Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 1 of 20

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLAELDBIASTNRYIDCTIVOISFIOGNEORGIAr-IIedat--:-:~/.'""",~.;;.;>O--..;{~_~M
~13 ,20 /5

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES,
Plaintiff,
v.
GRADY COUNTY, Georgia,
JUDGE J. WILLIAM BASS, SR., Grady County State Court Judge, in his official and individual capacities,
Defendants.

) )

DEPUTY CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO.l:13-CV-lS6(WLS)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ORDER ON THE JOINT MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF A CLASS FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES,
APPOINTMENT OF CLASS COUNSEL, PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT,
DIRECTION REGARDING NOTICE TO THE CLASS, AND THE SCHEDULING OF A FINAL FAIRNESS HEARING

Plaintiff Roberta Imogene Jones, defendant Grady County, Georgia, and defendant J. William Bass, Sr., (the "Parties") filed a joint motion (the "Motion") seeking: (1) certification of a class for settlement purposes; (2) appointment of class counsel; (3) preliminary approval of a proposed settlement; (4) direction regarding notice to class; and (5) the scheduling of a final fairness hearing, all of which is predicated on the following allegations:
A. The State Court of Grady County is located in Cairo, Georgia, and has jurisdiction over the trial of criminal cases below the grade of felony.
B. Since 2002, J. William Bass, Sr. has served as judge of the State Court of Grady County, and he is hereinafter referred to as "Judge Bass."

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 2 of 20

C. In the complaint filed in the above-styled action, plaintiff Roberta Imogene Jones

("Jones") alleged that Judge Bass required criminal defendants who appeared before him to pay

"Administrative Costs" as a part of their sentences.

D. Judge Bass contends that he did not impose Administrative Costs on any criminal

defendant who appeared before him. Instead, Judge Bass contends that, after he imposed a fine

on a criminal defendant who appeared before him, he would complete a sentencing sheet that

deemed a portion of the fine as Administrative Costs.

E. Any criminal defendant who paid Administrative Costs paid that money to his or

her probation officer or to the Clerk of the State Court of Grady County.

F. Regardless of who initially received the money associated with the payment of

Administrative Costs, that money was eventually transferred to Grady County and deposited into

the county treasury.

G. On July 9, 2012, Jones attended a hearing (the "Hearing") conducted by Judge

Bass and entered a plea of guilty to the charge of Driving Under the Influence.

H. The transcript of the Hearing shows that Judge Bass sentenced Jones to one year

of probation and imposed a fine of $1 ,000.00.

I.

The sentencing sheet that Judge Bass completed after the Hearing shows that, of

the $1,000.00 that Jones was ordered to pay, $700.00 was deemed to be Administrative Costs.

J.

Jones paid the $1,000.00 that she was ordered to pay by Judge Bass.

K. On September 24, 2013, Jones filed suit against Judge Bass and Grady County

(hereinafter collectively referred to as "Defendants").

2

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 3 of 20

L. In her complaint, Jones asserted claims for alleged violations of the rights

afforded to her by the Constitution ofthe United States and the Constitution and laws ofthe State

of Georgia.

M. In her complaint, Jones also sought the certification of a class consisting of all

persons who have paid Administrative Costs.

N. The class that Jones initially proposed contains more than 400 individuals.

O. On October 9, 2014, the Parties attended a mediation.

P. At the conclusion of the mediation, the Parties agreed to settle the claims being

asserted in this case and the terms of that agreement are memorialized in the settlement

agreement (the "Agreement").

Q. The Parties have asked the Court to certify for settlement purposes a class ("the

Class") of all individuals who: had a criminal case pending in the State Court of Grady County;

were required to pay Administrative Costs pursuant to an order by Judge Bass dated on or after

September 24,2011; and paid some or all of the Administrative Costs entered by Judge Bass.

The Court having read and considered the Motion, and approving of the terms of the

Agreement, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:

I.

CERTIFICATION OF THE CLASS

"To certify a class for settlement purposes the Court must determine whether the

prescriptions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 are satisfied. Specifically, certification

requires that each of the four factors set out in Rule 23(a) are satisfied, along with at least one of

the conditions under Rule 23(b)." Morefield v. NoteWorld, LLC, 2012 WL 1355573 (S.D Ga.

2012). As discussed below, the Court finds that the proposed class satisfies the numerosity,

commonality, typicality and adequacy requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a).

3

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 4 of 20
The Court also finds that issues of law and fact common to the members of the class predominate, and, in these circumstances, a class action is a superior method for resolving the disputed claims. Thus, the proposed class also satisfies the requirements of Rule 23(b).
A. The Class Satisfies the Requirements of Rule 23(a). The analysis required by Rule 23(a) focuses on numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a); see also Morefield, 2012 WL 1355573, *2. Each of the relevant factors is considered below.
1. Numerosity "Rule 23(a)(l) requires that the class be so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable." Morefield, 2012 WL 1355573, *2. "There is no single fixed number of Class Members required to meet the numerosity requirement." Hillis v. Equifax Consumer Services, Inc., 2007 WL 1953464, *7 (N.D. Ga. 2007). However, the Eleventh Circuit has noted that "generally less than twenty-one is inadequate, [and] more than forty [is] adequate . . . ." American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 784 F.2d 1546, 1553 (l1th Cir. 1986). In this case, the Class consists of more than 400 members. For that reason, the requirement of numerosity is satisfied.
2. Commonality Rule 23(a)(2) requires that there be questions of law or fact common to the class. WalMart Stores, Inc., 131 S. Ct. 2541, 2550-51 (2011). "Common questions are those that arise from a common nucleus of operative facts." Hillis, 2007 1953464, *7. "The commonality element is generally satisfied when a plaintiff alleges that defendants have engaged in a standardized course of conduct that affects all class members." Morefield, 2012 WL 1355573, *2. Commonality requires a plaintiff to demonstrate that class members have suffered a common injury that is capable of class-wide resolution. Wal-Mart, 131 S. Ct. at 2551.
4

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 5 of 20
As noted above, the claims asserted in the lawsuit are based on the alleged imposition of Administrative Costs by Judge Bass. Plaintiff claims that the imposition of these Administrative Costs violated her rights under the United States and Georgia Constitutions. Other class members have the same claim, and the resolution of these claims would depend on the same evidence and legal analysis. Because Judge Bass ordered each member of the Class to pay an amount of money that was deemed to be Administrative Costs, and each member of the Class paid some or all of those Administrative Costs, the commonality requirement imposed by Rule 23(a)(2) is satisfied.
3. Typicality "Typicality under Rule 23(a)(3) requires that 'the claims or defenses of the representative parties [be] typical of the claims or defenses of the class." Morefield, 2012 WL l355573, *2. "Typicality is satisfied where the named plaintiffs claims are sufficiently similar to those of the absent Class Members to conclude that the representative will protect the interest of the class and that there will be no antagonistic interests between the representative and the proposed class." Hillis, 2007 1953464, *7. As noted above, the Class consists of individuals who were ordered, on or after September 24, 2011, to pay an amount of money that was deemed to be Administrative Costs, and who actually paid some or all of those costs. The allegations contained in Plaintiffs's complaint demonstrate that the claim that Plaintiff is asserting is typical of the claims asserted on behalf of the other members of the Class. In particular, Plaintiff alleges that she appeared before Judge Bass on July 9, 2012, and entered a plea of guilty to the charge ofOUI. Thereafter, Judge Bass prepared a sentencing sheet that showed that Plaintiff was required to pay $700.00 in Administrative Costs, and Plaintiff paid those costs. As such, Plaintiffs claim is sufficiently
5

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 6 of 20
similar to those of the absent Class members and, therefore, the requirement of typicality imposed by Rule 23(a)(3) is satisfied.
4. Adequacy "Adequacy under Rule 23(a)(4) is queried through the following: '(1) whether the proposed class representatives have interests antagonistic to the class; and (2) whether the proposed class counsel has the competence to undertake the litigation at issue." Morefield, 2012 WL 1355573, *2. The requirement of adequacy is satisfied because there are no conflicts of interest between Plaintiff and the members of the Class, and because the attorneys representing Plaintiff and the putative Class have experience in civil rights and class action litigation. See infra § II, n. 1.
B. The Class satisfies the requirements of Rule 23(b). "In addition to proving the Rule 23(a) requirements, [the Parties] must also satisfy the criteria under Rule 23(b)(3). Rule 23(b)(3) asks whether: (1) issues of law and fact common to members of the class predominate over questions only affecting individual members; and (2) whether a class is the superior method of resolving the dispute." Columbus Drywall & Insulation, Inc. v. Masco Corp., 258 F.R.D. 545, 556 (N.D. Ga. 2007); Hillis, 2007 1953464, *9 ("Rule 23(b)(3) requires that "the questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members, and that a class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy.") Under Rule 23(b)(3), the Court must first examine the underlying cause of action to determine whether questions of law and fact predominate. Local 703, I.B. ofT Grocery & Food Employees Welfare Fundv. Regions Financial Corp., 762 F.3d 1248, 1253 (lIth Cir. 2014). Plaintiff alleged violations of the Due Process Clause and the Takings Clause under 42 U.S.c. §
6

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 7 of 20
1983 and the Georgia Constitution. The claims asserted in this case are based on the alleged imposition of Administrative Costs by Judge Bass. In particular, in her complaint, Plaintiff alleged that Judge Bass did not have the authority to impose Administrative Costs and that the imposition of those costs violated the rights afforded to her by the Constitutions of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Georgia. The proposed Class consists of those individuals who were purportedly ordered to pay Administrative Costs on or after September 24,2011, and who paid all or part of those costs. Thus, in this case, the thread that is common to the Class members - the payment of Administrative Costs - is also the basis for the claim.
The four factors listed in Rule 23(b)(3) further compel this Court to find that the "predominance" criterion is satisfied. First, no other class member has expressed an interest in controlling the prosecution of this action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3)(A). Second, there is no other pending litigation regarding this matter. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3)(B). Third, there has been no suggestion from any party or class member that it would be undesirable to concentrate the litigation of the claims in this forum. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3)(C). Fourth, the Settlement Agreement sets forth a common-sense, practical and manageable approach to resolving this controversy. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3)(D).
The Court further concludes that settling this action as a class would be beneficial. A class action will prevent wasteful, duplicative actions that will raise the same issues and questions of law. Absent class certification, each settling plaintiff would have to pursue an individual action and risk receiving no recovery, while Defendants could face multiple claims. For these, reasons, the Court concludes the class action is a superior method for resolving this
7

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 8 of 20
matter. Columbus Drywall, 258 F.R.D. at 558. The requirements of predominance and superiority are satisfied.
For the foregoing reasons, a class (the "Class") consisting of each individual who meets the following criteria is hereby CERTIFIED:
a. the individual had a criminal case pending in the State Court of Grady County; and
b. on or after September 24, 2011, Judge Bass entered an order in the individual's criminal case that required the individual to pay Administrative Costs; and
c. the individual paid some or all of the Administrative Costs ordered by Judge Bass.
II. APPOINTMENT OF CLASS COUNSEL "[AJ court that certifies a class must appoint class counsel." Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g). In appointing class counsel, the court must consider: (i) the work counsel has done in identifying or investigating potential claims in the action; (ii) counsel's experience in handling class actions, other complex litigation, and the types of claims asserted in the action; (iii) counsel's knowledge of the applicable law; and (iv) the resources that counsel will commit to representing the class. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(l)(A)(i-iv). Plaintiff is represented by lawyers from the Southern Center for Human Rights ("SCHR"), a privately funded, non-profit organization with extensive experience in civil rights and class action litigation. The Court finds as follows with respect to the appropriateness of appointing Plaintiff's counsel as Class Counsel pursuant to Rule 23(g)(l): First, Plaintiff's counsel represented to the Court that they took the following stepsto identify and investigate possible claims: (1) observed Grady County State Court proceedings; (2)
8

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 9 of 20
examined and analyzed Grady County State Court files; (3) researched the legality of charging
"Administrative Costs," possible constitutional and state law challenges to the imposition of such
costs, and possible defenses to the instant lawsuit; (3) filed Open Records Act requests seeking
pertinent documents; (4) met with potential plaintiffs and witnesses; (5) attended the Judicial
Qualifications Commission proceedings pertaining to Judge Bass, and reviewed documents
related thereto; (6) consulted with officials from the Administrative Office of the Courts
regarding the legality of Administrative Costs; (7) calculated the amount of Administrative Costs
collected by Grady County during a one-year period, and consulted with a certified public accountant regarding the same.
Second, Plaintiffs counsel satisfies Rule 23(g) based on their experience in cases similar
to the present case. SCHR has experience in class action litigation and the litigation of constitutional claims of the type raised in this lawsuit. 1
Third, counsel demonstrated their knowledge of the applicable law through their briefing
on the constitutional claims and defenses at issue. (Doc. 19, 20, 33,41.)
Fourth, Plaintiffs counsel committed resources to representing the Class. Plaintiffs
counsel identified and investigated possible claims (as set forth above), filed the Complaint,
responded to Defendants' motions to dismiss, and participated in mediation. Further, under the
1 SCHR was class counsel in the following certified class actions: Flournoy v. State, No. 2009-CV178947 (Fulton County Superior Court) (challenging denial of indigent plaintiffs' constitutional right to appellate counsel in their criminal appeals); People Accused ofCrimes v. Crawford, No. 2008-CV151884 (Fulton County Superior Court) (challenging denial of the right to counsel on behalf of a class of indigent defendants); Whitaker v. Perdue, 4:06-cv-140-CC (N.D. Ga.) (challenging certain residence and employment restrictions imposed on all persons on the Georgia sex offender registry); Laube v. Haley, No. 02-T-957 (M.D. Ala.) (challenging conditions of confinement on behalf of women at Tutwiler Prison); Leatherwoodv. Campbell, No. CV-02-BE-2812-W (N.D. Ala) (representing men with HIV/AIDS who challenged deficiencies in medical care at Limestone Correctional Facility); Maynor v. Morgan County, No. 5:01-CV-0851 (N.D. Ala.) (challenging conditions of confinement at the Morgan County Jail). SCHR also served as plaintiffs' counsel in Williams v. Clinch County, No. 7:04-CV-124HL (M.D. Ga.) (challenging a sheriff's imposition of "jail costs" on pre-trial detainees, and resulting in return of same to those who paid).
9

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 10 of 20
Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff s counsel agrees to undertake additional responsibilities, including distribution of funds to Class members.
Having considered the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiff s attorneys satisfy the standards in Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(I), and will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the Class, Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(2) and (g)(4). Therefore, Gerald Weber and Sarah Geraghty of the Southern Center for Human Rights are hereby appointed as class counsel.
III. PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT In considering whether a settlement of a class action should be preliminarily approved, the Court must determine whether the proposed settlement is fair, reasonable, adequate and free of collusion. Day v. Persels & Assoc., LLC, 729 F.3d 1309, 1326 (lith Cir. 2013); Columbus Drywall, 258 F.R.D. at 559. The Eleventh Circuit has identified six factors that a court should consider when determining whether a class action settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable. Day, 729 F.3d at 1326; In re Smith, 926, F.2d 1027, 1029 (lith Cir. 1991). The factors are: (l) the likelihood of success at trial; (2) the range of possible recoveries; (3) the point on or below the range of possible recoveries at which a settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable; (4) the complexity, expense and duration of litigation; (5) the substance and degree of opposition to the settlement; and (6) the state of the proceedings at which the settlement was achieved." Id. In addition, this Court has suggested consideration of additional factors, including: (7) the terms of the settlement; (8) the procedures afforded to notify class members of the proposed settlement and to allow them to present their views; and (9) the judgment of experienced counsel. Meyer v. Citizens & S. Nat 'I Bank, 677 F. Supp. 1196, 1201 (M.D. Ga. 1998).
10

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 11 of 20
There is a strong judicial policy favoring settlement. Meyer, 677 F. Supp. at 1200. After considering all of these factors, as set forth below, the Court concludes that the settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable, was reached without collusion, and should be approved.
A. Fairness, Adequacy and Reasonableness 1. The Likelihood of Success at Trial.
Plaintiff claims that Judge Bass violated her rights under the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution and laws of the State of Georgia by imposing Administrative Costs upon her after she pleaded guilty to a crime, and she further contends that Grady County violated her rights by receiving and retaining the funds that were paid in connection with the imposition of those costs. Because all of the members of the class paid Administrative Costs after pleading guilty to a crime, and because there is no indication that those convictions have been overturned, Judge Bass and Grady County argued that the claims asserted against them by Plaintiff (and the Class) are barred by the favorable termination requirement established in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). In addition, Judge Bass argued that the claims asserted against him are barred by the doctrine of judicial immunity and Grady County has argued that it cannot be held liable pursuant to 42 U.S.c. § 1983 for the actions of Judge Bass. For those reasons, it is not certain that Plaintiff (or the Class) would be successful at trial.
2. The Range of Possible Recovery at Which Settlement is Fair, Adequate and Reasonable.
"In determining whether a settlement is fair and reasonable, the court must also examine the range of possible damages that plaintiffs could recover at trial and combine this with an analysis of plaintiffs' likely success at trial to determine if the settlements fall within the range of fair recoveries." Columbus Drywall, 258 F.R.D. at 559. As such, it is necessary to examine the benefit that each member of the Class will receive pursuant to the Agreement. Each member of
11

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 12 of 20
the Class has been adjudicated guilty of a misdemeanor in the State Court of Grady County, and each member of the Class has paid Administrative Costs as a result. Judge Bass assessed Administrative Costs ranging from $25.00 to $2,000.00.2 According to the calculations performed by Plaintiffs attorneys, the average amount of Administrative Costs assessed to class members was $613.00. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, each member of the Class who submits a claim form will receive a payment of $1 00.00 as compensatory damages. In addition, the Administrative Costs paid by each one of those class members will be refunded, up to $700.00. For example, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, an individual who paid $500.00 in Administrative Costs will received a payment of $600.00 (a payment of $100.00 in compensatory damages plus a refund of $500.00). On the other hand, a person who paid $1,500.00 in Administrative Costs will receive a payment of $800.00 (a payment of $100.00 in compensatory damages plus a refund of $700.00).3 Given the uncertainties discussed in the preceding section, the proposed settlement is within the range of possible recovery. Id.
3. The Point on or Below the Range of Possible Recovery at Which a Settlement is Fair, Adequate and Reasonable.
To determine whether a proposed settlement falls within the range of reasonableness, a Court must consider the value to the Class. Id. In order to do so, it is necessary to consider the terms of the proposed settlement agreement. In this case, the Agreement will result in a number of members of the Class receiving a payment in excess of the amount of money that they paid in Administrative Costs while a small number of class members may receive less money than they paid in Administrative Costs. For instance, using the previous examples, a Class member who
2 Persons who were assessed Administrative Costs but did not pay any Administrative Costs are not members of the Class. 3 According to the analysis conducted by Jones's attorneys, only 27 Class members were assessed more than $800.00 in Administrative Costs. Of those, 12 Class members were assessed $850.00; 2 Class members were assessed $1,000.00; 1 Class member was assessed $1,067; 2 Class members were assessed $1,250.00; 9 Class members were assessed $1,500.00; and 1 Class member was assessed $2,000.00 in Administrative Costs.
12

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 13 of 20
paid $500.00 in Administrative Costs will receive $600.00, whereas a person who paid $1,500.00 in Administrative Costs will receive $800.00. Thus, the proposed recovery ranges from more than 100 percent of the Administrative Costs paid by some class members to approximately 53 percent of the amount paid by other class members. Under the Settlement Agreement, the vast majority of Class members will get back all the money they paid in Administrative Costs, plus $100. Only 27 Class members out of 400 will not receive the full amount they paid in Administrative Costs, but even they are eligible to receive $800. The Parties submit that the range of recovery afforded by the Agreement compares favorably to other settlements that have received court approval. For instance, the Court in Columbus Drywall noted that, in antitrust actions, "district courts have approved settlements equaling a small fraction of the potential recovery ...." Id.; see In re Domestic Air Transp. Antitrust Litig., 148 F.R.D. 297, 325 (N.D. Ga. 1993) (approving a comprehensive settlement equal to 12.7 to 15.3 percent of the potential recovery); and In re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust Litig., 2006 WL 3247396, *6 (S.D. N.Y. 2006) (approving settlement of "roughly 10-15%" of the allegedly illegal fees collected from the class.) Based on the foregoing, the amount of the payments called for by the Agreement is fair, adequate and reasonable.
4. The Complexity, Expense and Duration of Litigation Because they believe that they have legal defenses to Plaintiffs claims, Judge Bass and Grady County filed motions to dismiss Plaintiffs complaint. On August 13, 2014, the Court entered an order denying those motions to dismiss. By that point, the Parties were familiar with the facts and legal issues necessary to evaluate the claims, defenses and potential recoveries. For instance, Plaintiffs attorneys were able to provide information regarding the identity of the members of the Class and the amount of money that each Class member paid in Administrative
13

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 14 of 20
Costs. Because the facts and issues were apparent, the Parties attended mediation on October 9, 2014, and the negotiations that took place at the mediation resulted in the Agreement. By entering into this negotiated resolution of the case, the parties avoid the time and expense of further, protracted litigation, including discovery, a potential interlocutory appeal, trial, and/or appeal. The Agreement avoids the potential costs of continued litigation for the Class and the Defendants.
5. Substance and Degree of Opposition to the Settlement. "In determining whether to certify a settlement class, a court must also examine the degree of opposition to the settlement. Here, because notice has not yet been provided to the class members, the Court cannot assess whether there are any objectors." Columbus Drywall, 258 F.R.D. at 560. For that reason, the Court will address that issue once notice has been sent to the members of the Class. See Id.
6. The Stage of Proceedings at which the Settlement was Achieved. "The stage of the proceedings at which a settlement is achieved is evaluated to ensure that Plaintiffs had access to sufficient information to adequately evaluate the merits of the case and weigh the benefits of settlement against further litigation." Lipuma v. American Express Co., 406 F. Supp.2d 1298, 1324 (S.D. Fla. 2005). Here, although no discovery took place, the Plaintiff had access to court records and other public records that allowed Plaintiff to evaluate the merits of her case. The Parties agree on the basic facts and they are set forth in the Settlement Agreement. In addition, the Parties are familiar with the relevant legal issues as those issues were raised in the Defendants' motions to dismiss. Settlement was achieved in good faith following a formal mediation and after this Court ruled on Defendants' motions to dismiss.
14

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 15 of 20
7. Terms of the Settlement The Court has reviewed the Settlement Agreement and described its pertinent terms in Section III (A)(2) and (3) above. Under the Settlement Agreement, all Class members will be entitled to monetary compensation. Most class members (about 86%) will be entitled to receive back all of the money they paid in Administrative Costs, plus $100. Only about 14% of Class members will receive less than what they may have paid in Administrative Costs, but even they will be entitled to receive up to $800. These settlement terms are fair and reasonable.
8. Procedures to Notify Class Members of the Proposed Settlement For the reasons set forth below, the procedures to provide notice to the class are reasonably calculated to apprise class members of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their views.
9. Judgment of Experienced Counsel. In considering whether to approve the settlement, this Court is entitled to rely upon the judgment of experienced counsel for the parties. Meyer, 677 F. Supp. at 1210. "Indeed the trial judge, absent fraud, collusion, or the like, should be hesitant to substitute its own judgment for that of counsel." Id. (internal quotations and citation omitted). Here, counsel for the Parties are competent and experienced and have recommended that the Court approve the settlement. B. Absence of Collusion There is no evidence in the record before the Court, nor has there been any suggestion by anyone, that there has been any fraud or collusion among the parties or their attorneys in arriving at the terms of the settlement. On the contrary, the attorneys for the respective parties have vigorously advanced the interests of their respective clients. The Defendants filed motions to dismiss this case, Plaintiff contested those motions, and the Court permitted certain claims to
15

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 16 of 20
go forward. Defendants then sought reconsideration of the Court's order. A settlement was reached only after an arms-length negotiation before a mediator. Therefore, the Court finds that the settlement was negotiated without any fraud or collusion. Meyer, 677 F. Supp. at 120 I.
After considering the factors listed above in light of the terms of the proposed settlement, the Court hereby GRANTS preliminary approval of the settlement outlined in the Agreement.
IV. ADEQUACY OF NOTICE The Class members must be notified of the terms of the settlement that has been preliminarily approved by the Court. In that regard, Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure specifies that, "[t]he Court must direct notice in a reasonable manner to all class members who would be bound by a proposed settlement, voluntary dismissal, or compromise." The notice should be "reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections." Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797, 811-812 (1985). Further, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(h)(1), Class counsel must notify class members in a reasonable manner of any motion for attorney fees and costs. In accordance with Rule 23(e), the Court hereby DIRECTS that the members of the Class be notified in the following manner:
a. within 30 days of the entry of this order, Grady County will publish the advertisement (the "Advertisement") attached as Exhibit A to the Agreement in the Cairo Messenger once a week for two weeks;
b. on or before the date on which the Advertisement is first published in the newspaper, Grady County will mail the notice (the "Notice") attached as
16

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 17 of 20
Exhibit A to this Order4 to the individuals identified on the list attached as Exhibit C to the Settlement Agreement, who are believed to be the members of the Class, with the following understanding:
(I) the Notice will be mailed to the most recent address included in the file maintained by the Clerk of the State Court of Grady County with respect to each Class member's criminal case; and
(2) if the Notice that is originally mailed is returned to Grady County with a forwarding address, Grady County will mail a second Notice to the forwarding address;
(3) Grady County will inform the attorneys representing the Class of each Notice that is returned as undeliverable so that the attorneys for the Class will have an opportunity to identify a current address for each such Class member. If the attorneys for the Class identify a more current address, they shall provide that address to Grady County and Grady County shall mail another Notice to that address within five days of receipt of that address.
4 The parties revised the Notice to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(h)(1) (requiring Class counsel to notify class members oftheir request for attorneys fees and costs). The Court notes that fees may be assessed against government officials after a case has been settled by the entry of a consent decree. Evans v. Jeff D., 475 U.S. 717, 720 (1986) (citing Maher v. Gagne, 448 U.S. 122 (1980). See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(h)(l) (stating that a court "may award reasonable attorney's fees and nontaxable costs that are authorized by law or by the parties' agreement.").
17

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 18 of 20
The Court finds that the foregoing notice procedures are reasonably calculated to apprise Class members of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections. Phillips Petroleum Co., 472 U.S. at 811-812.
V. SCHEDULING Because it believes that the timeline established by the Agreement is reasonable, in accordance with that timeline, the Court hereby institutes the following schedule: A. as soon as practical following the entry of this order, Grady County shall notify the members of the Class as directed above, including by way of publication of the Advertisement; B. the individuals who meet the criteria of the Class shall have 90 days from the date of the first publication of the Advertisement, hereinafter referred to as the "Deadline," to do the following:
1. request the money due to them pursuant to the terms of the Agreement by completing Section I of the Response Form and mailing it to Raleigh Rollins at 411 Gordon Avenue in Thomasville, Georgia 31792;
2. exclude themselves from the Class by completing Section II of the Response Form and mailing it to Raleigh Rollins at 411 Gordon Avenue in Thomasville, Georgia 31792;
3. object to the terms if the Agreement by filing a letter with the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia at 201 W. Broad Street in Albany, Georgia 31701;
4. enter an appearance or move to intervene in the lawsuit.
18

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 19 of 20

C. Within 30 days after the Deadline, the attorney for Grady County will determine

the amount of money owed to each member of the Class who submitted a Response Form (with

Section I completed) on or before the Deadline (the "Individual Payment Amount"), and the

amount of money owed to the Class as a whole (the "Total Settlement Amount"), and the

attorney for Grady County shall provide all documentation to the attorneys for the Class that

shows the Individual Payment Amount due to each member of the Class and the Total Settlement

Amount.

D. Pursuant to Rule 23(h), Class Counsel shall file a motion and supporting

documentation in support of a request for reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses within 45

(forty-five) days of the entry of this Order.

r4 mJ ')

~"

V / j '- [§,n::n:'OcJ,P.'Yl .

E. Pursuant to Rule 23(e), the Court will hold a hearing on

with

respect to the fairness of the settlement that is memorialized by the Agreement, the validity of

any objections that may be raised with respect to the Agreement, and whether the settlement

should be given final approval.

F. If the Court gives its final approval to the settlement, it will enter an order that:

1. directs that a check for the Total Settlement Amount be mailed to the

attorneys for the Class and that the check, which will be made payable to

the attorneys for the Class, be deposited in their trust account;

2. within 15 days of their receipt of the check for the Total Settlement

Amount, the attorneys for the Class shall mail a check for the Individual

Payment Amount to each member ofthe Class who is entitled to payment;

3. bars the members of the Class from asserting any further claim or lawsuit

against Judge Bass, Grady County, and their respective agents, officers,

19

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 47 Filed 03/18/15 Page 20 of 20

employees. officials and personal representatives with respect to the imposition, receipt or retention of Administrative Costs; and 4. dismisses this case with prejudice. This'itetay of March, 2015.

CONSENT TO BY:
slSarah Geraghty Georgia Bar No. 291393 Southern Center For Human Rights 83 Poplar Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303 Telephone: (404) 688-1202 Email: sgeraghty@schr.org Attorney for Roberta Imogene Jones
sl James L. Elliott Georgia Bar No. 244244 Elliott, Blackburn & Gooding, PC 3016 North Patterson Street Valdosta, Georgia 31602 Telephone: (229) 242-3333 Email: jelliott@ebbglaw.com Attorney for J. William Bass, Sr.
slRaleigh W. Rollins Raleigh W. Rollins Georgia Bar No. 613860 ALEXANDER & VANN, LLP 411 Gordon Avenue Thomasville GA 31792 Telephone: (229) 226-2565 Email: rrollins@alexandervann.com Attorney for Grady County, Georgia

The Honorable W. Louis Sands United States District Judge

20

 
 Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 1 of 24

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

ALBANY DIVISION

_________________________________

)

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

) CLASS ACTION

v.

)

GRADY COUNTY, Georgia,

) CIVIL ACTION NO. _1_:1_3_-_C_V_-156(WLS) )

) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

JUDGE J. WILLIAM BASS, SR.,

)

Grady County State Court Judge,

)

in his official and individual

)

capacities,

)

)

Defendants.

)

_________________________________ )

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Roberta Imogene Jones, on behalf of herself and the class alleged

herein (“Plaintiff”), by counsel, states as follows for her Complaint:

I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

1. This is an action to stop Defendants from collecting substantial sums

in unauthorized “administrative costs” from citizens who come before the Grady

County State Court, without any statutory or legal basis for doing so. Plaintiff asks

this Court to order Defendants to return money that Defendants wrongfully

collected from Plaintiff and other putative class members.

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 2 of 24
2. For at least seven years, Judge J. William Bass, Sr. required persons convicted of misdemeanors in Grady County to pay large and undefined “administrative costs” to the County, in addition to statutorily authorized fines and surcharges. In many cases, these “administrative costs” were in the amount of $700 or $800 per defendant. The costs were imposed on hundreds of persons convicted of a range of offenses, including disorderly conduct, speeding, driving without a license, and other offenses.
3. Judge Bass and Grady County created these “administrative costs” out of whole cloth as a money-making mechanism for the County. From June 2011 until July 2012 alone, the County collected about $296,711 in unauthorized “administrative costs” from defendants, many of whom are indigent.
4. The Grady County State Court has no legal authority to impose such costs on defendants, and Grady County has no authority to retain these illegally collected monies. There is no state statute, court rule, local authority, or any other authority permitting the Grady County State Court to levy these costs.
5. The State Court’s “administrative costs” bear no relationship to any defendant’s particular offense, and the amount of such costs is set in the unbridled discretion of the court. These costs are assessed for the purpose of making money for the County. In a letter to the Grady County Commission delivered in July
2

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 3 of 24
2012, Judge Bass bragged about his efforts to make money from the bench, stating that he “work[ed] hard to maximize what get’s turned over,” [sic] and that “[t]he judge must go beyond the call of the job to produce that much for the county.” (Exhibit 1.) Judge Bass requested a substantial raise in his personal salary based on his efforts to “maximize” county revenues. (Id.)
6. Through its pervasive practice of collecting unauthorized costs in the State Court, Defendants have taken substantial sums of money from Plaintiff and hundreds of others.
7. On March 18, 2013, Georgia’s Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) issued a Public Reprimand to Judge Bass for numerous ethical violations, including, but not limited to, assessing unauthorized “administrative costs” to criminal defendants and seeking a raise in his personal salary based on the amount of money he made for the County. (Exhibit 2.)
8. Defendants have made no effort to return the “administrative costs” they collected to Plaintiff, the putative class members, or any other person.
9. Defendants’ policy and practice of requiring Grady County State Court defendants to pay “administrative costs” violates numerous provisions of the U.S. Constitution and the Georgia Constitution. Further, this policy and practice violates Georgia law and constitutes conversion of Plaintiff’s and putative class
3

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 4 of 24
members’ money. Plaintiff asserts claims for violation of her civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Georgia’s conversion statute. In addition, she seeks equitable restitution of her money, with interest at statutory rates.
10. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and all persons who paid “administrative costs,” not permitted as statutorily authorized fines and surcharges, pursuant to an order of the Grady County State Court since September 25, 2009. Plaintiff asks this Court to order Defendants to return money that Defendants have wrongfully collected from Plaintiff and other putative class members, with interest at statutory rates.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 11. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1343(a)(3) and (4) because the action arises under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Plaintiff’s request for declaratory and injunctive relief is authorized by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 because they are so related to the federal claims that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution.
4

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 5 of 24
12. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) because at least one Defendant resides in this judicial district. This District also is an appropriate venue for this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because all or a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims asserted herein occurred in this judicial district.
III. PARTIES A. Plaintiff
13. Plaintiff Roberta Imogene Jones is a resident of Statesboro, Georgia. She works nights at a poultry processing plant. In 2012, Ms. Jones was a resident of Thomasville, Georgia. On July 9, 2012, Ms. Jones pled guilty to Driving Under the Influence, First Offense, in the State Court of Grady County. Ms. Jones could not afford a lawyer and appeared before Judge Bass without counsel. Judge Bass sentenced Ms. Jones to one year of probation at a cost of $44 per month and imposed a fine – “including all surcharges and add-ons” – of $300. In addition, Judge Bass ordered Ms. Jones to pay $700 in “administrative costs” to the County. While Judge Bass had authority to order payment of the $300 fine, he did not have authority to order payment of any “administrative costs.” Ms. Jones has paid all fines, surcharges and costs related to her conviction.
5

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 6 of 24
B. Defendants 14. Defendant Grady County received “administrative costs” that were
unlawfully collected from Plaintiff and putative class members by the Grady County State Court. Grady County officials have deposited the “administrative costs” collected from Plaintiff and others into the County treasury. Grady County has caused, authorized, condoned, ratified, approved, and/or knowingly acquiesced in the illegal policy of charging Grady County State Court defendants “administrative costs,” as described in this Complaint. As a result, Grady County has been unjustly enriched at the expense of Plaintiff and putative class members.
15. Defendant J. William Bass, Sr. is the Judge for the Grady County State Court, and is a resident of Grady County, Georgia. Judge Bass is directly responsible for the daily management, administration, policies, and operation of the Grady County State Court. Judge Bass caused, created, authorized, condoned, ratified, approved, and/or knowingly acquiesced in the illegal policy of charging Grady County State Court defendants “administrative costs,” as described in this Complaint. Judge Bass is sued in his official capacity for declaratory and equitable relief and individual capacity for actual and punitive damages.
6

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 7 of 24
IV. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS 16. Plaintiff brings this class action pursuant to Rules 23(a) and (b)(2) and/or (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on her behalf and on behalf of a class similarly situated and affected during the pendency of this lawsuit and in the future. The class is defined as all persons who paid “administrative costs,” not permitted as statutorily authorized fines and surcharges, pursuant to an order of the Grady County State Court since September 25, 2009. 17. Plaintiff meets the requirements of Rule 23(a) in that: (a) The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. The class consists of hundreds or thousands of persons who paid illegal “administrative costs.” To give a partial example of the numbers at issue, between July 2011 and July 2012 alone, about 540 State Court defendants paid “administrative costs” totaling approximately $296,711. The total amount unjustly taken from the class will, on information and belief, be consistent with this smaller sample. (b) There are questions of law and fact common to the class concerning the constitutionality and lawfulness of the policy of charging Grady County State Court defendants “administrative costs” beyond those statutorily authorized. While the amount of the “administrative costs” imposed on each
7

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 8 of 24
class member may vary, the absence of any lawful basis for assessing the costs presents a question of fact and law common to all class members. (c) The policy challenged in this action applies with equal force to the named Plaintiff and all members of the class so that the claims of the Plaintiff are typical of those of the class. All class members have paid “administrative costs” which were ordered in violation of law and unjustly enriched Grady County. (d) The named Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. The Plaintiff possesses the requisite personal interest in the subject matter of the lawsuit and possesses no interests adverse to other class members. The Plaintiff is representative of the class of all persons who have been charged “administrative costs” in the Grady County State Court in violation of law. The Plaintiff is represented by attorneys at the Southern Center for Human Rights, a nonprofit organization with extensive experience in complex class action litigation. Plaintiff’s counsel have the resources, expertise, and experience to effectively prosecute this action.
8

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 9 of 24
18. Plaintiff meets the requirements of Rule 23(b)(2) in that the Defendants acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a whole.
19. Plaintiff meets the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3) because common questions of law and fact predominate over questions affecting individual class members. A class action is superior to any other method of adjudicating this dispute because hundreds of people paid unauthorized “administrative costs” demanded by Defendants, and few are likely to have the time, legal acumen, and resources to pursue a reimbursement of these costs on their own. In the absence of a class action, the County will be permitted to keep money exacted from class members in violation of their constitutional rights.
V. STATEMENT OF FACTS A. Defendants’ Assessment of Unauthorized “Administrative Costs”
20. The State Court of Grady County is located in Cairo, Georgia, and has jurisdiction over the trial of criminal cases below the grade of felony. See O.C.G.A. § 15-7-4. Judge J. William Bass, Sr. has presided over the State Court of Grady County since 2002.
9

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 10 of 24
21. Shortly after being elected to office, Judge Bass came up with an idea to use the Grady County State Court to make money for the County. Judge Bass decided that in addition to ordering defendants to pay statutorily authorized fines and surcharges, he would require defendants who appeared before him to pay a substantial additional “administrative cost” – an amount not statutorily authorized as fines or surcharges. In many cases, these “administrative costs” were assessed in the amount of $700 or $800 per defendant.
22. The Court’s policy of charging “administrative costs” has applied to virtually all defendants who come before the State Court, whether they are convicted of driving without a license, no proof of insurance, reckless conduct, DUI, or any other offense. Over the years, thousands of defendants paid “administrative costs.” Between July 2011 and July 2012 alone, about 540 State Court defendants paid “administrative costs” totaling approximately $296,711. The average administrative cost was $613 for this period. The total amount of Grady County’s unjust enrichment at class members’ expense will, on information and belief, be consistent with this sample.
23. The Court’s policy of charging “administrative costs” is not codified in any written document or authorized by any state or local authority. There is no state statute authorizing the State Court or County to collect “administrative costs.”
10

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 11 of 24
Through this illegal practice, the Defendants collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in unauthorized costs, unjustly enriching the County.
24. Since the costs were not authorized by law, the Court created a special system to facilitate the collection of “administrative costs.” Judge Bass revised the State Court’s existing sentencing disposition forms by adding a category for the unlawful “administrative costs” that was distinct and separate from the category for punitive fines. When entering the “administrative costs” into the Court’s computer system, the Court’s clerks improperly categorized the “administrative costs” as “restitution.” This designation ensured that the Court disbursed the “administrative costs” to the County first, before other monies collected from defendants were disbursed to the State.
25. Judge Bass made clear that the “administrative costs” served two functions: (a) to raise revenue for the County; and (b) to provide a basis for an increase in his own personal salary.
26. On or around July 3, 2012, Judge Bass delivered a document to the county governing authority requesting a salary increase from his current salary of $40,000 to $60,000. (Exhibit 1.) This document stated that Judge Bass’s proposed salary increase was warranted by the amount of funds he caused to be improperly collected by the State Court. The document stated in pertinent part:
11

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 12 of 24
I need my salary raised to $60,000 per year. Why should you do it? . . . . This court, because of the extra time and energy that I spend, contributes more than $350,000 per year to the county. Although I don’t get concerned about ‘raising money for the county’, I work hard to maximize what get’s turned over. At $40,000 per year, the next judge will not be able, or willing, to do that. The judge must go beyond the call of the job to produce that much for the county. To keep the income at that standard, the judge has got to be able to devote the time and energy required. (Exhibit 1.) (emphasis added). 27. The JQC put Judge Bass on notice that he had no authority to collect “administrative costs.” Judge Bass nevertheless continued to collect “administrative costs” against defendants who appeared in his courtroom. B. Roberta Imogene Jones 28. Roberta Jones was arrested for Driving Under the Influence, First Offense, and related charges in Grady County, Georgia. On July 9, 2012, Ms. Jones appeared before Judge Bass in the Grady County State Court where she pled guilty to one misdemeanor count of DUI. 29. Ms. Jones could not afford a lawyer and represented herself. Judge Bass sentenced Ms. Jones to one year of probation at a cost of $44 per month and imposed a fine – “including all surcharges and add-ons” – of $300. In addition, Judge Bass ordered Ms. Jones to pay “administrative costs” in the amount of $700. While Judge Bass had authority to order payment of the $300 fine, he did not have
12

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 13 of 24
authority to order payment of the $700 in administrative costs. Ms. Jones has paid all fines, costs and charges related to her case. C. Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) Proceedings
Against Judge Bass 30. On December 14, 2012, the JQC filed a Notice of Formal Proceedings, charging Judge Bass with violations of the law and the Code of Judicial Conduct, including, but not limited to: (a) appointing his son to serve as the Grady County State Court judge in his absence; (b) engaging in inappropriate, ex parte communications over Facebook regarding a party who was to appear before him; (c) asking members of the audience to vote for him in an upcoming election from the bench; (d) telling an attorney in court not to return because the attorney donated to his opponent’s election campaign. 31. The JQC further charged Judge Bass with ethical violations relating to his assessment of “administrative costs.” Specifically, the JQC charged Judge Bass as follows: A. You violated Canon 2A (“judges shall respect and comply with the law”) and/or Canon 3B (“judges should be faithful to the law”) of the Code of Judicial Conduct when you, without legal authority, ordered the collection of funds as “Administrative Costs” from criminal defendants. B. You violated Canon 2B (“judges shall not lend the prestige of judicial office to advance their private interests”) and/or Canon 2A (“judges shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and
13

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 14 of 24
impartiality of the judiciary”) of the Code of Judicial Conduct when you wrote and, on or about July 3, 2012, delivered a document to the county governing authority requesting a salary increase. . . . This document gave the appearance that your salary increase was warranted by the amount of funds you caused to be improperly collected by State Court. C. You violated Canon 2A (“judges shall respect and comply with the law”) and O.C.G.A § 16-10-1 (Oath of Office), when you illegally charged costs and exacted payment from defendants, without legal authority, for the benefit of the county and you, as the State Court Judge of Grady County, in order to “maximize” the collection of revenue which the county was not otherwise entitled to receive from defendants. (Exhibit 3.) 32. On March 6, 2013, the JQC held an ethics trial on the above-stated charges. 33. On March 18, 2013, pursuant to an “agreed upon” disposition of the JQC investigation and trial, the JQC issued a Public Reprimand to Judge Bass in which it found: You have admitted that without any legal authority, you ordered the collection of funds, which you called, “Administrative Costs” from criminal defendants and illegally charged those costs and exacted payment from defendants in what appeared to be an effort to “maximize” the collection of revenue which the county was not entitled to receive. (Exhibit 2.)
14

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 15 of 24
34. Even after receiving a Public Reprimand, Judge Bass again sought to impose unauthorized fees on criminal defendants as recently as August 2013. D. Defendants’ Conduct Is Unauthorized and Illegal
35. There is no statutory or other legal authority for Defendants to charge Plaintiff and others “administrative costs.” Defendants’ policy and practice constitutes unlawful conduct deliberately undertaken by Defendants to unjustly enrich the County.
36. In each and every instance set forth above, Defendants acted intentionally, with malice, and with actual intent to cause injury in the performance of their official functions. Defendants knew or should have known that confiscating funds, without any statutory authority, violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights. The actions set forth above were taken by Defendants under color of state law.
15

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 16 of 24
VI. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF COUNT ONE
VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF FEDERAL AND STATE CONSTITUTIONS 37. Plaintiff incorporates herein and re-alleges, as if fully set forth herein, all factual allegations of the preceding paragraphs. 38. By deliberately requiring Plaintiff to pay “administrative costs” without any legal authority permitting such costs or any measuring stick to determine the amount of such costs, Defendants deprived Plaintiff of money without due process of law in violation of Plaintiff’s constitutional rights. See U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1; Ga. Const. art. 1, § I, ¶¶ I and II. 39. The State Court’s “administrative costs” are further impermissible under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause because Judge Bass’s substantial financial interest in leveraging county revenue into a higher salary is the kind of “interes[t] that tempt[s] adjudicators to disregard neutrality.” See Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc., 556 U.S. 868, 878 (2009). As a result of that interest, each instance in which the unauthorized costs were assessed violated a person’s due process right to be sentenced by an impartial adjudicator. See Ward v. Village of Monroeville, 409 U.S. 57, 60-62 (1972).
16

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 17 of 24
40. In each and every instance set forth above, Defendants acted intentionally, with malice, and with actual intent to cause injury in the performance of their official functions. Defendants knew or should have known that confiscating funds, without any statutory authority, violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights. The actions set forth above were taken by Defendants under color of state law.
41. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ illegal policy and practice, Defendants unjustly enriched themselves by depriving Plaintiff and others of their money. Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the violations of Plaintiff’s rights, and the harm they suffered as a result, because each Defendant either personally participated in the actions or failures to act, or implicitly authorized, approved, or knowingly condoned or failed to remedy the wrongs at issue.
42. Defendants’ above-described actions were willful, deliberate, and malicious, and involved reckless or callous indifference to Plaintiff’s rights and should be punished and deterred by an award of punitive or enhanced damages against individual Defendants as permitted by law and in an amount to be determined at trial.
17

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 18 of 24
COUNT TWO VIOLATION OF TAKINGS CLAUSE OF FEDERAL AND STATE CONSTITUTIONS 43. Plaintiff incorporates herein and re-alleges, as if fully set forth herein, all factual allegations of the preceding paragraphs. 44. The Grady County State Court is a public resource and its administrative costs are properly borne by the taxpayers. By requiring Plaintiff to pay unauthorized and unreasonable “administrative costs,” Defendants took Plaintiff’s property for a public purpose without just compensation in violation of the Takings Clause of the federal and state constitutions. See U.S. Const. amend. V; Ga. Const. art. I, § III, ¶ I. 45. In each and every instance set forth above, Defendants acted intentionally, or at least recklessly, in disregard of Plaintiff’s constitutional rights. Defendants knew or should have known that placing a disproportionate and unreasonable share of funding for the State Court on Plaintiff and putative class members violated Plaintiff’s and class members’ constitutional rights. 46. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ illegal policy and practice, Plaintiff and others were wrongfully deprived of money that belonged to them.
18

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 19 of 24
47. Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the violations of Plaintiff’s rights, and the harm she suffered as a result, because each Defendant personally participated in the actions or failures to act, or implicitly authorized, approved, or knowingly condoned or failed to remedy the wrongs at issue.
48. Defendants’ above-described actions were willful, deliberate, and malicious, and involved reckless or callous indifference to Plaintiff’s rights and should be punished and deterred by an award of punitive or enhanced damages against individual Defendants as permitted by law and in an amount to be determined at trial.
COUNT THREE CONVERSION 49. Plaintiff incorporates herein and re-alleges, as if fully set forth herein, all factual allegations of the preceding paragraphs. 50. Defendants’ practice of appropriating Plaintiff’s and others’ money without legal authority constitutes conversion – an intentional tort under Georgia law. See O.C.G.A. § 51-10-1 (“The owner of personalty is entitled to its possession. Any deprivation of such possession is a tort for which an action lies.”). 51. Georgia’s conversion statute “authorizes the recovery of damages where a government official, without lawful authority, has temporarily deprived an
19

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 20 of 24
individual of his or her property.” Grant v. Newsome, 201 Ga. App. 710, 710, 411 S.E. 2d 796, 798 (1991). See also Felker v. Chipley, 246 Ga. App. 296, 297, 540 S.E.2d 285, 287 (2000) (“[A] plaintiff suing for the conversion of money may recover the amount of money converted, plus interest from the date of conversion”).
52. By taking Plaintiff’s money without authority and placing it in the County’s coffers, Defendants committed the tort of conversion. Defendants’ above-described actions were willful, deliberate, and malicious, and involved reckless or callous indifference to Plaintiff’s rights and should be punished and deterred by an award of punitive or enhanced damages against individual defendants as permitted by law and in an amount to be determined at trial.
COUNT FOUR UNJUST ENRICHMENT/ EQUITABLE RELIEF 53. Plaintiff incorporates herein and re-alleges, as if fully set forth herein, all factual allegations of the preceding paragraphs. 54. Defendants took and converted to their own use the funds set forth above from Plaintiff and putative class members. Those funds were exacted from Plaintiff by a biased adjudicator, in violation of Plaintiff’s federal and state constitutional right to due process of law. Defendants had no legal right to
20

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 21 of 24
Plaintiff’s funds and took these funds in violation of law. Under the circumstances here, Defendants’ retention of Plaintiff’s money would result in unjust enrichment.
COUNT FIVE MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED 55. Plaintiff incorporates herein and re-alleges, as if fully set forth herein, all factual allegations of the preceding paragraphs. 56. Under the doctrine of money had and received, recovery is authorized against one who holds sums of money of another which he ought in equity and good conscience to refund. Defendants received money that in equity and good conscience, they should not be permitted to keep. Plaintiff has made a demand for repayment, but Defendants have not refunded the money in question.
COUNT SIX DECLARATORY RELIEF 57. Plaintiff incorporates herein and re-alleges, as if fully set forth herein, all factual allegations of the preceding paragraphs. 58. For years, Judge Bass required State Court defendants to pay “administrative costs” pursuant to court order. Judge Bass continued to assess these costs after being placed on notice that he had no legal authority to do so. Even after receiving a Public Reprimand, Judge Bass again sought to impose
21

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 22 of 24
unauthorized costs on criminal defendants as recently as August 2013. 59. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, Plaintiff seeks a declaration by the
Court that the Grady County State Court’s orders requiring State Court defendants to pay administrative costs were and are unlawful and unenforceable.
60. Plaintiff and putative class members will be adversely affected if Defendants enforce orders to pay administrative costs. The controversy between Plaintiff and Defendants is definite and concrete. An actual controversy exists between the parties as to Defendants’ enforcement of orders to pay administrative costs and whether Defendants will seek to incarcerate putative plaintiffs for failing to pay the amounts allegedly due under the orders.
VII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court will: (a) Assume jurisdiction over this action; (b) Determine by Order pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that this action be maintained as a class action; (c) Order trial by jury on all claims so triable; (d) Enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff; (e) Impose a constructive trust on all money taken from Plaintiff and putative class members in violation of law;
22

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 23 of 24
(f) Order that Defendants return all money taken from Plaintiff and others in violation of law, with statutory interest paid; (g) Declare Defendants’ policy of requiring State Court defendants to pay “administrative costs” to be in violation of law; (h) Enter a preliminary and thereafter a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Grady County from collecting “administrative costs” or collecting other fees not permitted by law; (i) If declaratory relief is violated, enter a preliminary and thereafter a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Judge Bass from collecting “administrative costs” or collecting other fees not permitted by law; (j) Enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and the class for compensatory (or, in the alternative, nominal) and punitive damages, with statutory interest, as allowed by law, against each Defendant, jointly and severally; (k) Appoint a special master to oversee return of “administrative costs” to Plaintiff and class members; (l) Award Plaintiff the costs of this lawsuit and reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988;
23

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 1 Filed 09/24/13 Page 24 of 24
(m) Award enhanced or punitive damages as permitted by law and in an amount to be proven at trial; (n) Order such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. Respectfully submitted this 24th day of September, 2013.
s/Sarah Geraghty Sarah Geraghty Georgia Bar No. 291393 Gerald Weber Georgia Bar No. 744878 SOUTHERN CENTER
FOR HUMAN RIGHTS 83 Poplar Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303 Telephone: (404) 688-1202 Facsimile: (404) 688-9440 sgeraghty@schr.org gweber@schr.org Counsel for the Plaintiff
24

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES,

:

:

Plaintiff,

:

:

v.

:

:

GRADY COUNTY, GEORGIA, and :

JUDGE J. WILLIAM BASS SR.,

:

:

Defendants.

:

:

CASE NO.: 1:13-CV-156 (WLS)

ORDER

The above-captioned putative class action suit, brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleges violations of the Due Process and Takings Clauses of the United States Constitution. (Doc. 1 at 16 & 18.) The suit also purports to assert claims for violations of the Georgia Constitution and other state law statutes and doctrines. (Id. at 19.) The complaint alleges that Grady County State Court Judge J. William Bass Sr. caused the State Court to unlawfully collect an “administrative cost” from the named Plaintiff and putative class members. (Id. at ¶ 2.) Allegedly, the funds were then deposited into the Grady County Treasury by Grady County officials. (Id. at ¶ 14.) Defendants Grady County and Judge J. William Bass Sr. have filed motions to dismiss the referenced complaint. (Docs. 4 & 9.) For the reasons that follow, Grady County’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 4) is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART and Bass’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) is DENIED. Also, Plaintiff’s Motion to Exclude Affidavits from Consideration (Doc. 32) is GRANTED.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND1 The State Court of Grady County is located in Cairo, Georgia, and has jurisdiction over misdemeanor criminal cases. (Doc. 1 at ¶ 20.) Since 2002, Defendant Judge J. William

1 For the purposes of the motions to dismiss, the Court must accept all well-pleaded allegations in Jones’ complaint as true. Chaparro v. Carnival Corp., 693 F.3d 1333, 1335 (11th Cir. 2012) (citing Cinotto v. Delta Air Lines Inc., 674 F.3d 1285, 1291 (11th Cir. 2012)).

1

Bass Sr. (“Bass”), a resident of Grady County, Georgia, has presided over the State Court of Grady County. (Id. at ¶¶ 15 & 20.) Bass is directly responsible for the daily management, administration, and operation of that court. (Id. at ¶ 15.) Shortly after his election to the bench, Bass devised a plan to use the Grady County State Court to collect additional funds for Defendant Grady County (“Grady County” or “the County”). (Id. at ¶ 21.) To that end, Bass unlawfully required State Court defendants to pay “administrative costs” in addition to statutorily authorized fines and surcharges.2 (Id.) In many cases, the administrative cost totaled $700-$800 per defendant, and most defendants who appeared before Bass were required to pay some amount in such costs. (Id. at ¶¶ 21 & 22.) Between July 2011 and July 2012, about 540 State Court defendants paid administrative costs totaling approximately $296,711.00. (Id. at ¶ 22.) The average of such cost for that period was $613.00. (Id.) Bass charged those costs for at least seven years. (Id. at ¶ 2.) Grady County received the funds collected by Bass and the Grady County State Court from the named Plaintiff and other putative class members, and County officials deposited the same into the County treasury. (Id. at ¶ 14.) At a minimum, Grady County knowingly acquiesced to Bass’ policy of charging Grady County State Court defendants administrative costs. (Id.)
Bass caused the State Court of Grady County to create a special system to facilitate the collection of the referenced costs. (Id. at ¶ 24.) Bass revised the State Court’s thenexisting sentencing disposition forms by adding a category for the administrative costs. (Id.) That category was distinct from the category for punitive fines. (Id.) When entering the administrative costs into the State Court’s computer system, the court’s clerks categorized the costs as “restitution.” (Id.) That designation caused the referenced costs to be disbursed to Grady County before they were disbursed to the State of Georgia. (Id.)
Bass charged administrative costs to raise revenue for the County and to provide a basis for an increase in his own personal salary. (Id. at ¶ 25.) In July 2012, Bass delivered a document to the county governing authority requesting an annual salary increase from $40,000 to $60,000. (Id. at ¶ 26; see Doc. 1-2 at 1.) That letter stated as follows:
I need my salary raised to $60,000 per year.
2 The Parties do not dispute that the “administrative costs” were not authorized by law.
2

Why should you do it?
1. My ‘total compensation’ is about $40,000 of salary and $15,000 of insurance. I don’t take the insurance, but it’s still part of my compensation, and, by law, that can’t be lowered while I am in office. So, raising my salary to $60,000 won’t cost the county one red cent, considering that the county hasn’t had the expense of furnishing my insurance for several years (and won’t have to do so for the next two years).
2. I’ve never asked for any kind of raise. Although this is a part time [sic] job, it requires my attention on a full time [sic] basis. And, because people don’t think that judges can practice law, it’s simply hard to earn a living.
3. This court, because of the extra time and energy that I spend, contributes more than $350,000 per year to the county. Although I don’t get concerned about ‘raising money for the county’, [sic] I work hard to maximize what get’s [sic] turned over. At $40,000 per year, the next judge will not be able, or willing, to do that. The judge must go beyond the call of the job to produce that much for the county. To keep the income at that standard, the judge has got to be able to devote the time and energy required.
4. I also fill in for the Probate Judge when she is out of town, and, [sic] I’ve helped the Magistrate Court whenever I am asked…all of this at no charge to the county.
I am your State Court judge. I want to be able to continue to make it perform for the county as it should. I wouldn’t ask you to do this, [sic] if I saw any alternative. Remember, the performance of this court isn’t an accident…I don’t cry “Wolf!”…I humbly ask for your support in this matter.
(Doc. 1-2 at 1) (emphasis in original.) Plaintiff Roberta Imogene Jones (“Jones”) is a resi-
dent of Statesboro, Georgia. (Doc. 1 at ¶ 13.) She works night shifts at a poultry processing
plant. (Id.) On July 9, 2012, Jones pleaded guilty to Driving Under the Influence, First Of-
fense, in Grady County State Court. (Id.) Because she could not afford a lawyer, she ap-
peared before Bass without counsel. (Id.) Bass sentenced Jones to one year of probation at
a cost of $44 per month and imposed a fine of $300. (Id.) Those costs and fees were stated
to “includ[e] all surcharges and add-ons.” (Id.) Bass also ordered Jones to pay Grady Coun-
ty $700 in administrative costs. (Id.) Jones paid all fines, costs, and charges related to her
case. (Id. at ¶ 29.)
On December 14, 2012, the Judicial Qualifications Commission (“JQC”) filed a No-
tice of Formal Proceedings against Bass, charging him with violations of the law and Code
3

of Judicial Conduct. (Id. at ¶ 30.) As to the collection of administrative costs, the JQC
charged Bass as follows:
A. You violated Canon 2A (“judges shall respect and comply with the law”) and/or Canon 3B (“judges should be faithful to the law”) of the Code of Judicial Conduct when you, without legal authority, ordered the collection of funds as “Administrative Costs” from criminal defendants.
B. You violated Canon 2B (“judges shall not lend the prestige of judicial office to advance their private interests”) and/or Canon 2A (“judges shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary”) of the Code of Judicial Conduct when you wrote and, on or about July 3, 2012, delivered a document to the county governing authority requesting a salary increase. . . This document gave the appearance that your salary increase was warranted by the amount of funds you caused to be improperly collected by State Court.
C. You violated Canon 2A (“judges shall respect and comply with the law”) and O.C.G.A. § 16-10-1 (Oath of Office), when you illegally charged costs and exacted payment from defendants, without legal authority, for the benefit of the county and you, as the State Court Judge of Grady County, in order to “maximize” the collection of revenue which the county was not otherwise entitled to receive from defendants.
(Doc. 1-4 at 2-3.) On March 6, 2013, the JQC held an ethics trial on the referenced charges.
(Doc. 1 at ¶ 32.) After the trial, pursuant to an “agreed upon disposition of the investigation
by the [JQC],” the JQC issued a Public Reprimand to Bass. (Id. at ¶ 33.) As to Bass’ collec-
tion of administrative costs, the Public Reprimand stated as follows:
You have admitted that without any legal authority, you ordered the collection of funds, which you called, “Administrative Costs” from criminal defendants and illegally charged those costs and exacted payment from defendants in what appeared to be an effort to “maximize” the collection of revenue which the county was not entitled to receive.
(Doc. 1-3 at 1-2.) After receiving the Public Reprimand, Bass again sought to impose unau-
thorized fees on criminal defendants as recently as August 2013. (Doc. 1 at ¶ 34.)
4

ANALYSIS Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) permits a party to assert by motion the defense of failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. When reviewing a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the Court must “accept[ ] the allegations in the complaint as true and constru[e] them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” Hill v. White, 321 F.3d 1334, 1335 (11th Cir. 2003). A motion to dismiss a plaintiff’s complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) should not be granted unless the plaintiff fails to plead enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible, and not merely just conceivable, on its face. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). “Dismissal for failure to state a claim is proper if the factual allegations are not ‘enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.’ ” Edwards v. Prime, Inc., 602 F.3d 1276, 1291 (11th Cir. 2010) (quoting Rivell v. Private Health Care Sys., Inc., 520 F.3d 1308, 1309 (11th Cir. 2008)). “Stated differently, the factual allegations in the complaint must ‘possess enough heft’ to set forth ‘a plausible entitlement to relief.’ ” Id. at 1291 (quoting Fin. Sec. Assurance, Inc. v. Stephens, Inc., 500 F.3d 1276, 1282 (11th Cir. 2007)). I. Grady County
A. Federal claims i. Grady County’s liability under § 1983
First, Grady County argues that it cannot be held liable for Bass’ actions under § 1983 through respondeat superior. (Doc. 5 at 4.) In response, Jones states that her complaint does not purport to assert a § 1983 respondeat superior claim against Grady County. (Doc. 20 at 3-6.) She states that, instead, her complaint alleges that the County is directly liable for its own unconstitutional acts. (Id.) In reply, the County acknowledges that it can be held liable if it had a “policy or custom [that] is a cause of the deprivation of a plaintiff’s federal right,” but states that “the facts do not support Plaintiff’s contention.” (Doc. 26 at 2-3.) In support of that statement, the County submitted two affidavits and a contract. (See Docs. 27 & 28.) Jones filed a Motion to Exclude Affidavits from Consideration and therein states that Grady County’s Motion to Dismiss should be decided on the complaint alone. (Doc. 32.)
“In ruling upon a motion to dismiss, the district court may consider an extrinsic document if it is (1) central to the plaintiff’s claim, and (2) its authenticity is not challenged.”
5

SFM Holdings, Ltd. v. Bank of Am. Secs., LLC, 600 F.3d 1334, 1337 (11th Cir. 2010) (citing Day v. Taylor 400 F.3d 1272, 1276 (11th Cir. 2005)). Grady County asserts that the affidavits should be considered at this stage because “the information contained in the affidavits is central to Plaintiff’s claims.” (Doc. 34 at 4 (emphasis supplied).) The information contained in the documents is not what must be central to the plaintiff’s claim; it is the documents themselves whose centrality is of import. See Day, 400 F.3d at 1276 (“references to the dealership contract are a necessary part of [the plaintiff’s] effort to make out a claim”); see also Maxcess, Inc. v. Lucent Techs., Inc., 433 F.3d 1337, 1340 (11th Cir. 2005) (finding purchase agreement central to plaintiff’s claims involving dispute over that agreement). Grady County does not argue that the affidavits are central to Jones’ claims. Therefore, considering the referenced extrinsic documents at this stage would be inappropriate without converting the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment. Grady County stated no reasons as to why the Court should convert the instant motion into a motion for summary judgment. (See Doc. 34.) For that reason, the Court declines to take that action. As such, Jones’ Motion to Exclude Affidavits from Consideration (Doc. 32) is GRANTED.
The complaint purports to state a claim against Grady County for its own direct actions, which the Parties agree is the appropriate way to seek to hold the County liable for its allegedly unconstitutional acts. Because Grady County does not argue that its direct actions cannot give rise to a constitutional claim against it, the Court construes the Parties to agree that Jones has properly asserted a claim against Grady County for violations of the Due Process and Takings Clauses of the U.S. Constitution. For that reason, Grady County’s first ground for dismissal in its motion to dismiss (Docs. 4 & 5) is DENIED.
ii. Availability of a postdeprivation remedy Second, Grady County argues that it cannot be held liable for a procedural due process violation in this matter because a state law conversion action is an adequate postdeprivation remedy. (Doc. 5 at 8-9.) Jones asserts that the availability of a postdeprivation remedy is irrelevant because the conduct challenged was not “random” and “unauthorized.” (Doc. 20 at 6-7.) The Court agrees with Jones that “the availability of a state tort action is irrelevant to a claim for deprivation of a protected interest which is carried out by persons
6

acting under color of state law pursuant to an established procedure where predeprivation process is feasible.” Messick v. Leavins, 811 F.2d 1439, 1441 (11th Cir. 1987). In other words, a post-deprivation remedy does not bar a procedural due process claim where the alleged deprivation was pursuant to an “established state procedure and ‘process’ could be offered before any actual deprivation took place.” Gilmere v. City of Atlanta, 737 F.2d 894, 906 (11th Cir. 1984) (citing Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 537 (1981)).
Here, the complaint alleges that Grady County engaged in an established practice or procedure of collecting and spending funds that were obtained without legal authority. (See Doc. 1 at ¶ 14.) Prior to collecting administrative costs, Bass could have permitted State Court defendants to challenge the lawfulness of the administrative costs. As such, the Court finds that the complaint properly alleges that Grady County was acting pursuant to an established state procedure and predeprivation process was feasible. For those reasons, the availability of a state tort action is irrelevant and Grady County’s second ground for dismissal in its motion to dismiss (Docs. 4 & 5) is DENIED.
iii. Ripeness of the takings claim Third, Grady County argues that Jones’ takings claim is not ripe for review because exhaustion of Georgia’s inverse condemnation procedure is a condition precedent to such claim. (Doc. 5 at 11.) Jones states that her takings claim is ripe because the referenced procedure is not a reasonable, certain, and adequate procedure to recover her property in this case. (Doc. 20 at 10.) Further, Jones argues that the exhaustion requirement generally applicable to takings claims does not apply here because resort to the suggested procedure would be absurd under the circumstances of this case. (Id.) “[I]f a state provides an adequate procedure for seeking just compensation, the property owner cannot claim a violation of the Just Compensation Clause until it has used the procedure and been denied just compensation.” Williamson Cnty. Reg’l Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172, 195 (1985). Under Georgia law, “[t]he right of a property owner to recover against a governmental entity for damage to his property caused by public improvements is . . . implied from the self-executing constitutional provision . . . that ‘private property shall not be damaged for public purposes without just and adequate
7

compensation being paid.’ ” Adams v. City of Atlanta, 322 S.E.2d 730, 732 (Ga. 1984) (quoting Fulton Cnty. v. Baranan, 242 S.E.2d 617 (Ga. 1978)). Though the cases addressing Georgia’s inverse condemnation procedure deal mostly with land, see, e.g., id. at 732, that procedure applies to takings of personal property. See Howard v. Gourmet Concepts Int’l, Inc., 529 S.E.2d 406, 410 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000) (citations omitted). Grady County did not cite, nor could the Court find, any case involving the referenced procedure and a taking of currency.
Assuming aggrieved citizens may resort to Georgia’s inverse condemnation procedure for takings of currency, the Court nonetheless finds that resort to that procedure was not necessary in this case. For federal takings, a suit for money damages under the Tucker Act must be brought in the Court of Federal Claims before it may be brought in district court. See Student Loan Mktg. Ass’n v. Riley, 104 F.3d 397, 401 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1491). However, where a federal statute requires people to pay money to the government, aggrieved individuals need not first file suit under the Tucker Act. See In re Chateaugay Corp., 53 F.3d 478, 493 (2d Cir. 1995). Where Congress demonstrates a clear intent to take money from citizens, “it would make no sense to presume that [it also] intended for the Treasury to compensate” the aggrieved citizens. Id. “Every dollar paid pursuant to a statute would be presumed to generate a dollar of Tucker Act compensation” because the fair market value of currency is the face value of the currency. Id.
For the same reasons discussed above regarding federal takings of money, it would be nonsensical to require aggrieved citizens to resort to Georgia’s inverse condemnation procedure for state or municipal takings of money. Like the Tucker Act, Georgia’s inverse condemnation procedure is an avenue for an aggrieved citizen to seek the fair market value of the property taken by the government. See Housing Auth. of Atlanta v. Troncalli, 142 S.E.2d 93, 93-94 (Ga. Ct. App. 1965). That procedure is not an avenue for individuals to seek to have seized property returned. Id. Seeking fair market value for money is the same as seeking to have the money returned. Grady County’s policy of collecting money from State Court defendants indicates that the County had no intention to provide compensation therefor. Because Grady County demonstrated a clear intent to keep the money, resort to the inverse condemnation procedure in this case would have been a meaningless task. As such, the
8

Court finds that Jones’ takings claim is ripe for review. Accordingly, Grady County’s third ground for dismissal in its motion to dismiss (Docs. 4 & 5) is DENIED.
iv. Whether the H eck doctrine bars this suit Fourth, Grady County argues that Jones’ § 1983 claims are barred under the doctrine in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), because the conviction and sentence connected to the administrative costs have not been reversed, expunged, or invalidated. (Doc. 5 at 4, 8-9, 11, 12.) Jones asserts that the referenced doctrine, known as the favorable termination requirement, does not apply to her case because her claims are not cognizable in habeas and success on the merits of this suit would not demonstrate the invalidity of the relevant criminal judgment. (Doc. 20 at 11.) Under Heck, a § 1983 suit is not subjected to the favorable termination requirement unless “judgment in favor of the plaintiff [in the § 1983 suit] would necessarily imply the invalidity of [her] conviction or sentence.” See Heck, 512 U.S. at 487. The particular concern in the Heck line of cases was that prisoners could avoid the strictures of habeas but nonetheless challenge the duration or fact of their physical confinement, which is “the core of habeas corpus.” See Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 79 (2005). Heck does not apply unless the § 1983 challenge goes to “the core of habeas corpus.” Id. at 82. In this case, Jones challenges the constitutionality of statutorily unauthorized administrative costs she was required to pay in connection with a criminal conviction. Habeas petitions under § 2254 may be brought “only on the ground that [a prisoner] is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). “A collateral attack under [§ 2254] contests only custody . . . and not fines or special assessments.” Ryan v. United States, 688 F.3d 845, 849 (7th Cir. 2012); see also Dohrmann v. United States, 442 F.3d 1279, 1280 (noting that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 “affords relief only to those claiming the right to be released from custody”). Because a habeas challenge of the administrative costs was never available to Jones, her suit is clearly not at “the core of habeas corpus.” For that reason, the Court finds that Heck does not apply to Jones’ suit for damages. Also, in any event, Heck does not bar Jones’ claim for injunctive relief. See Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S.
9

641, 648 (1997). As such, Grady County’s fourth ground for dismissal in its motion to dismiss (Docs. 4 & 5) is DENIED.
B. State Tort Claims Next, Grady County argues that it is entitled to sovereign immunity under Georgia law as to Jones’ state tort claims because Jones failed to establish that such immunity was waived. (Doc. 5 at 14-16.) Jones asserts that sovereign immunity does not apply to suits to enjoin ultra vires acts. (Doc. 20 at 18.) However, since the briefing of this matter, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed the case relied upon by Jones. See Ga. Dep’t of Nat. Res. v. Ctr. for a Sustainable Coast, 755 S.E.2d 184, 185-86 (Ga. 2014). That case, overturning prior precedent, see IBM v. Evans, 453 S.E.2d 706 (Ga. 1995), held that sovereign immunity applies absent a waiver by the Georgia legislature notwithstanding an allegation of ultra vires acts. Ctr. for a Sustainable Coast, 755 S.E.2d at 188. Likewise, sovereign immunity applies to equitable relief. See id. at 191. Jones did not otherwise attempt to demonstrate that sovereign immunity has been waived. For that reason, the Court finds that Jones’ state law claims against Grady County are barred by sovereign immunity under Georgia law. See McCobb v. Clayton Cnty., 710 S.E.2d 207, 217-18 (Ga. App. Ct. 2011) (noting that waiver of sovereign immunity must be established by party seeking to benefit from such waiver). As such, Grady County’s motion to dismiss Jones’ state law claims is GRANTED.
C. Declaratory relief Grady County argues that Jones lacks standing as to her claim for declaratory relief because the County does not have the authority to control Bass’ actions. (Doc. 5 at 18.) Jones states that she seeks a declaration from the Court that the County’s policy or practice of retaining and expending the administrative costs violates the U.S. Constitution. (Doc. 20 at 19.) Without benefit of a reply from Grady County as to the referenced argument, the Court construes the Parties to be in agreement that Jones has standing to seek declaratory relief as to the allegedly unconstitutional acts directly committed by Grady County. In that regard, Grady County’s motion to dismiss Jones’ claim for declaratory relief is DENIED.
10

D. Claims under Georgia Constitution Grady County’s only argument for dismissal of Jones’ claims under the Georgia Constitution is based on the County’s assumption that Jones’ federal claims would be dismissed. For the reasons stated above, the County’s assumption is incorrect. Also, “[s]overeign immunity is not a bar to an action alleging a violation of a constitutional right . . . or an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” Kilgo v. Dep’t of Corrs., 413 S.E.2d 507, 508 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991) (citations omitted). As such, Grady County’s motion to dismiss Jones’ claims under the Georgia Constitution is DENIED. II. Judge Bass Bass advances three general arguments for dismissal of Jones’ claims against him. First, he seeks to adopt Grady County’s arguments that (1) Jones’ due process claim is barred because an adequate postdeprivation remedy is available to her, (2) Jones’ takings claim is not ripe because she did not exhaust Georgia’s inverse condemnation procedure, and (3) Jones’ entire § 1983 suit is barred by the Heck doctrine. (Doc. 10 at 2.) For the reasons discussed above, all of those grounds for dismissal are denied. Second, Bass asserts that the doctrine of judicial immunity bars Jones’ § 1983 and state law claims. (Id. at 2-3.) Third, under the assumption that Jones’ federal claims will be dismissed, Bass states that the Court should decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Jones’ state constitutional claims. (Id. at 3.) For the reasons discussed below, the federal claims will not be dismissed. For that reason, Bass’ argument for dismissal of the state constitutional claims is moot. Thus, as to Bass, the Court is left only with the matter of whether he is entitled to judicial immunity.
A. Judicial Immunity Bass argues that judicial immunity bars the federal and state law claims against him because he was acting in his judicial capacity. (Doc. 10 at 2-3.) Bass states that Jones was harmed only by the order that required her to pay administrative costs. (Doc. 29 at 2-3.) Jones asserts that her complaint seeks retribution for Bass’ act of creating the policy of collecting administrative costs. (Doc. 19 at 6.) In that light, Jones argues, Bass was acting in a legislative capacity and is therefore not protected by judicial immunity. (Id. at 10.)
11

“Judges are entitled to absolute judicial immunity from damages for those acts taken while they are acting in their judicial capacity unless they acted in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.” Bolin v. Story, 225 F.3d 1234, 1239 (11th Cir. 2000). Though a judge is entitled to absolute immunity when performing a judicial or adjudicative function, he is not entitled to such immunity when acting in a legislative capacity. Supreme Court of Va. v. Consumers Union of the U.S., Inc., 446 U.S. 719, 731 (1980). “Whether a judge’s actions were made while acting in his judicial capacity depends on whether: (1) the act complained of constituted a normal judicial function; (2) the events occurred in the judge’s chambers or in open court; (3) the controversy involved a case pending before the judge; and (4) the confrontation arose immediately out of a visit to the judge in his judicial capacity.” Sibley v. Lando, 437 F.3d 1067, 1070 (11th Cir. 2005) (citing Scott v. Hayes, 719 F.2d 1562, 1565 (11th Cir. 1983)). Legislative actions involve the promulgation of “rules of general application and are statutory in nature.” Id. (quoting Consumers Union of U.S., Inc. v. Am. Bar Ass’n, 470 F. Supp. 1055, 1064 (E.D. Ga. 1979)) (J. Warriner, dissenting)).
The Court finds that Jones’ complaint sufficiently alleges that Bass was not acting in his judicial capacity when his unconstitutional acts harmed Jones. The Court would unduly restrict the language of Jones’ complaint if it were to construe the allegations to be that Bass acted unconstitutionally only when he required Jones and other putative class members to pay administrative costs. Instead, when viewed in a light most favorable to Jones, see Hill v. White, 321 F.3d 1334, 1335 (11th Cir. 2003), Jones’ complaint asserts that she was harmed by Bass’ creation and enforcement of a policy that required State Court defendants to pay administrative costs which were not authorized by law. Though Bass made an individualized determination of the amount of administrative costs owed by Jones, he was acting pursuant to his policy of collecting administrative costs from the defendants who appeared before him. He created the referenced policy outside of the courtroom and equipped the Grady County State Court with various procedures to process the administrative costs. The creation of a generally applicable policy of collecting costs and fees goes beyond the role of a judge and does not constitute “a normal judicial function.” See Supreme Court of Va., 446 U.S. at 731 (finding judges acted in legislative capacity when they promulgated rules of general
12

applicability). As such, the Court finds that Bass was not acting in his judicial capacity and is therefore not entitled to absolute judicial immunity.3 Bass makes no other argument that Jones’ claims against him should be dismissed. As such, Bass’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) is DENIED.
CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Grady County’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 4) is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART, Defendant Judge J. William Bass’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) is DENIED, and Jones’ Motion to Exclude Affidavits from Consideration (Doc. 32) is GRANTED. Jones’ state law claims against Grady County are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Jones’ remaining claims shall proceed on their merits. SO ORDERED, this 13th day of August 2014.
/s/ W. Louis Sands W. LOUIS SANDS, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3 The Court notes that judicial immunity “does not bar injunctive relief against judicial officers acting in their judicial capacity.” Wahl v. McIver, 773 F.2d 1169, 1172 (1985).
13

 
 Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 37

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ALBANY DIVISION

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES,
Plaintiff,
v.
GRADY COUNTY, Georgia,
JUDGE J. WILLIAM BASS, SR., Grady County State Court Judge, in his official and individual capacities,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13-CV-156(WLS)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Plaintiff Roberta Imogene Jones ("Jones"), defendant Grady County, Georgia ("Grady County"), and defendant J. William Bass, Sr. ("Judge Bass"), hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to settle and resolve all of the issues raised in the complaint filed in the above-styled action upon the following terms: 1. Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Parties will ask the Court to certify a class (the "Class") that consists of each individual who meets the following criteria:
a. the individual had a criminal case pending in the State Court of Grady County; and
b. on or after September 24, 2011, Judge Bass entered an order in the individual's criminal case that required the individual to pay Administrative Costs; and
1

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 2 of 37
c. the individual paid some or all of the Administrative Costs ordered by Judge Bass.
At the same time that they ask the Court to certify the Class, the Parties will also ask the Court for preliminary approval of the terms of this settlement agreement (the "Agreement"). Assuming that the Court preliminarily approves the Agreement, the Parties shall proceed in accordance with the following paragraphs.
2. Following the certification of the Class and preliminary approval of the Agreement, Grady County will attempt to notify the members of the Class of the terms of the Agreement in the following manner:
a. Grady County will publish the advertisement (the "Advertisement") attached as Exhibit A in the Cairo Messenger once a week for two weeks to begin within 30 days following the certification of the Class and preliminary approval of the Agreement;
b. on or before the date on which the Advertisement is first published in the newspaper, Grady County will mail the notice attached as Exhibit B (the "Notice") by U.S. Mail, First Class to the individuals identified on the list attached as Exhibit C, who are believed by the Parties to be the members of the Class, with the following understanding: (1) the Notice will be mailed to the most recent address included in the file maintained by the Clerk of the State Court of Grady County with respect to each Class member's criminal case; and
2

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 3 of 37
(2) if the Notice that is originally mailed is returned to Grady County with a forwarding address, Grady County will mail a second Notice to the forwarding address;
(3) Grady County will inform the attorneys representing the Class of each Notice that is returned as undeliverable so that the attorneys for the Class will have an opportunity to identify a current address for each such Class member. If the attorneys for the Class identify a more current address, they shall provide that address to Grady County and Grady County shall mail another Notice to that address within five days of receipt of that address.
3. Each Notice mailed in accordance with paragraph 2, above, will be accompanied by a copy of the response fmm (the "Response Form") that is attached as Exhibit D. In addition, copies of the Response Form will be available in the Office of the Clerk of the State Court of Grady County. Furthermore, the attorneys for the Class and Grady County will deliver a copy of the Response Form by mail or electronic mail to any individual who requests such.
4. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, each individual who satisfies the criteria for Class membership will have the opportunity to opt out of the Class. Those individuals may opt out of the Class by indicating their intention to do so on the Response Form and returning that Response Form to the attorney for Defendant Grady County. The individuals who opt out of the Class will not be precluded from asserting any claim or lawsuit against Judge Bass or Grady County. However, the individuals who opt out of the Class will not be entitled to any of the compensation due to members of the Class pursuant to paragraph 7, below.
3

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 4 of 37
5. Each individual who satisfies the criteria for Class membership, and who does not opt out of the Class, will be entitled to the compensation described in paragraph 7, below. Further, if the Agreement receives final approval from the Court, each member of the Class will be precluded from asserting any claim or lawsuit against Judge Bass, Grady County, and their respective agents, officers, employees, officials and personal representatives as a result of the imposition, receipt or retention of Administrative Costs.
6. In order to receive any payment that he or she is entitled to pursuant to paragraph 7, below, a member of the Class must complete Section I of the Response Form and mail it to the attorney for Defendant Grady County within 90 days of the date that the Advertisement is published for the first time in accordance with paragraph 2(a), and that date is hereinafter referred to as the "Deadline."
7. Each member of the Class who mails a completed Response Form to the attorney for Grady County on or before the Deadline will be entitled to payment in the following amounts:
a. $100.00 for compensatory damages; and b. a payment equal to the amount of Administrative Costs paid by the
member of the Class, not to exceed $700.00. 8. Following the Deadline, the attorney for Grady County will:
a. confirm that each individual who completed Section I of the Response Form and returned it to the attorney for Grady County on or before the Deadline is a member of the Class;
4

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 5 of 37
b. verify the amount of Administrative Costs paid by each member of the Class who completed Section I of the Response Form and returned it to the attorney for Grady County on or before the Deadline;
c. provide the attorneys for the Class with copies of all completed Response Forms.
9. Within 30 days after the date of the Deadline, the attorney for Grady County will determine the amount of money owed to each member of the Class who submitted a completed Response Form on or before the Deadline (the "Individual Payment Amount"), and the amount of money owed to the Class as a whole (the "Total Settlement Amount"), and the attorney for Grady County shall provide all documentation to the attorneys for the Class that shows the Individual Payment Amount due to each member of the Class and the Total Settlement Amount.
10. At the same time that the Parties ask the Court to certify the Class, as contemplated by paragraph 1, above, the Parties will ask the Court to: (a) give preliminarily approve the Agreement; (b) direct that the Class members be notified in accordance with the terms of the Agreement; and (c) schedule a fairness hearing in accordance with Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
11. Assuming that the Court grants the motion contemplated in the preceding paragraph, and the Court conducts a fairness hearing and, thereafter, finally approves the Agreement, a check for the Total Settlement Amount will be mailed to the attorneys for the Class. That check will be made payable to the attorneys for the Class and shall be deposited in their trust account.
12. Within 15 days of their receipt of the check for the Total Settlement Amount, the attorneys for the Class will mail a check for the Individual Payment Amount to each member of
5

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 6 of 37
the Class who is entitled to payment. That check will be mailed to the address shown on the completed Claim Form submitted by each such member of the Class.
13. Assuming that the Court gives its final approval to the Agreement, a check made payable to Jones in the amount of $5,000.00 (the "Jones Check") will be mailed to the attorneys for the Class.
14. Following Jones's execution of the Satisfaction, Release and Indemnity Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit E, the attorneys for the Class will deliver the Jones Check to Jones.
15. If the Court enters an order giving its fmal approval to the Agreement, any member of the Class who has not requested to be excluded from the Class will be bound by all subsequent proceedings, orders and judgments of the Court and will be precluded from asserting any claim or lawsuit against Judge Bass, Grady County, and their respective agents, officers, employees, officials and personal representatives as a result of the imposition, receipt or retention of Administrative Costs.
16. Assuming that it ultimately approves of the Agreement, the Court will enter an order that dismisses with prejudice all of the claims that the members of the Class may have against Judge Bass and Grady County with respect to the imposition of Administrative Costs.
17. Provided that the Agreement is ultimately approved by order of the Court, the Parties acknowledge and agree that the attorneys for the Class represent the prevailing party and they are entitled to submit a fee petition within 60 days of the entry of the Order Approving/Overseeing the Settlement. The parties further agree that Defendants' attorneys will have an opportunity to respond to that petition and, following that response and any reply brief from Plaintiffs, the Court will issue a ruling with respect to that petition.
6

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 7 of 37

18. If the Agreement is not approved by the Court, the Agreement shall become null

and void and shall be without prejudice to the rights of the Parties, all of whom shall be restored

to their respective positions existing immediately prior to the mediation held in the above-styled

action (the "Lawsuit"). Further, if the Agreement is not approved by the Court, or if the

Agreement is not otherwise consummated, for whatever reason, Grady County and Judge Bass

shall have 10 days to file defensive pleadings in the Lawsuit and, if defensive pleadings are filed

within that 10 day period, they shall be deemed to have been filed in a timely manner. In

addition, the Parties agree that Jones will not seek a default in the Lawsuit prior to the expiration

of that 10 day period.

19. The Parties agree that the Agreement incorporates a compromise and settlement

of disputed claims, and the terms of the Agreement, including the payments called for the by

Agreement, are not to be construed as an admission of liability on the part of Judge Bass or

Grady County, both of whom expressly deny any liability.

0~ay This

of January, 2015.

S~CUo.~
Sarah Geraghty Georgia Bar No. 291393 Southern Center For Human Rights 83 Poplar Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303 Telephone: (404) 688-1202 Email: sgeraghty@schr.org Attorney for Roberta Imogene Jones

(signatures continued on following page) 7

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 8 of 37
1::- 1k1 /.,. I:I..Ro,,-!£ (k'..,.-iZ. )
J es L. Elliott Georgia Bar No. 244244 Elliott, Blackburn & Gooding, PC 3016 North Patterson Street Valdosta, Georgia 31602 Telephone: (229) 242-3333 Email: jelliott@ebbglaw.com Attorney for J. William Bass, Sr.
a~c,_Q&_ ~
ifaleigh w .IRoliins Georgia Bar No. 613860 ALEXANDER & VANN, LLP
4 411 Gordon venue
Thomasville GA 31792 Telephone: (229) 226-2565 E-mail: rrollins@alexandervann.com Attorney for Grady County, Georgia
8

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 9 of 37

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ALBANY DIVISION

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES, Plaintiff, v.
GRADY COUNTY, Georgia, JUDGE J. WILLIAM BASS, SR., Grady County State Court Judge,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO.l:l3-CV-156(WLS)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION, PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND FINAL APPROVAL/FAIRNESS HEARING

TO: INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE APPEARED IN GRADY STATE COURT

Please Read This Notice Carefully In Its Entirety. Your Right To Bring A Separate Lawsuit May Be Affected By The Settlement Of This Lawsuit. Your Rights And Options And The Deadlines To Exercise Them -Are Explained In This Notice.

I. THE LAWSUIT

This lawsuit is currently pending in the United States District Court for the Middle District of · Georgia ("the Court"). The lawsuit was brought by Roberta Imogene Jones (the "Representative Plaintiff') as a proposed class action against Grady County, Georgia ("Grady County") and Judge J. William Bass, Sr. ("Judge Bass"), who served as the Judge of the State Court of Grady
County.

In her complaint, the Representative Plaintiff alleges that Judge Bass unlawfully imposed

Administrative Costs upon individuals who appeared before him in criminal cases, and that

Grady County wrongfully received and retained payments that were made in connection with the

imposition of A<.iill.irustrative Costs.

··· · ··

Judge Bass and Grady County deny all of the claims made by the Representative Plaintiff. Judge Bass and Grady County also deny any wrongdoing or liability to the Representative Plaintiff or to any members of the proposed class (the "Class"). Judge Bass and Grady County contend that the Representative Plaintiffs claims have no merit, that they have meritorious defenses to the Representative Plaintiffs claims, and that they would prevail in the lawsuit if it were to proceed.

EXHIBIT
A

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 10 of 37
As a result of arms-length negotiations, a proposed settlement has been reached on the Representative Plaintiffs claims as well as the claims of the proposed Class. The settlement requires approval by the Court, and this notice advises you of the proposed settlement so that you can consider your legal rights.
The parties arrived at this settlement before any of the claims or defenses were tried on the merits and before the Court determined class certification. Accordingly, there has been no fmding that Judge Bass or Grady County violated any law in their conduct toward the Representative Plaintiff or other members of the proposed Class. This Settlement is a compromise of disputed claims and is not an indication of liability of any sort. Neither the settlement nor this Notice should be construed as an admission or concession of liability by Judge Bass or Grady County.
Counsel for the Representative Plaintiff and the Class ("Class Counsel") have investigated the facts and the applicable law regarding the matters raised in the lawsuit. The issues before the Court are complex and there is uncertainty as to the outcome of the lawsuit. Class Counsel believe that the claims raised in the lawsuit have merit, but recognize that there is a risk that Judge Bass and Grady County may prevaiL Therefore, on November _, 2014, Class Counsel entered into a settlement agreement (the "Settlement Agreement") with Judge Bass and Grady County. The Settlement Agreement has been preliminarily approved by the Court and, if it is finally approved by the Court, the Settlement Agreement will fully and finally resolve the claims asserted by the Representative Plaintiff against Judge Bass and Grady County, on behalf of herself and anyone else in the Class.
II. CLASS ACTION
The parties have agreed and the Court has ordered that, for settlement purposes only, the lawsuit may be maintained as a class action, subject to final and permanent approval at the conclusion of the settlement process. If this proposed settlement is not finally approved, or is withdrawn at any time, for any reason, the parties have agreed that the lawsuit will return to the same status as before the parties entered into the Settlement Agreement.
III. COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES
The Class is represented by the following attorneys:
Gerald Weber Sarah Geraghty · Southern Center forHurrian Rights 83 Poplar Street, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 (404) 688-1202
Judge Bass and Grady County are represented by the following attorneys:

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 11 of 37

Attorney for Judge Bass: James L. Elliott Elliott, Blackburn & Gooding, PC 3016 North Patterson Street Valdosta, Georgia 31602 (229) 242-3333

Attorney for Grady County: Raleigh Rollins Alexander & Vann, LLP 411 Gordon Avenue Thomasville, Georgia 31 792 (229) 226-2565

IV. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT

If it is finally approved, the Settlement Agreement will result in the dismissal of the lawsuit with prejudice and the release of those claims that were or could have been asserted by the Representative Plaintiff or any other Class Member against Judge Bass and Grady County in connection with the imposition, receipt and retention of Administrative Costs. The Settlement Agreement contains all of the tetms of the settlement and is available for review at www.schr.org, and is available for inspection at the Office of the Clerk of the State Court of Grady County in Cairo, Georgia.

Certification of Settlement Class

The Court has entered an order that provides certification of the Class for settlement purposes. The Class consists of each individual who meets the following criteria:

(a) the individual had a criminal case pending in the State Court of Grady County;

(b) on or after September 24, 2011, Judge Bass entered an order in the individual's criminal case that required the individual to pay Administrative Costs; and

(c) the individual paid some or all of the Administrative Costs ordered by Judge Bass.

Payment to Individual Class Members
Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, each member of the Class may be entitled to receive: (1) a payment of $100.00 as compensatory damages; and (2) a payment equal to the amount of Administrative Costs that he or she paid, not to exceed $700.00. Thus, the maximum amount that any member of the Class may be entitled to receive is $800.00.
Attorneys' .J?e.e~
Class Counsel have prosecuted this litigation without receiving any attorneys' fees to date. In addition, Class Counsel have advanced all of the costs necessary to prosecute this litigation. Class Counsel will ask the Court to award them fees and expenses to be paid by Judge Bass and Grady County. The amount of attorneys' fees and expenses awarded to Class Counsel will not impact the amount of money paid to members of the Class. The Court will conduct a hearing on the amount of attorneys' fees and expenses at a later date.

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 12 of 37
Class Representative Incentive Award
The Representative Plaintiff will be paid $5,000.00 as compensation for her services as the Class Representatives in the lawsuit. The amount paid to the Representative Plaintiff will not impact the amount of money paid to the other members of the Class.
Entry of Final Judgment and Release
The Settlement Agreement is subject to final approval by the Court. If the settlement is approved, the members of the Class will be bound by the terms of the settlement and any order of the Court that fmally approves the settlement and dismisses the lawsuit. If the settlement is approved, the Court will enter a judgment dismissing with prejudice all claims against Judge Bass and Grady County that arise from the imposition, receipt or retention of Administrative Costs. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the members of the Class will release Judge Bass, Grady County, and their respective agents, officers, employees, officials, and personal representatives from any and all claims, demands, suits or causes of action of any nature or description as a result of the imposition, receipt or retention of Administrative Costs. The full text of this release is contained in the Settlement Agreement.
V. RIGHTS AND OPTIONS OF CLASS MEMBERS
If you are a member of the Class, you have the following options:
1. Request the money due to you under the terms of the Agreement. If you are a member of the Class and are entitled to compensation, and any money due to you under the terms of the Settlement Agreement will be mailed to you at the address that you provide. In order to receive your money, you must complete Section I of the form entitled "Response Form" and return that form to Raleigh Rollins at 411 Gordon Avenue in Thomasville, Georgia 31792, by _ _ _ __
Copies of the Response Form are available in the Office of the Clerk of the State Court of Grady County. In addition, Class Counsel and the attorney for Grady County will deliver a copy of a Response Form by mail or electronic mail to any individual who requests such.
As a Class Member, you will receive any money due to you under the terms of the Settlement Agreement and be bound by any judgment or other final disposition of the lawsuit, including the release of claims and dismissal of the lawsuit with prejudice as provided in the Settlement
Agr~~me11t.... You w:ill_givet~p any a,nci alllegal.an4 eql].itable rights you ever had, or now have,
or hereafter may have against Judge Bass, Grady County, and their respective agents, officers, employees, officials and personal representatives as a result of the imposition, receipt or retention of Administrative Costs.
2. Exclude Yourself from the Class. You may request exclusion and "opt-out" of the Class. If you elect to be excluded from the Class, you will not be bound by any judgment or settlement of the lawsuit, nor will you receive any of the benefits of the class action, including

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 13 of 37

the payment to you of any money. You will retain, and be free to pursue, any claims that you may have on your own behalf.
In order to be excluded from the Class, you must complete Section II of the Response Form and return that fmm to Raleigh Rollins at 411 Gordon Avenue in Thomasville, Georgia 31792, by

Copies of the Response Form are available in the Office of the Clerk ofthe State Court of Grady County. In addition, Class Counsel and the attorney for Grady County will deliver a copy of a Response Form by mail or electronic mail to any individual who requests such.

3. Object to the Settlement Agreement. Even if you are a member ofthe Class, you may file an objection to the Settlement Agreement, and/or voice your objection, by yourself or through counsel, at the final approval hearing to be held in this case.

If you wish to file an objection to the Settlement Agreement, you must do so within ninety (90) days of the date of this Notice, by filing a letter with the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia at 201 W. Broad Street in Albany, Georgia 31701. The letter should reference this lawsuit and include: (i) a statement of each objection being made; (ii) a detailed description of the legal authorities underlying each such objection; (iii) a statement of whether the objector intends to appear at the Final Approval/Fairness Hearing; (iv) a list of witnesses who the objector may call by live testimony, oral deposition testimony, or affidavit during the Final Approval/Fairness Hearing; and (v) a list of the exhibits that the objector may offer during the Final Approval/Fairness Hearing, along with copies of those exhibits. Any Class member who does not file an objection within the time and in the manner described above will be forever prohibited from raising any objection to such matters in the event that the settlement is approved.

4. Enter an Appearance or Intervene. Even if you are a member of the Class, you may enter an appearance in the lawsuit through an attorney if you so desire or seek to intervene in the lawsuit. Any request for intervention must be by motion and must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. All entries of appearance or motions to intervene must be made within ninety (90) days of the date of this Notice. Any Class Member who does not file a request for intervention within the time and in the manner described above is forever prohibited from seeking intervention in this lawsuit.

VI. FINAL APPROVAL HEARING

A final approval hearing will be held by the Honorable W. Louis Sands at

a.m./p.m. on

_ _ _ _ _ _, 2015, at the C.B. King Courthouse at 201 W. Broad Street in Albany,

Georgia, to determine: (1) whether the lawsuit should be finally certified as a class action for the

purposes of settlement; (2) whether the Settlement Agreement should be finally approved as fair,

reasonable and adequate; and (3) the validity of any properly filed Objections.

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 14 of 37

MEMBERS OF THE CLASS WHO DO NOT OBJECT TO THE SETTLEMENT OR ANY OTHER MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED AT THE FINAL APPROVAL HEARING NEED NOT ATTEND THE FINAL APPROVAL HEARING.

VII. SCOPE OF SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL
If the settlement is approved, the terms of the Settlement Agreement, including the release outlined in Section IV of this Notice, will be final and binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of: (a) all Class Members, except those who request timely and proper exclusion from the Class; (b) any present, former, and future spouse, heir, executor, administrator, representative, agent, attorney, partner, successor, predecessor-in-interest, assignee, employee, insurer or other party standing in the shoes of any member of the Class; (c) Judge Bass, Grady County, and their respective agents, officers, employees, officials and personal representatives; and (d) the Association of County Commissioners of Georgia- Interlocal Risk Management Agency.
VIII. FOR MORE INFORMATION
If you have any questions concerning the matters dealt with in this Notice, please direct your inquiries in writing to Class Counsel at the address listed above in Section III of this Notice.
IX. PLEADINGS AND OTHER RECORDS
The pleadings and other records in this litigation may be examined and copied during regular office hours at the Clerk of the United States District Court, C.B. King Courthouse at 201 W. Broad Street in Albany, Georgia. PLEASE DO NOT TELEPHONE THE CLERK'S OFFICE OR THE JUDGE'S CHAMBERS.

D A T E : - - - - - - - ' 2014.

Clerk of United States District Court

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 15 of 37

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ALBANY DIVISION

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

GRADY COUNTY, Georgia, and

)

JUDGE J. WILLIAM BASS, SR.,

)

Grady County State Court Judge,

)

)

----~D~e~re~n~d~a~n=~~--------------->

CIVIL ACTION N0.1:13-CV-156(WLS)

NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION, PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND FINAL APPROVAL/FAIRNESS HEARING

The above-referenced lawsuit was filed as a proposed class action against Grady County, Georgia, and Judge J. William Bass, Sr. ("Judge Bass"), who serves as Judge of the State Court of Grady County. The lawsuit alleges that Judge Bass unlawfully imposed Administrative Costs on certain defendants that appeared before him, and that Grady County received and retained funds as a result of the payment of Administrative Costs. Judge Bass and Grady County deny that they have engaged in any unlawful or wrongful conduct.

The Court has entered an order certifying a class (the "Class") made up of individuals who meet the following criteria: (a) the individual had a criminal case pending in the State Court of Grady County; (b) on or after September 24, 2011, Judge Bass entered an order in the individual's criminal case that required the payment of Administrative Costs; and (c) the individual paid some or all of those Administrative Costs.

Records show that you may be a member of the Class and, for that reason, you may be entitled to receive a payment pursuant to the terms of a settlement agreement that has been reached with respect to the lawsuit. The settlement agreement is available for review at www.schr.org, and is available for inspection at the Office of the Clerk of the State Court of Grady County in Cairo, Georgia.

The settlement agreement provides that each member of the Class may be entitled to receive: (1) a payment of $100.00 for compensatory damages; and (2) a payment equal to the amount of the Administrative Cost that he or she paid, not to exceed $700.00.

In order to receive payment, each member of the Class must complete Section I of the Response Form that is attached hereto, and return that form to the following address by _ _ _ _ _ _, 2015, which is the deadline to submit claims:

EXHIBIT

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 16 of 37

Raleigh Rollins 411 Gordon Avenue Thomasville, Georgia 31 792

Assuming that you are a member of the class, a check for the amount of money that you may be entitled to receive will be mailed to you at the address shown on the Response Form. For that reason, it is very important that you include the address at which you receive mail and notify Raleigh Rollins of any subsequent change of address.

Please note that, if the Court gives its final approval to the settlement agreement, regardless of whether you submit a Response Form, and you are a member of the Class, you will be barred from filing any lawsuit against Judge Bass, Grady County, and their respective agents, officers, employees, officials and personal representatives as a result of the imposition, receipt or retention of Administrative Costs.

If you do not want to be bound by the terms of the settlement agreement, you may opt out

of the Class by completing Section II of the Response Form and returning it to Raleigh Rollins at

the address shown above by

. If you opt out of the Class, you will not be

prohibited from asserting any claims that you may have against Judge Bass or Grady County,

however, you will not receive any payment to which you may be entitled under the terms of the

settlement agreement.

Even if you are a member of the Class, you may object to the terms of the settlement

agreement by filing a written objection in the above-referenced lawsuit by

. Any

such objection should be mailed to the Clerk of the United States District Court, whose address

is 201 W. Broad Street, Albany, GA 31701. In addition, the Honorable W. Louis Sands will

conduct a fairness hearing with respect to the terms of the settlement at _:_p.m. on _ _ __

in the C.B. King Courthouse, which is located at 201 W. Broad Street in Albany, Georgia, and

you may appear at that hearing and voice any objection that you have to the settlement

agreement.

Finally, even if you are a member of the Class, you may enter an appearance in the lawsuit through an attorney if you so desire or seek to intervene in the lawsuit. Any request for intervention must be made by motion and must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. All entries of appearance and motions to intervene must be filed by _ _ _ __ 2014. Any Class Member who does not file a request for intervention in the time and manner described above is forever prohibited from seeking intervention in this lawsuit.

If you have any questions, you may contact the following attorney for the Class:

Ms. Sarah Geraghty Southern Center For Human Rights
83 Poplar Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303
Telephone: (404) 688-1202; sgeraghty@schr.org Attorney for the Class

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 17 of 37

GRADY COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS- AUGUST 2011 TO JULY 2012

Defendant

Case No.

Date of Order

Offense(s) Convicted

Admin. Costs Assessed Address

Green, Pamela

12-SR-011

2012.01.23

Marijuana

800 89S 7th Street NW Cairo GA 39828

Adams, Columbus

59125 2011.10.10

Reckless Driving

700 2213 Tired Creek Road Whigham, GA 39897

Hunter, Dewayne

59384 2011.12.05

Reckless Driving

700 23841 US HWY 19 Lot 8 Ochlocknee, GA 31773

Preyer, Jane

59380 2011.10.10

Reckless Driving

700 2S7 Cherokee Circle Thomasville, GA 31757

Gilmore, Joshua

59378 2012.06.11

Marijuana

800 99 Drachenfels Road Kearsarge, NH 03847

Copeland, Jason

59367 2011.10.10

DUI(1st)

700 296 13th Avenue SW Cairo, GA 39828

Williams, Vanaster

59354 2011.10.10

Marijuana

800 825 4th St NW Cairo, GA 39828

Ingram, Audie

59342 2011.10.10

lawnmower on Roadside

200 3110 Collins Rd. Whigham, GA 31797

Maxwell, Kenneth

59454 2011.12.05

Reckless Driving

700 4383 Ridge Rd Pelham GA 31779

Taylor, Kevin

59452 2011.10.24

Open Container

200 1017 N Young St. Thomasville, GA 31792

Smith, Darrell

59651 2011.11.28

Marijuana

800 1140 9th Avenue NW Cairo, GA 39828

Bell, Alvin

59586 2011.10.24

Fraudulent Display of DL

200 311 Garden Hill Dr. Albany, GA 31705

Merritt, Terry

59918 2012.02.27

Reckless Driving

700 1104 Midway Rd., Cairo, GA 39828

Nunez, Rafael

59924 2011.11.14

Reckless Driving

700 1800 Micousulee Rd., Apt. 602, Tallahassee, Fl32308

Nunez, Rafael

59925 2011.11.14

Marijuana

800 1800 Miccsoukee Rd, Apt 602, Tallahassee, FL 32308

Knight, Bobby

59927 2012.03.12

Reckless Driving

700 3195 Spring Hill Rd., Whigham, GA 39897

Ferrell, Christopher

59942 2011.11.14

Reckless Driving

700 1353 Bold Springs Rd, Cairo, GA 39827

Barfield, Frank

59946 2011.10.24

Reckless Driving

700 1390 Pine Park Rd., Cairo, GA 39828

Acevedo, Abigail

60119 2011.12.05

Unlicensed & license Suspenc

850 822 Pinetree Blvd Apt. 15 Thomasville, GA 31792

Daniels, William

60139 2011.12.05

DUI (2nd)

124 Third Ave, SW Cairo, GA 39828

Jones, Emory

60214 2011.10.10

Unlicensed & license Suspenc

450 727 Pine Park Rd., Cairo, GA 39828

Gist, Elizabeth

60215 2011.10.24

Reckless Driving

700 333 Covington DR., Apt 4 B, Detroit, Ml48203

Patel, Vimal

60218 2012.03.12

Reckless Driving

700 35 U S Highway 84 E, Cairo, GA 39828

Allen, Justin

60220 2012.03.12

Reckless Driving

700 63 Bellinger Place, Fortson, GA 31808

Adams, William

60229 2012.02.27

Unlicensed & license Suspenc

600 P. 0. Box 821, Thomasville, GA 31799

Simmons, Samuel

60233 2011.10.24

DUI (3rd)

1500 2236 Miskey Lake Trail SW, Atlanta, GA 30331

Young, Johnny

60294 2011.10.24

DUI (1st)

700 861 Second Ave SW, Cairo, GA 39828

Adkins, Kimberly

60300 2011.08.22

DUI (1st)

700 286 Gant Rd., Cairo, GA 39828

Addison, Jimmy

60303 2012.07.09

DUI (1st)

700 125 Third Ave SW, Cairo, GA 39828

Addison, Jimmy

60304 2012.07.09

Marijuana (2nd)

800 125 Third Ave SW, Cairo, GA 39828

Cain, Joel

60308

Unlicensed & License Suspenc

600 1089 Gainous Rd., Whigham, GA 39817

Ochoa, Guadalope

60310 2011.10.10

Unlicensed & license Suspenc

750 444 Belcher Circle Rd., Cairo, GA 39827

Gonzales, Arnalda

60311

Unlicensed & License Suspenc

450 991 East Boulevard, Cairo, GA 39828

Potts, Elizabeth

60313 2012.03.12

Reckless Driving

700 7661 Crutchfield Rd., Pelham, GA 31779

Lopez, Pascual

60334 2011.10.10

Unlicensed & license Suspen1

450 137 19th Avenue NW, Cairo, GA 39828

Johf1SOf1, Renief:!__

60343 2011.10.24

.. DUI (1st)

700 336 love Street NW, Pelham, GA 31779

Johnson, Raymond

60350 2011.10.10

Reckless Driving

700 14S B?YS Water Dr., Suwanee, GA 30024

Bush, Tina

60365 2011.12.05

Reckless Driving

700 108 Sim Street, Apt 4-A, Bainbridge, GA 39817

Cromer, Jamie

60368 2011.11.14

DUI (1st)

700 159 Tocaste Lane, Albany, GA 31707

Dunn, Gerald

60382 2012.04.23

Unlicensed & license Suspenc

450 296 Temple Terrace, Cairo, GA 39828

Hardy, Shedd rick

60385 2011.12.05

DOC

300 21S Third Avenue NW, Cairo, GA 39828

Wright, Demetrius

60390 2011.11;28

Unlicensed & license Suspem

800 311 Crescent Circle, Cairo, GA 39828

Washington, Sharon

60393 2011.10.10

Reckless Driving

700 243 Gainey Road, Climax, GA 39834

Revis, William

60397 2011.10.10

DUI (1st) (Less safe)

700 216 Mamie lane, Cairo, GA 39828

Miller, Jarred

60399 2011.12.05

DU! (2nd)

1500 153 Rosencrantz Road, Cairo, GA 39828

Admin Cost Paid 800 700 700 700 800 200 800 0 700 200 10 200 700 700 800 700
725
283 0
450 700 700 700
70 lSOO
0 700 100
0 600 7SO 450 700 450 300 700 700 700 450 300
0 700 700 1500

Noadmin f
EXHIBIT
j c

Mendez, Patrice Lopez, Rosa Cromer, James Cook, James Lauriano, Candelario lauriano, Candelario Whitehurst, Kane Whitehurst, Kane Connell, Joseph Hernandez-Perez, Jose Hernandez-Perez, Jose Reynolds, Robert Lee, Keith Aldridge, James Jr. Strickland, Sidney Strickland, Sidney Perez, Carlos Jimenez, Mariano Morrell, Jessie Gonzalez, Mario Diaz, Lopez Hernandez, Fernando Santoes, Santiago Santoes, Santiago Tinter, Christopher Gomez, David Gomez, David Greek, Phillip Cruz, Rigoberto Hernandez, Marcelino Hernandez, Marcelino Edenfield, Marvin Cortez, Victor Spicer, Emory Hicks, Andrew Resendez, Gaudencio Robinson, Sherelle Jimenez, Marvin ·· Aru:ierson, ihaneese Hurst, Dobie Hurst, Dobie Jones, Jeffery Canfield, Burton Williamson; Natalie Hicks, Wesley IV Mathis, William Mathis, William

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 18 of 37

60422 2011.10.10 60426 60455 2011.10.10 60457 2011.12.05 60459 2011.10.10 60460 2011.10.10 60461 2012.03.12 60462 2012.03.12 60563 2011.10.11 60466 2011.10.10 60467 2011.10.10 60472 2011.12.0S 60474 60476 2011.12.05 60482 2011.10.10 60483 2011.10.10 60485 2011.10.10 60487 2011.10.10 60550 2011.12.05 60552 2011.10.10 60556 60559 2011.10.10 60562 2011.10.10 60564 2011.10.10 60570 2011.10.10 60590 2011.10.24 60591 2011.10.24 60596 2011.10.10 60598 2011.10.10 60601 2011.10.24 60602 2011.10.24 60604 2011.10.24 60609 2011.10.10 60612 2011.10.10 60620 2012.03.12 60625 2011.10.10 60630 2011.10.10 60631 2011.10.10 6o633 2oii.o3ji 60636 2012.03.12 60637 2012.03.12 60639 2012.03.12 60648 2011.10.24 60670 2011.12.5 60677 60680 2011.10.24 60681 2011.10.24

Unlicensed & license Suspent

Unlicensed & License Suspem

Marijuana

DUI (2nd)

DUI (1st)

Unlicensed & License 5uspem

Reckless Driving

Open Container

Reckless Driving

DUI (1st)

Unlicensed & License Suspent

Reckless Driving

DUI (1st)

Reckless Driving

Reckless Driving

Open Container

Unlicensed & License Suspent

Unlicensed & license 5uspent

DUI (1st)

DUI (1st)

Unlicensed & License Suspen1

DUI (3rd)

DUI (3rd)

Unlicensed & License Suspem

Marijuana

Unlicensed & License Suspen1

Speeding

DOC

Unlicensed & License Suspem

Unlicensed & License Suspen1

No license

DUI (2nd)

Unlicensed & License Suspent

DUI (1st)

Reckless Driving

Unlicensed & license Suspent

Failure to Maintain lane

Un·l-i·cense.d

&
..

License

S..us.pent

Unlicensed & license Suspent

Reckless Driving

Unlicensed & license Suspended or Revoked

Unlicensed & license Suspent

Hit and Run & leaving the SeE

DUI (1st)

DUI (2nd)

Unlicensed & License Suspem

Marijuana

850 1358 Fifth Street SE, Cairo, GA 39828 450 916 11th Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 800 507 Woodlawn Dr., Cairo, GA 39828 700 Rt. 3 Box 410 Pecan MPH 2, Cairo, GA 39828 700 177 Muddy Road, Climax, GA 39834 450 177 Muddy Road, Climax, GA 39834 700 10053 Collins Hole Rd., Tallahassee, FL 32312 200 10053 Collins Hole Rd., Tallahassee, FL 32312 700 700 10 Seventh Avenue SW, No. 10, Cairo, GA 39828 450 10 Seventh Avenue SW, No. 10, Cairo, GA 39828 700 906 Blackwood Ave., Tallahassee, FL 32303 700 201 Tuggle Rd., Cairo, GA 39827 700 1400 Potter Street, Bainbridge, GA 39819 700 160 Beasley Lane lot No.4, Cairo, GA 39828 200 160 Beasley lane lot No.4, Cairo, GA 39828 450 959 Tenth Ave. NE, Cairo, GA 39828 850 193 Third Street. SE., Cairo, GA 39828 700 173 Moore Road Lot 2, Cairo, GA 39828 700 509 8th Ave. NE, Cairo, GA 39828 450 10 Seventh Avenue SW, Apt 3, Cairo, GA 39828 1500 363 Joyner Rd., Lot 63, Cairo, GA 39828 1500 628 Arnold Road, Surrency, GA 31563 1000 628 Arnold Road, Surrency, GA 31563 800 5430 Pedrick Crossing Drive, Tallahassee, Fl 32317 450 10 Seventh Ave., SW Apt 5., Cairo, GA 39828 200 10 Seventh Ave., SW Apt S., Cairo, GA 39828 200 107 Creekside lane, Cairo, GA 39828 450 72 Baytree Estates, Thomasville, GA 31792 450 342 Twelth Ave. NE, Cairo, GA 39828 200 342 Twelth Ave., NE., Cairo, GA 39828 700 1955 Old 179 South, Whigham, GA 39897 450 905 11th Ave NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 187 Mt. Nebo Lane, Cairo, GA 39828 700 347 Horseshoe Bend, Cairo, GA 39828 450 403 Owens Road, Cairo, GA 39828 100 460 Martin Luther King Blvd, Midway, FL 32343 850 Americana Road, Tallahassee, Fl 32304 450 1490 Knoxville lane, Tallahassee, Fl 32304 1500 4330 GA Highway 111 N, cairo, GA 39827
4330 GA Highway 111 N, Cairo, GA 39827 1500 734 8th Street, NW, Cairo, GA 39828
200 238 McQueen Road, Moultrie, GA 31768 700 320 6th Street, NE No. 23, Cairo, GA 39828 700 356 Hollingsworth Street, NE, Pelham, GA 31779 700 35 Blackberry Blvd., Thomasville, GA 31792 800 35 Blackberry Blvd., Thomasville, GA 31792

850 450 800 700 700 450 700 200
700 450 700 700 700 700 200 450 850 700 700 450 1500
0 190 800 450 200 200
0 450 200 700
0 0 700 450 100 850 120 1500 0 433 200 220 700 485 40

noadmin ft

Huntley, Timothy Perez, Santos Anderson, Delanna Williams, Darren Knight, lindsay Ross, Kwame Chesser, David Giliard, lamar Voss, Michael Thomas, Larry Thedford, Ricky Thedford, Ricky Donald, David Baxter, Dominique Davis, Quaterium Donalson, Brandon Myrick, Megan Prince, John Williams, Natravis Martinez, Desmond Prince, Michael Chesser, John Jones, Brandon Maxam, Walter Gaines, Gregory Gaines, Gregory Dixon, lyssa Brinson, Joseph Rawls, William Pilgrim, Sonny Aldredge, Matthew Aldredge, Jeremy Harris, Barry Johnson, Donald Johnson, Donald Sellers, Kathy Trammell, John Mahoney, Syrrina · schmidi;Eiizabei:li Jimenez, Juan Velazquez, Carmeline Demouey, Eric Dixon, Gowain Dixon; Gowan lopez, Santos Pallone, Patsy Campbell, Ericquan

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 19 of 37

60683 2011.10.10 60685 2011.10.24 60687 2011.10.24 60692 2011.10.10 60718 2011.11.14 60729 2012.01.09 60730 2011.12.05 60731 2011.11.14 60733 2011.11.14 60736 2012.08.27 60738 2012.03.12 60739 2012.03.12 60740 2012.02.27 60742 2012.02.27 60743 2012.02.27 60746 2011.11.28 60748 2011.11.28 60749 2012.03.12 60752 2011.11.28 60755 2011.10.24 60756 2012.03.12 60758 2012.02.27 60761 2011.10.24 60764 2011.10.24 60765 2012.03.12 60766 2012.03.12 60769 2011.10.24 60770 2011.10.24 60772 2012.02.27 60780 2012.02.27 60782 2011.11.28 60785 2011.11.28 60789 2011.12.05 60790 2011.10.24 60791 2011.10.24 60794 2012.02.27 60796 2011.10.24 60799 2012.01.09 60802 2012.03.12 60804 2011.11.14 60828 2012.01.09 60831 2011.10.24 60835 2011.11.14 60837 2011.11.14 60852 2011.11.28 60865 2011.11.28 60867 2012.03.12

DUI (1st) Unlicensed & license Suspenr Reckless Driving DUI (1st) Too Fast for Conditions Speeding Reckless Driving Reckless Driving DUI (1st) DUI (1st} Reckless Driving Marijuana Reckless Driving Reckless Driving DUI (1st) Marijuana Reckless Driving Reckless Driving DUI (1st) Marijuana Marijuana Reckless Driving Reckless Driving Marijuana Reckless Conduct Marijuana Reckless Conduct Reckless Conduct Reckless Driving Obstruction DUI (1st) Marijuana Reckless Driving Reckless Driving Marijuana Reckless Driving DUI (1st) DUI (1st) Reckless Driving Unlicensed & license Suspent Unlicensed & license Suspem Unlicensed & license Suspenr Unlicensed & license Suspen1 Fleeing Unlicensed & license Suspen1 Reckless Conduct DUI (2nd) (Less Safe)

700 4426 GA Highway 111 S., Cairo, GA 39828 850 10 Seventh Ave., SW Apt 19., Cairo, GA 39828 700 390 Bell Road, Havanna, FL 32333 700 P. 0. Box 901, Cairo, GA 39828
992 Clarence M Road, Whigham, GA 39897 300 115 Alice Johnson Road, Eastover, South Carolina 29044 700 516 Bond Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 552 Wilcox Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 722 Egg & Butter Road, Ochlocknee, GA 31773
803 9th Street NW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 2343 Woodhaven Road, Coolidge, GA 31738 800 2343 Woodhaven Road, Coolidge, GA 31738 700 1250 Harlem Drive,Cairo, Ga 39828 700 P. 0. Box 72381, Tallahassee, Fl 32301 700 1141 Fourth Ave., SW, Cairo, GA 39828 800 688 Fourth Ave., Cairo, GA 39828
2636 Bold Springs Road, Ochlocknee, GA 31773 700 2407 County Line Road, Meigs, GA 31765 700 230 15th Street SW, Cairo, GA 39828 800 102 Vine Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 800 107 MM Meadows Lane, Ochlocknee, GA 31773 200 516 Bond Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 727 Pine Park Rd., Cairo, GA 39828 800 1965 Oak Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1204 Roy Street, Bainbridge, GA 39817 800 1204 Roy Street, Bainbridge, GA 39817 700 593 Fredonia Road, Thomasvile, GA 31757 700 163 Meridia, Thomasville, GA 31792 250 2194 Wright Road, Perry, FL 32347 300 76 Harney Street, Camilla, GA 31730 700 8388 GA Hwy 6S, Camilla, GA 31730 800 8388 GA Hwy 65, Camilla, GA 31730 700 1819 Fairbanks Ferry Road, Tallahassee, Fl32312 700 PO Box 1182, Leesburg, GA 31763 800 PO Box 1182, leesburg, GA 31763 700 262 Pine Park Rd, Cairo, GA 39828 700 2008 BOld Cassidy, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 109 Smith Road lot 29, Cairo, GA 39828 700 3939 Hwy 112 North, Whigham, GA 39897 700 611 8th Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 2000 154 Green Shade Rd., Bainbridge, GA 39819 950 218 6th Avenue, Tallahassee, FL, 32303 700 616 Ninth Ave., NE, Cairo, GA 39828
616Ninth Ave., NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 363 Joyner Rd., lot 58 Cairo, GA 39828 700 480 11th Ave., NE Apt H-60, Cairo, GA 39828 700 160 Blair Dr., Cairo, GA 39828

700 850 700
50 0 0
700 700 700
0 700 800 232 200 700 582.5
0 700 700 800 800 200 177 800
0 800 700 700 300
0 700 800 700 700 800 700 249 445 700 700 2000
0 340
0 700 700 92.99

noadmin f1 no admin fr no admin fr
no ad min f1 admincost:

Hernandez, Olivia

Jarvis, Morgan

Luna, Guadalupe

Brown, Joey

Wilson, Ulysses

Perez, Josue

Smiley, Miguel

Grant, Gary

Grant, Gary

Griffin, Kendill

Moon, Robert

Vickers, Casey

Hale, Bruce

Sanchez, Jose

Brown, Kentrai!

Burton, Justin

Wooten, Johnathan

Smith, Kenneth

Gomez, Pascual

Wooten, Ronnie

Vickers, Casey

Perez, Marciano

Van Brunt, Norman

Willis, Theron

Martinez, Jose

Myrick, Robert

Perez, Alfredo

Maloy, Jonathan

Maloy, Jonathan

Perez, Jose Hernandez

Velasquez, Joaquin

Diaz, Salvadore

Persing, Kyle

Delaine, Terra

Edouard, Samuel

Guerra, Victor

Kinlaw, Miatta

".'

M. --o

ra
·~

l

ez,
'"-·

Abelordo

Smith, Gregory

Doss, Ronald

Gomez, Miguel

Mathis, Kajuanjula

Cox, James

· Wood, Russell

Franco-Cacho, Ricardo

Wiseman, Latoya

Maxwell, Joel

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 20 of 37

60870 2011.11.28 60872 2012.02.27 60894 2011.11.28 60902 2012.03.12 60905 2011.11.28 60931 2011.12.13 60937 2011.11.28 60939 2012.06.11 60940 2012.06.11 60945 2011.11.28 60948 2011.11.28 60952 2011.11.28 60956 60957 2011.11.28 60962 2011.11.28 60963 2011.11.28 60964 2011.11.28 60968 2012.02.27 60974 2011.12.05 60985 2012.03.12 60989 2011.11.28 60994 2012.02.13 60996 2011.12.05 60998 2011.12.0S 61015 2011.11.28 61016 2011.11.28 61042 2012.02.13 61484 2012.02.13 61485 2012.02.13 61090 2012.01.23 61418 2012.01.23 61075 61007 2012.01.09 61005 2011.12.05 61006 2011.12.05 61061 2011.12.05 61110 2012.01.09 61113 2012.01.23 61119 2012.01.23 61155 2012.01.09 61164 2012.01.23 61165 2012.01.09 61169 2012.01.09 61171 2012.01.09 61177 2012.01.09 61181 2012.02.27 61183 2012.01.09

Unlicensed & License Suspenr

Failure to Maintain lane

Unlicensed & License Suspen<

DUI (3rd)
our {1st)

Unlicensed & license Suspenr

Possession of Alcohol by Minor

DUl (1st}

Marijuana

Marijuana

DUl (1st)

Reckless Driving

Speeding

Reckless Driving

Open Container

Marijuana

Unlicensed & License Suspended or Revoked

Reckless Driving

DUI (1st)

DUI (1st)

DUI (1st)

Unlicensed & license Suspent

Reckless Conduct

Unlicensed & License Suspent

Unlicensed & License Suspent

DUI (1st)

Unlicensed & License Suspem

DUI (2nd)

Marijuana

Unlicensed & license Suspem

Unlicensed & License Suspent

Unlicensed & License Suspent

Speeding

Criminal Trespass

Criminal Trespass

Unlicensed & license Suspem

Speeding

Unlicensed .

&

licen.se

5usp. em

Expired Tag

Speeding

Unlicensed & License Suspended or Revoked

DUI (1st)

DUI {2nd)

DUI {1st}

Unlicensed & License Suspent

DUI (1st)

Reckless Conduct

800 4464 GA Highway 111 S, Cairo, GA 39828 100 171 Bold Springs Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 P. 0. Box 191, Bainbridge, GA 39818 lSOO 205 6th Ave., SW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 897 Ninth Street, NW, Cairo,GA 39828 1250 613 Third Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828
1242 Second Avenue SW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 326 Second Street, NW, Apt. 2, Cairo, GA 39828 800 326 Second Street, NW, Apt. 2, Cairo, GA 39828 800 219 8th Avenue NW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 139 Joyner Road, Cairo, GA 39828
353 Vickers Road, Whigham, GA 39897 426 6th Ave., NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 525 Dilsa land , lmmokaler, FL 34142 200 411 4th Street NE, Cairo, GA 39828 800 6790 GA Highway 202, Thomasville, GA 31757 No Address on File 700 307 Teresa Edwards St., Cairo, GA 39828 700 10 Seventh Ave., SW Apt No.5, Cairo, GA 39828 700 303 Sixth Ave., NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 353 Knight Road, Whigham, GA 39897 700 621 Eighth Ave., NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 198 lake Douglas Road, cairo, GA 39828 700 602 Cedar Grove Road, Climax, GA 39834 700 224 Marie Circle, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1255 Pine Park Road, Cairo, GA 39828 600 208 Sixth Street, NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1330 Old Thomasville Road, Pelham, GA 31779 800 1330 Old Thomasville Road, Pelham, GA 31779 950 Joyner Road, Apt. No.7, Cairo, GA 39828 400 363 Joyner Road, Cairo, GA 3828 450 2173 US Highway 84 East, cairo, GA 39828 400 782 GA Highway 93 N, Cairo, GA 39828 300 565 4th Ave., SE, Cairo, GA 39828 300 431 1st Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 346 Tommy Merritt Road, Moultrie, GA 31768 50 1700 Joe louis Street, Apt. 77, Talllahassee, FL 32304 450 1252 1st Street NE, Cairo, GA 39828 150 2504 Bridgeboro Street, Albany, GA 31705 200 P. 0. Box 15633, Tallahassee, FL 32317 6577 Havana Highway 12, Havana, FL 32333 700 1340 Timmons Road, Quincy, FL 32352 700 307 W. Railroad Street, G 25, Pelham, GA 31779 700 751 Reddick lane, Tallahassee, Fl 32337 1250 822 N. Pinetree Blvd., Thomasville, GA 31792 700 3853 Trotter Ridge Circle, Valdosta, GA 31605 500 964 Maxwell Road, Whigham, GA 39897

800 100 700 1500
0 1250
0 700 800 800 700
0 0 700 200 800 0 700 700 700 700 700 700 190 0 0 600 519 800 658 400 450 400 204 300 700 50 450 150 200 0 432 700 700 1250 70 500

no admin

Whigham, James Thomas, Jeremy Prince, Charles II Flynn, Andrew Nelson, Savannah Wyatt, James Wyatt, James Evaristo, Julio Watson, Nicholas Marchant, Richard __Hester, Austin Chason, Brian Austin, Ashley Thomas, Jamarcus lopez, Carlos Gutierrez, Santo Gutierrez, Santo Sholar, Dillon Reaves, Timothy Williams, Brandon Grimsley, Michelle Wimberly, James Wimberly, James Bryant, Augustus Garcia, Efien Barker, Jesse Edwards, Ryan Harrell, Joseph Griffin, Mark Griffin, Mark Calhoun, Tammy Hethington, Uriah Speed, Ronald Sanchez, Jimmy Melvin, Sabrina Sellers, Carroll Pratt, Shannon Alvarado, Elida i<efalas, i<evin Sanchez, Didier Velasquez, Joaquin Holmes, Isaac Carter, Pyron Williams, Markavis Fletcher, Michael Kefalas, Kevin Kefalas, Kevin

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 21 of 37

61186 2012.01.09 61189 2012.01.09 61192 2012.01.09 61204 2012.02.27 61206 2012.01.23 61208 61209 2012.04.23 61211 2012.01.23 61214 2012.04.23 61217 2012.03.12 61222 2012.01.09 61230 2012.02.27 61234 2012.04.23 61242 2012.01.23 61260 2012.02.27 61267 2012.01.23 61268 2012.01.23 61278 2012.03.12 61291 2012.06.11 61293 2012.04.23 61295 2012.01.09 61296 2012.01.09 61297 2012.01.09 61300 2012.03.12 61301 2012.01.09 61308 2012.01.09 61311 2012.03.12 61317 2012.01.23 61327 2012.01.23 61328 2012.01.23 61333 2012.03.12 613S1 2012.02.27 61353 2012.04.23 61354 2012.02.13 61356 2012.01.23 61358 2012.05.14 61362 2012.03.12 61381 2012,02.13 61404 2012.02.27 61411 2012.02.27 61418 2012.01.23 61464 2012.02.13 61470 2012.04.23 61472 2012.04,23 61476 2012.02.27 61480 2012.02.27 61481 2012.02.27

Reckless Conduct Reckless Conduct Reckless Conduct Unlicensed & License Suspem Unlicensed & License Suspenc Reckless Driving Unlicensed & License Suspenc Unlicensed & license Suspen< DUI (less Safe Only) DUI (1st) Reckless Conduct Failure to Maintain lane DUI (Less Safe Only} Marijuana Unlicensed & license 5uspen< DUI (1st) Unlicensed & License Suspent Reckless Driving Reckless Driving Unlicensed & License Suspent Marijuana Unlicensed & License Suspent Marijuana Reckless Driving DUI (1st) DUI (3rd) DUI (less Safe) Speeding Failure to Yield Driving in Violation of license Theft by Shoplifting Unlicensed & license Suspent Unlicensed & license Suspem Marijuana Unlicensed & License Suspenc Unlicensed & license Suspent DUI (1st) Failure to Maintain lane Speeding New Resident Without licens Unlicensed & License Suspent Reckless Driving DUI (Less Safe Only) DUI (1st) DUI (1st) DUI (1st) Marijuana

500 272 Womble Road, Cairo, GA 39827 SOO 259 D & G Lane, Lot D, Whigham, GA 39897 500 1199 Pine Park Road, Cairo, GA 39828 6SO 529 Andrews lane, Cairo, GA 39828
50 S900 SW 27 Terrace, Gainesville, Fl 32608 700 140 Blair Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 450 140 Blair Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 450 S686 Blounstown Highway, Tallahassee, FL 32304 700 3927 Mayan Drive, Tallahassee, Fl 32308 700 150 Pine Cone Lane, Cairo, GA 39828 200 443 Cain Road,Cairo, GA 39828 50 407 Jowers Road Lot 14, Whigham, GA 39897 700 205 Woodcrest Drive, Thomasville, GA 31792 800 1460 MlK Blvd, Cairo, GA 39828 1250 617 4th Street, Cairo, GA 39828 700 505 8th Ave., NE, Cairo, GA 39828 7SO SOS 8th Ave., NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1779 Wayland Park Drive, Remerton, GA 31601 700 P. 0. Box 6811, Thomasville, GA 31758 8SO 310 Humble Avenue SW, Cairo, GA 39828 800 P. 0. Box 473, Whigham, GA 39897 600 398 Owens Road, Cairo, GA 39828 800 398 Owens Road, Cairo, GA 39828
2784 A Pine Park Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 212 Wood Street, Attapulgus, GA 39815 1SOO 4949 Highway 84 W Lot X, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1477 Pine Park Road, Cairo, GA 39828
75 601 Fifth Street, Apt B, Cairo, GA 39828 200 2500 Lower Hawthorne Trail, Cairo, GA 39828 200 2500 Lower Hawthorne Trail, Cairo, GA 39828 200 760 lime Sink Road, Whigham, GA 39897 650 135 Hadley Street, Cairo, GA 39828 450 444 Belcher Circle Rd., Cairo, GA 39827 800 707 Caitlin lane, Thomasville, GA 39828 1SOO 101 Glenview Drive, Tallahassee, Fl 32303 450 4909 Highway 112 N , Pelham, GA 31779 700 117 Big Buck Drive, Tallahassee, Fl 32312 200 2425 GA Highway 37, Mel, GA 31620 100 501 East Clay Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 SOO 372 live Oak Road, Lot 3, Cairo, GA 39828 400 363 Joyner Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 901 Joy Road, lot G-8, Columbus, GA 31906 700 7445 Green Acres Drive, Donalsonville, GA 3984S 700 607 Caitlin lane, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 9517 Huckabee Road, Tallahassee, Fl 32311 700 S04 East Clay Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 800 S04 East Clay Street, Thomasville, GA 31792

500 500 500 650
50 225
0 450 568 700 350
50 700 800 671 700 7SO 700 700 850 800
0 195
0 575 1500 700
75 200 200 200 1SO 450 800 1067 4SO 700 200
0 500 4SO 700 700 700
0 0 0

no admin c admin cost noadmin c
noadmin c no admin f<
admincost

Maloy, Jonathan Maloy, Jonathan Ott, Seth Mims, Justin Johnson, David Freeman, Tavisa Daniels, Kimberly Graham, Nicholas Willis, Rashid Carroll, Dale . Carroll, Dale Nowell, Blake Revels, Alyssa Matias, Rocael Islas, Enrique lopez, Marcelino Angeles-Callejas, Jose Morrison, Darren Corker, Donald Beeks, Jimmy Jr. James, Timothy Brown, Edward Brown, Edward Kirkland, Michelle Kirkland, Michelle Dodd, Terry Jimenez, Williar Edwards, Tevin Gibson, George Gibson, George Moran, Miguel Moran, Miguel Adams, Derrick Brown, Charles Teal, Fabien Cruz, Jennifer Cruz, Jennifer . §ladst?ll~ Micha.el Maynor, Bruce Perez, Claudia Cooper, Cyrus Sutton, Tracy Rucker, Contez Giddens, Grady West, John Gilbert, Henry Gilbert, Henry

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 22 of 37

61484 2012.02.13 61485 2012.02.13 61493 2012.03.12 61498 2012.02.27 61S01 2012.02.27 61503 2012.03.12 61506 2012.02.13 61509 2012.02.13 61510 2012.02.27 61515 2012.03.12 61516 2012.03.27 61517 2012.02.27 61518 2012.02.13 61534 2012.02.27 61546 2012.01.23 61553 2012.02.13 61559 2012.03.12 61573 2012.02.27 61576 2012.02.27 61578 2012.02.27 61581 2012.02.27 61582 2012.04.23 61583 61584 2012.02.27 61586 2012.02.27 61588 2012.02.13 61592 2012.02.27 61614 2012.03.12 61638 2012.02.27 61640 2012.02.27 61649 2012.02.13 61650 2012.02.13 61653 2012.05.14 61656 2012.02.27 61657 2012.07.09 61658 2012.03.12 61659 2012.03.12 61662 2012.03.12 61694 2012.03.12 61696 2012.04.09 61699 2012.03.12 61701 2012.03.12 61704 2012.04.23 61708 2012.03.12 61716 2012.03.12 61723 61725 2012.04.09

DUI (2nd) Marijuana Speeding Reckless Conduct DUI (1st) DUI (1st) DUI {1st) Reckless Driving Reckless Driving Reckless Driving Expired Tag Possession of Alcohol by Minor Giving False Name Unlicensed & license Suspem Unlicensed & license Suspem Unlicensed & License Suspenc Unlicensed & license Suspenr Reckless Driving Reckless Driving Unlicensed & license Suspem Speeding Reckless Conduct Speeding Reckless Driving Failure to Stop at Stop Sign DUI (1st) Unlicensed & license Suspenr DUI (2nd) DUI (1st) Fleeing DUI (1st} Unlicensed & License Suspenr Unlicensed & License Suspenr Unlicensed & license Suspenr Unlicensed & license Suspenr Reckless Driving Unlicensed & License Suspended or Revoked Unlicensed & License Suspended or Revoked DUI (1st) Unlicensed & License Suspenr DUI (1st) DUI (1st) DUI (1st) Reckless Driving DUI (1st) DUI (2nd) Open Container

700 1330 Old Thomasville Road, Pelham, GA 31779 800 1330 Old Thomasville Road, Pelham, GA 31779
S24 Oakland Avenue, Tallahassee, FL 32301 700 52 Mallard Road, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 103 Phelphs Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 191 6th Avenue NE, cairo, GA 39828 700 1148 9th Avenue NW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 200 Jones Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 1840 1st Avenue SW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 2500 GA Highway 1115, Cairo, GA 39828
2500 GA Highway 1115, Cairo, GA 39828 1842 GA Highway 93 S, Cairo, GA 39828 200 413 N. Hansell Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 650 516 7th Avenue SE, Cairo, GA 39828 300 311 7th Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 650 1220 Park Blvd, Cairo, GA 39828 400 1876 Hondo Trail, Tallahassee, Fl 32563 700 198 Mamie lane, Cairo, GA 39828 700 P. 0. Box 824, Cairo, GA 39828 600 308 Johnson Road, Albany, GA 3170S 252 19th Street 5W, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1629 laurel Creek Circle, lithonia, GA 30058 125 1629 laurel Creek Circle, lithonia, GA 30058 700 3044 N Shannon Lakes Drive, Tallahassee, FL 32309 100 3044 N Shannon Lakes Drive, Tallahassee, FL 32309 700 381 Rawls Road, Cairo, GA 39828 600 504 Rossman Dairy Road, Lot Q, Moultrie, GA 31768 700 465 Baytree Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 464 Pebble Brook Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 SOD 464 Pebble Brook Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 700 5772 Highway 179 Lot No.. 2, Cairo, GA 39828 450 5772 Highway 179 Lot No.. 2, Cairo, GA 39828 450 480 Kristie lee Drive, Cairo, GA 39825 1000 4011 SW 19th Street, West Park, Fl 33023 450 485 Old Cannon Ford Road NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 559 McKinnley Street, Boston, GA 31626 559 McKinnley Street, Boston, GA 31626 254 Pine Stone Lane, Cairo, GA 39828 700 321 14th Street SW, Cairo, GA39828 450 517 8th Ave., NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 404 Bonanza Drive, Phoenix City, AL 36869
700 328 Jones Street SW, Cairo, GA 39828
700 15487 61st N Unit A, Clearwater, FL 33760 700 205 Pine Park Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 167 20th Ave NW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 556 Bell Road, Havanna, FL 32333
556 Bell Road, Havanna, Fl32333

519 800
0 700
60 700 500 700 306 700
0 0 200 650 300 650 400 700 700 132 0 700 125 700 100 700 600 115 395 500 700 450 450 505 450 626 0 1000 73 450 700 331 0 0 700 700 0

noadmin li no admin li noadmin li no admin li
ad min liste• no admin 1:

Sanders, Michael French, Jonathan French, Jonathan Taylor, Justin Sadler, Stacey Miller, Sheddrick Oliver, Lewis Raddar, Raame Starling, Kevin Chambers, larry .Legette, Tom Ill Irwin, Holland Reese, Jeffery Reese, Jeffery Clements, Maurice Ill Cutts, Fritz Simmons, Tarsha Miller, Steven Zimmer, David Guerra, Ashley Maxam, Walter Oliver, lewis Newkirk, Felicia Butler, Michael Avery, Ronnie Goode, Patrick Goode, Patrick Mitchell, Valarie Wynne, Christopher Ransefore, Vincent Ransefore, Vincent Lee, Demetric Lee, Demetric Frisco, Tanya Anderson, Shelion Smith, Reginald Anderson, Shellon Martinez, Frank Morales, Adrian Morales, Adrian McElhaney, Clinton Presha, Nathaniel Boden, Michael Boden, Michael Montgomery, Shayla Robinson, Christopher Robinson, Christopher

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 23 of 37

61729 2012.06.11 61732 2012.04.09 61733 2012.04.09 61752 2012.04.23 61758 2012.06.25 61765 2012.05.21 61766 2012.04.09 61768 2012.03.12 61783 2012.04.09 61801 2012.03.12 61804 2012.05.14 61805 2012.05.14 61809 2012.04.09 61808 2012.04.09 61811 2012.04.23 61813 2012.04.09 61814 2012.07.09 61816 2012.04.23 6183S 2012.10.22 61846 2012.05.21 61861 2012.05.21 61862 2012.04.09 61865 2012.05.21 61877 2012.04.23 61879 2012.04.23 61885 2012.04.23 61887 2012.04.23 61891 2012.08.27 61895 2012.08.27 61896 2012.04.09 61897 61899 2012.04.09 61900 61902 2012.04.09 61903 61906 2012.04.23 61907 2012.04.09 61911 2012.04.23 61928 2012.04.09 61929 2012.04.09 61931 2012.04.09 61932 61933 2012.04.09 61934 2012.04.09 61937 2012.07.09 61938 2012.04.09 61940 2012.04.09

DUI {1st) Reckless Driving Marijuana Criminal Trespass Reckless Driving Unlicensed & license Suspent Reckless Conduct Marijuana Passing within 200 ft. of Once DUI (1st) Underage Consumption Reckless Conduct Unlicensed & license Suspent DUI (1st) DUI (1st) DUI (2nd) Unlicensed & License Suspen• DUI {less Safe Only) Reckless Driving Unlicensed & License Suspent Possession of Alcohol by Min• 5eatbelt Permit Unauthorized Minor t• DUI (1st) DUI {1st) Unlicensed & License 5uspem Reckless Driving Obstruction DUI (1st) Marijuana (2nd) Open Container Unlicensed & license 5uspent Speeding Speeding Open Container Speeding Reckless Driving Unlicensed & License Suspent DUI (3rd) Unlicensed & license Suspent Unlicensed & License Suspent Unlicensed & license Suspent Marijuana Speeding Speeding DUI (1st) Open Container

700 381love Avenue SW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 600 Sands Drive, Apt 2504, Albany, GA 31705 800 600 Sands Drive, Apt 2504, Albany, GA 31705 200 315 Connell lane, Cairo, GA 39828 700 284 Pleasant Grove Road, Lot No.4, Cairo, GA 39828 450 172 Barwick Street, Cairo, GA 39828 500 141 Audubon Drive, Havanna, Fl32333 800 588 Hadley Ferry Road, Cairo, GA 39828 95 381 West Road, Lot 3, Cairo, GA 39828 700 421 Gibson Sawmill Road, Havanna, Fl 32333 200 1588 S. Broad Street, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1519 lull Water Circle, Cairo, GA 39827 450 192 Donald lee Drive, Apt. B, Camilla, GA 31730 700 192 Donald Lee Drive, Apt. B, Camilla, GA 31730 700 1394 Pine Park Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 999 Mizpah Road, Whigham, GA 39897 450 P. 0. Box 16, Cairo, GA 39828 700 200 6th Avenue SE, Cairo, GA 39828 50S 3886 Paddrick Drive, Tallahassee, FL 323089 450 1007 lewis Road, Cairo, GA 39828 200 1965 Oak Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 25 141 Audubon Drive, Havanna, Fl 32333 200 477 Kerri Anne Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 700 2521 Collins Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 3496 Collins Road, Whigham, GA 39897 450 1410 Orange Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 500 1410 Orange Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 179 3216 Black Gold Trail, Tallahassee, Fl 32309
816 4th Avenue SW, Cairo, GA 39828 800 3441 River Road, Camilla, GA 31730 200 3441 River Road, Camilla, GA 31730 450 3056 N. Carter Street, Meigs, GA 31765 101 3056 N. Carter Street, Meigs, GA 31765 101 1091 Ames Barrineau Road, Havanna, Fl 32333 200 982 Old Highway 84, Whigham, GA 39897 25 1240 Lake Douglas Road, Bainbridge, GA 39819 700 982 Old Highway 84, Whigham, GA 39897 250 497 Midway Road, Cairo, GA 39828
'"
1500 701 First Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 450 701 First Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 850 lowery Avenue, Apt 144, Thomasville, GA 31792 450 504 South MLK JR. Drive, Thomasville, GA 31792 800 99 NBC Lane, Meigs, GA 31765 100 99 NBC lane, Meigs, GA 31765
803 9th Street NW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 644 2nd Street SW, Cairo, GA 39828 200 644 2nd Street SW, Cairo, GA 39828

700 700 800
60 700 450 500 800 95.2 700 200 700
0 0 700 700 450 700 0 450 200 25 200 700 700 4SO 500 179 0 800 200 450 101 101 200 25 700 250 1500 0 850 450 800 100 0 700 200

ad min liste•
Adminliste Adminliste fine:500,d

Copeland, Jacenta Stroud, Anjelcia Hernandez, Mario Gomez, Santos Thornton, Bryce Washington, Michael Washington, Michael Yeje-Rodriguez, Myra Fransico, Renaldo Fransico, Renaldo Smiley, Darrye Velasco, Domingo Metcalf, Gary Kennedy, Randy Kennedy, Randy Miller, Ja'Reese Sagrero, Humberto Perez, Juan Perez, Juan Collins, Jeremy Thompson,Sheneka Jimenez, Beatrice Player, William Peppers, Jack Ayala, Joanna Kinsler, Pamela Gailey, Dustin Dodd, Travis Rash, James Johnson, Jermaine Anderson, Dorethea Anderson, Dorethea Freeman, Linda Freeman, linda Henderson, Anthony Walton, Malcom Clark, Travis Clark, Travis Coleman, Persephone Coleman, Persephone Lovan, Kyle Scott, Matthew Tatch, Steven Mitchell, Renard Mitchell, Renard Stacey, Patrick Stacey, Patrick

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 24 of 37

61948 2012.04.23

DUI (Less Safe Only)

61960 2012.04.23

Speeding

61967 2012.0S.21

Unlicensed & License Suspenr

61968 2012.05.21

Unlicensed & License Suspenc

61977 2012.04.23

DUI (1st)

61985 2012.06.25

Reckless Conduct

61986 2012.06.25

Marijuana

61990 2012.08.27

DUI (1st)

61993 2012.04.23

DUI (1st)

61994

Unlicensed & License Suspenc

62002 2012.05.14

Reckless Driving

62004 2012.05.21

Unlicensed & License Suspent

62006 2012.04.23

DUI (1st)

62024 2012.05.21

DUI (1st)

62025 2012.05.21

Unlicensed & License Suspen<

62029 2012.05.21

Marijuana

62030 2012.06.25

Reckless Driving

62032

2012.0423 DUI (3rd)

62033 2012.04.23

Unlicensed & License Suspem

62035 2012.07.09

Marijuana

62036 2012.08.27

DUI (1st)

62044 2012.06.25

Marijuana

62045 2012.05.21

Marijuana

62047 2012.05.21

Unlicensed & License Suspem

62058 2012.05.21

Unlicensed & License Suspent

62061

Speeding

62084 2012.06.11

Speeding

62087 2012.06.25

Marijuana

62088 2012.06.25

DUI (less Safe only) (Not a Re

62090

DUI (2nd)

62095 2012.05.14

DUI (2nd)

62096 2012.05.14

Marijuana

62097 2012.05.14

DUl (3rd)

62098 2012.05.14

Unlicensed & license Suspent

62102 2012.08.27

Suspended or Revoked Regist

62103 2012.05.14

Reckless Driving

62108

DUI (Less Safe) (Not a Refusal

62109 2012.05.14

Marijuana

62110 2012.05.21

DUI (1st)

62112 2012.05.21

Marijuana

62115 2012.07.09

Reckless Driving

62116 2012.05.14

DUI (2nd)

62118 2012.05.21

DUI (2nd)

62141 2012.05.14

DUI (1st)

62142 2012.05.14

Unlicensed & License Suspenc

62143 2012.05.21

DUI {less Safe Only)

62146

Marijuana

700 338 lOth Street SW, Cairo, GA 39828 200 1008 N Gate Circle, Bainbridge, GA 39817 450 4464 Highway 111 S, Cairo, GA 39828 450 1453 Tired Creek Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 P. 0. Box 708, Cairo, GA 39828 700 965 11th Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 800 965 11th Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828
3601 US Highway 84 West, Whigham, GA 39897 700 400-2 Owens Road, Cairo, GA 39828 850 400-2 Owens Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 135 Saint luke Lane, Cairo, GA 39828. 450 198 Rosencrantz Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 2513 US Highway 319 S, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 200 Crawford Lane, Cairo, GA 39828 450 200 Crawford lane, Cairo, GA 39828 800 26 Third Avenue SW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 314 Tobacco Road, Havanna, FL 32333 1500 410 6th Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 850 410 6th Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 800 676 Elkins Road, Cairo, GA 39828
412 Horri x Street, Apt. B, Thomasville, GA 31792 800 P. 0. Box 846, Cairo, GA 39828 800 245 Egypt Road, Thomasville, GA 31757 1300 323 Foxcroft Drive, Thomasville, GA 31757 450 2207 Bannerman Road, Tallahassee, FL 32312 100 331 Loblolly Lane, Apt C-5, Cairo, GA 39828 200 86 Hidden Acres Drive, Thomasville, GA 31757 800 182 Jamie Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 23171 Highway 3, Thomasville, GA 31792
663 Prince Road, Cairo, GA 39827 700 133 Oakland Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 800 133 Oakland Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 1500 P. 0. Box 484, Ochlocknee, GA 31773 450 P. 0. Box 484, Ochlocknee, GA 31773 80 2211st Avenue, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 P. 0. Box 336, Meigs, GA 31765 700 111 Crimson Circle, Thomasville, GA 31792 .. 800 111 Crimson Circle, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 1325 Warner Street, Apt A-6, Thomasville, GA 31792 800 1325 Warner Street, Apt A-6, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 8 Woodafe Drive, Apt A, Valdosta, GA 31602 700 5113 Clarecastle Way, Tallahassee, Fl 32309 700 2036 Second Street SE, Moultrie, GA 31768 700 426 Belcher Circle, Cairo,GA 39828 1000 426 Belcher Circle, Cairo, GA 39828 700 214 Old Newton Road, Pelham, GA 31779 800 214 Old Newton Road, Pelham, GA 31779

20 200 450
0 700 700 362
0 700
0 700 450 700 700 450 125 700 1500 850 800
0 800 244 410 450 100 200 277 700
0 700 800 1500 450
80 429 110 540 700 800 700 700 700 700 1000 700 246

Kennedy, Colby Robfero, Elmer Roblero, Elmer Roblero, Elmer Bennett, Robert Bennett, Robert landrum, Allen Kennedy, Tony Williams, Alton Palmore, Randy Ranger, Courtney Ranger, Courtney Flynn, Mark Hudson, Phillip Donaldson, Jimmy Fortner, Christopher Davis, Santana Davis, Santana Sutton, Charles Pickering, Michael Goodin, Madison Hunter, Robert Hunter, Robert Sweat, Chad lopez, Domingo Gibson, Raymond Ill Gibson, Raymond Ill Gutierez, Francisco Maxwell, Michael Diaz, Jose De La Cruz, Yaneth Garcia, Bailey Thurman, Wayne Glaster, Quinshall Perez, Pedro Gomez, Marliano Gomez, Marliano Hobbs, Jeffrey . Rankin, Rikki Cook, James James, Erica Deyounks, Christopher Miller, Emmanuel Copeland, Milton Custodio, Jose Austin, Antoine Griffin, Patricia

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 25 of 37

62151 2012.05.21 62155 2012.05.21 62156 62157 2012.05.21 62160 2012.06.25 62161 2012.06.25 62163 2012.08.27 62174 2012.08.27 62178 2012.08.27 62183 2012.05.14 62185 2012.05.21 62186 2012.05.21 62201 2012.06.11 62210 2012.05.21 62246 2012.08.27 62262 2012.05.21 62266 2012.07.09 62267 2012.07.09 62268 2012.08.27 62270 2012.07.23 62271 2012.06.11 62280 2012.07.09 62281 2012.07.09 62282 2012.06.25 62294 2012.06.11 62301 2012.06.11 62302 2012.06.11 62313 2012.06.11 62322 2012.07.09 62325 2012.07.09 62367 2012.06.25 62371 2012.06.25 62476 2012.06.25 62427 2012.08.13 62428 2012.07.09 62434 2012.07.09 62435 2012.07.09 62440 2012.07.23 62444 2012.08.27 62446 2012.07.09 62447 2012.10.08 62453 2012.07.09 62459 2012.07.23 62465 2012.07.09 62478 2012.07.09 62480 2012.07.09 62483 2012.10.22

Possession of Alcohol Bevera1 Unlicensed & License Suspenr No Proof of Minimum Insurance Speeding Reckless Driving Open Container DUI (less Safe Only) DUI (1st) DUI (Less Safe Only) DUI (less Safe only) (Not a Re DUI (1st) Marijuana (2nd) Speeding Open Container leaving the Scene of Accident DUI (2nd) DUI (less Safe Only) Marijuana DUI (1st) Unlicensed & License Suspem DUI (1st) DUI (2nd} Unlicensed & license Suspenc Reckless Driving Unlicensed & License Suspenr Class D Restriction Speeding Unlicensed & license Suspent Reckless Driving Unlicensed & license Suspent Unlicensed & license Suspended or Revoked Speeding DU! (2nd) Improper lane Change Unlicensed & license Suspenr Unlicensed & license Suspenr Speeding Speeding Reckless Driving Unlicensed & License Suspem DUI (1st} Speeding Speeding Driving in Violation of Permit Unlicensed & License Suspenc Reckless Driving DUI (To Alcohol Only)

200 125 Third Ave, Cairo, GA 39828 450 3424 Old St. Augustine Road, Taffahassee, FL 32303
3424 Old St. Augustine Road, Tallahassee, Fl 32303 3424 Old St. Augustine Road, Tallahassee, FL 32303 700 7817 Lake Seminole Road, Sneads, Fl 32460 200 7817 Lake Seminole Road, Sneads, Fl 32460 551 Airport Road, Cairo, GA 39828 125 Third Avenue, Cairo, GA 39828 170 Bell Circle, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1420 Sixth Avenue NW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 553 27th Street SE, Apt 1, Moultrie, GA 31788 800 553 27th Street SE, Apt 1, Moultrie, GA 31788 100 2630 Pine Acre Drive NE, Cairo, GA 39828 200 125 Hayes Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 850 Old Newton Road, Pelham, GA 31779 700 1306 Holder Avenue SW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 2875 Mission Road, Apt B, Tallahassee, Fl 32304 800 2875 Mission Road, Apt B, Tallahassee, Fl 32304 374 Hudson Road, Cairo, GA 39827 850 350 Burum Street SW, Pelham, GA 31779 700 8008 Patten Coolidge Road, Coolidge, GA 31738 400 979 9th Street NW, Cairo, GA 39828 450 979 9th Street NW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 469 Baytree Road, Cairo, GA 39828 450 1193 Tired Creek Blvd, Cairo, GA 39828 100 114 Feinberg Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 100 114 Feinberg Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 500 920 8th Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 700 458 White Blossom Trail, Thomasville, GA 31757 850 1120 Second Street NE, Cairo, GA 39828 826 Circle Road, Moultrie, GA 31768 11810 Wild Fire Way, Tampa, FL 33635 700 307 14th Street NW, Cairo, GA 39828 3206 Willington Road Apt. E, Montgomery, Al 36106 850 1088 12th Avenue NE, Cairo, GA 39828 500 592 Old Egg Road, Lot No. 16, Cairo, GA 39828 592 Old Egg Road, lot No. 16, Cairo, GA 39828 20 Kay Circle~ Tifton, GA 31793 1002 Woodland Road Cairo, GA 39828 850 950 Jowers Road, Whigham, GA 39897 465 Baytree Road, Cairo, GA 39828 300 369 Crescent Circle SW, Cairo, GA 39828 200 2371 Collquitt Highway, Colquitt, GA 39837 100 128 Sugarplum Way, Havanna, Fl 32333 450 312 Seven Bridges Road, Bainbridge, GA 39819 800 3040 Clarendale Drive NW, Atlanta, GA 30327 651 Airport Road, Cairo, GA 39828

200 0 0 0
700 200
0 0 0 700 229 0 100 200 0 700 410 0 0 850 700 72.5 0 700 450 100 100 0 700 850 0 0 700 0 850 500 0 0 0 850 0 300 200 100 450 164 0

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 26 of 37

Chandler, James Griffin, James Jones, Roberta Imogene Daphney, Billy Daphney, Billy Bowman, Terrence Copeland, Jacenta Kennedy, Randy lowe, Ricky Lowe, Ricky Sno.wden, Steven lopez, Domingo Sanders, Marty Moone, Kinnesh Wolford, lee Jones, James Parker, Lisa campbell, Ericquan Perez, Aroldo Strigglers, Terrell Huntley, Timothy Navarro-Garcia, Marco Navarro-Garcia, Marco Bell, Wilbert Bell, Wilbert Hernandez, Felix Cruz, Francisco Tuggle, Tyler lurry, Deontray Johnson, Richard Esters, Aaron Williams, Wilbert Carter, Johnny Gordon, Senior Barnett, John Barrett, John Hurst, Johnny --- P?Wf!li,_Bentle)' __ Warren, Cecil Jr. Mcleod, Jeffrey Scott, Robert Wright, James Parker, John -Jones, Allen Broomfield, Freddie Green, Pamela Braaksma, John

62485 2012.06.25

62488 2012.06.25

62489 2012.07.09

62494 2012.07.09

62495 2012.07.09

62S02 2012.07.09

62521 2012.07.09

62532 2012.07.09

62536 2012.07.09

62537 2012.07.09

62541 2012.07.09

62551 2012.07.23

62577 2012.10.08

62580 2012.08.13

62584 2012.07.23

63007 2012.10.08

63015 2012.10.08

63021 2012.10.22

63061

63063 2012.10.22

63066 2012.10.22

63069 2012.10.22

63071 2012.10.22

63076 2012.10.22

63077 2012.10.22

63079 2012.10.22

63127 2012.10.22

63131 2012.11.26

63136 2012.11.05

63189

59642 2011.10.24

59792

59713 2012.03.12

59895 2011.11.28

59892 2012.08.13

59892 2011.10.24

59823 2011.10.24

......

59801 2011.12.05

12-SR-074

2012.08.27

12-SR-058

2012.07.09

12-SR-055

2012.07.09

12-SR-037

2012.04.23

12-SR-029

2012.03.12

12-SR-019

2012.05.14

12-SR-014

2012.02.13

12-SR-011

2012.01.23

12-SR-009

2012.01.09

DUI (2nd)

Reckless Driving

DUI (1st)

DUI (1st)

Marijuana

DUI (1st)

Unlicensed & License Suspenc

Unlicensed & license Suspenc

DUI (1st)

Unlicensed & license Suspenc

DUI (1st)

Unlicensed & license Suspenc

Unlicensed & License Suspended or Revoked

DUI (1st)

DUI (1st)

DUI (1st)

Reckless Driving

Unlicensed & License Suspended or Revoked

Unlicensed & License Suspended or Revoked

Reckless Driving

DUI (2nd or 3rd)

Aggressive Driving

Speeding

DUI (1st)

Marijuana

DUI {1st)

DUI (1st)

DUI (2nd)

DUI (1st).

Reckless Driving

Unlicensed & License Suspent

DUI {Less Safe)

Reckless Driving

Marijuana

Failure to Appear

(Listed as 250)

DUI (1st)

DUI (2nd)

Reckless Driving

Simple

Marijuana

Theft by Taking

Move Over law

Battery, FV

Criminal Damage to Property

Unlawful Dumping

Marijuana

Battery, Obstruction, Carryinr

700 142 Johnson Road, Havanna, FL 32333 700 822 N. Pinetree Blvd., Lot 12 Thomasville, GA 31792 700 11906 U S Highway 301 S, Lot 9, Statesboro, GA 30458 700 207 Varnedoe Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 800 207 Varnedoe Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 426 Washington Homes Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 850 879 Brookwood Drive 5E, Cairo, GA 39828 850 200 Crawford Lane, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1313 N. Dawson Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 450 1313 N. Dawson Street, Thomasville, GA 31792 700 2087 Pine Park Road, Cairo, GA 39828 450 2195 Highway 111 S Lot 3, Cairo, GA 39828
325 H. D. Road, cairo, GA 39828 180 Blair Road, Cairo, Ga 39828 700 492 Rich Road, Cairo, GA 39827 901 MLK Avenue, Cairo, GA 39828 1052 Union Hill Road, Pelham, GA 31779 160 Blair Dr., Cairo, GA 39828 900 4th Street NE, Cairo, GA 39828 236 9th Street SW, Cairo, GA 39828 4426 GA Hwy 11 S, Cairo, GA 39828 84 Dante Court, Quincey, Fl32315 84 Dante Court, Quincey, Fl32315 480 11th Avenue NE, Apt. F41, Cairo, GA 39828 480 11th Avenue NE, Apt. F41, Cairo, GA 39828 Elpina Rd. lot 7, Cairo, GA 39828 25 Deer Run Ct, Havana, Fl32333 104 Desirable Rd, Cairo, GA 39828 365 15th Street SW, Cairo, GA 39828 586 10th Ave NE, Cairo GA 39828 450 240 Mark Charles Drive, Tallahassee, FL 32304 700 1166 7th Ave SW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1089 Piney Grove Rd., Whigham, GA 39897 382 Jowers Road, Whigham, GA 39897 381 West Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 381 West Road, Cairo, GA 39828 700 1350 Egg and Butter Road, Thomasville, GA 317921 700 901 Cardinal Drive, Cairo, GA 39828 304 Owens Road, Cairo, GA 39828 800 448 Live Oak Rd, Lot 1, Cairo, GA 39828 200 137 Cleon Waldrop Rd., Whigham, GA 39897 200 1323 Reynolds St., Bainbridge, GA 39819 200 1025 Union Hill Rd, Pelham, GA 31779 200 303 Pierce Chapel Road, Cairo, GA 39828 100 399 Jowers Road, Whigham, GA 39897 800 895 7th Sreet NW, Cairo, GA 39828 300 HOMELESS

700

700

700

700

310

700

850

709

0

0

135

0

0

no ad min li

0

700

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

144

700

0 250 700 700 700
0 130 200 200 200 200 100 800 100

Sheffield, Theresa Thomas, Timmy Vicks, Laverne Jordan, Alvin Hutcherson, Tierra Harris, Stacy Bailey, Dustin Norris, Jeremy Herring, Tirra Norris, Corey Wiggins, Cody Barrett, John Macon, Donna Barrett, Anthony Nelson, paul Garcia, Mario Ford, Nicholas Solomon, Mableane Allen, Elijah Allen, Elijah Arias, Anthony Teal, Terrance

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 27 of 37

12-SR-004 12-SR-001 11-SR-130 11-SR-129 11-SR-126 11-SR-125 11-SR-122 11-SR-112 11-SR-111 11-SR-108 11-SR-107 11-SSR-102 11-SR-100 11-SR-096 11-SR-095 11-SR-093 11-SR-092 11-SR-087 11-SR-083 11-SR-083 11-SR-032 11-SR-019

2012.01.09 2012.04.23 2012.02.27 2012.04.09 2012.04.23 2012.01.09 2012.03.12 2011.11.28 2011.11.28 2011.11.28 2011.11.28 2012.01.09 2011.12.05 2011.10.24 2011.10.24 2011.10.10 2011.11.14 2011.10.24 2011.10.24 2011.10.24 2011.10.24 2012.01.09

Disorderly Conduct Disorderly Conduct (crim tres Deposit Account Fraud (1 cou (computer has 700) DUI {2nd) Disorderly Conduct Affray Obstruction to Mailbox (1 cot Battery Simple Battery Battery Simple Battery Disorderly Conduct, Furnishin Obstruction Possession of Minor and Red Simple Battery, Obstruction Battery, FV Obstruction (1 count) Affray Unlicensed & license Suspen• Hit& Run Simple Battery, FV Simple Battery

200 122 Temple Terrace Circle, Cairo, GA 39828 200 690 Legion Blvd., Cairo, GA 39828 200 414 4th NW, Cairo, GA 39828 700 PO Box 883, Forrest Park, Fl, 30298 200 917 Copeland Ave, Cairo, GA 39828 100 319 4th Ave NW, Cairo, GA 39828 600 171 Bold Springs Road, Cairo, GA 39828 500 3718 Pine Park Road, Cairo, GA 39828 500 1476 Clay Ave, SW, Cairo, GA 39828 500 141 Bold Springs Rd, Lot 14, Cairo, GA 39828 400 189 Pine Park Rd., Cairo, GA 39828 800 1221 Woodland Rd., Cairo, GA 39828 200 4772 old 179 South, Calvary, GA 39829 SOD 1221 Woodland Rd., Cairo, GA 39828 700 630 Hwy 84 East Room #18, Cairo, GA 39828 SOO 2195 Hwy 111 South, lot 22, Cairo, GA 39828 300 4772 old 179 South, Calvary, GA 39829 200 593 PR Anders lane, Cairo, GA 39828 450 152 Ulmer Road, lot 7, Whigham, GA 39897 200 152 Ulmer Road, lot 7, Whigham, GA 39897 500 3601 Hwy 84 West, lot 8, Whigham, GA 39897 200 136 Pine Circle SW, Cairo, GA 39828

156 165 200 700 200 100 600 500 500 500
70 800 200 500
0 100 300 200 450 200 500
0 235313.19

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 28 of 37

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

ALBANY DIVISION

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13-CV-156(WLS)

)

GRADY COUNTY, Georgia,

)

)

JUDGE J. WILLIAM BASS, SR.,

)

Grady County State Court Judge,

)

)

Defendants.

)

RESPONSE FORM

I understand that the claims asserted in the above-referenced lawsuit are based on the alleged unlawful imposition of Administrative Costs by J. William Bass, Sr. ("Judge Bass"), who served as the Judge of the State Court of Grady County, and Grady County's receipt and retention of payments made in connection with the alleged imposition of Administrative Costs.

I also understand that I may be a member of the class (the "Class") that was certified in the above-referenced case and that the attorneys who are representing the Class have reached a preliminary settlement agreement (the "Settlement Agreement") with respect to the claims being
asserted on behalf of the Class.

If I am a member of the Class, the following options are available to me:

(1) I can request the money due to me under the terms of the Settlement Agreement by completing Section I of this form and mailing it to the address listed below by _ _ __; 2015. I understand that, if I complete Section I and mail it to the address shown below in a timely manner, any money that is due to me under the terms of the Settlement Agreement will be mailed to me at the address that I provide. I also understand that, as a member of the Class, I will be prohibited from asserting any further claims against Judge Bass, Grady County, and their respective agents, employees, officers, officials, and personal representatives as a result of the
imposition~receipt·or retention ofAdministrative Costs; or

(2) I can opt out of the Class by completing Section II of this form and mailing it to

the address listed below by

, 2015. I understand that, if I opt out of the Class, I will

not receive any money that may be due to me under the terms of the Settlement Agreement. I

also understand that, if I opt out, I will not be prohibited from asserting any claims that I may

have against Judge Bass or Grady County as a result of the imposition, receipt or retention of

Administrative Costs;

EXHIBIT

~

D

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 29 of 37

(3) Even if I am a member of the Class, I can object to the terms of the Settlement

Agreement by filing an objection with the Clerk of Court at the C.B. King Courthouse located at

201 W. Broad Street in Albany, Georgia 31701. Any such objection must be filed by

_____. I can also appear at a hearing that the Honorable W. Louis Sands will conduct at

__ p.m. on

at the C.B. King Courthouse with respect to the fairness of the

settlement agreement and voice any objection that I may have.

(4) Even if I am a member of the Class, I can enter an appearance in the lawsuit

through an attorney if I so desire or seek to intervene in the lawsuit. All entries of appearance or

motions to intervene must be made by

, 2015.

Section I- Request for Money Due Under Terms of the Settlement Agreement

By completing Section I, I requesting the money that is due to me under the tenns of the Settlement Agreement and, in that regard, I am providing the following information that will assist in determining whether I am entitled to any payment pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, and providing an address to which any such payment will be mailed:

Name:
(Please note that any settlement check to which you are entitled will be made payable to this name)
Former Name:
(For instance, if you were known by another name when you appeared in the State Court of Grady County, please include that name so that it can be determined whether you are entitled to a payment under the terms ofthe Settlement Agreement)

Address:

(Please note that any settlement check to which you are entitled will be mailed to this address)
Section II - Opt Out of the Class
By completing section II, I am opting out of the Settlement Agreement and will not receive any payment to which I may be entitled pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, but I will not be prohibited from asserting any claim that I may have against Judge Bass or Grady County.
Name:
Once completed, this response should be mailed to the following address by ____, 2015:
Raleigh Rollins 411 Gordon Avenue Thomasville, Georgia 31792

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 30 of 37
GENERAL RELEASE RECITALS
A. ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES ("Plaintiff') filed a complaint against GRADY COUNTY, GEORGIA ("Grady County") and ruDGE J. WILLIAM BASS, SR. ("Judge Bass"), individually and in his official capacity as Judge of the State Court of Grady County, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, bearing Civil Action File Number I: 13-cv-156(WLS) (the "Lawsuit") arising out of an order (the "Order") that Judge Bass entered in a criminal case that required Plaintiff to pay administrative costs ("Administrative Costs") in the amount of $700.00, Plaintiff's payment of those Administrative Costs, and Grady County's receipt and retention of Plaintiffs payment(s).
B. In the complaint that she filed in the Lawsuit, Plaintiff sought the certification of a class consisting of all persons who have paid Administrative Costs (the "Class") and the Court subsequently certified the Class;
C. Plaintiff, Grady County and Judge Bass (the "Parties") have agreed to settle the claims that Plaintiff is asserting in the Lawsuit, as well as the claims that are being asserted in the Lawsuit on behalf of the Class;
D. The terms of the agreement referred to in the preceding paragraph are contained in a document that is hereinafter referred to as the "Settlement Agreement;"
R ·Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Parties are entering into this General Release in order to provide for certain payments in full compromise, settlement, satisfaction and discharge of all claims that Plaintiff asserted in the Lawsuit and that have arisen, or could arise, as a result of the .Order, the imposition of Administrative Costs EXHIBIT
l E

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 31 of 37
upon Plaintiff, Plaintiffs payment of Administrative Costs, and Grady County's retention of Plaintiffs payment(s), upon the terms and conditions set forth herein.
AGREEMENTS 1. General Release and Discharge
In consideration of the payment called for herein, Plaintiff completely releases and forever discharges Grady County; Judge Bass, individually and in his official capacity as Judge of the State Court of Grady County; the Association of County Commissioners of Georgia-Interlocal Risk Management Agency ("ACCG"), and their respective agents, employees, servants, attorneys, elected officials, appointed officials, heirs, executors, administrators, personal representatives, successors and assigns (hereinafter referred to collectively as "Releasees") from any and all claims, demands, obligations, actions, and causes of action of any type, whether based in tort, contract, breach of warranty, strict liability, statute, or any other theory of recovery, including, but not limited to, those based on violations of constitutional rights or immunities, which Plaintiff now has or which may hereafter accrue or otherwise be acquired on account of the Order, the imposition of Administrative Costs upon Plaintiff, Plaintiffs payment of Administrative Costs, Grady County's receipt and retention of Plaintiffs payment(s), or any other alleged act or omission that gave rise to the Lawsuit, including, but not limited to, claims seeking to recover for: (1) any violation of the right to due process afforded Plaintiff by the Constitution of the United States (the "Constitution") or the Constitution of the State of Georgia (the "Georgia Constitution"); (2) any taking of Plaintiffs property in violation of the Constitution or the Georgia Constitution; (3) any conversion of Plaintiffs property;

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 32 of 37
(4) any unjust enrichment enjoyed by Releasees, or any one of them; and (5) money had and received.
2. Payment In consideration of the General Release and Discharge set forth in paragraph 1, above, and other agreements in this General Release, ACCG agrees to pay and Plaintiff agrees to accept the sum of FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000.00) payable to Plaintiff and her attorneys, the Southern Center for Human Rights.
3. Attorney's Fees. Costs and Dismissal with Prejudice The Parties acknowledge and agree that, pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the attorneys for Plaintiff are entitled to file a fee petition in the Lawsuit. The Parties further agree that the Court will issue an order, which the Parties may appeal, with respect to that petition and the only attorneys' fees that Releasees, or any one of them, will be required to pay to the attorneys representing Plaintiff and the Class will be set forth in the order issued by the Court. Thus, other than the filing of the fee petition referred to above, Plaintiff is hereby releasing any claim for attorneys' fees that she has or may have against Releasees, or any one of them. Furthermore, Plaintiff will cause her attorneys to do whatever is necessary to ensure that the Lawsuit is dismissed with prejudice in· accordance withthe terms of the·Settlement Agreement.

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 33 of 37
4. No Reliance on Representations by Released Parties Plaintiff assumes the risk of any and all claims for damages which exist as of this date, or that may exist in the future, but of which she does not know or suspect to exist, whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence, or otherwise, and which, if known, would materially effect the decision to enter into this General Release. Plaintiff is entering into this General Release voluntarily and with advice of counsel of her own choosing, and not in reliance on representations made by Releasees.
5. No Admission of Liability or Fault This General Release incorporates a compromise and settlement of disputed claims, and the payment made hereunder is not to be construed as an admission of liability on the part of Releasees, who expressly deny any liability. This payment and the compromise and settlement are made and entered into to end the cost, burden and uncertainty of further litigation and to allow Releasees to buy their peace.
6. Entire Agreement and Successors in Interest The Settlement Agreement and this General Release contain the entire understanding between the Parties with regard to the matters set forth herein and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the executors, administrators, personal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns of each. No other promises or agreements have been made to procure the Settlement Agreement and this General Release.

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 34 of 37
7. Outstanding Expenses In consideration of the payment made hereunder, Plaintiff represents that all medical expenses, including doctor, hospital, drug, psychologist, psychiatrist, counselor, and all other medical bills alleged to have been incurred as a result of the Order, the imposition of Administrative Costs upon Plaintiff, Plaintiff's payment of Administrative Costs, Grady County's receipt and retention of Plaintiff's payment(s), or any other act or omission giving rise to the Lawsuit, have been paid or will be paid by her out of the Settlement Proceeds, or otherwise. Plaintiff further represents that there are no medical expenses, liens, or claims for which Releasees, or any one of them, may be held liable under Medicare, Medicaid, CHAMPUS, CHAMPVA, TRICARE, ERISA or under any other law or statute of any state or the United States of America, or as a result ofany such claim by any agent or authority thereof, or by any insurer or other entity that provided benefits to or on behalf of Plaintif£ Plaintiff further warrants and represents that there are no liens, claims or expenses of any other kind whatsoever against the Settlement Proceeds. Plaintiff further agrees to indemnify Releasees, and each one of them, against any liens, claims or expenses referred to herein pursuant to Paragraph 8, below.
8. Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement The compromise and settlement set forth in this General Release shall include all claims ·arising out of any injury or damage to Plaintiff; Accordingly, and in further consideration for the payments made, Plaintiff agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Releasees of and from any loss, expense, claim, demand, action, cause of action, suit or judgment of any kind and description (including Releasees' attorneys' fees, costs and expenses, not only

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 35 of 37
in connection with defending against any such loss, expense, claim, demand, action, cause of action, suit or judgment, but also for the. enforcement of any indemnity and hold harmless provision of this Agreement) which may have been or which may be presented hereafter against Releasees, or any one of them, by Plaintiff or by any other person or entity because of or in any manner arising from or by reason of, or which in the future might arise from or by reason of, the Order, the imposition of Administrative Costs upon Plaintiff, the payment of Administrative Costs by Plaintiff, Grady County's receipt and retention of Plaintiffs payment(s), or any injuries or damages that Plaintiff sustained, or claims to have sustained, as a result of such.
9. Prior Notice to Claimants of Lack ofinsurer's Consent Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 33-7-12, Plaintiff is hereby notified of the lack of consent of Releasees (other than ACCG) to this compromise and settlement and of the fact that Releasees (other than ACCG) are not precluded from the further assertion of claims against Plaintiff.
10. Marital Status Plaintiff represents and warrants that she was not married on the date on which the Order was entered and no person has any claim for loss of consortium as a result of injuries or ··damages that Plaintiffmay have sustained in connection with the Order, the imposition of Administrative Costs upon Plaintiff, Plaintiff's payment of Administrative Costs, or Grady County's receipt and retention of Plaintiffs payment(s) and, pursuant to paragraph

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 36 of 37
8, above, Plaintiff agrees to indemnify Releasees from any action which may arise in this regard.
11. No Assignment Plaintiff warrants and represents that she is the sole and rightful owner of all rights, title and interest in and to every claim that she asserted in or that she could have been asserted in the Complaint filed in the Lawsuit. Plaintiff further represents and warrants that, prior to the execution of this General Release, she did not assigned or transferred, whether by act or otherwise, any such claim to any other person or entity.
12. Representation Plaintiff acknowledges that she is represented by legal counsel in these matters. Plaintiff further represents and warrants that she has had every opportunity to consult with her attorney; that her attorney has explained the meaning and intent of the wording of this General Release, and that she understands those matters. Plaintiff recognizes that her claims are disputed by Releasees. Under all the attendant facts and circumstances, Plaintiff has carefully evaluated whether she should settle the claims described herein and she is certain that she is acting in her own best interest in entering into this General Release. Plaintiff further acknowledges that she can read and write and is laboring under no disability and has· been subject to no undue influence in entering into this General Release and executing this instrument.

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 44-2 Filed 01/12/15 Page 37 of 37
Executed this _ _ _ day of January, 2015.
ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES
Sworn to and subscribed before me this __ day of January, 2015. Notary Public My Commission Expires: Reviewed and approved by: Sarah E. Geraghty Attorney for Plaintiff

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES,

:

:

Plaintiff,

:

:

v.

:

:

GRADY COUNTY, GEORGIA, and :

JUDGE J. WILLIAM BASS SR.,

:

:

Defendants.

:

:

CASE NO.: 1:13-CV-156 (WLS)

ORDER

In the preliminary order of settlement in the above-captioned class action, the Court approved the Parties’ agreement to litigate the issue of attorneys’ fees separately and independently from the other terms of the class settlement agreement. Because the Defendants have responded to the Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses, and the Plaintiff has replied thereto (Docs. 50, 54, 55), the Court finds that the Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses (Doc. 50) is ripe for review. See M.D. Ga. L.R. 7.3.1.
To determine the appropriate amount of an award of attorney’s fees, the Court multiplies the number of hours reasonably expended on a case by the reasonable or customary hourly rate. This “lodestar” amount is then adjusted upward or downward in light of the factors identified in Johnson v. Ga. Highway Express, Inc., 488 F.2d 714, 717-19 (5th Cir. 1974).1 Ordinarily, most of the Johnson factors2 will be reflected in the lodestar itself—

1 The Eleventh Circuit has adopted as binding precedent all decisions issued by the former Fifth Circuit prior to October 1, 1981. Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F. 2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc). 2 The Johnson factors are as follows:
1. The time and labor expended; 2. The novelty and difficulty of the questions raised; 3. The skill required to properly perform the legal services rendered; 4. The customary fee for like work; 5. The attorney’s opportunity costs in pressing the instant litigation; 6. The time limitations imposed by the client or circumstances; 7. The amount in controversy and the results obtained; 8. The experience, reputation, and ability of the attorney;
1

for example, time and rate—rather than in an adjustment of the lodestar. See Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886 (1984). “A strong presumption that the lodestar figure . . . represents a ‘reasonable fee’ is wholly consistent with the rationale behind the usual fee-shifting statute.” Blanchard v. Bergeron, 489 U.S. 87, 95 (1989) (quoting Penn. v. Del. Valley Citizens’ Counsel for Clean Air, 478 U.S. 546, 565 (1986)).
I. Reasonable hourly rate “A reasonable hourly rate is the prevailing market rate in the relevant legal
community for similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skills, experience, and reputation.” Norman v. Hous. Auth. of City of Montgomery, 836 F.2d 1292, 1299 (11th Cir. 1988) (citing Blum, 465 U.S. at 895-96 n.11). The Parties disagree as to whether Atlanta or Albany (or the Middle District of Georgia) is the “relevant legal community” for purposes of determining the reasonable hourly rate. The relevant legal market is generally where the case is filed, see Cullens v. Ga. Dep’t of Transp., 29 F.3d 1489, 1494 (11th Cir. 1994), but if no such market exists where the case is litigated, then the relevant legal market is where competent counsel can be obtained. Brooks v. Ga. State Bd. of Elections, 997 F.2d 857, 869 (11th Cir. 1993) (holding that district court did not err in finding Atlanta to be the relevant legal market for a civil rights class action suit filed in Brunswick). However, to receive their non-local rates, the burden is on the non-local plaintiff to show “a lack of attorneys practicing in that place who are willing and able to handle [their] claims.” ACLU of Ga. v. Barnes, 168 F.3d 423, 437 (11th Cir. 1999).
Plaintiff contends that Atlanta should be the relevant legal market because no attorneys local to Albany or the Middle District of Georgia challenged the unlawful practices of the Defendants for seven or more years. (Doc. 50-1 at 16.) Furthermore, they submit the declaration of Albany-attorney Kenneth B. Hodges III to suggest the great unlikelihood of a local attorney taking on a case with such high risks and low rewards. (See Doc. 50-6.) Defendants, however, argue that Atlanta is not the relevant legal market because Section 1983 cases are often litigated throughout the Middle District of Georgia by competent,
9. The undesirability of the case within the legal community in which the suit arose.
2

experienced attorneys. (Doc. 54 at 6.) Their opposition is supported by the declaration of Defendants’ own counsel, James L. Elliot. (Doc. 54-1 at ¶ 5.)
The Court finds Albany to be the most appropriate legal market because the case was originally filed in this District. Defendants’ counsel is correct in their assertion that Section 1983 cases are commonly litigated throughout the Middle District by skilled and able attorneys. While it may be true the Defendants wrongfully collected “administrative fees” for a period of seven years unchallenged, the burden remained on the Plaintiff to show that there were no local attorneys willing to take on this case. Plaintiff attempts to shift their burden to Defendants’ counsel by pointing out Defendants’ failure to identify local counsel willing to litigate the claims against them. (See Doc. 55 at 7.) However, the burden is on the Plaintiff to show otherwise and not on the Defendants. To the extent Plaintiff has attempted to do so, Plaintiff has only stated that no local attorney brought such an action, not that no local attorney was willing to do so. Because Plaintiff failed to carry their burden, the Court finds that Albany is the relevant legal market for determining Plaintiff’s reasonable hourly rates.
The prevailing party has the burden to justify the rates they are seeking. Davis v. Locke, 936 F.2d 1208, 1215 (11th Cir. 1991). In support of their assertion that $520 is a reasonable hourly rate for Gerald Weber, Plaintiff submitted the declaration of Mr. Weber, his previous attorney fee awards, a detailed list of his prior litigated constitutional law cases, and résumé. (Doc. 50-2.) Sarah Geraghty’s rate of $350 per hour is supported by her own declaration, which highlights her education and experience. (Doc. 50-3.) And Ryan Primerano’s rate of $200 per hour is supported by his own declaration, which likewise pinpoints his education and (albeit limited) experience. (Doc. 50-4.) Each rate was also supported by the declarations of Lawrence J. Bracken II (Doc. 50-5) and Kenneth Hodges (Doc. 50-6).
Defendants show through its own counsel’s declaration that $200 per hour is a reasonable hourly rate because it is the rate he personally charges, which he finds reasonable for a lawyer with his background and experience (i.e. thirty years of practice). (Doc. 54-1 at ¶ 6.) Defendants also offer the personal rate of its co-counsel, Raleigh W. Rollins, Jr., which is $150 per hour (or a range of $150-200), for twenty years of practice. (Id. at ¶ 7.)
3

Additionally, Defendants pointed out the hourly rates granted by or petitioned for in this Court in two cases involving Section 1983 litigation (neither being class action lawsuits). (Doc. 54 at 3.) From these reasons, Defendants concluded a reasonable rate for Gerald Weber is $250 per hour; for Sarah Geraghty, $175 per hour; and for Ryan Primerano, $100 per hour. (Id. at 7.)
The Court finds the rates requested by Plaintiff’s counsel to be unreasonable. Though Weber and Geraghty have extensive civil rights and Section 1983 litigation experience, their requested rates are not the prevailing market rates in Albany or the Middle District. Primerano’s rates are also unreflective of the local market rate of someone with significantly less experience than his co-counsel. The Court is also not convinced by the personal rates of Defendants’ counsel or by the rates requested from this Court in other non-class action cases. Defendants offer little rebuttal to the skill and experience of Plaintiff’s counsel, as well as the complexity of the issues in the instant case. Thus, the Court must additionally rely on its own experience to set a reasonable hourly rate.3 The Court will reduce each requested rate by 25% to account for the local market of § 1983 class action attorneys with comparable skill, reputation, and experience. In doing so, the Court also takes into account the novelty and difficulty of the issues raised, the required skill related to the legal services rendered, the attorneys’ opportunity costs, the amount in controversy and the results obtained, the experience, reputation, and ability of the attorneys, and the relative undesirability of the case within the legal community in which the suit arose. See Johnson, 488 F.2d at 717-19. Without necessarily finding such, the Court acknowledges that fewer local attorneys might be willing to bring an action which includes a sitting member of the local judiciary.
In other words, taking into account the local market and nature of the claims, the Court finds the adjusted rates reasonable. Accordingly, Gerald Weber is entitled to receive reasonable rate of $390 per hour; Sarah Geraghty is entitled to receive a reasonable rate of
3 Although this Court has granted an hourly rate of $450 in an employment discrimination case that went to trial, See Copeland v. Williams, No. 1:12-CV-188 (WLS) (Doc. 44), it is common practice for this Court to award attorney’s fees below $350 per hour. See, e.g., Tanner v. TPUSA, Inc., No 1:12-CV-33 (WLS) (Doc. 158) (attorney with over twenty-five years of experience awarded $350 per hour in this Fair Labor Standards Act case); Bird v. Sumter Cty. Sch. Dist., No. 1:12-CV-76 (WLS), 2014 WL 2196084, at *2 (M.D. Ga. May 27, 2014) (attorney with twenty-six years of experience awarded $250 per hour in this voting rights case).
4

$262.50 per hour; and Ryan Primerano is entitled to receive a reasonable rate of $150 per hour.
II. Reasonable amount of time expended The Eleventh Circuit requires that “both the proof of the hours spent in litigation
and any corresponding objections posed be voiced with a similar exactitude.” Mock v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., 456 F. App’x 799, 802 (11th Cir. 2012) (quoting Duckworth v. Whisenant, 97 F.3d 1393, 1397 (11th Cir. 1996)). “The fee applicant bears the burden of establishing entitlement and documenting the appropriate hours and hourly rates.” Norman, 836 F.2d at 1303. Counsel “should have maintained records to show the time spent on the different claims, and the general subject matter of the time expenditures ought to be set out with sufficient particularity so that the district court can assess the time claimed for each activity.” Id.
Plaintiff’s counsel submitted a detailed accounting of their respective tasks and the time expended on each task. All attorneys have voluntarily reduced their actual time by 10%, Geraghty and Primerano have further reduced their travel time by 50%, and Primerano did not bill for hours spent on tasks that were excessive or redundant. The Court recognizes the type of particularity shown by Plaintiff’s counsel in their records allows the Court to identify and assess each task and the time spent on each activity with relevant ease. It should also be noted that the Court finds there is no indication of block billing,4 which is highly disfavored. See, e.g., Bird v. Sumter Cty. Sch. Dist., No. 1:12-CV-76 (WLS), 2014 WL 2196084 (M.D. Ga. May 27, 2014).
Defendants challenge the requested 82.2 hours expended by Plaintiff’s counsel for a number of reasons. First, Defendants argue that Primerano is not entitled to 25 hours spent on traveling, reviewing, and copying court files, because it was clerical work best suited for a clerk or legal assistant. However, those hours had already been reduced from 50.25 hours, and Primerano’s work reviewed as a whole could hardly be classified as clerical. His review of over 1,000 court documents provided the foundation of the complaint, which requires the skill and training of an attorney. Furthermore, Plaintiff is represented by a non-profit
4 “Block billing is a practice of logging hours whereby activities are grouped together without regard to their similarity, thus rendering a review for reasonableness as to distinct activities impossible or impracticable.” Bird, 2014 WL 2196084, at *2.
5

organization and their support staff may be more limited than what Defendants’ counsel perceives. Thus, the Court finds that the 25 hours expended on travel, review, and copying of thousands of court documents is reasonable.
Second, Defendants argue that Primerano is not entitled to 4.5 of 9 hours of time expended on researching the Heck bar, because it is a common civil rights case that should have been known to Plaintiff’s counsel. In their reply, Plaintiff reduced the requested 9 hours to 4.5 hours. This reduction resolves the Defendants’ objection, and the Court will accept this reduction as a reasonable expenditure of time.
Third, Defendants contend Primerano is not entitled to be compensated for 30 of approximately 40 hours spent on research and responding to Defendants’ motions to dismiss because that research was previously conducted prior to the filing of the complaint. Without more, Defendants plainly state that the amount of time spent on the research and responses was unreasonable. Generalized statements of reasonable or unreasonable expenditures of time are unhelpful because it does little to guide the Court in understanding the reason for granting or rejecting a request for time expended. See Norman, 836 F.2d at 1301. Plaintiff, however, detailed the numerous issues that required close research and briefing to overcome Defendants’ attempt to end this case very early on in the litigation. Primerano also exercised reasonable billing judgment on these tasks by reducing his hours from over of 70 hours to about 40 hours. Lastly, it should be noted that Primerano’s development of the research and briefing was over the course of two and a half months. Therefore, the Court will reject Defendants’ general objection.
Fourth, Defendants believe it was unreasonable for Geraghty to spend 4 out of 8 hours and Weber to spend 7.5 out of 15 hours on drafting and revising the complaint. Similar to the objection above, Defendants only state that the amount of time spent on the complaint was unreasonable. Further, the Court notes the novelty and relative complexity of the complaint. Without more, the Court cannot accept Defendants’ blanket objection. It will accept Plaintiff’s request for 23 hours because it finds that, over a course of two months, the drafting, revision, and investigative work on this class action suit on behalf of hundreds of class members was a reasonable expenditure of time.
6

Fifth, Defendants object to Geraghty and Weber receiving compensation for 3 out of 6 hours (6 hours total) for attending mediation because the presence of all three of Plaintiff’s attorneys was unnecessary or unreasonable. Plaintiff replied that each attorney contributed meaningfully to the mediation. It is not unusual for a named plaintiff in a class action lawsuit to be represented by multiple attorneys. So long as each attorney is not being compensated for unnecessary or redundant work, the unique efforts of each attorney may be compensated. See Johnson v. Uni. Coll., 706 F.2d 1205, 1208 (11th Cir. 1993); Norman, 836 F.2d at 1302 (accord). However, aside from attending the mediation, Plaintiff’s counsel does not indicate their distinctive contributions in their time records or their reply brief. The burden always remains on the fee applicant to establish their entitlement to compensation for reasonable hours. Norman, 836 F.2d at 1303. Thus, because Plaintiff’s counsel did not meet this burden, the Court will reduce the requested mediation hours for Weber, Geraghty, and Primerano from 6 hours to 3 hours.
Sixth, Defendants object to Weber’s request for 4.10 hours and Geraghty’s request of 1.10 hours for time spent on a separate insurance case because Jones was not the “prevailing party” in that matter. Defendants’ insurer named Plaintiff as a party defendant in a matter regarding the Defendants’ insurance coverage. Plaintiff argues “because the insurance litigation could have reduced or destroyed any potential recovery for Jones and class members,” defending Jones in this separate litigation was “crucial to the vindication of rights at issue” in this case. (Doc. 55 at 4.) Though Jones may not have been successful in the insurance matter, her recovery in this litigation could have been adversely affected by the result of the separate, but related, insurance case. Plaintiff’s counsel was not required to defend Jones in the insurance coverage litigation, but their representation was “useful and of a type ordinarily necessary to secure the final result obtained from the litigation.” See Lambert v. Fulton Cty., Ga., 151 F. Supp. 2d 1364, 1372 (N.D. Ga. 2000) (quoting Penn., 478 U.S. at 561) (internal quotation marks omitted). Therefore, Weber and Geraghty are entitled to recover for their time spent on the insurance coverage litigation.
III. Reasonable expenses Finally, and related to the Defendants’ previous argument, Defendants object to
$459.09 of Plaintiff’s requested “Deposition Fee” expenses because no depositions were
7

taken in this case. Plaintiff replied that the deposition, which was noticed by Defendants, was taken during the insurance coverage case against Jones. For the same reasons stated above, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to recover expenses from the insurance litigation.
CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses (Doc. 50) is GRANTED-IN-PART. Defendant shall remit to Plaintiff within thirty (30) days of the entry of this order $96,362.63 in attorneys’ fees and $4,392.34 in costs, for a total of $100,754.97. SO ORDERED, this 9th day of September 2015.
/s/ W. Louis Sands W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8

 
 Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 1 of 16

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION Filed at g': 1,-S f/ M

1°];1 , 20 ;s

------JI'-!.-'--

)

Be~..-

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES,

)

)

DEPUTY CLERK, U.S. DISTRICTCOURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

Plaintiff,

)

)

CIVIL ACTION

v.

)

)

NO. 1:13-CV-156 (WLS)

GRADY COUNTY, Georgia,

)

)

JUDGE J. WILLIAM BASS, SR.,

)

Grady County State Court Judge,

)

in his official and individual

)

capacities,

)

)

_____D_e_fe_n_da_n_ts_. _______________))

ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT This matter having come to be heard on September 15, 2015, to determine the fairness of
the parties' Settlement Agreement, the validity of any objections raised with respect to the Settlement Agreement, and whether the Settlement Agreement should be given final approval, the Court enters the following order. I. BACKGROUND
A. Nature of the Lawsuit Plaintiff Roberta Imogene Jones filed this lawsuit against Defendants Grady County, Georgia, and J. William Bass, Sr., predicated on the following allegations. The State Court of Grady County is located in Cairo, Georgia, and has jurisdiction over the trial of criminal cases below the grade offelony. From 2002 until2015, J. William Bass, Sr.

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 2 of 16
served as judge of the State Court of Grady County, and he is hereinafter referred to as "Judge Bass."
In the complaint filed in the above-styled action, plaintiff Roberta Imogene Jones ("Jones") alleged that Judge Bass required criminal defendants who appeared before him to pay "Administrative Costs" as a part of their sentences. Judge Bass contends that he did not impose Administrative Costs on any criminal defendant who appeared before him. Instead, Judge Bass contends that, after he imposed a fine on a criminal defendant who appeared before him, he would complete a sentencing sheet that deemed a portion of the fine as Administrative Costs. Any criminal defendant who paid Administrative Costs paid that money to his or her probation officer or to the Clerk of the State Court of Grady County. Regardless of who initially received the money associated with the payment of Administrative Costs, that money was eventually transferred to Grady County and deposited into the county treasury.
On July 9, 2012, Jones attended a hearing (the "Hearing") conducted by Judge Bass and entered a plea of guilty to the charge of Driving Under the Influence. The transcript of the Hearing shows that Judge Bass sentenced Jones to one year of probation and imposed a fine of $1 ,000.00. The sentencing sheet that Judge Bass completed after the Hearing shows that, of the $1,000.00 that Jones was ordered to pay, $700.00 was deemed to be Administrative Costs. Jones paid the $1,000.00 that she was ordered to pay by Judge Bass.
On September 24, 2013, Jones filed suit against Judge Bass and Grady County (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Defendants"). In her complaint, Jones asserted claims for alleged violations of the rights afforded to her by the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Georgia. In her complaint, Jones also sought the
2

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 3 of 16
certification of a class consisting of all persons who have paid Administrative Costs. The class that Jones initially proposed contains more than 400 individuals.
B. Class Settlement On October 9, 2014, the Parties attended a mediation. At the conclusion of the mediation, the Parties agreed to settle the claims being asserted in this case and the terms of that agreement are memorialized in a Settlement Agreement. (Doc. 44-2.) The Parties then asked the Court to certifY for settlement purposes a class ("the Class") of all individuals who: had a criminal case pending in the State Court of Grady County; were required to pay Administrative Costs pursuant to an order by Judge Bass dated on or after September 24, 2011; and paid some or all of the Administrative Costs entered by Judge Bass. On March 18, 2015, the Court granted preliminary approval (Doc. 47 at 10-16) of the proposed class action settlement set forth in the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 44-2) between Plaintiff Roberta Imogene Jones, on behalf of herself and all members of the class, and Defendants Grady County, Georgia, and Judge J. William Bass, Sr. On September 15, 2015, the Court held a duly noticed final hearing on the fairness of the proposed settlement of this action. Counsel for the Class Members, Defendant Grady County, and Defendant Bass were present, and objectors to the Settlement Agreement had the opportunity to appear. II. FINDINGS 1. For purposes of this Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement, the Court adopts and incorporates herein by reference the parties' Settlement Agreement and exhibits (Doc. 44-2); and the Court's Order granting preliminary approval of the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 47).
3

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 4 of 16
2. On March 18, 2015, the Court entered findings and an Order on the Joint Motion for Certification of a Class for Settlement Purposes, Appointment of Class Counsel, Preliminary Approval of a Proposed Settlement, Direction Regarding Notice to the Class, and the Scheduling of a Final Fairness Hearing. (Doc. 47.) The Court provisionally certified the Class for settlement purposes (Doc. 47 at 3-8), appointed Sarah Geraghty and Gerry Weber as Class Counsel (Doc. 47 at 8-1 0), approved a procedure for giving notice to the Class (Doc. 47 at 1618), and set a final fairness hearing for September 15, 2015 (Doc. 47 at 19). The Court made preliminary findings that the Settlement Agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate, and that it satisfied Rule 23 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 47 at 8-16.)
3. The Class preliminarily certified by the Court consisted of each individual who met the following criteria: (a) the individual had a criminal case pending in the State Court of Grady County; (b) on or after September 24, 2011, Judge Bass entered an order in the individual's criminal case that required the individual to pay Administrative Costs; and (c) the individual paid some or all ofthe Administrative Costs ordered by Judge Bass. (Doc. 47 at 8.)
4. The Court directed that members of the Class would be notified of the Settlement Agreement in the following manner: (a) within 30 days of the entry of the preliminary order, Grady County would publish the Advertisement approved by the Court (Doc. 44-2 at 9-14) in the Cairo Messenger once a week for two weeks; (b) on or before the date on which the Advertisement was first published in the newspaper, Grady County would mail a Notice approved by the Court (Doc. 46-1) to the individuals identified on the list attached as Exhibit C to the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 44-2 at 17-27), who were believed to be the members ofthe Class. The Court further directed that (1) the Notice would be mailed to the most recent address included in the file maintained by the Clerk of the State Court of Grady County with respect to
4

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 5 of 16
each Class member's criminal case; (2) if the Notice that was originally mailed was returned to Grady County with a forwarding address, Grady County would mail a second Notice to the forwarding address; and (3) Grady County would inform the attorneys representing the Class of each Notice that was returned as undeliverable so that the attorneys for the Class would have an opportunity to identify a current address for each such Class member. If the attorneys for the Class identified a more current address, they were to provide that address to Grady County and Grady County was to mail another Notice to that address within five days of receipt of that address. (Doc. 47 at 16-17.)
5. The Advertisement was published in the Cairo Messenger newspaper on April 8, 2015, see Advertisement I, Cairo Messenger, April 8, 2015, at B9, and on April 15, 2015, see Advertisement II, Cairo Messenger, April 15, 2015, at C8.
6. The deadline for filing Class Member requests for payment under the Settlement Agreement, requests for exclusion from the Settlement Agreement, objections to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, or intervention in the lawsuit was 90 days from the date of the first publication of the Advertisement. (Doc. 47 at 18.) Because the first publication occurred on April 8, 2015, the deadline for requests for payment, requests for exclusion, objections, or intervention passed on Tuesday, July 7, 2015.
7. The Notice was sent to the individual Class Members' last known addresses in accordance with the Court's directive. Out of 462 total Class Members, 109 Class Members requested payment under the Settlement Agreement, which equates to a response rate of approximately 23 percent. Class Counsel advised the Court that there was no practicable alternative to direct mailing ofthe Notice and publication of the Advertisement.
5

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 6 of 16
8. The Court previously found that these notice procedures were reasonably calculated to appnse Class Members of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their claims, requests for exclusion, or objections. (Doc. 47 at 18.) Upon consideration of the circumstances of this case, the Court hereby reaffirms that finding and finds the notice given in this case is reasonable and adequate.
9. The Court finds that notice was directed to all Class Members as set out above. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(3)(B). No parties have intervened and the Court is not aware of any objections to or requests for exclusion from the Settlement Agreement.
10. For the reasons set out in the Court's preliminary order (Doc. 47), the Court finds that the Class satisfies the numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a). The Court also finds that issues of law and fact common to the members of the Class predominate, and, in these circumstances, a class action is a superior method for resolving the disputed claims, satisfYing Rule 23(b)(3).
11. For the reasons set out in the Court's preliminary order (Doc. 47), the Court finds that Sarah Geraghty, Gerry Weber, and the Southern Center for Human Rights are adequate class counsel under Rule 23(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
12. Based on the submissions of the parties and the representations presented at the fairness hearing, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: III. FINAL APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT
The claims of a certified class may be settled only with the court's approval. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e). In considering whether a settlement of a class action should be approved, the Court must determine whether the proposed settlement is fair, reasonable, adequate and free of
6

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 7 of 16
collusion. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(2); Day v. Persels & Assoc., LLC, 729 F.3d 1309, 1326 (II th Cir. 2013); Columbus Drywall & Insulation, Inc., 258 F.R.D. 545, 559 (N.D. Ga. 2007).
The Eleventh Circuit has identified six factors that a court should consider when determining whether a class action settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable. Day, 729 F.3d at 1326; In re Smith, 926 F.2d 1027, 1029 (11th Cir. 1991). The factors are: (1) the likelihood of success at trial; (2) the range of possible recoveries; (3) the point on or below the range of possible recoveries at which a settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable; (4) the complexity, expense and duration of litigation; (5) the substance and degree of opposition to the settlement; and (6) the state of the proceedings at which the settlement was achieved. /d. In addition, this Court has suggested consideration of additional factors, including: (7) the terms of the settlement; (8) the procedures afforded to notify class members of the proposed settlement and to allow them to present their views; and (9) the judgment of experienced counsel. Meyer v. Citizens & S. Nat 'l Bank, 677 F. Supp. 1196, 1201 (M.D. Ga. 1998).
There is a strong judicial policy favoring settlement. Meyer, 677 F. Supp. at 1200. After considering all of these factors, as set forth below, the Court concludes that the settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable, was reached without collusion, and should be approved.
A. Fairness, Adequacy and Reasonableness 1. The likelihood of success at trial
Plaintiff claims that Judge Bass violated her rights under the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution and laws of the State of Georgia by imposing Administrative Costs upon her after she pleaded guilty to a crime, and she further contends that Grady County violated her rights by receiving and retaining the funds that were paid in connection with the imposition of those costs. Because all of the members of the class paid Administrative Costs after pleading guilty to a
7

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 8 of 16
crime, and because there is no indication that those convictions have been overturned, Judge Bass and Grady County argued that the claims asserted against them by Plaintiff (and the Class) are barred by the favorable termination requirement established in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). In addition, Judge Bass argued that the claims asserted against him are barred by the doctrine of judicial immunity and Grady County has argued that it cannot be held liable pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for the actions of Judge Bass. For those reasons, it is not certain that Plaintiff (or the Class) would be successful at trial.
2. The range of possible recovery at which settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable
"In determining whether a settlement is fair and reasonable, the court must also examine the range of possible damages that plaintiffs could recover at trial and combine this with an analysis of plaintiffs' likely success at trial to determine if the settlements fall within the range of fair recoveries." Columbus Drywall, 258 F.R.D. at 559. As such, it is necessary to examine the benefit that each member of the Class will receive pursuant to the Settlement Agreement. Each member of the Class has been adjudicated guilty of a misdemeanor in the State Court of Grady County, and each member of the Class has paid Administrative Costs as a result. Judge Bass assessed Administrative Costs ranging from $25.00 to $2,000.00. 1 According to the calculations performed by Plaintiff's attorneys, the average amount of Administrative Costs assessed to class members was $613.00. Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, each member of the Class who submitted a claim form will receive a payment of $100.00 as compensatory damages. In addition, the Administrative Costs paid by each one of those class members will be refunded, up to $700.00. For example, pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, an individual
1 Persons who were assessed Administrative Costs but did not pay any Administrative Costs are not members of the Class.
8

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 9 of 16
who paid $500.00 in Administrative Costs will received a payment of $600.00 (a payment of $100.00 in compensatory damages plus a refund of $500.00). On the other hand, a person who paid $1,500.00 in Administrative Costs will receive a payment of$800.00 (a payment of$100.00 in compensatory damages plus a refund of $700.00).2 Given the uncertainties discussed in the preceding section, the proposed settlement is within the range of possible recovery. !d.
3. The point on or below the range of possible recovery at which a settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable
To determine whether a proposed settlement falls within the range of reasonableness, a Court must consider the value to the Class. !d. In order to do so, it is necessary to consider the terms of the proposed settlement agreement. In this case, the Settlement Agreement will result in a number of members of the Class receiving a payment in excess of the amount of money that they paid in Administrative Costs while a small number of class members may receive less money than they paid in Administrative Costs. For instance, using the previous examples, a Class member who paid $500.00 in Administrative Costs will receive $600.00, whereas a person who paid $1,500.00 in Administrative Costs will receive $800.00. Thus, the proposed recovery ranges from more than 100 percent of the Administrative Costs paid by some class members to approximately 53 percent of the amount paid by other class members. Under the Settlement Agreement, the vast majority of Class members will get back all the money they paid in Administrative Costs, plus $100. Only 27 Class members out of 400 will not receive the full amount they paid in Administrative Costs, but even they are eligible to receive $800. The Parties submit that the range of recovery afforded by the Settlement Agreement compares favorably to other settlements that have received court approval. For instance, the Court in Columbus
2 According to the analysis conducted by Jones's attorneys, only 27 Class members were assessed more than $800.00 in Administrative Costs. Of those, 12 Class members were assessed $850.00; 2 Class members were assessed $!,000.00; I Class member was assessed $1,067; 2 Class members were assessed $1,250.00; 9 Class members were assessed $1,500.00; and 1 Class member was assessed $2,000.00 in Administrative Costs.
9

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 10 of 16
Drywall noted that, in antitrust actions, "district courts have approved settlements equaling a small fraction of the potential recovery ...." !d.; see In re Domestic Air Transp. Antitrust Litig., 148 F.R.D. 297, 325 (N.D. Ga. 1993) (approving a comprehensive settlement equal to 12.7 to 15.3 percent of the potential recovery); and In re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust Litig., 2006 WL 3247396, *6 (S.D. N.Y. 2006) (approving settlement of "roughly 10-15%" of the allegedly illegal fees collected from the class.) Based on the foregoing, the amount of the payments called for by the Settlement Agreement is fair, adequate and reasonable.
4. The complexity, expense and duration of litigation Because they believe that they have legal defenses to Plaintiff's claims, Judge Bass and Grady County filed motions to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint. On August 13, 2014, the Court entered an order denying those motions to dismiss. By that point, the Parties were familiar with the facts and legal issues necessary to evaluate the claims, defenses and potential recoveries. For instance, Plaintiff's attorneys were able to provide information regarding the identity of the members of the Class and the amount of money that each Class member paid in Administrative Costs. Because the facts and issues were apparent, the Parties attended mediation on October 9, 2014, and the negotiations that took place at the mediation resulted in the Agreement. By entering into this negotiated resolution of the case, the parties avoid the time and expense of further, protracted litigation, including discovery, a potential interlocutory appeal, trial, and final appeal. The Settlement Agreement avoids the potential costs of continued litigation for the Class and the Defendants.
5. Substance and degree of opposition to the settlement The Court is not aware of any objections to the terms of the Settlement Agreement. "It is established that the absence of a large number of objections to a proposed class action settlement
10

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 11 of 16
raises a strong presumption that the terms of a proposed class settlement action are favorable to the class members." Nat'l Rural Telecom. Coop. v. DIRECTV, Inc., 221 F.R.D. 523, 529 (C.D. Cal. 2004) (collecting cases). Therefore, this factor weighs in favor of approving the settlement reached in this case.
6. The stage of proceedings at which the settlement was achieved "The stage of the proceedings at which a settlement is achieved is evaluated to ensure that Plaintiffs had access to sufficient information to adequately evaluate the merits of the case and weigh the benefits of settlement against further litigation." Lipuma v. American Express Co., 406 F. Supp.2d 1298, 1324 (S.D. Fla. 2005). Here, although no discovery took place, the Plaintiff had access to court records and other public records that allowed Plaintiff to evaluate the merits of her case. The Parties agree on the basic facts and they are set forth in the Settlement Agreement. In addition, the Parties are familiar with the relevant legal issues as those issues were raised in the Defendants' motions to dismiss. Settlement was achieved in good faith following a formal mediation and after this Court ruled on Defendants' motions to dismiss.
7. Terms of the settlement The Court has reviewed the Settlement Agreement and described its pertinent terms in Section III(A)(2) and (3) above. Under the Settlement Agreement, all Class members will be entitled to monetary compensation. Most class members will be entitled to receive back all of the money they paid in Administrative Costs, plus $100. Only about 14 percent of Class members will receive less than what they may have paid in Administrative Costs, but even they will be entitled to receive up to $800. The Court finds that these settlement terms are fair and reasonable.
11

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 12 of 16
8. Procedures to notify class members of the proposed settlement Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure specifies that, "[t]he Court must direct notice in a reasonable manner to all class members who would be bound by a proposed settlement, voluntary dismissal, or compromise." The notice should be "reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections." Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797, 811-812 (1985). Further, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(h)(l), Class counsel must also notify class members in a reasonable manner of any motion for attorney fees and costs. For the reasons set forth in the Court's preliminary order (Doc. 47 at 16-18), the procedures approved for providing notice to the Class complied with Rule 23 3 and the requirements of due process, as the procedures were reasonably calculated to apprise Class Members of the pendency of the action, inform them of their rights under the Settlement Agreement, and afford them an opportunity to present their views. The Court finds that Counsel for the parties complied with the Court's directives concerning notice and that no practicable alternative to those procedures exists given the distribution of Class Members around the State of Georgia and elsewhere. Although the response rate is approximately 23 percent, a low response rate does not necessarily indicate inadequate notice or unfair settlement terms. See Hall v. Bank ofAmerica, NA., No. 1:12-CV-22700-FAM, 2014 WL 7184039, at *8 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 17, 2014) ("Provided that notice is adequate, the relief made available to class members is fair, and the settlement is
3 The parties revised the Notice to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(h)(l) (requiring Class counsel to notify class members of their request for attorneys fees and costs). The Court notes that fees may be assessed against government officials after a case has been settled by the entry of a consent decree. Evans v. Jeff D., 475 U.S. 717, 720 (1986) (citing Maher v. Gagne, 448 U.S. 122 (1980)). See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(h)(l) (stating that a court "may award reasonable attorney's fees and nontaxable costs that are authorized by law or by the parties' agreement.").
12

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 13 of 16
otherwise fair and reasonable, the number of claims submitted at any particular time is not a relevant factor in evaluating the fairness, reasonableness, or adequacy of the settlement."); see, e.g., Date v. Sony Electronics, Inc., No. 07-CV-15474, 2013 WL 3945981, at *9 (E.D. Mich. July 31, 2013) (noting "many factors affect response rates" and that a response ratio of 6,594 out of 45,000 notices sent, or about 13 percent, "should not be given great significance"); White v. Experian Info. Solutions, Inc., 803 F.Supp.2d 1086, 1100 (C.D. Cal. 2011) (noting an "underwhelming [5%] response rate does not mean that the Settlement, on the whole, is not fair, reasonable and adequate"); Touhey v. United States, No. 08-CV-01418-VAP, 2011 WL 3179036, at *7 (C.D. Cal. July 25, 2011) (granting final approval in settlement where only 38 claims forms were received out of 1,875 notices mailed to the last known addresses of class members, equating to a response rate of about 2 percent); In re Cardizem CD Antitrust Litig., 218 F.R.D. 508, 526 (E.D. Mich. 2003) (granting final approval to class settlement where class constituencies' response rates were 6.9 percent and 9 percent). It is established that "many factors contribute to the claims response rate" and that "the adequacy of notice is measured by whether notice reached Class Members and gave them an opportunity to participate, not by actual participation." In re Serzone Products Liability Litig., 231 F.R.D. 221, 235-36 (S.D.W.Va. 2005).
For these reasons, the Court reaffirms its pnor finding that the notice procedure established by the Court constitutes the best notice practicable under the circumstances. Having found that the parties complied with the Court's directives in that regard, the Court finds that the Class Members were given sufficient notice of the terms of the Settlement Agreement and their rights to submit claims, request exclusion, or object to the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
13

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 14 of 16
9. Judgment of experienced counsel In considering whether to approve the settlement, this Court is entitled to rely upon the judgment of experienced counsel for the parties. Meyer, 677 F. Supp. at 1210. "Indeed the trial judge, absent fraud, collusion, or the like, should be hesitant to substitute its own judgment for that of counsel." Id. (internal quotations and citation omitted). Here, counsel for the Parties are competent and experienced and have recommended that the Court approve the settlement. B. Absence of Collusion There is no evidence in the record before the Court, nor has there been any suggestion by anyone, that there has been any fraud or collusion among the parties or their attorneys in arriving at the terms of the Settlement Agreement. On the contrary, the attorneys for the respective parties have vigorously advanced the interests of their respective clients. The Defendants filed motions to dismiss this case, Plaintiff contested those motions, and the Court permitted certain claims to go forward. Defendants then sought reconsideration ofthe Court's order. A settlement was reached only after an arms-length negotiation before a mediator. Therefore, the Court finds that the settlement was negotiated without any fraud or collusion. Meyer, 677 F. Supp. at 1201. After considering the factors listed above, the Court hereby GRANTS final approval of the settlement outlined in the Settlement Agreement. IV. FINAL ORDER ON SETTLEMENT For the reasons set forth herein, the Court hereby GRANTS final approval to the Settlement Agreement and ORDERS as follows:
1. Within 30 days of entry of this Order, a check for the Total Settlement Amount (as that term was defined in the Settlement Agreement, Doc. 44-2
14

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 15 of 16
at 5) shall be mailed to the attorneys for the Class and the check, which will be made payable to the attorneys for the Class, shall be deposited in their trust account; 2. Within 15 days of their receipt of the check for the Total Settlement Amount, the attorneys for the Class shall mail a check for the Individual Payment Amount to each member of the Class who is entitled to payment; 3. Within 30 days of entry of this Order, Defendants shall remit attorney's fees to attorneys for the Class in accordance with this Court's Order granting attorney's fees (Doc. 56), as amended on September 17, 2015 (Doc. 58); 4. Members of the Class are barred from asserting any further claim or lawsuit against Judge Bass, Grady County, and their respective agents, officers, employees, elected and appointed officials, and personal representatives with respect to the imposition, receipt or retention of Administrative Costs; and 5. This case is hereby dismissed with prejudice.
This~ day of October, 2015.
W. Louis Sands, Sr. Judge United States District Court CONSENT TO BY: s/ Sarah Geraghty Sarah Geraghty Georgia Bar No. 291393 SOUTHERN CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS 15

Case 1:13-cv-00156-WLS Document 59 Filed 10/14/15 Page 16 of 16
83 Poplar Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303 Telephone: (404) 688-1202 Email: sgeraghty@schr.org Attorney for Roberta Imogene Jones s/ James L. Elliott James L. Elliott Georgia Bar No. 244244 ELLIOTT, BLACKBURN & GOODING, PC 3016 North Patterson Street Valdosta, GA 31602 Telephone: (229) 242-3333 Email: jelliott@ebbglaw.com Attorney for J. William Bass, Sr. s/ Raleigh W. Rollins Raleigh W. Rollins Georgia Bar No. 613860 ALEXANDER & VANN, LLP 411 Gordon Avenue Thomasville, GA 31792 Telephone: (229) 226-2565 Email: rrollins@alexandervann.com Attorney for Grady County, Georgia
16

 
 Case 1:13-cv-156 As of: 11/05/2017 04:42 PM EST 1 of 5
U.S. District Court [LIVE AREA] Middle District of Georgia (Albany) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:13−cv−00156−WLS

JONES v. GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA et al Assigned to: U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 09/24/2013 Date Terminated: 10/14/2015 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES

represented by GERALD R WEBER PO BOX 5391 ATLANTA, GA 31107 404−522−0507 Email: wgerryweber@gmail.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

SARAH ELISABETH GERAGHTY 83 POPLAR ST NW ATLANTA, GA 30303−2122 404−688−1202 Email: sgeraghty@schr.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

RYAN PRIMERANO 83 POPLAR ST NW ATLANTA, GA 30303 404−688−1202 Email: rprimerano@schr.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA
Defendant JUDGE J WILLIAM BASS, SR Grady County State Court Judge, in his official and individual capacities

represented by JAMES A GARLAND 411 GORDON AVE THOMASVILLE, GA 31792 229−226−2565 Email: jgarland@alexandervann.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
RALEIGH ROLLINS 411 GORDON AVE THOMASVILLE, GA 31792 229−226−2565 Email: rrollins@alexandervann.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by JAMES L ELLIOTT 3016 N PATTERSON ST VALDOSTA, GA 31602 229−242−3333 Email: jelliott@ebbglaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed # Docket Text

Case 1:13-cv-156 As of: 11/05/2017 04:42 PM EST 2 of 5

09/24/2013
09/25/2013 11/07/2013 11/14/2013 11/14/2013 11/22/2013
12/04/2013 12/06/2013 12/06/2013 12/06/2013 12/09/2013 12/11/2013 12/16/2013 12/30/2013 12/30/2013 01/06/2014 01/09/2014
01/13/2014
01/14/2014

1 COMPLAINT against J WILLIAM BASS, SR, GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA, Filing Fee $ 400, Receipt Number 1689610, filed by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2Exhibit 1 − Letter from Judge Bass to Grady County Commission, # 3 Exhibit 2 − Public Reprimand, # 4 Exhibit 3 − Notice of Formal Proceedings)(bcl) Modified on 9/26/2013 (bcl). (Entered: 09/25/2013)
2 Consent Form (28 USC 636(c)(1)) sent to ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES. (bcl) (Entered: 09/25/2013)
3 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES. as to GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA (WEBER, GERALD) (Entered: 11/07/2013)
4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA filed by GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA(ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 11/14/2013)
5 MEMORANDUM in Support filed by GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA re: 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA (ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 11/14/2013)
6 MOTION for Extension of Time to File as to 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES filed by Sarah Elisabeth Geraghty. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Geraghty, Sarah) (Entered: 11/22/2013)
7 ORDER granting 6 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W. Louis Sands on 12/3/2013. (bcl) (Entered: 12/04/2013)
8 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by J WILLIAM BASS, SR. as to J WILLIAM BASS, SR (Elliott, James) (Entered: 12/06/2013)
9 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint re 1 Complaint, : by J WILLIAM BASS, SR filed by James L. Elliott.(Elliott, James) (Entered: 12/06/2013)
10 MEMORANDUM in Support filed by J WILLIAM BASS, SR re: 9 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint re 1 Complaint, : (Elliott, James) (Entered: 12/06/2013)
11 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to Bass Motion to Dismiss. by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES filed by GERALD R WEBER. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(WEBER, GERALD) (Entered: 12/09/2013)
12 ORDER granting 11 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Motion to Dismiss. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W. Louis Sands on 12/10/2013. (bcl) (Entered: 12/11/2013)
13 RULES 16/26 ORDER: Scheduling Conference set for 2/25/2014 03:30 PM in Albany before U.S. District Judge W. Louis Sands. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W. Louis Sands on 12/16/13. (jbk) (Entered: 12/16/2013)
14 Arbitration Referral Letter sent 12/30/2013 (hrm) (Entered: 12/30/2013)
15 ***Arbitration Opt Out Letter by Defendant (ELLIOTT, JAMES) (Entered: 12/30/2013)
16 ***Arbitration Opt Out Letter by Defendant (ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 01/06/2014)
17 MOTION for Extension of Time to File as to 9 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint re 1 Complaint, :, 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES filed by Sarah Elisabeth Geraghty. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Geraghty, Sarah) (Entered: 01/09/2014)
18 ORDER granting 17 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA, 9 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint re 1 Complaint. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W. Louis Sands on 1/10/2014. (bcl) (Entered: 01/13/2014)
(DOCKETED IN WRONG CASE − PLEASE DISREGARD) Proposed Scheduling/Discovery Order Received and forwarded to Chambers (wks) Modified on 1/14/2014 (wks). (Entered: 01/14/2014)

Case 1:13-cv-156 As of: 11/05/2017 04:42 PM EST 3 of 5

01/29/2014 01/29/2014 02/06/2014 02/11/2014 02/17/2014 02/24/2014 02/25/2014 02/25/2014 02/27/2014 02/28/2014 02/28/2014 02/28/2014 02/28/2014 03/07/2014 03/14/2014 03/17/2014
03/27/2014 04/04/2014 04/09/2014 08/13/2014

19 RESPONSE filed by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES re 9 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint re 1 Complaint, : (Geraghty, Sarah) (Entered: 01/29/2014)
20 RESPONSE filed by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES re 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA (Geraghty, Sarah) (Entered: 01/29/2014)
21 Letter regarding 14 day extension of time to reply to response to Motion to Dismiss re 20 Response to Motion (ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 02/06/2014)
22 Letter regarding Extension of time to file reply brief re 19 Response to Motion (ELLIOTT, JAMES) (Entered: 02/11/2014)
Proposed Scheduling/Discovery Order Received and forwarded to Chambers (bcl) (Entered: 02/18/2014)
23 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by JAMES A GARLAND on behalf of GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA (GARLAND, JAMES) (Entered: 02/24/2014)
24 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by RYAN PRIMERANO on behalf of ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES (PRIMERANO, RYAN) (Entered: 02/25/2014)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS: Discovery Hearing held on 2/25/2014. Discovery and Scheduling Order to be entered. (Court Reporter: Darlene Pino.) (jbk) (Entered: 02/26/2014)
25 SCHEDULING/DISCOVERY ORDER. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS on 2/27/2014. (bcl) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/28/2014: # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (bcl). (Entered: 02/27/2014)
26 REPLY to Response filed by GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA re 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA (ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 02/28/2014)
27 AFFIDAVIT in Support filed by GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA re 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 02/28/2014)
28 AFFIDAVIT in Support filed by GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA re 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA (ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 02/28/2014)
29 REPLY to Response filed by J WILLIAM BASS, SR re 9 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint re 1 Complaint, : (ELLIOTT, JAMES) (Entered: 02/28/2014)
30 MOTION for Leave to File Sur−Reply Brief by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES filed by Sarah Elisabeth Geraghty. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Geraghty, Sarah) (Entered: 03/07/2014)
31 ORDER granting 30 Motion for Leave to File Sur−Reply Brief. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS on 3/12/2014 (bcl) (Entered: 03/14/2014)
32 MOTION Exclude Affidavits From Consideration re 28 Affidavit in Support of Motion, 27 Affidavit in Support of Motion by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES filed by Sarah Elisabeth Geraghty. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Geraghty, Sarah) (Entered: 03/17/2014)
33 SURREPLY filed by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES re 9 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint re 1 Complaint, :, 4 MOTION to Dismiss Party GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA (Geraghty, Sarah) (Entered: 03/27/2014)
34 RESPONSE filed by GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA re 32 MOTION Exclude Affidavits From Consideration re 28 Affidavit in Support of Motion, 27 Affidavit in Support of Motion (ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 04/04/2014)
35 REPLY to Response filed by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES re 32 MOTION Exclude Affidavits From Consideration re 28 Affidavit in Support of Motion, 27 Affidavit in Support of Motion (PRIMERANO, RYAN) (Entered: 04/09/2014)
36 ORDER granting 32 Motion ; granting in part and denying in part 4 Motion to Dismiss Party; denying 9 Motion to Dismiss Complaint. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W

Case 1:13-cv-156 As of: 11/05/2017 04:42 PM EST 4 of 5

08/22/2014 08/26/2014 08/26/2014 08/26/2014 08/28/2014 11/06/2014 11/13/2014 01/12/2015 02/27/2015
03/13/2015 03/18/2015
03/18/2015 04/24/2015 05/01/2015

LOUIS SANDS on 8/13/2014. (bcl) (Entered: 08/13/2014)
37 MOTION to Stay Proceedings by J WILLIAM BASS, SR, GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA filed by RALEIGH ROLLINS. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 08/22/2014)
38 MOTION for Reconsideration re 36 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion to Dismiss Party, Order on Motion to Dismiss Complaint by GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA filed by RALEIGH ROLLINS.(ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 08/26/2014)
39 MEMORANDUM in Support filed by GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA re: 38 MOTION for Reconsideration re 36 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion to Dismiss Party, Order on Motion to Dismiss Complaint (ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 08/26/2014)
40 ORDER granting 37 Motion to Stay. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS on 8/26/2014. (bcl) (Entered: 08/26/2014)
41 RESPONSE filed by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES re 38 MOTION for Reconsideration re 36 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion to Dismiss Party, Order on Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Geraghty, Sarah) (Entered: 08/28/2014)
42 Letter regarding status of case (ELLIOTT, JAMES) (Entered: 11/06/2014)
43 ORDER denying 38 Motion for Reconsideration. The parties are ordered to file the necessary settlement documents with the Court within 60 days of the entry of this order. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS on 11/13/2014. (bcl) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
44 JOINT MOTION to Certify Class, MOTION for Hearing, MOTION for Settlement Approval by ALL PARTIES filed by RALEIGH ROLLINS. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit 1 − Proposed Settlement Agreement , # 3 Exhibit 2 − Proposed Settlement Order)(ROLLINS, RALEIGH) (Entered: 01/12/2015)
45 ORDER re 44 MOTION to Certify Class, MOTION for Hearing, MOTION for
Settlement Approval. The parties are ordered to submit a revised proposed Order that provides analysis of the referenced Rules as applied to the proposed settlement. Also, the parties are ordered to attend personally or telephonically, a preliminary hearing on 3/18/15 at 11:00 a.m. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS on 2/27/15. (wks) (Entered: 02/27/2015)
46 RESPONSE to Court Order re 45 Order, (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Notice of Class Action)(Geraghty, Sarah) (Entered: 03/13/2015)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS: Telephone Conference / Motion Hearing held on 3/18/2015 re 44 MOTION to Certify Class filed by J WILLIAM BASS, SR, GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA. Attys Rollins and Elliott present, Attys Weber and Geraghty appeared via telephone. Discussions re proposed settlement and deadlines were established by the Court. Final Fairness Hearing set for September 15, 2015. Preliminary Order to be entered by the Court. (Court Reporter: Sally Gray.) (jbk) (Entered: 03/18/2015)
47 ORDER granting 44 Motion to Certify Class; granting 44 Motion for Hearing;
granting 44 Motion for Settlement Approval. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS on 3/18/2015 (bcl) Modified on 3/18/2015 (bcl). (Entered: 03/18/2015)
48 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Attorney Fees and Expenses. by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES filed by SARAH ELISABETH GERAGHTY. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(GERAGHTY, SARAH) (Entered: 04/24/2015)
49 ORDER granting 48 Motion for Extension of Time to file Motion for Attorneys Fees
and Expenses. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE W LOUIS SANDS on 4/30/15 (wks) (Entered: 05/01/2015)

Case 1:13-cv-156 As of: 11/05/2017 04:42 PM EST 5 of 5

05/15/2015
06/02/2015 06/03/2015 06/11/2015
06/16/2015
07/01/2015 07/10/2015 07/27/2015 09/09/2015 09/09/2015 09/15/2015
09/17/2015 10/14/2015

50 MOTION for Attorney Fees by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES filed by SARAH ELISABETH GERAGHTY. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Affidavit Weber, Gerry, # 3 Affidavit Geraghty, Sarah, # 4 Affidavit Primerano, Ryan, # 5 Affidavit Bracken, Larry, # 6 Affidavit Hodges, Kenneth)(GERAGHTY, SARAH) (Entered: 05/15/2015)
51 Letter regarding extension of time re 50 MOTION for Attorney Fees (ELLIOTT, JAMES) (Entered: 06/02/2015)
Notice of Clerk's Granting of Extension re: 51 Letter, 50 MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES. (bcl) (Entered: 06/03/2015)
52 MOTION for Extension of Time to File to Motion for Attorneys' Fees as to 50 MOTION for Attorney Fees by J WILLIAM BASS, SR, GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA filed by JAMES L ELLIOTT. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(ELLIOTT, JAMES) (Entered: 06/11/2015)
53 ORDER granting 52 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 52
MOTION for Extension of Time to File to Motion for Attorneys' Fees as to 50 MOTION for Attorney Fees. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE W LOUIS SANDS on 6/15/2015. (bcl) (Entered: 06/16/2015)
NOTICE OF SETTING HEARING: Final Fairness Hearing re Settlement set for 9/15/2015 02:00 PM in Albany before US DISTRICT JUDGE W LOUIS SANDS. (jbk) (Entered: 07/01/2015)
54 RESPONSE filed by J WILLIAM BASS, SR, GRADY COUNTY GEORGIA re 50 MOTION for Attorney Fees (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Affidavit of James L. Elliott)(ELLIOTT, JAMES) (Entered: 07/10/2015)
55 REPLY to Response filed by ROBERTA IMOGENE JONES re 50 MOTION for Attorney Fees (GERAGHTY, SARAH) (Entered: 07/27/2015)
56 ORDER granting in part 50 Motion for Attorney Fees. Ordered by US DISTRICT
JUDGE W LOUIS SANDS on 9/9/2015. (bcl) (Entered: 09/09/2015)
57 JUDGMENT on Attorney Fees. (bcl) (Entered: 09/09/2015)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before US DISTRICT JUDGE W LOUIS SANDS: Final Fairness hearing held on 9/15/2015. The Court heard from counsel as to notice requirements and was satisfied the parties had complied. Counsel to submit proposed order for the Court's review and consideration by 9/30/2015. Final Order to be entered by the Court. Court Reporter: Sally Gray. (jbk) (Entered: 09/15/2015)
58 AMENDED ORDER amending 56 Order on Motion for Attorney Fees. Ordered
by US DISTRICT JUDGE W LOUIS SANDS on 9/17/2015. (bcl) (Entered: 09/17/2015)
59 ORDER Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement. Ordered by US
DISTRICT JUDGE W LOUIS SANDS on 10/13/2015. (bcl) (Entered: 10/14/2015)