Category Archives: 2015 Street Vending Lawsuit

Tentative Settlement Reached In Street Vending Lawsuit Against Fashion District BID And City Of Los Angeles

You can read up on the background in this 2015 LA times story and also in our multiple stories on the subject. Most of the paper filed in the case is available here.

The monumental lawsuit against the City of Los Angeles and the Fashion District BID for their abominable treatment of street vendors was set for trial in January. However, papers filed with the court yesterday announce that the plaintiffs have reached a settlement with the City and as soon as it’s approved, a process which can take many months for it to work its way through Committees and Council, they will drop the case against both the City and the BID. Hence they asked Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell to put the calendar on hold until the settlement is approved.

Today Virginia Phillips, Chief Judge of the local federal district, issued an order vacating the schedule in anticipation of this settlement. You can read the joint notice of pending settlement that inspired the order, and, as always, there’s a transcript of both documents after the break.
Continue reading Tentative Settlement Reached In Street Vending Lawsuit Against Fashion District BID And City Of Los Angeles

Share

Street Vending Lawsuit Trial Date Set For January 30, 2018, Fashion District BID Finally Sets Out Preliminary Position On Allegations

This kind of thing really has to stop soon.  This man was arrested and handcuffed in Hollywood and his ice cream set out to melt by the Andrews International BID Patrol, but the LAPD does the same and worse, as mostly likely does the Fashion District BID's rent-a-cops.
This kind of thing really has to stop soon. This man was arrested and handcuffed in Hollywood and his ice cream set out to melt by the Andrews International BID Patrol, but the LAPD does the same and worse, as mostly likely does the Fashion District BID’s rent-a-cops.

You can read up on the background in this 2015 LA times story and also in our multiple stories on the subject. Most of the paper filed in the case is available here.

A number of new documents have been filed in the National Lawyers’ Guild’s suit against the City of Los Angeles and the Fashion District business improvement district for their disgraceful treatment of street vendors. Here’s a list, followed by my usual uninformed commentary:

  • Joint Rule 26(f) report — This is a surprisingly interesting document. It’s evidently required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f), which regulates pretrial discovery agreements. For our purposes, though, it also seems to require that all the parties lay out their views of the case. This is especially interesting with respect to the Fashion District, which, even though it did answer the complaint, did so in a completely vacuous manner. There’s some substance here, and I discuss it after the break.
  • Court Order re: Scheduling Conference — Here Judge O’Connell cancels a settlement conference that was to be held Monday, orders that the parties complete the dispute resolution process by December 4, 2017, and file a joint report on it within 7 days of its conclusion.
  • Court Order re: Alternative Dispute Resolution — This order declares that the Alternative Dispute Resolution will be handled by the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case.
  • Order for Civil Jury Trial With relevant dates — This is an order for a trial, to take place on January 30, 2018, and other relevant dates.

Continue reading Street Vending Lawsuit Trial Date Set For January 30, 2018, Fashion District BID Finally Sets Out Preliminary Position On Allegations

Share

The Suit Goes On: Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell Files (Moderately Sarcastic) Order Denying City Of LA’s Motion To Dismiss Street Vending Lawsuit

Federal Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell, in whose court the NLG's street vending case is being heard.
Federal Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell, in whose court the NLG’s street vending case is being heard.
This is just a quick note to memorialize the fact that, after the City of Los Angeles filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit against it and the Fashion District BID brought by a number of downtown street vendors, tonight Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell filed a 16 page order denying everything, which of course means that the case will go on.1 The standard for denying a motion to dismiss is essentially that the plaintiff “…pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” The Judge found that they had, so the case will go on. Recall also that there was a hearing on the City’s motion scheduled for Monday, November 21. O’Connell canceled this hearing because “the Court deems this matter appropriate for resolution without oral argument of counsel.” That’s gotta hurt.

Briefly, one of the arguments raised by the City of LA is that the vendors’ organization, the Unión Popular de Vendedores Ambulantes, lacks standing to sue.2 More on this and some quotated snark after the break.
Continue reading The Suit Goes On: Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell Files (Moderately Sarcastic) Order Denying City Of LA’s Motion To Dismiss Street Vending Lawsuit

Share

Street Vendors Reply To City of LA’s Motions To Strike And To Dismiss, Also Important Records From Department Of Sanitation, Including The City’s Standard Operating Procedure For Cleaning Up Homeless Encampments

The Fashion District, September 2016.
The Fashion District, September 2016.
Good evening, Friends! I haven’t had time to write much recently and I won’t have time for another day or two because the latest installment in the MK.Org LAMC 49.5.5 project is turning out to be more complex than I’d anticipated. I expect to have it done with by the end of this week. This is just a short interim post to announce some new records.

First, you may recall that a couple weeks ago the City of LA filed a couple of motions in the street vending lawsuit. These were:

Tonight the plaintiffs filed their responses to these motions:

And turn the page for some material from the Department of Sanitation relating to homeless encampment cleanups. Most importantly, there is the City-Attorney-approved Standard Operating Procedure manual for cleanups. This is stunning, essential information.
Continue reading Street Vendors Reply To City of LA’s Motions To Strike And To Dismiss, Also Important Records From Department Of Sanitation, Including The City’s Standard Operating Procedure For Cleaning Up Homeless Encampments

Share

Defendant City of Los Angeles Files Motion To Dismiss Street Vending Lawsuit, Motion To Strike Putatively Irrelevant Material, Gratuitously Compares Street Vendors To Human Traffickers And Drug Dealers; Hearing Scheduled For November 21 At 1:30 P.M.

An image from a recent journey to the Fashion District, unrelated to anything discussed in this post or, for that matter, on this blog.
An image from a recent journey to the Fashion District, unrelated to anything discussed in this post or, for that matter, on this blog.
Recall that last week we learned that settlement talks in the Street Vendors lawsuit seemed to have fallen through, that the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, and that the City of LA denies everything.1 Well, today a couple more items2 hit PACER, which are:

The motion to dismiss isn’t that different from the motion to dismiss that the City filed in May but then withdrew a few days later. It doesn’t seem plausible,3 and you can read it for yourself. The motion to strike is more interesting, and you can read about it after the break.
Continue reading Defendant City of Los Angeles Files Motion To Dismiss Street Vending Lawsuit, Motion To Strike Putatively Irrelevant Material, Gratuitously Compares Street Vendors To Human Traffickers And Drug Dealers; Hearing Scheduled For November 21 At 1:30 P.M.

Share

Street Vending Lawsuit Settlement Talks Seem To Have Failed, Trial Seems To Be Gonna Happen, Fashion District BID Files Response To Complaint Consisting Of All Syntax, No Semantics

California-centralWhen last I wrote about the street vending lawsuit against the Fashion District BID and the City of Los Angeles, the parties were getting extension after extension based on their mutual representations that settlement talks were proceeding apace. Well, that’s all over with. In fact, at this point I feel like my amateurism has led me down the with-good-intentions-paved garden path like the cat i’ th’ adage and actually no one ever really thought anyone was going to settle, but this is just some ceremony that’s habitually performed for the first year of a federal lawsuit, and now that they have it over with they’re going to get down to tacky brass knuckles. I have no idea, but I do know that recently the following items have been filed on PACER:
Continue reading Street Vending Lawsuit Settlement Talks Seem To Have Failed, Trial Seems To Be Gonna Happen, Fashion District BID Files Response To Complaint Consisting Of All Syntax, No Semantics

Share

Sixth Time’s a Charm: Judge O’Connell Yet Again Extends Deadline for City of LA, Fashion District BID to Respond to Initial Complaint in Street Vending Lawsuit

California-centralJust a brief note here to memorialize the fact that last week the parties to the street vending lawsuit brought against the Fashion District BID and the City of Los Angeles jointly requested that Judge O’Connell give the defendants more time to respond to the initial complaint. Today Judge O’Connell issued an order granting the request. The new deadline for the defendants’ response is September 12, 2016. As with the five previous extensions, the reason given is that settlement talks are still proceeding fruitfully. So that happened.

Share

City of LA Needs More Time to Consider Proposed Settlement in Street Vending Lawsuit, so Parties Request Rescheduling of Conference

California-centralA request to reschedule the settlement conference in the Street Vendors v. City of LA and the Fashion District BID just hit PACER. A settlement conference was scheduled for tomorrow before magistrate judge Charles Eick, but:

The Defendant City of Los Angeles advised Plaintiffs’ counsel earlier today that the City needs additional time to consider the revised settlement proposal by the Plaintiffs.

The request states that the earliest possible time for the rescheduled conference would be July 18, 2016, but that the Fashion District BID’s lawyer hasn’t gotten back to everyone with confirmation that this date will suit. If you’ve been following the story, you may remember that July 18th is also the date that Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell shifted the defendants’ response deadline to, so something’s got to give.

Share

Settlement Talks in Street Vending Lawsuit Seem to be On Track; Judge O’Connell Extends Response Deadline to July 18

Pico and Santee.
Pico Blvd. and Santee Street.
Recall that there is a settlement conference in the street vending lawsuit scheduled for June 22, 2016. Today the parties filed a joint stipulation asking the judge to give the defendants more time to respond. The reason given is:

The parties have made substantial progress in settlement discussions: they have held two settlement conferences with Magistrate Judge Charles F. Eick and have scheduled a third settlement conference for June 22, 2016;

On April 11, 2016, the Court granted the Fourth Stipulation filed by the parties to extend the time to file responsive pleadings to the Complaint, with the current extension set to expire on June 1, 2016.

This was evidently good enough for Judge O’Connell, who, roughly contemporaneously, filed an order granting the request by extending the deadline to July 18. So that’s where we’re at with the street vending suit; another quiet month.
Continue reading Settlement Talks in Street Vending Lawsuit Seem to be On Track; Judge O’Connell Extends Response Deadline to July 18

Share

Street Vendors v. Fashion District BID et al. Settlement Conference Scheduled for June 22, 2016

California-centralJudge Beverly Reid O’Connell filed an order today in Santiago et al. v. Fashion District BID et al. setting a settlement conference to convene on Wednesday, June 22 in front of magistrate judge Charles Eick. These things are surely top secret, so there’s nothing to report or to attend, but I thought I’d drop the filing on you. It suggests that nothing much is going to happen in this case for a few weeks, anyway.

Share