Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

____________________________________

)

GREGORY SMITH,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,

)

)

Defendants.

)

____________________________________ )

Case No. 15-CV-161 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

NOTICE OF REMOVAL

Defendant the District of Columbia and the District of Columbia Department of

Corrections (“District Defendants”), by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully present

this Notice of Removal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, Civil Division

concerning Case No. 2014 CA 007278 B, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441, et seq. As grounds for

the removal, the District Defendants state as follows:

1. On November 14, 2014, Plaintiff Gregory Smith filed an action against the

District of Columbia, the District of Columbia Department of Corrections, and William J. Smith

in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, Civil Division, Case No. 2014 CA 007278 B.

Plaintiff asserts causes of action related to his incarceration and alleged over-detention from

March 18, 2014 until April 10, 2014. See Complaint, attached pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a).

2. Removal is proper because this Court has an independent basis for exercising

jurisdiction over the instant case – federal question jurisdiction based on purported violations of

the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Specifically, Plaintiff

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 2 of 3

alleges that the Defendants’ actions violated the requirements of the Fifth and Fourteenth

Amendments and constituted a violation of his constitutional rights.

3. Causes of action founded on “a claim arising under the Constitution, law or

treaties of the United States” are removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the

parties. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(c). Plaintiff alleges a violation of his constitutional rights pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Accordingly, removal based on a cause of action founded in federal law is

appropriate.

4. All Defendants who have been properly served have consented to the removal of

this action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2).

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a), copies of all process, pleadings and orders received or

sent by the District Defendants in this case are attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by

reference. Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 38 and 83, the District Defendants demand a

trial by jury by the maximum number of jurors permitted by law.

For these reasons, the District Defendants hereby remove this action to this Court from

the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, Civil Division.

Date: February 2, 2015

Respectfully submitted,

KARL A. RACINE Attorney General for the District of Columbia

GEORGE C. VALENTINE Deputy Attorney General, Civil Litigation Division

/s/ Kimberly M. Johnson KIMBERLY M. JOHNSON [435163] Chief, General Litigation Section I

/s/ Michael K. Addo MICHAEL K. ADDO [1008971] Assistant Attorney General 441 Fourth Street, N.W., Suite 600 South

2

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 3 of 3
Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone: (202) 724-6539 Email: michael.addo@dc.gov /s/ Alicia M. Cullen ALICIA M. CULLEN [1015227] Assistant Attorney General 441 Fourth Street, N.W., Suite 600 South Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone: (202) 741-0760 Fax: (202) 715-7721 E-mail: alicia.cullen@dc.gov Counsel for Defendants the District of Columbia and D.C. Department of Corrections
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on February 2, 2015, a true copy of the foregoing document was served via the Court’s electronic filing system to: Brendan Klaproth Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 Counsel for Plaintiff
/s/ Alicia M. Cullen ALICIA M. CULLEN Assistant Attorney General
3

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 45

- SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 CIVIL DIVISION

GREGORY SMITH

)

FILED -,

1225 M Street NE

)

CIVILA('TIONS BRANCH

Washington, DC 20002 Plaintiff, v.

) )

NOV 1 If 2014

)

SUperior COUrt
<dlhe Dislricl ofColomb'

)

J

Washington, DC. III

)

)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

1350 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20004

) Civ. No.

)

14-0007270 


)

Serve: Office of the Attorney General

)

For the District of Columbia

)

Darlene Fields or Tonia Robinson

)

441 4th Street NW, 6th Floor South

)

Washington, DC 20001

)

)

D.C. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

)

2000 14th Street, NW, Seventh Floor,

)

Washington, DC 20009

)

)

Serve: Office of the General Counsel

)

Maria Amato, Esquire

)

1923 Vennont Ave NW, STE N 102 )

Washington, DC 20001

)

)

WARDEN WILLIAM J. SMITH,

)

Individually and in his official capacity,

)

1901 D St SE

)

Washington, D.C. 20003

)

)

JOHN DOES 1-10 (being the fictitious names of )

agents and employees ofthe D. C. Department of )

Corrections who are not presently known to

)

Plaintif})

)

)

Defendants.

)

------------------------------) 


COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff Gregory Smith, by his attorneys, alleges for his Complaint herein:

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 2 of 45
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 
 1. This is a civil rights action arising from the wrongful and unlawful detention of Plaintiff Gregory Smith. Mr. Smith was overdetained by the District of Columbia Department of Corrections ("Department of Corrections") for twenty-three (23) days after he was ordered to be released by Judge McKenna of the D.C. Superior Court. Even more egregious, the underlying charges against Mr. Smith were ultimately dismissed. As a direct and proximate result of Mr. Smith's overdetention, Mr. Smith suffered substantial damages. 2. Plaintiffs, through their undersigned counsel, hereby alleges the following:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This civil rights action is brought pursuant to, inter alia, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and other state and federal laws for re1ief from commission of tortious acts. This Court has jurisdiction over this claim pursuant to D.C. Code § 11-921(a)(6). 4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants pursuant to D.C. Code § 13-423(a)(1 )-(4). 5. The acts alleged in this Complaint occurred in the District of Columbia and therefore venue is proper.
PARTIES AND RELEVANT PERSONS 6. Plaintiff Gregory Smith is a citizen of the District of Columbia. Mr. Smith was detained at the D.C. Jail by the Department of Corrections from March 18,2014 until April 10, 2014, despite the Court ordering Mr. Smith's release on March 18,2014. 7. Defendant District of Columbia is a municipality and the legal entity responsible for the acts and omissions of the individuals employed by the Department of Corrections,
2

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 3 of 45
including the practices, policies, and procedures relating to detention, intake, screening, transfer, and release of detained persons at the D.C. Jail. The District of Columbia was given notice of the underlying facts and circumstances of this lawsuit pursuant to D.C. Code § 12-309.
8. The D.C. Department of Corrections is a government agency created in and for the District of Columbia pursuant to D.C. Code § 24-211.01. Under D.C. Code § 24-211.02a, the D.C. Department of Corrections is responsible for processing and releasing inmates from the Central Detention Facility ("D.C. Jail"). The D.C. Code requires that all inmates must be released within 5 hours of being ordered released pursuant to a court order.
9. Warden William J. Smith is, upon information and belief, responsible for the corrections officers at the D.C. Jail. Warden William J. Smith is also, upon information and belief, responsible for establishing the customs, policies, and practices of the D.C. Jail.
10. In addition to named Defendants, unknown employees of the Department of Corrections are sued herein in their individual and official capacities under the fictitious names of JOHN DOES 1-10 because their true names, capacities and/or degree of responsibility for the acts alleged herein are unknown to Plaintiff at this time. When Plaintiff ascertains this information, he will amend this Complaint accordingly. John Does 1-10 are or were at all times mentioned herein employees of the D.C. Department of Corrections. In this capacity, they are or were responsible for the intake and processing of inmates upon arrival at the D.C. Jail, and the eventual release of an inmate upon the conclusion of their sentence or upon an order by the court. Thus, John Does 1-10 were the custodian(s) of Mr. Smith and responsible for his care and well­ being while an inmate at the D.C. Jail. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that John Does 1-10 are legally liable to Plaintiff in some part for the wrongful acts and omissions of which Plaintiff complains herein.
3 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 4 of 45
FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS 
 Overview of the D.C. Department of Corrections
11. The District of Columbia Department of Corrections holds prisoners committed by the District of Columbia Superior Court, and other agencies, in the Central Detention Facility ("DC Jail") and the Correctional Treatment Facility ("CTF").
12. Warden William J. Smith is the responsible official for all activities, including inmate releases, at the DC Jail.
13. The records office located at the DC Jail ("Records Office") is responsible for administering and maintaining the records of all persons housed at the DC Jail. The Records Office is also responsible for ensuring that all persons housed at the DC Jail are released as required by the release date specified in the court orders.
14. The District of Columbia Superior Court has a policy pursuant to which an incustody defendant or a defendant ordered into custody may not leave the courtroom without either a commitment order or a release order.
15. Once a defendant is ordered released, the Department of Corrections begins an administrative release process that results in the prisoner's actual release from the Department of Correction's custody. Upon information and belief, this process takes from 2 to 2.5 hours to complete.
16. The Department of Corrections considers "anyone released after 11 :59 p.m. on the day they are ordered released" to be classified as '~overdetained." Plaintiff's Overdetention
17. On March 15, 2014, Mr. Smith was arrested and charged in the District of Columbia with a misdemeanor for failure to appear in relation to a prior citation.
4 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 5 of 45
18. On March 18, 2014, after the Court had lawfully detained Mr. Smith for 3 days pursuant to D.C. Code § 23-1322(b)(1)(D), Judge Juliet McKenna of the D.C. Superior Court ordered Mr. Smith's release from custody in both cases. Upon information and belief, the Release Orders were transmitted to the D.C. Jail at I :28 PM via the Court View computer system. The release order is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
19. Despite the Court's order on March 18,2014, the D.C. Department of Corrections did not release Mr. Smith until April 10, 2014 after a hearing before the Court where Judge McKenna again ordered the D.C. Jail to release Mr. Smith.
20. On repeated occasions, Mr. Smith stated to the corrections officers at the D.C. Department of Corrections that the court ordered him to be released, and he demanded that he be released. The corrections officers wholly ignored Mr. Smith's requests to be released. On such an occasion, corrections officer, John Doe 1, replied, "If you're here, they know you're here and you're supposed to be here."
21. Mr. Smith was not ultimately released until April 10, 2014-the date upon which Judge McKenna learned that Mr. Smith had been held by the Department of Corrections in direct contravention of Judge McKenna's release order of March 18, 2014.
22. At all relevant times during Mr. Smith's twenty-three (23) day overdetention he was placed in a prison cell with a dangerous prisoner who, upon information and belief, had been
found guilty of possession of a loaded fire arm and possession of narcotics with an intent to
distribute. 23. The underlying misdemeanor charges against Mr. Smith, which allegedly
provided Defendants' justification for the initial detention, were dismissed on September 8, 2014.
5

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 6 of 45
24. As a direct and proximate result of Mr. Smith's twenty-three (23) day overdetention, Mr. Smith was terminated from his job.
25. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Mr. Smith has suffered significant economic damages and severe emotional harm.
COUNT I 
 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claims for Violations of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the 

United States Constitution 
 26. The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 27. Defendants deprived Mr. Smith of his constitutional right to liberty and deprived him of this liberty without due process of law as required by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution by detaining Mr. Smith for twenty-three (23) days after he was ordered to be released by the court. 28. Defendants acted under color of law and acted or purported to act in the performance of official duties under federal, state, county or municipal laws, ordinances, or regulations. 29. Defendants' conduct violated clearly established constitutional rights of which Defendants knew, or of which a reasonable public official should have known.
30. The Department of Corrections has a custom, policy, and practice of overdetaining inmates past their court ordered release date. For example, in 2007 the Department of Corrections admitted that 302 inmates were overdetained, 143 in 2008,56 in 2009,85 in 2010, and 22 in 2011 through the end of May. This custom, policy, and practice of overdetaining inmates caused the intentional and unjustified overdetention of Mr. Smith in violation of his constitutional rights.
6 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 7 of 45
31. Similarly, the Department of Corrections had a custom, policy, and practice of: (a) incarcerating inmates without any legal authority to do so; (b) failing to maintain accurate records of its inmates; (c) failing to keep track of inmates within the D.C. Jail; (d) failing to process release orders; (e) failing to release inmates on the same day of the inmates' court ordered­ release; (t) misfiling and/or misplacing release orders issued by the courts; (g) failing to respond to inmate complaints of overdetention; (h) failing to train its correction officer to process release orders; and. (i) failing to comply with court orders to release inmates.
These customs, policies, and practices were the direct and proximate cause of the violations of Mr. Smith's constitutional rights.
32. In addition, the District of Columbia knew, or should have known, of the overdetention problem at the DC Jail given the history of overdetentions by the D.C. Jail. The District of Columbia demonstrated a deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of the inmates at the D.C. Jail and Mr. Smith particularly, by failing to take any steps to remedy the ongoing constitutional violations occurring from the overdetentions. As a result of the District of Columbia's deliberate indifference, Mr. Smith's constitutional rights were violated. Moreover, the District of Columbia demonstrated a deliberate indifference to the Mr. Smith's Constitutional rights by failing to investigate Mr. Smith's claims that he was being unlawfully detained.
33. The actions, omission, policies, patterns, practices and customs of Defendants, complained of herein were intentional, reckless, and show a callous disregard for, or deliberate indifference to Mr. Smith's personal safety, security, freedom, and civil and constitutional rights.
7 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 8 of 45
34. These violations are compensable pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. As a direct and proximate result of these Defendants' conduct, Mr. Smith has suffered economic damages and significant physical and emotional harm.
COUNT II Common Law False Imprisonment 35. Plaintiffrealleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 36. Defendants unlawfully deprived Mr. Smith ofhis liberty by placing him in a jail cell where he was restrained against his will. The detention was unlawful where Mr. Smith was detained in direct contravention of a court order mandating him to be released. 37. Mr. Smith was falsely imprisoned by correction officers John Does 1-10. At all relevant times, John Does 1-10 were employed by the District of Columbia as corrections officers and were acting within the scope of their employment. 38. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' unlawful detention and false imprisonment, Mr. Smith has suffered and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial. 39. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief in the fonn of specific perfonnance judgment awarding compensatory damages, attorney's fees, and any other relief the Court deems proper.
COUNT III Negligence 40. The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 41. Defendants breached their duty of reasonable care by negligently acting or
8

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 9 of 45
omitting to act such that Mr. Smith suffered wrongful detention which Defendants knew or should have known would have caused harm to Mr. Smith.
42. Defendants were negligent in performing their duties and failed, neglected and/or refused to properly and fully discharge their responsibilities by, among other things:
a. Failing to investigate Mr. Smith's claims that he was ordered to be released and the he was unlawfully detained;
b. Misplacing and/or misfiling Mr. Smith's release order; c. Failing to process Mr. Smith's release; d. Failing to maintain a system to prevent overdetention of inmates; e. Failing to act on a court order; f. Failing to properly train and supervise corrections officers to process release
orders; and, g. Failing to release Mr. Smith on the same day of his court ordered release. 43. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant in failing to exercise due care, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer much physical pain and mental anguish; has incurred medical expenses and will continue to incur medical expenses; and has suffered and will continue to suffer mental and physical pain, and emotional distress. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief in the form of a judgment awarding compensatory damages and any other relief the Court deems proper.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant, as follows: (a) Awarding Plaintiff compensatory damages, including lost wages and future lost wages, mental anguish, and emotional distress damages; (b) Awarding Plaintiff punitive damages against John Does 1-10 for their outrageous, wanton, malicious and reckless conduct with no regard for the damage it would cause to Plaintiff;
9

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 10 of 45
(c) Awarding Plaintiff costs, expenses and attorney's fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and any other applicable law; and,
(e) Awarding any other relief the Court deems just and proper.
JURY AND TRIAL DEMAND
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury with respect to each claim in this Complaint. Respectfully submitted,
Brendan KJaproth (D.C. Bar No. 999360) Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202-618-2344 Email: Bklaproth@klaprothlaw.com David Akulian (D.C. Bar No. 1005750) 406 5th Street NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202-505-2113 Email: info@NotGuiltylnDC.com Attorneyfor Plaintiff
10 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 11 of 45
EXHIBIT 1 

to
COMPLAINT 

GREGORY SMITH v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 RELEASE ORDER 


¥

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 12 of 45

WI. r ,a

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICf OF COLUMBIA 

CRIMINAL DMSlON 


UNITED STATES
YI.
GREGOR.Y P SMl'IH

TO: SupednfeadeDt, D.C. Jail

RELEASE ORDER

Case No: 2014 CMD 004452
PDm:661106 . DCDC#:

SvetIaDa Poloachuk, DEPUTY CLBRK

'.

~:~18,2014

RELEASE 


JULIBT J MCKENNA
lUOOB

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 13 of 45

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

CRIMINAL DIVISION 


UNlTBD STATES
VI.
GRBOOR.Y P SMITH

TO: SuperiDtcadCDt, D.C. Jail

RELEASE ORDER

Case No: 2012 CMD 007806 PDID:661106 DCDCi#:

It is HBRBBY OR.DERED that the defendant be released fiom CUICOdy in tbis case..

Swt1aDa Poloachllk, DEPUTY ~

. . .-.

~:~18,2014

RELEASE

I

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 14 of 45

Superior Court of the District of Columbia 


It ~ CIVIL DIVISION

,J. 


\ ..., SOO Indiana Avenue, N.W., Suite SOOO " "

l, ilshington, D.C. lOGO) Telephone: (201) 879-1133

Plaintiff

vs.

Case ~~um4be-r 0_0_0_7_2_7_0_ __

Defendant

To the above named Defendant: 


SUMMONS 


You are hereby summoned and required to serve an Answer to the attached Complaint, either personally or through an attorney, within twenty (20) days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you are being sued as an officer or agency of the United States Government or the District of Columbia Government, you have sixty (60) days after service of this summons to serve your Answer. A copy of the Answer must be mailed to the attorney for the party plaintiff who is suing you. The attorney's name and address appear below. If plaintiff has no attorney, a copy of the Answer must be mailed to the plaintiff at the address stated on this Summons.

You are also required. to file the original Answer with the Court in Suite 5000 at 500 Indiana Avenue,

N.W., between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Mondays through Fridays or between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon on

Saturdays. You may file the original Answer with the Court either before you serve a copy of the Answer on

the plaintiff or within five (5) days after you have served the plaintiff. If you fail to file an Answer, judgment

by default may be entered against you for the relief demanded. in the complaint.

}Jfr1i:::JfJ?~tt,

Clerk ofthe Court

IMPORTANT: IF YOU FAIL TO FILE AN ANSWER WITHIN THE TIME STATED ABOVE, OR IF, AFTER YOU ANSWER. YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AT ANY TIME THE COURT NOTIFIES YOU TO DO SO, A JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT MAYBE ENTERED AGAINST YOU FOR THE MONEY DAMAGES OR OTHER RELIEF DEMANDED IN THE COMPLAINT. IF THIS OCCURS, YOUR WAGES MAY BE ATIACHED OR WITIDIELD OR PERSONAL PROPERTY OR REAL ESTATE YOU OWN MAY BE TAKEN AND SOLD TO PAY THE JUDGMENT. IF YOU INTEND TO OPPOSE THIS
ACTION, DO NOT FAIL mAHSWEB WUHIN THE REQWRED TIME.
If you wish to talk to a lawyer and feel that you cannot "afford to pay a fee to a lawyer, promptly contact one of the offices of the Legal Aid Society (202-628-1161) or the Neighborhood Legal Services (202-682-2700) for help or come to Suite 5000 at 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., for more information concerning places where you may ask for such help.
See reverse side for Spanish translation 
 Vea aI dorso la traducci6n aI espafI.ol 


FORM SUMMONS - Jan. 201 I

CASUM.doc

- - - - - - Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 15 of 45

TRIBUNAL SUPERIOR DEL DISTRITO DE COLUMBIA

~ Teh~rono: DIVISION CIVIL

'.

. 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., Suite 5000

ashington, D.C. 20001

(202) 879-1'rf1

contra

Demandante

Numero de Caso:

Demandado

AI susodicho Demandado: 


CITATORIO 


Por la presente se Ie cita a comparecer y se Ie require entregar una Contestaci6n a la Demanda adjunta, sea en persona 0 por mcdio de un abogado. en el plazo de veinte (20) dias contados despues que usted haya recibido este citatorio, excluyendo el dia mismo de la entrega del eitatorio. Si usted esta siendo demandado en calidad de olicial 0 agente del Gobiemo de los Estados Unidos de Norteamerica 0 del Gobiemo del Distrito de Columbia, tiene usted sesenta (60) dias contados despues que usted haya recibido este citatorio, paraentregar su Contestaci6n. Tiene que cnviarle por correo una copia de su Contestaei6n at abogado de la parte demandante. EI nombre y direcci6n del :Jbogado aparecen at final de este documento. Si el demandado no tiene abogado, tiene que enviarle al demandante una copia de la Contestaci6n por correo a la direcci6n que aparece en este Citatorio.

A usted tambien se Ie require presentar la Contestaci6n original al Tribunal en la Ofieina 5000. sito en 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., entre las 8:30 a.m. y 5:00 p.m., de lunes a viernes 0 entre las 9:00 a.m. y las 12:00 del mediodia los sabados. Usted puede presentar la Contestaci6n original ante el Juez ya sea antes que Usted Ie entregue al demandante una copia de la Contestaei6n 0 en el plazo de cinco (5) dias de haberle hecho la entrega al demandante. Si usted incumple con presentar una Contestacion, podria dictarseun fallo en rebeldia contra usted para que se haga efectivo el desagravio que se busca en la demanda.
SECRETARIO DEL TRIBUNAL Nombre del abogado del Demandante

Direccion

Por: 

Subsecretario 


Telefono

Fecha ------------------------------------

J2Il~nlliJ.ilntti! (202) 879-4828

Veuillez appeler au (202) 879-4828 pour une traduction ~ co m6t hili djch. hay goi (202) 879-4828

I[!:!~~ f!~~AI~, (202) 879-4828 £. ~!f~~AI2.

fh"'1Cf 1'.."''' 11...,.,1",. (202) 879-4828 ,.1.m-II·

IMPORTANTE: SI lISTED INCUMPLE CON PRESENTAR UNA CONTESTACI6N EN EL PLAZO ANTES MENCIONADO, 0, SI LUEGO DE CONTESTAR, USTED NO COMPARECE CUANDO LE AVISE EL JUZGADO, PODRiA DICTARSE UN FALLO EN REBELDiA CONTRA USTED PARA QUE SE LE COBRE LOS DANOS Y PERJUICIOS U OTRO DESAGRAVIO QUE SE BUSQUE EN LA DEMANDA. SI ESTO OCURRE, PODRlAN RETENERLE SUS INGRESOS, 0 PODRlAN TOMAR SUS BlENES PERSONALES 0 RAiCES Y VENDERLOS PARA PAGAR EL FALLO. SI USTED PRETENDE OPONERSE A ESTA ACCI6N, NO DElE DE CONTESTAR LA DEMANDA DENTRO DEL PLAZO EXIGIDO.

Si desea converser con un abogado y Ie parece que no puede afrontar el costa de uno, Harne pronto a una de nuestras oficinas del Legal Aid Society (202-628-1161) 0 el Neighborhood Legal Services (202-682-2700) para pedir ayuda 0 venga a la Oficina 5000 del 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., para informarse de otros lugares donde puede pedir ayuda aI respecto.

Vea al dorso eI original en ingles 
 See reverse side for English original 


CASUM.doc

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 16 of 45

Superior Court of the District of Columbia

S;r(fI, ~ CIVIL DIVISION

. '\

500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., Suite 5000 ....,

ashington, D.C. 20001 telephone: (202) 879·1133

Plaintiff

14-00072 7 0

vs.

Case Number

To the above named Defendant:

You are hereby summoned and required to serve an Answer to the attached Complaint, either personally or through an attorney, within twenty (20) days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you are being sued as an officer or agency of the United States Government or the District of Columbia Government, you have sixty (60) days after service of this summons to serve your Answer. A copy of the Answer must be mailed to the attorney for the party plaintiff who is suing you. The attorney's name and address appear below. Ifplaintiffhas no attorney, a copy of the Answer must be mailed to the plaintiff at the address stated on this Summons.

You are also required to file the original Answer with the Court in Suite 5000 at 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Mondays through Fridays or between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon on Saturdays. You may file the original Answer with the Court either before you serve a copy of the Answer on the plaintiff or within five (5) days after you have served the plaintiff. If you fail to file an Answer, judgment by default may be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.

N....~~;:.,..,~~

ClerkoftheCoUTI

lfJ5 Sa- 5f1t.r Vb)/ ~3Jc)

A~ ddre~jsI ~5 .;""~ 2I91'ILJ1't:

~
.;?c?&1/
'

By -----.:.CJd.u.tM~~\M.:.....::.0~.~bA~L_ __
Deputy Clerk
Date _ _ _...1.I.t..,...1-'4.:..-frz,,;....;.o...:..ri..t..-_ _ _ __

Telephone fIII• •if,lilTIt!.if (202) 879-4828

Veullle% appeler au (202) 8794828 pour une traducUon

'* cO mOt bai dieh, hly 89i (202) 8794828

tt!~a !!3tAI'i!!!, (202) 879-4828 ~ ~"~~AI2 f""'~ -l-C'H'" ",..,.,.,-l- (202) 879-4828 UJIJoh-

IMPORTANT: IF YOU FAIL TO FILE AN ANSWER WITHIN THE TIME STATED ABOVE, OR IF, AFTER YOU ANSWER, YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AT ANY TIME THE COURT NOTIFmS YOU TO 00 SO. A JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU FOR THE MONEY DAMAGES OR OTHER RELIEF DEMANDED IN THE COMPLAINT. IF THIS OCCURS. YOUR WAGES MAYBE ATTACHED OR WITHHELD OR PERSONAL PROPERTY OR REAL ESTATE YOU OWN MAY BE TAKEN AND SOLD TO PAY THE JUDGMENT. IF YOU INTEND TO OPPOSE THIS ACTION, DO NOT FAIL TO ANSWER WlI1lIN THE REQUIRED TIME.
If you wish to talk to a lawyer and feel that you cannot"afTord to pay a fee to a lawyer, promptly contact one of the offices of the Legal Aid Society (202.628·1161) or the Neighborhood Legal Services (202-682-2700) for help or come to Suite 5000 at 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., for more information concerning places where you may ask for such help.
See reverse side for Spanish translation 
 Vea al dorso la traduccion al espatlol 


FORM SUMMONS· Jan. 2011

eASOM.doc

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 17 of 45 ¥WI <C.­

'"

TRIBUNAL SUPERIOR DEL DISTRITO DE COLUMBIA

~ DIVISION CIVIL

~-' 


. 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., Suite 5000 


ashington, D.C. 20001 Telefono: (202) 879-11 3

contra

Demandante

Ntimero de Caso:

Demandado

Al susodicho Demandado:

CITATORIO

Par la presente se Ie cita a comparecer y se Ie require entregar una Contestacion a 1a Demanda adjunta, sea en persona 0 por medio de un abogado, en el plazo de veinte (20) dias contados despues que usted haya recibido este citatorio. excluyendo el dia mismo de la entrega del citatorio. Si usted esta siendo demandado en calidad de oficial 0 agente del Gobiemo de los Estados Unidos de Norteamerica 0 del Gobiemo del Distrito de Columbia, tiene usted sesenta (60) dias contados despues que usted baya recibido este dtatorio, paraentregar su Contestacion. Tiene que cnviarle por correo una copia de su Contestacion al abogado de la parte demandante. EI nombre y direcci6n del abogado aparecen al final de este documento. Si e) demandado no tiene abogado, tiene que enviarle al demandante una copia de la Contestaci6n por correo a la direccion que aparece en cste Citatorio.

A usted tambien se Ie require presentar la Contestacion original al Tribunal en la Oficina 5000, site en 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., entre las 8:30 a.m. y 5:00 p.m., de lunes a viernes 0 entre las 9:00 a.m. y las 12:00 del mediodia los sabados. Usted puede presentar la Contestacion original ante el Juez ya sea antes que Usted Ie entregue al dcmandante una copia de la Contestaci6n 0 en el plazo de cinco (5) dias de haberle becbo la entrega al demandante. Si listed incumple con presentar una Contestacion, podrladictarse un faIJo en rebeJdia contra usted para que se baga efectivo eI desagravio que se busca en 1a demanda.
SECRETARJO DEL TRIBUNAL Nombre del abogado del Demandante

Direcci6n

Por: ------------~Su~b-se-c-re-ta~ri- o ------------

Tel6fono

Fecha --------~------------------------

flUllliJ,~nlli! (202) 8794828

Veuillez appeler au (202) 8794828 pour une traduclion Da co 11191 bai dich. hlly gQi (202) 8794828

't!Q!j~ !:!at-AI'i!1. (202) 879-4828.£ ~lf~~AI2

fh..,C..... ~·C.,.'I" ",..,,,/1'" (202) 8794828 ;"'(1)01\,

IMPORTANTE: SI USTED INCUMPLE CON PRESENTAR UNA CONTESTACI6N EN EL PLAZO ANTES MENCIONADO, O.SI LUEGO DE CONTESTAR, USTED NO COMPARECE CUANDO LE AVISE EL JUZGADO, PODRiA DICTARSE UN FALLO EN REBELDiA CONTRA USTED PARA QUE SE LE COBRE LOS DANOS Y PERJUICIOS U OTRO DESAGRAVIO QUE SE BUSQUE EN LA DEMANDA. SI ESTO OCURRE, PODRiAN RETENERLE SUS INGRESOS, 0 PODRiAN TOMAR SUS BIENES PERSONALES 0 RAicES Y VENDERLOS PARA PAGAR EL FALLO. SI USTED
PRETENDE OPONERSE A ESTA ACCI6N, NO DEJE DE CONTESTAR LA DEMA,NDA DENTRO DEL PLAZO EX/GJDO.
Si desea converser con un abogado y Ie parece que no puede afrontar el costo de uno, name pronto a una de nuestras oficinas del Legal Aid Society (202-628-1161) 0 el Neighborhood Legal Services (202-682-2700) para pedir ayuda 0 venga a la Oficina SOOO del 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., para informarse de otros lugares donde puede pedir ayuda al respecto.

Vea al dollO el original en ingles See reverse side for English original

CASUM.doc

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 18 of 45

Superior Court of the District of Columbia

~<

CIVIL DIVISION

\

500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., Suite 5000 ....,

ashington, D.C.lOOOl Telephone: (202) 879-1133

Plaintiff

14-00072 7 0

VS.

Case Number

Defendant

To the above named Defendant:

SUMMONS

You are hereby summoned and required to serve an Answer to the attached Complaint, either 
 personally or through an attorney, within twenty (20) days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive 
 of the day of service. If you are being sued as an officer or agency of the United States Government or the 
 District of Columbia Government, you have sixty (60) days after service of this summons to serve your 
 Answer. A copy of the Answer must be mailed to the attorney for the party plaintiff who is suing you. The 
 attorney's name and address appear below. If plaintiff has no attorney, a copy of the Answer must be mailed 
 to the plaintiff at the address stated on this Summons. 


You are also required to file the original Answer with the Court in Suite 5000 at 500 Indiana Avenue, 


N.W., between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Mondays through Fridays or between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon on 


Saturdays. You may file the original Answer with the Court either before you serve a copy of the Answer on 


the plaintiff or within five (5) days after you have served the plaintiff. If you fail to file an Answer, judgment 


by default may be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 


N§[.d~~(8ti,

Clerk ofthe Court

By~O~dxu~_h~M/~~~J_·~boo~w~l~_______ Deputy Clerk

Date __-"'ll'-+/It..:.++r-=Z.~Of,-,-_ f _______

Telephone

fID• •if,illJllifi (202) 879-4828

Veuillez appaler au (202) 879-4828 poor une traduction Dl cO mOt bii dim, hiy!Wi (202) 879-4828

..,.,,+ 't!Q!I& fletAI'!!!. (202) 879-4828 S!. ~.~~AI2 fh",cf +C1-" ...

(202) 879-4828 tJ,spolr

IMPORTANT: IF YOU FAIL TO FILE AN ANSWER WITHIN THE TIME STATED ABOVE, OR IF, AFTER YOU ANSWER, YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AT ANY TIME TIlE COURT NOTIFIES YOU TO 00 SO, A JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU FOR THE MONEY DAMAGES OR OTHER RELIEF DEMANDED IN THE COMPLAINT. IF THIS OCCURS, YOUR WAGES MAY BE ATTACHED OR WITHHELD OR PERSONAL PROPERTY OR REAL ESTATE YOU OWN MAY BE TAKEN AND SOLD TO PAY THE JUDGMENT. IF YOU INTEND TO OPPOSE THIS
ACTION, DO NOT FAIL m ANSWER WCCHJN THE REQUIRED TIME·
If you wish to talk to a lawyer and feel that you cannot 8fTord to pay a fee to a lawyer, promptly contact one of the offices ofthe Legal Aid Society (202-628-1161) or the Neighborhood Legal Services (202-682-2700) for help or come to Suite 5000 at 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., for more information concerniog places where you may ask for such help.
See reverse side for Spanish translation 
 Yea al dorsa la traducci6n al espaftol 


FORM SUMMONS· Jan. 2011

CASUM.doc

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 19 of 45

"

TRIBUNAL SUPERIOR DEL DISTRITO DE COLUMBIA

~' .

DIVISION CIVIL

~'.

. SOO Indiana Avenue, N.W., Suite SOOO

ashington, D.C. 20001 Telefono: (202) 879·11 3

contra

Demandante

Numero de Caso:

Demandado

AI susodicho Demandado: 


CITATORIO 


Por la presente se Ie cita a comparecer y se Ie require entregar una Contestacion a la Demanda adjunta, sea en persona 0 por medio de un abogado, en eJ plazo de veinte (20) dias contados despues que usted haya recibido este cilatorio, excluyendo el dia mismo de Ja entrega del citatorio. Si usted esta siendo demandado en calidad de oficial 0 agente del Gobiemo de los Estados Unidos de Norteamerica 0 del Gobierno del Distrito de Columbia, tiene usted sesenta (60) dias contados despues que usted haya recibido este citatorio, para.entregar su Contestacion. Tiene que cnviarJe por correo una copia de su Contestacion al abogado de la parte demandante. EI nombre y direccion del abogado aparecen al final de este documento. Si el demandado no tiene abogado, tiene que enviarle al demandante una copia de la Contestacion por correo a la direccion que aparece en este Citatorio.

A usted tambien se Ie require presentar la Contestacion original al Tribunal en la Oficina 5000, sito en 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., entre las 8:30 a.m. y 5:00 p.m., de lunes a viernes 0 entre las 9:00 a.m. y las 12:00 del mediodia los silbados. Usted puede presentar la Contestacion original ante el Juez ya sea antes que Usted Ie ehtregue al demandante una copia de la Contestacion 0 en el plazo de cinco (5) dias de habeTle hecho la entrega al demandante. Si usted incumple con presentar una Contestacion, podriadictarse un fano en rebeldia contra usted para que se haga efectivo el desagravio que se busca en la demanda.
SECRETARIO DEL TRIBUNAL
Nombre del abogado del Demandante

Direcci6n

Por: Subsecretario

Telc~fono

Fecha -----------------------------------

tm!lllil,ilfJ.if (202) 879-4826

Veuillaz appeler au (202) 879-4828 pour una traduction

D~ c6 mQI OOi djch. My gQi (202) 679-4626

't!~ii f:!3fAII2:!. (202) 879-4828 .lit ~§PH:JAI.R

fh"'lCr:' -i'C1-r ""'I,,}"f-r (202) 879-4828 ",.(Dolt-

IMPORTANTE: 81 USTED lNCUMPLE CON PRESENTAR UNA CONTESTACION EN EL PLAZO ANTES MENCIONADO,O, SI LUEGO DE CONTESTAR, USTED NO COMPARECE CUANOO LE AVISE EL JUZGADO, PODRiA DlCTARSE UN FALLO EN REBELDiA CONTRA USTED PARA QUE SE LE COBRE LOS DANOS Y PERJUICIOS U OTRO DESAGRAVIO QUE SE BUSQUE EN LA DEMANDA. SI ESTO OCURRE, pooRiAN R£TENERLE SUS INGRESOS, 0 PODRiAN TOMAR SUS BIENES PERSONALES 0 RAicES Y VENDERLOS PARA PAGAR EL FALLO. SI USTED PRETENDE OPONERSE A ESTA ACCION, NO DElE DE CONTESTAR LA DEM4NDA DENTRO DEL PLAZO EXlGIDO.
Si desea converser con un abogado y Ie parece que no puede afrontar el costo de uno, name pronto a una de nuestras oficinas del Legal Aid Society (202-628-1161) 0 el Neighborhood Legal Services (202-682-2700) para pedir ayuda 0 venga a Ia Oficina SOOO del 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., para informarse de otros lugares donde puede pedir ayuda al respecto.
Vfa al dorsa eI original en ingles 
 See reverse side for English origioal 


CASUM.doe

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 20 of 45
,
Superior Court of the District of Columbia

Gregory Smith

CIVIL DIVISION- CIVIL ACTIONS BRANCH 

INFORMATION SHEET 

Case Number: 
 14 - 0 0 0 7 2 7 II

vs

Date: 11/)4/2014

District of Columbia

o One of the defendants is being sued
in their official capacity.

Name: (Please Pri~
Brendan aproth

Finn Name: K1aproth Law PLLC

Telephone No.:
202-618-2344

Six digit Unified Bar No.:
999360

Relationship to Lawsuit
[!] Attorney for Plaintiff
o Self(Pro Se) o Other:

TYPE OF CASE: D Non-Jury

[!] 6 Person Jury

D 12 Person Jury

Demand: $ 5,000,000.0o_ _ _ __

Other: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

PENDING CASE{S) RELATED TO THE ACTION BEING FILED

Case No.:._ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Judge: _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Calendar

Case No.:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Judge: _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Calendar#:,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

NATURE OF SUIT: (Check One Box Only)

A. CONTRACTS

001 Breach of Contract D 02 Breach of Warranty D 06 Negotiable Instrument
oD 15 Special Education Fees 10 Mortgage Foreclosure

oD 07 Personal Property 09 Real Property-Real Estate D 12 Specific Performance D 13 Employment Discrimination

COLLECTION CASES
D 14 Under $25,000 Pltf. Grants Consent D 16 Under $25,000 Consent Denied D 17 OVER $25,000 Pltf. Grants Consent D 18 OVER $25.000 Consent Denied

B. PROPERTY TORTS

DOl Automobile

D 03 Destruction of Private Property

D 02 Conversion

D 04 Property Damage

D 07 Shoplifting, D.C. Code § 27-102 (a)

D 05 Trespass D 06 Traffic Adjudication

C. PERSONAL TORTS

DOl Abuse of Process

D 09 Harassment

D 17 Personal Injury- (Not Automobile.

D 02 Alienation of Affection

D 10 Invasion of Privacy

Not Malpractice)

8 03 Assault and Battery

D 11 Libel and Slander

04 Automobile- Personal Injury D 12 Malicious Interference

0 18 Wrongful Death (Not Malpractice)
D 19 Wrongful Eviction

D 05 Deceit (Misrepresentation) D 13 Malicious Prosecution

D 20 Friendly Suit

D 06 False Accusation

D 14 Malpractice Legal

D 21 Asbestos

[l] 07 False Arrest

D 0 15 Malpractice Medical (Including Wrongful Death) 22 Toxic/Mass Torts

008 Fraud

D \6 Negligence- (Not Automobile, D 23 Tobacco

Not Malpractice)

D 24 Lead Paint

SEE REVERSE SIDE AND CHECK HERE D IF USED

CV-496fJun 13

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 21 of 45
\

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 22 of 45

Superior Court of the District of Columbia 


snu:/i.~-

CIVIL DMSION

," 


•

. 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., Suite 5000 ....,

asbington, D.C. 20001 Telephone: (202) 879-1133

Plaintiff

vs.

14-0007270
Case Number

Defendant

To the above named Defendant: 


SUMMONS 


You are hereby summoned and required to serve an Answer to the attached Complaint, either personally or through an attorney, within twenty (20) days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you are being sued as an officer or agency of the United States Government or the District of Columbia Government, you have sixty (60) days after service of this summons to serve your Answer. A copy of the Answer must be maiJed to the attorney for the party plaintiff who is suing you. The attorney's name and address appear below. If plaintiff has no attorney, a copy of the Answer must be mailed to the plaintiff at the address stated on this Summons.

You are also required to file the original Answer with the Court in Suite 5000 at 500 Indiana Avenue,

N.W., between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Mondays through Fridays or between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon on

Saturdays. You may file the original Answer with the Court either before you serve a copy of the Answer on

the p1aintiff or within five (5) days after you have served the plaintiff. If you fail to file an Answer, judgment

by default may be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.

N_1~~:a.JfI~

Clerk ofthe Court

Date _-!.I..!...J1\f-L-I4!.f\...::;U).:::;..I:...L.f_ _ _ _ _ __

Telephone

~• •if,_lTli.ii (202) 879-4828

Veuillez appeler au (202) 879-4828 pour une traduction De c;o m(It bAi djc;h, hiy SQi (202) 879-4828

"""'"+ 'tlQ!la !!.AI'i!!. (202) 879-4828 J:. ~IPHJAI2 rt.,",cr:t +C1-"

(202) 879-4828 U-m-Ir-

IMPORTANT: IF YOU FAIL TO FILE AN ANSWER WITHIN mE TIME STATED ABOVE, OR IF, AFTER YOU ANSWER, YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AT ANY TIME mE COURT NOTIFIES YOU TO 00 SO, A JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT MAYBE ENTERED AGAINST YOU FOR THE MONEY DAMAGES OR OTHER RELIEF DEMANDED IN mE COMPLAINT. IF THIS OCCURS, YOUR WAGES MAY BE AITACHED OR WITHHELD OR PERSONAL PROPERTY OR REAL ESTATE YOU OWN MAY BE TAKEN AND SOLD TO PAY mE JUDGMENT. IF YOU INTEND TO OPPOSE THIS ACTION, DO NOT FAIL TO ANSWER WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME.
If you wish to talk to a lawyer and feel that you cannofafford to pay a fee to a lawyer, promptly contact one of the offices of the Legal Aid Society (202-628-1161) or the Neighborhood Legal Services (202-682-2700) for help or come to Suite SOOO at 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., for more infonnation concerning places where you may ask for such help.
See reverse side for Spanish translation 
 Yea al dorsa la traducci6n al espaftol 


FORM SUMMONS - Jan. 2011

CASUM.doc

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 23 of 45

TRIBUNAL SUPERIOR DEL DISTRITO DE COI.lUMBIA

~. '.

DIVISI6N CIVIL

i J'.' "

500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., Suite 5000

ashington, D.C. 20001 Telefono: (202) 879-11 3

contra

Demandante

Ntimero de Caso:

Demandado

AI susodicho Demandado:

CITATORIO

Por la presente se Ie cita a comparecer y se Ie require entregar una Contestaci6n a la Demanda adjunta, sea en persona 0 por medio de un abogado, en el plazo de veinte (20) dias contados despues que usted haya recibido este citatorio. excluyendo el dia mismo de la entrega del citatorio. Si usted esta siendo demandado en calidad de oficial 0 agente del Gobiemo de los Estados Unidos de Norteamerica 0 del Gobiemo del Distrito de Columbia, tiene usted sesenta (60) dias contados despues que usted haya recibido este citatorio, para entregar su Contestaci6n. Tiene que enviarle por correo una copia de su Contestaci6n al abogado de la parte demandante. EI nombre y direcci6n del ubogado aparecen al final de este documento. Si el demandado no tiene abogado, tiene que enviarle al demandante una copia de Ja Contestacion por correo a la direcci6n que aparece en este Citatorio.

A usted tambien se Ie require presentar la Contestacion original al Tribunal en la Oficina 5000. silo en 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., entre las 8:30 a.m. y 5:00 p.m., de lunes a viemes 0 entre las 9:00 a.m. y Jas 12:00 del mediodia los sabados. Usted puede presentar la Contestacion original ante el Juez ya sea antes que Usted Ie entregue al demandante una copia de 13 Contestacion 0 en eJ plazo de cinco (5) dias de haberte hecho la entrega al demandante. Si usted incumple con presentar una Contestaci6n, podria dictarse un faHo en rebeJdia contra usted para que se haga efectivo eI desagravio que se busca en la demanda.
SECRETARlO DEL TRIBUNAL Nombre del abogado del Demandante

Por:
. ,

Fecha ----------~----------------------

liIllllllil.il1.TEI!,if (202) 879-4828

Veuillez appeler au (202) 879-4828 pour una traduction D~ c6 mQI bai dich. hi'ly gQi (202) 879-4828

tt!~ii- !:!81 AI1I!!, (202) 879-4828.5t ~1J~{JAI.2

fh"'C'i' ')'CI-'/" ""'''I.t-}- (202) 879-4828 1.1.0"""

IMPORTANTE: SI USTED INCUMPLE CON PRESENTAR UNA CONTESTACION EN EL PLAZO ANTES MENCIONADO, 0, SI LUEGO DE CONTESTAR, USTED NO COMPARECE CUANDO LE AVISE EL JUZGADO, PODRIA DICTARSE UN FALLO EN REBELDtA CONTRA USTED PARA QUE SE LE COBRE LOS DANOS Y PERJUICIOS U OTRO DESAGRAVIO QUE SE BUSQUE EN LA DEMANDA. SI ESTO OCURRE, PODRiAN' RETENERLE SUS INGRESOS, 0 PODRiAN TOMAR SUS BIENES PERSONALES 0 RAicES Y VENDERLOS PARA PAGAR EL FALLO. SI USTED PRETENDE OPONERSE A ESTA ACCION, NO DEJE DE CONTESTAR LA DEMANDA DENTRO DEL PLAZa EXlGIDO.
Si desea converser con un abogado y Ie parece que no puede afrontar el costo de uno, Uame pronto a una de nuestras oficinas del Legal Aid Society (202-628-1161) 0 el Neighborhood Legal Services (202-682-2700) para pedir ayuda 0 venga ala Oficina 5000 del 500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., para informarse de otros lugares donde puede pedir ayuda al respecto.

Vea al dorso el original en ingles 
 See reverse side for English original 


CASUM.doc

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 24 of 45
Infornlation Sheet, Continued 


C.OTHERS

D 01 Accounting

10 T.R.O./lnjunction

D 02 An. Before Judgment

D II Writ of Replevin

D 04 Condemnation (Emin. Domain) D 12 Enforce Mechanics Lien

D 05 Ejectment

D 16 Declaratory Judgment

D 071nsurancelSubrogation

D 17 Merit Personnel Act (OEA)

Under $25,000 Pltf.
Grants Consent
D 08 Quiet Title D 09 Special Writ/Warrants

(D.C. Code Title I, Chapter 6)
D 18 Product Liability
D 24 Application to Confirm, ModifY,
Vacate Arbitration Award

(DC Code § 11·941)

(DC Code § 16·440 I)

25 Liens: Tax/Water Consent Granted
D 261nsurancel Subrogation
Under $25,000 Consent Denied
D 27 Insurance/ Subrogation
Over $25,000 Pltf. Grants Consent
D 28 Motion to Confirm Arbitration
Award (Collection Cases Only)
D 29 Merit Personnel Act (OHR)
D 30 Liens: Tax/ Water Consent Denied
D 31 Housing Code Regulations
D 32 Qui Tam
33 Whistleblower
D 34 Insurance/Subrogation
Over $25,000 Consent Denied

II.

D 03 Change of Name

0 15 Libel oflnformation

oD 06 Foreign Judgment

D 19 Enter Administrative Order as

13 Correction of Birth Certificate

Judgment { D.C. Code §

D 14 Correction of Marriage
Certificate

2-1802.03 (h) or 32-1519 (a)]
0 20 Master Meter (D.C. Code §

42-3301, et seq.)

o 21 Petition for Subpoena
[Rule 28-1 (b»)
oD 22 Release Mechanics Lien 23 Rule 27(a)( I)
(Perpetuate Testimony)
o 24 Petition for Structured Settlement
D 25 Petition for Liquidation

Attorney's Signature

Date

CV-4961Jun 13

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 25 of 45
.. 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 26 of 45

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIVIL DIVISION

GREGORY SMITH

Vs.

C.A. No.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al

INITIAL ORDER AND ADDENDUM

2014 CA 007278 B

Pursuant to D.C. Code § 11-906 and District of Columbia Superior Court Rule of Civil Procedure 
 ("SCR Civ") 40-1, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 


(1) Effective this date, this case has assigned to the individual calendar designated below. All future filings in this case shall bear the calendar number and the judge's name beneath the case number in the caption. On filing any motion or paper related thereto, one copy (for the judge) must be delivered to the Clerk along with the original.

(2) Within 60 days of the filing of the complaint, plaintiff must file proof of serving on each defendant: copies of the Summons, the Complaint, and this Initial Order. As to any defendant for whom such proof of service has not been filed, the Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution unless the time for serving the defendant has been extended as provided in SCR Civ 4(m).

(3) Within 20 days of service as described above, except as otherwise noted in SCR Civ 12, each defendant must respond to the Complaint by filing an Answer or other responsive pleading. As to the defendant who has failed to respond, a default and judgment will be entered unless the time to respond has been extended as provided in SCR Civ 55(a).

(4) At the time and place noted below, all counsel and unrepresented parties shall appear before the assigned judge at an Initial Scheduling and Settlement Conference to discuss the possibilities of settlement and to establish a schedule for the completion of all proceedings, including, normally, either mediation, case evaluation, or arbitration. Counsel shall discuss with their clients prior to the conference whether the clients are agreeable to binding or non-binding arbitration. This order is the only notice that parties and counsel will receive concerning this Conference.

(5) Upon advice that the date noted below is inconvenient for any party or counsel, the Quality Review Branch (202) 879-1750 may continue the Conference !U!££, with the consent of all parties, to either of the two succeeding Fridays. Request must be made not less than six business days before the scheduling conference date. No other continuance of the conference will be granted except upon motion for good cause shown.

(6) Parties are responsible for obtaining and complying with all requirements of the General Order for Civil cases, each Judge's Supplement to the General Order and the General Mediation Order. Copies of these orders are available in the Courtroom and on the Court's website http://www.dccourts.gov/.

Case Assigned to: Judge MAURICE ROSS Date: November 14,2014 Initial Conference: 9:00 am, Friday, February 13, 2015 Location: Courtroom 100
500 Indiana Avenue N.W. WASHINGTON, DC 20001

Chief Judge Lee F. Satterfield Caio.doc

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 27 of 45

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 28 of 45
ADDENDUM TO INITIAL ORDER AFFECTING ALL MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CASES
In accordance with the Medical Malpractice Proceedings Act of 2006, D.C. Code § 16-2801, et seq. (2007 Winter Supp.), "[a]fter an action is filed in the court against a healthcare provider alleging medical malpractice, the court shall require the parties to enter into mediation, without discovery or, if all parties agree[,] with only limited discovery that will not interfere with the completion of mediation within 30 days of the Initial Scheduling and Settlement Conference ("ISSCIf), prior to any further litigation in an effort to reach a settlement agreement. The early mediation schedule shall be included in the Scheduling Order following the ISSC. Unless all parties agree, the stay of discovery shall not be more than 30 days after the ISSC." D.C. Code § 16­ 2821.
To ensure compliance with this legislation, on or before the date of the ISSC, the Court will notify all attorneys and pro se parties of the date and time of the early mediation session and the name of the assigned mediator. Information about the early mediation date also is available over the internet at https:llwww:dccourts.gov/pal. To facilitate this process, all counsel and pro se parties in every medical malpractice case are required to confer, jointly complete and sign an EARLY MEDIATION FORM, which must be filed no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the ISSC. Two separate Early Mediation Forms are available. Both forms may be obtained at www.dccourts.gov/medmalmediation. One form is to be used for early mediation with a mediator from the multi-door medical malpractice mediator roster; the second form is to be used for early mediation with a private mediator. Both forms also are available in the Multi-Door Dispute Resolution Office, Suite 2900, 410 E Street, N.W. Plaintiffs counsel is responsible for eFiling the form and is required to e-mail a courtesy copy to earlymedmal@dcsc.gov. Pro se Plaintiffs who elect not to eFile may file by hand in the Multi-Door Dispute Resolution Office.
A roster of medical malpractice mediators available through the Court's Multi-Door Dispute Resolution Division, with biographical information about each mediator, can be found at www.dccourts.gov/medmalmediation/mediatorprofiles. All individuals on the roster are judges or lawyers with at least 10 years of significant experience in medical malpractice litigation. D.C. Code § 16-2823(a). If the parties cannot agree on a mediator, the Court will appoint one. D.C. Code § l6-2823(b).
The following persons are required by statute to attend personally the Early Mediation Conference: (1) all parties; (2) for parties that are not individuals, a representative with settlement authority; (3) in cases involving an insurance company, a representative of the company with settlement authority; and (4) attorneys representing each party with primary responsibility for the case. D.C. Code § 16-2824.
No later than ten (10) days after the early mediation session has terminated, Plaintiff must eFile with the Court a report prepared by the mediator, including a private mediator, regarding: (1) attendance; (2) whether a settlement was reached; or, (3) if a settlement was not reached, any agreements to narrow the scope of the dispute, limit discovery, facilitate future settlement, hold another mediation session, or otherwise reduce the cost and time of trial preparation. D.C. Code § 16-2826. Any Plaintiff who is pro se may elect to file the report by hand with the Civil Clerk's Office. The forms to be used for early mediation reports are available at www.dccourts.gov/medmalmediation.
Chief Judge Lee F. Satterfield
Caio.doc

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 29 of 45

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 30 of 45
Filed D.C. superior Court 
 Ol/l6/20l5 l8:44PM 
 Clerk of the Court 

THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 CIVIL DIVISION 


GREGORY SMITH Plaintiff,
v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.
Defendants.

)

)

)

) Civ. No.: 14 CA 007278 B

) Judge:

Hon. Judge Maurice Ross

) Next Event: Initial Scheduling Conference

)

February 13,2015

)

-----------------------------) 


PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR SERVICE 

Pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the D.C. Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Gregory Smith, by and through counsel, respectfully moves this Court to enter an Order to extend the time for service by sixty (60) days.
As set forth in the enclosed Statement of Points and Authorities, there is good cause to extend the time for service. Moreover, there has been no previous extensions of time for service.

Dated: January 16,2015

. Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Brendan Klaproth Brendan Klaproth (D.C. Bar No. 999360) Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202-618-2344 Email: Bklaproth@klaprothlaw.com
David Akulian (D.C. Bar No. 1005750) 406 5th Street NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20001

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 31 of 45 Telephone: 202-505-2113 Email: info@NotGuiltyInDC.com Attorneysfor Plaintiff
2

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 32 of 45

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 CIVIL DIVISION 


GREGORY SMITH Plaintiff, v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.
Defendants.

)

)

)

) Civ. No.: 14 CA 007278 B

) Judge:

Hon. Judge Maurice Ross

) Next Event: Initial Scheduling Conference

)

February 13,2015

)

--------------) 


STATEMENT OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 
 IN SUPPORT OF 

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR SERVICE 

Plaintiff, by and through counsel, respectfully submits this Statement of Points and Authorities in Support of Plaintiff's Motion to Extend the Time for Service by sixty (60) days.
Pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the D.C. Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure, a motion may be made to extend the time for service prior within 60 days of filing of the complaint. "The Court shall extend the period for such time as may be warranted by circumstances." D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 4(m); see also Wagshal v. Rigler, 711 A.2d 112 (D.C. 1998) (overturning trial court's dismissal of case under Rule 4(m)). The circumstances in the present case warrant an extension of the time for service for the following reasons:
1. Plaintiff filed a Complaint on November 14, 2014. Plaintiff has taken the following steps to serve the Defendants thereby warranting an extension for the time to serve.
2. Defendant District of Columbia - Plaintiff served Defendant District of Columbia through the Office of the Mayor and the Office of the Attorney General on January 5,

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 33 of 45

2015. Decl. ofKlaproth ~ 3. The designated representative for the Mayor's Office and the Office of the Attorney General, Ma~orie Thomas, accepted service. Id
3. Defendant Warden William J. Smith - Pursuant to Rule 4(c)(3), Plaintiff attempted to serve Defendant Warden William J. Smith on January 6,2015, via certified mail, return receipt requested. Decl. ofKlaproth ~ 5. Plaintiff has, however, yet to receive the return receipt. Id The tracking information (tracking # 9414710200883491358915) indicates that the service documents are still in transit to Defendant D.C. Department of Corrections. Id If Plaintiff does not receive the return receipt within ten (10) days of this motion, Plaintiffwill have Defendant Warden William J. Smith personally served.
4. Defendant D.C. Department of Corrections - Pursuant to Rule 4(c)(3), Plaintiff attempted to serve Defendant D.C. Department of Corrections on January 6, 2015, via certified mail, return receipt requested. Dec!. ofKlaproth ~ 5. Plaintiff has, however, yet to receive the return receipt. Id The tracking information (tracking # 9414710200830559233929) indicates that the service documents are still in transit to Defendant D.C. Department of Corrections. Id If PI aintiff does not receive the return receipt within ten (10) days of this motion, Plaintiffwill have Defendant D.C. Department of Corrections personally served.
Thus, for the reasons set forth above, there is good cause to extend the time for service. Moreover, there have been no previous extensions requested. Plaintiff has also diligently pursued serving the Defendants and has outlined the efforts to be made in the future to obtain service. Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to grant Plaintiff's Motion to Extend Service.

Dated: January 16,2015

Respectfully submitted, 2 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 34 of 45
lsI Brendan Klaproth Brendan Klaproth (D.C. Bar No. 999360) Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202-618-2344 Email: Bklaproth@kJaprothlaw.com David Akulian (D.C. Bar No. 1005750) 406 5th Street NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202-505-2113 Email: info@NotGuiltylnDC.com Attorneysjor Plaintiff
3

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 35 of 45
EXHIBIT 1
to
PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE
Declaration of Brendan Klaproth 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 36 of 45

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 CIVIL DIVISION 


GREGORY SMITH

) 


) 


Plaintiff,

) 


) Civ. No.: 14 CA 007278 B 


v.

) Judge:

Hon. Judge Maurice Ross

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.

) Next Event: Initial Scheduling Conference

)

February 13,2015

) 


Defendants.

) 


-------------------------------)

DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE

I, BRENDAN KLAPROTH, hereby declare under penalty of perjury:

1. I am an attorney representing the Plaintiff in the above-captioned litigation. As

counsel for Mr. Smith, I am familiar with the facts stated herein. I submit this Declaration in

support of Plaintiffs Motion to Extend Time for Service.

2. Plaintiff filed a Complaint on November 14, 2014.

3. I personally served Defendant District of Columbia through the Office of the

Mayor and the Office of the Attorney General on January 5, 2015. The designated representative

for the Mayor's Office and the Office of the Attorney General, Marjorie Thomas, accepted

service.

4. Pursuant to Rule 4(c)(3), Plaintiff attempted to serve Defendant D.C.

Department of Corrections on January 6,2015, via certified mail, return receipt requested.

Plaintiff has, however, yet to receive the return receipt. The tracking information (tracking #

9414710200830559233929) indicates that the service documents are still in transit to Defendant

D.C. Department of Corrections.

1

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 37 of 45
5. Pursuant to Rule 4(c)(3), Plaintiff's attempted to serve Defendant Warden William J. Smith on January 6, 2015, via certified mail, return receipt requested. Plaintiff has, however, yet to receive the return receipt. The tracking information (tracking # 9414710200883491358915) indicates that the service documents are still in transit to Defendant D.C. Department of Corrections.
I declare and affirm under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 16,2015
Brendan Klaproth (D.C. Bar No. 999360) Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 Tel: 202-618-2344 Email: Bklaproth@klaprothlaw.com Attorneyfor Plaintiff
2 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 38 of 45

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 CIVIL DIVISION 


GREGORY SMITH

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

) Civ. No.: 14 CA 007278 B

v.

) Judge:

Han. Judge Maurice Ross

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.

) Next Event: Initial Scheduling Conference

)

February 13,2015

)

Defendants.

)

-----------------------------)

[Proposed] Order

In consideration of Plaintiff' s Motion to Extend the Time for Service, on this

day

_ _ _ _ _ _--' it is hereby:

ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have an additional sixty (60) days to

effectuate service on all Defendants.

SO ORDERED.

Honorable Judge Maurice Ross

1 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 39 of 45

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on January 16,2015, I caused to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs' Motion to Extend Time for Service and supporting documents through the court's electronic filing system, as well as by first-class mail on all parties.

Dated: January 16,2015

Respectfully submitted,
lsI Brendan Klaproth Brendan Klaproth (D.C. Bar No. 999360) Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 Tel: 202-618-2344 Email: bklaproth@klaprothlaw.com

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 40 of 45

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 CIVIL DIVISION 


GREGORY SMIT

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

) Civ. No.: 14 CA 007278 B

v.

) Judge:

Hon. Judge Maurice Ross

DISTRICT OF COLV

) Next Event: Initial Scheduling Conference

)

February 13,2015

)

Defendants.

)

-----------------------------)

PROOF OF SERVICE FOR 
 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA-ATTORNEY GENERAL 

I, Brendan Klaproth, hereby declare under penalty of perjury:
1. On January 5, 2015, [personally served a copy of the (1) summons, (2) . complaint, and (3) the initial order setting the case for an Initial Scheduling Conference, on the District of Columbia by serving the designated official from the Office of the Attorney General, Majorie Thomas, at approximately 3:20pm.

I declare and affirm under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Dated: January 15,2015

Respectfully submitted,
... o
I~( "/'1. -{ ,
Brendan Klaproth ( .C. Bar No. 999360) Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 2000 I Telephone: 202-618-2344 Email: Bklaproth@klaprothlaw.com Attorneyfor Plaintiff

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 41 of 45

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FUR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 CIVIL DIVISION 


GREGORY SMITH

Plaintiff, 


) ~iv. No.: 14 CA 007278 B 


v.

. dge:

Hon. Judge Maurice Ross

DISTRICT OF COLUMBI

) Next Event: Initial Scheduling Conference

)

February 13,2015

)

Defendants.

) 


-----------------------------) 


PROOF OF SERVICE FOR 
 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - MAYOR'S OFFICE 

I, Brendan Klaproth, hereby declare under penalty of perjury:
1. On January 5, 2015, I served a copy of the (1) summons, (2) complaint, and (3) the initial order setting the case for an Initial Scheduling Conference, on the District of Columbia by personally serving the designated official from the Office of the Mayor, Majorie Thomas, at approximately 3:2Opm.

I declare and affirm under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Dated: January 15,2015

Respectfully submitted,
/~~
Brendan Klaproth (D.C. Bar No. 999360) Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202-618-2344 Email: Bklaproth@klaprothlaw.com Attorneyfor Plaintif!

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 42 of 45

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICt OF COLUMBIA

-CIVIL DIVISION

r:'o..F!'"·

.. '.~CH

k1T
 GREGORY Ml'lfI JAN 202815

Plaintiff,

)

) Civ. No.: 14 CA 007278 B

v.

) Judge: Hon. Judge Maurice Ross

) Next Event: Initial Scheduling Conference

DISTRlCf OF COLUMBIA, e( al.

)

February 13,2015

) 


Defendants.

) 


-----------------------------)

PROOF OF SERVICE FOR 
 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - DEPARTMENT OF CORRECtIONS 

I, DAVID AKULIAN, hereby declare under penalty of perjwy:
1. On January 20, 2015, I served a copy of the (1) summons, (2) complaint, and (3) 
 the initial order setting the case for an Initial Scheduling Conference, on the 
 District of Columbia Department ofCorrections by personally serving Assistant 
 General Counsel Meghan Murphy at approximately 9;45a.m. 

I declare and affinn under penalty of perjwy that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: January 20,2015

~,qa...,~Ulan #1005750 Law Office of David Akulian 406 5th Street NW Suite 201 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 888-847-9859 Email: info@NotOuiltylnDC.com Attorneyfor Plaintiff

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 43 of 45
Filed D.C. Superior Court 01/22/2015 10:07AH Clerk of the Court
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 CIVIL DIVISION 


GREGORY SMITH, Plaintiff,
v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et aI.,
Defendants.

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 2014 CA 7278 B

)

Judge Ross

)

Calendar #6

)

) 


) 


) 


ORDER

In consideration of Plaintiffs Motion to Extend the Time to Serve, it is this 21 sf day of

January 2015, hereby:

ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED~ and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have until March 23, 2015, to effectuate

service on all Defendants and file proof of the same with the Clerk of the Court~ and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, that the Initial Scheduling Conference previously set for

February 13, 20]5, is hereby VACATED and re-set for Friday, April 24, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. in

Courtroom 100.

Copies to:
Brandan Klaproth, Esquire Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street, NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001

Judge Maurice A. Ross

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 44 of 45
Filed
D.C. Superior Court 01/23/2015 16:27PM Clerk of the Court
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
 CIVIL DIVISION 


)

GREGORY SMITH,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et ai.,

)

)

Defendants.

)

--------------------------)

Civil Action No. 2014 CA 007278 B Judge: Maurice Ross Next Event: Initial Conference Date: February 13,2015 at 9:00 a.m,

PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE

The Clerk of the Court will please enter the appearance of Assistant Attorneys General

Michael K. Addo and Alicia M. Cullen as counsel for Defendant the District of Columbia in the

above-captioned action.

Date: January 23, 2015

Respectfully submitted,

KARL A. RACINE Attorney General for the District of Columbia

GEORGE C. VALENTINE Deputy Attorney General, Civil Litigation Division

lsi Kimberly M. Johnson KIMBERLY M. JOHNSON Chief, General Litigation Section I

lsi Michael K. Addo MICHAEL K. ADDO [1008971] Assistant Attorney General 441 Fourth Street, N.W., Sixth Floor South Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone: (202) 724-6539 Email: michael.addo@dc.gov

lsi Alicia M. Cullen ALICIA M. CULLEN [1015227] 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/02/15 Page 45 of 45
Assistant Attorney General 441 Fourth Street, N.W., Sixth Floor South Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone: (202) 741-0760 Fax: (202) 715-7721 E-mail: alicia.cullen@dc.gov Counsel/or Defendant the District o/Columbia CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on January 23, 2015, a true copy of the foregoing document was served via the Court's electronic filing system to: Brendan Klaproth Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 Counsel/or Plaintiff
lsi Alicia M. Cullen
ALICIA M. CULLEN Assistant Attorney General
2 


 
 Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 1 of 15
CASREF,JURY,TYPE−L
U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:15−cv−00161−ABJ

SMITH v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al Assigned to: Judge Amy Berman Jackson Referred to: Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey (Settlement)

Case in other court:

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 2014 CA 007278 B

Cause: Petition for Removal− Civil Rights

Plaintiff

Date Filed: 02/02/2015 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

GREGORY SMITH

represented by Brendan James Klaproth KLAPROTH LAW PLLC 406 Fifth Street, NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 (202) 618−2344 Fax: (202) 618−4636 Email: bklaproth@klaprothlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

David Akulian LAW OFFICE OF DAVID H. AKULIAN 840 First Street, NE 3rd Floor Washington, DC 20002 (888) 847−9859 Fax: (202) 204−5291 Email: info@notguiltyindc.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jesse Colin Klaproth KLAPROTH LAW PLLC 1500 Walnut Street 8th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 (215) 644−7463 Fax: (202) 618−4636 Email: jklaproth@klaprothlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

represented by Akua Damali Coppock OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL/DC 441 4th Street, NW Suite 630 South Washington, DC 20001 (202) 724−6522 Fax: (202) 730−1888 Email: akua.coppock@dc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Alicia Marie Cullen

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 2 of 15

OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL/DC 441 Fourth Street, NW 6th Floor North Washington, DC 20001 (202) 442−9840 Fax: (202) 715−7721 Email: alicia.cullen@dc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael K. Addo OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL/DC 441 Fourth Street, NW 6th Floor North Washington, DC 20001 (202) 724−6539 Fax: (202) 715−0585 Email: michael.addo@dc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Robert A. DeBerardinis , Jr. OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Civil Litigation Division 441 4th Street, NW One Judiciary Square− 6th Floor South Washington, DC 20001 (202) 724−6642 Fax: (202) 741−8895 Email: robert.deberardinis@dc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS TERMINATED: 02/27/2015

represented by Alicia Marie Cullen (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael K. Addo (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
WILLIAM J. SMITH WARDEN, Individually and in his official capacity TERMINATED: 12/15/2015

represented by Alicia Marie Cullen (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael K. Addo (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
JOHN DOES 1−10 being the fictitious names of agents and employees of the D. C. Department of Corrections who are not presently known to Plaintiff

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 3 of 15

TERMINATED: 04/21/2016

Defendant JACK JONES

represented by Alicia Marie Cullen (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael K. Addo (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Robert A. DeBerardinis , Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant JEANETTE MYRICK

represented by Alicia Marie Cullen (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael K. Addo (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Robert A. DeBerardinis , Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 02/02/2015
02/03/2015 02/03/2015 02/04/2015
02/09/2015 02/09/2015 02/12/2015

# Docket Text
1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Superior Court of the District of Columbia, case number 2014 CA 007278 B filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Superior Court Documents, # 2 Exhibit Civil Cover Sheet)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 02/02/2015)
Case Assigned to Judge Amy Berman Jackson. (rd) (Entered: 02/03/2015)
2 NOTICE TO COUNSEL by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (rd) (Entered: 02/03/2015)
3 Receipt on 2/4/2015 of ORIGINAL FILE, certified copy of transfer order and docket sheet from Superior Court. Superior Court Number 2014 CA 007278 B. (Attachments: # 1 Superior Court Documents)(rdj) (Entered: 02/04/2015)
4 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 02/09/2015)
5 MOTION to Dismiss by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 02/09/2015)
MINUTE ORDER. Meet and Confer Initial Scheduling Conference set for 3/10/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3 before Judge Amy Berman Jackson. Plaintiff and Defendant District of Columbia shall meet, confer, and file a Joint Report pursuant to Local Rule 16.3 by 3/2/2015. Any dates contained in the Report should be expressed as specific dates (month/day/year) rather than as time frames (e.g., "60 days after the entry of the scheduling order"). Counsel are directed to contact the Court's Deputy Clerk in the first instance to request the rescheduling of court appearances. The party

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 4 of 15

02/20/2015 02/27/2015 03/02/2015 03/03/2015 03/03/2015 03/04/2015
03/04/2015 03/04/2015 03/04/2015 03/10/2015 03/10/2015
03/10/2015
04/24/2015 06/01/2015

seeking the change in schedule must first confer with counsel for all other parties and be prepared to provide the Deputy Clerk with proposed mutually agreeable dates. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 02/12/2015. (jth) (Entered: 02/12/2015)
6 NOTICE of Appearance by David Akulian on behalf of GREGORY SMITH (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Akulian, David) (Entered: 02/20/2015)
7 STIPULATION of Dismissal Defendant D.C. Department of Corrections by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 02/27/2015)
MINUTE ORDER denying as moot 5 defendant D.C. Department of Corrections' Motion to Dismiss, in light of 7 the Stipulation of Dismissal of that defendant. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/2/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/02/2015)
8 MOTION for Leave to File by GREGORY SMITH (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Certificate of Service, # 4 Text of Proposed Order)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 03/03/2015)
9 REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO ISSUE by GREGORY SMITH filed by GREGORY SMITH.(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 03/03/2015)
MINUTE ORDER granting 8 Motion for Leave to File plaintiff's LCvR 16.3 report. The Clerk is directed to file plaintiff's report [Dkt. # 8−1] on the docket. The parties shall continue to confer in an effort to submit a joint LCvR 16.3 report before the scheduling conference set for March 10, 2015. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/4/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/04/2015)
10 SUMMONS (1) Issued Electronically as to WILLIAM J. SMITH. (jf, ) (Entered: 03/04/2015)
11 MEET AND CONFER STATEMENT. (jf, ) (Entered: 03/04/2015)
12 MEET AND CONFER STATEMENT. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 03/04/2015)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Amy Berman Jackson: Meet and Confer Hearing held on 3/10/2015. A Status Conference is scheduled for 11/10/2015 at 10:00 AM before Judge Amy Berman Jackson. Scheduling Order to be issued. (Court Reporter Janice Dickman) (jth) (Entered: 03/10/2015)
13 SCHEDULING ORDER. Initial disclosures shall be completed by April 24, 2015. All fact discovery shall be completed by November 10, 2015. All discovery requests shall be served in sufficient time to allow a response consistent with the timing set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Civil Rules unless otherwise stipulated by the parties. Each side may conduct up to 10 depositions and serve up to 25 interrogatories. A further status conference is scheduled for November 10, 2015 at 10:00 am in Courtroom 3. Plaintiff's expert disclosures shall be made by December 10, 2015. Defendant's expert disclosures shall be made by February 10, 2016. All expert depositions shall be completed no later than April 10, 2016. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/10/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/10/2015)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Initial disclosures shall be completed by 4/24/2015. Fact Discovery to be completed by 11/10/2015. A further status conference is scheduled for 11/10/2015 at 10:00 AM. Plaintiff's Rule 26(a)(2) Expert Disclosures shall be made by 12/10/2015. Defendant's Rule 26(a)(2) Expert Disclosures shall be made by 2/10/2016. All expert depositions shall be completed by 4/10/2016. (jth) (Entered: 03/10/2015)
14 RULE 26a1 STATEMENT. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 04/24/2015)
15 MOTION for Extension of Time to Serve Defendant Warden William J. Smith by GREGORY SMITH (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Declaration, # 3 Exhibit 1 to Declaration, # 4 Exhibit 2 to Declaration, # 5 Exhibit 3 to Declaration, # 6 Text of Proposed Order, # 7 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 06/01/2015)

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 5 of 15

06/02/2015 06/02/2015 06/05/2015 06/12/2015 07/27/2015 08/14/2015 08/31/2015 10/01/2015 10/02/2015
10/02/2015 11/05/2015
11/05/2015
11/06/2015
11/09/2015

MINUTE ORDER granting 15 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff shall have until August 3, 2015, to effectuate service on defendant William J. Smith. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/2/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 06/02/2015)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Time to effectuate service upon defendant William J. Smith due by 8/3/2015. (tb) (Entered: 06/02/2015)
16 Consent MOTION for Protective Order by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Protective Order)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 06/05/2015)
17 PROTECTIVE ORDER (see the order for more complete details). Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/12/2015. (jth) (Entered: 06/12/2015)
18 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. WILLIAM J. SMITH served on 7/24/2015, answer due 8/14/2015 (Akulian, David) (Entered: 07/27/2015)
19 MOTION to Dismiss by WILLIAM J. SMITH (Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 08/14/2015)
20 Memorandum in opposition to re 19 MOTION to Dismiss filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 08/31/2015)
21 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO HIS MOTION TO DISMISS by WILLIAM J. SMITH (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Reply)(Addo, Michael) (Entered: 10/01/2015)
MINUTE ORDER granting 21 Motion for Leave to File. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket [21−1] defendant Smith's reply in support of his motion to dismiss. The parties are instructed that any future requests for an extension must be filed two days before the date to be extended. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 10/2/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 10/02/2015)
22 REPLY to opposition to re 19 MOTION to Dismiss filed by WILLIAM J. SMITH. (jf) (Entered: 10/05/2015)
23 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by GREGORY SMITH (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Declaration, # 3 Exhibit 1, # 4 Exhibit 2, # 5 Exhibit 3, # 6 Exhibit 4, # 7 Exhibit 5, # 8 Exhibit 6, # 9 Text of Proposed Order, # 10 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 11/05/2015)
MINUTE ORDER. In light of the issues raised in 23 plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to complete discovery, it is ORDERED that the status conference presently set for November 10, 2015 at 10:00 am in Courtroom 3 will proceed as scheduled, and the Court will resolve the issues identified in plaintiff's motion at that time. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/5/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/05/2015)
24 RESPONSE re 23 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 11/06/2015)
MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part 23 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. Notwithstanding the minute order issued on November 5, 2015, the Court hereby vacates the status conference scheduled for November 10, 2015 and resets it for January 13, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 3. Plaintiff's motion to extend the time to complete discovery will be granted in part, and the schedule established by this Court on March 10, 2015 will be amended as follows: Fact discovery, including both the taking of individual and 30(b)(6) depositions and the completion of outstanding paper discovery, shall be completed by January 15, 2016. Plaintiff's expert disclosures shall be made by February 10, 2016. Defendants' expert disclosures shall be made by April 11, 2016. All expert depositions shall be completed no later than June 10, 2016. The parties are reminded that the scheduling order in this case specifically provides: "No written discovery motion may be filed without a prior conference with the Court and leave of Court." Any future pleadings concerning discovery that are filed in violation of the order will be stricken. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/9/15. (DMK) (Entered: 11/09/2015)

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 6 of 15

11/09/2015
12/15/2015 12/15/2015 01/13/2016
01/29/2016 02/01/2016
02/01/2016 02/02/2016 02/12/2016
02/12/2016 02/18/2016
02/22/2016 02/24/2016 02/25/2016

Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: The Status Conference is re−scheduled for 1/13/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3; Fact discovery, including both the taking of individual and 30(b)(6) depositions and the completion of outstanding paper discovery, shall be completed by 1/15/2016; Plaintiff's Expert Disclosures are due by 2/10/2016; Defendants' Expert Disclosures are due by 4/11/2016. All expert depositions shall be completed by 6/10/2016. (jth) (Entered: 11/09/2015)
25 ORDER granting 19 Motion to Dismiss. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/15/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/15/2015)
26 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/15/2015. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/15/2015)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Amy Berman Jackson: Status Conference held on 1/13/2016. Fact Discovery now closes on 1/29/2016. The parties are directed to file a Joint Status Report on 1/29/2016 proposing the remainder of a schedule, including their respective positions on Expert Discovery and Mediation. (Court Reporter Janice Dickman) (jth) (Entered: 01/13/2016)
27 Joint STATUS REPORT by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. (Addo, Michael) (Entered: 01/29/2016)
28 ORDER REFERRING CASE for Mediation to Magistrate Judge Alan Kay, to commence on February 1, 2016 and to conclude April 1, 2016. Fact discovery shall conclude by February 12, 2016, and the remainder of the discovery schedule, including the need to identify expert witnesses and any date for the filing of an amended complaint, shall be held in abeyance until the close of mediation. The parties shall file a report on the status of the mediation on March 11, 2016, and if the case settles in whole or in part, both parties shall immediately advise the Court of the settlement by filing a stipulation.See Order for details. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/1/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/01/2016)
CASE DIRECTLY REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Alan Kay to commence February 1, 2016 and to conclude 4/1/2016. (sth) (Entered: 02/03/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Mediation to conclude by 4/1/2016; Fact discovery to conclude by 2/12/2016; The Parties shall file a Report on the Status of Mediation on 3/11/2016. (jth) (Entered: 02/02/2016)
MINUTE ORDER. Pursuant to the teleconference held between the parties on February 12, 2016, it is ORDERED that the deadline to complete fact discovery in this matter is hereby extended until February 26, 2016. In the future, if the parties seek an extension of a deadline, and the parties agree to the requested extension, the parties may obtain the extension by filing a consent motion. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/12/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/12/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: The deadline to complete Fact Discovery is extended until 2/26/2016. (jth) (Entered: 02/12/2016)
MINUTE ORDER: This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Kay for mediation. Counsel have been given a tentative Settlement Conference date: February 25, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. Counsel should please contact chambers (202−354−3030) to confirm this date or select a new date. Signed by Magistrate Judge Alan Kay on 02/18/16. (DM) (Entered: 02/18/2016)
MINUTE ORDER Per request of counsel, the Settlement Conference is rescheduled from 2/25/2016 to 3/3/2016 at 10:00 AM in Chambers (room 2333) before Magistrate Judge Alan Kay. Signed by Magistrate Judge Alan Kay on 2/22/2016. (lcak1) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
29 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by GREGORY SMITH (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service, # 2 Memorandum in Support, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Akulian, David) (Entered: 02/24/2016)
MINUTE ORDER granting 29 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. The deadline to complete fact discovery in this matter is hereby extended until March 11, 2016. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/25/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/25/2016)

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 7 of 15

02/25/2016 03/03/2016 03/14/2016
03/15/2016 03/15/2016 03/16/2016 03/17/2016
03/17/2016
03/25/2016 04/08/2016 04/18/2016 04/19/2016 04/20/2016

Set/Reset Deadlines: The deadline to complete Fact Discovery in this matter is hereby extended until 3/11/2016. (jth) (Entered: 02/25/2016)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Alan Kay: Settlement Conference held on 3/3/2016. (DM) (Entered: 04/12/2016)
MINUTE ORDER. On February 1, 2016, the Court referred this matter to Magistrate Judge Alan Kay for mediation, and it called for the parties to file a status report on the mediation by March 11, 2016. The Court also stated that "the remainder of the discovery schedule, including the need to identify expert witnesses and any date for the filing of an amended complaint," would be held in abeyance pending the close of mediation. As of today's date, the parties have not filed the joint status report as ordered. Thus, it is ORDERED that by March 18, 2016, the parties shall file a joint status report advising the Court of the status of mediation and proposing a schedule for expert discovery and the briefing of dispositive motions, if necessary. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/14/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/14/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: The Parties shall file a Joint Report advising the Court of the Status of Mediation and proposing a schedule for expert discovery and the briefing of dispositive motions, if necessary, by 3/18/2016. (jth) (Entered: 03/15/2016)
30 NOTICE of Appearance by Akua Damali Coppock on behalf of DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Coppock, Akua) (Entered: 03/15/2016)
31 Joint STATUS REPORT by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 03/16/2016)
MINUTE ORDER. In light of 31 the parties' joint status report, it is ORDERED that: plaintiff shall file his motion for leave to file an amended complaint, if any, by March 25, 2016; plaintiff's expert disclosures shall be made by April 15, 2016; defendant's expert disclosures shall be made by June 15, 2016; expert discovery shall be completed by July 15, 2016; motions for summary judgment, if any, shall be filed by August 15, 2016, with oppositions filed by September 5, 2016, and replies filed by September 19, 2016. It is FURTHER ORDERED that a status conference shall be held on July 19, 2016, at 10:00 am in Courtroom 3. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/17/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/17/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Plaintiff's Motion for leave to file an Amended complaint, if any, is due by 3/25/2016; Plaintiff's expert disclosures are due by 4/15/2016; Defendant's expert disclosures are due by 6/15/2016; Expert Discovery shall be completed by 7/15/2016; Motions for Summary Judgment, if any, are due by 8/15/2016; Oppositions are due by 9/5/2016, Replies are due by 9/19/2016; a Status Conference is scheduled for 7/19/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3 before Judge Amy Berman Jackson. (jth) (Entered: 03/17/2016)
32 MOTION to Amend/Correct Complaint by GREGORY SMITH (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit 1 − First Amended Complaint, # 3 Text of Proposed Order, # 4 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 03/25/2016)
33 Memorandum in opposition to re 32 MOTION to Amend/Correct Complaint filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 04/08/2016)
34 REPLY to opposition to motion re 32 MOTION to Amend/Correct Complaint filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 04/18/2016)
35 ORDER granting 32 Motion to Amend/Correct. By April 22, 2016, plaintiff shall file an amended complaint which consists of the revised version of the proposed amended complaint found at Dkt. # 34−1 and the exhibit attached to the earlier version of the proposed amended complaint at Dkt. # 32−2. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 4/19/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 04/19/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff shall file by 4/22/2016, an Amended Complaint which consists of the revised version of the proposed amended complaint found at Dkt. # 34−1 and the exhibit attached to the earlier version of the proposed amended complaint at Dkt. # 32−2. (jth) (Entered: 04/20/2016)

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 8 of 15

04/21/2016 04/21/2016 05/05/2016 05/11/2016
05/31/2016 06/10/2016 06/13/2016
06/13/2016 06/13/2016 06/14/2016
06/14/2016 06/14/2016
06/16/2016 07/08/2016

36 AMENDED COMPLAINT against DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK with Jury Demand filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Summons, # 2 Summons)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 04/21/2016)
37 SUMMONS (2) Issued Electronically as to JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK. (jf) (Entered: 04/21/2016)
38 ANSWER to 36 Amended Complaint by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Related document: 36 Amended Complaint filed by GREGORY SMITH.(Addo, Michael) (Entered: 05/05/2016)
39 MOTION for Costs and Fees by GREGORY SMITH (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit 11, # 13 Exhibit 12, # 14 Declaration of Klaproth, # 15 Declaration of Akulian, # 16 Text of Proposed Order, # 17 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) Modified event title on 5/12/2016 (znmw). (Entered: 05/11/2016)
40 Memorandum in opposition to re 39 MOTION for Costs and Fees filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3)(Addo, Michael) (Entered: 05/31/2016)
41 REPLY to opposition to motion re 39 MOTION for Costs and Fees filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 06/10/2016)
MINUTE ORDER REFERRING CASE for Determination on Motion. It is ORDERED that 39 plaintiff's Motion for Costs and Fees is hereby referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for determination pursuant to LCvR 72.2. Until this referral is terminated, all filings related to this motion shall include the initials of the Magistrate Judge in the caption next to the initials of the undersigned judge. See LCvR 5.1(f). Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/13/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 06/13/2016)
42 MOTION for Extension of Time to Designate Experts by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 06/13/2016)
CASE RANDOMLY REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson for determination on 39 Motion pursuant to LCvR 72.2 (md) (Entered: 06/13/2016)
MINUTE ORDER granting 42 Motion for Extension of Time. The Court finds that defendant has shown good cause for the requested extension, notwithstanding plaintiff's objection. It is therefore ORDERED that defendant's expert disclosures shall be made by August 15, 2016; expert discovery shall be completed by September 14, 2016; and motions for summary judgment, if any, shall be filed by October 17, 2016, with oppositions filed by November 7, 2016, and replies filed by November 21, 2016. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the status conference presently set for July 19, 2016, is hereby rescheduled to September 23, 2016, at 10:00 am in Courtroom 3. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/14/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 06/14/2016)
Set/Reset Hearings: Status Conference set for 9/14/2016 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 4 before Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson. (lcdar1, ) (Entered: 06/14/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Defendant's Expert Disclosures shall be made by 8/15/2016; Expert Discovery shall be completed by 9/14/2016; Motions for Summary Judgment, if any, are due by 10/17/2016; Oppositions are due by 11/7/2016; Replies are due by 11/21/2016; The status conference presently scheduled for 7/19/2016 at 10:00 AM, is hereby rescheduled to 9/23/2016, at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3 before Judge Amy Berman Jackson. The Status Conference before Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson remains scheduled for 9/14/2016 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 4. (jth) (Entered: 06/14/2016)
43 WAIVER OF SERVICE by GREGORY SMITH. JACK JONES waiver sent on 5/11/2016, answer due 7/10/2016. (Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 06/16/2016)
44 WAIVER OF SERVICE by GREGORY SMITH. JEANETTE MYRICK waiver sent on 5/11/2016, answer due 7/10/2016. (Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 07/08/2016)

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 9 of 15

07/08/2016 08/12/2016 08/23/2016 08/25/2016 08/26/2016 08/29/2016 08/30/2016 08/30/2016 09/01/2016
09/01/2016 09/05/2016

45 ANSWER to 36 Amended Complaint by JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK. Related document: 36 Amended Complaint filed by GREGORY SMITH.(Addo, Michael) (Entered: 07/08/2016)
46 MOTION to Conduct Independent Medical Examination and Motion to Extend Time to Designate Expert Psychiatrist by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 08/12/2016)
MINUTE ORDER. In light of 46 defendant's motion seeking to conduct an independent medical examination of plaintiff and its request for an extension of time in which to designate an expert psychiatrist, it is ORDERED that the deadlines for expert discovery set in the Court's Minute Order of June 14, 2016, are hereby VACATED and will be revisited when the Court rules on the pending motion. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 8/23/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 08/23/2016)
47 Memorandum in opposition to re 46 MOTION to Conduct Independent Medical Examination and Motion to Extend Time to Designate Expert Psychiatrist filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Certificate of Service)(Akulian, David) (Entered: 08/25/2016)
48 NOTICE of Appearance by Robert A. DeBerardinis, Jr on behalf of DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK (DeBerardinis, Robert) (Entered: 08/26/2016)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Amy Berman Jackson: Telephone Conference Call held on 8/29/2016. (No Court Reporter Present) (jth) (Entered: 08/29/2016)
MINUTE ORDER. By September 2, 2016, the parties shall notify the Court of the agreed−upon date, time, and location for the medical examination of the plaintiff, as discussed during the teleconference held on August 29, 2016. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 8/30/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 08/30/2016)
Set/Reset Deadline: By 9/2/2016, the parties shall notify the Court of the agreed−upon date, time, and location for the medical examination of the plaintiff, as discussed during the teleconference held on 8/29/2016. (jth) (Entered: 08/30/2016)
MINUTE ORDER granting 46 defendant's Motion to Conduct Independent Medical Examination of Plaintiff. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 35, and as discussed during the teleconference held on August 29, 2016, it is ORDERED that plaintiff shall submit to a medical examination to be conducted by Dr. Carolina Klein on September 20, 2016, at 9:00 am, at 4803B Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria VA 22304. By September 9, 2016, defendant shall provide plaintiff with a general description of the examination as well as copies of any biographical or intake forms the plaintiff will be asked to complete and the names of the psychological tests to be administered during the examination, if any. The examination itself shall focus on the "mental anguish, "mental...pain," and "emotional distress" plaintiff claims he suffered as a result of the alleged over−detention at issue in this matter, including his emotional, mental, and psychological condition during and after the detention; his emotional, mental, and psychological history prior to the detention; and any prior traumatic event in plaintiff's life that may be related to his alleged mental pain and emotional distress. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the following schedule shall apply in this action moving forward: Dr. Klein shall provide her expert report to plaintiff by October 4, 2016; plaintiff shall have until October 31, 2016, to depose Dr. Klein; and motions for summary judgment shall be due by November 17, 2016, with oppositions due by December 7, 2016, and replies due by December 21, 2016. The status conference presently scheduled for September 23, 2016, is hereby rescheduled for November 4, 2016, at 10:00 am in Courtroom 3. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/1/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 09/01/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Summary Judgment motions due by 11/17/2016. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 12/7/2016. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 12/21/2016. Status Conference set for 11/4/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3 before Judge Amy Berman Jackson. (zsm) (Entered: 09/01/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff shall have until 10/31/2016 to depose Dr. Klein. (jth) (Entered: 09/05/2016)

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 10 of 15

09/14/2016
10/03/2016 10/04/2016 10/05/2016 10/18/2016 10/27/2016 10/28/2016
10/28/2016 11/04/2016 11/16/2016 11/17/2016 11/18/2016

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson on 9/14/16 : Case was called as a Status Hearing, but proceeded as a Hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for Costs and Fees 39 . The Court will take the matter under advisement and issue a memorandum opinion and order. Plaintiff's Counsel: Brendan Klaproth and David Akulian; Defendants' Counsel: Alicia Cullen, Michael Addo and Akua Coppock. (Court Reporter: FTR Gold − Ctrm. 4; FTR Time Frame: 11:34:05 − 12:25:14. (kk) (Entered: 09/14/2016)
49 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Expert Discovery by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK (Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 10/03/2016)
MINUTE ORDER granting 49 Motion for Extension of Time. It is therefore ORDERED that defendant issue Dr. Klein's expert report to plaintiff by October 18, 2016, and plaintiff depose Dr. Klein by November 14, 2016. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 10/4/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 10/04/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant shall issue Dr. Klein's expert report to Plaintiff by 10/18/2016; Plaintiff shall depose Dr. Klein by 11/14/2016. (jth) (Entered: 10/05/2016)
50 RULE 26a2 STATEMENT. (Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 10/18/2016)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Amy Berman Jackson: Discovery Telephone Conference Call held in chambers on 10/27/2016. (No Court Reporter) (jth) (Entered: 10/27/2016)
MINUTE ORDER. Based on the matters discussed during the telephonic discovery conference held on October 27, 2016, it is ORDERED that defendant may depose plaintiff's liability expert on a mutually agreeable date that will not necessitate extending the summary judgment briefing schedule that is now in place. If plaintiff cannot make his expert available within that time period, defendant may move for a brief extension of the schedule. In addition, it is ORDERED that the existing schedule be revised as follows: defendant's motion for summary judgment is due by November 17, 2016, plaintiff's opposition (and his cross−motion for summary judgment, if any, which shall be supported by a single memorandum of points and authorities) is due by December 7, 2016, defendant's reply (and cross−opposition, if needed) will be due by December 21, 2016, and plaintiff's cross−reply, if any, will be due by December 30, 2016. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 10/28/16. (lcabj2) (Entered: 10/28/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Cross Motions due by 12/7/2016. Response to Cross Motions due by 12/21/2016. Reply to Cross Motions due by 12/30/2016. Summary Judgment motions due by 11/17/2016. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 12/7/2016. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 12/21/2016. (tb) (Entered: 10/28/2016)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Amy Berman Jackson: Status Conference held on 11/4/2016. (Court Reporter: Bryan A. Wayne) (jth) (Entered: 11/04/2016)
51 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK (Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 11/16/2016)
52 Memorandum in opposition to re 51 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Text of Proposed Order, # 3 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 11/17/2016)
MINUTE ORDER granting 51 Motion for Extension of Time. Upon consideration of both 51 the motion and 52 the opposition, defendant's motion is granted. The Court acknowledges that there is little to justify defendant's request and that defendant has not pointed to extenuating circumstances that would warrant the imposition of a substantial delay over plaintiff's objection. But this is not a substantial delay. And plaintiff's opposition, which was more vituperative than necessary, did not point to any real prejudice to plaintiff that would arise out of the relatively short extension of the briefing schedule that has been requested. If the extension poses a problem for

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 11 of 15

11/18/2016 11/21/2016
11/21/2016 12/05/2016
12/05/2016 12/06/2016 12/06/2016 12/08/2016 12/08/2016 12/12/2016 12/20/2016

plaintiff's counsel, the Court will of course extend the time for plaintiff to respond accordingly. The Court notes that given the state of its docket, revising the briefing schedule will not have a significant impact on when the Court considers the cross−motions in any event. Therefore, defendant's motion for summary judgment is due by December 8, 2016. Because plaintiff did not inform the Court of the date plaintiff's counsel will return from his trip, the Court will await a proposal from plaintiff before setting the date for plaintiff's opposition/cross−motion and any further pleadings. Under all of these circumstances, any further requests for extensions by defendant will not be favorably received. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/18/16. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/18/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is now due by 12/8/2016. Because plaintiff did not inform the Court of the date counsel will return from his trip, the Court will await a proposal from plaintiff before setting the date for plaintiff's opposition/cross−motion and any further pleadings. (jth) (Entered: 11/18/2016)
MINUTE ORDER. In light of the Court's Minute Order on November 18, 2016, and plaintiff's response to it, the Court hereby ORDERS that the briefing schedule will be as follows: defendant's motion for summary judgment is due by December 8, 2016; plaintiff's opposition (and his cross−motion for summary judgment, if any, which shall be supported by a single memorandum of points and authorities) is due by January 9, 2017; defendant's reply (and cross−opposition, if needed) is due by January 30, 2017; and plaintiff's cross−reply, if any, is due by February 13, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/21/16. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/21/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant's motion for summary judgment is due by 12/8/2016; Plaintiff's opposition and cross−motion for summary judgment, if any, is due by 1/9/2017; Defendant's reply and cross−opposition, if any, is due by 1/30/2017; Plaintiff's cross−reply, if any, is due by 2/13/2017. (jth) (Entered: 11/21/2016)
MINUTE ORDER. The Court has been informed that the parties are currently engaged in a discovery dispute. Due to the Court's trial schedule, defendants are hereby granted leave to submit a motion in writing instead of the Court conducting a telephonic discovery conference with the parties. If the parties cannot resolve the discovery dispute amongst themselves, defendants may submit a motion, not to exceed two pages, by December 8, 2016. Plaintiff may file a response by December 12, 2016 also not to exceed two pages. The Court will review the parties' submissions and will advise the parties if further information is needed to resolve the dispute. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/5/16. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/05/2016)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant's Motion due by 12/8/2016, if discovery dispute not resolved; Plaintiff's Response due by 12/12/2016 (tg) (Entered: 12/06/2016)
53 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 39 Motion for Costs and Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson on 12/6/2016. (lcdar1) (Entered: 12/06/2016)
54 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re 39 Plaintiff's Motion for Costs and Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson on 12/6/2016. (lcdar1) (Entered: 12/06/2016)
55 MOTION to Compel Signed Authorizations by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 12/08/2016)
56 MOTION for Summary Judgment by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 12/08/2016)
57 Memorandum in opposition to re 55 MOTION to Compel Signed Authorizations filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Text of Proposed Order, # 3 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 12/12/2016)
58 OBJECTIONS re 54 Memorandum & Opinion, 53 Order on Motion for Attorney Fees filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK. (Addo,

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 12 of 15

01/03/2017 01/09/2017
01/09/2017 01/10/2017 01/10/2017 01/11/2017 01/11/2017 01/11/2017 01/11/2017 01/12/2017 01/20/2017 01/23/2017 01/30/2017

Michael) Modified event title on 12/21/2016 (znmw). (Entered: 12/20/2016)
59 RESPONSE re 58 Response to Order of the Court filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 01/03/2017)
60 Memorandum in opposition to re 56 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Cross Motion for Summary Judgment on Liability filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Statement of Facts Plaintiff's Statement of Genuine Issues of Material Fact, # 3 Statement of Facts Plaintiff's Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, # 4 Certificate of Service, # 5 Text of Proposed Order, # 6 Exhibit Table of Exhibits, # 7 Exhibit 1, # 8 Exhibit 2, # 9 Exhibit 3, # 10 Exhibit 4, # 11 Exhibit 5, # 12 Exhibit 6, # 13 Exhibit 7, # 14 Exhibit 8, # 15 Exhibit 9, # 16 Exhibit 10, # 17 Exhibit 11, # 18 Exhibit 12, # 19 Exhibit 13, # 20 Exhibit 14, # 21 Exhibit 15, # 22 Exhibit 16, # 23 Exhibit A, # 24 Exhibit B, # 25 Exhibit C, # 26 Exhibit D, # 27 Exhibit E, # 28 Exhibit F, # 29 Exhibit G, # 30 Exhibit H)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 01/09/2017)
61 Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on Liability by GREGORY SMITH; (See docket entry no. 60 to view document.) (td) (Entered: 01/10/2017)
NOTICE OF ERROR re 60 Memorandum in Opposition; emailed to bklaproth@klaprothlaw.com, cc'd 10 associated attorneys −− The PDF file you docketed contained errors: 1. This has been corrected. In the future if your document has multiple events or reliefs, remember to docket all parts. (td, ) (Entered: 01/10/2017)
62 SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by GREGORY SMITH (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service, # 2 Text of Proposed Order, # 3 Exhibit 5, # 4 Exhibit 7, # 5 Exhibit 10, # 6 Exhibit 11)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 01/10/2017)
63 ORDER granting 55 Motion to Compel. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/11/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/11/2017)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff shall provide to Defendant by 2/6/2017 an Authorization for the Release of Tax Records for the last five years, as well as an Authorization for Use or Disclosure of Employment, Income, and Insurance Information. (jth) (Entered: 01/11/2017)
MINUTE ORDER granting 62 Sealed Motion for Leave to File Document Under Seal. Defendant is ORDERED to show cause by January 20, 2017 why any of these materials designated confidential by the defense must remain sealed. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/11/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/11/2017)
64 SEALED DOCUMENT (EXHIBITS 5, 7, 10 and 11) filed by GREGORY SMITH. re 60 Memorandum in Opposition,,, filed by GREGORY SMITH. (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 7, # 2 Exhibit 10, # 3 Exhibit 11)(znmw) (Entered: 01/12/2017)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendant is Ordered to show cause by 1/20/2017 why any of these materials designated confidential by the defense must remain sealed. (jth) (Entered: 01/12/2017)
65 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA . (Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 01/20/2017)
MINUTE ORDER. In light of 65 defendants' response to the Court's order to show cause, Min. Order (Jan. 11, 2017), the documents at issue will remain sealed pursuant to the Court's order, id., granting 62 plaintiff's sealed motion for leave to file document under seal. However, sealed filings may be subject to further review. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/23/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/23/2017)
66 Memorandum in opposition to re 61 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 14, # 2 Exhibit 15, # 3 Exhibit 16, # 4 Exhibit 17)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 01/30/2017)

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 13 of 15

01/30/2017 02/07/2017 02/08/2017 02/08/2017 02/09/2017 02/09/2017 02/17/2017 02/17/2017 02/20/2017 02/21/2017
03/31/2017 04/06/2017 04/14/2017

67 REPLY to opposition to motion re 56 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 14, # 2 Exhibit 15, # 3 Exhibit 16, # 4 Exhibit 17)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 01/30/2017)
68 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Cross−Reply in Support of Summary Judgment by GREGORY SMITH (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 02/07/2017)
69 NOTICE of Filing by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK (Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 02/08/2017)
MINUTE ORDER granting 68 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff must file his cross−reply on or before February 20, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/8/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/08/2017)
MINUTE ORDER. In light of 69 defendants' notice of filing, the parties shall file a joint status report by February 17, 2017 if nothing has been filed with the Court by then. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/9/2017 (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/09/2017)
Set/Reset Deadlines: The parties shall file a Joint Status Report by 2/17/2017 if nothing has been filed with the Court by that date. (jth) (Entered: 02/09/2017)
70 STATUS REPORT by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 02/17/2017)
71 NOTICE of Defendants' Report to the Court by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK (Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 02/17/2017)
72 REPLY to opposition to motion re 61 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Updated Table of Exhibits, # 2 Exhibit 17, # 3 Exhibit 18, # 4 Exhibit 19, # 5 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 02/20/2017)
MINUTE ORDER. In light of 70 plaintiff's status report and 71 defendants' status report, the Court hereby DENIES as MOOT 56 defendants' motion for summary judgment and 61 plaintiff's cross−motion for partial summary judgment. Defendants must produce a corporate representative to provide testimony relating to the Department of Correction's receipt of the Release Order, and plaintiff must take this corporate representative's 30(b)(6) deposition by March 17, 2017. Additionally, the Court ORDERS that the briefing schedule will be as follows: defendants' motion for summary judgment is due by March 31, 2017; plaintiff's opposition (and his cross−motion for summary judgment, if any, which shall be supported by a single memorandum of points and authorities) is due by April 14, 2017; defendants' reply (and cross−opposition, if needed) is due by April 28, 2017; and plaintiff's cross−reply, if any, is due by May 12, 2017. If the discovery of the Release Order and the taking of the corporate representative's deposition clarify matters such that the parties jointly conclude that they would benefit from a referral to the Court's mediation program, the parties may inform chambers and it will issue the appropriate order. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/21/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/21/2017)
73 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Text of Proposed Order, # 3 Exhibit 1, # 4 Exhibit 2, # 5 Exhibit 3, # 6 Exhibit 4, # 7 Exhibit 5, # 8 Exhibit 6, # 9 Exhibit 7, # 10 Exhibit 8, # 11 Exhibit 9, # 12 Exhibit 10, # 13 Exhibit 11, # 14 Exhibit 12, # 15 Exhibit 13)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 03/31/2017)
74 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER. It is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation 54 is modified; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that the Court awards plaintiff attorneys' fees in the amount of $15,579.90. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 4/6/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 04/06/2017)
75 Memorandum in opposition to re 73 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment and Cross Motion for Summary Judgment as to Liability and Entry for a Permanent Injunction filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Statement of Facts Plaintiff's Statement of Genuine Issues of Material Fact, # 3

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 14 of 15

04/14/2017 04/17/2017 04/21/2017 04/24/2017
04/24/2017 04/24/2017 04/24/2017 04/28/2017
04/28/2017
05/12/2017 03/30/2018

Statement of Facts Plaintiff's Statement of Undisputed Fact, # 4 Certificate of Service, # 5 Text of Proposed Order, # 6 Exhibit Table of Exhibits, # 7 Exhibit 1, # 8 Exhibit 2, # 9 Exhibit 3, # 10 Exhibit 4, # 11 Exhibit 5, # 12 Exhibit 6, # 13 Exhibit 7, # 14 Exhibit 8, # 15 Exhibit 9, # 16 Exhibit 10, # 17 Exhibit 11, # 18 Exhibit 12, # 19 Exhibit 13, # 20 Exhibit 14, # 21 Exhibit 15, # 22 Exhibit 16, # 23 Exhibit 17, # 24 Exhibit A, # 25 Exhibit B, # 26 Exhibit D, # 27 Exhibit E, # 28 Exhibit F, # 29 Exhibit G, # 30 Exhibit H, # 31 Exhibit I, # 32 Exhibit J, # 33 Exhibit C)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 04/14/2017)
77 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment by GREGORY SMITH (See docket entry 75 to view document)(zrdj) (Entered: 04/17/2017)
76 NOTICE of Appearance by Jesse Colin Klaproth on behalf of GREGORY SMITH (Klaproth, Jesse) (Entered: 04/17/2017)
78 SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by GREGORY SMITH (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Certificate of Service, # 3 Exhibit 5, # 4 Exhibit 7, # 5 Exhibit 10, # 6 Exhibit 11)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 04/21/2017)
MINUTE ORDER granting 78 sealed motion for leave to file under seal Exhibits 5, 7, 10, and 11 to plaintiff's opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter plaintiff's exhibits 5, 7, 10, and 11 [Dkt. ## 78−3 through 78−6] on the docket under seal. The Court notes that sealed filings may be subject to further review. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 4/24/17. (DMK) (Entered: 04/24/2017)
79 SEALED Exhibit 5 re 75 Memorandum in Opposition filed by GREGORY SMITH. (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.)(zjf) (Entered: 04/25/2017)
80 SEALED Exhibit 7 re 75 Memorandum in Opposition,,,, filed by GREGORY SMITH. (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.)(zjf) (Entered: 04/25/2017)
81 SEALED Exhibit 10−11 re 75 Memorandum in Opposition filed by GREGORY SMITH. (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.)(zjf) (Entered: 04/25/2017)
82 Memorandum in opposition to re 77 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts Response to Plaintiff's Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, # 2 Statement of Facts Reply in Further Support of Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, # 3 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order, # 4 Exhibit 14, # 5 Exhibit 15, # 6 Exhibit 16, # 7 Exhibit 17, # 8 Exhibit 18, # 9 Exhibit 19, # 10 Exhibit 20, # 11 Exhibit 21, # 12 Exhibit 22, # 13 Exhibit 23)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 04/28/2017)
83 REPLY to opposition to motion re 73 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, JACK JONES, JEANETTE MYRICK. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts Response to Plaintiff's Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, # 2 Statement of Facts Reply in Further Support of Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, # 3 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order, # 4 Exhibit 14, # 5 Exhibit 15, # 6 Exhibit 16, # 7 Exhibit 17, # 8 Exhibit 18, # 9 Exhibit 19, # 10 Exhibit 20, # 11 Exhibit 21, # 12 Exhibit 22, # 13 Exhibit 23)(Cullen, Alicia) (Entered: 04/28/2017)
84 REPLY to opposition to motion re 77 MOTION for Summary Judgment on Liability filed by GREGORY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Klaproth, Brendan) (Entered: 05/12/2017)
85 ORDER. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that defendants' 73 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and plaintiff's 77 Cross−Motion for Summary Judgment are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. See Order for complete details. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/30/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

Case: 1:15-cv-161 As of: 06/08/2018 01:07 PM EDT 15 of 15

03/30/2018 04/06/2018 04/20/2018 04/20/2018
04/20/2018 04/23/2018 04/26/2018 06/05/2018

86 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/30/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/30/2018)
MINUTE ORDER. A Status Conference in this matter is set for 4/20/2018 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 3 before Judge Amy Berman Jackson. SO ORDERED. By Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 4/6/2018. (jth) (Entered: 04/06/2018)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Amy Berman Jackson: Status Conference held on 4/20/2018. Case to be referred to Magistrate Judge Harvey for mediation. Order to be issued. (Court Reporter: Janice Dickman) (jth) (Entered: 04/20/2018)
87 ORDER REFERRING CASE for Mediation. With the consent of the parties on April 20, 2018, it is ORDERED that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Harvey for settlement purposes to commence on April 20, 2018 and to conclude on June 19, 2018. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the parties submit a report to this Court on the status of the mediation by June 19, 2018, and if the case settles in whole or in part, both parties shall immediately advise the Court of the settlement by filing a stipulation. See Order for details. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 4/20/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 04/20/2018)
CASE DIRECTLY REFERRED to Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey for Mediation. Settlement purposes to commence on April 20, 2018 and to conclude on June 19, 2018. (zmd) (Entered: 04/23/2018)
88 MEDIATION STANDING ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey on 4/23/2018. (lcgmh2) (Entered: 04/23/2018)
Set/Reset Hearings: Settlement Conference set for 6/5/2018 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6 before Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey. (lcgmh2) (Entered: 04/26/2018)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey: Settlement Conference held on 6/5/2018. (lcgmh2) (Entered: 06/08/2018)

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

GREGORY SMITH

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

) Civ. No. 1:15-CV-00161-ABJ

)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

1350 Pennsylvania Ave NW

)

Washington, DC 20004

)

)

JEANETTE MYRICK, in her individual capacity, )

1901 D Street SE

)

Washington, DC 20001

)

)

JACK JONES, in his individual capacity,

)

1901 D Street SE

)

Washington, DC 20001

)

)

Defendants.

)

_________________________________________ )

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Plaintiff Gregory Smith, by his attorneys, alleges for his Complaint herein:
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1. This is a civil rights action arising from the wrongful and unlawful detention of Plaintiff Gregory Smith. Mr. Smith was overdetained by the District of Columbia Department of Corrections (“Department of Corrections”) for twenty-three (23) days after he was ordered to be released by Judge McKenna of the D.C. Superior Court. Even more egregious, the underlying charges against Mr. Smith were ultimately dismissed. As a direct and proximate result of Mr. Smith’s overdetention, Mr. Smith suffered substantial damages. 2. Plaintiffs, through their undersigned counsel, hereby alleges the following:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This civil rights action is brought pursuant to, inter alia, the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and other state and federal laws for relief from commission of tortious acts. This Court has jurisdiction over this claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 4. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the D.C. tort claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367. 5. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) as the acts and/or omissions alleged in this Complaint occurred in the District of Columbia. Moreover, the Defendants are found in, reside, or transact business in the District of Columbia
PARTIES AND RELEVANT PERSONS 6. Plaintiff Gregory Smith is a citizen of the District of Columbia. Mr. Smith was detained at the D.C. Jail by the Department of Corrections from March 18, 2014 until April 10, 2014, despite the Court ordering Mr. Smith’s release on March 18, 2014. 7. Defendant District of Columbia is a municipality and the legal entity responsible for the acts and omissions of the individuals employed by the Department of Corrections, including the practices, policies, and procedures relating to detention, intake, screening, transfer, and release of detained persons at the D.C. Jail. The District of Columbia was given notice of the underlying facts and circumstances of this lawsuit pursuant to D.C. Code § 12-309. 8. Defendant Jeanette Myrick is employed by the District of Columbia in the position of Correctional Program Administrator within the Department of Corrections. At all times relevant, Ms. Myrick acted within the scope of her employment with the District of Columbia. Ms. Myrick is responsible for “oversee[ing] the day-to-day operations of the Inmate
2

Records Office” at the D.C. Jail. Ms. Myrick is also the supervisor required “to make sure that the inmates are released.” Ms. Myrick supervises Legal Instrument Examiners. Legal Instrument Examiners are the D.C. Jail employees responsible for processing release orders received from the D.C. Superior Court. Jack Jones, a Legal Instrument Examiner and subordinate to Ms. Myrick, deprived Mr. Smith of his constitutionals right by failing to process the release orders issued by the D.C. Superior Court on March 18, 2016.
a. Ms. Myrick has been employed at the D.C. Jail as the Correctional Program Administrator since approximately 2012. At all times relevant, Ms. Myrick knew, or reasonably should have known, that her subordinates were failing to process prisoner releases in a timely fashion. Notably, Ms. Myrick even maintained a file on her computer of “overdetention reports.” Despite the known problem of overdetentions, Ms. Myrick failed to take any steps to prevent the overdetention of prisoners at the D.C. Jail, including Mr. Smith. In fact, Ms. Myrick admitted that the Department of Correction’s written policy of requiring Legal Instrument Examiners to “obtain and review printouts from…Courtview” when processing a prisoner release was not the actual practice or custom for the Legal Instrument Examiners that she supervised. Indeed, Jack Jones’ failure to review Courtview was the direct and proximate cause of Mr. Smith’s overdetention.
b. Furthermore, in response to Mr. Smith’s overdetention, Ms. Myrick performed no investigation, did not interview any subordinate, and did not discipline any employee. Ms. Myrick did not even prepare an “overdetention report” in connection with Mr. Smith’s detention although it is undisputed that Ms. Myrick is required to do so and that Mr. Smith was overdetained at the D.C. Jail. Ms. Myrick’s failure to take any action in response to the overdetentions, demonstrates that Ms. Myrick established and/or maintained, with deliberate
3

indifference to the consequences, a policy, practice, or custom which directly caused the overdetention of Mr. Smith. Ms Myrick’s reckless disregard and callous indifference to the federally protected rights of others, such as Mr. Smith’s rights, warrants punitive damages.
9. At all times relevant, Defendant Jack Jones was an individual employed by the District of Columbia in the position of Legal Instrument Examiner for the Department of Corrections, and acted within the scope of his employment. A Legal Instrument Examiner is responsible for processing prisoner intakes and releases at the D.C. Jail. Mr. Jones is the Legal Instrument Examiner who failed to process the Release Orders issued by the D.C. Superior Court on March 18, 2014. Specifically, Mr. Jones processed the March 18, 2014 Release Order for one of Mr. Smith’s cases (2014 CMD 4452), but failed to process the March 18, 2014 Release Order for the second case (2012 CMD 7806). Pursuant to the Department of Correction’s policies, a Legal Instrument Examiner “must review each inmate’s file to make sure that all releasing documents match the case and identify any other pending cases and/or detainers on file,” which requires also “search[ing] Courtview to check for other cases holding the inmate in custody.” Mr. Jones failed to process the Release Order for case no. 2012 CMD 7806 despite the fact that the Courtview system states the Release Order was filed and sent to the D.C. Jail on March 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM. In addition, Gregory Smith’s institutional file contained a copy of both Release Orders issued on March 18, 2016. Had Jack Jones reviewed Mr. Smith’s institutional file, as he was required to do, Mr. Smith would not have been overdetained. Jack Jones’ recklessness and callous disregard for the rights of Gregory Smith is the direct and proximate cause of Mr. Smith’s overdetention.
FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS Overview of the D.C. Department of Corrections
4

10. The District of Columbia Department of Corrections holds prisoners committed by the District of Columbia Superior Court, and other agencies, in the Central Detention Facility (“DC Jail”) and the Correctional Treatment Facility (“CTF”).
11. The records office located at the DC Jail (“Records Office”) is responsible for administering and maintaining the records of all persons housed at the DC Jail. The Records Office is also responsible for ensuring that all persons housed at the DC Jail are released as required by the release date specified in the court orders.
12. The District of Columbia Superior Court has a policy pursuant to which an incustody defendant or a defendant ordered into custody may not leave the courtroom without either a commitment order or a release order.
13. The Department of Corrections has a policy that an individual cannot be detained at the D.C. Jail unless there is a commitment order received from the D.C. Superior Court.
14. Once a prisoner is ordered released, the Department of Corrections immediately begins an administrative release process that results in the prisoner’s actual release from the Department of Correction’s custody.
15. The Department of Corrections considers “anyone released after 11:59 p.m. on the day they are ordered released” to be classified as “overdetained.” Plaintiff’s Overdetention
16. On March 15, 2014, Mr. Smith was arrested and charged in the District of Columbia with a misdemeanor for failure to appear in relation to a prior citation.
17. On March 18, 2014, after the Court had lawfully detained Mr. Smith for 3 days pursuant to D.C. Code § 23-1322(b)(1)(D), Judge Juliet McKenna of the D.C. Superior Court ordered Mr. Smith’s release from custody in both cases. Upon information and belief, the
5

Release Orders were transmitted to the D.C. Jail at 1:28 PM via the Court View computer system. The Release Order are attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
18. Despite the Court’s order on March 18, 2014, the D.C. Department of Corrections did not release Mr. Smith until April 10, 2014 after a hearing before the Court where Judge McKenna again ordered the D.C. Jail to release Mr. Smith.
19. On repeated occasions, Mr. Smith stated to the corrections officers at the D.C. Department of Corrections that the court ordered him to be released, and he demanded that he be released. The corrections officers wholly ignored Mr. Smith’s requests to be released. On such an occasion, corrections officer, John Doe 1, replied, “If you’re here, they know you’re here and you’re supposed to be here.”
20. Mr. Smith was not ultimately released until April 10, 2014—the date upon which Judge McKenna learned that Mr. Smith had been held by the Department of Corrections in direct contravention of Judge McKenna’s release order of March 18, 2014.
21. At all relevant times during Mr. Smith’s twenty-three (23) day overdetention he was placed in a prison cell with a dangerous prisoner who, upon information and belief, had been found guilty of possession of a loaded fire arm and possession of narcotics with an intent to distribute.
22. The underlying misdemeanor charges against Mr. Smith, which allegedly provided Defendants’ justification for the initial detention, were dismissed on September 8, 2014.
23. As a direct and proximate result of Mr. Smith’s twenty-three (23) day overdetention, Mr. Smith was terminated from his job.
24. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, Mr. Smith has suffered significant economic damages and severe emotional harm.
6

COUNT I 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claims for Violations of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
(All Defendants) 25. The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 26. Defendants deprived Mr. Smith of his constitutional right to liberty and deprived him of this liberty without due process of law as required by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution by detaining Mr. Smith for twenty-three (23) days after he was ordered to be released by the court. 27. Defendants acted under color of law and acted or purported to act in the performance of official duties under federal, state, county or municipal laws, ordinances, or regulations. 28. Defendants’ conduct violated clearly established constitutional rights of which Defendants knew, or of which a reasonable public official should have known. 29. The Department of Corrections has a custom, policy, and practice of overdetaining inmates past their court ordered release date. For example, in 2007 the Department of Corrections admitted that 302 inmates were overdetained, 143 in 2008, 56 in 2009, 85 in 2010, and 34 in 2011, 8 in 2012, and 11 in 2013. This custom, policy, and practice of overdetaining inmates caused the intentional and unjustified overdetention of Mr. Smith in violation of his constitutional rights. 30. Similarly, the Department of Corrections had a custom, policy, and practice of:
(a) incarcerating inmates without any legal authority to do so; (b) failing to maintain accurate records of its inmates; (c) failing to keep track of inmates within the D.C. Jail; (d) failing to process release orders;
7

(e) failing to release inmates on the same day of the inmates’ court orderedrelease;
(f) misfiling and/or misplacing release orders issued by the courts; (g) failing to respond to inmate complaints of overdetention; (h) failing to train its employees to process release orders; (i) failing to discipline its employees, specifically Legal Instrument Examiners,
who made errors in processing release orders; and, (j) failing to comply with court orders to release inmates. These customs, policies, and practices were the direct and proximate cause of the violations of Mr. Smith’s constitutional rights. 31. In addition, the District of Columbia knew, or should have known, of the overdetention problem at the DC Jail given the history of overdetentions by the D.C. Jail. The District of Columbia demonstrated a deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of the inmates at the D.C. Jail and Mr. Smith particularly, by failing to take any steps to remedy the ongoing constitutional violations occurring from the overdetentions. As a result of the District of Columbia’s deliberate indifference, Mr. Smith’s constitutional rights were violated. Moreover, the District of Columbia demonstrated a deliberate indifference to Mr. Smith’s Constitutional rights by failing to investigate Mr. Smith’s claims that he was being unlawfully detained. 32. Furthermore, the District of Columbia’s policy to not provide training to Legal Instrument Examiners, or supervise the Legal Instrument Examiners, is the direct and proximate cause of the overdetention of Mr. Smith and the resulting violation of his constitutional rights. Indeed prior to Mr. Smith’s overdetention, thirty-two (32) prisoners were overdetained as a result of staff error, which notably included the failure to check Courtview in some instances. Despite the known problem of staff error in processing inmate releases, the Legal Instrument Examiners did not (and still do not) receive any formal training on the processing of release orders. Instead,
8

Legal Instrument Examiners “pretty much do the work and […] learn further into it by doing the work.” While the Legal Instrument Examiners do have an annual training on things such as first aid, key control, and human resources information, they do not receive any training relating to the performance of their job or the processing of prisoner releases. In light of the known problem of prisoner overdetention at the D.C. Jail, the failure to train and supervise the Legal Instrument Examiners amounts to a deliberate indifference to the fact that the lack of training and supervision would result in prisoner overdetention, and the overdetention of Mr. Smith.
33. For the reasons set forth more fully in ¶ 8 above which is hereby incorporated by reference, Defendant Myrick is individually liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Ms. Myrick was responsible for supervising Jack Jones; she had a duty to instruct Jack Jones to properly process release orders to prevent prisoner overdetentions; and that, as a result of Ms. Myrick’s failure to instruct and supervise Jack Jones, Mr. Smith was overdetained.
34. For reasons set forth more fully in ¶ 9 above which is hereby incorporated by reference, Defendant Jones is individually liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Jack Jones had a duty to process prisoner release orders received from the D.C. Superior Court. Mr. Jones’ reckless failure to process the Release Order received by the D.C. Superior Court, which ordered Mr. Smith to be released in case 2012 CMD 7806, resulted in the violation of Mr. Smith’s constitutional rights. Similarly, Jack Jones’ failure to check the Courtview System and review Mr. Smith’s institutional file resulted in the violation of Mr. Smith’s constitutional rights.
35. The actions, omission, policies, patterns, practices and customs of Defendants, complained of herein were intentional, reckless, and show a callous disregard for, or deliberate indifference to Mr. Smith's personal safety, security, freedom, and civil and constitutional rights.
36. These violations are compensable pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. As a direct and
9

proximate result of these Defendants’ conduct, Mr. Smith has suffered economic damages and significant physical and emotional harm.
COUNT II Common Law False Imprisonment
(All Defendants) 37. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 38. Defendants unlawfully deprived Mr. Smith of his liberty by placing him in a jail cell where he was restrained against his will. The detention was unlawful where Mr. Smith was detained in direct contravention of a court order mandating him to be released. 39. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful detention and false imprisonment, Mr. Smith has suffered and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial. 40. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief in the form of specific performance judgment awarding compensatory damages, attorney’s fees, and any other relief the Court deems proper.
COUNT III Negligence (All Defendants) 41. The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 42. Defendants had a duty to release inmates that they had no legal authority to detain. Defendants breached their duty to exercise reasonable care by negligently and recklessly failing to process the Release Order received by the D.C. Superior Court ordering Mr. Smith to be released in the case 2012 CMD 7806. Defendants further breached their duty of reasonable care by negligently acting or omitting to act such that Mr. Smith suffered a wrongful detention which
10

Defendants knew or should have known would have caused harm to Mr. Smith. 43. Defendants were negligent in performing their duties and failed, neglected and/or
refused to properly and fully discharge their responsibilities by, among other things: a. Failing to investigate Mr. Smith’s claims that he was ordered to be released and the he was unlawfully detained; b. Misplacing and/or misfiling Mr. Smith’s release order; c. Failing to process Mr. Smith’s release; d. Failing to maintain a system to prevent overdetention of inmates; e. Failing to act on a court order; f. Failing to properly train and supervise corrections officers to process release orders; and, g. Failing to release Mr. Smith on the same day of his court ordered release.
44. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant in failing to exercise due care, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer much physical pain and mental anguish; has incurred medical expenses and will continue to incur medical expenses; and has suffered and will continue to suffer mental and physical pain, and emotional distress.
45. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief in the form of a judgment awarding compensatory damages and any other relief the Court deems proper.
COUNT IV Negligent Supervision and Negligent Training
(Defendant District of Columbia) 46. The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 47. The District of Columbia had a duty to train its employees and to supervise its employees. The District of Columbia breached its duty to exercise reasonable care by acting negligently and recklessly in the following specific respects and without limitation:
11

a. Failing to provide formal training to Legal Instrument Examiners, including Jack Jones, on processing prisoner releases;
b. Failing to supervise Jack Jones in his performance of processing Mr. Smith’s prisoner release;
c. Failing to adopt policies for its employees to ensure that prisoners are released as required by court orders received by the D.C. Superior Court;
d. Failing to adopt policies to ensure release orders are processed in a timely manner;
e. Failing to discipline employees for employee errors in processing release orders; and,
f. Failing to investigate prisoner overdetentions at the D.C. Jail.
48. It was foreseeable to the District of Columbia that the failure to train its
employees, including Jack Jones, to properly process release orders would result in the
overdetention of prisoners, such as Mr. Smith, and cause those prisoners harm. As a direct and
proximate result of the District of Columbia’s failure to exercise due care, Plaintiff has suffered
and will continue to suffer much physical pain and mental anguish; has incurred medical
expenses and will continue to incur medical expenses; and has suffered and will continue to
suffer mental and physical pain, and emotional distress.
49. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief in the form of a judgment awarding
compensatory damages and any other relief the Court deems proper
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant, as follows:
(a) Awarding Plaintiff compensatory damages, including lost wages and future lost wages, mental anguish, and emotional distress damages;
(b) Awarding Plaintiff punitive damages against Defendants Myrick and Jones for their reckless and callous disregard for rights of Mr. Smith and with no regard for the damage it would cause to Mr. Smith;
(c) Awarding Plaintiff costs, expenses and attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and any other applicable law;
12

(d) Awarding equitable relief, including but not limited to, ordering the Department of Corrections to adopt an annual training program on prisoner releases for employees in the Records Office at the D.C. Jail; and,
(e) Awarding any other relief the Court deems just and proper. JURY AND TRIAL DEMAND
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury with respect to each claim in this Complaint. Respectfully submitted, __/_s_/ _B_r_en_d__an__J_. _K_la_p_r_o_t_h_________ Brendan J. Klaproth (D.C. Bar No. 999360) Klaproth Law PLLC 406 5th Street NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202-618-2344 Email: Bklaproth@klaprothlaw.com David Akulian (D.C. Bar No. 1005750) 406 5th Street NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: 202-505-2113 Email: info@NotGuiltyInDC.com Attorney for Plaintiff
13

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

____________________________________

)

GREGORY SMITH,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,

)

)

Defendants.

)

____________________________________)

Civil Action No. 15-0161 (ABJ)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff Gregory Smith has brought this action against the District of Columbia, the

District of Columbia Department of Corrections, Warden William J. Smith, and unknown

employees of the Department of Corrections, alleging that defendants unlawfully detained plaintiff

in the District of Columbia Jail from March 18, 2014 to April 10, 2014, after he had been ordered

to be released. Compl. [Dkt. # 1-1]. He asserts Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment claims pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as claims for false imprisonment and negligence. Compl. ¶¶ 27–43.

Defendant Warden Smith has moved to dismiss the claims against him pursuant to Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Def. William J. Smith’s Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt. # 19] (“Def.’s Mot.”).1

Because the Court finds that plaintiff has failed to allege any facts that would support a plausible

claim against the warden, individually or in his official capacity, the Court will grant the motion

and dismiss defendant Smith from this case. The Court notes, though, that the District of Columbia

is still a party to this matter, and plaintiff’s claims against the District will proceed.

1 The District of Columbia has filed an answer and has not moved to dismiss any of plaintiff’s claims. Answer [Dkt. # 4]. On February 27, 2015, the parties jointly stipulated to the dismissal of all claims against the Department of Corrections. Stipulation of Dismissal [Dkt. # 7].

BACKGROUND On March 15, 2014, plaintiff was arrested in the District of Columbia and held at the District of Columbia Jail. Compl. ¶¶ 6, 17–18. On March 18, 2014, a judge of the Superior Court ordered that plaintiff be released from custody. Id. ¶ 18. However, plaintiff was not freed until April 10, 2014, after a hearing in which the same Superior Court judge was compelled to order again that plaintiff be released. Id. ¶ 19. Plaintiff alleges that he repeatedly told the corrections officers at the jail that his release had been ordered by the Superior Court, and he demanded to be released, but these demands were ignored. Id. ¶ 20. One unidentified corrections officer allegedly told plaintiff, “[i]f you’re here, they know you’re here and you’re supposed to be here.” Id. Plaintiff alleges that he was imprisoned in a cell with “a dangerous prisoner who, upon information and belief, had been found guilty of possession of a loaded fire arm and possession of narcotics with an intent to distribute.” Compl. ¶ 22. He also states that he was terminated from his job as a result of the overdetention. Id. ¶ 24. The charges against plaintiff were dismissed on September 8, 2014. Id. ¶ 23. Plaintiff initiated this action in Superior Court on November 14, 2014, and it was removed to this Court on February 2, 2015. Notice of Removal [Dkt. # 1] ¶ 1. Plaintiff brings three counts against all defendants: claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (Count I); False Imprisonment (Count II), and Negligence (Count III). Compl. ¶¶ 27–43. On August 14, 2015, defendant Smith filed the pending motion to dismiss, Def’s Mot.; Mem. of P. & A. in Supp. of Def.’s Mot. [Dkt. # 19] (“Def.’s Mem.”), and plaintiff opposed the motion on August 31, 2015. Pl.’s Mem. of Opposing P. & A. to Def.’s Mot. [Dkt. # 20] (“Pl.’s Opp.”). On October 2, 2015, with leave of Court, see Min. Order (Oct. 2, 2015), defendant Smith filed a reply in support of his motion. Def.’s Reply to Pl.’s Opp. [Dkt. # 22] (“Def.’s Reply”).
2

STANDARD OF REVIEW “To survive a [Rule 12(b)(6)] motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009), quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A claim is facially plausible when the pleaded factual content “allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id., citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556. “The plausibility standard is not akin to a ‘probability requirement,’ but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.” Id., quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556. A pleading must offer more than “labels and conclusions” or a “formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action,” id., quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, and “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Id., citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. When considering a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), the complaint is construed liberally in the plaintiff’s favor, and the Court should grant the plaintiff “the benefit of all inferences that can be derived from the facts alleged.” Kowal v. MCI Commc’ns Corp., 16 F.3d 1271, 1276 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Nevertheless, the Court need not accept inferences drawn by the plaintiff if those inferences are unsupported by facts alleged in the complaint, nor must the Court accept plaintiff’s legal conclusions. See id.; see also Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). In ruling upon a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, a court may ordinarily consider only “the facts alleged in the complaint, documents attached as exhibits or incorporated by reference in the complaint, and matters about which the Court may take judicial notice.” Gustave-Schmidt v. Chao, 226 F. Supp. 2d 191, 196 (D.D.C. 2002), citing EEOC v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial Sch., 117 F.3d 621, 624–25 (D.C. Cir. 1997).
3

ANALYSIS I. Plaintiff’s official-capacity claims against defendant Smith are duplicative of his
claims against the District of Columbia. Plaintiff sues defendant Smith in both his individual and official capacity. See Caption, Compl., at 1. Defendant Smith has moved to dismiss the official-capacity claims against him as duplicative of plaintiff’s claims against the District of Columbia. Def.’s Mem. at 3–4. In his opposition, plaintiff states that he “agrees with Defendant Smith that the official capacity suit against him is duplicative of the claim against the District of Columbia.” Pl.’s Opp. at 4 n.1. Thus, plaintiff has conceded this point, and his official-capacity claims against defendant Smith will be dismissed. See Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 165–66 (1985) (“Official-capacity suits . . . ‘generally represent only another way of pleading an action against an entity of which an officer is an agent.’”), quoting Monell v. N.Y. City Dep’t of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 690 n.55 (1978); see also Price v. District of Columbia, 545 F. Supp. 2d 89, 93 (D.D.C. 2008) (dismissing constitutional and tort claims against defendant warden in his official capacity as “duplicative of the claims lodged against the District of Columbia”). II. Plaintiff has failed to state a plausible claim against defendant Smith in his individual capacity. Defendant Smith has also moved pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss the individualcapacity claims against him, resting almost exclusively on the argument that “Plaintiff does not allege that Defendant Smith was the Warden at the time of his alleged over-detention.” Def.’s Mem. at 4; see also Def.’s Reply at 2 (“Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to allege that Defendant Smith was the Warden at the time of Plaintiff’s alleged over-detention or otherwise plead facts to show that he bears personal responsibility for the claims raised against him.”). Plaintiff maintains that defendant Smith is improperly asking the Court to “look beyond the factual allegations contained
4

in the Complaint” by accepting his representation that he was not the warden at the time plaintiff was detained. Pl.’s Opp. at 5.
Plaintiff is correct that it would be improper for the Court to treat defendant’s representation as fact in resolving a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, since the Court is limited at this stage to assessing the sufficiency of the factual matter contained in the complaint. See Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. But there is a distinction between the Court making a factual finding of whether defendant Smith was the warden in March and April of 2014, and the Court observing that such a factual allegation is absent from the complaint. Plaintiff does allege that defendant Smith “is” the warden at the D.C. Jail, and he claims that Smith “is” responsible for overseeing the corrections officers, establishing customs, policies, and practices, and supervising inmate releases. Compl. ¶¶ 9, 12. But he does not allege that defendant Smith “was” the warden during the relevant time period, and none of the other factual allegations relating to plaintiff’s overdetention pertain specifically to actions taken by the defendant himself during the time period in question. This omission is fatal to plaintiff’s individual-capacity claims against defendant Smith.
And in any event, even if the Court were to construe the complaint as alleging that defendant Smith was the responsible official at the time of plaintiff’s alleged overdetention, plaintiff has still failed to state a plausible claim against him. Therefore, the motion to dismiss the individual-capacity claims will be granted.
A. Plaintiff’s section 1983 claims against defendant Smith will be dismissed. In Count I, plaintiff alleges that defendant Smith violated 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and deprived him of his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights by detaining him after he was ordered released. Compl. ¶¶ 27–34. Because the Court finds that plaintiff has failed to state a plausible claim against defendant Smith for any constitutional violation, Count I will be dismissed.
5

1. The Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to defendant Smith because he is an employee of the District of Columbia.
First, defendant Smith moves to dismiss that portion of plaintiff’s section 1983 claim that is premised on the Fourteenth Amendment on the grounds that “the Fourteenth Amendment applies only to the States; it does not apply to the Federal Government or the District of Columbia or its employees.” Def.’s Mem. at 3. Plaintiff appears to concede this point, when he argues that Count I should nevertheless survive because his section 1983 claim is based on the Fifth Amendment, in addition to the Fourteenth. Pl.’s Opp. at 3–4. But to the extent that plaintiff did not concede this issue, dismissal of the Fourteenth Amendment aspect of his section 1983 claim is warranted, because “the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia or its officials/employees.” Robinson v. District of Columbia, 736 F. Supp. 2d 254, 260 (D.D.C. 2010), citing Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497, 499 (1954).
2. Plaintiff has failed to plead facts sufficient to show that defendant Smith was individually responsible for the Fifth Amendment violations of which he complains.
In Count I, plaintiff also alleges that defendant Smith deprived him of his Fifth Amendment due process rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Compl. ¶¶ 27–34. Section 1983 creates a private cause of action against a “person” who violates an individual’s constitutional rights while acting “under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage” of any state or the District of Columbia. 42 U.S.C. § 1983. “Because vicarious liability is inapplicable to . . . § 1983 suits, a plaintiff must plead that each Government-official defendant, through the official’s own individual actions, has violated the Constitution.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 676. “Only those who cause a violation of a right secured by the Constitution are liable.” Elkins v. District of Columbia, 690 F.3d 554, 564 (D.C. Cir. 2012), citing Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 676.
6

Plaintiff has not pled any facts showing that defendant Smith was personally involved in plaintiff’s alleged overdetention. He merely alleges that defendant “is, upon information and belief, responsible for the correction officers at the D.C. jail,” that he “is also . . . responsible for establishing the customs, policies, and practices of the D.C. jail,” and “is the responsible official for all activities, including inmate release,” at the jail. Compl. ¶¶ 9, 12. Not one of these facts demonstrates that defendant Smith played an individual role in the events of plaintiff’s detention in March and April of 2014, or that he personally deprived plaintiff of his Fifth Amendment rights. Thus, the complaint fails under Rule 12(b)(6) to plausibly allege that defendant Smith “cause[d] a violation of a right secured by the Constitution,” Elkins, 690 F.3d at 564, “through [his] own individual actions.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 676.
To the extent that plaintiff seeks to hold defendant Smith liable for the unconstitutional actions or omissions of his subordinates – here, the unnamed corrections officers – on a theory of respondeat superior or supervisory liability, he cannot do so. Even assuming that the unnamed corrections officers committed a constitutional violation, “[g]overnment officials may not be held liable for the unconstitutional conduct of their subordinates under a theory of respondeat superior.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 676. “A supervisor who merely fails to detect and prevent a subordinate’s misconduct, therefore, cannot be liable for that misconduct.” Int’l Action Ctr. v. United States, 365 F.3d 20, 28 (D.C. Cir. 2004). Rather, the supervisor “must know about the conduct and facilitate it, approve it, condone it, or turn a blind eye for fear of what they might see.” Id., quoting Jones v. City of Chicago, 856 F.2d 985, 992 (7th Cir. 1988).
Plaintiff has offered nothing to make such a showing here. He claims that “[t]he Department of Corrections has a custom, policy, and practice of overdetaining inmates past their court ordered release date,” Compl. ¶ 30, but he does not allege facts from which the Court could
7

conclude that defendant Smith “had actual or constructive knowledge of past transgressions or that [he was] responsible for or aware of ‘clearly deficient’ training” of the unnamed corrections officers that were allegedly responsible for his unlawful detention. See Int’l Action Ctr., 820 F.2d at 28. In the absence of any factual allegations from which the Court could conclude that defendant Smith himself acted unlawfully, plaintiff’s section 1983 claim against defendant Smith in his individual capacity will be dismissed.
B. Plaintiff’s false imprisonment claim against defendant Smith will be dismissed. For many of the same reasons, plaintiff’s claim in Count II that defendant Smith caused him to be falsely imprisoned will be dismissed. Plaintiff does not offer any facts from which the Court could conclude that defendant Smith was involved in, or even aware of, plaintiff’s alleged overdetention and false imprisonment. To state a claim for false imprisonment, a plaintiff must allege “(1) that [the defendant] detained or restrained the plaintiff against [his] will within the boundaries fixed by [the defendant], and (2) the unlawfulness of the restraint.” Cotton v. District of Columbia, 541 F. Supp. 2d 195, 205 (D.D.C. 2008), citing Edwards v. Okie Dokie, Inc., 473 F. Supp. 2d 31, 44 (D.D.C. 2007). Plaintiff has adequately pled that the restraint was unlawful, because he was ordered released as of March 18, 2014, but was not freed until April 10, 2014. Compl. ¶¶ 18–19. But he fails to allege that defendant Smith himself “detained or restrained” him against his will; in fact, he states that he “was falsely imprisoned by correction officers John Does 1–10,” id. ¶ 37, and not by defendant Smith or even “Defendants” generally, as he alleges throughout the complaint with regard to his other claims. In other words, the complaint lacks any allegations – other than general, conclusory statements regarding defendant Smith’s position and responsibility as warden – that would tend to show that he played any role in detaining plaintiff past his court-ordered release date.
8

To the extent that plaintiff purports to base his false imprisonment claim against defendant Smith on the conduct of the unnamed corrections officers, for which plaintiff asserts defendant Smith is responsible, see Compl. ¶ 9, he cannot do so. See, e.g., King v. Kidd, 640 A.2d 656, 666 (D.C. 1993) (holding that “as a matter of law only the employer, the District of Columbia, could be held liable for the tortious acts of one of its employees,” and that the supervisory employees could not be held liable). Thus, the Court finds that plaintiff has failed to state a claim for false imprisonment against defendant Smith, and it will dismiss Count II against him.
C. Plaintiff’s negligence claims against defendant Smith will be dismissed. “In the District of Columbia, as elsewhere, ‘[t]o establish negligence a plaintiff must prove a duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty by the defendant, and damage to the interests of the plaintiff, proximately caused by the breach.’” Novak v. Capital Mgmt. & Dev. Corp., 452 F.3d 902, 907 (D.C. Cir. 2006), quoting District of Columbia v. Beretta, USA, Corp., 847 A.2d 1127, 1134 n.2 (D.C. 2004). In support of his negligence claim in Count III, plaintiff alleges that “Defendants were negligent in performing their duties and failed . . . to properly and fully discharge their responsibilities” in the following ways:
a. Failing to investigate [plaintiff’s] claims that he was ordered to be released and th[at] he was unlawfully detained;
b. Misplacing and/or misfiling [plaintiff’s] release order; c. Failing to process [plaintiff’s] release; d. Failing to maintain a system to prevent overdetention of inmates; e. Failing to act on a court order; f. Failing to properly train and supervise corrections officers to process
release orders; and,
9

g. Failing to release [plaintiff] on the same day of his court ordered release. Compl. ¶ 42.
But as with his other claims, these conclusory allegations do not show that defendant Smith personally engaged in any action or committed any omission that resulted in or contributed to plaintiff’s overdetention, or even that defendant Smith had any knowledge of plaintiff’s predicament. In other words, plaintiff has failed to show that defendant Smith personally breached any duty owed to plaintiff, or that any actions or omissions by defendant Smith were the proximate cause of his injury. Rather, the complaint contains the sort of “unadorned, the defendantunlawfully-harmed-me accusation,” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678, that is not enough to state a plausible claim for relief against defendant Smith in his individual capacity. See, e.g., Turner v. District of Columbia, 532 A.2d 662, 675 (D.C. 1987) (affirming dismissal of negligence claims against supervisory officials in their individual capacities where “[t]he complaint alleged no facts suggesting personal involvement in this case by either of them,” and because “as public officials they cannot be held liable in tort for the acts of their subordinates under a respondeat superior theory unless they directed or countenanced the tortious acts”), citing Eskridge v. Jackson, 401 A.2d 986, 989 (D.C. 1979); see also Linares v. Jones, No. 04-0247 (GK), 2007 WL 1601725, at *7 (D.D.C. June 4, 2007) (dismissing plaintiff’s negligence claim against former mayor in his individual capacity “[i]n the absence of ‘any factual indication that [the defendant] was connected in any way with the event[s] giving rise to the lawsuit’”), quoting Eskridge, 401 A.2d at 989. Thus, for the same reasons that warrant the dismissal of plaintiff’s other individual-capacity claims against defendant Smith, plaintiff’s individual negligence claim against the warden in Count III will also be dismissed.
10

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

GREGORY SMITH, Plaintiff,
v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.,
Defendants.

Civil Action No. 15-161 ABJ/DAR

MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, Gregory Smith, brought this civil rights action in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia alleging that the District of Columbia Department of Corrections (“DOC”) unlawfully detained him for 23 days after he was ordered to be released from custody. Amended Complaint (ECF No. 36) at 1. Defendants subsequently removed the case to this court. Notice of Removal (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff dismissed the DOC as a defendant on February 27, 2015, leaving the District of Columbia (“the District”), and DOC employees Jack Jones and Jeanette Myrick as the remaining defendants. This case was referred to the undersigned for determination of Plaintiff’s Motion for Costs and Fees (ECF No. 39), wherein Plaintiff alleges various discovery violations by the District and seeks sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37. See Plaintiff’s Statement of Points and Authorities in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Costs and Fees (“Plaintiff’s P&A”) (ECF No. 39-1).

BACKGROUND The Court (Jackson, J.), entered a scheduling order on March 10, 2015, establishing the
deadlines governing the course of discovery in this proceeding. See Scheduling Order (ECF No. 13). During the discovery period, Plaintiff sought, inter alia, two main types of materials

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

2

pertaining to the instant motion: data from the District’s electronic transaction management system (“TMS”), and “over-detention reports” compiled by the DOC. Plaintiff’s P&A at 1–2.1

Over-Detention Reports Plaintiff served Defendants with his first request for production of documents on March 27, 2015. Plaintiff’s P&A at 4. In that request, Plaintiff sought “all reports prepared by the District of Columbia relating to overdetention of inmates at the D.C. Jail between March 1, 2007 and April 10, 2014.” Id. at 5. The District responded to this request on September 1, 2015, pointing Plaintiff toward its prior response to Plaintiff’s Interrogatory No. 2, which had provided a table listing the number of over-detentions by month. Id.; Exhibit 6, District’s Responses to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents and Interrogatories (ECF No. 39-7). On September 25, 2015, Plaintiff served a second request for the production of documents, slightly rephrasing his request for “[a]ll release discrepancy reports from March 2009 through April 2014.” Exhibit 8, Response to Plaintiff’s Second Set of Requests for Production of Documents (ECF No. 39-9) at 2. Plaintiff followed up on October 7, 2015, noting that Plaintiff was seeking “all reports prepared by the District of Columbia relating to the over-detention of inmates,” and that “[d]espite the acknowledgement of the existence of the monthly reports . . . the monthly reports have not been produced.” Exhibit 7, Plaintiff Letter to District of Columbia (ECF No. 39-8) at 1. In response, the District directed Plaintiff to a website for the District of Columbia’s Judiciary and Public Safety on November 22, 2015. Exhibit 8 at 2. Plaintiff subsequently noticed a deposition pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) outlining, inter alia, the following topics:

1 The term “over-detention reports” refers to reports authored by DOC personnel following “each incident of an overdetention[.]” See Exhibit 11, Jeanette Myrick Deposition I (Relating to Overdetention Reports) (ECF No. 3912) at 5.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

3

10. Prisoner overdetention at the DC Jail between March 18, 2009 and April 10, 2014. a) All sources of information relied upon in answering Plaintiff’s Interrogatory No. 2. b) The definition of “overdetention” used in responding to Plaintiff’s Interrogatory No. 2. c) All policies to decrease the instances overdetention of prisoners between March 18, 2009 and April 10, 2014. d) All policies to prevent the overdetention of prisoners in place on March 2014. e) All reports and/or written statements made by the Department of Corrections relating to prisoner overdetention between March 18, 2009 and April 10, 2014.
Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice (ECF No. 39-10) at 4–5. In addition to noticing those topics,
Plaintiff requested that the deponent designated by the District provide “[a]ll reports published
by the Department of Corrections relating to prisoner overdetention between March 18, 2009 and
April 10, 2014.” The 30(b)(6) deposition was held on November 23, 2015, and the District’s
designee, Defendant Jeanette Myrick, appeared and testified as to the over-detention reports, but
did not bring the requested documents with her to the deposition. Exhibit 11, Jeanette Myrick
Deposition I (Relating to Overdetention Reports) (ECF No. 39-12) at 2–3. Ms. Myrick testified
that she authors over-detention reports and keeps electronic versions of said reports in a folder on
her computer. Id. at 4.
On December 6, 2015, Plaintiff submitted to the District his third request for documents,
specifically identifying the reports contained on Ms. Myrick’s computer. Plaintiff’s P&A at 8.
On January 27, 2016, the District produced said reports. Id.

TMS Data Plaintiff first learned of the existence of the TMS data during the December 14, 2015 deposition of Defendant Jack Jones, an employee of the DOC. Plaintiff’s P&A at 3. Mr. Jones testified that when the Records Office receives documents such as release orders from the D.C.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

4

Superior Court, such documents are uploaded into the TMS system. Id. The TMS system also indicates the time at which such documents are uploaded. Id. Plaintiff made his first request for the TMS data during the deposition. Id. Plaintiff followed up his initial request for the TMS data with an email request to the District on January 4, 2016. Exhibit 2, Plaintiff Email to District of Columbia (ECF No. 39-3) at 1. In this email, Plaintiff requested “screenshots of the TMS system indicating when the release orders (for cases 2014 CMD 452 and 2012 CMD 7806) were uploaded for [Plaintiff] into the TMS system.” Id. Alternatively, Plaintiff requested access to inspect the TMS system with regard to the cases pertaining to each of Plaintiff’s releases. Id.
On January 29, 2016, the parties filed a Joint Status Report with the Court, wherein the District stated that it “anticipates . . . full compliance with the requested discovery [of TMS data] in two (2) weeks.” Joint Status Report (ECF No. 27) at 2. The Joint Status Report also requested an extension of fact discovery until February 12, 2016. Id. at 2. On the final day of the fact discovery period, the District sent Plaintiff an email stating “[w]e have been advised that the TMI [sic] information you requested does not exist.” Exhibit 1, District Email to Plaintiff (ECF No. 39-2) at 1. The parties held a teleconference that same day, after which the Court (Jackson, J.) extended fact discovery until February 26, 2016. 01/12/2016 Minute Order.
Plaintiff noticed a second deposition pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) in relation to the retention and preservation of the TMS data. Exhibit 5, Deposition Notice Regarding TMS Data (ECF No. 39-6). This notice included, inter alia, the following topics: “[t]he existence of data and/or information in the TMS system as it related to [Plaintiff] (for cases 2014 CMD 452 and 2012 CMD 7806)”; “[t]he retention policy for data contained in the TMS system during March and April 2014”; “[t]he search performed by DOC to obtain data and/or information from the TMS system as it relates to [Plaintiff] (for cases 2014 CMD 452 and 2012 CMD 7806)”; and “[t]he

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

5

existence of backup data from the TMS system.” Id. at 2. On March 4, 2016, the day of the deposition, the District provided Plaintiff with TMS data pertaining to 2014 CMD 452, but not 2012 CMD 7806. Plaintiff’s P&A at 4. Fact discovery subsequently closed on March 11, 2016.

CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES Rule 37(c)(1) Violations Plaintiff argues that the District violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1) when it
failed to initially disclose the TMS data, id. at 9, and the over-detention reports, id. at 15. According to Plaintiff, “the District’s only purported defense in this matter is the claim that it did not receive the release order relating to [Plaintiff],” and therefore “the District was required to disclose all information relating to the TMS system under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1).” Id. at 9. Additionally, Plaintiff alleges that the District went further than simply failing to disclose the TMS data—it made a “false representation” regarding its existence. Id.
Plaintiff also argues that the District violated Rule 28(e) when it failed to supplement its response to Interrogatory No. 2 with the actual over-detention reports that were eventually produced in January 2016. See id. at 14. Plaintiff notes that Defendant Myrick answered Interrogatory No. 2 with a table containing the number of over-detentions, which was “data that directly contradicted the ‘overdetention reports’ she authored and [which] were contained on her computer.” See id. at 12, 14; District’s Responses to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents and Interrogatories, Exhibit 6, at 5–8. Plaintiff points out that Ms. Myrick was both the author of the actual reports, and the person who “signed the interrogatory responses under oath.” Id. at 14. As such, there is “no good faith basis for the District’s failure to disclose the overdetention reports contained on Ms. Myrick’s computer for the ten months Plaintiff repeatedly requested the reports.” Id. Plaintiff argues that these failures to disclose under Rule

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

6

26(a)(1) and failures to supplement under Rule 28(e) amount to violations of Rule 37(c)(1) and therefore require that sanctions be levied against the District.
The District argues that sanctions under Rule 37(c)(1) are inappropriate because Plaintiff “has not shown that the District violated any discovery rule under Rule 26(a) or 26(e).” Defendant District of Columbia’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Costs and Fees (“Defendant’s Opposition”) (ECF No. 40) at 6. Because the District eventually provided all the requested material to Plaintiff, there is no cause for the Court to order sanctions. See id.

Rule 37(d) Violations In addition to sanctions for the alleged violations of Rule 37(c) for failure to disclose or supplement, Plaintiff also seeks sanctions based on the District’s purported violation of Rule 37(d) for “failure to prepare its 30(b)(6) witness” with regard to both the over-detention reports, Plaintiff’s P&A at 13, and the TMS data, id. at 4; Plaintiff’s Reply Brief in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Costs and Fees (“Plaintiff’s Reply”) (ECF No. 41) at 6–7. Plaintiff argues that Ms. Myrick was unprepared for both Rule 30(b)(6) depositions because: (1) Ms. Myrick “did not bring any documents responsive to the deposition notice,” nor did she “perform any search for documents responsive to this request”; Plaintiff’s P&A at 13, and (2) Ms. Myrick “did not produce, or even search for any documents relating to the deposition on TMS system data as it related to case no. 2012 CMD 7806”; Plaintiff’s Reply at 6. The District contends that Rule 37(d) sanctions are not appropriate in this case because “the District’s 30(b)(6) witnesses appeared at deposition, and Ms. Myrick appeared twice.” Defendant’s Opposition at 8. Therefore, since the designated witness was present for the 30(b)(6) deposition, there is no underlying violation sufficient to warrant Rule 37(d) sanction.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

7

Scope of Sanctions Based on these allegations, Plaintiff contends that he is entitled to sanctions against the District in three forms: (1) costs and fees related to the additional discovery and Plaintiff’s bringing of the instant motion, (2) an order precluding Defendants from using the TMS data in a motion, hearing, or at trial, and (3) an order informing the jury that the District failed to disclose the TMS data and over-detention reports in a timely manner. See Proposed Order (ECF No. 3916) at 1. The District, while still denying that Plaintiff is entitled to any sanction, takes particular issue with Plaintiff’s request for attorneys’ fees. Defendant’s Opposition at 9–15. The District argues that if Plaintiff is to be awarded any attorneys’ fees, the rates should be determined by the United States Attorney Office (“USAO”) Laffey Matrix rather than Plaintiff’s Legal Services Index (“LSI”) Laffey rates. Id. at 12–13. Additionally, the District contends that any fee award should be reduced due to inaccurate entries in the records that Plaintiff’s counsel has provided. Id. at 14–15. Plaintiff replies that the LSI-Laffey Matrix is a “better measure of the change in prices for legal services in Washington D.C.” than the USAO Laffey Matrix. Plaintiff’s Reply at 12. Plaintiff also explained that any inaccuracies in counsel’s records was a result of typographical error. Id. at 11.

APPLICABLE STANDARDS
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c)(1) states:
(1) Failure to Disclose or Supplement. If a party fails to provide information or identify a witness as required by Rule 26(a) or (e), the party is not allowed to use that information or witness to supply evidence on a motion, at a hearing, or at a trial, unless the failure was substantially justified or is harmless. In addition to or instead of this sanction, the court, on motion and after giving an opportunity to be heard:

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

8

(A) may order payment of the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, caused by the failure; (B) may inform the jury of the party’s failure; and (C) may impose other appropriate sanctions, including any of the orders listed in Rule 37(b)(2)(A)(i)-(vi). Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c)(1). “Rule 37(c)(1) is a self-executing sanction, and the motive or reason for
the failure is irrelevant. It therefore is unnecessary to decide whether the [Defendant] acted in
bad faith . . . or was simply sloppy in its search for relevant documents and in assisting its
litigation counsel in responding to interrogatories.” Norden v. Samper, 544 F. Supp. 2d 43, 49–
50 (D.D.C. 2008) (quoting Elion v. Jackson, No. 05-0992, 2006 WL 2583694, at *1 (D.D.C.
Sept. 8, 2006)). Additionally, “[t]he burden of showing substantial justification and special
circumstances is on the party being sanctioned.” Banks v. Vilsack, 292 F.R.D. 158, 160 (D.D.C.
2013) (citation omitted). Before the sanctioned party is required to provide such justification,
however, “the initial burden is on the movant to show that the [evidence] was undisclosed.”
Romero v. ITW Food Equipment Group LLC, 289 F.R.D. 387, 388 (D.D.C. 2013) (citation
omitted); see also DL v. District of Columbia, 274 F.R.D. 320, 325 (D.D.C. 2011) (“[O]nce the
party seeking sanctions has shown a violation of Rule 26(e), the party facing possible sanctions
must prove that its failure to comply with the rule was substantially justified or is harmless.”)
(internal quotation marks omitted).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(d)(1) states:
(A) Motion; Grounds for Sanctions. The court where the action is pending may, on motion, order sanctions if: (i) a party or a party’s officer, director, or managing agent—or a person designated under Rule 30(b)(6) or 31(a)(4)—fails, after being served with proper notice, to appear for that person’s deposition.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

9

Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(d)(1). This court has held that a party’s “failure to educate its Rule 30(b)(6) witness with respect to . . . every one of the . . . deposition topics was significant, conscious and material to plaintiff’s discovery of their case and, therefore . . . [the defendant] effectively failed to appear for the purposes of Rule 37(d).” In re Vitamins Antitrust Litigation, 216 F.R.D. 168, 174 (D.D.C. 2003).
Once a court decides to sanction a party, it must then calibrate the extent of the sanction “guided by the concept of proportionality between the offense and sanction” such that any sanction is just. See DL, 274 F.R.D. at 325 (citing Bonds v. District of Columbia, 93 F.3d 801, 808 (D.C. Cir. 1996)). Deterrence is a legitimate aim for the court’s use of sanctions “not merely to penalize those whose conduct may be deemed to warrant such a sanction, but to deter those who might be tempted to such conduct in the absence of such a deterrent.” National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc., 427 U.S. 639, 643 (1976).

ANALYSIS The undersigned finds that the District’s conduct constituted a violation of both Rule
26(e) and Rule 37(d) sufficient to warrant the imposition of sanctions against it. An analysis of each violation and the appropriate sanction is outlined below.

Rule 37(c)(1) Violations Plaintiff argues that the District’s failure to supplement its disclosure with regard to the TMS data and the actual over-detention reports amount to a violation of Rule 26(e). The Court agrees. Under Rule 26, a party who has already made a disclosure, either by means of an interrogatory response or a request for production, must “supplement or correct its disclosure or response . . . in a timely manner if the party learns that in some material respect the disclosure or response is incomplete or incorrect.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e)(1)(A) (emphasis added). The District

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

10

responded to Plaintiff’s request for TMS by sending an email to Plaintiff’s counsel that stated, “We have been advised that the TMI [sic] information you requested does not exist.” Exhibit 1, District Email to Plaintiff (ECF No. 39-2) at 1. Assuming that the District was acting on an incorrect, but sincerely held belief that the TMS data did not actually exist, it was still under an obligation to supplement its response in a timely manner once the actual existence of the TMS data became known.
Plaintiff, acting on the assertion that the TMS data did not exist, noticed a 30(b)(6) deposition on the spoliation of that data. It was only on the day of the deposition that a portion of the TMS data was provided to Plaintiff. Even if, as Defendant contends, the District received the TMS data on the morning of the deposition and “provided it as soon as it could do so,” Defendant’s Opposition at 5, n.1, Plaintiff is entitled to the costs associated with taking the deposition. The deposition was predicated on the inaccurate representation from the District that the TMS data did not exist, and would not have been necessary had Defendant provided accurate disclosure at the outset of discovery.
Additionally, Rule 37(c)(1) allows for a party to avoid sanctions relating to the failure to disclose or supplement by showing that “the failure was substantially justified or is harmless.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c)(1). Plaintiff asserted at the hearing on this motion that there was no justification provided for the District’s misstatement regarding the purported non-existence of the TMS data. Rather than argue that the misstatement or the delay in supplementing the TMS data was justified in any way, counsel for Defendant raised for the first time at the hearing the argument that it was under no obligation to provide the TMS data to Plaintiff prior to the 30(b)(6) deposition because Plaintiff had not submitted an official document request.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

11

The undersigned finds that this argument is unpersuasive for several reasons. In the first instance, the District was on notice that Plaintiff was seeking the TMS data in December 2015 when Plaintiff deposed Mr. Jones and first learned of the TMS system. Exhibit 10, Deposition of Jack Jones (ECF No. 39-11) at 8 (“Plaintiff will be requesting the TMS, the native data format which indicates, as the testimony indicated, that it shows the upload date for each document when it’s uploaded.”). Most dissuasive, however, is the fact that the District had agreed to provide TMS data to Plaintiff within “two (2) weeks” of the Joint Status Report submitted to the Court on January 29, 2016. See Joint Status Report (ECF No. 27) at 2. The District cannot simultaneously hold that it has complied with its disclosure requirement by informing Plaintiff that the TMS data did not exist on February 12, 2016, while at the same time contend that it was under no obligation to provide any TMS data until it received the notice of the second 30(b)(6) deposition. Because the District previously informed the Court that it would comply with a recognized request for TMS data in January, its argument that it was under no such obligation until February is without merit.
Accordingly, the undersigned finds that the District has violated its discovery obligations under Rule 26(e) in failing to timely supplement its misrepresentation that the TMS data did not exist and will, therefore, award Plaintiff fees and costs associated with his pursuit of the TMS data. The District’s argument that its disclosure of the TMS data “before the deposition” fulfilled its obligation is similarly unpersuasive. Defendant’s Opposition at 6 (emphasis in original). Plaintiff received some of the TMS data on the morning of the deposition, and—as the District conceded at the hearing on this motion—would have already expended both the costs of holding the deposition and the fees associated with counsels’ preparation for the deposition.2

2 Plaintiff maintains that he has still not been provided “any TMS data with regard to case no. 2014 CMD 7806.” Plaintiff’s Reply at 7. The undersigned views this statement as one containing a typographical error that should read

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

12

Plaintiff’s second allegation revolves around a ten-month delay in the production of overdetention reports. The District argues that it comported with the requirements of Rule 26(e) when it supplemented its disclosure several times throughout the discovery period. See Defendant’s Opposition at 6. The undersigned finds, however, that such supplementation was insufficient to comply with Rule 26. Plaintiff has been consistent in seeking over-detention reports. Plaintiff’s first response for production of documents in March 2015 sought “all reports prepared by the District of Columbia relating to overdetention of inmates at the D.C. Jail between March 1, 2007 and April 10, 2014.” Plaintiff’s P&A at 5; Defendant’s Opposition at 6. The District admits that, in response, it did not provide the reports themselves, but instead pointed to the answer to Interrogatory No. 2, which contained “a table purporting to identify the number of overdetentions occurring by month between March 2009 through April 2014.” Defendant’s Opposition at 6.
Plaintiff then tried again in his second request for production of documents in September 2015, seeking “discrepancy reports from March 2009 through April 2014.” Plaintiff’s P&A at 5; Defendant’s Opposition at 6. While the wording is slightly different, counsel for the District conceded at the hearing that when Plaintiff requested “discrepancy reports,” counsel understood that to mean that Plaintiff was requesting over-detention reports. Still, the District failed to produce the actual reports, even though such reports were authored and stored by the same designated 30(b)(6) witness who had provided the answer to Interrogatory No. 2—namely Ms. Myrick. It was only at the 30(b)(6) deposition that Plaintiff learned that actual over-detention reports existed and propounded a third request for the production of documents listing the actual reports contained on Ms. Myrick’s computer. Only then did the District produce the reports.

“2012 CMD 7806” so as to adequately differentiate it from any TMS data relating to case number 2014 CMD 452, which has been provided to Plaintiff.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

13

As in the case of the TMS data, the District offers no explanation or attempted justification for why it failed to produce the over-detention reports that Plaintiff requested. Rather, the District argues that it adequately supplemented its disclosures. Defendant’s Opposition at 6. The undersigned finds that while the District did attempt to supplement its disclosure, it failed to provide the actual reports as Plaintiff repeatedly requested. Accordingly, the District did not satisfy its obligations under Rule 26(e), and therefore Plaintiff is entitled to a sanction of costs and fees associated with the extended discovery needed to obtain the overdetention reports.

Rule 37(d) Violations Plaintiff alleges that the District, in addition to violating Rule 37(c), failed to properly educate a designated 30(b)(6) witness in violation of Rule 37(d). Plaintiff noticed two 30(b)(6) deposition and the District designated Ms. Myrick as the witness for both depositions. Plaintiff argues that Ms. Myrick’s failure to search for or bring the over-detention reports to the first deposition, and her failure to search for or bring TMS data related to case number 2012 CMD 7806 to the second deposition, amount to violations of Rule 37(d). With regard to the first deposition regarding over-detention reports, the undersigned does not agree that Ms. Myrick was a “woefully unprepared” designated witness – i.e. one who “knows nothing about the topics and does nothing to inform [herself] about them.” See Covad Communications Co. v. Revonet, Inc., 267 F.R.D. 14, 25 (D.D.C. 2010). Indeed, Plaintiff has reduced his request for fees and costs associated with the first 30(b)(6) deposition because “although Ms. Myrick was not prepared to testify on the overdetention reports, she did testify on topics other than the overdetention reports.” Declaration in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Costs and Fees (“Klaproth Declaration”) (ECF No. 39-14) at 5, n.2. This court has held that

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

14

“[i]gnorance in one area, provided it is professed in good faith, may lead to additional 30(b)(6) witnesses, but it should not lead to sanctions that should be reserved for the ‘bandying’ that the courts have found unacceptable. Covad, 267 F.R.D. at 25–26. Plaintiff’s main concern appears to be the failure by the District to disclose the over-detention reports themselves, rather than Ms. Myrick’s failure to testify about them. The undersigned notes that since sanctions will be awarded based on the District’s violation of Rule 37(c)(1), Ms. Myrick’s failure to bring the over-detention reports with her to the first 30(b)(6) deposition does not, in and of itself, warrant the imposition of additional sanctions against the District.
The District’s conduct regarding the second 30(b)(6) deposition, however, is more troubling. Once again Ms. Myrick was the designated witness on the subject of the TMS data, and once again, Ms. Myrick failed to bring, or even search for, the TMS data related to case number 2012 CMD 7806. When asked why she did not review the requested material Ms. Myrick stated “I had no reason to.” Exhibit 12, Jeanette Myrick Deposition II (ECF No. 39-13) at 4. Ms. Myrick stated that she was aware of the documents that Plaintiff had requested in his deposition notice, but failed to provide any explanation for her failure to review or bring those documents with her. Id. at 3–4.
As the court has noted, “[m]onetary sanctions are mandatory under Rule 37(d) for failure to appear by means of wholly failing to educate a Rule 30(b)(6) witness, unless the conduct was substantially justified.” In re Vitamins Antitrust Litigation, 216 F.R.D. at 174. In its written filings, the District offers no justification for Ms. Myrick’s failure to adequately prepare, stating simply “the District’s 30(b)(6) witnesses appeared at the deposition, and Ms. Myrick appeared twice.” Defendant’s Opposition at 8.3 In this case, some justification is required. Plaintiff

3 At the hearing on this motion, the District argued that Ms. Myrick was in fact prepared for the deposition because she helped prepare the requested discovery material for disclosure. This does not, however, address Ms. Myrick’s

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

15

deposition notice include only two topic areas, see Exhibit 5, Deposition Notice Regarding TMS Data (ECF No. 39-6), and yet Ms. Myrick failed to review one of the two documents pertaining to Plaintiff. Accordingly, the undersigned finds that sanctions pursuant to Rule 37(d) are appropriate.

Scope of Sanctions Plaintiff seeks sanctions in three forms: (1) costs and fees related to the additional discovery and Plaintiff’s bringing of the instant motion, (2) an order precluding the District from using the TMS data in a motion, hearing, or at trial, and (3) an order informing the jury that the District failed to disclose the TMS data and over-detention reports in a timely manner. “District courts are entrusted with broad discretion regarding whether to impose sanctions under Rule 37 and the nature of any sanctions to be imposed.” Banks v. Office of the Senate Sergeant-At-Arms, 241 F.R.D. 370 (D.D.C. 2007). Here, the undersigned finds that an order informing the jury about the District’s discovery failures is reserved for cases in which violations are more extreme than the present instance. Additionally, an order precluding the use of all TMS data would not be appropriate since TMS data regarding case number 2014 CMD 452 was provided to Plaintiff, albeit belatedly. Therefore, since the District has not provided Plaintiff with the TMS data relating to case number 2012 CMD 7806, the District shall be precluded only from using TMS data related to case number 2012 CMD 7806 in any motion, at a hearing, or at trial. Finally, the undersigned finds that in the interest of deterrence, the District shall pay Plaintiff’s costs and fees associated with

admitted failure to search for and review the TMS data with regard to 2012 CMD 7806 prior to her second 30(b)(6) deposition.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

16

the additional discovery required, and Plaintiff’s efforts to recover those costs and fees in this action.

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs The final dispute in this matter regards Plaintiff’s requested attorney fee award. The District challenges both the applicable rate, as well as the number of hours claimed in Plaintiff’s Motion. The undersigned notes that “a district court has broad discretion in determining the size of an expenses award under Rule 37.” Beck v. Test Masters Educational Services, Inc., 289 F.R.D. 374, 382 (D.D.C. 2013) (citing Tequila Centinela, S.A. de C.V. v. Bacardi & Co., 248 F.R.D. 64, 68 (D.D.C. 2008)). When determining the proper size of the award, “the Court uses the lodestar method, multiplying a reasonably hourly rate by the reasonable number of hours expended.” Id. With regard to the reasonableness of the hourly rate, the District argues that the rates Plaintiff has requested “are excessive, unreasonable and would constitute a windfall for Plaintiff’s counsel.” Defendant’s Opposition at 11. “Reasonable rates are those in line with those prevailing in the community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience, and reputation.” Beck, 289 F.R.D. at 383 (quoting Covington v. District of Columbia, 57 F.3d 1101, 1109 (D.C. Cir. 1995)) (internal quotation marks omitted). While the burden is on the moving party to demonstrate the reasonableness of the rates requested, Plaintiff may satisfy that burden by “point[ing] to such evidence as an updated version of the Laffey matrix—a schedule of charges based on an attorney’s experience developed in Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 572 F. Supp. 354 (D.D.C. 1983)—or the U.S. Attorney’s Office matrix, or their own survey of prevailing market rates in the community.” Id.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

17

Plaintiff notes that the LSI-Laffey rates were recently affirmed by this Circuit in another case involving federal civil rights litigation. Klaproth Declaration at 5; Declaration of David Akulian in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Costs and Fees (ECF No. 39-15) at 1. The D.C. Circuit held that an award of LSI-Laffey rates in a civil rights action was not an abuse of the District Court’s discretion. Salazar ex rel. Salazar v. District of Columbia, 809 F.3d 58, 64 (D.C. Cir. 2015). While the District argues that the USAO Laffey rates are more appropriate, it fails to present sufficient evidence to rebut the reasonableness of the LSI-Laffey rates requested by Plaintiff.
The District cites several cases wherein courts in this district have awarded USAO Laffey rates rather than LSI-Laffey rates. In addition, the District presents a Statement of Interest from the United States, which argues that USAO Laffey rates should be the highest rates awarded for attorney fees. See Statement of Interest of the United States (ECF No. 40-2). The undersigned, notes, however, that this document was first filed in an unrelated case, Eley v. District of Columbia, No. 11-0309, 2106 WL 4435187 (D.D.C. Aug. 22, 2016), prior to the Circuit’s ruling in Salazar. While the Statement contends that LSI-Laffey rates are never appropriate in any type of federal litigation, the document deals primarily with Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) cases. Id. As it predates Salazar, and deals mainly with rates for fees subject to a fee-shifting statute rather than Rule 37 sanctions, the undersigned affords it relatively little weight.
Because Plaintiff has presented evidence that LSI-Laffey rates are the prevailing rates for this type of complex federal litigation, and because the District has not provided sufficient evidence to rebut this assertion, the Court will utilize its discretion to award Plaintiff attorneys’ fees corresponding to the hourly rate set forth in the LSI-Laffey matrix.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

18

Lastly, the District challenges the number of Plaintiff’s requested hours, arguing that Plaintiff’s counsel has failed to keep accurate records. Defendant’s Opposition at 14–15. The District cites to two specific entries as evidence of Plaintiff’s counsel’s inaccurate record keeping. Id. at 15.4 Plaintiff argues that any inaccuracies were based on typographical errors and that Plaintiff’s counsel kept contemporaneously recorded time records. Plaintiff’s Reply at 11–12. The undersigned accepts that Plaintiff’s submitted records may contain typographical errors that would not preclude reimbursement. As the District notes, however, some of Plaintiff’s entries reflect activity that Plaintiff’s counsel would be required to perform regardless of any misconduct by the District. Defendant’s Opposition at 15. Upon review of the records submitted by Plaintiff, the undersigned has identified four entries that are not directly related to the District’s discovery violations. See Cobell v. Babbitt, 188 F.R.D. 122, 127 (D.D.C. 1999) (citing Westmoreland v. CBS, Inc., 770 F.2d 1168, 1179 (D.C. Cir. 1985)) (“A near ‘but for’ relationship must exist between the Rule 37 violation and the activity for which fees and expenses are awarded.”). On the chart labeled “Time Incurred Obtaining TMS Data” the undersigned will excise both entries on 1/4/2016 for a total reduction of 1.1 hours. Both entries predate the District’s failure to supplement TMS data under Rule 26(e). Additionally, on the chart labeled “Time Incurred Obtaining Overdetention Reports” the undersigned will excise the 3/27/2015 entry and the 1/27/2015 entry for a total reduction of 1.8 hours. Both entries reflect activity that Plaintiff’s counsel would have been required to perform regardless of the District’s failure to supplement under Rule 26(e).

4 “[T]he table labeled ‘Time Incurred Obtaining Overdetention Reports’ contains the two following notable entries: 1/12/2015 – email re overdetention report – 0.2; and 1/27/2015 – review overdetention reports – 0.5.” Defendant’s Opposition at 15.

Smith v. District of Columbia, et al.

19

In total, the undersigned will reduce the applicable number of hours for Mr. Klaproth by

2.9. Accordingly, the Court will award Plaintiff attorneys’ fees accordingly:

Mr. Klaproth Ms. Akulian Total

Rate $ 406.00 $ 661.00

Hours 30.9 8.9

Fee Award $ 12,545.40 $ 5,882.90 $ 18,428.30

In addition to fees, the Court will award Plaintiff the costs associated with both 30(b)(6)

depositions as requested by Plaintiff.

CONCLUSION

Upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion, Defendant’s Opposition thereto, Plaintiff’s

Reply in support thereof, the arguments of the parties at the hearing held on September 14, 2016,

the entire record, and for the reasons outlined above, the undersigned finds that the District has

violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c) and (d), and that Plaintiff is entitled to sanctions

against the District in the form of limited preclusion, as well as costs and fees. Plaintiff is not

entitled to sanctions in the form of an order informing the jury of the violations. Accordingly,

Plaintiff’s Motion for Costs and Fees (ECF No. 39) will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED

IN PART.

The Court, exercising its discretion in this matter, holds that the District will be precluded

from using TMS data relating to case number 2012 CMD 7806 in any motion, at a hearing, or at

trial. In addition, the District shall reimburse Plaintiff for attorneys’ fees in the amount of

$18,428.30, and costs in the amount of $454.93. An Order accompanying this Memorandum

Opinion will be issued contemporaneously.

Date: December 6, 2016

/s/ DEBORAH A. ROBINSON United States Magistrate Judge

 
 Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 1 of 11

81,7(' 67$7(6 ',675,&7 &2857 )25 7+( ',675,&7 2) &2/80%,$

BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB



*5(*25< 60,7+





3ODLQWLII





Y





',675,&7 2) &2/80%,$ et al.





'HIHQGDQWV



BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

&LYLO $FWLRQ 1R  $%-

0(025$1'80 23,1,21 $1' 25'(5

3ODLQWLII *UHJRU\ 6PLWK EURXJKW WKLV FLYLO ULJKWV DFWLRQ XQGHU WR  86&   DOOHJLQJ

WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW RI &ROXPELD 'HSDUWPHQW RI &RUUHFWLRQV ³'2&´ XQODZIXOO\ GHWDLQHG KLP IRU

WZHQW\WKUHH GD\V DIWHU D FRXUW RUGHUHG WKDW KH ZDV WR EH UHOHDVHG IURP FXVWRG\ $PHQG &RPSO

>'NW  @ DW  ,Q FRQQHFWLRQ ZLWK D GLVFRYHU\ GLVSXWH SODLQWLII ILOHG D 0RWLRQ IRU &RVWV DQG )HHV

DJDLQVW WKH 'LVWULFW DUJXLQJ WKDW GHIHQGDQW YLRODWHG )HGHUDO 5XOHV RI &LYLO 3URFHGXUH D

H F DQG G DQG VHHNLQJ ³WR UHFRYHU FRVWV DQG IHHV LQFXUUHG DV D UHVXOW RI D

PLVUHSUHVHQWDWLRQ E\ >GHIHQGDQW@ DERXW WKH H[LVWHQFH RI GRFXPHQWV GXULQJ WKH FRXUVH RI

GLVFRYHU\´ 3O¶V 0RW IRU &RVWV )HHV >'NW  @ ³3O¶V 0RW´ 3O¶V 6WDWHPHQW RI 3 $ LQ

6XSS RI 3O¶V 0RW >'NW  @ ³3O¶V 6WDWHPHQW´ DW  'HIHQGDQW GHQLHG YLRODWLQJ DQ\

GLVFRYHU\ UXOHV DQG DUJXHG WKDW DQ\ FRVWV DQG IHHV LQFXUUHG E\ SODLQWLII ³DUH WKH QRUPDO FRVWV RI

OLWLJDWLRQ RQO\ WR EH UHLPEXUVHG VKRXOG >S@ODLQWLII SUHYDLO DW WKH HQG RI WKH FDVH    ´ 'HI 'LVWULFW

RI &ROXPELD¶V 0HP RI 3 $ LQ 2SS WR 3O¶V 0RW >'NW  @ ³'HI¶V 2SS´ DW 

7KH &RXUW UHIHUUHG WKH PRWLRQ WR D 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH IRU D GHFLVLRQ SXUVXDQW WR /RFDO &LYLO

5XOH  0LQ 2UGHU 5HIHUULQJ &DVH -XQH   2Q 'HFHPEHU   WKH 0DJLVWUDWH

-XGJH LVVXHG DQ RUGHU JUDQWLQJ WKH PRWLRQ LQ SDUW DQG GHQ\LQJ LW LQ SDUW 2UGHU >'NW  @ 7KH

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 2 of 11
0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH IRXQG WKDW GHIHQGDQW KDG FRPPLWWHG WZR GLVFRYHU\ YLRODWLRQV DQG DZDUGHG SODLQWLII DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV LQ WKH DPRXQW RI   IRU  KRXUV RI 0U .ODSURWK¶V WLPH DW  SHU KRXU DQG  IRU  KRXUV RI 0U $NXOLDQ¶V WLPH DW  SHU KRXU 0HP 2S UH 3O¶V 0RW >'NW  @ ³0HP 2S´ DW 
7KH RQO\ REMHFWLRQ UDLVHG WR WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V UXOLQJ UHODWHV WR WKH DPRXQW RI DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV ± LQ SDUWLFXODU WKH KRXUO\ UDWH XVHG WR FDOFXODWH WKH IHHV 'HI¶V 2EM WR 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V 'HF   5XOLQJ >'NW  @ ³'HI¶V 2EM´ 0HP RI 3 $ LQ 6XSS RI 'HI¶V 2EM >'NW  @ ³'HI¶V 2EM 0HP´ 'HIHQGDQW DUJXHV WKDW WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH FRPPLWWHG FOHDU HUURU ZKHQ VKH DSSOLHG WKH KLJKHU /HJDO 6HUYLFHV ,QGH[ ³/6,´ Laffey UDWHV UDWKHU WKDQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV $WWRUQH\¶V 2IILFH ³86$2´ Laffey UDWHV 'HI¶V 2EM 0HP DW ± 3ODLQWLII FRQWHQGV WKDW WKH XVH RI WKH KLJKHU UDWH VFDOH ZDV MXVWLILHG EHFDXVH WKH FDVH LQYROYHV FRPSOH[ IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ 3O¶V 5HVS WR 'HI¶V 2EM >'NW  @ ³3O¶V 5HVS´ DW ± 'HIHQGDQW¶V REMHFWLRQV WR WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V UXOLQJ DUH QRZ EHIRUH WKH &RXUW
7KH &RXUW FRQFOXGHV WKDW WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH FRPPLWWHG FOHDU HUURU LQ FDOFXODWLQJ WKH IHHV DQG WKHUHIRUH LW ZLOO RUGHU GHIHQGDQW WR SD\ SODLQWLII DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV FRUUHVSRQGLQJ WR WKH UDWHV VHW IRUWK LQ WKH 86$2 Laffey 0DWUL[ IRU D WRWDO SD\PHQW RI  :KLOH WKH '& &LUFXLW KDV DXWKRUL]HG WKH XVH RI WKH KLJKHU PDWUL[ LQ FRPSOH[ IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ LQ JHQHUDO SODLQWLII KDV IDLOHG WR PHHW KLV EXUGHQ WR HVWDEOLVK WKDW WKH UDWHV DUH UHDVRQDEOH LQ WKLV FDVH LQ SDUWLFXODU DQG WKHUHIRUH WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V GHWHUPLQDWLRQ ZDV FRQWUDU\ WR ODZ
%$&.*528' ³7KH Laffey 0DWUL[ VHWV RXW D JHQHUDO JXLGHOLQH IRU DZDUGLQJ DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV EDVHG RQ H[SHULHQFH´ Salazar ex. rel. Salazar v. District of Columbia  )G   '& &LU  %XW WKH UDWHV DUH WKLUW\ \HDUV ROG DQG PXVW EH DGMXVWHG IRU LQIODWLRQ Id. $V D UHVXOW XSGDWHG Laffey


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 3 of 11
PDWULFHV KDYH EHHQ GHYHORSHG LQFOXGLQJ WKH WZR DW LVVXH KHUH  WKH ³/6, Laffey 0DWUL[´ XSGDWHG LQ DFFRUGDQFH ZLWK WKH /HJDO 6HUYLFHV ,QGH[ RI WKH 1DWLRQZLGH &RQVXPHU 3ULFH ,QGH[ DQG  WKH ³86$2 Laffey 0DWUL[´ ZKLFK LV PDLQWDLQHG E\ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV $WWRUQH\¶V 2IILFH DQG DGMXVWV UDWHV WR DFFRXQW IRU LQIODWLRQ E\ XVLQJ WKH $OO,WHPV &RQVXPHU 3ULFH ,QGH[ IRU WKH :DVKLQJWRQ '& DUHD See id. Eley v. District of Columbia  )G  ± '& &LU  HODERUDWLQJ RQ WKH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKH WZR PDWULFHV
3ODLQWLII VRXJKW DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV FDOFXODWHG DW WKH UDWHV VHW RXW LQ WKH /6, Laffey 0DWUL[ SRLQWLQJ RXW WKDW WKH XVH RI WKH UDWHV ZDV DIILUPHG UHFHQWO\ E\ WKH '& &LUFXLW LQ Salazar  )G DW  D FDVH LQYROYLQJ IHGHUDO FLYLO ULJKWV OLWLJDWLRQ 5HSO\ %U LQ 6XSS RI 3O¶V 0RW >'NW  @ ³3O¶V 5HSO\´ DW ± 'HIHQGDQW DUJXHG WKDW SODLQWLII¶V UHTXHVWHG UDWHV ZHUH ³H[FHVVLYH XQUHDVRQDEOH DQG ZRXOG FRQVWLWXWH D ZLQGIDOO IRU >S@ODLQWLII¶V FRXQVHO´ DQG WKDW WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH VKRXOG FDOFXODWH WKH UDWHV EDVHG RQ WKH 86$2 Laffey 0DWUL[ 'HI¶V 2SS DW ±
,Q KHU UXOLQJ WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH VWDWHG DW WKH RXWVHW WKDW WKH ³GLVWULFW FRXUW KDV EURDG GLVFUHWLRQ LQ GHWHUPLQLQJ WKH VL]H RI DQ H[SHQVH DZDUG XQGHU 5XOH ´ 0HP 2S DW  TXRWLQJ Beck v. Test Masters Educ. Servs., Inc.  )5'   ''&  DQG WKDW ³WKH >F@RXUW XVHV WKH ORGHVWDU PHWKRG PXOWLSO\LQJ D UHDVRQDEO\ KRXUO\ UDWH E\ WKH QXPEHU RI KRXUV H[SHQGHG´ WR GHWHUPLQH WKH VL]H RI WKH DZDUG Id. ,Q UHOLDQFH XSRQ WKH KROGLQJ LQ Salazar WKDW ³DQ DZDUG RI WKH /6,Laffey UDWHV LQ D FLYLO ULJKWV DFWLRQ ZDV QRW DQ DEXVH RI WKH >G@LVWULFW >F@RXUW¶V GLVFUHWLRQ´ id. DW  FLWLQJ Salazar  )G DW  WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH IRXQG WKDW SODLQWLII KDG SUHVHQWHG HQRXJK HYLGHQFH WR HVWDEOLVK WKDW WKH ³/6,Laffey UDWHV DUH WKH SUHYDLOLQJ UDWHV IRU WKLV W\SH RI FRPSOH[ IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ´ Id. 7KH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH DOVR FRQFOXGHG WKDW GHIHQGDQW ³IDLO>HG@ WR SUHVHQW VXIILFLHQW HYLGHQFH WR UHEXW WKH UHDVRQDEOHQHVV RI WKH /6,Laffey UDWHV UHTXHVWHG E\ >S@ODLQWLII´ Id.


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 4 of 11
'HIHQGDQW KDG VXEPLWWHG WKH 6WDWHPHQW RI ,QWHUHVW RI WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV ZKLFK WKH 'LVWULFW KDG SUHYLRXVO\ VXEPLWWHG WR WKH GLVWULFW FRXUW LQ Eley v. District of Columbia  ) 6XSS G  ''&  DQG ZKLFK DUJXHV WKDW 86$2 Laffey UDWHV VKRXOG EH WKH KLJKHVW UDWHV DZDUGHG IRU DWWRUQH\ IHHV See 0HP 2S DW  ([  WR 'HI¶V 2SS >'NW  @ %XW WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH VWDWHG WKDW VKH ZRXOG DFFRUG WKH 6WDWHPHQW RI ,QWHUHVW IURP Eley ³UHODWLYHO\ OLWWOH ZHLJKW´ EHFDXVH LW ³SUHGDWHV Salazar´ DQG ³GHDOV PDLQO\ ZLWK UDWHV IRU IHHV VXEMHFW WR D IHHVKLIWLQJ VWDWXWH UDWKHU WKDQ 5XOH  VDQFWLRQV    ´ 0HP 2S DW  :LWKRXW RWKHU HYLGHQFH WR UHEXW D ILQGLQJ WKDW WKH /6, Laffey UDWHV ZHUH UHDVRQDEOH WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH H[HUFLVHG KHU GLVFUHWLRQ ³WR DZDUG >S@ODLQWLII DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV FRUUHVSRQGLQJ WR WKH KRXUO\ UDWH VHW IRUWK LQ WKH /6,Laffey PDWUL[´ Id.
'HIHQGDQW KDV REMHFWHG WR WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V GHFLVLRQ WR DSSO\ WKH KRXUO\ UDWHV FRQWDLQHG LQ WKH /6, Laffey 0DWUL[ LQVWHDG RI WKH OHVV JHQHURXV 86$2 Laffey IHH VFKHGXOH 'HI¶V 2EM DW  ,W FRQWHQGV WKDW SODLQWLII GLG QRW SURGXFH VXIILFLHQW HYLGHQFH WR HVWDEOLVK WKDW WKH KRXUO\ UDWHV ZHUH UHDVRQDEOH DQG WKDW WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH HUUHG LQ DSSO\LQJ WKH /6, Laffey UDWH VFKHGXOH 'HI¶V 2EM 0HP DW ± 7KH &RXUW DJUHHV $IWHU UHYLHZLQJ WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V GHFLVLRQ XQGHU WKH GHIHUHQWLDO VWDQGDUG VHW RXW E\ )HGHUDO 5XOH RI &LYLO 3URFHGXUH D DQG /RFDO &LYLO 5XOH F WKH &RXUW FRQFOXGHV WKDW WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V IHH DZDUG ZDV FOHDUO\ HUURQHRXV DQG FRQWUDU\ WR ODZ
67$1'$5' 2) 5(9,(: $ FRXUW PD\ UHIHU QRQGLVSRVLWLYH PDWWHUV LQFOXGLQJ D PRWLRQ IRU DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV WR D 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH IRU UHVROXWLRQ SXUVXDQW WR )HGHUDO 5XOH RI &LYLO 3URFHGXUH D DQG /RFDO 5XOH  )HG 5 &LY 3 D /&Y5 D see also New Life Evangelistic Ctr., Inc. v. Sebelius  ) 6XSS G  ± ''&  8SRQ UHIHUUDO WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH ³PXVW SURPSWO\ FRQGXFW WKH UHTXLUHG SURFHHGLQJV DQG ZKHQ DSSURSULDWH LVVXH D ZULWWHQ RUGHU VWDWLQJ WKH GHFLVLRQ´


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 5 of 11
)HG 5 &LY 3 D see also /&Y5 D 2QFH WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH LVVXHV KHU GHFLVLRQ DQ\ SDUW\ PD\ UDLVH REMHFWLRQV WR WKDW GHFLVLRQ ZLWKLQ IRXUWHHQ GD\V ³DIWHU EHLQJ VHUYHG ZLWK WKH RUGHU´ /&Y5 E see also )HG 5 &LY 3 D )DLOXUH WR HQWHU D WLPHO\ REMHFWLRQ ZLOO UHVXOW LQ D ZDLYHU )HG 5 &LY 3 D
7KH GLVWULFW FRXUW VKDOO UHYLHZ ³WLPHO\ REMHFWLRQV DQG PRGLI\ RU VHW DVLGH DQ\ SDUW RI WKH RUGHU WKDW LV FOHDUO\ HUURQHRXV RU LV FRQWUDU\ WR ODZ´ )HG 5 &LY 3 D ³$ FRXUW VKRXOG PDNH VXFK D ILQGLQJ ZKHQ WKH FRXUW µLV OHIW ZLWK WKH GHILQLWH DQG ILUP FRQYLFWLRQ WKDW D PLVWDNH KDV EHHQ FRPPLWWHG¶´ New Life Evangelistic Ctr., Inc.  ) 6XSS G DW  TXRWLQJ Am. Soc’y for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Feld Entm’t, Inc.  )G   '& &LU 
$1$/<6,6 $Q DWWRUQH\V¶ IHH DZDUG IRU D YLRODWLRQ RI 5XOH  LV FDOFXODWHG XVLQJ WKH ORGHVWDU PHWKRG LQ ZKLFK WKH FRXUW PXOWLSOLHV D UHDVRQDEOH KRXUO\ UDWH E\ D UHDVRQDEOH QXPEHU RI KRXUV H[SHQGHG See Weisberg v. Webster  )G  ± '& &LU  GHWHUPLQLQJ D IHH IRU D 5XOH  VDQFWLRQ E\ DSSO\LQJ Nat’l Ass’n of Concerned Veterans v. Sec. of Def.  )G  '& &LU  ZKLFK DGYRFDWHG WKH XVH RI WKH ORGHVWDU PHWKRG see also Davis v. District of Columbia  )5'   ''&  ³*HQHUDOO\ WKH SURSHU PHWKRG RI DZDUGLQJ DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV IRU D YLRODWLRQ RI 5XOH  LV WKH ORGHVWDU PHWKRG    ´ TXRWLQJ Kornegay v. AT&T 1R   :/  DW  ''& 6HSW   ³:KHQ UHTXHVWLQJ DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV XQGHU 5XOH


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 6 of 11
 WKH PRYLQJ SDUW\ EHDUV WKH EXUGHQ RI SURYLQJ WKDW WKH UHTXHVW LV UHDVRQDEOH´ Davis  )5'
DW 
7R GHWHUPLQH LI D SODLQWLII KDV PHW KLV EXUGHQ WR VKRZ WKDW WKH UHTXHVWHG UDWH LV UHDVRQDEOH
FRXUWV XVXDOO\ FRQVLGHU WKUHH HOHPHQWV  ³WKH DWWRUQH\V¶ ELOOLQJ SUDFWLFHV´  ³WKH DWWRUQH\V¶
VNLOO H[SHULHQFH DQG UHSXWDWLRQ´ DQG  ³WKH SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWHV LQ WKH UHOHYDQW FRPPXQLW\´
Covington v. District of Columbia  )G   '& &LU  $IWHU UHYLHZLQJ WKH
HYLGHQFH SODLQWLII VXEPLWWHG WKH &RXUW LV QRW VDWLVILHG WKDW SODLQWLII KDV PHW KLV EXUGHQ
,Q KLV GHFODUDWLRQ LQ VXSSRUW RI KLV UHTXHVW IRU DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV SODLQWLII¶V FRXQVHO VWDWHG
, JUDGXDWHG IURP ODZ VFKRRO LQ  %DVHG RQ WKH UDWH LQGH[ HVWDEOLVKHG E\ WKH /HJDO 6HUYLFH ,QGH[ XSGDWH WR WKH /DIIH\ 0DWUL[ ³/6,/DIIH\ 0DWUL[´ P\ SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWH LV  SHU KRXU 7KH XVH RI WKH /6, /DIIH\ 0DWUL[ ZDV UHFHQWO\ DIILUPHG E\ WKLV &LUFXLW See Salazar v. District of Columbia  )G  '& &LU  7KH VDPH DV LQ Salazar WKLV  86&   DFWLRQ LQYROYHV FRPSOH[ IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ ,Q DGGLWLRQ P\ FXUUHQW FXVWRPDU\ ELOOLQJ UDWH LV  SHU KRXU
'HFO RI %UHQGDQ .ODSURWK LQ 6XSS RI 3O¶V 0RW >'NW  @ ³.ODSURWK 'HFO´  
7KH LQIRUPDWLRQ FRQFHUQLQJ SODLQWLII¶V VHFRQG DWWRUQH\ LV VLPLODUO\ EULHI DQG GRHV QRW HYHQ
LQFOXGH WKH UHIHUHQFH WR D ³FXVWRPDU\ ELOOLQJ UDWH´
, JUDGXDWHG IURP ODZ VFKRRO LQ -XQH  %DVHG RQ WKH UDWH LQGH[ HVWDEOLVKHG E\ WKH /HJDO 6HUYLFH ,QGH[ XSGDWH WR WKH /DIIH\ 0DWUL[ ³/6, /DIIH\ 0DWUL[´ P\ SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWH LV  SHU KRXU



7KH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH VWDQGDUG IRU DZDUGLQJ DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV XQGHU 5XOH

 PD\ EH GLIIHUHQW IURP WKH UXOHV WKDW DSSO\ WR DZDUGLQJ DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV XQGHU D IHHVKLIWLQJ

VWDWXWH See 0HP 2S DW  JLYLQJ ³OLWWOH ZHLJKW´ WR WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV¶V 6WDWHPHQW RI ,QWHUHVW

IURP WKH GLVWULFW FRXUW GHFLVLRQ LQ Eley EHFDXVH LW GHDOW ³PDLQO\ ZLWK UDWHV IRU IHHV VXEMHFW WR D IHH

VKLIWLQJ VWDWXWH UDWKHU WKDQ 5XOH  VDQFWLRQV´ %XW WKH WHVW LQ ERWK VLWXDWLRQV LV SUDFWLFDOO\

LGHQWLFDO DQG WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH UHOLHG KHDYLO\ RQ WKH GHFLVLRQ LQ Salazar  )G  ZKLFK

GHDOW ZLWK DQ DWWRUQH\V¶ IHH DZDUG XQGHU D IHHVKLIWLQJ VWDWXWH ±  86&   ± DQG QRW 5XOH





Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 7 of 11
'HFO RI 'DYLG $NXOLDQ LQ 6XSS RI 3O¶V 0RW ³$NXOLDQ 'HFO´ >'NW  @   Q 6R ZLWK UHVSHFW WR WKH ILUVW SURQJ RI WKH QHFHVVDU\ VKRZLQJ ± WKH DWWRUQH\V¶ ELOOLQJ SUDFWLFHV ± WKH HYLGHQFH LV TXLWH WKLQ IRU RQH DWWRUQH\ DQG FRPSOHWHO\ ODFNLQJ IRU WKH RWKHU
$ SODLQWLII PXVW DOVR SURYLGH WKH &RXUW ZLWK LQIRUPDWLRQ FRQFHUQLQJ WKH DWWRUQH\V¶ H[SHULHQFH VNLOO DQG UHSXWDWLRQ Covington  )G DW  +HUH WKLV HYLGHQFH LV DOPRVW QRQ H[LVWHQW 7KH GHFODUDWLRQV VWDWH QRWKLQJ PRUH WKDQ WKH \HDU WKDW HDFK DWWRUQH\ JUDGXDWHG IURP ODZ VFKRRO .ODSURWK 'HFO   $NXOLDQ 'HFO   %XW FRXUWV GHPDQG PRUH ± WKHUH PXVW EH VRPH GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH DWWRUQH\¶V H[SHULHQFH ZLWK VSHFLILF W\SHV RI FDVHV WKDW ZRXOG HQDEOH WKH FRXUW WR HYDOXDWH ZKDW WKDW DWWRUQH\ LV EULQJLQJ WR WKH WDEOH LQ RUGHU WR MXVWLI\ WKH KRXUO\ UDWH See Covington  )G DW ± ILQGLQJ WKDW SODLQWLIIV ³FOHDUO\ PHW WKHLU EXUGHQ´ ZKHUH WKH\ ³VXEPLWWHG GDWD GHPRQVWUDWLQJ WKHLU DWWRUQH\V¶ H[SHULHQFH LQ WKH OHJDO SURIHVVLRQ DQG LQ OLWLJDWLQJ FRPSOH[ IHGHUDO FRXUW FDVHV DV ZHOO DV LQIRUPDWLRQ SUREDWLYH RI WKHLU DWWRUQH\V¶ VNLOO DQG UHSXWDWLRQ Young v. Sarles  ) 6XSS G   ''&  FRQFOXGLQJ SODLQWLII VDWLVILHG KLV EXUGHQ E\ VXEPLWWLQJ ³DIILGDYLWV IURP HDFK RI KLV DWWRUQH\V GHVFULELQJ WKHLU H[SHULHQFH DQG H[SHUWLVH DV ZHOO DV WKHLU W\SLFDO ELOOLQJ SUDFWLFHV LQ OLWLJDWLQJ FLYLO ULJKWV FDVHV
7KLV GHILFLHQF\ DOVR DIIHFWV SODLQWLII¶V DELOLW\ WR DGGUHVV WKH WKLUG HOHPHQW WKH UHTXLUHPHQW WKDW D IHH DSSOLFDQW PXVW ³SURGXFH VDWLVIDFWRU\ HYLGHQFH ± in addition to WKH DWWRUQH\¶V RZQ DIILGDYLWV ± WKDW WKH UHTXHVWHG UDWHV DUH LQ OLQH ZLWK WKRVH SUHYDLOLQJ LQ WKH FRPPXQLW\ IRU VLPLODU VHUYLFHV E\ ODZ\HUV RI UHDVRQDEO\ FRPSDUDEOH VNLOO H[SHULHQFH DQG UHSXWDWLRQ´ Eley  )G DW  TXRWLQJ Blum v. Stenson  86   Q  HPSKDVLV LQ RULJLQDO ,Q Eley WKH &RXUW RI $SSHDOV RYHUWXUQHG D GLVWULFW FRXUW¶V GHFLVLRQ WR DSSO\ WKH KLJKHU /6, Laffey UDWHV LQ D FDVH LQYROYLQJ WKH ,QGLYLGXDOV ZLWK 'LVDELOLWLHV (GXFDWLRQ $FW ³,'($´ EHFDXVH SODLQWLII KDG QRW SURYLGHG WKH FRXUW ZLWK VXIILFLHQW HYLGHQFH WR VXSSRUW WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI WKH KLJKHU UDWHV


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 8 of 11
Id. DW  7KH RQO\ HYLGHQFH WKDW KDG EHHQ SUHVHQWHG ZDV  WKH /6, Laffey 0DWUL[  D GHFODUDWLRQ IURP 0LFKDHO .DYDQDXJK 3K' WKH HFRQRPLVW ZKR GHYHORSHG WKH /6, Laffey 0DWUL[ DQG  WKH SODLQWLII¶V ODZ\HU¶V YHULILHG VWDWHPHQW WKDW KH FKDUJHG KLV SD\LQJ FOLHQWV WKH UDWHV LQ WKH /6, Laffey 0DWUL[ Id. 7KH &LUFXLW IRXQG WKDW WKH SODLQWLII KDG QRW VXEPLWWHG DQ\ HYLGHQFH WR VKRZ WKDW /6, Laffey UDWHV ZHUH LQ OLQH ZLWK WKRVH SUHYDLOLQJ UDWHV LQ WKH OHJDO FRPPXQLW\ IRU ³µsimilar services¶ i.e. ,'($ OLWLJDWLRQ´ Id. HPSKDVLV LQ RULJLQDO TXRWLQJ Covington  )G DW  $OWKRXJK WKH FRXUW PDGH FOHDU WKDW LW ZDV QRW GHFLGLQJ ZKHWKHU ,'($ OLWLJDWLRQ LV VXIILFLHQWO\ ³FRPSOH[´ WR XVH HLWKHU YHUVLRQ RI WKH Laffey 0DWUL[ LW FRQFOXGHG WKDW UHJDUGOHVV ³WKH REOLJDWLRQ ZDV >WKH SODLQWLII¶V@ WR GHPRQVWUDWH WKDW KHU VXJJHVWHG UDWHV ZHUH DSSURSULDWH´ DQG WKDW VKH KDG QRW GRQH VR Id. DW 
/DWHU LQ Salazar WKH &RXUW RI $SSHDOV GLG ILQG WKH UHFRUG WR EH VXIILFLHQW WR VXSSRUW WKH XVH RI WKH /6, Laffey 0DWUL[ DW WKH FRQFOXVLRQ RI D FLYLO ULJKWV FODVV DFWLRQ  )G DW  7KH RQO\ LVVXH LQ WKDW FDVH ZDV ZKHWKHU WKH SODLQWLII KDG VDWLVILHG WKH WKLUG HOHPHQW ± WKH SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWH ± DQG WKH SODLQWLII VXEPLWWHG  DQ DIILGDYLW IURP 'U .DYDQDXJK H[SODLQLQJ ³ZK\ WKH /6, LV D EHWWHU PHDVXUH RI WKH FKDQJH LQ SULFHV IRU OHJDO VHUYLFHV LQ :DVKLQJWRQ '& WKDQ WKH 86$2 XSGDWH WR WKH Laffey 0DWUL[´  ELOOLQJ UDWH WDEOHV ³GHPRQVWUDWLQJ WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ DYHUDJH QDWLRQDO ODZ ILUP UDWHV DQG WKH /6, XSGDWH WR WKH Laffey 0DWUL[ DV ZHOO DV WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ DYHUDJH QDWLRQDO ODZ ILUP UDWHV DQG WKH 86$2 XSGDWH WR WKH Laffey 0DWUL[´ DQG  D VXUYH\ VKRZLQJ WKH UDWHV IRU SDUWQHUV LQ :DVKLQJWRQ '& RQ WKH KLJK HQG RI WKH PDUNHW DQG KRZ WKRVH UDWHV IDU H[FHHGHG WKH UDWHV LQ WKH /6, XSGDWH Id. DW ±
7KH &RXUW RI $SSHDOV IRXQG WKLV VKRZLQJ VXIILFLHQW WR MXVWLI\ WKH GLVWULFW FRXUW¶V H[HUFLVH RI GLVFUHWLRQ WR VHOHFW WKH /6, Laffey UDWHV DQG LW H[SODLQHG WKDW WKH KROGLQJ ZDV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK Eley


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 9 of 11
,Q Eley ZH YDFDWHG D GLVWULFW FRXUW¶V IHH DZDUG EDVHG RQ HYLGHQFH VXEPLWWHG E\ WKH 'LVWULFW WHQGLQJ WR VKRZ WKDW LQ WKH SDUWLFXODU FRQWH[W RI ,'($ FODLPV WKHUH LV D VXEPDUNHW LQ ZKLFK DWWRUQH\V¶ KRXUO\ IHHV DUH JHQHUDOO\ ORZHU WKDQ WKH UDWHV LQ HLWKHU RI WKH Laffey 0DWULFHV ,Q WKLV FDVH E\ FRQWUDVW WKH 'LVWULFW LGHQWLILHV QR VXFK VXEPDUNHW LQVWHDG DFTXLHVFLQJ LQ WKH QRWLRQ WKDW WKH OLWLJDWLRQ DW LVVXH TXDOLILHV DV FRPSOH[ IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ DV WR ZKLFK WKH Laffey 0DWULFHV DSSO\
Salazar  )G DW  LQWHUQDO FLWDWLRQ RPLWWHG
$V RQH GLVWULFW FRXUW KDV REVHUYHG
>7@KH '& &LUFXLW¶V VXJJHVWLRQ LQ WKHVH WZR UHFHQW RSLQLRQV WKDW FHUWDLQ FDWHJRULHV RI IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ IDOO LQWR GLVWLQFW DQG GLVFHUQDEOH VXEPDUNHWV RI OHJDO VHUYLFHV LQ ZKLFK SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWHV DSSOLFDEOH WR WKH JHQHUDO UXQ RI µFRPSOH[ IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ¶ PD\ QRW DSSO\ SUHVHQWV SRWHQWLDO QHZ FRPSOLFDWLRQV IRU FRXUWV DV ZHOO DV OLWLJDQWV VHHNLQJ WR FDOFXODWH UHDVRQDEOH IHH DZDUGV
Makray v. Perez  ) 6XSS G   ''& 
,W LV IDLU WR VD\ WKDW WKHUH DUH VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKH VHFWLRQ  FODVV DFWLRQ
OLWLJDWLRQ LQYROYHG LQ Salazar DQG WKH FODLP EURXJKW RQ EHKDOI RI D VLQJOH SODLQWLII KHUH ,QGHHG
SODLQWLII LQLWLDOO\ EURXJKW KLV FRPSODLQW ZKLFK LQFOXGHV WKH VHFWLRQ  FODLP DQG WZR FRPPRQ
ODZ WRUW FODLPV LQ WKH 6XSHULRU &RXUW RI WKH 'LVWULFW RI &ROXPELD DQG LW ZDV GHIHQGDQW WKDW
UHPRYHG LW WR IHGHUDO FRXUW 1RWLFH RI 5HPRYDO >'NW  @ %XW LW LV QRW QHFHVVDU\ WR GHFLGH ZKHWKHU
WKLV DFWLRQ LV SURSHUO\ FKDUDFWHUL]HG DV ³FRPSOH[ IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ´ RU SalazarOHYHO ³FRPSOH[
IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ´ LI VXFK D FDWHJRU\ H[LVWV LQ RUGHU WR UXOH RQ WKH LVVXH SUHVHQWHG KHUH EHFDXVH
ERWK VHWV RI Laffey UDWHV DSSO\ WR ³FRPSOH[ IHGHUDO OLWLJDWLRQ´ QR PDWWHU ZKLFK PHWKRG RI DGMXVWLQJ
IRU LQIODWLRQ LV DSSOLHG See Salazar  )G DW 
7KH SUREOHP KHUH LV VLPLODU WR WKH SUREOHP LGHQWLILHG LQ Eley WKH IDLOXUH WR FRPH IRUZDUG
ZLWK HYLGHQFH ³WKDW WKH UHTXHVWHG UDWHV DUH LQ OLQH ZLWK WKRVH SUHYDLOLQJ LQ WKH FRPPXQLW\ IRU
VLPLODU VHUYLFHV E\ ODZ\HUV RI UHDVRQDEO\ FRPSDUDEOH VNLOO H[SHULHQFH DQG UHSXWDWLRQ´  )G
DW  TXRWLQJ Blum  86 DW  Q 3ODLQWLII KDV VLPSO\ OLIWHG 'U .DYDQDXJK¶V DIILGDYLW


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 10 of 11

IURP WKH Salazar FDVH DQG WKXV WKHUH LV QRWKLQJ LQ WKH UHFRUG WR LQGLFDWH WKDW WKH HFRQRPLVW ZDV RIIHULQJ DQ RSLQLRQ DERXW FDVHV OLNH WKLV RQH RU WKDW KH KDG JLYHQ DQ\ FRQVLGHUDWLRQ WR PDWWHUV ILOHG LQ 6XSHULRU &RXUW See Prunty v. Vivendi  ) 6XSS G  ± ''&  ³,W PD\ EH WKDW RUGLQDULO\ D FLYLO ULJKWV RU FRS\ULJKW FDVH ZRXOG ULVH WR WKH OHYHO RI µFRPSOH[ IHGHUDO FRXUW OLWLJDWLRQ¶ WKDW ZRXOG MXVWLI\ DSSOLFDWLRQ RI WKH /6, Laffey 0DWUL[ DSSURYHG LQ Salazar %XW DEVHQW DFWXDO evidence WKDW HVWDEOLVKHV WKDW WR EH VR WKH FRXUW GHFOLQHV WR DSSO\ WKH KLJKHU UDWHV LQ WKLV FDVH ,QVWHDG WKH 86$2 Laffey 0DWUL[ SURYLGHV DQ DSSURSULDWH EHQFKPDUN E\ ZKLFK WR PHDVXUH WKH SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWH LQ WKLV FDVH´
0RUH LPSRUWDQW ZLWKRXW DQ\ HYLGHQFH LQ WKH UHFRUG HVWDEOLVKLQJ ZKHUH WKHVH DWWRUQH\V IDOO RQ WKH VSHFWUXP RI VNLOO DQG H[SHULHQFH RU WKH W\SH RI OHJDO VHUYLFHV WKDW WKH\ W\SLFDOO\ SURYLGH WKHUH LV QR EDVLV LQ WKH UHFRUG WR FRQFOXGH WKDW WKH /6, Laffey UDWHV MXVWLILHG E\ WKH H[SHUW LQ Salazar DV ³SUHYDLOLQJ LQ WKH FRPPXQLW\´ DUH IRU VHUYLFHV VLPLODU WR WKRVH IRU ZKLFK DWWRUQH\ .ODSURWK FKDUJHV KLV FXVWRPDU\ UDWH RU WKDW WKH\ DUH FKDUJHG E\ ODZ\HUV ZLWK FRPSDUDEOH UHVXPHV
:KDW WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH GLG LQ WKLV FDVH ZDV WR WUHDW WKH /6, Laffey UDWHV DV WKH SUHVXPSWLYH UDWHV IRU FLYLO ULJKWV FDVHV LQ IHGHUDO FRXUW XQOHVV UHEXWWHG EXW WKH Salazar RSLQLRQ GLG QRW JR WKDW IDU :KLOH LW XSKHOG D GLVWULFW FRXUW¶V DSSURYDO RI WKH KLJKHU PDWUL[ EDVHG RQ WKH UHFRUG EHIRUH LW LQ WKDW FDVH LW GLG QRW GLVSHQVH ZLWK WKH WKUHHSURQJHG WHVW IRU HVWDEOLVKLQJ WKH UHDVRQDEOHQHVV RI D UHTXHVWHG UDWH LQ DQ\ LQGLYLGXDO IXWXUH FDVH



7KH VKRZLQJ KHUH GRHV QRW PHDVXUH XS WR WKH HYLGHQFH IRXQG E\ WKH FRXUW WR EH VXIILFLHQW

WR MXVWLI\ WKH KLJKHU UDWHV LQ Makray  D GHFODUDWLRQ IURP SODLQWLII¶V FRXQVHO GHVFULELQJ KLV

H[WHQVLYH H[SHULHQFH  D GHFODUDWLRQ IURP D :DVKLQJWRQEDVHG DWWRUQH\ DYHUULQJ WKDW SODLQWLII¶V

UHTXHVWHG UHLPEXUVHPHQW UDWH ZDV UHDVRQDEOH DQG FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWHV LQ WKH

DUHD  D GHFODUDWLRQ IURP D :DVKLQJWRQEDVHG FLYLO ULJKWV OLWLJDWRU DVVHUWLQJ WKDW WKH 86$2

Laffey UDWHV DUH EHORZ WKH SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWH IRU WKLV NLQG RI ZRUN LQ IHGHUDO FRXUW DQG 

³HYLGHQFH FRPSDULQJ WKH UHVXOWV RI D  1DWLRQDO /DZ -RXUQDO ELOOLQJ VXUYH\ ZKLFK LQFOXGHV

UDWH GDWD IRU WZHOYH QDWLRQDO ODZ ILUPV EDVHG LQ :DVKLQJWRQ '& WR WKH SODLQWLII¶V UHTXHVWHG UDWH´

 ) 6XSS G DW ±



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 74 Filed 04/06/17 Page 11 of 11
+HUH DV LQ Prunty SODLQWLII IDLOHG WR SUHVHQW VXIILFLHQW HYLGHQFH WR ³DOORZ WKH FRXUW WR HYDOXDWH WKH UHDVRQDEOHQHVV RI >WKH@ UDWHV LQ WKLV FDVH´  ) 6XSS G DW  $QG WKHUHIRUH WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V GHFLVLRQ WR DSSO\ WKH /6, Laffey 0DWUL[ ZDV FOHDUO\ HUURQHRXV DQG FRQWUDU\ WR ODZ %HFDXVH SODLQWLII KDV QRW PHW KLV LQLWLDO EXUGHQ RI MXVWLI\LQJ WKH UHDVRQDEOHQHVV RI WKH UDWHV DSSOLHG WKH &RXUW ZLOO PRGLI\ WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V GHFLVLRQ DQG DSSO\ WKH 86$2 Laffey 0DWUL[ UDWHV
8WLOL]LQJ WKDW VWDQGDUG WKH &RXUW ILQGV WKDW SODLQWLII LV HQWLWOHG WR  LQ IHHV  IRU  KRXUV RI 0U .ODSURWK¶V WLPH DW  SHU KRXU DQG  IRU  KRXUV RI 0U $NXOLDQ¶V WLPH DW  SHU KRXU ,W LV KHUHE\
25'(5(' WKDW WKH 0DJLVWUDWH -XGJH¶V 5HSRUW DQG 5HFRPPHQGDWLRQ >'NW  @ LV PRGLILHG DQG LW LV
)857+(5 25'(5(' WKDW WKH &RXUW DZDUGV SODLQWLII DWWRUQH\V¶ IHHV LQ WKH DPRXQW RI 
62 25'(5('

'$7( $SULO  

$0< %(50$1 -$&.621 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 'LVWULFW -XGJH



:KHQ WKH IHHUHTXHVWLQJ SDUW\ KDV QRW SUHVHQWHG VXIILFLHQW HYLGHQFH WR HVWDEOLVK WKH

SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWH EDVHG RQ WKH /6, Laffey 0DWUL[ FRXUWV RIWHQ DSSO\ WKH 86$2 Laffey 0DWUL[

UDWHV See Prunty  ) 6XSS G  ³*LYHQ WKH QHDU DEVHQFH RI HYLGHQFH VXEPLWWHG E\

>G@HIHQGDQWV WR HVWDEOLVK WKH SUHYDLOLQJ PDUNHW UDWH KHUH WKH FRXUW ZLOO UHO\ RQ WKH PRUH

FRQVHUYDWLYH 86$2 Laffey 0DWUL[ WR HYDOXDWH WKH UHDVRQDEOHQHVV RI &RXQVHO¶V SURSRVHG KRXUO\

UDWHV´ Eley  ) 6XSS G DW  KROGLQJ WKDW ZKHQ WKH IHH DSSOLFDQW GRHV QRW PHHW WKH

HYLGHQWLDU\ EXUGHQ UHLPEXUVHPHQW EDVHG RQ WKH 86$2 Laffey 0DWUL[ DSSURSULDWH



 
 Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 1 of 56

81,7('67$7(6',675,&7&2857 )257+(',675,&72)&2/80%,$

BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB



*5(*25<60,7+





3ODLQWLII





Y





',675,&72)&2/80%,$et al.





'HIHQGDQWV



BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

 &LYLO$FWLRQ1R$%-

0(025$1'8023,1,21



,Q SODLQWLII*UHJRU\6PLWK ZDV KHOGDWWKH '&MDLOIRUWZHQW\WKUHHGD\VDIWHU D

MXGJHRUGHUHGWKDWKHEHUHOHDVHG7KH'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELDKDVQRWVXJJHVWHGWKDWWKHUHZDVDQ\

OHJDO MXVWLILFDWLRQ IRU WKLV XQGLVSXWHG ³RYHUGHWHQWLRQ´ ZKDW LV DW VWDNH LV ZKHWKHU SODLQWLII KDV

IRXQGHGKLVFODLPVIRUUHGUHVVRQWKHDSSURSULDWHOHJDOWKHRULHVDQGZKHWKHUKHKDVFRPHIRUZDUG

ZLWKVXIILFLHQWHYLGHQFHWRVXSSRUWWKHP



3ODLQWLIIVXHGWKH'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELDDQGWZRLQGLYLGXDOVZKRZRUNHGIRUWKH'HSDUWPHQW

RI &RUUHFWLRQV ³'2&´  -HDQHWWH 0\ULFN DQG -DFN -RQHV  +H EURXJKW FODLPV DJDLQVW DOO WKUHH

GHIHQGDQWVXQGHU86&IRUDOOHJHGYLRODWLRQVRIKLV)LIWK$PHQGPHQWULJKWVDVZHOO

DV FRPPRQ ODZ FODLPV DOOHJLQJ IDOVH LPSULVRQPHQW DQG QHJOLJHQFH  +H DOVR EURXJKW D FODLP

DOOHJLQJQHJOLJHQWVXSHUYLVLRQDQGWUDLQLQJDJDLQVWWKH'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELD'HIHQGDQWVPRYHG

IRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQDOORIWKHFRXQWVH[FHSWWKHQHJOLJHQFHFODLPsee 'HIV¶0RWIRU3DUWLDO

6XPP->'NW@³'HIV¶0RW´DQGSODLQWLIIILOHGDFURVVPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQ

DOOIRXUFRXQWVSee 3O¶V2SSWR'HIV¶0RW 3O¶V&URVV0RWIRU6XPP-RQ/LDELOLW\ (QWU\

RID3HUPDQHQW,QM>'NW@³3O¶V&URVV0RW´

Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 2 of 56



'HIHQGDQWV PRYHG IRU VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW RQ WKH VHFWLRQ  FODLPV LQ &RXQW , RQ WKH

JURXQGVWKDWSODLQWLIIKDVQRWHVWDEOLVKHGWKHQHFHVVDU\SUHGLFDWHYLRODWLRQRIKLVFRQVWLWXWLRQDO

ULJKWV  WKH LQGLYLGXDO GHIHQGDQWV DUH HQWLWOHG WR TXDOLILHG LPPXQLW\ DQG  SODLQWLII KDV QRW

VDWLVILHG WKH SUHUHTXLVLWHV IRU HVWDEOLVKLQJ PXQLFLSDO OLDELOLW\ XQGHU VHFWLRQ  WKDW LV WKH

H[LVWHQFHRIDSROLF\RUSUDFWLFHWKDWFDXVHGWKHFRQVWLWXWLRQDOGHSULYDWLRQ7KH&RXUWFRQFOXGHV

WKDWWKHUHDUHJHQXLQHGLVSXWHVRIPDWHULDOIDFWRQWKHTXHVWLRQVRIZKHWKHUSODLQWLII¶VFRQVWLWXWLRQDO

ULJKWVZHUHYLRODWHGDQGZKHWKHUWKH'LVWULFWKDGDFXVWRPRUSUDFWLFHFRQFHUQLQJLWVUHFHLSWRI

SDSHUZRUNWKDWFDXVHGSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQDQGWKRVHGLVSXWHVSUHFOXGHWKHHQWU\RIVXPPDU\

MXGJPHQW IRU SODLQWLII RU WKH 'LVWULFW RQ&RXQW,+RZHYHUWKHLQGLYLGXDOGHIHQGDQWVDUHERWK

HQWLWOHGWRTXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\VRVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQ&RXQW,ZLOOEHJUDQWHGLQWKHLUIDYRUDQG

WKHRWKHUWKHRULHVDGYDQFHGE\SODLQWLIIIRUVHFWLRQOLDELOLW\ZLOOQRWPRYHIRUZDUG



7KH &RXUW ZLOO JUDQW VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW RQ WKH IDOVH LPSULVRQPHQW FODLP LQ &RXQW ,, LQ

IDYRU RI SODLQWLII EHFDXVH QR UHDVRQDEOH MXURU FRXOG ILQG WKDW KH ZDV ODZIXOO\ GHWDLQHG  6LQFH

SODLQWLII GLG QRW PRYH IRU VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW RQ KLV QHJOLJHQFH FODLP LQ &RXQW ,,, RQ SURSHU

JURXQGVWKH&RXUWZLOOGHQ\KLVPRWLRQRQWKDWFRXQWZLWKRXWSUHMXGLFH)LQDOO\WKH&RXUWZLOO

JUDQWWKH'LVWULFW¶VPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQWKHQHJOLJHQWVXSHUYLVLRQDQGWUDLQLQJFODLP

LQ&RXQW,9EHFDXVHSODLQWLIIKDVQRWFRPHIRUZDUGZLWKH[SHUWWHVWLPRQ\WRHVWDEOLVKWKHH[LVWHQFH

RIDQDWLRQDOVWDQGDUGRIFDUHWKDWZDVEUHDFKHGLQWKLVLQVWDQFH




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 3 of 56

%$&.*5281'



7KHIROORZLQJIDFWVUHJDUGLQJSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQDUHXQGLVSXWHG

x 2Q 0DUFK   WKH 'HSDUWPHQW RI &RUUHFWLRQV ³'2&´ UHFHLYHG FRPPLWPHQW RUGHUV LQ WZR GLIIHUHQW '& 6XSHULRU &RXUW PLVGHPHDQRU FDVHV  &0'  DQG&0'RUGHULQJWKDWSODLQWLIIEHFRPPLWWHGWRWKHFXVWRG\RIWKH'2& XQWLOIXUWKHURUGHURIWKH&RXUWSee 'HIV¶62)±3O¶V5HVS62)±3O¶V 62)   'HIV¶ 5HVS 62)   see also ([  WR 3O¶V &URVV0RW >'NW@ ³&RXUW9LHZ&DVH1R&0'´([WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW @³&RXUW9LHZ&DVH1R&0'´
x 2Q0DUFKSODLQWLIIZDVWUDQVSRUWHGIURP'&MDLOWR6XSHULRU&RXUWDQGD MXGJHRUGHUHGKLPWREHUHOHDVHGLQERWKFDVHV'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62) 3O¶V62)'HIV¶5HVS62)see ([WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@([ WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@DW±WRJHWKHU³5HOHDVH2UGHU&DVH1R &0'´([WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@([WR3O¶V&URVV0RW >'NW@DWWRJHWKHU³5HOHDVH2UGHU&DVH1R&0'´see also &RXUW 9LHZ &DVH 1R  &0'  &RXUW 9LHZ &DVH 1R  &0' 
x '2&UHFHLYHGDQGSURFHVVHGWKHUHOHDVHRUGHUIRUFDVHQXPEHU&0'RQ WKHVDPHGD\'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62)
x $OWKRXJKWKH'2&UHFHLYHGWKHUHOHDVHRUGHULQFDVHQXPEHU&0'RQ 0DUFKWKHRUGHUZDVQRWSURFHVVHG'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62) 3O¶V62)'HIV¶5HVS62)see also 5HOHDVH2UGHU&DVH1R&0' 
x '2&GLGQRWUHOHDVHSODLQWLIIIURPFXVWRG\RQ0DUFK3O¶V62)'HIV¶5HVS 62)
x 3ODLQWLIIZDVKHOGDWWKH'&MDLOXQWLO$SULO'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS 62)


 ,QVXSSRUWRIWKHLUPRWLRQVDQGRSSRVLWLRQVHDFKSDUW\VXSSOLHGWKH&RXUWZLWKVWDWHPHQWV RIIDFW'HIV¶6WDWHPHQWRI0DWHULDO)DFWVDVWR:KLFK7KHUHLVQR*HQXLQH'LVSXWH>'NW @ ³'HIV¶ 62)´± 3O¶V 6WDWHPHQW RI *HQXLQH ,VVXHV RI 0DWHULDO )DFW 3XUVXDQW WR /RFDO 5XOH+LQ5HVSWR'HIV¶62)>'NW@³3O¶V5HVS62)´3O¶V6WDWHPHQWRI0DWHULDO )DFWVDVWR:KLFK7KHUHLVQR*HQXLQH'LVSXWH3XUVXDQWWR/RFDO5XOH+>'NW@³3O¶V 62)´'HIV¶5HVSWR3O¶V62)>'NW@³'HIV¶5HVS62)´'HIHQGDQWVDOVRSURYLGHG DUHVSRQVHWRSODLQWLII¶VVWDWHPHQWRIIDFWVLQUHVSRQVHWRGHIHQGDQWV¶VWDWHPHQWRIIDFWVsee 'HIV¶ 5HVSWR3O¶V5HVS62)>'NW@EXWVXFKDVWDWHPHQWLVQRWFRQWHPSODWHGE\WKHORFDOUXOHV DQGLWLVXQFOHDUZK\WKLVGRFXPHQWZDVSURYLGHGSee /&Y5K



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 4 of 56



7KHSURFHVVE\ZKLFKSULVRQHUVDUHVXSSRVHGWREHUHOHDVHGLVDOVRODUJHO\XQGLVSXWHG



$IWHUD6XSHULRU&RXUWMXGJHDXWKRUL]HVDQLQPDWH¶VUHOHDVHGXULQJDFRXUWDSSHDUDQFHWKH

FRXUWURRPFOHUNJHQHUDWHVDUHOHDVHRUGHUDQGSULQWVWZRFRSLHVERWKRIZKLFKDUHVLJQHGE\WKH

MXGJHWKHFOHUNDQGWKH860DUVKDOLQFKDUJHRIWKHSULVRQHU'HIV¶62)±3O¶V5HVS

62)±   7KH FOHUN PDLQWDLQV WKH FRXUW¶V FRS\ DQG LV UHVSRQVLEOH IRU VXEPLWWLQJ LW WR WKH

VFDQQLQJ GHSDUWPHQW DW WKH '& 6XSHULRU &RXUW ZKHUH WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU LV WKHQ VFDQQHG LQWR D

FRPSXWHUL]HG GDWDEDVH FDOOHG &RXUW 9LHZ  'HIV¶ 62)  3O¶V 5HVS 62)     7KLV

LQIRUPDWLRQLVDOVRUHIOHFWHGLQDQRWKHUFRXUWV\VWHPFDOOHG0\-867,6See 'HIV¶62)3O¶V

5HVS62)7KH0DUVKDOUHWDLQVWKHVHFRQGFRS\DQGWDNHVWKHUHOHDVHRUGHUDQGWKHSULVRQHU

WRWKHPDLQFHOOEORFNLQWKHFRXUWKRXVH'HIV¶62)±3O¶V5HVS62)±



7KH 0DUVKDO KDQG GHOLYHUV WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU WR D /HJDO ,QVWUXPHQW ([DPLQHU ³/,(´ RU

/HDG/HJDO,QVWUXPHQW([DPLQHU³//,(´ORFDWHGDWD'HSDUWPHQWRI&RUUHFWLRQVVDWHOOLWHRIILFH

ZLWKLQWKHFRXUWKRXVHDQGWKH'2&HPSOR\HHWKHQXSORDGVWKHGRFXPHQWLQWRDGDWDEDVHFDOOHG

WKH7UDQVDFWLRQ0DQDJHPHQW6\VWHP³706´See'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62)([

WR 'HIV¶ 0RW >'NW@ DW ± ([ % WR 3O¶V &URVV0RW >'NW  @ DW ±

2QFHWKHUHOHDVHRUGHULVXSORDGHGLQ706D/HJDO,QVWUXPHQW([DPLQHUORFDWHGLQWKH5HFRUGV

2IILFHDWWKH'&MDLOLWVHOIZLOODFFHVVWKHGRFXPHQWLQ706DQGEHJLQSURFHVVLQJWKHLQPDWH¶V


 7KHSDUWLHVFLWHWRYDULRXVSRUWLRQVRI5RELO\Q%URZQ¶VGHSRVLWLRQIURP'HFHPEHU See([WR'HIV¶0RW>'NW@([(WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@WRJHWKHU³%URZQ 'HF'HS´7KH&RXUW¶VFLWDWLRQWR%URZQ¶VWHVWLPRQ\HQFRPSDVVHVDOORIWKHSRUWLRQVRI WKHWUDQVFULSWFLWHGE\WKHSDUWLHV   7KHSDUWLHVFLWHWRYDULRXVSRUWLRQVRI-HDQHWWH0\ULFN¶VGHSRVLWLRQIURP1RYHPEHU See([WR'HIV¶0RW>'NW@([%WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@([WR'HIV¶ 5HSO\ >'NW  @ WRJHWKHU ³0\ULFN 1RY  'HS´  7KH &RXUW¶V FLWDWLRQ WR 0\ULFN¶V WHVWLPRQ\HQFRPSDVVHVDOORIWKHSRUWLRQVRIWKHWUDQVFULSWFLWHGE\WKHSDUWLHV 



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 5 of 56

UHOHDVHE\SHUIRUPLQJWKHVHULHVRIDFWLRQVVSHFLILHGE\WKHV\VWHPSee 'HIV¶62)3O¶V

5HVS62)see also %URZQ'HF'HSDW±



8VXDOO\ WKH ILUVW VWHS LQYROYHG LQ SURFHVVLQJ WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU LV WR WLPH VWDPS LW  3O¶V

62)'HIV¶5HVS62)7KH/,(WKHQSXOOVWKHKDUGFRS\RIWKHLQPDWH¶VLQVWLWXWLRQDO

ILOH WR HQVXUH WKDW WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU PDWFKHV WKH FRPPLWPHQW RUGHU DQG WKDW WKH LQPDWH¶V

LGHQWLI\LQJLQIRUPDWLRQPDWFKHVWKDWRIRWKHUUHFRUGVLQWKHLQVWLWXWLRQDOILOHSee 'HIV¶62)

3O¶V5HVS62)see also %URZQ'HF'HSDW± ([WR'HIV¶0RW>'NW

@DW±,IDOORIWKHLQIRUPDWLRQPDWFKHVWKH/,(WKHQJRHVLQWRDQLQWHUQDOGDWDEDVHFDOOHG

-$&&6 DQG PDNHV VXUH WKDW DOO RI WKH GRFXPHQWV FRQWDLQHG LQ WKH LQPDWH¶V LQVWLWXWLRQDO ILOH DUH

DOVR LQ -$&&6 DQG DJDLQ WKDW DOO RI WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ LV FRQVLVWHQW DFURVV WKH FRPPLWPHQW DQG

UHOHDVHRUGHUVSee 'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62)([,WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW

@ DW ± GHVFULELQJ KRZ RQFH WKH /,( SXOOV WKH LQVWLWXWLRQDO ILOH WKH /,( HQWHUV WKH GDWD

IURPWKHRUGHULQWR-$&&6,IDOORIWKHLQIRUPDWLRQLVFRQVLVWHQWWKH/,(FORVHVRXWWKHFDVHLQ


 :KLOHQHLWKHUVLGHKDVGHVFULEHGWKLVSURFHVVLQPRUHGHWDLODOORIWKHUHFRUGVLQWKHFDVH WKDW WKH SDUWLHV DJUHH EHDU D ³WLPH VWDPS´ DSSHDU WR KDYH EHHQLQNHG ZLWK YDU\LQJ GHJUHHV RI VXFFHVVWKURXJKXVHRIDSK\VLFDOWLPHVWDPSPDFKLQHRUKDQGVWDPSQRWGDWHGGLJLWDOO\   7KHSDUWLHVFLWHWRYDULRXVSRUWLRQVRI-DFN-RQHV¶VGHSRVLWLRQSee([WR'HIV¶0RW >'NW@ ([ ' WR 3O¶V &URVV0RW >'NW  @ ([  WR 'HIV¶ 5HSO\ >'NW@ WRJHWKHU³-RQHV'HS´7KH&RXUW¶VFLWDWLRQWR-RQHV¶VWHVWLPRQ\HQFRPSDVVHVDOORIWKHSRUWLRQV RIWKHWUDQVFULSWFLWHGE\WKHSDUWLHV   7KHSDUWLHVFLWHWRYDULRXVSRUWLRQVRI5RELO\Q%URZQ¶VGHSRVLWLRQIURP0DUFKSee ([,WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@([WR'HIV¶0RW>'NW@WRJHWKHU³%URZQ 0DU'HS´7KH&RXUW¶VFLWDWLRQWR%URZQ¶VWHVWLPRQ\HQFRPSDVVHVDOORIWKHSRUWLRQVRI WKHWUDQVFULSWFLWHGE\WKHSDUWLHV 



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 6 of 56

-$&&6SULQWVWKHUHOHDVHRUGHUDQGVFDQVLWLQWRDQRWKHU'2&LQWHUQDOV\VWHPFDOOHG3DSHU&OLSV

See 'HIV¶62)±3O¶V5HVS62)±



,QRUGHUWRIXUWKHUYHULI\DQLQPDWH¶VSDSHUZRUNWKH/,(PXVWFKHFN0\-867,6DFRXUW

EDVHGV\VWHPWKDWUHIOHFWVLQIRUPDWLRQWKDWZDVHQWHUHGE\WKHFRXUWSee 'HIV¶62)±

3O¶V5HVS62)±7KH/,(FKHFNV0\-867,6WRFRQILUPWKDWDUHOHDVHRUGHUKDVEHHQ

LVVXHGLQWKHUHOHYDQWFDVHDQGWKDWWKHUHLVQRFRPPLWPHQWRUGHUIURPDQRWKHUFDVHIRUWKDWLQPDWH

See 'HIV¶62)±3O¶V5HVS62)±see also -RQHV'HSDW±7KH/,(

PXVW DOVR FKHFN WKH :DVKLQJWRQ $UHD /DZ (QIRUFHPHQW 6\VWHP ³:$/(6´ DOVR NQRZQ DV

H$JHQWDQG1DWLRQDO&ULPH,QIRUPDWLRQ&HQWHU³1&,&´WRPDNHVXUHWKHUHDUHQRRXWVWDQGLQJ

DFWLYHZDUUDQWVIRUWKHLQPDWH'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62)



2QFH WKLV SURFHVV LV FRPSOHWH D VXSHUYLVRU\ /,( LV UHTXLUHG WR GRXEOH FKHFN DOO RI WKH

/,(¶V ZRUN  'HIV¶ 62)   3O¶V 5HVS 62)    7KHQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU SUHSDUHV D UHOHDVH

DXWKRUL]DWLRQIRUP'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62):KLOHPXFKRIWKLVZRUNWDNHVSODFH

DWWKHMDLOPLVGHPHDQRULQPDWHVDUHVXSSRVHGWREHUHOHDVHGGLUHFWO\IURP'&6XSHULRU&RXUW

3O¶V62)'HIV¶5HVS62)

352&('85$/+,6725<



3ODLQWLII ILOHG WKLV ODZVXLW LQ '& 6XSHULRU &RXUW RQ 1RYHPEHU   see &RPSO

>'NW@DQGGHIHQGDQWVUHPRYHGLWWRWKLV&RXUWRQ)HEUXDU\See 1RWLFHRI5HPRYDO


 ,QKLVVWDWHPHQWRIIDFWVSODLQWLIIDVVHUWVWKDWWKLVSURFHVVLQFOXGHVSULQWLQJDKDUGFRS\RI WKHUHOHDVHRUGHUEHIRUHLWFDQEHVFDQQHGLQWR3DSHUFOLSVSee 3O¶V62):KLOHLWLVWUXHWKDW %URZQGLGQRWVSHFLILFDOO\WHVWLI\WKDWWKHGRFXPHQWJHWVSULQWHGDQGGHIHQGDQWVDUHTXLFNWRSRLQW WKDWRXWLQWKHLUUHVSRQVHWRSODLQWLII¶VVWDWHPHQWRIIDFWVsee 'HIV¶5HVS62)³7KHUHLVQR HYLGHQFHWKDWDKDUGFRS\RIWKHUHOHDVHRUGHUJHWVSULQWHGEHIRUHLWLVVFDQQHGLQWR>3@DSHUFOLSV´ LWLVXQOLNHO\WKDWVRPHWKLQJFDQEHUHFHLYHGRQWKHFRPSXWHUDQGWKHQODWHUscannedLQWRDQRWKHU GRFXPHQWV\VWHPZLWKRXWILUVWEHLQJSULQWHG 



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 7 of 56

>'NW@3ODLQWLIIDPHQGHGKLVFRPSODLQWRQ$SULODIWHUWKH&RXUWJUDQWHGGHIHQGDQW

:LOOLDP6PLWK¶VPRWLRQWRGLVPLVVXQGHU)HGHUDO5XOHRI&LYLO3URFHGXUHESee Smith v.

District of Columbia)6XSSG''&see also $P&RPSO>'NW@



2Q'HFHPEHUGHIHQGDQWVILOHGWKHLUILUVWPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQW'HIV¶

0RW IRU 6XPP->'NW@'HIV¶ 0HPRI3 $LQ 6XSSRI 'HIV¶0RW IRU 6XPP -

>'NW@,QVXSSRUWRIWKHLUPRWLRQGHIHQGDQWVDVVHUWHGWKDWWKH'HSDUWPHQWRI&RUUHFWLRQVGLG

QRWUHFHLYHDUHOHDVHRUGHULQFDVHQXPEHU&0'XQWLO$SULOId.DW±



+RZHYHURQ)HEUXDU\GHIHQGDQWVQRWLILHGWKH&RXUWWKDW'2&KDGGLVFRYHUHGWKDW

LWKDGLQGHHGUHFHLYHGDFRS\RIWKHUHOHDVHRUGHUIRUFDVHQXPEHU&0'RQ0DUFK

DQGWKDWLWZDVWLPHVWDPSHGRQ0DUFKDW301RWLFHRI)LOLQJ>'NW@,Q

OLJKWRIWKLVUHYHODWLRQWKH&RXUWDOORZHGWKHSDUWLHVWRXQGHUWDNHDGGLWLRQDOOLPLWHGGLVFRYHU\DQG

WKH&RXUWGHQLHGWKHSHQGLQJFURVVPRWLRQVIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWDVPRRWSee 0LQ2UGHU)HE





2Q0DUFKGHIHQGDQWVILOHGWKHSHQGLQJPRWLRQIRUSDUWLDOVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQ

&RXQWV,,,DQG,9See 'HIV¶0RW0HPRI3 $LQ6XSSRI'HIV¶0RW>'NW@³'HIV¶

0HP´3ODLQWLIIRSSRVHGWKHPRWLRQDQGILOHGDFURVVPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQDOOIRXU

FRXQWVSee 3O¶V&URVV0RW3O¶V0HPRI3 $LQ6XSSRI3O¶V0RW>'NW@³3O¶V

&URVV0HP´7KHPRWLRQVDUHIXOO\EULHIHG


 'HIV¶2SSWR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW±@³'HIV¶5HSO\´3O¶V%ULHILQ6XSSRI 3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@³3O¶V&URVV5HSO\´



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 8 of 56

)$&765(/$7('723/$,17,))¶629(5'(7(17,21



$OWKRXJK WKH SDUWLHV DJUHH RQ WKH JHQHUDO SURFHGXUH IRU SURFHVVLQJ D UHOHDVH RUGHU WKH

FLUFXPVWDQFHV VXUURXQGLQJ WKH SURFHVVLQJ RI WKH WZR UHOHDVH RUGHUV LQ WKLV FDVH KDYH QRW EHHQ

GHILQLWLYHO\HVWDEOLVKHG



3ODLQWLIIDSSHDUHGLQ6XSHULRU&RXUWRQWZRPLVGHPHDQRUFDVHVEHIRUHWKHVDPHMXGJHFDVH

QXPEHUV&0'DQG&0'RQ0DUFK7KH6XSHULRU&RXUW¶V

&RXUW 9LHZ GDWDEDVH UHYHDOV WKDW DQ RUGHU WR UHOHDVH SODLQWLII ZDV HQWHUHG LQWR WKH V\VWHP DQG

³VHQW´WRWKH'&MDLOLQFDVHQXPEHU&0'DW30DQGLQFDVHQXPEHU

&0'DW30See &RXUW9LHZ&DVH1R&0'&RXUW9LHZ&DVH1R

&0'3ODLQWLIIZDVRUGHUHGWRUHWXUQWRFRXUWRQ$SULOLQERWKFDVHVSee &RXUW

9LHZ&DVH1R&0'&RXUW9LHZ&DVH1R&0'



7KH UHFRUG WKDW KDV EHHQ SURYLGHG WR WKH &RXUW GRHV QRW LQFOXGH WHVWLPRQ\ IURP D 86

0DUVKDORURWKHUHYLGHQFHFRQFHUQLQJZKDWZDVGRQHZLWKWKHSDSHUFRSLHVRIWKHUHOHDVHRUGHUV

WKDWZHUHVXSSRVHGWRWUDYHOZLWKSODLQWLIIWRWKHFHOOEORFNDQGWKHQLQWRWKHKDQGVRIDQ/,(DWWKH

'2&¶VRIILFHLQWKHFRXUWKRXVH%XWWKHUHFRUGGRHVLQFOXGHRQHFRS\RIDUHOHDVHRUGHUVLJQHG

E\D'HSXW\860DUVKDORQ0DUFKLQFDVHQXPEHU&0'See ([WR

3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@³,QVWLWXWLRQDO)LOH´DW



,WLVXQGLVSXWHGWKDW'2&ERWKUHFHLYHGDQGSURFHVVHGWKHUHOHDVHRUGHUIRUFDVHQXPEHU

&0'RQ0DUFK'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62)7KHUHLVQRGLUHFW

HYLGHQFHLQGLFDWLQJZKDWVWHSVLIDQ\ZHUHWDNHQE\WKH/,(ORFDWHGDWWKHFRXUWKRXVH-DFN-RQHV

DQ/,(ZKRZRUNVLQWKH5HFRUGV2IILFHDWWKH'&MDLO'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62)

WHVWLILHGWKDWKHSURFHVVHGWKLVUHOHDVHRUGHU-RQHV'HSDW±+HNQHZWKDWKHGLGVR




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 9 of 56

EHFDXVH KLV KDQGZULWWHQ LQLWLDOV DSSHDU LQ WKH XSSHU OHIWKDQG FRUQHU RI WKH GRFXPHQW  Id. see

also ,QVWLWXWLRQDO)LOHDW



+RZ -RQHV ZHQW DERXW SURFHVVLQJ WKLV RUGHU LV VRPHZKDW XQFOHDU  +H WHVWLILHG WKDW KH

ZURWH³36´RQWKHGRFXPHQWZLWKKLVLQLWLDOVWRLQGLFDWHWKDWKHKDGERWKSULQWHGDQGVFDQQHGWKH

RUGHU-RQHV'HSDW±see also ,QVWLWXWLRQDO)LOHDWBut see -RQHV'HSDW±

H[SODLQLQJ WKDW WKH ³3´ VWDQGV IRU ³SRVWHG´ DQG ³6´ IRU ³VFDQQHG´  %XW KH GLG QRW VSHFLI\ DW

ZKDW SRLQW LQ WKH SURFHVV KH SULQWHG LW RXW RU ZKDW V\VWHP KH WKHQ VFDQQHG LW LQWR  )XUWKHU KH

DGPLWWHG WKDW KH IDLOHG WR WLPH VWDPS WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU QRWZLWKVWDQGLQJ WKH '2& SROLF\ WKDW

UHTXLUHGKLPWRWLPHVWDPSHYHU\GRFXPHQWKHSURFHVVHGId. DW±$QGWKHGRFXPHQW

KHZRUNHGZLWKWKDWEHDUVKLVLQLWLDOVGRHVQRWLQFOXGHWKHVLJQDWXUHRID860DUVKDOId.DW±

see also ,QVWLWXWLRQDO)LOHDW7KHUHLVQRHYLGHQFHLQWKHUHFRUGUHJDUGLQJZKHWKHU-RQHV

FKHFNHGWKHYDULRXVH[WHUQDOV\VWHPVVXFKDV0\-867,6DVKHZDVUHTXLUHGWRGR



7XUQLQJ WR WKH RUGHU LQ FDVH QXPEHU  &0'  WKH SDUWLHV DJUHH WKDW '2&

UHFHLYHG WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU RQ 0DUFK   EHFDXVH LW EHDUV D WLPH VWDPS IRU 0DUFK  DW

30'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62)5HOHDVH2UGHU&DVH1R&0'

see also %URZQ0DU'HSDW±id. DW±WHVWLI\LQJWKDWVKHNQRZV'2&UHFHLYHG

WKHRUGHUEHFDXVHRIWKHWLPHVWDPS%XWRQHFDQQRWGLVFHUQIURPWKHGRFXPHQWZKHWKHULWZDV

WLPHVWDPSHGE\D'HSDUWPHQWRI&RUUHFWLRQV/,(DW6XSHULRU&RXUWRUE\DQ/,(DWWKH5HFRUGV

2IILFHORFDWHGDWWKHMDLOCompare %URZQ0DU'HSDW±id. DW±WHVWLI\LQJ

WKDWWKHILUVWVWHSWRSURFHVVLQJDUHOHDVHRUGHULVWRWLPHVWDPSLWDQGWKHQWRLQSXWWKHGDWDLQWR

706ZKLFKRFFXUVDWWKHFRXUWKRXVHwith -RQHV'HSDW ±WHVWLI\LQJWKDW/,(¶VZHUH

UHTXLUHGWRWLPHVWDPSUHOHDVHRUGHUVZKHQWKH\ZHUHUHFHLYHGDWWKHMDLO




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 10 of 56



,W LV DOVR XQFOHDU ZKHWKHU WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU LQ WKH  FDVH ZDV HYHU XSORDGHG WR 706

5RELO\Q%URZQDVXSHUYLVRU\/,(WHVWLILHGWKDWVKHGLGQRWEHOLHYHLWZDVVLQFHWKHLQIRUPDWLRQ

FRQWDLQHGLQWKHUHOHDVHRUGHUQHYHUPDGHLWVZD\LQWR-$&&6%URZQ0DU'HSDW±

WHVWLI\LQJWKDWXSORDGLQJWKHGRFXPHQWLQWR706ZDVQRW³GRQHZLWKUHVSHFWWRWKLVGRFXPHQW´

EHFDXVH VKH ³GLG D -$&&6 DXGLW DQG LW ZDVQ¶W LQ WKHUH WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ ZDVQ¶W XSORDGHG LQWR

-$&&6´id.DW±see also ([&WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@³0\ULFN0DU

'HS´DW±WHVWLI\LQJWKDW'2&KDVQR³WUDQVDFWLRQ´GDWHGIRU0DUFKDQGWKDWDOO

GRFXPHQWV ³UHFHLYHG IURP '& 6XSHULRU &RXUW    ZRXOG EH XSORDGHG ZLWKLQ 706 VR WKDW WKH

VWDIIFRXOGPDLQWDLQSURFHVVLQJRIWKDWGRFXPHQW´



%XW LW LV XQGLVSXWHG WKDW WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU IURP FDVH QXPEHU  &0'  GLG

XOWLPDWHO\PDNHLWVZD\LQWRSODLQWLII¶VLQVWLWXWLRQDOSDSHUILOHSee 3O¶V62)'HIV¶5HVS

62)see also %URZQ'HF'HSDW±DFNQRZOHGJLQJWKDWWKHUHOHDVHRUGHU

ZDVFRQWDLQHGLQSODLQWLII¶VLQVWLWXWLRQDOILOH0\ULFN0DU'HS±WHVWLI\LQJWKDW

WKH UHOHDVH IRU FDVH QXPEHU  &0'  ZDV IRXQG ZLWKLQ SODLQWLII¶V LQVWLWXWLRQDO ILOH

+RZHYHUWKHUHFRUGGRHVQRWHVWDEOLVKKRZORQJLWKDVEHHQWKHUHSee %URZQ0DU'HSDW

± WHVWLI\LQJ WKDW VKH FRXOG QRW FRQILUP LI WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU KDG EHHQ LQ SODLQWLII¶V

LQVWLWXWLRQDOILOHVLQFH0DUFK([WR'HIV¶5HSO\>'NW@³0\ULFN'HFO

³5HOHDVHRUGHUVDUHSODFHGLQDQLQPDWH¶VLQVWLWXWLRQDOILOHZKHQWKH\DUHUHFHLYHGZKLFKPD\EH

DWWKHWLPHRILVVXDQFHRUVRPHWLPHWKHUHDIWHU´0\ULFN0DU'HSDW±DJUHHLQJWKDW

³DOO GRFXPHQWV UHFHLYHG IURP WKH '& 6XSHULRU &RXUW DUH DOVR LQFOXGHG LQ WKH LQPDWH¶V

LQVWLWXWLRQDOILOH´



$OWKRXJKSODLQWLIIZDVVFKHGXOHGWRUHWXUQWR6XSHULRU&RXUWRQ$SULOKHIDLOHGWR

DSSHDUEHFDXVH'2&GLGQRWWUDQVSRUWKLPWKHUH([$WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@³6PLWK




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 11 of 56

'HS´DW±$VDUHVXOWWKH6XSHULRU&RXUWMXGJHLVVXHGDEHQFKZDUUDQWSee &RXUW

9LHZ&DVH1R&0'&RXUW9LHZ&DVH1R&0'3ODLQWLIIZDVEURXJKW

WRWKHFRXUWKRXVHWKHQH[WGD\IRUDVWDWXVKHDULQJDQGWZRPRUHUHOHDVHRUGHUVZHUHLVVXHGSee

([  WR 3O¶V &URVV0RW >'NW  @ ([  WR 3O¶V &URVV0RW >'NW  @ see also

,QVWLWXWLRQDO)LOHDW±UHOHDVHRUGHUVIURPERWKFDVHVWKDWZHUHVLJQHGE\WKHMXGJHDQG

860DUVKDODQGGDWHGRQ$SULOsee id. DWUHOHDVHRUGHUIURPFDVHQXPEHU&0'

WKDWLQFOXGHVWKH860DUVKDOVLJQDWXUHIURP0DUFKEXWLVWLPHVWDPSHGRQ$SULO



3ODLQWLII ZDV UHOHDVHG IURP FXVWRG\ RQ $SULO    'HIV¶ 62)   3O¶V 5HVS

62)  $IWHU KH ZDV UHOHDVHG QR LQYHVWLJDWLRQ WRRN SODFH QR UHSRUW FRQFHUQLQJ KLV

RYHUGHWHQWLRQ ZDV FUHDWHG 3O¶V 62)± 'HIV¶ 5HVS 62)± see 0\ULFN 1RY

'HSDW±DQGQRHPSOR\HHZDVGLVFLSOLQHGSee 0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±

3ODLQWLIILVQRWFRXQWHGLQWKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQVWDWLVWLFVFRQWDLQHGLQWKHUHSRUWVVXEPLWWHG

DVHYLGHQFHLQWKLVFDVHSee ([WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@³6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ

5HSRUW´([WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@³7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUW´7KHVH

FLUFXPVWDQFHVGRQRWFRPSRUWZLWKWKHVWDQGDUGVDQQRXQFHGE\WKH'2&¶V&RUUHFWLRQDO3URJUDP

$GPLQLVWUDWRU-HDQHWWH0\ULFN'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62)see also 0\ULFN1RY

'HSDW±id. DW±



0\ULFN LV UHVSRQVLEOH IRU RYHUVHHLQJ WKH GDLO\ RSHUDWLRQV RI WKH 5HFRUGV 2IILFH DQG IRU

HQVXULQJ WKDW LQPDWHV DUH UHOHDVHG DQG GRFXPHQWV DUH UHFHLYHG DQG SURFHVVHG  3O¶V 62)  

'HIV¶5HVS62)6KHVXSHUYLVHVWKUHHFRUUHFWLRQDOSURJUDPRIILFHUVVL[VXSHUYLVRUVHLJKW

OHDG OHJDO LQVWUXPHQWV H[DPLQHUV DQG DSSUR[LPDWHO\ HLJKWHHQ OHJDO LQVWUXPHQWV

H[DPLQHUV±LQFOXGLQJ-DFN-RQHVSee 0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±0\ULFNWHVWLILHGWKDW

DV SDUW RI KHU UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV LW LV KHU SUDFWLFH WR SUHSDUH DQ RYHUGHWHQWLRQ UHSRUW DIWHU HDFK




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 12 of 56

LQVWDQFH RI RYHUGHWHQWLRQ 3O¶V 62)   'HIV¶ 5HVS 62)   0\ULFN 1RY  'HS DW

± DQG WR WUDQVPLW WKRVH UHSRUWV WR WKH GHSXW\ GLUHFWRU  0\ULFN 1RY  'HS DW

±  6KH DOVR WHVWLILHG WKDW DIWHU VKH OHDUQV RI DQ RYHUGHWHQWLRQ HPSOR\HHV DUH RIWHQ

GLVFLSOLQHGId.DW±



'XULQJ GLVFRYHU\ 0\ULFN SURGXFHG DQ RYHUGHWHQWLRQ UHSRUW GHWDLOLQJ WKH RYHUGHWHQWLRQV

WKDWKDYHRFFXUUHGDWWKH'2&EHWZHHQ2FWREHUDQG2FWREHUSee 7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ

5HSRUW3ODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQZDVQRWLQFOXGHGLQWKHWRWDOEXWWKHUHSRUWUHYHDOHGWKDWWKHUH

ZHUHVHYHQW\WZRRWKHUVLQWKDWWLPHSHULRGWKLUW\WZRRIZKLFKZHUHDWWULEXWHGWR³VWDIIHUURU´

ZKLFKLVJHQHUDOO\QRWVSHFLILHGId.6RPHRIWKHVWDIIHUURUVLGHQWLILHGLQWKH7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ

5HSRUWDUHGHVFULEHGLQPRUHGHWDLOLQWKH6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWZKLFKZDVUHSRUWHGWR

WKH'&&RXQFLOSee 6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUW



)RUH[DPSOHERWKUHSRUWVLQFOXGHLQPDWHVZKRZHUHUHOHDVHGDIHZGD\VODWHEHFDXVHWKHLU

³VHQWHQFH>V@>ZHUH@FRPSXWHGLQHUURU´Compare 6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWwith7KLUG

2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWcompare 6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWwith 7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ

5HSRUWDWcompare 6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWwith 7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDW

%RWKDOVRLGHQWLI\LQPDWHVZKRZHUHUHOHDVHGODWHEHFDXVH³JRRGWLPHFUHGLW>ZDV@QRWDSSOLHGWR

>WKHLU@VHQWHQFH>V@´Compare 6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWwith 7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUW

DWcompare 6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWwith7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWcompare

6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWwith 7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDW


 3ODLQWLII VXJJHVWV WKDW WKH RYHUGHWHQWLRQ UHSRUWV PD\ QRW EH UHOLDEOH VLQFH GHIHQGDQW SURGXFHG³WKUHHGLIIHUHQWLWHUDWLRQVWKDWFRQWDLQYDVWO\GLIIHUHQWGDWDRQ'2&RYHUGHWHQWLRQV´ 3O¶V&URVV0HPDW :KLOHWKHUHSRUWVDUHVRPHZKDWGLIIHUHQWWKHUHTXHVWVWKDWOHGWRWKHLU SURGXFWLRQDVNHGIRUGDWDIURPGLIIHUHQWWLPHSHULRGVDQGVRPHUHTXHVWVDVNHGIRUGHIHQGDQWWR H[FOXGHFHUWDLQVRUWVRIRYHUGHWHQWLRQVRUFHUWDLQWLPHIUDPHVVRWKHYDULDWLRQVGRQRWQHFHVVDULO\ LQGLFDWHWKDWWKH\DUHXQUHOLDEOH



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 13 of 56



)XUWKHUWKHUHSRUWVUHYHDODQXPEHURIUHDVRQVRWKHUWKDQ'2&VWDIIHUURUIRUWKHGHWHQWLRQ

RILQPDWHVSDVWWKHLUUHOHDVHGDWHV)RUH[DPSOHERWKUHSRUWVLGHQWLI\LQPDWHVZKRZHUHGHWDLQHG

D IHZ GD\V SDVW WKHLU UHOHDVH GDWHV EHFDXVH WKH:$/(6 SURJUDP LQGLFDWHG WKH H[LVWHQFH RI DQ

RXWVWDQGLQJ ZDUUDQW  Compare 6HFRQG 2YHUGHWHQWLRQ 5HSRUW DW  with 7KLUG 2YHUGHWHQWLRQ

5HSRUWDWcompare 6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWwith 7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDW

2QFH'2&SHUVRQQHOGHWHUPLQHGWKDWWKHGHWDLQHHZDVQRWWKHFRUUHFWZDQWHGSHUVRQWKHLQPDWH

ZDVSURFHVVHGDQGUHOHDVHGSee, e.g.7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDW2WKHURYHUGHWHQWLRQV

ZHUH DWWULEXWHG WR HUURUV PDGH E\ FRXUW VWDII DQG QRW '2& SHUVRQQHO  Compare 6HFRQG

2YHUGHWHQWLRQ 5HSRUW DW ± with 7KLUG 2YHUGHWHQWLRQ 5HSRUW DW ± compare 6HFRQG

2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDWwith 7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUWDW±

35(9,28629(5'(7(17,21&$6(6$*$,1677+(',675,&72)&2/80%,$



7KLVFDVHDULVHVDJDLQVWDEDFNGURSRISUHYLRXVOLWLJDWLRQDJDLQVWWKH'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELD

LQYROYLQJDOOHJHGRYHUGHWHQWLRQDWWKH'&MDLO



,Q  D FODVV RI LQPDWH SODLQWLIIV VXHG WKH 'LVWULFW RI &ROXPELD  7KH\ DOOHJHG WKDW

RIILFLDOVDWWKH'&MDLOXQODZIXOO\VWULSVHDUFKHGDQGRYHUGHWDLQHGLQPDWHVZKRUHWXUQHGWRWKH

MDLODIWHUUHFHLYLQJUHOHDVHRUGHUVIURPWKHFRXUWSee Bynum v. District of Columbia)6XSS

G''&GHQ\LQJGHIHQGDQWV¶PRWLRQWRGLVPLVVWKHFDVH,QWKHFRXUWDSSURYHG

DVHWWOHPHQWEHWZHHQWKHSDUWLHVBynum v. District of Columbia)6XSSG''&

$VSDUWRIWKHVHWWOHPHQW'2&DJUHHGWRLPSOHPHQWPDMRUFKDQJHVVXFKDVWKHFRPSOHWLRQ

RIDQ,QPDWH3URFHVVLQJ&HQWHUZKLFKZRXOGSURYLGHDGHTXDWHSURFHVVLQJIDFLOLWLHVIRULQWDNHDQG

UHOHDVHId.)XQGVDOORFDWHGWRWKHFHQWHUZRXOGEHXVHG³WRLPSURYHRUDVVLVWLQSURFHVVLQJLQPDWHV

IRUUHOHDVHDQGWRUHGXFHLQFLGHQWVRIRYHUGHWHQWLRQ´Id.




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 14 of 56



$V WKH Bynum FDVH QHDUHG VHWWOHPHQW '2& DGRSWHG D SROLF\ RI GLYHUWLQJ LQFXVWRG\

GHIHQGDQWVZKRKDGEHHQRUGHUHGUHOHDVHGRUZKRZHUHRWKHUZLVHHQWLWOHGWRUHOHDVHWRDKROGLQJ

IDFLOLW\RQWKHJURXQGVRI'&*HQHUDO+RVSLWDOZKHUHWKH\ZRXOGEHSURFHVVHGZKLFKPHDQWWKDW

LQPDWHVZHUHQRWUHWXUQHGWRWKHMDLOSRSXODWLRQDQGZRXOGQRWEHVXEMHFWHGWRVWULSVHDUFKHVSee

Barnes v. District of Columbia  )5'   ''&  GHVFULELQJ WKH Bynum

OLWLJDWLRQ  %XW LQPDWHV ZKR ZHUH HQWLWOHG WR UHOHDVH VWLOO VOLSSHG WKURXJK WKH FUDFNV DQG VRPH

ZHUHUHWXUQHGWRWKH'&MDLODQGVXEMHFWHGWRWKHVDPHVHDUFKDQGGHWHQWLRQSURFHGXUHVWKDWZHUH

DWLVVXHLQ WKHBynum FDVHSee id.



7KHUHIRUHLQDQHZJURXSRISODLQWLIIVILOHGVXLWFKDOOHQJLQJWKH'2&¶VV\VWHPId.

DW 7KHBarnes FDVHZDVEDVHGRQWKHVDPHOHJDOWKHRULHVDVWKHBynum FDVHDQGWKHSDUWLHV

UHDFKHGDVHWWOHPHQWLQSee Barnes v. District of Columbia)6XSSG''&

PRGLI\LQJFRXUW¶VILQDORUGHUDSSURYLQJVHWWOHPHQW



7KH MXGJH LQ WKH Barnes OLWLJDWLRQ REVHUYHG WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW KDG PDGH OLWWOH RU QR

LPSURYHPHQWVWRLWV³SDSHUERXQGDQG%\]DQWLQHUHOHDVHSURFHVV´DVLWZDVVXSSRVHGWRGRDIWHU

WKHBynum FDVHVHWWOHGBarnes v. District of Columbia)6XSSG±''&

REVHUYLQJWKDW³DPRYHWRDSDSHUOHVVV\VWHPWRSURFHVVUHOHDVHV´ZDV³HLWKHUUHMHFWHGE\

WKH '2& RU UHPDLQ>HG@ WR WKLV GD\ FDXJKW LQ D ZKLUOSRRO RI GHOD\V´  +RZHYHU WKH FRXUW

UHFRJQL]HG WKDW WKH '2& WRRN D ³VLJQLILFDQW VWHS WRZDUG UHGXFLQJ WKH QXPEHU DQG GXUDWLRQ RI

RYHUGHWHQWLRQV´ E\ LPSOHPHQWLQJ WKH ³FRXUWKRXVH UHOHDVH´ SURJUDP LQ  ZKLFK UHOHDVHG

LQPDWHVFKDUJHGZLWKPLVGHPHDQRUVGLUHFWO\IURP6XSHULRU&RXUWId.DW 

67$1'$5'2)5(9,(:

6XPPDU\MXGJPHQWLVDSSURSULDWH³LIWKHPRYDQWVKRZVWKDWWKHUHLVQRJHQXLQHGLVSXWHDV

WRDQ\PDWHULDOIDFWDQGWKHPRYDQWLVHQWLWOHGWRMXGJPHQWDVDPDWWHURIODZ´)HG5&LY3




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 15 of 56
D  7KH SDUW\ VHHNLQJ VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW ³EHDUV WKH LQLWLDO UHVSRQVLELOLW\ RI LQIRUPLQJ WKH GLVWULFW FRXUW RI WKH EDVLV IRU LWV PRWLRQ DQG LGHQWLI\LQJ WKRVH SRUWLRQV RI WKH SOHDGLQJV GHSRVLWLRQVDQVZHUVWRLQWHUURJDWRULHVDQGDGPLVVLRQVRQILOHWRJHWKHUZLWKWKHDIILGDYLWVLIDQ\ ZKLFKLWEHOLHYHVGHPRQVWUDWHWKHDEVHQFHRIDJHQXLQHLVVXHRIPDWHULDOIDFW´Celotex Corp. v. Catrett  86     7R GHIHDW VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW WKH QRQPRYLQJ SDUW\ PXVW ³GHVLJQDWHVSHFLILFIDFWVVKRZLQJWKDWWKHUHLVDJHQXLQHLVVXHIRUWULDO´Id.DW
7KH PHUH H[LVWHQFH RI D IDFWXDO GLVSXWH LV LQVXIILFLHQW WR SUHFOXGH VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.86±$GLVSXWHLV³JHQXLQH´RQO\LID UHDVRQDEOHIDFWILQGHUFRXOGILQGIRUWKHQRQPRYLQJSDUW\DIDFWLV³PDWHULDO´RQO\LILWLVFDSDEOH RIDIIHFWLQJWKHRXWFRPHRIWKHOLWLJDWLRQId.DW Laningham v. U.S. Navy)G  '& &LU   ,Q DVVHVVLQJ D SDUW\¶V PRWLRQ WKH FRXUW PXVW ³YLHZ WKH IDFWV DQG GUDZ UHDVRQDEOH LQIHUHQFHV µLQ WKH OLJKW PRVW IDYRUDEOH WR WKH SDUW\ RSSRVLQJ WKH VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW PRWLRQ¶´Scott v. Harris86DOWHUDWLRQVRPLWWHGTXRWLQJUnited States v. Diebold, Inc.86SHUFXULDP
³7KHUXOHJRYHUQLQJFURVVPRWLRQVIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWLVWKDWQHLWKHUSDUW\ZDLYHV WKHULJKWWRDIXOOWULDORQWKHPHULWVE\ILOLQJLWVRZQPRWLRQHDFKVLGHFRQFHGHVWKDWQRPDWHULDO IDFWVDUHDWLVVXHRQO\IRUWKHSXUSRVHVRILWVRZQPRWLRQ´Sherwood v. Wash. Post)G Q'&&LUDOWHUDWLRQLQRULJLQDOTXRWLQJMcKenzie v. Sawyer)G Q'&&LU,QDVVHVVLQJHDFKSDUW\¶VPRWLRQ³>D@OOXQGHUO\LQJIDFWVDQGLQIHUHQFHV DUHDQDO\]HGLQWKHOLJKWPRVWIDYRUDEOHWRWKHQRQPRYLQJSDUW\´N.S. ex rel. Stein v. District of Columbia)6XSSG''&FLWLQJAnderson86DW



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 16 of 56

$1$/<6,6

, 7KH&RXUWZLOOGHQ\LQSDUWDQGJUDQWLQSDUWWKHPRWLRQVIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQ &RXQW,IRU6HFWLRQOLDELOLW\



,Q&RXQW,SODLQWLIIFODLPVWKDWWKH'LVWULFWDQGWZR'2&HPSOR\HHVDUHOLDEOHXQGHU

86&   IRU WKH XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO GHSULYDWLRQ RI KLV OLEHUW\  See $P &RPSO  ±

'HIHQGDQWVPDLQWDLQWKDWSODLQWLIIKDVQRWVXIIHUHGDFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQ'HIV¶0HPDW±

  7KH 'LVWULFW DOVR DUJXHV WKDW LW LV HQWLWOHG WR VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW EHFDXVH SODLQWLII KDV QRW

SURGXFHGVXIILFLHQWHYLGHQFHWRVXSSRUWPXQLFLSDOOLDELOLW\XQGHUVHFWLRQDQGWKHLQGLYLGXDO

GHIHQGDQWV FRQWHQG WKDW WKH\ DUH HQWLWOHG WR TXDOLILHG LPPXQLW\  Id. DW ±  3ODLQWLII KDV DOVR

PRYHGIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQWKLVFRXQW3O¶V&URVV0HPDW±

$ 0XQLFLSDO/LDELOLW\8QGHU6HFWLRQ



6HFWLRQRIWKH&LYLO5LJKWV$FWSURYLGHV

(YHU\ SHUVRQ ZKR XQGHU FRORU RI DQ\ VWDWXWH RUGLQDQFH UHJXODWLRQ FXVWRP RU XVDJH RI DQ\ 6WDWH RU 7HUULWRU\ RU WKH 'LVWULFW RI &ROXPELD VXEMHFWVRUFDXVHVWREHVXEMHFWHGDQ\FLWL]HQRIWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVRURWKHU SHUVRQ ZLWKLQ WKH MXULVGLFWLRQ WKHUHRI WR WKH GHSULYDWLRQ RI DQ\ ULJKWV SULYLOHJHV RU LPPXQLWLHV VHFXUHG E\ WKH &RQVWLWXWLRQ DQG ODZV VKDOO EH OLDEOHWRWKHSDUW\LQMXUHGLQDQDFWLRQDWODZVXLWLQHTXLW\RURWKHUSURSHU SURFHHGLQJIRUUHGUHVV

86&



7RHVWDEOLVKWKDWDPXQLFLSDOLW\LVOLDEOHXQGHUVHFWLRQDSODLQWLIIPXVWSURYHERWK

³DSUHGLFDWHFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQ´DQG³WKDWDFXVWRPRUSROLF\RIWKHPXQLFLSDOLW\FDXVHG

WKHYLRODWLRQ´Baker v. District of Columbia)G'&&LUFLWLQJCollins

v. City of Harker Heights86



$ PXQLFLSDOLW\ FDQQRW EH KHOG OLDEOH IRU WKH XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO FRQGXFW RI LWV HPSOR\HHV

EDVHGRQDWKHRU\RIrespondeat superiorMonell v. Dep’t of Social Servs.86

 see also Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati  86    QRWLQJ WKDW ³ZKLOH




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 17 of 56

&RQJUHVVQHYHUTXHVWLRQHGLWVSRZHUWRLPSRVHFLYLOOLDELOLW\RQPXQLFLSDOLWLHVIRUWKHLUown LOOHJDO

DFWV &RQJUHVV GLG GRXEW LWV FRQVWLWXWLRQDO SRZHU WR LPSRVH VXFK OLDELOLW\ LQ RUGHU WR REOLJH

PXQLFLSDOLWLHV WR FRQWURO WKH FRQGXFW RI others´ HPSKDVLV LQ RULJLQDO FLWDWLRQ RPLWWHG

³,QVWHDGLWLVZKHQH[HFXWLRQRIDJRYHUQPHQW¶VSROLF\RUFXVWRPZKHWKHUPDGHE\LWVODZPDNHUV

RUE\WKRVHZKRVHHGLWVRUDFWVPD\IDLUO\EHVDLGWRUHSUHVHQWRIILFLDOSROLF\LQIOLFWVWKHLQMXU\

WKDWWKHJRYHUQPHQWDVDQHQWLW\LVUHVSRQVLEOHXQGHU´Monell86DW



$VDUHVXOW³>S@ODLQWLIIVZKRVHHNWRLPSRVHOLDELOLW\RQORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVXQGHU

PXVW SURYHWKDWµDFWLRQSXUVXDQWWRRIILFLDOPXQLFLSDOSROLF\¶FDXVHGWKHLULQMXU\´ Connick v.

Thompson86TXRWLQJMonell86DWsee alsoMonell86DW

QRWLQJWKDWWKHSROLF\PXVWEH³WKHPRYLQJIRUFHRIWKHFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQ´7KH'&

&LUFXLWKDVH[SODLQHG

>7@KHUH DUH D QXPEHU RI ZD\V LQ ZKLFK D ³SROLF\´ FDQ EH VHW E\ D PXQLFLSDOLW\WRFDXVHLWWREHOLDEOHXQGHUWKHH[SOLFLWVHWWLQJRID SROLF\E\WKHJRYHUQPHQWWKDWYLRODWHVWKH&RQVWLWXWLRQWKHDFWLRQRID SROLF\PDNHUZLWKLQWKHJRYHUQPHQWWKHDGRSWLRQWKURXJKDNQRZLQJ IDLOXUH WR DFW E\ D SROLF\ PDNHU RI DFWLRQV E\ KLV VXERUGLQDWHV WKDW DUH VR FRQVLVWHQW WKDW WKH\ KDYH EHFRPH ³FXVWRP´    RU WKH IDLOXUH RI WKH JRYHUQPHQW WR UHVSRQG WR D QHHG IRU H[DPSOH WUDLQLQJ RI HPSOR\HHV LQ VXFK D PDQQHU DV WR VKRZ ³GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH´ WR WKH ULVN WKDW QRW DGGUHVVLQJWKHQHHGZLOOUHVXOWLQFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQV

Baker)GDWLQWHUQDOFLWDWLRQVRPLWWHG(DFKSURQJRIWKHWHVW³LVVHSDUDWHDQGVHUYHV

GLIIHUHQWSXUSRVHV´Id.

 7KHUH LV D JHQXLQH GLVSXWH RI PDWHULDO IDFW DV WR ZKHWKHU SODLQWLII KDV HVWDEOLVKHGDSUHGLFDWHFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQ



,QWKHLUPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWGHIHQGDQWVDUJXHWKDWSODLQWLIIKDVQRWHVWDEOLVKHG

WKHSUHGLFDWHIRUDVHFWLRQDFWLRQDFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQSee 'HIV¶0HPDW±7KH

DPHQGHG FRPSODLQW DOOHJHV WKDW SODLQWLII ZDV GHSULYHG RI ³KLV FRQVWLWXWLRQDO ULJKW WR OLEHUW\ DQG

GHSULYHGRIWKLVOLEHUW\ZLWKRXWGXHSURFHVVRIODZDVUHTXLUHGE\WKH)LIWK$PHQGPHQW´ZKHQ




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 18 of 56

KHZDVGHWDLQHGIRUWZHQW\WKUHHGD\VDIWHUKHZDVRUGHUHGWREHUHOHDVHG$P&RPSOsee

also 3O¶V &URVV0HP DW ± DUJXLQJ WKDW KLV RYHUGHWHQWLRQ ³HVWDEOLVKHV WKH SUHGLFDWH

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQ´*LYHQWKHHYLGHQFHWKDWKDVEHHQDGGXFHGLQWKLVFDVHWKH&RXUWILQGV

WKDWSODLQWLIIKDVFRPHIRUZDUGZLWKVXIILFLHQWHYLGHQFHWRFUHDWHDJHQXLQHLVVXHRIPDWHULDOIDFW

RQZKHWKHUWKHFRQGXFWLQWKLVFDVHZDVVRHJUHJLRXVWKDWLWYLRODWHGKLVGXHSURFHVVULJKWVXQGHU

WKH)LIWK$PHQGPHQW



7KH)LIWK$PHQGPHQWVWDWHVWKDW³>Q@RSHUVRQVKDOOEHGHSULYHGRIOLIHOLEHUW\RU

SURSHUW\ZLWKRXWGXHSURFHVVRIODZ´86&RQVWDPHQG9³,QRUGHUWRHVWDEOLVK>WKH@

SUHGLFDWHFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQQHLWKHU'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELDSROLF\PDNHUVQRUHPSOR\HHVQHHG

EHLPSOLFDWHG$OOWKDWLVEHLQJHVWDEOLVKHGLVWKDWWKHUHLVVRPHFRQVWLWXWLRQDOKDUPVXIIHUHG

E\WKHSODLQWLIIQRWZKHWKHUWKHPXQLFLSDOLW\LVOLDEOHIRUWKDWKDUP´Baker)GDW



³)UHHGRPIURPERGLO\UHVWUDLQWKDVDOZD\VEHHQDWWKHFRUHRIWKHOLEHUW\SURWHFWHGE\WKH

'XH3URFHVV&ODXVH´Foucha v. Louisiana86%XWWKHUHLVQREULJKWOLQH

UXOHWKDWGHWDLQLQJDQLQPDWHZKRLVHQWLWOHGWRUHOHDVHIRUDSDUWLFXODUOHQJWKRIWLPHLVper se

XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDOSee Barnes v. District of Columbia)6XSSG±''&

³7HPSRUDULO\ UHWDLQLQJ FXVWRG\ RYHU DQ LQPDWH ZKR LV HQWLWOHG WR UHOHDVH    LV QRW SHU VH

XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO    >EXW@ LQPDWHV¶ GXH SURFHVV ULJKWV PD\ EH YLRODWHG LI WKH\ DUH QRW UHOHDVHG

ZLWKLQDUHDVRQDEOHWLPHDIWHUWKHUHDVRQVIRUWKHLUGHWHQWLRQVKDYHHQGHG´FLWDWLRQVRPLWWHG

Berry v. Baca)GWK&LU³&RXUWVKDYHQRWVHWWOHGRQDQ\FRQFUHWHQXPEHU

RISHUPLVVLEOHKRXUVRIGHOD\LQWKHFRQWH[WRISRVWUHOHDVHGHWHQWLRQV´Lewis v. O’Grady


 8VXDOO\GXHSURFHVVFODLPVE\JRYHUQPHQWRIILFLDOVDUHDQDO\]HGXQGHUWKH'XH3URFHVV &ODXVHRIWKH)RXUWHHQWK$PHQGPHQWZKLFKDSSOLHVWRVWDWHVSee Butera v. District of Columbia )GQ'&&LU³:KLOHWKH'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELDLVQRWDVWDWHLWLVVXEMHFW WRWKH'XH3URFHVV&ODXVHRIWKH)LIWK$PHQGPHQW´Id. 



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 19 of 56

)GWK&LUREVHUYLQJWKDWDGPLQLVWUDWLYHWDVNVLQFLGHQWWRDSULVRQHU¶VUHOHDVH

PD\ UHTXLUH WKH SULVRQHU WR UHPDLQ GHWDLQHG IRU D SHULRG RI WLPH EXW FRQFOXGLQJ WKDW WKH

UHDVRQDEOHQHVVRIWKHHOHYHQKRXURYHUGHWHQWLRQZDVDMXU\TXHVWLRQDavis v. Hall)G

±WK&LUFRQFOXGLQJWKDWWKHMXU\PXVWGHWHUPLQHLIWKHSODLQWLII¶VILIW\VHYHQGD\

RYHUGHWHQWLRQURVHWRWKHOHYHORIDFRQVWLWXWLRQDOGXHSURFHVVYLRODWLRQBut see Douthit v. Jones

)GWK&LUKROGLQJWKDWWKHSODLQWLIIHVWDEOLVKHGDSULPDIDFLHFDVHDWWULDO

WKDW GHIHQGDQW YLRODWHG KLV FRQVWLWXWLRQDO ULJKWV EHFDXVH ³>G@HWHQWLRQ RI D SULVRQHU WKLUW\ GD\V

EH\RQG WKH H[SLUDWLRQ RI KLV VHQWHQFH LQ WKH DEVHQFH RI D IDFLDOO\ YDOLG FRXUW RUGHU RU ZDUUDQW

FRQVWLWXWHVDGHSULYDWLRQRIGXHSURFHVV´



,Q WKH FRQWH[W RI GHWHQWLRQ DIWHU DUUHVW SHQGLQJ D SUREDEOH FDXVH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ WKH

6XSUHPH&RXUWKDVKHOGWKDWDGHWHQWLRQJUHDWHUWKDQIRUW\HLJKWKRXUVPD\ULVHWRWKHOHYHORID

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQSee County of Riverside v. McLaughlin86:KHQ

FRQVLGHULQJZKHWKHUWRDGRSWWKLVVWDQGDUGLQWKHFRQWH[WRIGHWDLQLQJLQPDWHVRQFHWKHEDVLVIRU

FRQILQHPHQWKDVHQGHGVRPHFRXUWVKDYHREVHUYHGWKDWIRUW\HLJKWKRXUVRUHYHQOHVVPD\EHWKH

DSSURSULDWHEHQFKPDUNIRUILQGLQJDFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQSee, e.g.Barnes)6XSSGDW

 ³>&@RXUWV DSSHDU WR DJUHH WKDW WKH PD[LPXP SHUPLVVLEOH DGPLQLVWUDWLYH GHOD\ LQ WKH

RYHUGHWHQWLRQFRQWH[WOLNHO\IDOOVZHOOVKRUWRIWKHKRXUKRUL]RQVHWRXWLQMcLaughlin´Brass

v. County of Los Angeles)GWK&LU ³2QHPLJKWFRQFOXGHWKDWZKHQD

FRXUW RUGHUV D SULVRQHU UHOHDVHG ± RU ZKHQ IRU H[DPSOH D SULVRQHU¶V VHQWHQFH KDV EHHQ

FRPSOHWHG±WKH RXWHU ERXQGV IRU UHOHDVLQJ WKH SULVRQHU VKRXOG EH OHVV WKDQ  KRXUV´  7KH

GHWHQWLRQ KHUH H[WHQGV ZHOO EH\RQG WKDW WKUHVKROG VR WKHUH LV QR VHULRXV GLVSXWH WKDW SODLQWLII¶V

ULJKWWROLEHUW\ZDVDEULGJHG




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 20 of 56
7KHGHIHQVHSRLQWVWRFDVHODZWKDWKROGVWKRXJKWKDWWKHTXHVWLRQ³LVQRWVLPSO\ZKHWKHU DOLEHUW\LQWHUHVWKDVEHHQLQIULQJHGEXWZKHWKHUWKHH[WHQWRUQDWXUHRIWKHUHVWUDLQWLVVXFKDV WRYLRODWHGXHSURFHVV´Youngberg v. Romeo86,QYoungberg, WKH&RXUW UHFRJQL]HGWKDW³>L@QGHWHUPLQLQJZKHWKHUDVXEVWDQWLYHULJKWSURWHFWHGE\WKH'XH3URFHVV&ODXVH KDV EHHQ YLRODWHG LW LV QHFHVVDU\ WR EDODQFH WKH OLEHUW\ RI WKH LQGLYLGXDO DQG WKH GHPDQGV RI DQ RUJDQL]HG VRFLHW\´ id. LQWHUQDO FLWDWLRQ RPLWWHG ³>D@FFRUGLQJO\ ZKHWKHU UHVSRQGHQW¶V FRQVWLWXWLRQDO ULJKWV KDYH EHHQ YLRODWHG PXVW EH GHWHUPLQHG E\ EDODQFLQJ KLV OLEHUW\ LQWHUHVWV DJDLQVWWKHUHOHYDQWVWDWHLQWHUHVWV´Id. DW+HUHRIFRXUVHGHIHQGDQWVKDYHQRWVXJJHVWHG WKDWWKHUHFRXOGEHDOHJLWLPDWHVWDWHLQWHUHVWLQKROGLQJDQDFFXVHGDIWHUDMXGJHKDVRUGHUHGKLV UHOHDVH  %XW GHIHQGDQWV DUJXH WKDW VLQFH WKH REYLRXV LQIULQJHPHQW RI SODLQWLII¶V OLEHUW\ LV RQO\ SRWHQWLDOO\DWWULEXWDEOHWRQHJOLJHQFHRQWKHLUSDUWWKHGHSULYDWLRQGRHVQRWULVHWRWKHOHYHORID FRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQIRUVHFWLRQSXUSRVHVSee 'HIV¶0HPDW
7KH6XSUHPH&RXUWKDVPDGHLWFOHDUWKDWDSODLQWLIIPXVWVKRZPRUHWKDQPHUHQHJOLJHQFH WRHVWDEOLVKDYLRODWLRQRIKLVVXEVWDQWLYHGXHSURFHVVULJKWV³:HKDYHHPSKDVL]HGWLPHDQGDJDLQ WKDW WKH WRXFKVWRQH RI GXH SURFHVV LV SURWHFWLRQ RI WKH LQGLYLGXDO DJDLQVW DUELWUDU\ DFWLRQ RI JRYHUQPHQW2XUFDVHVGHDOLQJZLWKDEXVLYHH[HFXWLYHDFWLRQKDYHUHSHDWHGO\HPSKDVL]HG WKDWRQO\WKHPRVWHJUHJLRXVRIILFLDOFRQGXFWFDQEHVDLGWREHDUELWUDU\LQWKHFRQVWLWXWLRQDOVHQVH´ County of Sacramento v. Lewis86±LQWHUQDOFLWDWLRQVRPLWWHGsee also United States v. Salerno 86³6RFDOOHGµVXEVWDQWLYHGXHSURFHVV¶SUHYHQWV WKHJRYHUQPHQWIURPHQJDJLQJLQFRQGXFWWKDWµVKRFNVWKHFRQVFLHQFH¶RULQWHUIHUHVZLWKULJKWV µLPSOLFLWLQWKHFRQFHSWRIRUGHUHGOLEHUW\¶´LQWHUQDOFLWDWLRQVRPLWWHG
$SSO\LQJWKHVHSULQFLSOHVWKHLewis &RXUWUXOHGWKDWSDUHQWVRIDPRWRUF\FOHSDVVHQJHU NLOOHGGXULQJDKLJKVSHHGFKDVHE\WKHSROLFHKDGQRWPDGHRXWDVHFWLRQFODLP



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 21 of 56
:H KDYHUHMHFWHG WKH ORZHVW FRPPRQ GHQRPLQDWRU RI FXVWRPDU\ WRUW OLDELOLW\ DV DQ\ PDUN RI VXIILFLHQWO\ VKRFNLQJ FRQGXFW DQG KDYH KHOG WKDW WKH&RQVWLWXWLRQGRHVQRWJXDUDQWHHGXHFDUHRQWKHSDUWRIVWDWHRIILFLDOV OLDELOLW\IRUQHJOLJHQWO\LQIOLFWHGKDUPLVFDWHJRULFDOO\EHQHDWKWKHWKUHVKROG RIFRQVWLWXWLRQDOGXHSURFHVV 86DW±see also Daniels v. Williams86³+LVWRULFDOO\WKLV
JXDUDQWHH RI GXH SURFHVV KDV EHHQ DSSOLHG WR deliberate GHFLVLRQV RI JRYHUQPHQWDO RIILFLDOV WR
GHSULYHDSHUVRQRIOLIHOLEHUW\RUSURSHUW\´HPSKDVLVLQRULJLQDO%XWWKH&RXUWDOVRUHFRJQL]HG
WKDWZKLOHWKHSULQFLSOHVPD\EHHDV\WRDSSO\DWHLWKHUHQGRIWKHFXOSDELOLW\VSHFWUXP³>Z@KHWKHU
WKHSRLQWRIWKHFRQVFLHQFHVKRFNLQJLVUHDFKHGZKHQLQMXULHVDUHSURGXFHGZLWKFXOSDELOLW\IDOOLQJ
ZLWKLQWKHPLGGOHUDQJHIROORZLQJIURPVRPHWKLQJPRUHWKDQQHJOLJHQFHEXWOHVVWKDQLQWHQWLRQDO
FRQGXFWVXFKDVUHFNOHVVQHVVRUJURVVQHJOLJHQFHLVDPDWWHUIRUFORVHUFDOOV´Lewis86
DW  LQWHUQDO FLWDWLRQV RPLWWHG  7KH &RXUW UHDVRQHG WKDW VLQFH GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH WR WKH
ULJKWV RI GHWDLQHHV PD\ VXIILFH WR HVWDEOLVK OLDELOLW\ XQGHU WKH (LJKWK $PHQGPHQW GHOLEHUDWHO\
LQGLIIHUHQWFRQGXFWPD\DOVRVDWLVI\WKHIDXOWUHTXLUHPHQWIRUFODLPVXQGHUWKH'XH3URFHVV&ODXVH
Id. DW±%XWVLQFH³GHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFHWKDWVKRFNVLQRQHHQYLURQPHQWPD\QRWEHVR
SDWHQWO\HJUHJLRXVLQDQRWKHU´id. DWWKHGHWHUPLQDWLRQRIZKHWKHUFRQGXFWLQDSDUWLFXODUFDVH
LVVXIILFLHQWO\HJUHJLRXVWRYLRODWHWKH&RQVWLWXWLRQ³GHPDQGVDQH[DFWDQDO\VLVRIFLUFXPVWDQFHV´
Id.
7KHLewis &RXUWWKHQFRQWUDVWHG³WKHPDUNHGO\GLIIHUHQWFLUFXPVWDQFHVRIQRUPDOSUHWULDO
FXVWRG\´ZLWKWKHH[LJHQWFLUFXPVWDQFHVWKDWVXUURXQGDKLJKVSHHFKFKDVH
$VWKHYHU\WHUP³GHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFH´LPSOLHVWKHVWDQGDUGLVVHQVLEO\ HPSOR\HG RQO\ ZKHQ DFWXDO GHOLEHUDWLRQLV SUDFWLFDO DQGLQWKH FXVWRGLDO VLWXDWLRQ RI D SULVRQ IRUHWKRXJKW DERXW DQ LQPDWH¶V ZHOIDUH LV QRW RQO\ IHDVLEOH EXW REOLJDWRU\ XQGHU D UHJLPH WKDW LQFDSDFLWDWHV D SULVRQHU WR H[HUFLVHRUGLQDU\UHVSRQVLELOLW\IRUKLVRZQZHOIDUH 86DWLQWHUQDOFLWDWLRQRPLWWHG7KH&RXUWREVHUYHGWKRXJKWKDWHYHQLQWKHSULVRQ
FRQWH[W LQGLIIHUHQFH LQ HPHUJHQF\ FLUFXPVWDQFHV VXFK DV D ULRW PLJKW QRW JLYH ULVH WR D 


Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 22 of 56

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQDQGDPXFKKLJKHUVWDQGDUGZRXOGDSSO\Id. DW±$VWKH&RXUW

H[SODLQHG

>/@LDELOLW\ IRULQPDWH ZHOIDUH UHVWV XSRQ WKH OX[XU\ HQMR\HG E\ SULVRQ RIILFLDOVRIKDYLQJWLPHWRPDNHXQKXUULHGMXGJPHQWVXSRQWKHFKDQFHIRU UHSHDWHG UHIOHFWLRQ ODUJHO\ XQFRPSOLFDWHG E\ WKH SXOOV RI FRPSHWLQJ REOLJDWLRQV:KHQVXFKH[WHQGHGRSSRUWXQLWLHVWRGREHWWHUDUHWHDPHGZLWK SURWUDFWHGIDLOXUHHYHQWRFDUHLQGLIIHUHQFHLVWUXO\VKRFNLQJ

Id.DW)RUWKHVHUHDVRQVWKH&RXUWFRQFOXGHGWKDWVSOLWVHFRQGFKRLFHVPDGHGXULQJDUDFHRQ

FLW\VWUHHWV±HYHQLIWKH\ZHUHIODZHG±IDLOHGWRPHHWWKHVKRFNWKHFRQVFLHQFHWHVWId. DW



7KHOHVVRQRQHFDQGUDZIURPLewis LVWKDWDVKRZLQJRIGHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFHFDQVXSSRUW

DILQGLQJRIDVXEVWDQWLYHGXHSURFHVVYLRODWLRQLQD³QRUPDOFXVWRG\´VLWXDWLRQSee Barnes

) 6XSS G DW  REVHUYLQJ WKDW LQ WKH SULVRQ VHWWLQJ GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH FDQ ULVH WR D

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOO\VKRFNLQJOHYHODQGIRUPWKHEDVLVRIDGXHSURFHVVYLRODWLRQ,QWKLVFDVHLWLV

XQGLVSXWHGWKDWSODLQWLIIZDVGHWDLQHGIRUWZHQW\WKUHHGD\VDIWHUKHZDVRUGHUHGWREHUHOHDVHG

See 'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62),WLVDOVRQRWGLVSXWHGWKDW'2&LVVXSSRVHGWR

EH LQ SRVVHVVLRQ RI D FRPPLWPHQW RUGHU D UHWXUQ RUGHU RU D UHOHDVH RUGHU EHIRUH LW UHFHLYHV DQ

LQGLYLGXDO LQWR FXVWRG\ 3O¶V 62) 'HIV¶ 5HVS 62)   EXW WKHUH ZDV QR FRPPLWPHQW

RUGHULQH[LVWHQFHZKHQSODLQWLIIUHWXUQHG IURP 6XSHULRU &RXUWRQ0DUFKSee &RXUW

9LHZ &DVH 1R  &0'  &RXUW 9LHZ &DVH 1R  &0'  RUGHULQJ KLP

UHOHDVHGLQERWKFDVHVsee generally ,QVWLWXWLRQDO)LOH

)XUWKHUSODLQWLIIKDVSUHVHQWHGHYLGHQFHWKDWRQFHKHDUULYHGEDFNDWWKH'&MDLOKHWROG

WKHFRUUHFWLRQDORIILFHU³,¶PVXSSRVHGWREHUHOHDVHGZKDW¶VJRLQJRQ"´6PLWK'HSDW±

6PLWKWHVWLILHGWKDWWKHRIILFHUFRQWLQXHGWRSURFHVVKLPDQGDQRWKHU'2&VWDIIPHPEHUWROGKLP

³LI\RX¶UHKHUH\RX¶UHVXSSRVHGWREHKHUH\RX¶UHQRWJRLQJDQ\ZKHUH´Id. DW±

'HIHQGDQWVDUJXHWKDWWKLVHYLGHQFHVKRXOGEHLJQRUHGEHFDXVHLW³DPRXQWVWRQRWKLQJPRUHWKDQ

VHOIVHUYLQJVWDWHPHQWVWKDWFDQQRWGHIHDWWKH>G@HIHQGDQWV¶FODLPIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQW´'HIV¶



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 23 of 56

5HSO\DW±+RZHYHUWKDWLVQRORQJHUWKHODZLQWKLV&LUFXLWSee Johnson v. Perez)G

  '& &LU  ³,W LV    EH\RQG TXHVWLRQ DV D JHQHUDO SURSRVLWLRQ WKDW SDUWLHV OLNH

RWKHUIDFWZLWQHVVHVDUHOHJDOO\FRPSHWHQWWRJLYHPDWHULDOWHVWLPRQ\,QGHHGLQPDQ\NLQGVRI

FDVHVSDUWLHVDUHWKHNH\RUHYHQVROHZLWQHVV´$QGGHIHQGDQWVKDYHQRWFRPHIRUZDUGZLWK

DQ\HYLGHQFHWRFUHDWHDJHQXLQHGLVSXWHRQWKLVLVVXH



0RUHRYHU DFFRUGLQJ WR -HDQHWWH 0\ULFN WKH &RUUHFWLRQDO 3URJUDP $GPLQLVWUDWRU FDVH

PDQDJHUVDQGFRUUHFWLRQDORIILFHUVKDYH³DGXW\WRUHSRUWDOOHJDWLRQVRIRYHUGHWHQWLRQVZKHQWKH\

OHDUQRIWKHP´0\ULFN'HFODQGWKLVLVDSULPDU\PHDQVE\ZKLFKWKHLQVWLWXWLRQEHFRPHV

DZDUHRIVXFKSUREOHPV 0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±<HWWKHUHLVQRHYLGHQFHLQWKHUHFRUG

WKDWDQ\'2&VWDIIPHPEHULQFOXGLQJHLWKHURIWKHFRUUHFWLRQDORIILFHUVSUHVHQWDWWKHWLPHSODLQWLII

UHWXUQHGWRWKHMDLOUHSRUWHGSODLQWLII¶VLQTXLU\RUXQGHUWRRNDQ\IXUWKHULQYHVWLJDWLRQGXULQJWKH




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 24 of 56

WZHQW\WKUHHGD\VLQZKLFKHDFKFRXOGGHOLEHUDWHDQG³PDNHXQKXUULHGMXGJPHQWV´Lewis

86DW

$QG WKHUH LV QR HYLGHQFH WKDW LW WRRN WZHQW\WKUHH GD\V WR FRPSOHWH DQ\ QHFHVVDU\

DGPLQLVWUDWLYHWDVNVRUWKDWWKHUHZDVDQ\RWKHUUHDVRQDEOHEDVLVIRUWKHGHOD\



7KHUHIRUHWKH&RXUWFRQFOXGHVWKDWSODLQWLIIKDVFRPHIRUZDUGZLWKVXIILFLHQWHYLGHQFHWR

FUHDWHDJHQXLQHLVVXHRIPDWHULDOIDFWRQZKHWKHUWKHFRQGXFWLQWKLVFDVHZDVVRHJUHJLRXVWKDWLW

YLRODWHGKLVGXHSURFHVVULJKWVXQGHUWKH)LIWK$PHQGPHQW7KHUHIRUHWKH&RXUWZLOOQRWHQWHU

VXPPDU\MXGJPHQWLQIDYRURIGHIHQGDQWVRQWKHEDVLVWKDWSODLQWLIIKDVQRWHVWDEOLVKHGDSUHGLFDWH

FRQVWLWXWLRQDO YLRODWLRQ  :KDW UHPDLQV LV WR GHWHUPLQH ZKHWKHU SODLQWLII FDQ HVWDEOLVK WKH RWKHU



 7KH&RXUWDFNQRZOHGJHVWKDWLWZRXOGQRWEHIHDVLEOHIRU'2&VWDIIWRLQYHVWLJDWHHYHU\

FRPSODLQWE\DQLQPDWHWKDWKHZDVEHLQJZURQJIXOO\GHWDLQHG7KH6XSUHPH&RXUWUHFRJQL]HG

WKDWVXFKFODLPVPD\EHYRLFHGTXLWHRIWHQLQBaker v. McCollanDFDVHLQYROYLQJDSODLQWLIIZKR

ZDVDUUHVWHGSXUVXDQWWRDYDOLGZDUUDQWDQGWKHQGHWDLQHGGHVSLWHKLVSURWHVWVRIPLVWDNHQLGHQWLW\

86±³>:@HGRQRWWKLQNDVKHULIIH[HFXWLQJDQDUUHVWZDUUDQWLVUHTXLUHG

E\ WKH &RQVWLWXWLRQ WR LQYHVWLJDWH LQGHSHQGHQWO\ HYHU\ FODLP RI LQQRFHQFH ZKHWKHU WKH FODLP LV

EDVHGRQPLVWDNHQLGHQWLW\RUDGHIHQVHVXFKDVODFNRIUHTXLVLWHLQWHQW´7KH&RXUWKHOG³WKDWD

GHWHQWLRQRIWKUHHGD\VRYHUD1HZ<HDU¶VZHHNHQGGRHVQRWDQGFRXOGQRWDPRXQW´WRGHSULYDWLRQ

RIWKHSODLQWLII¶VFRQVWLWXWLRQDOULJKWVEXWREVHUYHGWKDW³GHWHQWLRQSXUVXDQWWRDYDOLGZDUUDQW

LQWKHIDFHRIUHSHDWHGSURWHVWVRILQQRFHQFHZLOODIWHUWKHODSVHRIDFHUWDLQDPRXQWRIWLPHGHSULYH

WKHDFFXVHGRIµOLEHUW\ZLWKRXWGXHSURFHVVRIODZ¶´Id.DW±



%XWWKHNH\IDFWRULQWKHBaker &RXUW¶VGHFLVLRQZDVWKDWWKHSODLQWLIIKDGEHHQDUUHVWHG

SXUVXDQWWRDIDFLDOO\YDOLGZDUUDQWDQGKHGLGQRWFKDOOHQJHLWVYDOLGLW\See id. DW±+HUH

GHIHQGDQW KDV QRW SUHVHQWHG DQ\ HYLGHQFH WKDW LW DFWHG SXUVXDQW WR D IDFLDOO\ YDOLG RUGHU RI DQ\

NLQGDQGLWLVXQGLVSXWHGWKDW³'2&ZLOOQRWWDNHDSULVRQHUZLWKRXWDFRPPLWPHQWRUGHUUHWXUQ

RUGHURUUHOHDVH´3O¶V62)'HIV¶5HVS62)see also 0\ULFN1RY'HSDW

±DIILUPLQJWKDW³>L@WLV'2&SROLF\WRSULRUWRDFFHSWLQJFXVWRG\RIDQLQPDWHVWDII

GHWHUPLQHVWKDWWKHLQPDWHLVOHJDOO\FRPPLWWHGWRWKHIDFLOLW\´



)XUWKHUPRUH LQ GHWHUPLQLQJ ZKHWKHU WR GUDZ WKH LQIHUHQFH WKDW GHIHQGDQWV ZHUH

GHOLEHUDWHO\ LQGLIIHUHQW WR SODLQWLII¶V ULJKW WR OLEHUW\ WKH MXU\ FDQ DOVR FRQVLGHU WKH IDFW WKDW

SODLQWLII¶VQDPHGRHVQRWHYHQDSSHDULQDQ\RIWKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQUHSRUWV




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 25 of 56

HOHPHQWV QHHGHG WR KROG HLWKHU WKH 'LVWULFW RU WKH LQGLYLGXDO GHIHQGDQWV OLDEOH IRU WKH DOOHJHG

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOGHSULYDWLRQ

 7KHUHLVDTXHVWLRQRIIDFWDVWRZKHWKHUD'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELDFXVWRPRU SROLF\FDXVHGSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQ



7KH 'LVWULFW RI &ROXPELD FDQ RQO\ EH KHOG OLDEOH IRU WKH FRQVWLWXWLRQDO YLRODWLRQ LI LWV

HPSOR\HHVDFWHGDFFRUGLQJWRDFLW\³SROLF\RUFXVWRP´WKDWZDV³WKHPRYLQJIRUFH´EHKLQGWKH

YLRODWLRQMonell86DW7KH'&&LUFXLWKDVLGHQWLILHGIRXUZD\VLQZKLFKDSODLQWLII

FDQ GHPRQVWUDWH WKDW D PXQLFLSDOLW\ LV OLDEOH XQGHU VHFWLRQ  ³WKH H[SOLFLWVHWWLQJ RI D

SROLF\E\WKHJRYHUQPHQWWKDWYLRODWHVWKH&RQVWLWXWLRQ´³WKHDFWLRQRIDSROLF\PDNHUZLWKLQ

WKHJRYHUQPHQW´³WKHDGRSWLRQWKURXJKDNQRZLQJIDLOXUHWRDFWE\DSROLF\PDNHURIDFWLRQV

E\KLVVXERUGLQDWHVWKDWDUHVRFRQVLVWHQWWKDWWKH\KDYHEHFRPHµFXVWRP¶´RU³WKHIDLOXUHRI

WKHJRYHUQPHQWWRUHVSRQGWRDQHHGIRUH[DPSOHWUDLQLQJRIHPSOR\HHVLQVXFKDPDQQHUDVWR

VKRZµGHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFH¶WRWKHULVNWKDWQRWDGGUHVVLQJWKHQHHGZLOOUHVXOWLQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO

YLRODWLRQV´Baker)GDWLQWHUQDOFLWDWLRQVRPLWWHG



'HIHQGDQWDUJXHVWKDWHYHQLISODLQWLIIKDVHVWDEOLVKHGDSUHGLFDWHFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQ

WKHHOHPHQWVRIMonell KDYHQRWEHHQVDWLVILHG'HIV¶0HPDW±3ODLQWLIIEDVHVKLVFURVV

PRWLRQRQWKUHHWKHRULHVWKDWH[SUHVVPXQLFLSDOSROLFLHVFDXVHGWKHFRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQLQ

WKLVFDVHGHIHQGDQWKDVFXVWRPVRUSUDFWLFHVWKDWKDYHEHFRPHWDQWDPRXQWWRH[SUHVVSROLFLHV

WKDW FDXVHG KLV RYHUGHWHQWLRQ DQG  WKDW '2&¶V IDLOXUH WR WUDLQ RU VXSHUYLVH LWV HPSOR\HHV

VKRZHG³GHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFH´WRWKHULVNRIYLRODWLQJKLVFRQVWLWXWLRQDOULJKWVSee 3O¶V&URVV

0HP DW ±  7KH &RXUW ILQGV WKDW WKHUH DUH JHQXLQH LVVXHV RI PDWHULDO IDFW FRQFHUQLQJ WKH

H[LVWHQFH RI D SUDFWLFH LQYROYLQJ WKH LQFRQVLVWHQW KDQGOLQJ RI SDSHUZRUN DQG ZKHWKHU VXFK D

FXVWRPRUSUDFWLFHFDXVHGSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQDQGWKHUHIRUHWKLVDVSHFWRIWKHVHFWLRQ

FODLPPXVWEHSUHVHQWHGWRWKHMXU\




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 26 of 56

D ([SUHVV0XQLFLSDO3ROLFLHV



7KH6XSUHPH&RXUWREVHUYHGLQMonellWKDW³&RQJUHVVGLGQRWLQWHQGPXQLFLSDOLWLHVWREH

KHOG OLDEOH XQOHVV DFWLRQ SXUVXDQW WR RIILFLDO PXQLFLSDO SROLF\ RI VRPH QDWXUH FDXVHG D

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOWRUW´Monell86DW3ODLQWLIISRVLWVWKDW'2&KDV³SROLFLHVWRFRQFHDO

WKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQSUREOHP´EXWKHKDVIDLOHGWRSXWIRUZDUGDQ\HYLGHQFHRIWKHH[LVWHQFHRIWKHVH

SROLFLHV7KHUHIRUHVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWIRUSODLQWLIILVLQDSSURSULDWHRQWKLVWKHRU\RIOLDELOLW\



)LUVW SODLQWLII DVVHUWV WKDW ³'2&¶V SROLF\ WKDW WKH 5HFRUGV 2IILFH VKRXOG QRW UHSRUW

LQVWDQFHV RI RYHUGHWHQWLRQ >ZD@V WKH FDXVH RI 0U 6PLWK¶V SURORQJHG XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO

RYHUGHWHQWLRQ´  3O¶V &URVV5HSO\ DW   7KH HYLGHQFH UHYHDOV WKDW WKHUH LV QR ZULWWHQ SROLF\ LQ

SODFHWKDWUHTXLUHV'2&VWDIIWRUHSRUWVXVSHFWHGRYHUGHWHQWLRQsee 0\ULFN1RY'HSDW

±0\ULFN'HFOEXWSODLQWLIIKDVQRWSURGXFHGDQ\HYLGHQFHRIWKHH[LVWHQFHRIDSROLF\

WKDWGLUHFWV'2&VWDIInot WRUHSRUWLQVWDQFHVRIRYHUGHWHQWLRQ



3ODLQWLII¶VWKHRU\LVWKDWWKHDEVHQFHRIDSROLF\WRUHSRUWRYHUGHWHQWLRQVDPRXQWVWRDSROLF\

QRW WR UHSRUW WKHP  %XW HYHQ WKDW WKHRU\ LV QRW VXSSRUWHG E\ WKH HYLGHQFH  $W OHDVW RQH /HJDO

,QVWUXPHQW([DPLQHUWHVWLILHGWKDWKHZRXOGUHSRUWRYHUGHWHQWLRQVWRKLVVXSHUYLVRUXSRQOHDUQLQJ

RIWKHP([WR'HIV¶0RW>'NW@DW±$QGWKHUHLVHYLGHQFHLQWKHUHFRUG

WKDW DOO HPSOR\HHV LQ WKH 5HFRUGV 2IILFH DUH WUDLQHG WR UHSRUW SRVVLEOH RYHUGHWHQWLRQ ZKHQ WKH\

EHFRPHDZDUHRILW0\ULFN'HFODQGWKDWFDVHPDQDJHUVDQGFRUUHFWLRQDORIILFHUVKDYHDGXW\

WRPDNHVXFKUHSRUWV0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±0\ULFN'HFO±


 7KHSDUWLHVFLWHWRYDULRXVSRUWLRQVRI)UHG7KRPSVRQ¶VGHSRVLWLRQSee([WR'HIV¶ 0RW>'NW@([)WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@WRJHWKHU³7KRPSVRQ'HS´7KH &RXUW¶VFLWDWLRQWR7KRPSVRQ¶VWHVWLPRQ\HQFRPSDVVHVDOORIWKHSRUWLRQVRIWKHWUDQVFULSWFLWHG E\WKHSDUWLHV 



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 27 of 56



6HFRQGSODLQWLIIFRQWHQGVWKDW³'2&¶VSROLF\ZKLFKKDVQRRYHUVLJKWPHFKDQLVPLQSODFH

WR HQVXUHWKHFRPSOH[UHOHDVHV\VWHPLVIROORZHGUHVXOWHGLQWKH RYHUGHWHQWLRQ RI0U 6PLWK´

3O¶V&URVV0HPDW3ODLQWLIISRLQWVWRWKHIDFWWKDW'2&GRHVQRWKDYHDFKHFNRXWVKHHWORJ

RU D FRPSXWHU V\VWHP WR GHWHUPLQH ZKHQ DQ HPSOR\HH DFFHVVHV D SULVRQHU¶V LQVWLWXWLRQDO ILOH

%URZQ 0DU  'HS DW ± see 3O¶V &URVV5HSO\ DW   %XW WKH DEVHQFH RI WKRVH

SDUWLFXODU PHFKDQLVPV GRHV QRW HVWDEOLVK D ODFN RI DQ\ RYHUVLJKW RU WKH H[LVWHQFH RI DQ H[SUHVV

SROLF\ WKDW DYRLGV RYHUVLJKW DQG IRVWHUV RYHUGHWHQWLRQ DQG WKHUH LV FRQVLGHUDEOH HYLGHQFH DERXW

OD\HUVRIUHYLHZLQYROYHGLQWKHSURFHVVLQJRIUHOHDVHRUGHUV



%HFDXVH WKHUH LV QR HYLGHQFH LQ WKH UHFRUG WKDW HLWKHU FODLPHG H[SUHVV SROLF\ H[LVWHG RU

WKDWHLWKHUSROLF\FDXVHGSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQWKH&RXUWZLOOGHQ\VXPPDU\MXGJPHQWLQIDYRU

RISODLQWLIIRQWKLVWKHRU\RIOLDELOLW\

E &XVWRPRU3UDFWLFH



³>$@Q DFW SHUIRUPHG SXUVXDQW WR D µFXVWRP¶ WKDW KDV QRW EHHQ IRUPDOO\ DSSURYHG E\ DQ

DSSURSULDWH GHFLVLRQPDNHU PD\ IDLUO\ VXEMHFW D PXQLFLSDOLW\ WR OLDELOLW\ RQ WKH WKHRU\ WKDW WKH

UHOHYDQWSUDFWLFHLVVRZLGHVSUHDGDVWRKDYHWKHIRUFHRIODZ´Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs of Bryan

Cnty. v. Brown86FLWLQJMonell86DW±see also Warren v.

District of Columbia)G'&&LU³2UDSROLF\PDNHUFRXOGNQRZLQJO\LJQRUH


 3ODLQWLIIFLWHVWR/RFDO5XOHEDQGDUJXHVWKDWWKH'LVWULFWFRQFHGHGWKLVDUJXPHQWE\QRW RSSRVLQJLWLQLWVUHSO\3O¶V&URVV5HSO\DW7KH&RXUWREVHUYHVWKDWWKH'LVWULFWGLGLQGHHG IDLO WR DGGUHVV SODLQWLII¶V DUJXPHQW WKDW LW KDG D SROLF\ QRW WR PRQLWRU VWDII FRPSOLDQFH ZLWK WKH UHOHDVHRUGHUSURFHVV+RZHYHUWKH'&&LUFXLWUHFHQWO\KHOGWKDW³>X@QGHUWKH)HGHUDO5XOHVRI &LYLO3URFHGXUHDPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWFDQQRWEHµFRQFHGHG¶IRUZDQWRIRSSRVLWLRQ´ Winston & Strawn, LLP v. McLean)G'&&LU7KHFRXUWXQGHUVFRUHG WKDW³>W@KH'LVWULFW&RXUWµPXVWDOZD\VGHWHUPLQHIRULWVHOIZKHWKHUWKHUHFRUGDQGDQ\XQGLVSXWHG PDWHULDOIDFWVMXVWLI\JUDQWLQJVXPPDU\MXGJPHQW¶´Id.TXRWLQJGrimes v. District of Columbia  )G   '& &LU   2Q WKH UHFRUG EHIRUH WKH &RXUW HYHQ ZLWKRXW GHIHQGDQW¶V RSSRVLWLRQWKH&RXUWFRQFOXGHVWKDWSODLQWLIILVQRWHQWLWOHGWRVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQWKLVWKHRU\



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 28 of 56

DSUDFWLFHWKDWZDVFRQVLVWHQWHQRXJKWRFRQVWLWXWHFXVWRP´FLWLQJCity of St. Louis v. Praprotnik

863ODLQWLIILGHQWLILHVWKUHHSUDFWLFHVWKDWKHPDLQWDLQVKDYHWDNHQRQWKH

IRUFHRIDQRIILFLDOSROLF\WKDWFDXVHGKLVRYHUGHWHQWLRQSee 3O¶V&URVV0HPDW±7KH&RXUW

FRQFOXGHVWKDWWKHUHLVDTXHVWLRQRIIDFWDVWRWKHH[LVWHQFHRIRQHRIWKH'LVWULFW¶VDOOHJHGSUDFWLFHV

DQGZKHWKHULWFDXVHGWKHGHSULYDWLRQRISODLQWLII¶VOLEHUW\

 7KH'LVWULFW¶V$OOHJHG3UDFWLFHRI)DLOLQJWR5HYLHZ&RXUW9LHZ



3ODLQWLIIFRQWHQGVWKDW'2&¶VSUDFWLFHRIIDLOLQJWRFRQVXOWWKH&RXUW9LHZGDWDEDVHZKHQ

SURFHVVLQJUHOHDVHRUGHUVFDXVHGKLVRYHUGHWHQWLRQ3O¶V&URVV0HPDW±



$FFRUGLQJWRDZULWWHQ'2&SROLF\FLWHGE\SODLQWLII³5HFRUGV2IILFH/HJDO,QVWUXPHQWV

([DPLQHUVVKDOOREWDLQDQGUHYLHZSULQWRXWVIURP&28579,(:WRGHWHUPLQHLIWKHUHDUH

DQ\RXWVWDQGLQJFKDUJHVSUHYHQWLQJUHOHDVHSULRUWRDQLQPDWH¶VUHOHDVHIURPWKHFXVWRG\RI

WKH'2&´See ([WR3O¶V&URVV0RW>'NW@DW$OVRZKHQFRPSOHWLQJWKHUHOHDVH

DXWKRUL]DWLRQ IRUP WKH /,( PXVW FHUWLI\ WKDW ³&RXUW9LHZ UHYLHZ >ZDV@ FRPSOHWHG´  See

,QVWLWXWLRQDO)LOHDW$QGHDFK/,(PXVWDOVRFRPSOHWHDQ³,QPDWH5HOHDVH&KHFN/LVW´RQ

ZKLFKWKH/,(PXVWFKHFNDQGLQLWLDOQH[WWRWKHVWHS³5HYLHZ&RXUW9LHZ2SHQ&DVHV´Id.DW



3ODLQWLIIKLJKOLJKWVHYLGHQFHWKDW'2&VWDIIPHPEHUVKDYHQRWKDGDFFHVVWR&RXUW9LHZ

VLQFHHDUO\See 0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±WHVWLI\LQJWKDWWKHSROLF\WKDWVWDWHVWKDW

DQ /,( PXVW UHYLHZ D SULQW RXW RI &RXUW 9LHZ ³LV QRW DFFXUDWH´ -RQHV 'HS DW ±

FRQILUPLQJWKDWVWDII³QRORQJHUKDYHDFFHVVWR&28579,(:´+HDUJXHVWKDWWKLVGHSDUWPHQW

ZLGHRPLVVLRQUHVXOWHGLQKLVRYHUGHWHQWLRQ3O¶V&URVV0HPDW



+RZHYHUGHIHQGDQWKDVSURGXFHGHYLGHQFHWKDW/,(¶VKDGDFFHVVWRDOORIWKHLQIRUPDWLRQ

FRQWDLQHG LQ &RXUW 9LHZ WKH\ VLPSO\ DFFHVVHG LW WKURXJK D GLIIHUHQW V\VWHP FDOOHG 0\-867,6

See%URZQ'HF'HSDW±QRWLQJWKDWWKHQDPHVRIWKHVSHFLILFSURJUDPVLQWKHSROLF\

DUHQRWFRUUHFWDQGWKDW³&28579,(:LVQRZ0\-867,6´-RQHVH[SODLQHGWKDW0\-867,6



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 29 of 56

³UHIOHFWV WKH GDWD WKDW¶V LQ WKH &2857 9,(: 6\VWHP´  ³&2857 9,(: LV WKH &RXUW¶V PDLQ

V\VWHP  %HFDXVH ZH QR ORQJHU KDYH DFFHVV WR &2857 9,(: -867,6 LV DEOH WR ± WKH\

VKDUH±&28579,(:VKDUHVLQIRUPDWLRQZLWK-867,6IRUXVWRORRNLQWRHDFKFDVHZLWKHDFK

LQGLYLGXDOLQPDWH´-RQHV'HSDW±$QGSODLQWLIIGRHVQRWGLVSXWHWKDW³0\-867,6LV

DFRXUWEDVHGV\VWHPWKDWUHIOHFWVLQIRUPDWLRQWKDWZDVLQSXWWHGE\WKH&RXUW´'HIV¶62)

3O¶V5HVS62)



-RQHVGHVFULEHGWKHRSHUDWLRQRI0\-867,6LQKLVGHSRVLWLRQ

4 6RDIWHU\RXYHULI\WKHGRFXPHQW\RXVWDWHG\RXJRLQWRWKHV\VWHP



DQG\RXUXQall FKHFNV:KDWV\VWHPDUH\RXUHIHUULQJWR"

$ ,¶P UHIHUULQJ WR -867,6 -$&&6 PDWUL[ V\VWHP DQG ZH KDYH



H$JHQWZKLFKUXQVRXU1&,&FKHFNV

4 :KDW¶V-867,6"

$ -867,6WUDFNVHDFKFRXUWDSSHDUDQFHRIHDFKLQPDWHDQGZKDWZDV



GLVFXVVHGGXULQJWKDWFRXUWDSSHDUDQFH

4 6RZKDWGR\RXFKHFNIRUZKHQ\RXFKHFNWKH-867,6V\VWHP"

$ ,Q -867,6 ZH DUH FKHFNLQJ WR PDNH VXUH WKDW WKHUH LV D UHOHDVH



RUGHUWKDWWKHUHLVQRWDQRWKHUFDVHWKDWKDVEHHQ±WKHLQPDWHKDV



EHHQFKDUJHGZLWK

4 6RLI\RXUHFHLYHDUHOHDVHRUGHUWKH-867,6V\VWHPVKRXOGUHIOHFW



WKDWWKHUHZDVDUHOHDVHRUGHULVVXHGWKDWGD\LQFRXUWLVWKDWFRUUHFW"

$ 7KDW¶VFRUUHFW

4 $QG\RXVWDWHG\RXFKHFNWRVHHLIWKHUH¶VDQ\RWKHUFDVHVIRUWKH



LQPDWH:KDWGR\RXGRZKHQ\RXSHUIRUPWKDWFKHFN"

$ ,RSHQHDFKLQGLYLGXDOFDVHWRPDNHVXUHWKHLQPDWHKDVQRWEHHQ



FRPPLWWHGRQWKDWFKDUJH

-RQHV'HSDW±



3ODLQWLIIDVVHUWVWKDWHYHQLI0\-867,6FRQWDLQVWKHVDPHLQIRUPDWLRQDV&RXUW9LHZ³WKH

PHUHIDFWWKDW'2&ZULWWHQSROLFLHVDUHLQFRQWUDGLFWLRQZLWKLWVHVWDEOLVKHGSUDFWLFHVGHPRQVWUDWHV

WKH G\VIXQFWLRQDO QDWXUH RI WKH 5HFRUGV 2IILFH´  3O¶V &URVV5HSO\ DW   :KHWKHU WKDW LV DQ




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 30 of 56

DFFXUDWHDVVHVVPHQWRUQRWLWLVDIDUFU\IURPLGHQWLI\LQJDFXVWRPRUSUDFWLFHWKDWOHGWRSODLQWLII¶V

GHWHQWLRQ  '2&¶V IDLOXUH WR XSGDWH LWV ZULWWHQ SROLF\ WR VXEVWLWXWH WKH QDPH RI WKH FXUUHQWO\

DYDLODEOHWHFKQRORJ\LVQRWDEDVLVIRUVHFWLRQOLDELOLW\3ODLQWLIIKDVIDLOHGWRFRPHIRUZDUG

ZLWKHYLGHQFHWKDWZRXOGHQDEOHDUHDVRQDEOHMXURUWRFRQFOXGHWKDWWKH'LVWULFWKDGDFXVWRPRU

SUDFWLFH RI LJQRULQJ WKH LPSRUWDQW LQIRUPDWLRQ FRQWDLQHG LQ WKH FRXUW¶V GDWDEDVH DQG WKHUHIRUH

VXPPDU\MXGJPHQWIRUSODLQWLIILVLQDSSURSULDWHRQWKLVWKHRU\

 7KH 'LVWULFW¶V $OOHJHG 3UDFWLFH RI 5HFHLYLQJ &RXUW 2UGHUV 7KURXJK 0XOWLSOH1RQ(OHFWURQLF0HDQV



3ODLQWLIIFRQWHQGVWKDW'2&KDVPDLQWDLQHGDSUDFWLFHRIUHFHLYLQJDQGSURFHVVLQJUHOHDVH

RUGHUVWKDWKDYHEHHQID[HGHPDLOHGDQGRUKDQGGHOLYHUHGWRWKHMDLOHYHQWKRXJKLWLVVXSSRVHG

WREHRSHUDWLQJXQGHUDSDSHUOHVVV\VWHPDQGWKDWWKLVSUDFWLFHKDVWDNHQRQWKHIRUFHRIDQRIILFLDO

SROLF\WKDWUHVXOWHGLQKLVRYHUGHWHQWLRQ3O¶V&URVV0HPDW:KLOHSODLQWLIIKDVQRWFRPH

IRUZDUG ZLWK HQRXJK XQGLVSXWHG HYLGHQFH WR VXSSRUW WKH HQWU\ RI MXGJPHQW LQ KLV IDYRU RQ WKLV

WKHRU\DVDPDWWHURIODZKHKDVSRLQWHGWRHQRXJKWRZLWKVWDQGDPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQW

DJDLQVW KLP 7KHUH LV D JHQXLQH GLVSXWH RI PDWHULDO IDFW DV WR ZKHWKHU '2& KDV D SUDFWLFH RI

UHFHLYLQJUHOHDVHRUGHUVE\PXOWLSOHPHDQVDQGLIVRZKHWKHUWKLVDOOHJHGO\KDSKD]DUGV\VWHPOHG

WRSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQ



7KH '2&¶V SURFHGXUH IRU SURFHVVLQJ UHOHDVH RUGHUV LV VXSSRVHG WR EH DOPRVW HQWLUHO\

HOHFWURQLF DIWHU WKH 0DUVKDO GHOLYHUV D FRS\ RI WKH FRXUW¶V VLJQHG SDSHU RUGHU WR WKH /,( DW WKH

FRXUWKRXVHSee 'HIV¶62)±3O¶V5HVS62)±see also 3O¶V62)

'HIV¶5HVS62)³$VDUHVXOWRIWKH%\QXPODZVXLW'2&DJUHHGWRµPRYHWRDSDSHUOHVV

V\VWHPWRSURFHVVUHOHDVHV¶´'HIV¶5HSO\DW±³>0@LVGHPHDQDQWVDUHSURFHVVHGE\DV\VWHP

WKDWGRHVQRWUHO\XSRQWKHWUDQVSRUWRIDSDSHURUGHUWRWKHMDLOIRUSURFHVVLQJ´2QFHWKH/,(

UHFHLYHVWKHUHOHDVHRUGHUKHRUVKHXSORDGVWKHGRFXPHQWLQWR706'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 31 of 56

62)$IWHUWKHUHOHDVHRUGHULVXSORDGHGLQ706DQ/,(ORFDWHGLQWKH5HFRUGV2IILFHDWWKH

'& MDLO ZLOO DFFHVV WKH GRFXPHQW IURP 706 DQG EHJLQ SURFHVVLQJ WKH LQPDWH¶V UHOHDVH E\

SHUIRUPLQJDFWLRQVLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKHV\VWHP¶VGLUHFWLRQVSee 'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS

62)see also %URZQ'HF'HS±id. DW±7KLVLVVXSSRVHGWRLQFOXGH

FKHFNLQJ H[WHUQDO GLJLWDO V\VWHPV VXFK DV 0\-867,6 WR HQVXUH WKDW DOO RI WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ LV

DFFXUDWH DQG WKDW WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU PDWFKHV ZLWK WKH FRPPLWPHQW RUGHU  'HIV¶ 62)   

3O¶V5HVS62)

3ODLQWLIIDUJXHVWKDWQRWZLWKVWDQGLQJWKHHYLGHQFHUHODWHGWRWKHH[LVWHQFHRIWKLVSURWRFRO

'2&LQIDFWUHFHLYHVFRXUWRUGHUHGUHOHDVHVWKURXJKIRXUGLIIHUHQWFKDQQHOVDQGWKDWWKLV³FKDRWLF

SROLF\´KDVUHVXOWHGLQ'2&¶VUHFHLSWRIUHOHDVHRUGHUVWKDWDUHQRWSURFHVVHGLQFOXGLQJKLVRZQ

3O¶V &URVV0HP DW   3ODLQWLII SRLQWV WR HYLGHQFH WKDW UHYHDOV WKDW '2& PD\ LQGHHG UHFHLYH

PXOWLSOHFRSLHVRIWKHVDPHRUGHUWKURXJKYDULRXVPHWKRGVLQFOXGLQJYLDID[HPDLOKDQGGHOLYHU\

IURPWKH0DUVKDOVDWWKHFRXUWKRXVHRULQFRQQHFWLRQZLWKWUDQVSRUWIURPWKH6XSHULRU&RXUWSee,

e.g.0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±WHVWLI\LQJWKDWWKH5HFRUGV2IILFHFDQUHFHLYHRUGHUVYLD

³ID[ HPDLO >DQG@ VWDII´ %URZQ 'HF  'HS DW ± WHVWLI\LQJ WKDW WKH 5HFRUGV 2IILFH

FDQUHFHLYHRUGHUVYLDHPDLOID[RUKDQGGHOLYHU\IURPDPDUVKDOWRWKH/,(LQWKHFRXUWKRXVH

id. DW±WHVWLI\LQJWKDWWKH5HFRUGV2IILFHFDQUHFHLYHGRFXPHQWVIURP³WUDQVSRUW´id. DW

± DFNQRZOHGJLQJ WKDW WKH 5HFRUGV 2IILFH FDQ UHFHLYH IRXU FRSLHV RI WKH VDPH

GRFXPHQW$QGVXSHUYLVRU\/,(5RELO\Q%URZQWHVWLILHGWKDWWKHSURFHVVLQJRIDUHOHDVHRUGHU

FDQEH³WULJJHUHG´ZKHQWKH/,(UHFHLYHV³LWIURPDQ\RQHRIWKRVHIRXU´PHWKRGV%URZQ'HF

'HSDW±



+RZHYHU%URZQDOVRWHVWLILHGWKDWKDQGGHOLYHU\IURPD0DUVKDOWRWKH/,(DWWKH6XSHULRU

&RXUWDQGWKHQWKHXSORDGLQJRIWKHRUGHUE\WKH/,(LQWR706LVWKH³PRVWFRPPRQZD\´WKDW




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 32 of 56

DQ/,(DWWKH5HFRUGV2IILFHDWWKHMDLOZRXOGUHFHLYHWKHRUGHU %URZQ'HF'HS DW±

  $QG WKHUH LV DOVR VRPH HYLGHQFH WKDW DQ\ DGGLWLRQDO FRSLHV ZHUH RQO\ SURYLGHG WR WKH

5HFRUGV2IILFHIRUTXDOLW\DVVXUDQFHSXUSRVHVSee id. DW±id. DW±WHVWLI\LQJ

WKDW ID[HG DQG HPDLOHG FRSLHV RI UHOHDVH RUGHUV DUH UHFHLYHG E\ ³>T@XDOLW\ DVVXUDQFH DW WKH '&

6XSHULRU &RXUW´ DQG WKDW KDQG GHOLYHUHG FRSLHV DUULYH IURP WUDQVSRUW DW WKH HQG RI WKH GD\ DV D

³GRXEOHFKHFNWRPDNHVXUHDOOWKHGRFXPHQWVZHUHWUDQVSRUWHG´



%DVHGRQWKHHYLGHQFHDGGXFHGE\ERWKSDUWLHVWKH&RXUWFRQFOXGHVWKDWDTXHVWLRQRIIDFW

H[LVWVDVWRZKHWKHU'2&KDVDSUDFWLFHRIUHFHLYLQJUHOHDVHRUGHUVLQPXOWLSOHZD\VLQFOXGLQJLQ

SDSHUIRUP



%XWHYHQLISODLQWLIIFDQHVWDEOLVKWKDWVXFKDSUDFWLFHH[LVWVKHPXVWDOVR³GHPRQVWUDWHD

GLUHFWFDXVDOOLQNEHWZHHQWKHPXQLFLSDODFWLRQDQGWKHGHSULYDWLRQRIIHGHUDOULJKWV´Brown

86 DW   7KDW LV WKH 'LVWULFW¶V SUDFWLFH PXVW EH WKH ³PRYLQJ IRUFH´ EHKLQG WKH DOOHJHG

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQSee Monell86DW



$SROLF\LVGHHPHGWREHWKH³PRYLQJIRUFH´EHKLQGDFRQVWLWXWLRQDOLQMXU\LIWKH

FRQGXFWLVDVXEVWDQWLDOIDFWRULQEULQJLQJDERXWKDUP7KHGHIHQGDQW PD\EHKHOGOLDEOHIRUKDUPWKDWLV³IRUHVHHDEO\DWWULEXWDEOH´WRKLVFRQGXFW DV ZHOO DV IRU XQIRUHVHHDEOH KDUP DWWULEXWDEOH WR KLV FRQGXFW XQOHVV LW DSSHDUVWKDWWKHFKDLQRIHYHQWVLV³KLJKO\H[WUDRUGLQDU\LQUHWURVSHFW´

Parker v. District of Columbia)G'&&LUTXRWLQJMorgan v. District of

Columbia)G±'&&LU



3ODLQWLIIKDVSXWIRUZDUGOLWWOHHYLGHQFHRQWKHLVVXHRIFDXVDWLRQ,QKLVPHPRUDQGXPKH

VLPSO\RIIHUVWKHFRQFOXVRU\DUJXPHQWWKDW³'2&¶VIDLOXUHWRKDYHDXQLIRUPVWDQGDUGSROLF\RI

UHFHLYLQJDQGSURFHVVLQJUHOHDVHRUGHUVUHVXOWHGLQ0U6PLWK¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQ´3O¶V&URVV0HP

DWsee also 3O¶V&URVV5HSO\DW³7KH'LVWULFW¶VEURNHQV\VWHPRIUHFHLYLQJUHOHDVHRUGHUV

IURPWKH6XSHULRU&RXUWLVWKHGLUHFWDQGSUR[LPDWHFDXVHRIWKH'LVWULFW¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQRI0U




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 33 of 56

6PLWKIRUGD\VDIWHULWUHFHLYHGWKHUHOHDVHRUGHU´:KHQSODLQWLII¶VH[SHUW&DPHURQ/LQGVD\

ZDV TXHVWLRQHG DERXW '2&¶V SURFHVVLQJ SURFHGXUHV KH FRXOG QRW GHVFULEH WKH V\VWHP LQ SODFH

([WR'HIV¶5HSO\>'NW@DW±7KHH[SHUWFRXOGH[SODLQWKDW³DQ\WLPH\RX¶UH

XWLOL]LQJ SDSHU WKDW¶V D YHU\ FXPEHUVRPH SURFHVV>@    HPDLOV FDQ EH PLVVHG ID[HV FDQ EH

LQDGYHUWHQWO\GLVFDUGHGRUQRWSULQWHGHWFHWHUD´Id.DW±%XWKHQHYHUVSHFLILFDOO\OLQNHG

WKHUHFHLSWRIDSDSHUUHOHDVHRUGHULQSODLQWLII¶VFDVHWRKLVRYHUGHWHQWLRQ7KHUHIRUHWKH&RXUW

FDQQRWILQGWKDWSODLQWLIIKDVHVWDEOLVKHGFDXVDWLRQDVDPDWWHURIODZDQGLWZLOOGHQ\KLVPRWLRQ

IRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQ&RXQW,RQWKLVWKHRU\



:KHWKHUGHIHQGDQWLVHQWLWOHGWRMXGJPHQWLVDFORVHUTXHVWLRQ7KHUHLVHYLGHQFHLQWKH

UHFRUG WR VXJJHVW WKDW ZKLOH WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU IRU FDVH QXPEHU  &0'  ZDV QHYHU

XSORDGHG LQWR 706 DV LW VKRXOG KDYH EHHQ %URZQ 0DU  'HS DW ± id. DW ±

0\ULFN0DU'HSDW±LWZDVWLPHVWDPSHGDVUHFHLYHGE\'2&DW30RQ

0DUFK    'HIV¶ 62)   3O¶V 5HVS 62)   $QG LW ZDV SODFHG LQ SODLQWLII¶V

LQVWLWXWLRQDOILOH3O¶V62)'HIV¶5HVS62)

%XW WKHUH LV QR LQGLFDWLRQ WKDW DQ\RQH SDLG DQ\ DWWHQWLRQ WR LW  ,QGHHG WKH ILUVW WLPH WKH

GHIHQVHPRYHGIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWWKH&RXUWZDVWROGWKDWWKH'HSDUWPHQWRI&RUUHFWLRQVKDG

QRW³UHFHLYHG´LWHYHQWKRXJKLWZDVLQSODLQWLII¶VILOHSee'HIV¶0HPRI3 $LQ6XSSRI

'HIV¶0RWIRU6XPP->'NW@DW±%URZQ'HF'HSDW±DFNQRZOHGJLQJ

WKDW WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU IRU FDVH QXPEHU  &0'  ZDV FRQWDLQHG ZLWKLQ SODLQWLII¶V

LQVWLWXWLRQDOILOH0\ULFNLQVLVWHGWKDWLWKDGQRWEHHQ³UHFHLYHG´VLQFHLWZDVQRWWLPHVWDPSHG

see 0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±DQGVKHDGYDQFHGWKHIDXOW\DQGFLUFXODUSURSRVLWLRQWKDW


 7KHSDUWLHVFLWH WR YDULRXV SRUWLRQVRI/LQGVD\¶VGHSRVLWLRQ See ([  WR 'HIV¶0RW >'NW  @ ([  WR 'HIV¶ 5HSO\ >'NW  @ WRJHWKHU ³/LQGVD\ 'HS´  7KH &RXUW¶V FLWDWLRQWR/LQGVD\¶VWHVWLPRQ\HQFRPSDVVHVDOORIWKHSRUWLRQVRIWKHWUDQVFULSWFLWHGE\WKHSDUWLHV



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 34 of 56
VLQFHWKHUHOHDVHZDVQRWSURFHVVHGRQ0DUFKLWPXVWQRWKDYHEHHQUHFHLYHGWKHQId. DW±'2&GLGQRWDGPLWWKDWLWKDG³UHFHLYHG´DFRS\RIWKHUHOHDVHRUGHULQFDVHQXPEHU &0'XQWLODIWHUWKHPRWLRQKDGEHHQIXOO\EULHIHGSee 1RWLFHRI)LOLQJ>'NW@ :K\QRW"
,WLVLPSRVVLEOHWRLJQRUHWKHIDFWWKDWHYHQDIWHUDOORIWKLVWLPHWKHGHIHQVHKDVQRW\HW EHHQ DEOH WR SXW WRJHWKHU D VLPSOH FKURQRORJ\ RI ZKDW WRRN SODFH LQ WKLV FDVH DQG ZKDW ZHQW ZURQJ'LGWKH0DUVKDOZDONSODLQWLIIWRWKHFHOOEORFNZLWKRQHSLHFHRISDSHURUWZR":K\ ZDVRQHRUGHULQSXWLQWR706EXWQRWWKHRWKHU"+RZGLGWKHVHFRQGRUGHUHQGXSLQSODLQWLII¶V ILOHLI706RQO\LQFOXGHGDQG-RQHVRQO\SURFHVVHGRQH":K\ZDVSODLQWLIIWUDQVSRUWHGEDFNWR WKHMDLODWDOO":K\GRHVWKHUHFRUGLQFOXGHERWKWLPHVWDPSHGDQGQRWWLPHVWDPSHGYHUVLRQVRI WKHVDPHGRFXPHQWVRUYHUVLRQVWKDWDUHERWKVLJQHGDQGQRWVLJQHGE\D'HSXW\0DUVKDO"7KH XQV\VWHPDWLF DQG LQFRQVLVWHQW KDQGOLQJ RI UHOHDVH RUGHUV LQ WKLV FDVH KDV FHUWDLQO\ LPSHGHG WKH SDUWLHV IURP DVFHUWDLQLQJ WKH IDFWV DQG WKH &RXUW LV UHOXFWDQW WR ILQG RQ WKLV ZRHIXOO\ GHILFLHQW UHFRUGWKDWQRMXURUFRXOGFRQFOXGHWKDWDKDSKD]DUGSURFHVVRIUHFHLYLQJRUGHUVWKURXJKDYDULHW\ RIPHDQVDQGLQDYDULHW\RIIRUPDWVDQGDWGLIIHUHQWVWDJHVLQWKHSURFHHGLQJVGLGQRWFRQWULEXWH WR WKH IDFW WKDW VRPH RI WKHP ZHUH LJQRUHG DQG WKDW WKH EDOO ZDV GURSSHG DW DW OHDVW RQH DQG SRVVLEO\PRUHVWHSVDORQJWKHZD\6RWKH'LVWULFW¶VPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWZLOOEHGHQLHG DVWRWKLVDVSHFWRI&RXQW,DVZHOO

 See, e.g. %URZQ'HF'HSDW±³46RGR\RXNQRZZKLFKFDVH0U6PLWK ZDV EHLQJ GHWDLQHG RQ ZKHQ \RX FRPSOHWHG WKH UHOHDVH DXWKRUL]DWLRQ IRUP"  $  ,¶P VWLOO QRW VXUH´



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 35 of 56

 7KH'LVWULFW¶V$OOHJHG3UDFWLFHRIQRW5HOHDVLQJ0LVGHPHDQDQWV)URP &RXUW



3ODLQWLII DOVR DUJXHV WKDW '2& KDV D SUDFWLFH RI QRW IROORZLQJ LWV SROLF\ WR UHOHDVH

PLVGHPHDQDQWVGLUHFWO\IURPWKHFRXUWKRXVHDQGWKDWDIDLOXUHWRIROORZWKLVSROLF\UHVXOWHGLQKLV

RYHUGHWHQWLRQ3O¶V&URVV0HPDW7KLVRYHUODSVVRPHZKDWZLWKWKHSDSHUZRUNWKHRU\



,Q LWV VWDWHPHQW RI IDFWV WKH 'LVWULFW DVVHUWHG WKDW ³PLVGHPHDQRU LQPDWHV DUH UHOHDVHG

GLUHFWO\IURP'&6XSHULRU&RXUW´DQGLWVXSSRUWHGWKLVVWDWHPHQWZLWKGHSRVLWLRQWHVWLPRQ\IURP

GHIHQGDQW0\ULFNSee 'HIV¶62),QUHVSRQVHSODLQWLIIVWDWHGWKDWWKHIDFWZDVGLVSXWHG

EHFDXVH KH³ZDV QRW UHOHDVHG GLUHFWO\IURPWKH &RXUW´3O¶V5HVS62) 7KDWLVFOHDUO\

FRUUHFW%XWSODLQWLIIKDVQRWSRLQWHGWRDQ\HYLGHQFHLQWKHUHFRUGWKDWZRXOGVXSSRUWKLVWKHRU\

WKDWWKLVRPLVVLRQZDVSDUWRIDODUJHUSUREOHPDQGWKDW'2&KDVVRFRQVLVWHQWO\IDLOHGWRIROORZ

LWVRZQSROLF\WKDWLWLVLWVFXVWRPRUSUDFWLFHWRGRVRDQGWKHSUDFWLFHOHGWRWKHHUURULQKLVFDVH



7KHUHIRUHWKH&RXUWZLOOGHQ\VXPPDU\MXGJPHQWIRUSODLQWLIIRQWKLVWKHRU\

F 'HOLEHUDWH,QGLIIHUHQFHRQWKH3DUWRIWKH'LVWULFW

 1R UHDVRQDEOH MXURU FRXOG FRQFOXGH WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW ZDV GHOLEHUDWHO\LQGLIIHUHQWWRWKHQHHGRIWUDLQLQJLWVWDIIVRDVWRFDXVH SODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQ



3ODLQWLII FRQWHQGV WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW IDLOHG WR WUDLQ LWV VWDII DGHTXDWHO\ RQ KRZ WR SURFHVV

UHOHDVHRUGHUVDQGWKDWWKLVODFNRIWUDLQLQJFDXVHGKLVRYHUGHWHQWLRQ3O¶V&URVV0HPDW±

'HIHQGDQW PDLQWDLQV WKDW EHFDXVH LW SURYLGHG VWDII ZLWK WUDLQLQJ UHODWLQJ WR SURFHVVLQJ UHOHDVH


 7KHHYLGHQFHLQWKHUHFRUGVXSSRUWVDQLQIHUHQFHWKDWSODLQWLIIZDVQRWUHOHDVHGGLUHFWO\ IURPFRXUWEHFDXVHRQHRIKLVUHOHDVHRUGHUVZDVQRWSURFHVVHG



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 36 of 56

RUGHUV QR UHDVRQDEOH MXURU FRXOG FRQFOXGH WKDW LWV LQGLIIHUHQFH WR WKH QHHG IRU WUDLQLQJ FDXVHG

SODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQ'HIV¶0HPDW±7KH&RXUWDJUHHV



³>$@JRYHUQPHQW¶VGHFLVLRQQRWWRWUDLQFHUWDLQHPSOR\HHVDERXWWKHLUOHJDOGXW\WRDYRLG

YLRODWLQJ FLWL]HQV¶ ULJKWV PD\ ULVH WR WKH OHYHO RI DQ RIILFLDO JRYHUQPHQW SROLF\ IRU SXUSRVHV

RI´ EXW WKH PXQLFLSDOLW\ ZLOO RQO\ EH KHOG OLDEOH LQ ³OLPLWHG FLUFXPVWDQFHV´ EHFDXVH LWV

³FXOSDELOLW\IRUDGHSULYDWLRQRIULJKWVLVDWLWVPRVWWHQXRXVZKHUHDFODLPWXUQVRQDIDLOXUHWR

WUDLQ´Connick v. Thompson867KHUHIRUHDPXQLFLSDOLW\¶VIDLOXUHWRWUDLQ

LWV HPSOR\HHV PXVW DPRXQW WR ³GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH WR WKH ULJKWV RI SHUVRQV ZLWK ZKRP WKH

XQWUDLQHGHPSOR\HHVFRPHLQWRFRQWDFW´Id.TXRWLQJCity of Canton v. Harris86

 LQWHUQDO HGLWV RPLWWHG  ,W LV DW WKDW SRLQW WKDW WKH VKRUWFRPLQJ RI SURSHUO\ WUDLQLQJ

HPSOR\HHVFDQEHWKRXJKWRIDVDFLW\¶V³SROLF\RUFXVWRP´WKDWLVDFWLRQDEOHXQGHUWKHVWDWXWHSee

id.



7R ULVH WR WKH OHYHO RI GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH WKH SODLQWLII PXVW SURYLGH SURRI WKDW WKH

³PXQLFLSDODFWRUGLVUHJDUGHGDNQRZQRUREYLRXVFRQVHTXHQFHRIKLVDFWLRQ´Connick86

DWTXRWLQJBrown86DW³>:@KHQDFLW\¶VSROLF\PDNHUVDUHRQDFWXDORUFRQVWUXFWLYH

QRWLFHWKDWDSDUWLFXODURPLVVLRQLQWKHLUWUDLQLQJSURJUDPFDXVHVFLW\HPSOR\HHVWRYLRODWHFLWL]HQV¶

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOULJKWVWKHFLW\PD\EHGHHPHGGHOLEHUDWHO\LQGLIIHUHQWLIWKHSROLF\PDNHUVFKRRVH

WRUHWDLQWKDWSURJUDP´Id. DWFLWLQJBrown86DW8VXDOO\³>D@SDWWHUQRIVLPLODU

FRQVWLWXWLRQDO YLRODWLRQV E\ XQWUDLQHG HPSOR\HHV LV    µQHFHVVDU\¶ WR GHPRQVWUDWH GHOLEHUDWH

LQGLIIHUHQFHIRUSXUSRVHVRIIDLOXUHWRWUDLQ´Id.TXRWLQJBrown86DW+RZHYHUWKHUH

DUHUDUHFLUFXPVWDQFHVLQZKLFK³WKHXQFRQVWLWXWLRQDOFRQVHTXHQFHVRIIDLOLQJWRWUDLQFRXOGEHVR

SDWHQWO\REYLRXVWKDWDFLW\FRXOGEHOLDEOHXQGHUZLWKRXWSURRIRIDSUHH[LVWLQJSDWWHUQRI




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 37 of 56

YLRODWLRQV´Id.DW)LQDOO\SODLQWLIIEHDUVWKHEXUGHQRISURYLQJWKDWWKHODFNRIWUDLQLQJDFWXDOO\

FDXVHGWKHYLRODWLRQLQTXHVWLRQSee Harris86DW



+HUHWKHHYLGHQFHSURYLGHGE\ERWKSDUWLHVLQGLFDWHVWKDWWKHUHLVQRTXHVWLRQWKDW'2&

VWDIIUHFHLYHGsome WUDLQLQJRQKRZWRSURFHVVUHOHDVHRUGHUVDQGSODLQWLIIKDVQRWFRPHIRUZDUG

ZLWKHYLGHQFHFRQQHFWLQJDQ\JDSVLQWKDWWUDLQLQJWRDVHULHVRIVLPLODUFRQVWLWXWLRQDOGHSULYDWLRQV

WKDWVKRXOGKDYHQRWLILHG'2&RIDSUREOHP



,WLVXQGLVSXWHGWKDWZKHQDQ/,(LVILUVWKLUHGHDFKRQHSDUWLFLSDWHVLQDIRUW\KRXUWUDLQLQJ

VHVVLRQ ZKLFK LQFOXGHV WUDLQLQJ RQ ³WRSLFV GLUHFWO\ UHODWHG WR WKH ZRUN SHUIRUPHG E\ OHJDO

LQVWUXPHQW H[DPLQHUV VXFK DV LQWDNHV FRXUW UHWXUQV KRZ WR SURFHVV UHOHDVHV >DQG@ VHQWHQFH

FRPSXWDWLRQV´'HIV¶62)±3O¶V5HVS62)±see also 0\ULFN1RY'HS

DW ± GHVFULELQJ WKH IRUW\ KRXUV RI ³VSHFLDOL]HG WUDLQLQJ´ DV LQFOXGLQJ WUDLQLQJ RQ

³SURFHGXUHV RQ SURFHVVLQJ WKH >VHQWHQFLQJ@ FRPSXWDWLRQV WKH UHOHDVHV SUHWULDO GRFXPHQWV DQG

DQ\RWKHUGRFXPHQWWKDWZLOOKROGDQLQPDWHZLWKLQFXVWRG\´7KRPSVRQ'HSDW±VWDWLQJ

WKDWZKHQKHILUVWEHFDPHD/,(³LWZDVOLNHWKHRWKHUSHRSOHWKDWZDVDOUHDG\WKHUHWUDLQLQJXV

VKRZLQJXVGLIIHUHQWWKLQJVDQGZHKDGPDQXDOVWKDWZHKDGWRORRNDWRXUVHOYHVWRUHDOO\OHDUQ

RXUVHOYHV´-RQHV'HSDW±DFNQRZOHGJLQJWKDW/,(¶V³DUHWDXJKWWKHEDVLFVRIHDFKSDUWRI

>WKHLU@MRE´DQGWKHQWKH\³SUHWW\PXFKGRWKHZRUNDQG>WKH\@OHDUQIXUWKHULQWRLWE\GRLQJWKH

ZRUN´  /,(¶V DOVR UHFHLYH WUDLQLQJ PDQXDOV WKDW RXWOLQH WKRVH SURFHGXUHV  0\ULFN 1RY 

'HSDW±7KRPSVRQ'HSDW±%XWWKHUHLVQRDGGLWLRQDOUHJXODUWUDLQLQJLQUHOHDVH

SURFHGXUHVHYHQIRUVXSHUYLVRUVSee0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±FODULI\LQJWKDW³WKH

VWDII LQ >WKH WUDLQLQJ@ WKDW DUH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH /,(V VR WKH\¶YH DOUHDG\ EHHQ WKURXJK WKH EDVLF

WUDLQLQJ´id.DW±GHVFULELQJDQQXDOWUDLQLQJRQWRSLFVUHODWHGWRILUVWDLGDQGKXPDQ

UHVRXUFHV7KRPSVRQ'HSDW±VDPH-RQHV'HSDW±VDPH




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 38 of 56



)XUWKHUPRUHWKHUHLVQRHYLGHQFHWKDW/,(¶VZHUHXQDZDUHRIWKHDSSURSULDWHSURFHGXUHV

IRUSURFHVVLQJLQPDWHV5DWKHUHDFK/,(DQGVXSHUYLVRUZKRWHVWLILHGDERXWWKHSURFHVVLQFOXGLQJ

-RQHVUHYHDOHGDQDFFXUDWHXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIWKHSURFHGXUHSee, e.g.-RQHV'HSDW±

id. DW±id. DW±id. DW±id. DW±%URZQ'HF'HSDW±

id. DW±%URZQ0DU'HSDW±



3ODLQWLII DUJXHV WKRXJK WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW ZDV RQ QRWLFH RI D VLJQLILFDQW RYHUGHWHQWLRQ

SUREOHP DQG WKDW LWV IDLOXUH WR LPSOHPHQW DGGLWLRQDO WUDLQLQJ DPRXQWV WR GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH

WKDWFDXVHGWKHHUURULQSODLQWLII¶VFDVHSee 3O¶V&URVV0HPDW±3O¶V&URVV5HSO\DW

%XWWKDWLVQRWWKHSURSHULQTXLU\3ODLQWLIILVUHTXLUHGWRFRPHIRUZDUGZLWKHYLGHQFHRINQRZQ

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOYLRODWLRQVWKDWUHYHDOHGDIODZLQWKHSHUSHWUDWRUV¶WUDLQLQJDQGSXW'2&RQQRWLFH

RIDQHHGWRUHYLVHRUVXSSOHPHQWLWVLQVWUXFWLRQVWRLWVSHUVRQQHO



3ODLQWLII KDV HQGHDYRUHG WR SURYH WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW ZDV ³RQ QRWLFH RI WKH VLJQLILFDQW

RYHUGHWHQWLRQSUREOHP´UDWKHUWKDQWKDWWKH'LVWULFWZDVRQQRWLFHWKDWits failure to train'2&

VWDIIZDVFDXVLQJLWVHPSOR\HHVWRRYHUGHWDLQLQPDWHVLQYLRODWLRQRIWKHLUFRQVWLWXWLRQDOULJKWVDV

UHTXLUHGE\Connick86DW+HSRLQWVWRWZRSULRUODZVXLWVWKHBynam FDVHILOHGLQ

DQGWKHBarnes FDVHILOHGLQ%RWKFRQFHUQHGLQPDWHVEHLQJKHOGWRRORQJDIWHUWKH\

ZHUHRUGHUHGUHOHDVHGE\DFRXUWRUWKHLUVHQWHQFHVH[SLUHGDQGVRPHLQPDWHVEHLQJUHWXUQHGWR

MDLO DQG VWULS VHDUFKHG ZKLOH WKHLU UHOHDVHV ZHUH EHLQJ SURFHVVHG  See Barnes v. District of

Columbia)6XSSG''&³7KHUHIRUHWKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQSUREOHP

DQGWKHVWULSVHDUFKSUREOHPDUHLQWHUUHODWHGWKHRQHOHDGLQJWRWKHRWKHU´Bynam v. District of

Columbia)6XSSG''&3ODLQWLIIDUJXHVWKDWWKRVHODZVXLWVSXWWKH'LVWULFW

RQQRWLFHRIXQFRQVWLWXWLRQDOGHWHQWLRQVDQGWKDWEHFDXVHWKH³'2&KDVQRWSURYLGHGDQ\WUDLQLQJ

WR LWV VWDII RQ SURFHVVLQJ UHOHDVH RUGHUV´ LW KDV DFWHG GHOLEHUDWHO\ ZLWK LQGLIIHUHQFH WR FLWL]HQV¶




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 39 of 56

ULJKWV  3O¶V &URVV0HP DW   %XW WKRVH FDVHV GHDOW ZLWK ODUJH FODVVHV RI SODLQWLIIV DOOHJLQJ

XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDORYHUGHWHQWLRQWLHGWRDVWULSVHDUFKSROLF\DQGWKH\GLGQRWVSHFLILFDOO\GHDOZLWK

WKH PLVKDQGOLQJ RI UHOHDVH RUGHUV RU WKH WUDLQLQJ '2& UHFRUGV H[DPLQHUV UHFHLYHG LQ   6R

NQRZOHGJH RI WKRVH FDVHV GRHV QRW QHFHVVDULO\ SURYH WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW ZDV DZDUH LQ  RI D

WUDLQLQJSUREOHP



3ODLQWLIIDOVRSRLQWVWRWKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQUHSRUWVZKLFKFRQWDLQEULHIH[SODQDWLRQVIRUWKH

FDXVHV RI LQFLGHQWV RI RYHUGHWHQWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH \HDUV RI  DQG   See 6HFRQG

2YHUGHWHQWLRQ 5HSRUW 7KLUG 2YHUGHWHQWLRQ 5HSRUW  %XW WKH\ DOVR GR QRW SURYLGH D EDVLV IRU D

UHDVRQDEOH MXU\ WR FRQFOXGH WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW KDG QRWLFH RI D SDWWHUQ RI OLNHO\ XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO

FRQGXFWDWWULEXWDEOHWRWUDLQLQJ7KHFDXVHVRIWKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQVYDULHGIURP³,7V\VWHPLVVXHV´

WR ³ZDUUDQWLQ :$/(6´ WR ³PLVWDNH LQ VHQWHQFLQJ FRPSXWDWLRQ´WR ³VWDII HUURU´ DQG WKHUH LV

HYLGHQFH WKDW '2& VWDII UHFHLYHG WUDLQLQJ RQ KRZ WR SURFHVV UHOHDVH RUGHUV LQ RUGHU WR SUHYHQW

HUURUV  See 6HFRQG 2YHUGHWHQWLRQ 5HSRUW 7KLUG 2YHUGHWHQWLRQ 5HSRUW see also Robinson v.

Pezzat)G'&&LUFRQFOXGLQJWKDWUHSRUWVRIGRJVKRRWLQJVGLGQRWSURYLGH

D EDVLV IRU D MXU\ WR FRQFOXGH WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW KDG QRWLFH RI D SDWWHUQ RI OLNHO\ XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO

FRQGXFWDGHTXDWHWRSURYHGHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFHZKHUHPDQ\RIWKHUHSRUWVLQGLFDWHGWKDWRIILFHUV

VKRWGRJVIRUUHDVRQVWKDWZHUHQRWXQFRQVWLWXWLRQDOVXFKDVZKHQWKH\ZHUHEHLQJDWWDFNHGDQG

EHFDXVHWKHSROLFHGHSDUWPHQWJDYHRIILFHUVWUDLQLQJDERXWKRZWRLGHQWLI\DQGFRQWUROGDQJHURXV

GRJV



0RUHRYHU QR UHDVRQDEOH MXURUFRXOGFRQFOXGHWKDWLWZDVDODFN RI WUDLQLQJ WKDWFDXVHG

SODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQ³>)@RUOLDELOLW\WRDWWDFKWKHLGHQWLILHGGHILFLHQF\LQDFLW\¶VWUDLQLQJ

SURJUDPPXVWEHFORVHO\UHODWHGWRWKHXOWLPDWHLQMXU\´See Harris86DW7KDWPHDQV

WKDWWKHDOOHJHGO\LQDGHTXDWHWUDLQLQJPXVWEHWKH³PRYLQJIRUFH´EHKLQGWKHDOOHJHGFRQVWLWXWLRQDO




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 40 of 56

YLRODWLRQSee Monell86DW7KXVLQWKHFDVHDWKDQGSODLQWLIIPXVWSURYHWKDWWKH

GHILFLHQF\LQWUDLQLQJFDXVHG-RQHVWRLPSURSHUO\SURFHVVSODLQWLII¶VUHOHDVHRUGHUZKLFKUHVXOWHG

LQWKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQSee Harris86DW



3ODLQWLII¶VH[SHUWWHVWLILHGWKDWKH³ZRXOGOLNHWRVHH´WKH'2&LPSOHPHQWWUDLQLQJVLPLODU

WR WKDW RIIHUHG E\ WKH )HGHUDO %XUHDX RI 3ULVRQV ³%23´  /LQGVD\ 'HS DW ±  +H

GHVFULEHG WKH %23¶V QLQHPRQWK WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP ZKLFK LQFOXGHV FRPSOHWLQJ PRGXOHV

GHPRQVWUDWLQJSURILFLHQF\LQSDUWLFXODUDUHDVId. +RZHYHU/LQGVD\GLGQRWLGHQWLI\GHILFLHQFLHV

LQ '2&¶V WUDLQLQJ ZLWK UHVSHFW WR UHOHDVH RUGHUV LQ SDUWLFXODU DQG KH GLG QRW FRQQHFW DQ\

GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ KLV SUHIHUUHG WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP DQG '2&¶V WR ZKDW WRRN SODFH LQ WKLV FDVH

³:LWKRXW PRUHD UHDVRQDEOH MXU\ FRXOG RQO\ VSHFXODWH WKDW WKH ODFN RI VRPH XQVSHFLILHG

WUDLQLQJFRQWULEXWHGWR´SODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQLane v. District of Columbia)6XSSG

''&FRQFOXGLQJWKDWWKHSODLQWLIIKDGQRWSURYHQWKDWDODFNRIWUDLQLQJFDXVHG

DQRIILFHUWRXVHGHDGO\IRUFH0RUHRYHUWKHUHLVQRHYLGHQFHWKDW-RQHVGLGQRWNQRZWKHSURSHU

SURFHGXUHIRUKRZWRSURFHVVUHOHDVHRUGHUV



³,QYLUWXDOO\HYHU\LQVWDQFHZKHUHDSHUVRQKDVKDGKLVRUKHUFRQVWLWXWLRQDOULJKWVYLRODWHG

E\DFLW\HPSOR\HHDSODLQWLIIZLOOEHDEOHWRSRLQWWRVRPHWKLQJWKHFLW\µFRXOGKDYHGRQH¶

WRSUHYHQWWKHXQIRUWXQDWHLQFLGHQW´ Harris86DW%XWPRUHLVQHFHVVDU\WRHVWDEOLVK

PXQLFLSDOOLDELOLW\³$QGSODLQO\DGHTXDWHO\WUDLQHGRIILFHUVRFFDVLRQDOO\PDNHPLVWDNHVWKHIDFW

WKDWWKH\GRVD\VOLWWOHDERXWWKHWUDLQLQJSURJUDPRUWKHOHJDOEDVLVIRUKROGLQJWKHFLW\OLDEOH´Id.

DW  %HFDXVH SODLQWLII KDV QRW SUHVHQWHG VXIILFLHQW HYLGHQFH WR HVWDEOLVK WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW¶V

VWDQGDUGWUDLQLQJRQSURFHVVLQJUHOHDVHRUGHUVLVGHILFLHQWRUKRZWKHODFNRIDGGLWLRQDOWUDLQLQJ

ZDVFRQQHFWHGWRSODLQWLII¶VGHWHQWLRQWKH&RXUWZLOOJUDQWVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWIRUWKH'LVWULFWRQ

WKLVWKHRU\RIOLDELOLW\




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 41 of 56

 1R UHDVRQDEOH MXURU FRXOG FRQFOXGH WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW ZDV GHOLEHUDWHO\ LQGLIIHUHQW WR WKH QHHG RI VXSHUYLVLQJLW VWDII VR DV WR FDXVHSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQ



$PXQLFLSDOLW\FDQEHKHOGOLDEOH³XSRQDVKRZLQJRIGHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFHH[KLELWHGE\

D SDWWHUQ RI LQDGHTXDWHVXSHUYLVLRQ DQG GLVFLSOLQH RI >RIILFLDOV@ SURYLGHG WKHUH LV D FDXVDO

FRQQHFWLRQEHWZHHQVXFKLQDGHTXDFLHVDQGWKHULVNRIKDUPWRRWKHUV´Parker)GDW

3ODLQWLII DUJXHV WKDW WKH 'LVWULFW¶V IDLOXUH WR VXSHUYLVH LWV HPSOR\HHV RU WR LPSOHPHQW DGHTXDWH

PRQLWRULQJ FRQWUROV WR SUHYHQW RYHUGHWHQWLRQ DPRXQWV WR GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH WR WKH

FRQVWLWXWLRQDOULJKWVRILQPDWHV3O¶V&URVV0HPDW±6SHFLILFDOO\KHPDLQWDLQVWKDWWKH

ODFN RI DQ\ ³RYHUVLJKW FRQWUROV WR YHULI\ LI DQ HPSOR\HH FRPSOHWHV D VWHS LQ LWV OHQJWK\ UHOHDVH

RUGHU SURFHVV´ FRPELQHG ZLWK WKH QRQH[LVWHQFH RI D ³V\VWHP WR LGHQWLI\ VWDII PHPEHUV WKDW

FRPPLWHUURUV´UHVXOWHGLQKLVXQFRQVWLWXWLRQDORYHUGHWHQWLRQId. DW



,WLVXQGLVSXWHGWKDWDVXSHUYLVRU\//,(GRXEOHFKHFNVDOOZRUNFRPSOHWHGE\D/,('HIV¶

62)3O¶V5HVS62)6XSHUYLVRUVDOVRXVHWKH706DQG-$&&6V\VWHPVWRPRQLWRU

HPSOR\HH SHUIRUPDQFH  0\ULFN WKH &RUUHFWLRQDO 3URJUDP $GPLQLVWUDWRU WHVWLILHG WKDW

VXSHUYLVRUVXVH706WRPRQLWRUVWDIISURGXFWLYLW\DQGWRKROGWKHPDFFRXQWDEOHIRUDFFRPSOLVKLQJ

FHUWDLQWDVNVWKURXJKRXWWKHGD\0\ULFN0DU'HSDW±$QG%URZQDVXSHUYLVRU\

//,(WHVWLILHGWKDWVKHFDQSHUIRUPDQDXGLWLQWKH-$&&6V\VWHPWRLGHQWLI\WKHLQGLYLGXDOZKR

VWDPSHGDVSHFLILFUHOHDVHRUGHUDQGZKRWKHQHQWHUHGWKHLQIRUPDWLRQLQWR-$&&6See %URZQ

0DU'HSDW±id. DW±



$QG ZLWK UHJDUG WR DFWLRQV VXSHUYLVRUV WDNH RQFH WKH\ OHDUQ RI RYHUGHWHQWLRQV 0\ULFN

WHVWLILHG WKDW RQFH DQ RYHUGHWHQWLRQ LV UHSRUWHG VKH SUHSDUHV D UHSRUW DQG WKHQ GLVFLSOLQHV WKH

HPSOR\HHVZKRPDGHWKHHUURU0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±id. DW±




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 42 of 56



3ODLQWLII DUJXHV WKDW EHFDXVH ³'2& KDG DFWXDO QRWLFH WKDW VWDII HUURU KDV UHVXOWHG LQ

XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO RYHUGHWHQWLRQV´ LWV IDLOXUH WR GR PRUH WR VXSHUYLVH LWV HPSOR\HHV DPRXQWHG WR

GHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFHDQGFDXVHGSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQ3O¶V&URVV0HPDW



7RSURYHWKDWWKH'LVWULFWZDVRQQRWLFHWKDWVWDIIHUURUZDVUHVXOWLQJLQXQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO

RYHUGHWHQWLRQVSODLQWLIISRLQWVWRWKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQUHSRUWVLQWKHUHFRUG3O¶V&URVV0HPDW

+RZHYHUWKHUHSRUWVUHIOHFWWKDWRYHUGHWHQWLRQVUHVXOWHGIURPDQXPEHURILVVXHVVXFKDV³VWDII

HUURU´ ³RWKHU FRXUW GLVFUHSDQF\´ ³LQDGHTXDWH KDQGOLQJ RI GRFXPHQWV´ ³,7 V\VWHP LVVXHV´

³VHQWHQFHFRPSXWDWLRQHUURU´³:DUUDQWLQ:$/(6´DQG³JRRGWLPHFUHGLWZDVQRWDSSOLHG´See

6HFRQG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUW7KLUG2YHUGHWHQWLRQ5HSRUW%DVHGRQDOORIWKHUHDVRQVOHDGLQJWR

WKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQVLQDGGLWLRQWRWKHHYLGHQFHWKDWVXSHUYLVRUVGLGKDYHDQDFWLYHUROHDWWKH'2&

QRUHDVRQDEOHMXURUFRXOGFRQFOXGHWKDWWKHUHSRUWVSXWWKH'LVWULFWRQQRWLFHRIDSDWWHUQRIOLNHO\

XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDOFRQGXFWDGHTXDWHWRSURYHGHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFHSee Robinson)GDW



3ODLQWLII DOVR IRFXVHV KHDYLO\ RQ 0\ULFN¶V IDLOXUH WR IROORZ ZKDW VKH WHVWLILHG ZDV KHU

VWDQGDUGSUDFWLFHVKHGLGQRWFUHDWHDQRYHUGHWHQWLRQUHSRUWLQWKLVFDVHDQGVKHGLGQRWGLVFLSOLQH

DQ\ HPSOR\HH LQ FRQQHFWLRQ ZLWK SODLQWLII¶V RYHUGHWHQWLRQ  7KLV VKRZV VD\V SODLQWLII WKDW WKH

'LVWULFW³WXUQHGDEOLQGH\H´WRZDUGVWDIIHUURUVDQGIDLOHGWRSURYLGHDGHTXDWHVXSHUYLVLRQ3O¶V

&URVV0HP DW   :KLOH WKHVH IDFWV DUH WURXEOLQJ DQG XQH[SODLQHG WKH 'LVWULFW FDQQRW EH KHOG

OLDEOHIRU0\ULFN¶VIDLOXUHVXQGHUDrespondeat superiorWKHRU\Monell86DW$QG

WKLVRQHH[DPSOHLVQRWHQRXJKWRGHPRQVWUDWHGHOLEHUDWHLQGLIIHUHQFHRQWKHSDUWRIWKH'LVWULFW

SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ OLJKW RI HYLGHQFH LQ WKH UHFRUG WKDW RWKHU '2& VWDII PHPEHUV ZKR PDGH VLPLODU

HUURUV UHVXOWLQJ LQ RYHUGHWHQWLRQV ZHUH GLVFLSOLQHG See 6HFRQG 2YHUGHWHQWLRQ 5HSRUW 0\ULFN

1RY  'HS DW ±  0RUH RIWHQ WKDQ QRW WKH HPSOR\HH UHFHLYHG VRPH VRUW RI

GLVFLSOLQDU\ DFWLRQ VXFK DV FRXQVHOLQJ VXVSHQVLRQ RU UHSULPDQG  See 6HFRQG 2YHUGHWHQWLRQ




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 43 of 56

5HSRUW0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±7KHUHIRUHSODLQWLIIKDVQRWGHPRQVWUDWHGWKDWWKH

'LVWULFWZDVGHOLEHUDWHO\LQGLIIHUHQWWRDSDWWHUQRILQDGHTXDWHVXSHUYLVLRQWKDWFDXVHGSODLQWLII¶V

RYHUGHWHQWLRQ7KH'LVWULFWLVWKHUHIRUHHQWLWOHGWRVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQWKLVWKHRU\RIOLDELOLW\DV

ZHOO

% ,QGLYLGXDO/LDELOLW\8QGHU6HFWLRQ



%RWKLQGLYLGXDOGHIHQGDQWVDUJXHWKDWVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWLQWKHLUIDYRULVDSSURSULDWHRQ

SODLQWLII¶VVHFWLRQFODLPEHFDXVHWKH\DUHHQWLWOHGWRTXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\See 'HIV¶0HPDW

±



4XDOLILHGLPPXQLW\SURWHFWVJRYHUQPHQWRIILFLDOV³IURPOLDELOLW\IRUFLYLOGDPDJHVLQVRIDU

DVWKHLUFRQGXFWGRHVQRWYLRODWHFOHDUO\HVWDEOLVKHGVWDWXWRU\RUFRQVWLWXWLRQDOULJKWVRIZKLFKD

UHDVRQDEOHSHUVRQZRXOGKDYHNQRZQ´Harlow v. Fitzgerald86³7KH

UHOHYDQWGLVSRVLWLYHLQTXLU\LVZKHWKHULWZRXOGEHFOHDUWRDUHDVRQDEOHRIILFHUWKDWKLVFRQGXFW

ZDVXQODZIXOLQWKHVLWXDWLRQKHFRQIURQWHG´Saucier v. Katz867KXV

WKH GRFWULQH ³JLYHV JRYHUQPHQW RIILFLDOV EUHDWKLQJ URRP WR PDNH UHDVRQDEOH EXW PLVWDNHQ


 (YHQ LI WKH 'LVWULFW¶V DOOHJHGO\ GHILFLHQW VXSHUYLVLRQ URVH WR WKH OHYHO RI GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH QR UHDVRQDEOH MXURU FRXOG ILQG WKDW WKH GHILFLHQF\ ZDV ³WKH PRYLQJ IRUFH´ EHKLQG SODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQHLWKHUSee Westfahl v. District of Columbia)6XSSG ''&  REVHUYLQJ WKDW ZKLOH WKH VXJJHVWLRQ RI EHWWHU LQYHVWLJDWLRQV DQG PRUH VWULQJHQW GLVFLSOLQH ZRXOG GLVFRXUDJH RIILFHUV IURP XVLQJ H[FHVVLYH IRUFH D ³PRUH OD[ GLVFLSOLQH V\VWHP GRHVQRWGHPRQVWUDWHWKDW03'¶VSUDFWLFHVZHUHµthePRYLQJIRUFH¶EHKLQGWKLVVSHFLILFLQFLGHQW´ FLWDWLRQ RPLWWHG  $W PRVW WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ SROLFLHV DQG PRQLWRULQJ FRQWUROV LQ SODFH PDGH LW GLIILFXOWWRLGHQWLI\WKHSHUVRQRUSHUVRQVUHVSRQVLEOHIRUSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQVLQFHWKHUHZDV QRSURJUDPLQH[LVWHQFHWR³LGHQWLI\HUURUVE\VWDII´See 0\ULFN0DU'HSDW± 3ODLQWLIIFRQFHGHVDVPXFKLQKLVFURVVPRWLRQE\DGPLWWLQJWKDWWKH³UHVXOWRI'2&¶VIDLOXUHWR VXSHUYLVHLWVVWDII>ZDVWKDW@'2&>ZD@VXQDEOHWRGHWHUPLQHKRZLWUHFHLYHGWKH0DUFK UHOHDVHRUGHUVFRQWDLQHGLQLWVLQVWLWXWLRQDOILOHIRU0U6PLWK´3O¶V&URVV0HPDW0RUHRYHU SODLQWLIIKDVQRWFRPHIRUZDUGZLWKFRQFUHWHH[DPSOHVRIZKDWDGGLWLRQDOVXSHUYLVLRQFRXOGKDYH SUHYHQWHGWKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQ3ODLQWLIIVHHPVWRVXJJHVWDQHHGIRUDV\VWHPWKDWZRXOGLGHQWLI\ HUURUVE\WKHVWDIIZKLFK0\ULFNDGPLWVGRHVQRWH[LVWSee 0\ULFN0DU'HSDW± %XWKHGRHVQRWH[SODLQZKDWVRUWRIV\VWHPFRXOGDVFHUWDLQZKDWWRRNSODFHZKHQDQRUGHU ZDVQRWHQWHUHGLQWRWKHV\VWHP



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 44 of 56

MXGJPHQWV´Ashcroft v. al-Kidd86see also Pearson v. Callahan

86    ³7KH SULQFLSOHV RI TXDOLILHG LPPXQLW\ VKLHOG DQ RIILFHU IURP SHUVRQDO

OLDELOLW\ ZKHQ DQ RIILFHU UHDVRQDEO\ EHOLHYHV WKDW KLV RU KHU FRQGXFW FRPSOLHV ZLWK WKH ODZ´

³4XDOLILHG LPPXQLW\ EDODQFHV WZR LPSRUWDQW LQWHUHVWV ± WKH QHHG WR KROG SXEOLF RIILFLDOV

DFFRXQWDEOH ZKHQ WKH\ H[HUFLVH SRZHU LUUHVSRQVLEO\ DQG WKH QHHG WR VKLHOG RIILFLDOV IURP

KDUDVVPHQWGLVWUDFWLRQDQGOLDELOLW\ZKHQWKH\SHUIRUPWKHLUGXWLHVUHDVRQDEO\´Pearson

86 DW  $ GHIHQGDQW¶V HQWLWOHPHQWWRTXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\LVDTXHVWLRQRIODZEXWIDFWXDO

GLVSXWHVFDQSUHFOXGHDILQGLQJRIVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWPitt v. District of Columbia)G

'&&LU



7KH IDFW WKDW WKH &RXUW DOUHDG\ FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKHUH LV D EDVLV IRU WKH MXU\ WR ILQG WKDW

SODLQWLII¶V)LIWK$PHQGPHQWULJKWVZHUHYLRODWHGGRHVQRWPHDQWKDWGHIHQGDQWV0\ULFNDQG-RQHV

FOHDUO\VKRXOGKDYHNQRZQWKH\ZHUHYLRODWLQJWKHPZKHQWKH\DFWHGRUIDLOHGWRDFWSee Elkins

v. District of Columbia)G'&&LUFRQFOXGLQJWKDWWKHSODLQWLII¶V)RXUWK

$PHQGPHQWULJKWVZHUHYLRODWHGZKHQRIILFHUVVHL]HGEHORQJLQJVQRWLQFOXGHGLQWKHZDUUDQWEXW

WKDWWKHGHIHQGDQWZKRZDVDMXQLRUPHPEHURIWKHVHDUFKWHDPDQGZDVXQDZDUHRIWKHWHUPVRI

WKHZDUUDQWZDVHQWLWOHGWRTXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\EHFDXVHKHU³DFWLRQVWKRXJKPLVWDNHQZHUHQRW

XQUHDVRQDEOH´see also Anderson v. Creighton86³7KHFRQWRXUVRIWKH

ULJKWPXVWEHVXIILFLHQWO\FOHDUWKDWDUHDVRQDEOHRIILFLDOZRXOGXQGHUVWDQGWKDWZKDWKHLVGRLQJ

YLRODWHVWKDWULJKW´



$QLQGLYLGXDO¶VFRQGXFWZLOOULVHWRWKHOHYHORIDVXEVWDQWLYHGXHSURFHVVYLRODWLRQLIKLV

RUKHUFRQGXFWLVVRHJUHJLRXVWKDWitVKRFNVWKHFRQVFLHQFHSee Lewis86DW±7KH

6XSUHPH &RXUW KDV GHVFULEHG WKLV FRQGXFW DV IDOOLQJ VRPHZKHUH EHWZHHQ QHJOLJHQFH DQG

LQWHQWLRQDO FRQGXFW DQG LW LQFOXGHV UHFNOHVVQHVV RU DFWLQJ ZLWK GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH WRZDUG




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 45 of 56

LQPDWHVSee id.DW±³:HKDYHDFFRUGLQJO\UHMHFWHGWKHORZHVWFRPPRQGHQRPLQDWRURI

FXVWRPDU\ WRUW OLDELOLW\ DV DQ\ PDUN RI VXIILFLHQWO\ VKRFNLQJ FRQGXFW DQG KDYH KHOG WKDW WKH

&RQVWLWXWLRQ GRHV QRW JXDUDQWHH GXH FDUH RQ WKH SDUW RI VWDWH RIILFLDOV OLDELOLW\ IRU QHJOLJHQWO\

LQIOLFWHGKDUPLVFDWHJRULFDOO\EHQHDWKWKHWKUHVKROGRIFRQVWLWXWLRQDOGXHSURFHVV´7KHUHIRUH

WKHTXHVWLRQEHIRUHWKH&RXUWLVZKHWKHUWKHLQGLYLGXDOGHIHQGDQWV¶DFWLRQVFDQEHVDLGWRVKRFN

WKHFRQVFLHQFH

 -DFN-RQHVLVHQWLWOHGWRTXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\



'HIHQGDQW -RQHV SURFHVVHG SODLQWLII¶V UHOHDVH RUGHU RQ 0DUFK   LQ FDVH QXPEHU

&0'-RQHV'HSDW±$OWKRXJKKHDGPLWWHGWKDWKHIDLOHGWRWLPHVWDPS

WKHRUGHUDVKHZDVUHTXLUHGWRGRid. DW±KHFRUUHFWO\GHVFULEHGWKHSURFHGXUHIRU

KRZ WR SURFHVV UHOHDVH RUGHUV LQFOXGLQJ WKH IDFW WKDW KH ZDV UHTXLUHG WR UHYLHZ 0\-867,6 IRU

UHOHDVHRUGHUVDQGRUDGGLWLRQDOFDVHVFRPPLWWLQJWKHLQPDWHId.DW±id. DW±



3ODLQWLII SRVLWV WKDW VLQFH KH ZDV LQGHHG GHWDLQHG ³HLWKHU -RQHV GLG FKHFN -867,6 DQG

LQWHQWLRQDOO\ UHIXVHG WRSURFHVVWKHUHOHDVH RUGHU LQ FDVH QR &0'  RU 0U -RQHV


 'HIHQGDQWVDUJXHWKDWWKH&RXUWVKRXOGJUDQWWKHLUPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQWKHLU TXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\GHIHQVHDVFRQFHGHGSXUVXDQWWR/RFDO&LYLO5XOHEEHFDXVHSODLQWLII³IDLOHG WRDGGUHVVWKLVOHJDODUJXPHQW´DQGRQO\PDGHFRQFOXVRU\VWDWHPHQWV'HIV¶5HSO\DW7KH &RXUWILQGVWKDWGHIHQGDQWV¶DWWHPSWWRKDYHWKLVDUJXPHQWEHWUHDWHGDVFRQFHGHGLVFRPSOHWHO\ GLVLQJHQXRXV  3ODLQWLII DGGUHVVHV GHIHQGDQWV¶ TXDOLILHG LPPXQLW\ GHIHQVH RYHU WKH VSDQ RI PXOWLSOHSDJHVsee 3O¶V&URVV0HPDW±DQGMXVWEHFDXVHSODLQWLIIPD\QRWKDYHUHVSRQGHG WR RQH SDUWLFXODU VHQWHQFH LQ GHIHQGDQWV¶ EULHI QR DXWKRULW\ VXSSRUWV D ILQGLQJ RI VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQWRQWKDWEDVLV0RUHLPSRUWDQWO\WKHODZLQWKLV&LUFXLWSUHFOXGHVD&RXUWIURPJUDQWLQJ PRWLRQVIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWDVFRQFHGHGSee Winston & Strawn, LLP)GDW± ³>5XOH@GRHVQRWLQDQ\ZD\HQGRUVHDQDSSURDFKSXUVXDQWWRZKLFKWKH'LVWULFW&RXUWPD\ JUDQWMXGJPHQWµDVFRQFHGHG¶VLPSO\EHFDXVHDQRQPRYLQJSDUW\IDLOVWRUHVSRQG´7KH&RXUW QRWHVWKDWSODLQWLIILVDOVRDWIDXOWDWWHPSWLQJWRPDNHWKHVDPHDUJXPHQWLQKLVFURVVUHSO\WKDW EHFDXVHGHIHQGDQWV³IDLOHGWRSXWIRUWKDQ\DUJXPHQWLQUHVSRQVHWR>S@ODLQWLII¶VPRWLRQSHUWDLQLQJ WR >G@HIHQGDQW 0\ULFN >G@HIHQGDQWV WKHUHIRUH FRQFHGH WKDW >S@ODLQWLII¶V 0RWLRQ IRU 6XPPDU\ -XGJPHQWDVWR>G@HIHQGDQW0\ULFNPXVWEHJUDQWHG´3O¶V&URVV5HSO\DW%RWKSDUWLHVEULHIHG WKHLVVXHRITXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\DQGPDGHWKHLUUHVSHFWLYHDUJXPHQWVDQGWKDWLVZKDWWKH&RXUW ZLOOFRQVLGHU



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 46 of 56

IDLOHGWRFKHFN-867,6DVKHZDVUHTXLUHGWRGR´3O¶V&URVV0HPDW+HWKHQFRQFOXGHVWKDW

EHFDXVH -RQHV IDLOHG WR SURFHVV WKH UHOHDVH RUGHU SURSHUO\ KH DFWHG ZLWK GHOLEHUDWH LQGLIIHUHQFH

DQG WKHUHIRUH YLRODWHG KLV FRQVWLWXWLRQDO ULJKWV  Id. ³$V VXFK -RQHV DFWHG ZLWK GHOLEHUDWH

LQGLIIHUHQFHWRWKHULJKWVRI0U6PLWKE\IDLOLQJWRSURFHVVWKHUHOHDVHRUGHU´%XWSODLQWLIIGRHV

QRWSRLQWWRDQ\HYLGHQFHWKDWZRXOGVKRZWKDW-RQHV¶VRPLVVLRQZDVDQ\WKLQJRWKHUWKDQDPLVWDNH

WKHUHLVQRHYLGHQFHWKDWKHKDGDKLVWRU\RIFRPPLWWLQJWKHVHW\SHVRIHUURUVRUWKDWKHDFWHGZLWK

DQDWWLWXGHRILQGLIIHUHQFHWRZDUGKLVMREGXWLHV 



7KHUHLVHYLGHQFHWRVXSSRUWDQLQIHUHQFHWKDW-RQHV¶VDFWLRQVRURPLVVLRQVFRQWULEXWHGLQ

VRPHZD\WRSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQ%XWWKHUHOHYDQWTXHVWLRQKHUHLVZKHWKHU-RQHV¶VDOOHJHG

PLVWDNHV ZHUH VR HJUHJLRXV DQG VKRFNLQJ WKDW WKH\ FDQ EH IRXQG WR EH D YLRODWLRQ RI WKH )LIWK

$PHQGPHQW%DVHGRQWKHIDFWVSUHVHQWHGQRUHDVRQDEOHMXURUFRXOGILQGWKDW-RQHV¶VIDLOXUHWR

SURFHVVWKHRUGHUSURSHUO\LQWKHFRXUVHRIKLVGXWLHVZDVDQ\WKLQJPRUHWKDQDPLVWDNHWKDWOHGWR

DQ XQIRUWXQDWHUHVXOW%HFDXVHWKLV LV WKH VRUW RI EHKDYLRU WKDW TXDOLILHG LPPXQLW\ LV PHDQW WR

SURWHFWWKH&RXUWFRQFOXGHVWKDW-RQHVLVHQWLWOHGWRTXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\

 -HDQHWWH0\ULFNLVHQWLWOHGWRTXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\



$ JRYHUQPHQW RIILFHU PD\ EH KHOG OLDEOH ³IRU FRQVWLWXWLRQDO ZURQJV HQJHQGHUHG E\ KLV

IDLOXUHWRVXSHUYLVHRUWUDLQVXERUGLQDWHVDGHTXDWHO\´Haynesworth v. Miller)G

'&&LUabrogated on other grounds by Hartman v. Moore867KLV

WKHRU\RIOLDELOLW\LVEDVHG³RQWKHSULQFLSOHWKDWLQVRPHFRQWH[WVIDLOXUHRIDQRIILFLDOWRVDIHJXDUG

DJDLQVW FRQVWLWXWLRQDO WUDQVJUHVVLRQV E\ WKRVH XQGHU KLV FRQWURO FRQVWLWXWHV DQ DFWLRQDEOH ZURQJ

XQGHU6HFWLRQ´Id. DW±'HIHQGDQW0\ULFNDUJXHVWKDWVKHFDQQRWEHKHOGOLDEOH


 %XWWKHUHLVDOVRHYLGHQFHWRVXJJHVWWKDWWKHVHFRQGUHOHDVHRUGHUQHYHUPDGHLWVZD\LQWR 706WRFRPHWR-RQHV¶VDWWHQWLRQWKHZD\WKHILUVWRUGHUGLGDQGWKDWHUURUFDQQRWEHDWWULEXWHGWR KLP



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 47 of 56

XQGHU D WKHRU\ RI VXSHUYLVRU\ OLDELOLW\ EHFDXVH VKH DFWHG UHDVRQDEO\ DQG QRW ZLWK GHOLEHUDWH

LQGLIIHUHQFHDQGLVWKHUHIRUHHQWLWOHGWRTXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\See 'HIV¶0HPDW



0\ULFN ZRUNV IRU WKH '& 'HSDUWPHQW RI &RUUHFWLRQV DV WKH &RUUHFWLRQDO 3URJUDP

$GPLQLVWUDWRU'HIV¶62)3O¶V5HVS62)6KHLVWKHKLJKHVWUDQNLQJSHUVRQLQWKH

,QPDWH 5HFRUGV 2IILFH see 3O¶V 62)   'HIV¶ 5HVS 62)   DQG VKH VXSHUYLVHV WKUHH

FRUUHFWLRQDO SURJUDP RIILFHUV VL[ VXSHUYLVRUV HLJKW OHDG OHJDO LQVWUXPHQWV H[DPLQHUV DQG

DSSUR[LPDWHO\ HLJKWHHQ OHJDO LQVWUXPHQWV H[DPLQHUV ± LQFOXGLQJ-DFN -RQHV  See 0\ULFN 1RY

 'HS DW ±  0\ULFN LV UHVSRQVLEOH IRU RYHUVHHLQJ WKH GDLO\ RSHUDWLRQV RI WKH ,QPDWH

5HFRUGV 2IILFH DQG IRU HQVXULQJ WKDW LQPDWHV DUH UHOHDVHG DQG GRFXPHQWV DUH UHFHLYHG DQG

SURFHVVHG  3O¶V 62)   'HIV¶ 5HVS 62)    6KH LV DOVR UHVSRQVLEOH IRU SUHSDULQJ DQ

RYHUGHWHQWLRQUHSRUWDIWHUHDFKLQVWDQFHRIRYHUGHWHQWLRQ3O¶V62)'HIV¶5HVS62)

0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±DQGWKHQWUDQVPLWWLQJWKRVHUHSRUWVWRWKHGHSXW\GLUHFWRU

0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±



3ODLQWLIIDUJXHVWKDWEHFDXVHRI0\ULFN¶VSRVLWLRQVKHZDV³DZDUHRIWKHVLJQLILFDQWKLVWRU\

RI XQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO RYHUGHWHQWLRQV DW WKH '& -DLO´ DQG WKDW VKH ³KDV IDLOHG WR LPSOHPHQW DQ\

SROLFLHVRUWUDLQLQJWRSUHYHQWRYHUGHWHQWLRQV´HVVHQWLDOO\³WXUQLQJDEOLQGH\HWRWKHRYHUGHWHQWLRQ

SUREOHP´3O¶V&URVV0HPDW%XWKHKDVQRWSURYLGHGWKH&RXUWZLWKDQ\HYLGHQFHWRSURYH

WKDW 0\ULFN¶V DFWLRQV ZHUH VXIILFLHQWO\ HJUHJLRXV WR VKRFN WKH FRQVFLHQFH RU WKDW KHU FRQGXFW

FDXVHGWKHLQIULQJHPHQWRISODLQWLII¶VULJKWWROLEHUW\LQWKLVFDVH



7KHUH LV QR HYLGHQFH LQ WKH UHFRUG WKDW 0\ULFN ZDV SHUVRQDOO\ LQYROYHG LQ SURFHVVLQJ

SODLQWLII¶VSDSHUZRUNRUWKDWVKHZDVDZDUHRUVKRXOGKDYHEHHQDZDUHRI-RQHV¶VDOOHJHGIDLOXUH

WRFKHFNWKH0\-867,6GDWDEDVHRURWKHUZLVHSURFHVVSODLQWLII¶VUHOHDVHRUGHUSURSHUO\:KDW

SODLQWLII SRLQWV WR LV 0\ULFN¶V FRQGXFW DIWHU SODLQWLII ZDV UHOHDVHG  KHU IDLOXUH WR FUHDWH DQ




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 48 of 56

RYHUGHWHQWLRQUHSRUW3O¶V62)±'HIV¶5HVS62)±DQGKHUIDLOXUHWRGLVFLSOLQH

DQ\HPSOR\HHVIRUSODLQWLII¶VRYHUGHWHQWLRQSee 0\ULFN1RY'HSDW±%XWWKHVH RPLVVLRQV REYLRXVO\ GLG QRW FDXVH SODLQWLII¶V GHWHQWLRQ DQGFDQQRW VXSSO\ WKH EDVLV IRU VHFWLRQ OLDELOLW\



$FFRUGLQJO\0\ULFNLVHQWLWOHGWRTXDOLILHGLPPXQLW\DQGWKH&RXUWZLOOJUDQWVXPPDU\

MXGJPHQWRQSODLQWLII¶VVHFWLRQFODLPLQIDYRURIWKHLQGLYLGXDOGHIHQGDQWV

,, 7KH &RXUW ZLOO JUDQW VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW LQ IDYRU RI SODLQWLII RQ KLV IDOVH LPSULVRQPHQWFODLPLQ&RXQW,,DJDLQVWWKH'LVWULFW
 %RWKSDUWLHVKDYHPRYHGIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQSODLQWLII¶VIDOVHLPSULVRQPHQWFODLP
)DOVH LPSULVRQPHQW LV ³WKH UHVWUDLQW E\ RQH SHUVRQ RI WKH SK\VLFDO OLEHUW\ RI DQRWKHU ZLWKRXW
FRQVHQWRUOHJDOMXVWLILFDWLRQ´Faniel v. Chesapeake and Potomac Tel. Co. of Md.$G
'&7RSURYHDFODLPRIIDOVHLPSULVRQPHQWDSODLQWLIIPXVWGHPRQVWUDWHWKDW

WKHGHWHQWLRQRUUHVWUDLQWLVDJDLQVWRQH¶VZLOOZLWKLQERXQGDULHVIL[HGE\WKHGHIHQGDQWDQG

WKHUHVWUDLQWLVXQODZIXOId.  ³7R FRQVWLWXWH LPSULVRQPHQW WKH UHVWUDLQW RI >SODLQWLII¶V@ IUHHGRP RI PRYHPHQW E\
>GHIHQGDQW@PXVWKDYHEHHQWRWDO´Id.DW³7KHHYLGHQFHPXVWHVWDEOLVKDUHVWUDLQWDJDLQVWWKH SODLQWLII¶VZLOODVZKHUHVKH\LHOGVWRIRUFHWRWKHWKUHDWRIIRUFHRUWRWKHDVVHUWLRQRIDXWKRULW\´

Id.DW±


 $OWKRXJKSODLQWLIIEURXJKWKLVFODLPIRUIDOVHLPSULVRQPHQWDJDLQVWDOOWKUHHGHIHQGDQWV KHDSSHDUVWRRQO\VHHNWRKROGWKH'LVWULFWOLDEOHIRUWKLVFODLPSee 3O¶V&URVV0HPDW± WLWOLQJWKHVHFWLRQLQKLVEULHI³7KH8QGLVSXWHG)DFWV6KRZ7KDWWKH'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELDLV/LDEOH IRU)DOVHO\,PSULVRQLQJ0U6PLWK´see also 3O¶V&URVV5HSO\DWVWDWLQJWKDWWKH³'LVWULFW >I@DOVHO\>L@PSULVRQHG0U6PLWK´DQGDVNLQJWKH&RXUWWRJUDQWKLV³PRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQW RQWKHOLDELOLW\SRUWLRQRIKLVIDOVHLPSULVRQPHQWFODLP´'HIHQGDQWVPDLQWDLQWKDWSODLQWLIIKDV QRW SURYLGHG HYLGHQFH WR SURYH KRZ WKH DFWLRQV RI 0\ULFN RU -RQHV ³FRQWULEXWHG WR >SODLQWLII¶V@ FODLP IRU IDOVH LPSULVRQPHQW´  'HIV¶ 5HSO\ DW   7KH\ DUJXH WKDW ³DW WKH YHU\ OHDVW    WKH &RXUWVKRXOGJUDQWVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWWR-DFN-RQHVDQG-HDQHWWH0\ULFNRQ&RXQW,,´Id. 6LQFH SODLQWLIIKDVSURYLGHGQRHYLGHQFHWKDWGHIHQGDQWV-RQHVRU0\ULFNZHUHSHUVRQDOO\LQYROYHGLQ KLVGHWHQWLRQWKH&RXUWZLOOJUDQWVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQWKLVFRXQWLQWKHLUIDYRU



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 49 of 56
 )XUWKHU D GHWHQWLRQ LV SUHVXPHG WR EH XQODZIXO RQFH D SODLQWLII DOOHJHV WKDW KH ZDV LPSULVRQHGZLWKRXWSURFHVVClarke v. District of Columbia$G'&7KH EXUGHQWKHQVKLIWVWRWKHGHIHQGDQWWRMXVWLI\WKHUHVWUDLQWDVODZIXOId. 7KDWLVEHFDXVHWKHODFN RI MXVWLILFDWLRQ IRU WKH LPSULVRQPHQW LV QRW SDUW RI D SODLQWLII¶V DIILUPDWLYH FDVH EXW UDWKHU DQ HOHPHQW RI D GHIHQVH WR EH UDLVHG DQG SURYHG E\ WKH GHIHQGDQW  See Marshall v. District of Columbia$G'&FLWLQJClarke$GDW
 7KHXQGLVSXWHGIDFWVGHPRQVWUDWHWKDWSODLQWLIIZDVUHVWUDLQHGDJDLQVWKLVZLOOZLWKLQWKH ZDOOV RI WKH '& MDLO IRU WZHQW\WKUHH GD\V  $QG EHFDXVH SODLQWLII KDV QRW RQO\ FRPH IRUZDUG ZLWKDOOHJDWLRQVEXWZLWKDFWXDOHYLGHQFHWKDWKHZDVKHOGEHFDXVHDFRXUWRUGHUUHOHDVLQJKLP ZDVQRWSURFHVVHGsee 'HIV¶62)±3O¶V5HVS62)±WKHEXUGHQVKLIWVWRWKH 'LVWULFW WR FRPH IRUZDUG ZLWK HYLGHQFH WR SURYH WKH OHJDOLW\ RI WKH UHVWUDLQW  %XW RI FRXUVH GHIHQGDQWKDVQRWGRQHVRLWGRHVQRWGLVSXWHWKDWSODLQWLIIZDVGHWDLQHGLQHUURUGHVSLWHWKHIDFW WKDWDMXGJHKDGRUGHUHGKLVUHOHDVHSee 'HIV¶62)±3O¶V5HVS62)±
 ,QVWHDG WKH 'LVWULFW FRQWHQGV WKDW ³EHFDXVH QR >G@HIHQGDQW LQWHQGHG >S@ODLQWLII WR EH XQODZIXOO\GHWDLQHGDJDLQVWKLVZLOO>S@ODLQWLII¶VFODLPIDLOVDVDPDWWHURIODZ´'HIV¶5HSO\DW %XWGHIHQGDQW¶VIRFXVRQLQWHQWLVPLVSODFHGDQGXQSHUVXDVLYH$OWKRXJKIDOVHLPSULVRQPHQW LV FODVVLILHG DV DQ LQWHQWLRQDO WRUW WKH FDVH ODZ FOHDUO\ VWDWHV WKDW ³QHLWKHU PDOLFH QRU ZURQJIXO LQWHQWDUHFRQWUROOLQJFRQVLGHUDWLRQVLQDQDFWLRQIRUIDOVHDUUHVWRUIDOVHLPSULVRQPHQW´Clarke $GDW,QRWKHUZRUGVWKHUHLVQRUHTXLUHPHQWWKDWDQ\SHUVRQPXVWKDYHFDUULHGRXWD GHOLEHUDWHSODQWRXQODZIXOO\GHWDLQVRPHRQH
 7R IRUHVWDOO D ILQGLQJ RI VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW DJDLQVW LW GHIHQGDQW PXVW VKRZ WKDW WKH WZHQW\WKUHHGD\GHWHQWLRQRISODLQWLIIZDVLQVRPHZD\ODZIXO7KH'LVWULFWKDVQRWDQGFDQQRW



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 50 of 56

PDNHVXFKDVKRZLQJ7KHUHIRUHWKH&RXUWILQGVLWDSSURSULDWHWRDZDUGVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWLQ

IDYRURISODLQWLIIRQ&RXQW,,DJDLQVWWKH'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELD

,,, 7KH&RXUWZLOOGHQ\SODLQWLII¶VPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQKLVQHJOLJHQFHFODLP LQ&RXQW,,,ZLWKRXWSUHMXGLFH



,Q KLV FURVVPRWLRQ SODLQWLII FRQWHQGV WKDW ³WKH 'LVWULFW KDV FRQFHGHG LWV OLDELOLW\ RQ

QHJOLJHQFHHQWLWOLQJ>S@ODLQWLIIWRVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQKLVQHJOLJHQFHFODLPV´3O¶V&URVV0HP

DW   3ODLQWLII QRWHV WKDW DOWKRXJK GHIHQGDQWV LQLWLDOO\ PRYHG IRU VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW RQ WKH

QHJOLJHQFHFODLPLQ'HFHPEHURIWKH\KDYHQRWVRXJKWVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQWKLVFODLPLQ

WKHLUUHYLVHGPRWLRQId. DW Q



%XWPDNLQJDVWUDWHJLFGHFLVLRQQRWWRPRYHIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQDSDUWLFXODUFRXQW

LVQRWWKHVDPHWKLQJDVFRQFHGLQJOLDELOLW\$QGEHFDXVHSODLQWLIIKDVSUHGLFDWHGKLVPRWLRQRQ

WKLVFRXQWVROHO\RQWKHEDVLVWKDWLWKDVEHHQFRQFHGHGDQGKHGLGQRWPDUVKDOWKHXQGLVSXWHGIDFWV

WKDW PDNH RXW WKH HOHPHQWV RI WKH FODLP DV UHTXLUHG E\ )HGHUDO 5XOH RI &LYLO 3URFHGXUH  DQG

/RFDO &LYLO 5XOH K WKH &RXUW ZLOO GHQ\ SODLQWLII¶V PRWLRQ RQ WKH QHJOLJHQFH FRXQW ZLWKRXW

SUHMXGLFH


 7KH&RXUWQRWHVWKDWGHIHQGDQWVKDYHPDGHVWDWHPHQWVHQGRUVLQJDQHJOLJHQFHWKHRU\LQ WKHLUSOHDGLQJVSee, e.g.'HIV¶0HPDW³$WZRUVWWKHFRQGXFWRI>G@HIHQGDQW-RQHVLQIDLOLQJ WRXQGHUWDNHIXUWKHULQYHVWLJDWLRQDIWHUSURFHVVLQJWKHUHOHDVHLQRQHFDVHDPRXQWVWRQHJOLJHQFH´ id. DW  ³>7@KHUH LV QR HYLGHQFH LQ WKH UHFRUG WR GHPRQVWUDWH WKDW >S@ODLQWLII¶V RYHUGHWHQWLRQ UHVXOWHGIURPDQ\WKLQJPRUHWKDQLQDGYHUWHQFHRUFOHULFDOHUURU´'HIV¶5HSO\DW³'HIHQGDQW -RQHVDUJXHGLQKLVPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWWKDWKHFRXOGQRWEHIRXQGFXOSDEOHIRUD)LIWK $PHQGPHQWYLRODWLRQEHFDXVHDWZRUVWHYHQLIDOOIDFWVUHOHYDQWWRWKLVLVVXHDUHFRQVWUXHGLQWKH OLJKWPRVWIDYRUDEOHWRWKH>S@ODLQWLIIKLVDOOHJHGPLVFRQGXFWDPRXQWHGWRQHJOLJHQFH´   3ODLQWLIIDVNHG³WKHFRXUWWRLQVWUXFWWKHMXU\WRSUHVXPH>G@HIHQGDQWV¶QHJOLJHQFHXQGHUWKH GRFWULQHRIres ipsa loquitor´LILWGHQLHGWKHPRWLRQIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQW3O¶V&URVV0HPDW +RZHYHUWKHUHTXHVWIRUDMXU\LQVWUXFWLRQLVSUHPDWXUHDWWKLVVWDJHRIWKHSURFHHGLQJV 



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 51 of 56

,9 7KH &RXUW ZLOO JUDQW VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW LQ IDYRU RI WKH 'LVWULFW RQ SODLQWLII¶V QHJOLJHQWVXSHUYLVLRQDQGWUDLQLQJFODLPLQ&RXQW,9



,Q&RXQW,9SODLQWLIIDOOHJHVWKDWWKH'LVWULFWZDVQHJOLJHQWLQIDLOLQJWRWUDLQ/,(¶VKRZWR

SURFHVVUHOHDVHRUGHUVDQGLQIDLOLQJWRVXSHUYLVH-RQHVLQKLVSHUIRUPDQFHRISURFHVVLQJSODLQWLII¶V

UHOHDVH RUGHU  $P &RPSO    7KH SDUWLHV KDYH ERWK PRYHG IRU VXPPDU\ MXGJPHQW RQ WKLV

FRXQW



/LDELOLW\IRUQHJOLJHQWVXSHUYLVLRQDQGWUDLQLQJDULVHVZKHQDQ³HPSOR\HUNQHZRUVKRXOG

KDYHNQRZQLWVHPSOR\HHEHKDYHGLQDGDQJHURXVRURWKHUZLVHLQFRPSHWHQWPDQQHUDQGWKDWWKH

HPSOR\HU DUPHG ZLWK WKDW DFWXDO RU FRQVWUXFWLYH NQRZOHGJH IDLOHG WR DGHTXDWHO\ VXSHUYLVH >RU

WUDLQ@WKHHPSOR\HH´Brown v. Argenbright Sec., Inc.$G'&TXRWLQJ

Giles v. Shell Oil Corp.$G'&



$VLQDQ\QHJOLJHQFHDFWLRQWRSUHYDLORQDFODLPRIQHJOLJHQWVXSHUYLVLRQDQGWUDLQLQJD

SODLQWLII³PXVWHVWDEOLVKE\FRPSHWHQWHYLGHQFHDVWDQGDUGRIFDUHWKDWWKHGHIHQGDQWYLRODWHGWKDW

VWDQGDUGDQGWKDWVXFKYLRODWLRQSUR[LPDWHO\FDXVHGLQMXU\WRWKHSODLQWLII´District of Columbia

v. Carmichael$G'&see also Phelan v. City of Mount Rainier$G

'&³>$@QDFWLRQIRUQHJOLJHQWVXSHUYLVLRQUHTXLUHVSURRIWKDWWKHHPSOR\HU

EUHDFKHGDGXW\WRSODLQWLIIWRXVHUHDVRQDEOHFDUHLQWKHVXSHUYLVLRQRIDQHPSOR\HHZKLFK


 'HIHQGDQW DUJXHV WKDW SODLQWLII¶V QHJOLJHQW VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG WUDLQLQJ FODLP DJDLQVW WKH 'LVWULFWLVEDUUHGEHFDXVHSODLQWLIIIDLOHGWRFRPSO\ZLWK'&&RGHSee 'HIV¶0HPDW ±+RZHYHUDVSODLQWLIIFRUUHFWO\QRWHVLQKLVRSSRVLWLRQsee 3O¶V&URVV0HPDWWKH &RXUWDOUHDG\UXOHGLQSODLQWLII¶VIDYRURQWKLVDIILUPDWLYHGHIHQVH,QJUDQWLQJSODLQWLII¶VPRWLRQ IRU OHDYH WR ILOH DQ DPHQGHG FRPSODLQW WKH &RXUW KHOG WKDW ³SODLQWLII¶V 0D\   OHWWHU ZDV VXIILFLHQW WR DOHUW WKH 'LVWULFW µRI WKH DSSUR[LPDWH WLPH SODFH FDXVH DQG FLUFXPVWDQFHV RI WKH LQMXU\ RU GDPDJH¶ XQGHUO\LQJ KLV FODLPV´ LQ FRPSOLDQFH ZLWK 6HFWLRQ   See 2UGHU >'NW@DW'HIHQGDQWKDVH[SODLQHGWKDWLWUDLVHGWKHLVVXHDJDLQWRSUHVHUYHLWRQDSSHDOsee 'HIV¶5HSO\DWQDQGLQDQ\HYHQWWKH&RXUWVHHVQRUHDVRQWRFKDQJHLWVUXOLQJ3ODLQWLII¶V OHWWHUWRWKH0D\RUsee ([WR'HIV¶0RW>'NW@SURYLGHGVXIILFLHQWQRWLFHE\JLYLQJ WKH 'LVWULFW ³IDFWV WKDW ZRXOG DOORZ LW WR FRPSUHKHQG WKURXJK D UHDVRQDEOH LQYHVWLJDWLRQ WKH FLUFXPVWDQFHV XQGHUO\LQJ WKH FODLP´ Enders v. District of Columbia  $G   '& 



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 52 of 56

SUR[LPDWHO\FDXVHGKDUPWRSODLQWLII´2UGLQDULO\WKHDSSOLFDEOHVWDQGDUGRIFDUHLVEDVHGRQWKH

WUDGLWLRQDO UHDVRQDEOH SHUVRQ VWDQGDUG ZKLFK WKH MXU\ FDQ DVFHUWDLQ ZLWKRXW WKH DLG RI H[SHUW

WHVWLPRQ\Godfrey v. Iverson)G'&&LU([SHUWWHVWLPRQ\WRHVWDEOLVK

WKH VWDQGDUG RI FDUH LV RQO\ QHFHVVDU\ ³LI WKH VXEMHFW LQ TXHVWLRQ LV VR GLVWLQFWO\ UHODWHG WR VRPH

VFLHQFHSURIHVVLRQRURFFXSDWLRQDVWREHEH\RQGWKHNHQRIWKHDYHUDJHOD\SHUVRQ´District of

Columbia v. Arnold & Porter  $G   '&  TXRWLQJ Messina v. District of

Columbia$G'&



7KH 'LVWULFW PDLQWDLQV WKDW SODLQWLII¶V FODLP IDLOV DV D PDWWHU RI ODZ EHFDXVH KH KDV QRW

SURYHQWKHQHFHVVDU\VWDQGDUGRIFDUHE\ZD\RIWKHH[SHUWWHVWLPRQ\SURYLGHG'HIV¶0HPDW

±3ODLQWLIIDUJXHVWKDWH[SHUWWHVWLPRQ\LVQRWQHFHVVDU\VLQFHWKHVWDQGDUGRIFDUHIRUWKH

W\SHRIWUDLQLQJDQGVXSHUYLVLRQQHFHVVDU\LV³ZHOOZLWKLQWKHNHQRIDOD\SHUVRQ´3O¶V&URVV

0HPDW$QGSODLQWLIIDVVHUWVWKDWKLV³VHFXULW\H[SHUWDUWLFXODWHGWKHUHOHYDQWVWDQGDUGVRI

FDUHWRDVVLVWWKHXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIWKHWULHURIIDFW´Id.

7KHILUVWTXHVWLRQWKH&RXUWPXVWUHVROYHWKHQLVZKHWKHUH[SHUWWHVWLPRQ\LVUHTXLUHGLQ

WKLVFDVH7KH&RXUWKDVGHWHUPLQHGWKDWLWLV



7\SLFDOO\H[SHUWWHVWLPRQ\LVUHTXLUHG³LQQHJOLJHQFHFDVHVZKLFKLQYROYHLVVXHVRI

VDIHW\VHFXULW\DQGFULPHSUHYHQWLRQ´Varner v. District of Columbia$G'&

  '& FRXUWV ³KDYH UHSHDWHGO\ KHOG WKDW WKH VWDQGDUG RI FDUH RZHG E\ WKH 'LVWULFW RI

&ROXPELDWRSHUVRQVLQLWVFXVWRG\LVDPDWWHUEH\RQGWKHNHQRIWKHDYHUDJHMXURUWKDWUHTXLUHV

H[SHUWWHVWLPRQ\´Clark v. District of Columbia$G±'&UHTXLULQJ

H[SHUW WHVWLPRQ\ WR HVWDEOLVK VWDQGDUG RI FDUHDSSOLFDEOH WR 'LVWULFW RIILFLDOV RSHUDWLQJMXYHQLOH

GHWHQWLRQ FHQWHU see also Carmichael  $G DW  ILQGLQJ WKDW ³H[SHUW WHVWLPRQ\ ZDV

HVVHQWLDO´WRHVWDEOLVKZKHWKHUSULVRQRIILFLDOVDFWHGUHDVRQDEO\WRVHFXUHWKHVDIHW\RIDQLQPDWH




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 53 of 56

Toy v. District of Columbia$G '& FRQFOXGLQJWKDW H[SHUWWHVWLPRQ\ZDV

QHHGHG WR HVWDEOLVK WKH VWDQGDUG RI FDUH IRU KRZ RIILFHUV ZHUHVXSSRVHG WR UHVSRQG ZKHQ WKH\

IRXQGDQLQPDWHKDQJLQJLQKLVFHOO



6LQFHWKHSXUSRVHRIH[SHUWWHVWLPRQ\LVWRDYRLGMXU\ILQGLQJVEDVHGRQVSHFXODWLRQsee

Travers v. District of Columbia$G'&DQGEHFDXVHWKHGHFLVLRQZKHWKHU

WR UHTXLUH H[SHUW WHVWLPRQ\ ³LV FRQILGHG WR WKH VRXQG GLVFUHWLRQ RI WKH WULDO FRXUW´ Varner 

$GDWWKH&RXUWFRQFOXGHVWKDWH[SHUWWHVWLPRQ\LVUHTXLUHGWRHVWDEOLVKWKHVWDQGDUGRIFDUH

LQWKLVFDVHZKLFKLQYROYHVWKHLQWULFDFLHVRIUXQQLQJDFRUUHFWLRQDOIDFLOLW\WKDWKRXVHVLQPDWHV

DZDLWLQJWULDODQGPDQDJHVGDLO\LQWHUDFWLRQVZLWKDEXV\FRXUW



7R SUHYDLO DW WULDO RQ KLV FODLP SODLQWLII PXVW SURYH WKDW GHIHQGDQW GHYLDWHG IURP WKH

VWDQGDUG RI FDUH JRYHUQLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG WUDLQLQJ RI WKH SHUVRQQHO ZKR SURFHVV UHOHDVH

RUGHUV

7KHH[SHUWPXVWFOHDUO\DUWLFXODWHDQGUHIHUWRDVWDQGDUGRIFDUHE\ZKLFK WKHGHIHQGDQW¶VDFWLRQVFDQEHPHDVXUHG7KXVWKHH[SHUWPXVWFOHDUO\UHODWH WKH VWDQGDUG RI FDUH WR WKH SUDFWLFHV LQ IDFW JHQHUDOO\ IROORZHG E\ RWKHU FRPSDUDEOH JRYHUQPHQWDO IDFLOLWLHV RU WR VRPH VWDQGDUG QDWLRQDOO\ UHFRJQL]HGE\VXFKXQLWV

Arnold & Porter$GDWTXRWLQJPhillips v. District of Columbia$G

'&LQWHUQDOHGLWVRPLWWHG



7KXV WR PHHW KLV EXUGHQ WR SURYH D QDWLRQDO VWDQGDUG RI FDUH LQ WKLV FDVH SODLQWLII LV

UHTXLUHGWRVKRZHLWKHUWKDWRWKHUSULVRQVDGKHUHWRDVSHFLILFVWDQGDUGRIFDUHZKLFKLVQDWLRQDOO\

UHFRJQL]HGRUWKDWWKHDFWXDOSUDFWLFHVIROORZHGE\FRPSDUDEOHSULVRQVUHJDUGLQJVXSHUYLVLRQDQG

WUDLQLQJFRQVWLWXWHDQDWLRQDOVWDQGDUGRIFDUHSee Arnold & Porter$GDW±



7R HVWDEOLVK WKH VWDQGDUG RI FDUH SODLQWLII VXSSOLHG WKH H[SHUW UHSRUW DQG GHSRVLWLRQ

WHVWLPRQ\ RI &DPHURQ /LQGVD\ ZKR KDV VHUYHG LQ YDULRXV SRVLWLRQV DW IHGHUDO DQG VWDWH SULVRQ

IDFLOLWLHVDFURVVWKHFRXQWU\See ([  WR3O¶V &URVV0RW>'NW  @ ³([SHUW5HSRUW´



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 54 of 56

/LQGVD\H[SOLFLWO\UHIHUVWRKLVWLPHDV:DUGHQDWWKH%URRNO\Q'HWHQWLRQ&HQWHUEHFDXVHLWZDVD

³SUHWULDOSUHVHQWHQFLQJIDFLOLW\WKDWSURFHVVHGUHOHDVHVWZHQW\IRXUKRXUVSHUGD\´Id. DW



:LWKUHJDUGWRWKHVWDQGDUGRIFDUHIRUWUDLQLQJSHUVRQVVXFKDVOHJDOLQVWUXPHQWVH[DPLQHUV

LQ SULVRQ IDFLOLWLHV /LQGVD\ UHIHUUHG WR WKH )HGHUDO %XUHDX RI 3ULVRQV ³%23´ (PSOR\HH

'HYHORSPHQWDO0DQXDO([SHUW5HSRUWDW

)RU H[DPSOH WKH %23 KDV WKH (PSOR\HH 'HYHORSPHQW 0DQXDO ZKLFK HVWDEOLVKHVDFRPSUHKHQVLYHHPSOR\HHWUDLQLQJSURJUDPWKHUHTXLUHPHQWRI DQ DQQXDO WUDLQLQJ SODQ DQG VWULQJHQW UHFRUG NHHSLQJ UHTXLUHPHQWV RQ HPSOR\HHWUDLQLQJ,QDGGLWLRQWKH%23UHTXLUHVWKDWDOOVWDIIFRPSOHWHD ILYHGD\ RULHQWDWLRQ DQG WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP  %23 IXUWKHU UHTXLUHV WKDW HPSOR\HHV LQ WKH &RUUHFWLRQDO 6\VWHPV 'HSDUWPHQW IRUPDOO\ NQRZQ DV ³5HFHLYLQJ DQG 'LVFKDUJH´ DQG %23 HTXLYDOHQW RI WKH '2&¶V 5HFRUGV 2IILFH PXVW VXFFHVVIXOO\ FRPSOHWH WUDLQLQJ PRGXOHV ZLWKLQ QLQH PRQWKV RIDSSRLQWPHQW$PLQLPXPVFRUHRIPXVWEHDFKLHYHGWRSDVVHDFK PRGXOH

Id./LQGVD\DOVRWHVWLILHGWKDW/,(¶VLQWKH)HGHUDO%XUHDXRI3ULVRQV³XQGHUJRDULJLGUHJLPHQRI

WUDLQLQJ´/LQGVD\'HSDW±GHVFULELQJKRZ/,(¶V³XQGHUJRQLQHPRQWKVRILQWHQVH

WUDLQLQJ>DQG@WKH\KDYHWRFRPSOHWHDFHUWDLQQXPEHURIPRGXOHVGHPRQVWUDWLQJSURILFLHQF\LQ

WKDWGLVFLSOLQH´



%XWWKHH[SHUWIDLOHGWRFRQQHFWWKLVHYLGHQFHRIZKDWWKHIHGHUDOJRYHUQPHQWUHTXLUHVWR

ZKDWLVGRQHDWWKHVWDWHDQGORFDOSUHWULDOIDFLOLWLHVDFURVVWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVDQGKHSURYLGHGQR

HYLGHQFH IURP ZKLFK RQH FDQ FRQFOXGH WKDW WKH %23 SURWRFRO LV LQ IDFW WKH QDWLRQDO VWDQGDUG RI

FDUHIRUMDLOV/LQGVD\DGPLWWHGWKDWKHZDVRQO\IDPLOLDUZLWKWKHWUDLQLQJLQGLYLGXDOVUHFHLYHGDW

³WKHLQVWLWXWLRQZKHUH>KH@VHUYHG´±PHDQLQJWKH%URRNO\Q'HWHQWLRQ&HQWHUSee /LQGVD\'HS

DW±$QGKHDFNQRZOHGJHGWKDWKHGLGQRWNQRZKRZWKDWIDFLOLW\FRPSDUHGWRWKH'&

MDLOLQWHUPVRIWKHQXPEHURIGHWDLQHHVSURFHVVHGId.DW±id.DW±+HGLGQRWHYHQ

UHYLHZWKHWUDLQLQJPDQXDOV'2&SURYLGHGWRLWV/,(¶VId. DW±




Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 55 of 56



7KHUHIRUH WKH HYLGHQFH SODLQWLII KDV SUHVHQWHG LV LQVXIILFLHQW WR HVWDEOLVK D QDWLRQDO

VWDQGDUG RI FDUH  See, e.g. District of Columbia v. Moreno  $G   '& 

ILQGLQJ WKDW UHIHUHQFHV WR WKH ³$PHULFDQ &RUUHFWLRQDO $VVRFLDWLRQ 6WDQGDUGV´ ZLWKRXW DQ\

LQIRUPDWLRQDERXWVSHFLILFFRPSDUDEOHIDFLOLWLHVZDVLQVXIILFLHQWWRHVWDEOLVKWKHVWDQGDUGRIFDUH

Messina  $G DW  ILQGLQJ LQVXIILFLHQW H[SHUW WHVWLPRQ\ ZKHUH H[SHUW SUHVHQWHG ³QR

HYLGHQFHRIWKHH[WHQWWRZKLFKPXQLFLSDOLWLHVRURWKHUVFKRROV\VWHPVDFWXDOO\FRPSOLHGRUHYHQ

DWWHPSWHGWRFRPSO\ZLWKWKH>SXUSRUWHG@JXLGHOLQHV´Toy$GDWFRQFOXGLQJWKDWH[SHUW

WHVWLPRQ\ GLG QRW HVWDEOLVK QDWLRQDO VWDQGDUG RI FDUH ZKHUH H[SHUW ³JDYH QR LQGLFDWLRQ RI KRZ

PDQ\ SROLFH GHSDUWPHQWV WKURXJKRXW WKH FRXQWU\ >KDG@ WKLV W\SH RI HPHUJHQF\ HTXLSPHQW

DYDLODEOH´H[FHSWIRUQDPLQJRQHSROLFHGHSDUWPHQWZKHUHKHKDGEHHQWKHSROLFHFRPPLVVLRQHU

see also Briggs v. WMATA)G'&&LUREVHUYLQJWKDWDQH[SHUWPXVW

HLWKHUVKRZWKDWWKHVWDQGDUGKDVEHHQ³SURPXOJDWHGRULVJHQHUDOO\NQRZQ´RUPXVWVKRZ³WKDW

LW KDV EHHQ DFFHSWHG DV FRQWUROOLQJ LQ IDFLOLWLHV DQG HQWHUSULVHV WKDW DUH VLPLODU WR GHIHQGDQWV¶

IDFLOLWLHVRUHQWHUSULVHV´LQWHUQDOHGLWVRPLWWHGFLWDWLRQRPLWWHG



6LQFH WKH ³IDLOXUH WR SURYH D VWDQGDUG RI FDUH LV IDWDO´ WR D QHJOLJHQFH FDXVH RI DFWLRQ

Carmichael$GDWWKH&RXUWZLOOJUDQWVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWLQIDYRURIWKH'LVWULFWRQ

&RXQW,9


 7KH &RXUW UHDFKHV WKH VDPH FRQFOXVLRQ ZLWK UHJDUG WR WKH VWDQGDUG RI FDUH QHHGHG IRU SODLQWLIIWRPDLQWDLQDQHJOLJHQWVXSHUYLVLRQFODLPVLQFHSODLQWLII¶VH[SHUWRQO\PDNHVUHIHUHQFHV WRWKHVRUWRIFRQWUROVWKDWDUHLQSODFHZLWKLQWKH%23ZLWKRXWJLYLQJDQ\VSHFLILFH[DPSOHVRU FRPSDULQJ VSHFLILF %23 IDFLOLWLHV ZLWK WKH '& MDLO  See ([SHUW 5HSRUW DW  ³%23 KDV YHU\ VWUXFWXUHGFRQWUROVLQSODFHWRHQVXUHODWHUHOHDVHVGRQRWRFFXU´id. DW³7KH%23FRQGXFWVRQ DFRQWLQXDOEDVLVVFKHGXOHGLQIRUPDOEXWZHOOGRFXPHQWHGLQWHUQDOLQWUDIDFLOLW\DXGLWVNQRZQ DV2SHUDWLRQDO5HYLHZVWKURXJKRXWWKH\HDU7KLVLVGRQHLQDGGLWLRQWR3URJUDP5HYLHZVZKLFK DUHHVVHQWLDOO\DZHHNORQJIRUPDODXGLW>@FRQGXFWHGE\WKH&HQWUDO2IILFHLQWKH%23´/LQGVD\ 'HSDW±H[SODLQLQJWKDW/,(¶VDUH³FRQWLQXDOO\LQYROYHGLQZKDWWKH\FDOOSHUSHWXDO DXGLWV´DQG³RSHUDWLRQDOUHYLHZV´WKDWDUH³FRQGXFWHGE\WKHFHQWUDORIILFHVWDII´



Case 1:15-cv-00161-ABJ Document 86 Filed 03/30/18 Page 56 of 56

&21&/86,21





)RUWKHIRUHJRLQJUHDVRQVERWKSDUWLHV¶PRWLRQVIRUVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWDUHGHQLHGLQSDUW

DQGJUDQWHGLQSDUW



7KHFODLPVDJDLQVWWKHLQGLYLGXDOGHIHQGDQWVLQ&RXQW,VHFWLRQDQGLQ&RXQW,,IDOVH

LPSULVRQPHQWZLOOEHGLVPLVVHG7KHRQO\FRXQWUHPDLQLQJDJDLQVWWKHLQGLYLGXDOGHIHQGDQWVLV

SODLQWLII¶VQHJOLJHQFHFODLPLQ&RXQW,,,



-XGJPHQWZLOOEHHQWHUHGLQIDYRURISODLQWLIIRQ&RXQW,,IDOVHLPSULVRQPHQWDJDLQVWWKH

'LVWULFWRI&ROXPELD



7ZRFRXQWVZLOOJRIRUZDUGDJDLQVWWKH'LVWULFWWKHSRUWLRQRI&RXQW,WKDWSUHGLFDWHVD

VHFWLRQDFWLRQRQ'2&¶VDOOHJHGSUDFWLFHRIUHFHLYLQJFRXUWRUGHUVWKURXJKPXOWLSOHPHDQV

DQG&RXQW,,,DOOHJLQJWKHFRPPRQODZFODLPRIQHJOLJHQFH



-XGJPHQW ZLOO EH HQWHUHG LQ IDYRU RI WKH 'LVWULFW RQ DOO RWKHU DVSHFWV RI &RXQW , DQG RQ

&RXQW,9QHJOLJHQWVXSHUYLVLRQDQGWUDLQLQJ



$VHSDUDWHRUGHUZLOOLVVXH

    
'$7(0DUFK

$0<%(50$1-$&.621 8QLWHG6WDWHV'LVWULFW-XGJH


