Barnes v. District of Columbia
278 F.R.D. 14
D.D.C.2011Background
- Case involves overdetentions and strip searches at DC jail facilities; relates to prior Bynum settlement and ongoing Barnes class action under 42 U.S.C. §1983.
- Court previously held District liable for overdetentions from Sept 1, 2005 to Dec 31, 2006 and for 2007–2008 disputed period; significant liability issues remain for Jan 1, 2007–Feb 25, 2008.
- Court found District liable for strip searches of court releases and for related Fourth Amendment violations.
- Case bifurcated into liability and damages phases; discovery for liability closed in 2010, with limited reopening proposed.
- Disagreement on damages methodology—Dellums non-random sampling vs. random sampling—and on scope of injunctive relief, with injunctive-relief issues deferred to end of liability phase.
- Court orders limited discovery on number of overdetentions for the disputed period and limits on process-related discovery.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs may amend the complaint and seek further summary judgment | Barnes seeks amendment for new theories and summary judgment on liability for 2007–2008 period | District contends amendments and further summary judgment would prejudice it | No amendment or further summary judgment motions allowed |
| How liability discovery should proceed for the disputed period | Discovery needed to determine number of overdetentions | Discovery should be limited to overdetention count, not process issues | Limited discovery on overdetention counts approved; 120 days total; no additional process discovery |
| Damages trial method for general damages | Dellums non-random sample proposed for general damages | Dellums inappropriate; prefer random sampling for class-wide damages | Dellums non-random sampling approved for general damages, with restrictions on testimony to avoid representativeness distortion |
| Damages trial method for special damages | Seek class-wide special damages | Special damages must be individualized | Special damages decertified; must proceed individually |
| Injunctive relief timing and scope | Seek injunctive relief on DOC practices | Relief moot or premature until liability resolved | Injunctive-relief issues deferred until after liability trial; related discovery to follow damages discovery |
Key Cases Cited
- Dellums v. Powell, 566 F.2d 167 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (non-random sample used to determine general damages)
- Augustin v. Jablonsky, 2011 WL 4953982 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (approved non-random sampling for general damages; rejected for special damages)
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (U.S. 2011) (Supreme Court rejected Trial-by-Formula for class backpay; random sampling not always valid)
- Hilao v. Estate of Marcos, 103 F.3d 767 (9th Cir. 1996) (random sampling used in some contexts; questioned validity in others)
- Dellums v. Powell (repeated), 566 F.2d 167 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (see above)