Barnett v. County of Contra Costa et al

Filing 174

ORDER re: Pendency of Class Action. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 11/30/09. (rbe, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/30/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 31

Mark E. Merin (SBN 043849) ­ [e-mail] Cathleen A. Williams (SBN 068029) ­ [e-mail] LAW OFFICES OF MARK E. MERIN 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Andrew C. Schwartz (SBN 64578) ­ [e-mail] CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK 2121 North California Blvd., Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiffs PETER OBSTLER (SBN 171623) - [e-mail] JEE YOUNG YOU (SBN 241658) - [e-mail] BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP Three Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111-4067, U.S.A. Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 415.393.2286 JAMES V. FITZGERALD, III (SBN 055632) [e-mail] MCNAMARA, DODGE, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, PFALZER & BORGES LLP 1211 Newell Ave. Post Office Box 5288 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendants Co0oC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ­ SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION Co0oC ROSALETY BARNETT, ADELINE CHAN, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, et al., Defendants. CASE NO: C 04-04437 TEH NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION

1 NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION Barnett, et al. v. Contra Costa County, et al.; USDC, No. Dist., Case No. C 04-4437 TEH

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 31

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that: Plaintiff has brought an action in this Court against the County of Contra Costa, Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department, the Contra Costa County Sheriff Warren E. Rupf, and numerous defendants sued by fictitious names. Plaintiff has brought this action on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated who have been subjected to strip searches in violation of state and federal law defined as follows: All persons, since October 20, 2002, and continuing until Defendants' prior custom and policy was brought into compliance with the law on June 1, 2003, or such other more recent date when the policy was implemented, who were arrested on any misdemeanor or lesser charge not involving weapons, controlled substances, or felony violence, and who were subjected to a uniform and indiscriminate (blanket) strip/visual body cavity search(es) by defendants before arraignment at the Contra Costa County Jails without any individualized reasonable suspicion that they were concealing contraband. This class may also include arrestees who were subjected to subsequent blanket strip searches before arraignment after the initial strip search, without any reasonable individualized suspicion that they had subsequently acquired and hidden contraband on their persons. Also excluded from the class are those otherwise eligible arrestees who (1) have a history of at least one prior conviction or two prior arrests for excludable offenses within the last five years; (2) have a current probation condition which includes consent to search; (3) upon arrest or detention, exhibit behavior or circumstances indicating they may be a danger to himself/herself or others; or (4) are strip searched after arraignment. If, during the period from and including October 20, 2002, through June 1, 2003, or such other more recent date when a strip search policy was implemented, you have been subjected to a routine or "blanket" strip/visual body cavity search before arraignment while in the custody of the Contra Costa County Jails and were arrested for a misdemeanor or lesser offense not involving drugs, weapons or violence, you are a member of the class. If you were subjected to subsequent strip searches before arraignment after the initial strip search, you are also a member of the class. If you do not wish to be considered a member of the class, or do not wish to be represented by the plaintiff in this action, you may be excluded from the action by mailing a letter which must be postmarked on or before January 31, 2010, requesting exclusion from the class. The letter should include the name and number of the case (Barnett, et al. v. County of Contra Costa, et al., USDC, Northern District, Case No. C04-4437 TEH), your name and address, and a clear statement that you do not wish to be considered a member of the class and do not wish to be bound by the judgment in the action. You should mail your letter to one of the
2 NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION Barnett, et al. v. Contra Costa County, et al.; USDC, No. Dist., Case No. C 04-4437 TEH

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 31

Attorneys for Plaintiffs whose address appears below. Under the Rule of res judicata, the judgment, whether favorable or not, will include all class members who do not request exclusion by a letter as described above, postmarked on or before January 31, 2010. If you do not request exclusion, this action will be maintained on your behalf by plaintiff and their attorneys, Law Office of Mark E. Merin and Casper, Meadows, Schwartz & Cook. If you wish, you may move the court for permission to appear as a named class co-representative. You may also move to associate additional counsel to represent the class. Further information concerning this action may be obtained by contacting the attorneys for the parties in this action who are as follows: Attorneys for Plaintiffs: LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN Mark E. Merin, Esq. Cathleen A. Williams, Esq. 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, California 95811 Telephone: [phone] CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK Andrew C. Schwartz, Esq. Thom Seaton, Esq. 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: [phone] Attorneys for Defendants: MCNAMARA, DODGE, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, PFALZER & BORGES, LLP James V. Fitzgerald, III, Esq. Noah G. Blechman, Esq. P.O. Box 5288 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: [phone] BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN, LLP Peter Obstler, Esq. Three Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111-4067 Telephone: [phone] It should be understood that the court in this action does not at present express any opinion as to the merits of the action. 11/30
UNIT ED
ISTRIC ES D TC AT T

RT U O

DATED:

, 2009

NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION Barnett, et al. v. Contra Costa County, et al.; USDC, No. Dist., Case No. C 04-4437 TEH

ER

N

F D IS T IC T O R

A

C

LI

3

FO

.H helton E Judge T

n enderso

R NIA

Judge, United States District Court Northern District of California
NO

S

RT

H