Case: Rooks & U.S. v. Herring

1:92-cv-00316 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama

Filed Date: April 23, 1992

Closed Date: 1998

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On April 23, 1992, inmates at the Conecuh County Jail ("Jail") in Evergreen, Alabama filed a class action lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Alabama Department of Corrections in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.The plaintiffs, represented by attorneys from the Southern Center For Human Rights, sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as damages for the alleged inhumane conditions of confinement they were subjected to at the Jail. The case wa…

On April 23, 1992, inmates at the Conecuh County Jail ("Jail") in Evergreen, Alabama filed a class action lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Alabama Department of Corrections in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.

The plaintiffs, represented by attorneys from the Southern Center For Human Rights, sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as damages for the alleged inhumane conditions of confinement they were subjected to at the Jail. The case was certified by the Court as a class action and, subsequently, the United States intervened pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1997 et seg.

After extensive discovery and several settlement conferences, the parties arrived at a settlement. On September 27, 1994, the proposed Consent Order setting forth the settlement agreement was preliminarily approved. After a hearing, the District Court (Magistrate Judge Bert W. Milling, Jr.) overruled objections to the settlement and approved and entered the Consent Order on January 24, 1995. The Consent Order resolved the class action claims, the individual inmate claims, and the claims of the United States. It called for a renovation of the Jail and substantive reforms in various policies and procedures which governed its operation.

Following the entry of the Consent Order, the defendants provided progress reports to the District Court detailing the status of implementing the specified reforms.

On July 11, 1996, counsel for all parties filed a joint motion to dismiss, stating that the defendants had substantially complied the terms of the Consent Order. The District Court granted the motion on July 24, 2006 and dismissed the case, retaining jurisdiction over the payment of attorneys' fees.

Subsequent to the dismissal order, plaintiffs filed a motion for relief from the judgment and a motion to Show Cause. On March 7, 1997, the District Court entered a stay order in the case and further ordered the defendants to submit monthly reports to counsel for plaintiffs, covering agreed upon topics which included the jail's population.

Thereafter, defendants filed a motion to terminate Consent Order pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act. For reasons that are not clear from the PACER docket, on 10/05/1998, the Court entered an order denying plaintiffs' motion for relief from the Order and denied as moot all other pending motions. We have no further information on the proceedings in this case.

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (2/7/2007)

People


Judge(s)

Milling, Bert W. Jr. (Alabama)

Vollmer, Richard W. Jr. (Alabama)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Barrick, Andrew J. (District of Columbia)

Brewster, Henry (Alabama)

Masling, Mark S. (District of Columbia)

Ortega, Nancy E. (Georgia)

Patrick, Deval L. (District of Columbia)

Seidel, Eugene A. (Alabama)

Toone, Robert E. Jr. (Georgia)

Vulevich, Edward J. Jr. (Alabama)

Judge(s)

Milling, Bert W. Jr. (Alabama)

Vollmer, Richard W. Jr. (Alabama)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Barrick, Andrew J. (District of Columbia)

Brewster, Henry (Alabama)

Masling, Mark S. (District of Columbia)

Ortega, Nancy E. (Georgia)

Patrick, Deval L. (District of Columbia)

Seidel, Eugene A. (Alabama)

Toone, Robert E. Jr. (Georgia)

Vulevich, Edward J. Jr. (Alabama)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Alford, Helen Johnson (Alabama)

Harden, Paul M. Jr. (Alabama)

Leonard, Ellen Ruth (Alabama)

Lyles, Harry A. (Alabama)

Redd, Andrew Weldon (Alabama)

Stevens, Frederick H. (Alabama)

Wasden, H. William (Alabama)

Other Attorney(s)

Peabody, Arthur E. Jr. (District of Columbia)

Reno, Janet (District of Columbia)

Schoen, Benjamin P. (District of Columbia)

Turner, James P. (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

Rooks v. Thigpen

Oct. 5, 1998 Docket

Complaint & Amended Complaint

June 30, 1992 Complaint

Report and Recommendation

Rooks v. Thigpen

1993 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 17794

Nov. 10, 1992 Order/Opinion

Letter

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama

Oct. 6, 1993 Correspondence

Findings letter re: Intention to Intervene in Rooks v. Thigpen (Rooks v. Herring)

No Court

Nov. 30, 1993 Findings Letter/Report
100

Order and Judgment

Rooks v. Thigpen

1993 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 17683

Dec. 10, 1993 Order/Opinion
140

Consent Order

Sept. 27, 1994 Order/Opinion
160

Order

Jan. 24, 1995 Order/Opinion
187

Joint Motion to Dismiss

July 11, 1996 Pleading / Motion / Brief
188

Order

July 24, 1996 Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated May 11, 2022, 8 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

State / Territory: Alabama

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 23, 1992

Closing Date: 1998

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

All persons who are now, have previously or in the future will be incarcerated at the Conecuh County Jail.

Attorney Organizations:

Southern Center for Human Rights (SCHR)

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Alabama Department of Corrections, State

Conecuh County Jail (Evergreen, Conecuh), County

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 1997 et seq.

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Order Duration: 1992 - 1998

Issues

General:

Access to lawyers or judicial system

Assault/abuse by residents/inmates/students

Bathing and hygiene

Classification / placement

Disciplinary procedures

Fire safety

Food service / nutrition / hydration

Grievance Procedures

Mail

Phone

Religious programs / policies

Sanitation / living conditions

Search policies

Sexual abuse by residents/inmates

Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)

Suicide prevention

Totality of conditions

Visiting

Crowding:

Crowding / caseload

Discrimination-basis:

Race discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female

Male

Medical/Mental Health:

Medical care, general

Mental health care, general

Suicide prevention

Type of Facility:

Government-run