Filed Date: June 26, 2020
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
COVID-19 Summary: This class action was filed pro se by eight inmates in the Cumberland County Correctional Facility on June 26, 2020. The plaintiffs were later appointed legal counsel and, in an amended complaint, sought safety and testing remedies in light of COVID-19. On March 22, 2024, the court approved a final class action settlement that contained various COVID-19 policies as well as monitoring through 2026.
This case concerns the constitutionality of the COVID-19 procedures in the Cumberland County Jail (“Jail”) in Bridgeton, New Jersey. Five pre-trial detainees and three post-conviction inmates filed this class action lawsuit pro se in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on June 26, 2020. The plaintiffs sued the warden and assistant warden of the Jail, as well as the deputy county administrator, for violations of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause and the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and usual punishment. The case was assigned to District Judge Noel L. Hillman.
The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants had recklessly failed to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 to the health and safety of the pretrial inmates, which violated the Due Process Clause. The complaint also alleged that the defendants violated the Eighth Amendment by being deliberately indifferent to an unreasonable risk of serious damage to the convicted inmates through a failure to test for the virus and a failure to provide personal protective equipment (“PPE”) and cleaning supplies. The plaintiffs requested certification of a class of all persons confined, in the present or in the future, at the Jail. They divided the class into two subclasses: persons confined pre-trial and those confined post-conviction.
The plaintiffs requested injunctive relief or a writ of habeas corpus requiring the defendants to reduce the inmate population and to house each remaining inmate in an individual room. They also requested that the court appoint an expert to make recommendations regarding which class members should be released from confinement. The plaintiffs further requested increased supplies, including hand soap, paper towels, toilet paper, facial tissue, and hand sanitizer. To prevent further transmission, the plaintiffs requested immediate testing for those displaying symptoms of COVID-19 and those exposed to anyone who had tested positive for the virus. The plaintiffs additionally requested the court to ensure that individuals who had tested positive or been exposed to the virus be properly quarantined in a non-punitive setting, for medical requests to be answered within an hour, and for an independent monitor to ensure compliance with each of these conditions. Lastly, the plaintiffs requested the full amount of the COVID-19 grant fund at the Jail in the amount of $3.4 million, in addition to another $62 million in damages to be shared equally among the class members.
On July 16, 2020, the court determined that the complaint stated a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and that the action warranted appointment of counsel from the civil pro bono panel.
The following year, on January 29, four of the original pre-trial detainee plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated plaintiffs against the deputy warden and acting warden. The plaintiffs reasserted their request for class certification with two subclasses, as in the original complaint. The amended complaint focused on four issues: the Jail’s failure to provide adequate COVID-19 testing, the lack of access to PPE, the lack of hand sanitizer and cleaning supplies, and the Jail’s failure to implement social distancing policies. The plaintiffs again sued under the Fifth and Eighth Amendments. They added another claim under Article I of the New Jersey Constitution, which protects inmates from cruel and unusual punishment. In the amended complaint, the plaintiffs requested declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and the appointment of an independent monitor.
On the same day they filed their amended complaint, the plaintiffs also moved for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs sought immediate relief, including N95 masks, a cleaning service or additional cleaning materials, nutritious food, social distancing, testing for COVID-19 exposure, and a neutral monitor to inspect the Jail and provide additional recommendations. On February 1, 2021, the court ordered the defendants to show cause why an order should not be issued providing the plaintiffs with their requested preliminary relief.
After the court conducted several evidentiary hearings, the parties entered into a consent order on May 13, 2021. The plaintiffs and defendants agreed to add an additional inmate as a plaintiff and Cumberland County, New Jersey as a defendant. The parties additionally agreed that all relief would be in the form of class relief and that the court would appoint a Special Master, to be paid for by Cumberland County, who would file a report regarding the adequacy of the COVID-19 procedures at the Jail. The procedures under review would include COVID-19 testing and contract tracing, quarantining and isolation practices, the availability of PPE and cleaning supplies, and social distancing measures. The consent order provided that the appointed Special Master would file an initial report with recommendations within 45 days of the appointment. The court appointed William J. Hughes, Jr. as Special Master on May 17, 2021. Two months later, on July 2, the court granted an additional 35 days for the Special Master to file his report.
On June 15, 2021, the Special Master filed a partial initial report and recommendation. The report focused on the narrow question of the procedures used to segregate, isolate, and quarantine inmates who the Jail suspects have COVID-19, have been exposed to the virus, or tested positive for the virus. The Special Master recommended that the Jail develop a formal written policy for COVID-19, containing procedures for testing, isolation, and quarantine. The report recommended that all new inmates be tested and that the Jail create procedures to test symptomatic existing inmates. The Special Master also recommended mandatory quarantine for inmates testing positive and isolation for those who have been exposed. The report recommended a wristband system for staff to identify isolated and quarantined inmates, with different bands for those who have tested positive and those who have been exposed to the virus.
Two months later, on August 4, the Special Master filed a second partial initial report and recommendation. This report focused on the Jail’s use of Simple Green Cleaning Solution to protect against COVID-19, despite the fact that it does not protect against the virus. The report recommended that the Jail immediately cease using the solution and that the Jail be required to implement an effective disinfectant within 48 hours. The Special Master also recommended that the Jail be required to stock storage lockers with cleaning supplies and PPE. The court issued orders adopting the Special Master’s recommendations in the following months, on August 6 (2021 WL 4260776) and September 7 (2021 WL 4260777).
The Special Master filed a third report on October 26, 2021, explaining that COVID-19 cases at the Jail were rising. Its recommendations included increased medical staffing, the installation of HEPA filters, educating inmates about COVID-19, changing from antigen tests to PCR tests, daily health screenings, mask requirements for staff, vaccination efforts, and providing regular exercise time and library services.
A few months later, on January 21, the court entered a consent order containing various COVID-19 policies that the parties had agreed upon after the Special Master’s first three reports. The policies included mask requirements, contract tracing, hand sanitizer dispensers, social distancing, visitor temperature checks, vaccination availability, education, intake screening, weekly testing of staff and inmates, and storage lockers with cleaning supplies.
The plaintiffs moved to supplement the first amended complaint on January 21, 2022, to add claims against Jail officers for retaliation in violation of the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments (under 42 § U.S.C. 1983) and a civil conspiracy to violate those rights (under 42 U.S.C. § 1985). They alleged that the Jail warden and several officers coordinated and conducted a “shakedown” in the Jail to retaliate for the litigation. The plaintiffs further alleged that Jail officers ransacked cells, seized the detainees’ cleaning supplies, and texted photos of the shakedown to the Warden. The court granted this unopposed motion on March 3, 2022, 2022 WL 621043, and the plaintiffs filed the supplement to the first amended complaint a few days later.
The court held several status conferences throughout late 2021 and the first half of 2022. The Special Master continued to file regular reports.
On February 7, 2022, Judge Hillman signed an additional consent order to provide notice of COVID-19 testing to Jail inmates. Later that year, on April 26, the court ordered Cumberland County to pay $10,000 for violating a prior order that it keep a record of cleaning supply use and inventory.
A few weeks later, on May 11, one defendant moved to dismiss the supplement to the first amended complaint, which contained the allegations of retaliation and intimidation relating to the shakedown.
On January 24, 2023, the court ordered some of the Jail defendants to appear and show cause why the court should not hold them in contempt for testifying falsely about the incident reports relating to the shakedown or for violating the court’s sequestration order about the shakedown and lying about the violation under oath. The court held a hearing on the order to show cause on March 20, 2023, and the plaintiffs moved to hold the defendants involved in the shakedown in civil contempt on April 14, 2023.
The defendants moved to enforce the settlement agreement on March 30, 2023, arguing that the parties no longer disagreed about any of the unambiguous material terms. The following month, on April 21, they also moved to stay the case pending the court’s decision. The court denied both motions on May 17, 2023. Judge Hillman held that a binding settlement agreement did not exist because a “meeting of the minds” did not occur between the parties under New Jersey contract law. 2023 WL 3495904.
On June 15, 2023, the court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the supplement to the first amended complaint. Judge Hillman held that the plaintiffs had sufficiently alleged the elements of the retaliation and civil conspiracy claims to survive a motion to dismiss. 2023 WL 4014476.
The plaintiffs moved to hold the county defendants in contempt on June 29, 2023, alleging that they had repeatedly made false statements to the court and delayed implementing a COVID-19 policy.
On December 22, 2023, the plaintiffs moved for preliminary approval of the settlement agreement and certification of the settlement class. The court granted the motion on January 31, 2024, preliminarily certifying a class of all inmates of the Cumberland County Jail as of and since May 6, 2021 through November 17, 2023.
The settlement required, among other things, that the defendants implement specific COVID-19 policies related to mask requirements and availability; regular and symptom-based testing; vaccine education and availability; isolation for staff and inmates who test positive; cleaning supplies, including the use of storage cabinets; and regular disinfectant use. The agreement also required that a monitor be appointed through September 2026 to ensure compliance; that the defendants pay $40,000 to class representatives; and that the defendants pay $900,000 in attorneys’ fees related to future enforcement of the settlement.
The following month, on February 29, Judge Hillman resigned from the bench and the case was reassigned to Judge Karen M. Williams. A few weeks later, on March 15, the plaintiffs moved for final approval of the settlement, and the court granted the motion soon after, on March 22.
The case is ongoing as of April 22, 2024.
Summary Authors
Nicholas Gillan (10/22/2021)
Sophia Acker (3/7/2024)
Brown v. Smith, District of New Jersey (2020)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17304169/parties/brown-v-warren/
Donio, Ann Marie (New Jersey)
Hillman, Noel Lawrence (New Jersey)
Confoy, Karen A (New Jersey)
Ferrara, Michael A Jr (New Jersey)
Hughes, William J Jr (New Jersey)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17304169/brown-v-warren/
Last updated April 22, 2024, 2:22 p.m.
State / Territory: New Jersey
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: June 26, 2020
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
All inmates of the Cumberland County Jail as of and since May 6, 2021 through November 17, 2023.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: Yes
Class Action Sought: Yes
Class Action Outcome: Granted
Defendants
Cumberland County Department of Corrections (Cumberland), State
Cumberland County (Cumberland), County
Defendant Type(s):
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)
Constitutional Clause(s):
Due Process: Substantive Due Process
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Content of Injunction:
Preliminary relief request withdrawn/mooted
Amount Defendant Pays: $950,000
Issues
General/Misc.:
Food service / nutrition / hydration
Sanitation / living conditions
COVID-19:
CDC Guidance ordered implemented
COVID testing ordered/modified
Independent monitor/inspector imposed/assisted
PPE-ordered provided to prisoners for free
Sanitizer/Handsoap ordered made available/used
Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:
Medical/Mental Health Care: