Tag Archives: 08 Civ. 01034

Judge Scheindlin Gives Departing Interviews to NYT, NYLJ, and AP

The articles are here (NYT), here (NYLJ), and here (AP). In the articles, Judge Scheindlin defends her work on the stop-and-frisk cases (which we covered extensively, see here).  She called the Second Circuit’s decision to remove her from the cases an “intrafamily attack on judicial independence.” As of today, Judge Scheindlin will be working at JAMS and at Stroock … Continue Reading

Judge Torres Grants Police Unions a Say in Stop-and-Frisk Reform Efforts

In an order issued today, Judge Torres granted the motion of two police unions to participate in what Judge Torres described as “the difficult process of bringing the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policies and practices into compliance with federal and state law.”  After having previously denied the unions’ motion to intervene in the case — a ruling … Continue Reading

Second Circuit Affirms Judge Torres’ Denial of Police Unions’ Request to Intervene in Stop-and-Frisk Cases

The opinion’s introduction summarizes the holding as follows: We hold that the police unions’ motions to intervene are untimely and do not assert an interest that the law seeks to protect. The unions knew, or should have known, of their alleged interests in these controversial and public cases well before they filed their motions in September 2013. For years now, … Continue Reading

Judge Torres Denies Police Unions’ Request to Intervene in Stop-and-Frisk Litigation

In a 108-page opinion today, Judge Torres ruled that various police unions could not intervene to block or appeal the settlement of litigation concerning the police practice known as “stop-and-frisk.”  New York City and the plaintiffs have agreed to settlement terms, but Judge Torres found that the unions raised their objections too late and that, … Continue Reading

Second Circuit Denies Judge Scheindlin Intervention in Stop-and-Frisk Case and Explains Grounds for Her Removal

The Second Circuit issued two orders today concerning the removal of Judge Scheindlin from the stop-and-frisk litigation. In the first Order, the Second Circuit ruled that she lacked standing to intervene to seek to vacate the ruling removing her: We know of no precedent suggesting that a district judge has standing before an appellate court … Continue Reading

NYC Moves to Vacate Stop-and-Frisk Rulings; Argues That Judge Scheindlin Improperly Deemed New Case “Related” to Closed One

The Second Circuit panel that removed Judge Scheindlin from the stop-and-frisk case cited her “improper application of the Court’s ‘related case rule,’” without further explanation. In a motion filed late this evening asking the Second Circuit to vacate Judge Scheindlin’s orders, New York City argued that Judge Scheindlin violated the related case rule, which the City … Continue Reading

Judge Scheindlin Rules “Stop-and-Frisk” Unconstitutional

In ruling this morning, Judge Scheindlin ruled unconstitutional under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments the New York Police Department’s “stop-and-frisk” policing method. As we have reported on in the past, Judge Scheindlin conducted a bench trial of claims brought by a class of plaintiffs who alleged to have been unlawfully detained under the policy. In … Continue Reading

Judge Scheindlin Certifies Class Action Accusing NYPD of Unlawful Stop-And-Frisk Practices

In an opinion dated yesterday, Judge Scheindlin certified a class of plaintiffs who have, since 2005, allegedly been unlawfully detained under the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk practices. Class treatment of the claims was appropriate, Judge Scheindlin reasoned, because “the overwhelming and indisputable evidence shows that the NYPD has a department-wide stop and frisk program; the program has … Continue Reading