Filed Date: May 20, 2015
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding in progress
COVID-19 Summary: This class-action lawsuit originated with a claim that the Louisiana State Penitentiary provided inadequate medical care that violated the plaintiffs' Eighth Amendment rights. Upon learning that the penitentiary planned to transfer individuals with COVID-19 to the penitentiary, the plaintiffs filed an emergency motion to stop the transfer and re-open discovery to determine that the defendant's policies for COVID-19 were adequate. Both motions were denied as non-justiciable. A settlement conference was held on June 4. On March 31, 2021, the court issued a ruling that the defendants violated the ADA, Rehab Act, and the Eighth Amendment; the defendants filed for reconsideration which the court denied on October 8. After a bench trial about the remedy, the court granted the plaintiffs a permanent injunction on November 6, 2023.
On May 20, 2015, inmates incarcerated at Louisiana State Penitentiary filed this class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana (Baton Rouge). The plaintiffs sued the Louisiana State Penitentiary and the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU and private counsel, asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief. The plaintiffs claimed to have serious medical needs that went untreated, undertreated, or mistreated by the defendants in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The plaintiffs claimed that defendants engaged in systemic practices that exposed the plaintiffs to unacceptable risks to their health. These practices included routinely delaying specialty care, declining to provide medically necessary treatment, discouraging plaintiffs from requesting medical assistance, punishing plaintiffs who seek medical treatment, and maintaining an insufficient number of qualified medical personnel. The case was assigned to Judge Brian A. Jackson.
On December 14, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a motion for Entry of Protective Order Governing Protected and Individually Identifiable Health Information (PHI/IIHI). The order was granted on December 16, 2015 and the terms will survive through the end of litigation, and continue to fully apply to all materials containing PHI/IIHI. Further, the court will retain jurisdiction over all parties and persons who received access to such materials, indefinitely.
Plaintiffs moved for class certification on October 14, 2016. Plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment on their ADA and Eighth Amendment claims on January 6, 2017. Defendants moved to disqualify the judge on February 28, 2017. The court (Judge Brian A. Jackson) granted defendants' motion to disqualify the judge on April 20, 2017, and the case was reassigned to Judge Shelly D. Dick. Defendants filed a sealed motion for summary judgment on May 12, 2017. The court denied both parties' motions for summary judgment on September 21, 2017, but allowed parties to re-urge the motions, without being required to refile them, following the hearing on the class action certification.
The court granted class action certification on February 26, 2018, certifying a class of "all inmates who now, or will be in the future, incarcerated at LSP" and a subclass of "all qualified individuals with a disability, as defined by the ADA/RA, who are now, or will be in the future, incarcerated at LSP." Defendants subsequently moved to re-urge their motion for summary judgment on July 11, 2018. A bench trial was held between October 11 and October 25, 2018.
After both parties submitted post-trial briefs, they engaged in a settlement conference before the court on July 24, 2019. The parties were unable to reach a resolution.
In February 2020, the court issued an order informing the parties that it was preparing to issue a ruling on the merits. The order stated that the court planned to find the medical care at Angola State Penitentiary unconstitutional in some respects and was prepared to order injunctive relief to remediate these findings. The court encouraged the litigants to reach an agreement on some or all of the claims.
The sudden onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020 led the plaintiffs to file an emergency motion to re-open discovery on March 28. Given the congregated nature of the Louisiana State Penitentiary and penitentiary's history of inadequate medical care, the plaintiffs were concerned that the penitentiary would be a "tinderbox" for a COVID-19 outbreak. Therefore, the plaintiffs moved to re-open discovery for the "limited and sole purpose of ensuring that Defendants' policies and practices concerning COVID-19 do not place class members at a substantial risk of serious harm or likely death."
Three days later, the plaintiffs filed an emergency motion to restrain the defendants from transferring COVID-19 carriers to the Louisiana State Penitentiary. The plaintiffs argued that the penitentiary already possessed inadequate medical care (as evidenced by the original claim of this case alleging that the medical care was unconstitutional), and that the planned transfer would place the class members at particular risk given that many members were either elderly or suffered from underlying medical conditions. If the transfer were to occur as planned, the plaintiffs argued, the harm would be irreparable.
On April 2, Judge Shelly Dick denied the plaintiff's Emergency Motion to Re-open Discovery, and denied the plaintiff's Emergency Motion to Restrain Defendants from Transferring COVID-19 Carriers. The judge found both measures to be non-justiciable. The two measures were found to be beyond the scope of the original claims asserted, and the plaintiff did not cite an authority for joining these independent claims to their ongoing case. Further, Judge Dick found the plaintiff's measures to be based on speculation and conjecture as to what the defendant "might" do with respect to transferring inmates.
On March 31, 2021, the Court issued an opinion holding that the defendants violated the ADA and Rehabilitation Act, as well as the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 2021 WL 1219988. Specifically, Judge Dick found that the defendants failed to provide constitutionally adequate medical care in clinical and emergency settings, and failed to provide people with disabilities reasonable accommodations. The same day as the opinion was issued, Judge Dick also temporarily stayed the case in order to prepare for the remedy phase.
The defendants subsequently filed a motion to lift the stay in order to file a Motion for Reconsideration or, in the alternative, file an interlocutory appeal. The defendants argued that Judge Dick's March 31 opinion relied on outdated information and therefore did not accurately represent the current state of the correctional facilities. Meanwhile, the plaintiffs filed a motion seeking attorneys' fees and costs.
On October 8, 2021, Judge Dick denied the motion for reconsideration or, in the alternative, to file an interlocutory appeal. 2021 WL 5287856. Judge Dick stated that the court relied on a wide range of evidence in making its decision, including evidence from current staff members, expert testimony, a site visit, and other forms of evidence. The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a status conference to discuss the remedy in the case. The following month, on November 29, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the defendants' request for a writ of mandamus, which would have required the appeals court to intervene in an extraordinary way in an ongoing district court case.
On December 8, 2021, the defendants filed a motion to stay and/or deny plaintiffs’ motion for attorneys’ fees and costs because it was premature. A week later, the court granted the motion to stay.
The following year, on March 17, the parties submitted a partial settlement to the court, but immediately withdrew it because the defendants had failed to consult with the Attorney General’s office before settling.
After numerous discovery disputes, a bench trial on the remedy was held on June 6-17, 2022. Later that year, on November 6, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and granted them a permanent injunction. The court held that the defendants continued to violate the Eighth Amendment, the ADA, and the Rehabilitation Act, warranting injunctive relief. The court laid out in detail the defendants’ numerous continuing violations, including issues related to clinical care, the sick call policy, specialty care, emergency care, infirmary/inpatient care, medical leadership and organization, and accommodations for people with disabilities. 2023 WL 7299130.
As part of the court’s permanent injunction, it ordered the appointment of three special masters as well a physician and a nurse or nurse practitioner to make recommendations and monitor compliance. The court ordered the special masters to propose remedial plans for both medical care and ADA compliance. The court also ordered the defendants to allow the special masters to conduct reviews of the facility, the health care operations, and the ADA operations, and to provide records and documents to the special masters. The special masters were also instructed to submit reports every six months.
On November 20, 2023, the defendants appealed this decision and the order granting class certification to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The defendants also filed a motion in the district court to stay the remedial order and judgment pending the appeal.
As of November 25, 2023, the district court has not yet ruled on the motion and the appeal is pending.
Summary Authors
Lakshmi Gopal (10/17/2015)
Elizabeth Heise (10/28/2018)
Chandler Hart-McGonigle (11/1/2020)
Justin Hill (9/12/2021)
Venesa Haska (11/25/2023)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5177905/parties/lewis-v-cain/
Ahmed, Nora Sam (Louisiana)
Angelson, Meredith (Louisiana)
Animashaun, Babatunde Mobolade (Louisiana)
Archey, Connell Lee (Louisiana)
Atkinson, Judith R. (Louisiana)
Angelson, Meredith (Louisiana)
Bosalavage, Samantha Nicole (Louisiana)
Compa, Elizabeth Claire (Louisiana)
Delerno, Zachary John (Louisiana)
Dubner, Jeffrey B. (District of Columbia)
Hamilton, Bruce Warfield (Louisiana)
Harrison, Justin Paul (Louisiana)
Johnson, Jamila A. (Louisiana)
LoPalo, Christopher R. (Louisiana)
Lospennato, Ronald K (Louisiana)
Lubin, Emily Blythe (Louisiana)
Montagnes, Mercedes Hardy (Louisiana)
Navalance, Erica Lauren (Louisiana)
Puccio, Thomas Philip (Louisiana)
Ramaswamy, Rebecca R. (Louisiana)
Sirmon, Candice C. (Louisiana)
Small, Daniel A. (District of Columbia)
Taaffe, Damon William (Louisiana)
Animashaun, Babatunde Mobolade (Louisiana)
Archey, Connell Lee (Louisiana)
Atkinson, Judith R. (Louisiana)
Balhoff, Thomas E. (Louisiana)
Barient, Andrea Leigh (Louisiana)
Blanchfield, Andrew (Louisiana)
Bond, Caroline Tomeny (Louisiana)
Bourque, Jude David (Louisiana)
Bynum, Lauren Ashley (Louisiana)
Caldwell, James David (Louisiana)
Castaing, Andre Charles (Louisiana)
Clark, Colin Andrew (Louisiana)
Cobb, Brent Joseph (Louisiana)
Conine, John Clifton Jr. (Louisiana)
Davis, Michael Reese (Louisiana)
Evans, James Garrison (Louisiana)
Freel, Angelique Duhon (Louisiana)
Gilmer, Eddie David (Louisiana)
Guillot, Grant Joseph (Louisiana)
Hicks, Michael Brent (Louisiana)
Hillburn, James L. (Louisiana)
Hultberg, Shannon Williams (Louisiana)
Hunley, Mary Ellen (Louisiana)
Jones, Carlton Jones (Louisiana)
Juhas, Bailey Adams (Louisiana)
Kendall, George H. (Louisiana)
Landry, Kathryn W. (Louisiana)
LeBlanc, Crews Reynolds (Louisiana)
McCain, Allena Brooke (Louisiana)
McEacharn, Molly Frances (Louisiana)
Murrill, Elizabeth Baker (Louisiana)
Payne, Chelsea Acosta (Louisiana)
Pickett, Andrew Milton (Louisiana)
Pipes, David Stephen (Louisiana)
Pleasant, Sanettria Glasper (Louisiana)
Schneiderman, Brendan R. (Louisiana)
Seng, Annette Rhodes (Louisiana)
Shapiro, Stephen H. (Louisiana)
Sherburne, Richard Allen (Louisiana)
Shows, Edmond Wade (Louisiana)
Swenson, Douglas Gist (Louisiana)
Tomeny, Caroline M (Louisiana)
Valenti, Desiree Marie (Louisiana)
Vining, Jonathan R. (Louisiana)
Wall, Kurt Lawrence (Louisiana)
Wheeler, Jeffery A (Louisiana)
White, Winston Eric (Louisiana)
White, Michelle Marney (Louisiana)
Willis, Grant Lloyd (Louisiana)
Wilson, Jacqueline B. (Louisiana)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5177905/lewis-v-cain/
Last updated May 6, 2024, 3:15 a.m.
State / Territory: Louisiana
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Post-WalMart decisions on class certification
Key Dates
Filing Date: May 20, 2015
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
All inmates who now are, or will be in the future, incarcerated at LSP.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Attorney Organizations:
NDRN/Protection & Advocacy Organizations
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: Yes
Class Action Outcome: Granted
Defendants
Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections (Angola), State
Defendant Type(s):
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.
Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701
Constitutional Clause(s):
Due Process: Substantive Due Process
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Content of Injunction:
Order Duration: 2023 - None
Issues
General/Misc.:
Sanitation / living conditions
COVID-19:
Disability and Disability Rights:
Discrimination Basis:
Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)
Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:
Medical/Mental Health Care: