Los Angeles Gang Injunction Class Action Settlement

A settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit alleging the City of Los Angeles served gang injunctions with unconstitutional curfews on more than 5,000 people.

If you were served with an LA gang injunction prior to Feb. 20, 2013, you may be entitled to benefits from the Los Angeles gang member class action settlement.

According to the LA gang injunction class action lawsuit, the language contained in the injunctions allegedly included a requirement that people not go outside during specified nighttime hours unless they engage in unspecified “legitimate meeting or entertainment activit[ies].” A California appellate court found the curfew provisions in the LA gang injunctions violated the California Constitution.

The plaintiffs allege the unconstitutionally vague language regarding curfews allowed for the arbitrary and discriminatory harassment by police officers that violated the rights of individuals in the neighborhoods covered by the injunctions. According to the LA gang injunction class action lawsuit, the affected individuals were disproportionately black or Latino, and the injunction kept them from being able to visit with their families, advance their education and career skills, and to pursue career opportunities.

The gang injunction class action lawsuit was filed after the arrests of Christian Rodriguez and Alberto Cazarez in 2009. Rodriguez and Cazaraz were allegedly labeled as gang members and lived in an injunction zone. They were reportedly arrested for violating curfew even though the LAPD knew that the curfews were declared unconstitutional in 2007.

The defendants have agreed to pay up to $30 million to settle the gang injunction class action lawsuit. The class action settlement offers Class Members a variety of benefits, including job training programs, tattoo removal, and an application process for removal from the list of individuals covered by the injunctions.

The LA gang class action settlement received final approval and final judgment was issued on March 24, 2017.

Who’s Eligible

To be eligible for benefits from the LA gang settlement, you must have been served with one or more of the gang injunctions issued in the following court cases prior to Feb. 20, 2013:

• Culver City Boys, Injunction Case No. SC056980
• Grape Street Crips, Injunction Case No. BC330087
• Venice Shoreline Crips, Injunction Case No. SC057282
• 18th Street (Hollywood), Injunction Case No. BC305434
• Highland Park (HLP), Injunction Case No. BC359944
• Venice Trece, Injunction Case No. SC060375
• 18th Street (Wilshire), Injunction Case No. BC313309
• Krazy Ass Mexicans, Injunction Case No. BC282629
• Westside Wilmas, Eastside Wilmas, Injunction Case No. NC030080
• Avenues, Injunction Case No. BC287137
• Langdon Street, Injunction Case No. LC048292
• White Fence (Boyle Heights), Injunction Case No. BC353596
• Big Hazard, Injunction Case No. BC335749
• Mara Salvatrucha, Injunction Case No. BC311766
• White Fence (Hollywood), Injunction Case No. BC353596
• Blythe Street, Injunction Case No. LC020525
• Playboys, Injunction Case No. BC351990
• Rolling 60’s Crips, Injunction Case No. BC298646
• Canoga Park Alabama, Injunction Case No. BC267153
• School Yard Crips, Geer Street Crips, Injunction Case No. BC349468
• Varrio Nueva Estrada, Injunction Case No. BC319981
• Clover, Eastlake, Lincoln Heights, Injunction Case No. BC358881
• All For Crime, Barrio Mojados, Blood Stone Villains, Florencia, Oriental Boyz, Pueblo Bishops, Injunction Case No. BC397522
• Crazy Riders, Krazy Town (KTO), Down in Action (DIA), La Raza Loca, Orphans, Rockwood Street Locos, Varrio Vista Rifa, Wanderers, Witmer Street Locos, Injunction Case No. BC332713
• 38th Street, Injunction Case No. BC319166
• 42nd Street Gangster Crips, 43rd Street Gangster Crips, 48th Street Gangster Crips, Injunction Case No. BC 326016
• Dogtown, Injunction Case No. BC359945

Potential Award

The settlement provides the following benefits to eligible Class Members:

1. A jobs and education program (participants may receive up to $1,000 if they meet certain requirements)
2. Tattoo removal (provided on a first-come, first-served basis)
3. An application process to get off the injunction
4. New rules that must be followed by the LAPD

Class Members must file a timely and valid Claim Form to be eligible to receive the first three benefits listed above.

Proof of Purchase

N/A

Claim Form

CLICK HERE TO FILE A CLAIM (ENGLISH) »

Claim Form

CLICK HERE TO FILE A CLAIM (SPANISH) »

Claim Form Deadline

8/14/2020

NOTE: The funds in this class action settlement are limited and available on a first-come, first-served basis. Class Members should file a claim as soon as possible.

Case Name

Rodriguez, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. 2:11-cv-01135, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Final Hearing

12/2/2016

Settlement Website

www.GangCase.net

Claims Administrator

Rodriguez v. City of Los Angeles Claims
c/o CAC Services Group LLC
6420 Flying Cloud Dr., Ste. 101
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
(310) 997-0380

Class Counsel

Olu K. Orange
ORANGE LAW OFFICES

Dan Stormer
Cindy Pánuco
Mohammed Tajsar
HADSELL STORMER & RENICK LLP

Anne K. Richardson
Alisa Hartz
PUBLIC COUNSEL

Defense Counsel

N/A