Case: Roe v. Crawford

2:05-cv-04333 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri

Filed Date: Oct. 12, 2005

Closed Date: 2008

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On October 12, 2005, plaintiff filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri against the Missouri Department of Corrections [DOC], challenging the DOC's refusal to transport plaintiff to an off-site medical clinic so that she could receive a nontherapeutic abortion. The complaint alleged that that the prison's policy that female prisoners would not be sent out of their institutions for abortions that were not medically necessary depri…

On October 12, 2005, plaintiff filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri against the Missouri Department of Corrections [DOC], challenging the DOC's refusal to transport plaintiff to an off-site medical clinic so that she could receive a nontherapeutic abortion. The complaint alleged that that the prison's policy that female prisoners would not be sent out of their institutions for abortions that were not medically necessary deprived plaintiff of her Fourteenth Amendment right to reproductive choice. The complaint further alleged that by forcing her to carry her an unwanted pregnancy to term, the prison was deliberately indifferent to her serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Plaintiff, represented by the ACLU, sought declaratory and injunctive relief. An emergency motion for a TRO was filed simultaneously with the complaint.

On October 13, 2005, the District Court (Judge Dean Whipple) granted Plaintiff's motion for TRO and ordered Defendant to transport Plaintiff to Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of St. Louis (RHS) in St. Louis, Missouri to receive medical services to terminate her pregnancy. Defendant filed a notice of appeal and moved for a stay of the TRO pending appeal. The Court denied the request on October 14, 2005 and entered an Order and Modified Judgment of Preliminary Injunction. Roe v. Crawford, 396 F.Supp.2d 1041 (W.D.Mo. 2005).

On October 14, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that the Modified Judgment of October 14, 2005 be stayed pending further order by Justice Thomas. On October 17, 2005, U.S. Supreme Court vacated the temporary stay entered on October 14, 2005 and denied the application for stay. Crawford v. Roe, 126 S.Ct. 477 (U.S. 2005). The District Court then entered another Modified Judgment of Preliminary Injunction, again ordering the DOC to transport Plaintiff to an outside facility for the purpose of receiving medical services to terminate her pregnancy. The DOC complied with the order and Plaintiff was so transported on October 20, 2005.

Plaintiff amended her complaint on October 19, 2005 and moved to certify the action as a class action. On November 28, 2005, the District Court certified a class defined as "All pregnant women who are seeking or may in the future seek non-therapeutic abortions

and who are in the custody of Defendants at the time Plaintiff Roe filed her Verified

Complaint in this case or who will be placed in the custody of Defendants in the future

and may while in the custody of Defendants seek a non-therapeutic abortion."

The parties then filed cross-motions for summary judgment. On July 18, 20016, Judge Whipple granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denied defendants' motion, finding that the DOC policy prohibiting transportation of female inmates for abortion procedures violated both the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Roe v. Crawford, 439 F.Supp.2d 942 (W.D.Mo. 2006). On November 29, the court awarded the Plaintiffs $87,908.00 for attorneys fees and $7,379.05 for costs to the Plaintiffs.

On November 29, 2006, the Court granted Defendants' unopposed motion to amend the judgment and stay payment of fees and costs pending resolution of Defendants' appeal.

On January 22, 2008, Judge William J. Riley, writing for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, affirmed the judgment. Although he found that the District Court erred in its finding that the DOC policy was invalid under the Eighth Amendment, he determined that the DOC policy could not be maintained under the Fourteenth Amendment in light of Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 89-91 (1987). The Eight Circuit denied the Defendant's motion to rehear the case en banc.

The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari on November 17, 2008, ending the case.

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (7/19/2012)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4653620/parties/roe-v-crawford/


Judge(s)

Hansen, David Rasmussen (Iowa)

Hays, Sarah W. (Missouri)

Riley, William Jay (Nebraska)

Thomas, Clarence (District of Columbia)

Whipple, Dean (Missouri)

Wollman, Roger Leland (South Dakota)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Blumenthal, Thomas Michael (Missouri)

Camp, Susan Talcott (New York)

Chandrasekhar, Charua A. (New York)

Felakos, James G. (Missouri)

Judge(s)

Hansen, David Rasmussen (Iowa)

Hays, Sarah W. (Missouri)

Riley, William Jay (Nebraska)

Thomas, Clarence (District of Columbia)

Whipple, Dean (Missouri)

Wollman, Roger Leland (South Dakota)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Blumenthal, Thomas Michael (Missouri)

Camp, Susan Talcott (New York)

Chandrasekhar, Charua A. (New York)

Felakos, James G. (Missouri)

Kasdan, Diana (New York)

Patel, Chakshu (New York)

Rothert, Anthony [Tony] E. (Missouri)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Pritchett, Michael (Missouri)

Other Attorney(s)

Micarelli, Carl (New York)

Mikkor, Alison (New York)

Muenzen, Terrianne (New York)

Nevins, Jennifer (New York)

Parker, Kimberly (District of Columbia)

Waters, Jessica L. (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket (PACER)

Nov. 17, 2008 Docket
1

Verified Complaint for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunctive Relief

Oct. 12, 2005 Complaint
4

Order and Judgment of Preliminary Injunction

Oct. 13, 2005 Order/Opinion
12

Order and Modified Judgment of Preliminary Injunction

396 F.Supp.2d 1041

Oct. 14, 2005 Order/Opinion
15

Modified Judgment of Preliminary Injunction

Oct. 17, 2005 Order/Opinion

Order

Crawford v. Roe

Supreme Court of the United States

546 U.S. 959, 126 S.Ct. 477, 163 L.Ed.2d 361

Oct. 17, 2005 Order/Opinion
17

Supplemental Amended Complaint For Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Oct. 19, 2005 Complaint
28

Order

Nov. 28, 2005 Order/Opinion
87

Order

439 F.Supp.2d 942

July 18, 2006 Order/Opinion

Brief of Appellants

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Oct. 13, 2006 Pleading / Motion / Brief

Resources

Title Description External URL

The Caged Canary

Elizabeth Alexander

The United States has experienced an explosion in the number of people in prison, an explosion that cannot be attributed to changes in the crime rate, but rather reflects changes in public policy, pa… Dec. 1, 2008 http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1032&context=wmjowl

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4653620/roe-v-crawford/

Last updated May 19, 2022, 11:56 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

Complaint

Oct. 12, 2005 PACER
2

Motion for TRO

Oct. 12, 2005 PACER
3

Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Oct. 12, 2005 PACER
4

ORDER - granting plaintiff's 2 motion for TRO. It is further ORDERED that defendants shall transport Plaintiff Jane Roe to Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of St. Louis (RHS) located at 4251 Forest Park Avenue, St. Louis, MO . 63108 or any other local health care provider willing to provide the service on an expedited basis, on the earliest date an appointment is available, preferably Friday, October 14, 2005, for the purpose of providing medical services to terminate h er pregnancy, including, but not limited to any necessary counseling, education, surgery, and follow-up services, for a period of no more than 48 hours. Plaintiff shall post a cash bond of $1.00 security in order to secure this Order. The part ies shall provide the Court with a proposed scheduling order in the ordinary course of scheduling, but within no more than 45 days, to establish a schedule to determine whether defendants shall be permanently prohibited from denying prisoners access to medical services to terminate pregnancy, but defendants are temporarily enjoined from denying such access until further order of this Court. Signed by Judge Dean Whipple on 10/13/2005. (Johnson, Yvonne)

Oct. 13, 2005 RECAP
5

Notice of filing

Oct. 13, 2005 PACER
6

Notice of Appearance

Oct. 13, 2005 PACER
7

Notice of Appeal

Oct. 13, 2005 PACER
8

Motion to Stay

Oct. 13, 2005 PACER
9

Suggestions in Opposition to Motion

Oct. 14, 2005 PACER
10

Suggestions in Opposition to Motion

Oct. 14, 2005 PACER
11

Suggestions in Support of Motion

Oct. 14, 2005 PACER
12

ORDER - denying 8 motion to stay. Defendants are directed to transport plaintiff to Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of St. Louis (RHS) located at 4251 Forest Park Ave., St. Louis, MO. on Saturday, October 15, 2005 at 9:00 a.m. fo r the purpose of providing medical services to terminate the pregnancy, including, but not limited to any necessary counseling, education, surgery, and follow-up services, for a period of no more than 48 hours. Abesent a stay granted by the Eighth C ircuit Court of Appeals prior to Saturday, October 15, 2005 at 9:00 a.m., an application for a stay of this Modified Order does not authorize Defendants to refuse to carry out its terms. This Court will not tolerate further defiance of its Orders. Signed by Judge Dean Whipple on 10/14/2005. (Johnson, Yvonne)

Oct. 14, 2005 RECAP
13

Transmission of Notice of Appeal Supplement to US Court of Appeals

Oct. 14, 2005 PACER
14

TRANSCRIPT of Teleconference on Temporary Injunction held on October 13, 2005 before Judge Dean Whipple. Court Reporter: Sandra Lamken. This is a text entry only − no document is attached. The transcript is available for review in the Clerk's Office located in Jefferson City, Missouri. Please contact the court reporter listed above for copies. (Sullivan, Tanya) (Entered: 10/14/2005)

Oct. 14, 2005
15

Preliminary Injunction

Oct. 17, 2005 PACER
16

Status Conference

Oct. 17, 2005 PACER

US COURT OF APPEALS Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals CASE NUMBER 05−3790 for 7 Notice of Appeal filed by Cyndi Pruden,, Larry Crawford,. (Kee, Georgia) (Entered: 11/04/2005)

Oct. 14, 2005
26

Status Conference

Oct. 18, 2005 PACER
17

Amended Complaint

Oct. 19, 2005 RECAP
18

Motion to Certify Class

Oct. 19, 2005 PACER
19

Suggestions in Support of Motion

Oct. 19, 2005 PACER
20

Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Oct. 19, 2005 PACER
21

Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Oct. 19, 2005 PACER
22

Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Oct. 19, 2005 PACER
23

Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Oct. 19, 2005 PACER
24

Answer to Amended Complaint

Oct. 31, 2005 PACER
25

Suggestions in Opposition to Motion

Oct. 31, 2005 PACER
27

Reply Suggestions to Motion

Nov. 15, 2005 PACER
28

Order on Motion to Certify Class

Nov. 28, 2005 PACER
29

Report of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting

Dec. 2, 2005 PACER
30

Trial Order

Dec. 13, 2005 PACER
31

Scheduling Order

Dec. 13, 2005 PACER
32

CERTIFICATE of service of initial Rule 26 disclosures

Dec. 16, 2005 PACER
33

CERTIFICATE of service of initial Rule 26 disclosures

Dec. 19, 2005 PACER
34

Certificate of Service

Jan. 3, 2006 PACER
35

USCA Judgment and Mandate

Jan. 3, 2006 PACER
36

Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery

Jan. 30, 2006 PACER
37

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery

Feb. 3, 2006 PACER
38

Certificate of Service

Feb. 10, 2006 PACER
39

Certificate of Service

Feb. 10, 2006 PACER
40

Certificate of Service

Feb. 22, 2006 PACER
41

Certificate of Service

Feb. 23, 2006 PACER
42

Certificate of Service

Feb. 23, 2006 PACER
43

Motion for Extension of Time

April 10, 2006 PACER
44

Notice to Take Deposition

April 14, 2006 PACER
45

CERTIFICATE OF TRANSMISSION OF DEPOSITION

April 17, 2006 PACER
46

CERTIFICATE OF TRANSMISSION OF DEPOSITION

April 17, 2006 PACER
47

CERTIFICATE OF TRANSMISSION OF DEPOSITION

April 17, 2006 PACER
48

CERTIFICATE OF TRANSMISSION OF DEPOSITION

April 17, 2006 PACER
49

CERTIFICATE OF TRANSMISSION OF DEPOSITION

April 17, 2006 PACER
50

CERTIFICATE OF TRANSMISSION OF DEPOSITION

April 17, 2006 PACER
51

Order on Motion for Extension of Time

April 17, 2006 PACER
52

Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages

May 9, 2006 PACER
53

Motion for Extension of Time

May 11, 2006 PACER
54

Suggestions in Opposition to Motion

May 11, 2006 PACER
55

Order on Motion for Extension of Time

May 12, 2006 PACER
56

Motion for Leave to File

May 15, 2006 PACER
57

Motion for Summary Judgment

May 15, 2006 PACER
58

Order on Motion for Leave to File

May 15, 2006 PACER
59

Suggestions in Support of Motion

May 15, 2006 PACER
60

Motion for Order (Sealed)

May 15, 2006 PACER
61

Suggestions in Support of Motion

May 16, 2006 PACER
62

Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages

May 23, 2006 PACER
63

Motion to Seal Document

June 8, 2006 PACER
64

Order on Motion to Seal Document

June 9, 2006 PACER
65

Suggestions in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment (Sealed)

June 9, 2006 PACER
66

Motion for Order

June 19, 2006 PACER
67

Agreed Upon Statement

June 19, 2006 PACER
68

Suggestions in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment (Sealed)

June 19, 2006 PACER
70

Proposed Witness List

June 26, 2006 PACER
71

Proposed Exhibit List

June 26, 2006 PACER
72

DESIGNATION

June 26, 2006 PACER
73

Proposed Findings of Fact

June 26, 2006 PACER
74

Reply Suggestions to Motion

June 27, 2006 PACER
75

Trial Order

June 28, 2006 PACER
76

Reply Suggestions to Motion

June 29, 2006 PACER
77

Proposed Findings of Fact

July 3, 2006 PACER
78

Proposed Witness List

July 3, 2006 PACER
79

Proposed Exhibit List

July 3, 2006 PACER
80

DESIGNATION

July 3, 2006 PACER
81

Objections (non motion)

July 3, 2006 PACER
82

Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

July 5, 2006 PACER
83

Objections (non motion)

July 10, 2006 PACER
84

Motion in Limine

July 10, 2006 PACER
85

DESIGNATION

July 10, 2006 PACER
86

Trial Brief

July 17, 2006 PACER
87

ORDER - granting plaintiff's 57 motion for summary judgment, denying defendant's 60 Sealed Motion for summary judgment. Signed by Judge Dean Whipple on 7/18/2006. (Johnson, Yvonne)

July 18, 2006 RECAP
88

CLERK'S JUDGMENT - entered. (Johnson, Yvonne)

July 18, 2006 RECAP
89

Motion for Attorney Fees

Aug. 1, 2006 PACER
90

Proposed Bill of Costs

Aug. 1, 2006 PACER
91

Notice of Appeal

Aug. 16, 2006 PACER
93

Objection to bill of costs

Aug. 16, 2006 PACER
94

Suggestions in Opposition to Motion

Aug. 16, 2006 PACER
95

Transmission of Notice of Appeal Supplement to US Court of Appeals

Aug. 18, 2006 PACER
96

Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

Aug. 30, 2006 PACER
97

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

Sept. 7, 2006 PACER
98

Reply Suggestions to Motion

1 Exhibit 1

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 2

View on PACER

3 Exhibit 3

View on PACER

4 Exhibit 4

View on PACER

5 Exhibit 5

View on PACER

6 Exhibit 6

View on PACER

7 Exhibit 7

View on PACER

Sept. 26, 2006 PACER
99

Order on Motion for Attorney Fees

Oct. 17, 2006 PACER
100

Order

Oct. 18, 2006 PACER
101

Motion to Alter Judgment

Oct. 31, 2006 PACER

State / Territory: Missouri

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Key Dates

Filing Date: Oct. 12, 2005

Closing Date: 2008

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

All pregnant women who are seeking or may in the future seek nontherapeutic abortions, who need transport to the abortion appointment, and who are in the custody of Defendants (MDOC).

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Missouri Department of Corrections, State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Due Process

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Order Duration: 2005 - 0

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief granted

Issues

Affected Gender:

Female

Medical/Mental Health:

Medical care, general

Type of Facility:

Government-run