Case: Lasky v. Quinlan

1:73-01666 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Filed Date: April 16, 1973

Closed Date: 1977

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

Inmates at the Dutchess County Jail in New York filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against representatives of the county in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The inmates asked the court to grant them injunctive relief against the county, alleging that their constitutional rights had been violated by inadequacies at the jail in the areas of classification, personal hygiene, health services, kitchen sanitation, and recreation. On July 25, 1973 the parties entere…

Inmates at the Dutchess County Jail in New York filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against representatives of the county in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The inmates asked the court to grant them injunctive relief against the county, alleging that their constitutional rights had been violated by inadequacies at the jail in the areas of classification, personal hygiene, health services, kitchen sanitation, and recreation.

On July 25, 1973 the parties entered into a stipulation with respect to the improvements needed in the jail which the defendants agreed to implement. On July 30, 1973, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Judge Murray Gurfein) issued an opinion and order approving the stipulation that had been entered into between the parties.

On December 8, 1975 the plaintiffs asked the court to hold Sheriff Quinlan in contempt for non-compliance with the agreement and order. On June 21, 1976, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Judge Henry Werker) held that the Sheriff was willfully in contempt for failure to comply with the stipulation and fined him $500. Lasky v. Quinlan, 419 F.Supp. 799 (S.D.N.Y. 1976). On October 8, 1976, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Judge Werker) issued another opinion requiring the Sheriff to pay $35,000 in legal fees and $9,573.48 in disbursements. Lasky v. Quinlan, 426 F.Supp. 682 (S.D.N.Y. 1976). The Sheriff appealed these decisions.

On July 29, 1977, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (Judge Edmund Palmieri) vacated the district court's judgment, holding that because there were no individual plaintiffs still in custody at the jail and the district court had expressly denied class certification, the case was moot. Lasky v. Quinlan, 558 F.2d 1133 (2nd Cir. 1977).

Summary Authors

Kristen Sagar (6/9/2007)

People


Judge(s)

Palmieri, Edmund Louis (New York)

Werker, Henry Frederick (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Arnason, Jon Yard (New York)

Levin, Jack P. (New York)

Steinbock, Sara E. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Benson, James D. (New York)

Fedorchak, James M. (New York)

Kehoe, Peter R. (New York)

Maroulis, Peter L. (New York)

Judge(s)

Palmieri, Edmund Louis (New York)

Werker, Henry Frederick (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Arnason, Jon Yard (New York)

Levin, Jack P. (New York)

Steinbock, Sara E. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Benson, James D. (New York)

Fedorchak, James M. (New York)

Kehoe, Peter R. (New York)

Maroulis, Peter L. (New York)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Opinion

419 F.Supp. 799, 1976 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 14529

June 21, 1976 Order/Opinion

Memorandum Decision

426 F.Supp. 682, 1976 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 12837

Oct. 8, 1976 Order/Opinion

Reported Opinion

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

558 F.2d 1133, 1977 U.S.App.LEXIS 12211

July 29, 1977 Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

State / Territory: New York

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 16, 1973

Closing Date: 1977

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

County jail inmates who had entered into stipulation with the sheriff concerning improvements in jail conditions

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown

Filed Pro Se: Unknown

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Dutchess County (Dutchess), County

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Due Process

Due Process: Substantive Due Process

Freedom of speech/association

Availably Documents:

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Confession of Judgment

Order Duration: 1973 - 1977

Issues

General:

Administrative segregation

Bathing and hygiene

Classification / placement

Food service / nutrition / hydration

Recreation / Exercise

Sanitation / living conditions

Visiting

Medical/Mental Health:

Medical care, unspecified

Type of Facility:

Government-run