Case: Northcutt v. South Carolina Department of Corrections

4:17-cv-03301 | U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina

Filed Date: Dec. 7, 2017

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On December 7, 2017, eighteen death row prisoners in the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC) alleged they had been kept in solitary confinement at the Broad River Correctional Institution (BRCI) for between nine and twenty years. Plaintiffs sued SCDC, its Director, and its Warden under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of their Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments rights. The prisoners alleged that they were placed in solitary confinement regardless of behavioral history or individu…

On December 7, 2017, eighteen death row prisoners in the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC) alleged they had been kept in solitary confinement at the Broad River Correctional Institution (BRCI) for between nine and twenty years. Plaintiffs sued SCDC, its Director, and its Warden under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of their Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments rights. The prisoners alleged that they were placed in solitary confinement regardless of behavioral history or individual status. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III.

On December 22, 2017, the plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction asserting that they were transferred from Lieber Correctional Institution to the Maximum Security Unit at Kirkland Reception and Evaluation Center, which provided even harsher conditions than those previously experienced in their solitary confinement at Lieber. On June 26, 2018, Magistrate Judge Rogers issued a Report and Recommendation that the plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction be denied. 2018 WL 3802100. Judge Rogers found that the plaintiffs failed to make a showing that they were likely to succeed on the merits of their due process claim. The court adopted this recommendation and subsequently denied the motion on August 9, 2018. 2018 WL 3773933. One of the plaintiffs then filed a motion for protective order on August 21, 2018 which was granted on August 23, 2018. On April 16, 2018, the plaintiffs amended their complaint.

The plaintiffs filed a second motion for preliminary injunction on May 21, 2019, along with a motion for temporary restraining order. On June 5, 2019 however, plaintiffs voluntarily withdrew both motions. They explain in the supporting documentation that defendants had worked with plaintiffs counsel to voluntarily make some changes to the facility that made the preliminary relief no longer necessary. They maintained that the ultimate question regarding conditions at BRCI remain valid and that they intended to continue pursuing the lawsuit.

The court issued a scheduling order on December 2, 2019 regarding discovery and hearing preparation. As of April 10, 2020, there have been no other entries in the docket. This case is ongoing.

Summary Authors

Abigail DeHart (8/8/2018)

Alex Moody (4/10/2020)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7635910/parties/northcutt-v-south-carolina-department-of-corrections/


Judge(s)
Attorney for Plaintiff

Druding, Kyle M. (District of Columbia)

Ferguson, Laura G (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Defendant

Arnold, Melissa J. (South Carolina)

Frawley, Patrick John (South Carolina)

Gessner, Evan Markus (South Carolina)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

4:17-cv-03301

Docket [PACER]

Dec. 2, 2019

Dec. 2, 2019

Docket
1

4:17-cv-03301

Complaint

Dec. 7, 2017

Dec. 7, 2017

Complaint
6

4:17-cv-03301

Plaintiffs' Motion and Memorandum of Law for Preliminary Injunction

Dec. 22, 2017

Dec. 22, 2017

Pleading / Motion / Brief
30

4:17-cv-03301

Amended Complaint

April 16, 2018

April 16, 2018

Complaint
42

4:17-cv-03301

Report and Recommendation

June 26, 2018

June 26, 2018

Magistrate Report/Recommendation

2016 WL 3802100

99

4:17-cv-03301

Plaintiffs' Emergency Motion and Memorandum of Law for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction

May 21, 2019

May 21, 2019

Pleading / Motion / Brief
102

4:17-cv-03301

Notice of Withdrawal of Plaintiffs' Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction without Prejudice

June 5, 2019

June 5, 2019

Pleading / Motion / Brief

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7635910/northcutt-v-south-carolina-department-of-corrections/

Last updated Dec. 17, 2024, 9:34 a.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: South Carolina

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Solitary confinement

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Dec. 7, 2017

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Eighteen death row prisoners in the South Carolina Department of Corrections

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

South Carolina Department of Corrections, State

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Mixed

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief denied

Issues

General/Misc.:

Classification / placement

Conditions of confinement

Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:

Administrative segregation

Solitary confinement/Supermax (conditions or process)