Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 06-18-2024

Case Style:

Michael Gunn, et al. v. City of Ferguson, Missouri

Case Number: 4:15-cv-00253

Judge: Audrey G. Fleissig

Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (St. Louis County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:



Click Here For The Best St. Louis, Missouri civil rights Lawyer Directory




Defendant's Attorney: Timothy William Rudolph, et al.

Description:


St. Louis, Missouri civil rights lawyers represented the Plaintiffs who sued on civil rights violation theories.



"The City of Ferguson jails people when they cannot afford to pay their traffic debt and cash bonds for other minor offenses. No inquiry is made into the person’s ability to pay, no alternatives to payment are offered to the individuals, and no counsel is provided. Jail officers arbitrarily set amount for relatives to pay in order for the individuals to be released. According to the complaint, “In 2014 the City of Ferguson issued an average of more than 3.6 arrest warrants per household and almost 2.2 arrest warrants for every adult, most in cases involving unpaid debt for tickets.”

Fines and Fees Justice Center

Outcome: 06/18/2024 683 ELECTRONIC MINUTE ENTRY (no pdf attached) for proceedings held before Sr. District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig: Motion Hearing held on 6/18/2024 re 678 MOTION for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and 680 MOTION for Attorney Fees Costs, and Service Awards. Discussion held. The Court grants the Motion for Settlement and Motion for Attorney Fees, Costs and Service Awards. Order to follow. (Court Reporter:Reagan Fiorino, Reagan_Fiorino@moed.uscourts.gov, 314-244-7989) (proceedings started: 9:38 am) (proceedings ended: 10:35 am) (Deputy Clerk: C. Thoele)(Appearance for Plaintiff: Maureen Hanlon, Kathryn Hong and Brendan Roediger)(Appearance for Defendant: Jason Retter) (CLT) (Entered: 06/18/2024)

06/18/2024 684 ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT GRANTINGFINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Settlement Agreement is given final approval as fair, reasonable, and adequate for the settlement of the claims of the Class Members. 2. The Parties will comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement, and the terms of the settlement are incorporated in this Order and Judgment. 3. All Class Members, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns are bound by this Final Approval Order and Judgment. The Settlement Classes are defined as: (See order for full details.). Signed by Sr. District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 6/18/24. (KJS) (Entered: 06/18/2024)

06/18/2024 685 JUDGMENT - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the Class Action Settlement, entered into by and between the parties to resolve all outstanding claims in this action, is APPROVED. The Order and Final Judgment Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement, and this Judgment entered thereon, are considered final and appealable as of the date of their entry. Pursuant to Local Rule 13.05, Section B(2), if a party wishes for any documents previously filed under seal to remain sealed, a Motion to Continue Sealing must be filed in this case within 90 days following the final disposition of the litigation. 60-Day Reminder for LR 13.05 Unsealing 8/19/2024 90-day Reminder for LR 13.05 Unsealing 9/16/2024 Signed by Sr. District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 6/18/24. (KJS) (Entered: 06/18/2024)

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: