Filed: Nov. 30, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 30, 2018
Summary: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE: JOINT MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION KENDALL J. NEWMAN , Magistrate Judge . The parties filed a Joint Motion for Class Certification under Rules 23(a), 23(b)(1), and 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, which came on for hearing before the undersigned on November 29, 2018. After full consideration of the evidence, the parties' arguments, and the authorities submitted by counsel, the undersigned recommends that this action be maintained as a class
Summary: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE: JOINT MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION KENDALL J. NEWMAN , Magistrate Judge . The parties filed a Joint Motion for Class Certification under Rules 23(a), 23(b)(1), and 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, which came on for hearing before the undersigned on November 29, 2018. After full consideration of the evidence, the parties' arguments, and the authorities submitted by counsel, the undersigned recommends that this action be maintained as a class ..
More
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE: JOINT MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.
The parties filed a Joint Motion for Class Certification under Rules 23(a), 23(b)(1), and 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, which came on for hearing before the undersigned on November 29, 2018. After full consideration of the evidence, the parties' arguments, and the authorities submitted by counsel, the undersigned recommends that this action be maintained as a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 23(a), 23(b)(1), and 23(b)(2), and recommends the parties' Joint Motion for Class Certification be granted.
The undersigned finds as follows:
1. The numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy requirements of Rule 23(a) are satisfied.
2. The requirements under both Rule 23(b)(1) and Rule 23(b)(2) are satisfied.
3. The action should be certified as a class action as to all claims and defenses at issue in the Complaint pursuant to Rules 23(a), 23(b)(1), and 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
4. The undersigned recommends certification of the following classes:
Plaintiff Class: All people who are now, or in the future will be, incarcerated in the Sacramento County jails.
Plaintiff Subclass (the "Disability Class"): All qualified individuals with disabilities, as that term is defined in 42 U.S.C. § 12102, 29 U.S.C. § 705(9)(B), and California Government Code § 12926(j) and (m), who are, or will be in the future, incarcerated in the Sacramento County jails.
5. Plaintiffs MAYS, RICHARDSON, BOTHUN, LEE, BEIRGE, and GARLAND be certified to serve as representatives of the Plaintiff Class and Disability Subclass.
6. Disability Rights California, the Prison Law Office, and Cooley LLP be appointed as class counsel to represent the interests of the Plaintiff Class and Disability Subclass. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(1)(B).
7. Pursuant to Rule 23(c)(2)(A), the parties shall confer and, in their joint status report to be filed on December 17, 2018, shall address the status of their proposed notice to the Plaintiff Class and Disabilities Subclass, and the proposed method of distribution of such notice.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within seven days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
