Judge May Dismiss About 20 Rampart Civil Rights Suits

A federal judge has set a hearing later this month to decide whether to dismiss about 20 civil rights suits against Rampart police officers, it was revealed Friday.

At issue is a 1994 Supreme Court ruling that only people whose convictions have been overturned can sue under federal civil rights law on grounds that they were framed.

In an order dated Thursday, U.S. District Judge Gary A. Feess directed lawyers whose cases might be affected to appear at a hearing Oct. 23 to show cause why their lawsuits should not be dismissed.

More than 70 civil rights suits have been filed in Los Angeles federal court by people who say they were wrongfully arrested or attacked by Rampart Division officers.

About 20 of those cases involve plaintiffs whose convictions have not been overturned, according to Mike Qualls, spokesman for the Los Angeles city attorney’s office.

Brian Lysaght, who represents many Rampart litigants with standing convictions, reacted angrily to Feess’ order.

“It’s outrageous from a purely moral perspective to say that someone who has been brutalized cannot come into federal court until he jumps through these procedural hoops,” Lysaght said Friday.

Feess, who recently assumed charge over all Rampart-related civil rights suits, “should be bending over backward to ensure that Rampart victims have their day in court,” Lysaght said.

Before the Rampart cases were consolidated under Feess, another federal judge, William J. Rea, had given Lysaght and his co-counsel, Stephen Yagman, permission to proceed with one lawsuit even though their client’s conviction had not been overturned.

In that case, Rea found that a subsequent Supreme Court decision created an exception for convicts who were no longer behind bars.

Lysaght complained Friday that Judge Feess “appears to be considering overruling Judge’s Rea’s decision.”

He also expressed annoyance with Feess’ recent refusal to lift an order temporarily staying further actions by attorneys involved in the Rampart cases.

Lysaght said he and Yagman wanted the stay lifted so they could seek an injunction to bar further abuses by Rampart police officers.

Feess, he said, sat on their request until after city officials agreed to a consent decree with the U.S. Justice Department to establish federal monitoring of the Police Department.

At that point, Lysaght said, Feess ruled that they no longer needed to seek an injunction.

In another development Friday, Feess announced that U.S. District Judge Dickran Tevrizian will supervise mediation of Rampart cases. Participation is voluntary.

Under the ground rules spelled out by Feess, a panel of three retired judges will conduct a one-day hearing and decide how much money, if any, the city should pay in damages.

Each side will have 14 days to accept or reject the mediation panel’s recommendation.

Feess, who was appointed to the bench by President Clinton last year, was selected last month to handle all pretrial proceedings in the Rampart civil litigation. Afterward, those cases not settled will be assigned to other judges for trial.

The city attorney’s office has estimated that legal damages arising from the Rampart scandal could exceed $125 million.