mark D. Rosenbaum (59940) mrosenbaum@aclu-sc.org

11

Lori Rifkin (244081) lrifkin@aclu-sc.org

12

1313 W. 8th Street Los Angeles, CA 90017

13

Telephone: (213) 977-9500 Facsimile: (213) 977-5297

ACLU FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Hector Villagra (177586) hvillagra@aclu-sc.org Belinda Escobosa Helzer (214178) bescobosahelzer@aclu-sc.org 2140 W. Chapman Ave., Suite 209 Orange, California 92868 Telephone: (714) 450-3962 Facsimile: (714) 450-3969 ERWIN CHEMERINSKY (of counsel) University of California, Irvine School of Law 401 E. Peltason Irvine, California 92697-8000 Telephone: (949) 824-7722

14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

15

Mark Sipprelle, Helen Ayres, Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael and Paul Ishak

16

17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

19

MARK SIPPRELLE, HELENE AYRES; FELIPE RUIZ; ROBERT

) )

20

CARMICHAEL; and PAUL ISHAK,

) )

21

Plaintiffs,

) )

22

v.

) )

23

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH; THE LAGUNA BEACH POLICE

) )

24 DEPARTMENT; and THE CITY

)

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

)

25 LAGUNA BEACH,

)

)

26

Defendants.

)

)

27

)

)

28

)

Case No. SACV 08-1447 CJC (AGRx) ORDER DISMISSING CASE

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

Case 8:08-cv-01447-CJC-AGR Document 15 Filed 07/20/09 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:107

1

ORDER

2

Pursuant to the settlement reached on June 19, 2009 by and between

3 Plaintiffs Mark Sipprelle, Helene Ayres, Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, and Paul

4 Ishak on the one hand (“Plaintiffs”), and Defendants City of Laguna Beach,

5 Laguna Beach Police Department, and City Council of the City of Laguna Beach

6 on the other hand (“Defendants”), all claims by Plaintiffs against Defendants are

7 hereby dismissed, with prejudice.

8

The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this case for a term of three years to

9 enforce the terms of the settlement agreement, with the condition that no party may

10 bring litigation to enforce it without first providing the other side notice of any

11 alleged violation and a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged violation.

12

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14

15

16 DATED: July 20, 2009
17

By: Judge Cormac J. Carney United States District Court

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

 
 Case: 8:08-cv-1447 As of: 09/20/2012 07:47 AM PDT 1 of 7
(AGRx), CLOSED, DISCOVERY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Southern Division − Santa Ana)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 8:08−cv−01447−CJC−AGR

Sipprelle et al v. City of Laguna Beach et al Assigned to: Judge Cormac J. Carney Referred to: Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg Cause: 28:1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 12/23/2008 Date Terminated: 07/20/2009 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Mark Sipprelle

represented by Andra Barmash Greene Irell &Manella 840 Newport Ctr Dr, Ste 400 Newport Beach, CA 92660−6324 949−760−0991 Fax: 949−760−5200 Email: agreene@irell.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Belinda Escobosa Helzer ACLU Foundation of Southern California 2100 North Broadway Suite 209 Santa Ana, CA 92706 714−450−3962 Fax: 714−543−5240 Email: bescobosahelzer@aclu−sc.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Brian Zane Bark Irell &Manella 840 Newport Ctr Dr, Ste 400 Newport Beach, CA 92660−6324 949−760−0991 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Erwin Chemerinsky University of California, Irvine School of Law 401 East Peltason Irvine, CA 92697−8000 949−824−7722 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Hector O Villagra ACLU Foundation of Southern California 2140 West Chapman Avenue, Suite 209 Orange, CA 92868 714−450−3962 Email: hvillagra@aclu−sc.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jill Robyn Sperber Irell and Manella 840 Newport Center Drive, Suite 400 Newport Beach, CA 92660

Case: 8:08-cv-1447 As of: 09/20/2012 07:47 AM PDT 2 of 7

949−760−0991 Email: jsperber@irell.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Kenneth Richard Nielsen Irell and Manella 840 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 949−760−0991 Email: knielsen@irell.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Lori E Rifkin Rosen Bien and Galvan LLP 315 Montgomery Street 10th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 415−433−6830 Fax: 415−433−7104 Email: lrifkin@rbg−law.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Mark D Rosenbaum ACLU Foundation of Southern California 1313 West Eighth Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 213−977−9500 x224 Fax: 213−977−5297 Email: mrosenbaum@aclu−sc.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Helene Ayres

represented by Andra Barmash Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Belinda Escobosa Helzer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Brian Zane Bark (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Erwin Chemerinsky (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Hector O Villagra (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jill Robyn Sperber (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 8:08-cv-1447 As of: 09/20/2012 07:47 AM PDT 3 of 7

Plaintiff Felipe Ruiz
Plaintiff Robert Carmichael

Kenneth Richard Nielsen (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lori E Rifkin (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark D Rosenbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Andra Barmash Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Belinda Escobosa Helzer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Brian Zane Bark (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Erwin Chemerinsky (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Hector O Villagra (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jill Robyn Sperber (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kenneth Richard Nielsen (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lori E Rifkin (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark D Rosenbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by

Case: 8:08-cv-1447 As of: 09/20/2012 07:47 AM PDT 4 of 7

Andra Barmash Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Belinda Escobosa Helzer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Brian Zane Bark (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Erwin Chemerinsky (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Hector O Villagra (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jill Robyn Sperber (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Kenneth Richard Nielsen (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Lori E Rifkin (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Mark D Rosenbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Paul Ishak

represented by Andra Barmash Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Belinda Escobosa Helzer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Brian Zane Bark (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Erwin Chemerinsky (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY

Case: 8:08-cv-1447 As of: 09/20/2012 07:47 AM PDT 5 of 7
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Hector O Villagra (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jill Robyn Sperber (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kenneth Richard Nielsen (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lori E Rifkin (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark D Rosenbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant City of Laguna Beach
Defendant The Laguna Beach Police Department
Defendant The City Council of the City of Laguna Beach

represented by Philip D Kohn Rutan and Tucker LLP 611 Anton Boulevard 14th Floor Costa Mesa, CA 92626−1931 714−641−5100 Fax: 714−546−9035 Email: pkohn@rutan.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Philip D Kohn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Philip D Kohn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 12/23/2008
12/23/2008

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against Defendants City of Laguna Beach, The Laguna Beach Police Department and The City Council of the City of Laguna Beach.(Filing fee $ 350). Filed by Plaintiffs Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, Mark Sipprelle, Paul Ishak and Helene Ayres.(lwag) (lwag, ). (Entered: 12/24/2008)
20 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint − (Discovery), Complaint − (Discovery) 1 as to Defendants City of Laguna Beach, The Laguna Beach Police Department and The City Council of the City of Laguna Beach. (lwag) (Entered: 12/24/2008)

Case: 8:08-cv-1447 As of: 09/20/2012 07:47 AM PDT 6 of 7

12/23/2008 01/28/2009 01/28/2009 03/11/2009 06/05/2009 06/12/2009
06/25/2009
06/25/2009 06/25/2009 06/25/2009 07/09/2009 07/20/2009 07/20/2009
07/24/2009

2 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, Mark Sipprelle, Paul Ishak and Helene Ayres, (lwag) (lwag, ). (Entered: 12/24/2008)
3 ANSWER to Complaint − (Discovery), Complaint − (Discovery) 1 filed by Defendants City of Laguna Beach, The Laguna Beach Police Department, The City Council of the City of Laguna Beach.(Kohn Esq, Philip) (Entered: 01/28/2009)
4 Certificate of Interested Parties filed by Defendants City of Laguna Beach, The Laguna Beach Police Department, The City Council of the City of Laguna Beach, (Kohn Esq, Philip) (Entered: 01/28/2009)
5 NOTICE OF INTENT TO SCHEDULE THE CASE by Judge Cormac J. Carney:( Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 6/26/2009.) (nbo) (Entered: 03/11/2009)
6 STATUS REPORT (Joint) and Request to Postpone the Issuance of the Court's Scheduling Order filed by Plaintiffs Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, Mark Sipprelle, Paul Ishak, Helene Ayres. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Postponing Issuance of the Court's Scheduling Order)(Villagra, Hector) (Entered: 06/05/2009)
7 ORDER Postponing the Issuance of the Court's Scheduling Conference by Judge Cormac J. Carney. The Scheduling Order currently set to be issued on 06/26/2009 is postponed until 07/24/2009. The FRCivP 26(f) early meeting of counsel shall be held no later than 07/02/2009 and report of such meeting shall be postponed to 07/16/2009. (db) (Entered: 06/16/2009)
8 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Order for Expungement filed by Plaintiffs Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, Mark Sipprelle, Paul Ishak, Helene Ayres. Motion set for hearing on 7/20/2009 at 08:30 AM before Judge Cormac J. Carney. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order of Expungement)(Rosenbaum, Mark) (Entered: 06/25/2009)
9 MEMORANDUM in Support of MOTION for Order for Expungement 8 filed by Plaintiffs Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, Mark Sipprelle, Paul Ishak, Helene Ayres. (Rosenbaum, Mark) (Entered: 06/25/2009)
10 DECLARATION of Hector O. Villagra in support of MOTION for Order for Expungement 8 filed by Plaintiffs Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, Mark Sipprelle, Paul Ishak, Helene Ayres. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Rosenbaum, Mark) (Entered: 06/25/2009)
11 REQUEST to Dismiss Case filed by Plaintiffs Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, Mark Sipprelle, Paul Ishak, Helene Ayres. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − Settlement Agreement, # 2 Proposed Order Dismissing Case)(Rosenbaum, Mark) (Entered: 06/25/2009)
12 Amendment to MOTION for Order for Expungement 8 and Notice of Motion for Expungement filed by Plaintiffs Felipe Ruiz, Robert Carmichael, Mark Sipprelle, Paul Ishak, Helene Ayres. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order of Expungement)(Rosenbaum, Mark) (Entered: 07/09/2009)
13 MINUTES OF Motion Hearing held before Judge Cormac J. Carney: Court grants Plaintiffs motion for expungement 8 and request to dismiss the case 11 .Orders signed and filed this date. Court Reporter: Maria Dellaneve. (mu) (Entered: 07/24/2009)
15 ORDER DISMISSING CASE by Judge Cormac J. Carney: Pursuant to the settlement reached on June 19, 2009 by and between Plaintiffs and Defendants all claims by Plaintiffs against Defendants are hereby dismissed, with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. (see document for complete details) (Made JS−6. Case Terminated.) (mu) (Entered: 07/24/2009)
14 ORDER OF EXPUNGEMENT by Judge Cormac J. Carney: Good cause having been shown, IT IS ORDERED THAT Defendants shall: (1) seal, expunge or destroy permanently all records created on and after 6/18/07 relating to arrests of or citations to Plaintiffs and other persons for violation of the former provision of Laguna Beach Municipal Code section 18.04.020 with regard to camping or sleeping on public property. (see document for further details) (mu) (Entered:

Case: 8:08-cv-1447 As of: 09/20/2012 07:47 AM PDT 7 of 7 07/24/2009)

 
 ACLU/SC Applauds Laguna Beach City Council’s Repeal of Anti-Sleeping Ordinance

Page 1 of 2

HOME NEWS & FEATURES TAKE ACTION SUPPORT US EVENTS LEGAL ABOUT US

Search »

Home → News Releases → Release
ACLU/SC Applauds Laguna Beach City Council’s Repeal of Anti-Sleeping Ordinance
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
LOS ANGELES, Calif. – The ACLU of Southern California today applauded the Laguna Beach City Council for repealing an anti-sleeping ordinance that criminalized individuals for being chronically homeless. The City Council action came three months after the ACLU/SC, the law firm of Irell & Manella LLP, and Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California, Irvine law school, sued the affluent city for its unconstitutional harassment and intimidation of disabled homeless residents.
The city had used the ordinance as a premise for its police officers to wake and subject homeless residents to harassment, threats and intimidation; conduct unjustified stops of them that resulted in middle-of-the-night interrogations and warrant checks; and to confiscate their property, among other punitive steps.
“We’re pleased that the city recognizes it cannot treat its most vulnerable residents as if they were a law-enforcement problem that can be eliminated with citations and harassment,” said Ramona Ripston, executive director of the ACLU/SC. “We hope the city’s leaders will now seek a long-term solution to chronic homelessness by providing shelters and supportive services. This will not only take people off the street but, as has been shown time and time again in communities across the country, provide taxpayers with a more cost effective and humane way to treat homeless individuals who might otherwise end up in already overburdened public emergency medical facilities, or in the hands of law enforcement.”
Andra Barmash Greene, the managing partner of Irell & Manella LLP’s Newport Beach office and co-counsel in the case, added that she hopes the council’s action “is the first step in addressing issues of homelessness in Laguna Beach. What the City Council has still not addressed is whether previously issued citations will be rescinded or expunged.”
Hector Villagra, director of the ACLU/SC’s Orange County office, noted that the ACLU/SC and its partners will monitor the city’s new policy for dealing with homeless people to ensure that the Laguna Beach Police Department does not revert to the criminalization of the past.
“This is a step in the right direction, but whether it will resolve the lawsuit remains to be seen,” Villagra said. “We challenged the mistreatment of the homeless, not the justification for it. If the city is going to continue to harass homeless residents under other provisions, then we are essentially in the same

ACLU/SC Sues Upscale Coastal Resort for Treating Disabled Homeless People as Outlaws (03/06/2009)
Attorneys Urge California Supreme Court To Invalidate Prop 8 (03/05/2009)
more releases ...
Report: Racial Profiling and the LAPD: Reform & Resistance Jails Project Helps LA County Inmates and Families
Military Recruiting in Our Public Schools Get Help Fixing California's Broken Classrooms
Access For All: Our Campaign For Net Neutrality
U.S. Citizen Illegally Detained and Deported Latest Victim of Unconstitutional Immigration Enforcement Policy
Prop. 8 News, Updates

https://www.aclu-sc.org/releases/view/102936

3/13/2009

ACLU/SC Applauds Laguna Beach City Council’s Repeal of Anti-Sleeping Ordinance

Page 2 of 2

position as we were before the repeal.”
The lawsuit was filed on Dec. 23 last year after yearlong discussions between city officials and attorneys representing the homeless failed to yield necessary revisions to Laguna Beach’s policy toward homeless persons. The legal action sought to prevent the city from harassing and intimidating the homeless, particularly for the involuntary and necessary act of sleeping.
The long-term solution is for Laguna Beach to provide more shelter support and services that can help chronically homeless people get off the streets and into supportive environments where their disabilities can be treated. Currently there are no beds regularly available to the city’s homeless residents, while the lone nonprofit rehabilitative center south of downtown Laguna Beach has limited sleeping space and strict rules that make it difficult for chronically homeless residents to qualify for one of its beds.

and More

home | contact us | volunteer | jobs | privacy policy | legal intake | chapter calendar | RSS/feeds
This is the web site of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California and the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. Learn more about the distinction between these two components of the ACLU. Copyright 2007 The ACLU of Southern California.

https://www.aclu-sc.org/releases/view/102936

3/13/2009