'•

:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

KEVIN GARNES

)

DCDC No. 174-873

)

Correctional Treatment Facility )

1901 E Street, S.E.

)

Washington, D.C., 20003

)

)

MICHAEL PENNY

)

DCDC No. 183-608

)

Correctional Treatment Facility )

1901 E Street, S.E.

)

Washington, D.C., 20003

)

)

FREDDIE DAVIS

)

DCDC No. 224-604

Correctional Treatment Facilit P A o F N U M B E R i:97CV00240

1901 E Street, S.E.

C

Washington, D.C., 20003

JUDGE: Paul L. Friedman

JAMES WITHERSPOON

DECK TYPE: Civil General

DCDC No. 250-699

/q7

Correctional Treatment Facilit DATE STAMP-. 0<./u4/y/

1901 E Street, S.E.

Washington, D.C., 20003

)

)

and all others similarly situated )

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

V.

)

)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

)

)

Defendant.

)

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJCNCTIVE RELIEF I. NATURE OF THE CLAIM
1. In this class action lawsuit brought by disabled District of Columbia prisoners, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the plaintiffs seek equitable relief
declaring that the defendant's conduct unlawfully discriminates against the plaintiffs in access to various educational, recreational, religious, rehabilitative and visitation programs,
Games v. D.C.

PC-DC-002-001

and injunctive relief to remedy this discrimination. Specifically, the plaintiffs claim that physical barriers and certain practices of the defendant exclude them from participation in programs or from receiving services that are available to non-disabled prisoners. Defendant's conduct violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §12101 et sea. ("A.D.A.") and the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §701 et seq.
II. JURISDICTION 2. This is a civil action for declaratory and injunctive relief arising under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq. and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §701 et sea. 3. This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§1331, 1343(3) and 1361. Declaratory relief is sought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§2201 and 2202.
III. CLASS ACTION 4. This case is brought pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(a) and 23(b)(1)-(3), by the named plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and the class of all disabled prisoners who are mobility impaired and who are now or who will later be incarcerated in the D.C. Department of Corrections and housed at the Correctional Treatment Facility ("C.T.F."). 5. The proposed class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. Upon information and belief, there are currently approximately 100 disabled prisoners in the Department

of Corrections, and at least 50 are housed at the C.T.F. All disabled prisoners are susceptible to confinement at the C.T.F. at some point during their incarceration because that facility has one of only two handicapped units in the D.C. corrections system. In addition, membership in the class is constantly changing because the class members are perpetually being admitted and discharged from the C.T.F.
6. There are common questions of law and fact affecting the rights of disabled prisoners to receive access to educational, vocational, drug treatment, recreational, religious and visitation programs, including: whether physical barriers obstruct prisoners from participating in drug treatment programs; whether physical barriers obstruct prisoners from participating in educational and vocational programs; and whether disabled prisoners who are pretrial or are misdemeanants should be kept on lockdown solely because of their disabilities.
7. Plaintiffs1 claims are typical of the claims of the class, and plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the class. Each plaintiff is a disabled, mobility impaired prisoner who has been denied access to programs that constitute one or more of the claims alleged.
8. Separate actions maintained by individual members of the class would create a risk of varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the class. Inconsistent adjudications could establish incompatible standards of conduct for the defendants, and adjudication regarding individual class members

could, as a practical matter, be dispositive of, or impair the interests of, other class members not parties to the adjudication. For example, adjudication in multiple individual cases regarding access to programs or retrofitting bathrooms and showers could result in inconsistent obligations imposed on the defendants.
9. Defendants have acted and/or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the class that the plaintiffs represent, thereby making final injunctive and/or corresponding declaratory relief appropriate with respect to the class as a whole. For example, defendants have failed to provide disabled prisoners with a ramp to secure their access to outside recreation, with accessible bathrooms at the Chapel, Mosque and the visitation hall, or with handicapped accessible drug treatment programs.
10. Plaintiffs are represented by counsel experienced in prisoners' rights litigation. D.C. Prisoners' Legal Services Project specializes in civil rights litigation and has litigated a number of class action cases on behalf of prisoners in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Counsel are competent to prosecute this case and to protect the interests of the class members.
IV. PARTIES A. Plaintiffs 11. Plaintiff Kevin Games is, and at all times relevant hereto was, a prisoner of the District of Columbia Department of Corrections. Mr. Games suffers from multiple sclerosis, has

severe loss of muscle control and is confined to a wheelchair. He is incarcerated in the infirmary unit at the C.T.F. Mr. Games is unable to ambulate without the aid of his wheelchair, and is disabled under the definition of the A.D.A. and the Rehabilitation Act.
12. Plaintiff Michael Penny is, and at all times relevant hereto was, a prisoner of the District of Columbia Department of Corrections. Mr. Penny is confined to a wheelchair as a result of an infection to his spinal cord, caused by an untreated puncture wound to his back. He is incarcerated in the infirmary unit at the C.T.F. Mr. Penny is a paraplegic, is unable to ambulate without the aid of his wheelchair, and is disabled under the definition of the A.D.A. and the Rehabilitation Act.
13. Plaintiff Freddie Davis is, and at all times relevant hereto was, a prisoner of the District of Columbia Department of Corrections. Mr. Davis is a paraplegic confined to a wheelchair as a result of a gunshot wound to his back, and is incarcerated in the handicapped unit at the C.T.F. Mr. Davis is disabled under the definition of the A.D.A. and the Rehabilitation Act.
14. Plaint • f f James Witherspoon is, and at all tiir :s relevant hereto was, a prisoner of the District of Columbia Department of Corrections. Mr. Witherspoon has severe nerve damage as a result of a stab wound to his back and ambulates with the use of a wheelchair. He is incarcerated in the handicapped unit at the C.T.F. Mr. Witherspoon is disabled under the definition of the A.D.A. and the Rehabilitation Act.

B. Defendant 15. Defendant District of Columbia is a municipal corporation that has as one of its agencies the Department of Corrections. The Department of Corrections is responsible, pursuant to D.C. Code §24-442, for the safekeeping, care and protection of all D.C. prisoners. 16. The defendant has negotiated the sale of the C.T.F. to the Corrections Corporation of America ("C.C.A.11), which will continue to operate the facility as a District of Columbia prison. C.C.A. is expected to assume responsibility for the operation of the C.T.F. in March, 1997. This transfer will have no effect on the liability of the defendant due to C.C.A.'s agency relationship with the District of Columbia.1
V. 8TATEMENT OF THE CLAIM A. Introduction 17. The members of the plaintiff class are prisoners incarcerated at the C.T.F. Each has a physical disability which interferes with his or her ability to ambulate without the use of a wheelchair or other walking aid. Each class member seeks access to ser ices, programs, facilities and benefit? that the defendant provides to similarly situated prisoners who are not disabled and denies to the class members solely because of their disabilities.
1 The plaintiffs have advised C.C.A. of the substance of their complaints and their intent to file this lawsuit. A courtesy copy of this complaint will be served on C.C.A. and the plaintiffs will determine whether to add it as a party at the appropriate time.

18. Because disabled prisoners are held in a facility which, except for their housing unit, is not handicapped accessible, all of the disabled prisoners at the C.T.F. are denied access to these programs and services.
19. The C.T.F. is the newest prison built by the D.C. Department of Corrections. The C.T.F. is located in the District of Columbia, houses convicted prisoners, was built with federal funds and, upon information and belief, receives federal funds to provide programs. The C.T.F. was built to house certain special populations, and it includes a unit for drug treatment, a unit for prisoners with disabilities, an intake and diagnostic unit and a unit for women prisoners. The C.T.F. also houses the only inpatient infirmary in the Department of Corrections. The C.T.F. began housing prisoners in June, 1992.
20. Most disabled prisoners at the C.T.F. are held on a unit designated for handicapped prisoners. This unit has a number of cells and a room equipped to provide physical therapy.
21. In addition, some prisoners with mobility impairments are housed in the infirmary unit. Disabled prisoners held on the infirr dry unit are not allowed to leave the u dt to participate in any programs or activities, such as educational or vocational classes or religious programs. They can only leave the unit to go to a medical appointment, social or legal visits, or to court. This restriction applies regardless of the nature of the condition that resulted in their confinement to the infirmary or the length of time they are held on the infirmary unit.

B. Disabled Prisoners are Denied Access to Drug Treatment
22. Although the primary intensive, residential drug treatment program in the Department of Corrections is located at the C.T.F., the drug treatment unit is not handicapped accessible. The toilets and showers are not outfitted for use by handicapped prisoners, and the unit is on three levels with stairs between the floors. Therefore, it is not accessible to any prisoners in wheelchairs or with significant mobility problems.
23. The inability of disabled prisoners to participate in the drug treatment program can have severe consequences. Drug treatment is often a condition of parole or a recommendation of the sentencing judge. Therefore, disabled prisoners are penalized because they cannot get drug treatment, and so stay incarcerated for longer periods of time.
24. For instance, Mr. Penny was told by the Parole Board that he needed to participate in drug treatment in order to be paroled. Mr. Penny tried to enroll in a drug treatment program, but there is no handicapped accessible drug treatment program within the Department of Corrections. But for his disability, Mr. Penny would be eligible to participate in the drug treatment program. In October of 1995 and June of 1996, Mr. Penny was denied parole and each time received a six month set-off because he had not participated in a drug treatment program.

25. Mr. Witherspoon, Mr. G a m e s and Mr. Davis also seek to participate in drug treatment, but cannot solely because they are disabled and cannot be housed in the drug treatment unit.
c. Disabled Prisoners are Denied Access to Educational and Vocational Programs Offered at the c.T.F. 26. The C.T.F. offers a variety of programs to prisoners, including: educational programs (e.g., college level courses); vocational programs (e.g., graphic arts, word processing, tailoring and computer literacy); and various work programs. 27. Because there are structural barriers which prevent disabled prisoners from participating in these programs, every disabled inmate at the C.T.F. is denied access to the educational and vocational programs. For example, one vocational program offered is in computer literacy. The plaintiffs cannot participate in the computer courses because they are held in a classroom which is located up a flight of stairs. 28. Mr. Witherspoon, Mr. Penny, Mr. G a m e s and Mr. Davis would like to participate in educational and vocational classes, but the classes are not handicapped accessible. But for their disabilities, they are otherwise eligible to participate in these programs. Mr. G a m e s and Mr. Penny are further restricted by the policy that all infirmary patients, regardless of their length of stay, cannot participate in programs. 29. Mr. Davis has also sought to participate in the tailoring class because he believes this would be a good trade to learn in order to earn a livelihood when he is released. However, he has not been allowed to participate in the class.
9

Mr. Davis has also asked to participate in the Life Skills class, but he has not been allowed to do so.
30. The problems that plaintiff class members experience in obtaining access to programs is compounded by the fact that adequate mobility aids are unavailable. For instance, for more than a year, Mr. Witherspoon had a wheelchair that did not function properly. The wheelchair had no leg rest and Mr. Witherspoon had to take parts from other wheelchairs to replace missing parts in the wheelchair he was given. The wheels on his chair were very loose and Mr. Witherspoon was concerned that they would become detached. Mr. Witherspoon made numerous attempts to have his wheelchair repaired or to receive another wheelchair, but he was unsuccessful for more than a year. Having a broken wheelchair limits Mr. Witherspoon's ability to participate in any programs. Other class members have similarly dysfunctional equipment or are denied necessary equipment altogether. Mr. Davis, for example, was given a wheelchair with no arm rests, which makes it much more difficult to get in and out of his wheelchair.
31. There is a severe shortage of wheelchairs for disabled prisoners at the C.T.F. and the facility does not provide regular wheelchair maintenance. Wheelchairs are repaired by the same employees who are responsible for facilities maintenance, who have no experience or expertise in repairing or maintaining wheelchairs. Therefore, wheelchairs provided to disabled prisoners are usually in very poor repair, and may be missing
10

(:•-••
brakes, footrests, armrests and other critical parts. There are not enough wheelchairs available to provide one for every disabled inmate. Therefore, many disabled prisoners do not have regular access to a wheelchair and are severely limited in their movement and activities.
32. Disabled prisoners who are pretrial or misdemeanants are held on lockdown at the C.T.F. because they can't commingle with convicted prisoners and there is no handicapped accessible facility for pretrial detainees. These handicapped pretrial detainees are locked down 23 hours a day and are denied access to every program offered at the C.T.F. But for their disability, they would be housed on an open population dorm at the D.C. Detention Facility.
33. For example, Kevin Perry is a pretrial inmate who is held on involuntary protective custody at the C.T.F. solely because he is disabled and confined to a wheelchair. If Mr. Perry were not disabled, he would not be locked down 23 hours a day and would be housed on an open population dorm.
D. Disabled Prisoners at C.T.F. are Denied Access to Educational and Vocat-' anal Programs provided to non-Disabled Prisoners at other District Prisons. 34. Most disabled prisoners, but for their disabilities, would be housed at one of the Lorton prisons or in the C.T.F. drug treatment unit. Non-disabled prisoners have access to a variety of programs at these institutions which are denied to disabled prisoners, including college courses, industries, drug
11

and alcohol treatment, anger management and life skills classes, religious programs, group therapy, etc.
35. Mr. Games and Mr. Penny would like to participate in college level courses, but, upon information and belief, these programs are not accessible to inmates on the handicapped unit or in the infirmary. If Mr. Games and Mr. Penny were not disabled, they could be housed at a facility which provided access to college level programs. Therefore, but for their disabilities, they would otherwise be eligible to participate in these programs.
E. Disabled Prisoners are Denied Access to Recreational Programs 36. At the C.T.F., prisoners who are not disabled are given access to both an outdoor recreation yard and an indoor gymnasium. Disabled prisoners are not allowed to participate in outdoor recreation because there is no ramp which allows them to descend the stairs into the outside recreation yard. Disabled prisoners who are housed in the infirmary unit are denied access to both the outdoor and indoor recreation programs. 37. All of the disabled prisoners at the C.T.F. are unable to go outside for rec eation, and the defendant has refused tj build a ramp to allow disabled prisoners access to outdoor recreation. As a result, they never leave the building except to go to medical appointments and to court, and are thus severely limited in their access to natural light.
12

38. Mr. G a m e s complained to the administrator of the C.T.F., but he was informed that there was no money available to build a ramp.
F. Disabled Prisoners are Denied Access to Religious Programs 39. Although religious programs are conducted in rooms which are wheelchair accessible, the bathrooms on those floors are not wheelchair accessible. If a handicapped inmate participating in a religious service needs to go to the bathroom, he must be escorted back to his unit. When this occurs, he is rarely able to return to the religious service because the officers will not escort him.2 40. For instance, Mr. Witherspoon and Mr. Davis routinely attend religious services. Both have had to interrupt their attendance because they could not use the bathroom and at times are discouraged from attending because of this problem. Sometimes, Mr. Witherspoon brings a plastic jar with him to relieve himself so that he may participate in religious services, but finds this to be a humiliating accommodation to the lack of available, accessible bathrooms. But for their disabilities, they are othe- tfise eligible to participate in these religious programs. 41. Prisoners on the infirmary unit are not allowed to leave the unit to participate in religious services, so none of
2 As a result of their injuries or maladies, many disabled prisoners have decreased control over their bodily functions and require more frequent access to a bathroom.
13

the disabled prisoners are allowed to go to worship services. Mr. Games and Mr. Penny, for instance, want to participate in religious services. However, the only religious program available on the infirmary unit is an evangelical Christian minister who comes to the infirmary on Sundays to conduct prayer. Mr. Penny participates in these prayers, although he is a Muslim, because he is not allowed to leave the infirmary to go to Muslim services on Friday night.
G. Disabled Prisoners are Denied Access to Visitation 42. The bathrooms in the visiting hall are not handicapped accessible. When handicapped prisoners have visitors, they must terminate the visit if the prisoners need to go to the bathroom because there are no handicapped accessible bathrooms available near the visiting hall. After the disabled prisoners are taken to a handicapped accessible bathroom, the correctional officers will not return them to the visiting hall, so their visit is terminated. For example, both Mr. Games and Mr. Witherspoon have had to terminate visits because they needed to use the bathroom.
VI. CAUSES OF ACTION FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION; Americans with Disabilities Act 43. By the above stated actions, the defendant has violated the plaintiffs1 rights under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §12132, et seq. to be free from discrimination on the basis of disability.
14

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION! Rehabilitation Act 44. By the above stated actions, the defendant has violated the plaintiffs' rights under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §701 et seq. to be free from discrimination on the basis of handicap in programs that receive federal funding.
VII. REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, plaintiffs request that this Court grant the following relief:
a. Declare that the actions and inactions of the defendant described herein have violated and continue to violate the plaintiffs' rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act;
b. Enjoin the defendant from engaging in any action or conduct, or from failing to act in any way, that violates the plaintiffs' above-mentioned rights;
c. Order the defendant to make reasonable modifications to structures and in policies, practices, procedures necessary to remedy the violations of the plaintiffs' abo e-mentioned rights;
d. Award plaintiffs the cost of this suit, and reasonable attorneys' fees; and
15

e. Award plaintiffs all further relief that this Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,

By:

I

Hall ^(#420157)

:han Smith ^(#396598) D.C. Prisoners1 Legal

Services Project, Inc.

1400 20th Street, N.W.

Suite 117

Washington, D.C. 20036

(202) 775-0323

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Dated: February 4, 1997

16

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA «-,,
FILED /

KEVIN GARNES, gt al.
Plaintiffs,
v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendant.

)

c **

\

Clerk, u.i>. L)«trict Court

)

District of Columbia

)
) Civil Action No. 97-240 (PLF)

) )

) )

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT AND ORDER Counsel for the parties having reached an agreement resolving this action, hereby request that this settlement be approved in accordance with Fed.R.Civ. P. 23 (e). As more fully described below, the settlement fairly resolves the claims raised by the plaintiffs in the Complaint. I. Background This case was filed on February 4, 1997 by four mobility impaired prisoners confined to the Correctional Treatment Facility ("C.T.F.") on behalf of themselves and the class that they represent. The plainti fs claim in the complaint, inter alia, that mobility impaired prisoners are subjected to discrimination, based solely on their handicap, in access to educational, vocational, religious, drug treatment and recreational programs. Shortly after the initiation of this lawsuit, counsel for the parties entered into a series of negotiations designed to identify the remedial actions that could be taken by the defendant to resolve the plaintiffs' claims. Defendant's

contractor, Corrections Corporation of America ("C.C.A.") was
actively involved in these discussions. The parties toured the
C.T.F. with their respective consultants and identified various options to address the plaintiffs1 allegations.
Following the consultants' site visit, the defendant and
C C A . developed a series of plans to modify the C.T.F. and
instituted a number of changes in policy. The plans were
reviewed by the plaintiffs and their expert and any differences
were resolved. The majority of the work required under these
plans has now been completed, and the remaining work is expected
to be completed within the next several months.
The defendant has taken a number of actions to make the
C.T.F. more accessible to the plaintiffs, including:
• renovations in two male drug treatment units and one female drug treatment unit in order to create two cells in each unit which are handicapped accessible;
• renovation of a cell in a women's general population housing unit to make it handicapped accessible;
• renovation of a bathroom in the religious services area to make it handicapped accessible
• construction of a ramp so that prisoners in wheelchairs can access outdoor recreation;
• relocation of computer training classes to a room that is handicapped accessible;
• relocation of education classes to rooms that are handicapped accessible;
• repair or replacement of a number of wheelchairs and the institution of a wheelchair maintenance program;

• modification of practices and/or policies to permit medically cleared mobility impaired prisoners to hold prison jobs;
• modification of practices and/or policies to permit medically cleared mobility impaired prisoners on the infirmary unit to participate in religious services, outdoor recreation and the law library; and
• purchase of a van appropriately equipped to transport wheelchair bound prisoners to court and medical appointments.
XI• Terms of Settlement
The parties agree to the following terms of settlement:
A. Upon approval of this settlement pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e), the proceedings in this action shall be
stayed for a six month period. During this period, the
defendants shall complete all uncompleted, but agreed to,
modifications and make reports to the plaintiffs in accordance
with the terms of this settlement as set forth below.
B. The stay may be lifted at the end of this six month
period upon showing by either party that there has been a
material breach of this settlement. The parties agree that the
litigation shall '"hen proceed only as to those issues whi ^h
remain in dispute. The stay may be lifted prior to the end of
the six month period upon a showing that circumstances present a
threat to the health or safety of the plaintiffs. If the stay is
lifted, this litigation will be restored to its procedural status
prior to settlement.

C. At the expiration of the six month monitoring period, unless the Court has lifted the stay in accordance with paragraph II.B. above, the action shall be dismissed.
D. The parties agree the defendant will: 1. Admit qualified handicapped inmates to the drug treatment program, and allow them full participation in the program; 2. Allow all qualified handicapped inmates at the Correctional Treatment Facility, including medically cleared inmates on the infirmary unit, to participate in the educational and vocational programs offered at C.T.F., including access to a handicapped accessible bathroom, when necessary; 3. Allow all medically cleared handicapped inmates at the Correctional Treatment Facility, including those on the infirmary unit, access to indoor and outdoor recreation; 4. Allow all handicapped inmates at the Correctional Treatment Facility, including medically cleared inmates on the infirmary unit, access to religious programs, and access to the retrofitte 1 bathroom located near the religious services, when needed; 5. Allow all qualified handicapped inmates at the Correctional Treatment Facility, including medically cleared inmates on the infirmary unit, access to the law library; 6. Allow all qualified handicapped inmates at the Correctional Treatment Facility, including medically cleared inmates on the infirmary unit, access to work details;

7. Provide ongoing routine wheelchair maintenance at the Correctional Treatment Facility, or new wheelchairs, when necessary.
E. In order to allow the plaintiffs to adequately monitor compliance during the six month period, the defendant shall:
1. Allow the plaintiffs to tour the Correctional Treatment Facility with their expert at the beginning of the six month period and at such other times as the plaintiffs request, upon reasonable notice to the defendant, and under such circumstances as do not pose a threat to security;
2. After the Court approves the settlement, provide the plaintiffs with a monthly report for six months which includes a list of each program offered at C.T.F., the name and DCDC number of each disabled inmate who participated in each program during that month, including, but not limited to, the drug treatment program, educational and vocational programs, and work details. The report shall also indicate how often members of the plaintiff class on each unit are allowed to participate in indoor and outdoor recreation, religious services, visitat on, and the law library. The report shall indicate whether there are any barriers to the participation of disabled inmates in these programs, and the steps being taken to abate these barriers.
III. Approval of Agreement pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e) A. The parties propose the following schedule for approval pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e):

1. within 14 days, the parties shall present a mutually agreeable class notice to the Court for approval;
2. within 7 days following Court approval of the notice, the defendant shall provide a copy of the notice to each mobility impaired prisoner within the Department of Corrections, and shall post the notice in the C.T.F. infirmary, C.T.F. law library and in the handicapped units at the C.T.F. and the Central Facility;
3. the notice shall provide that any class member may provide written comments to the Court within 14 days of having been served with the notice. These comments shall be sent to the Clerk of the Court and made available to the Court and counsel for the parties; and
4. a fairness hearing shall be scheduled at the Court's convenience.

AurielT. Hall (#420157) Jonathan M. Smith (#396598) D.C. Prisoners1 Legal Services
Project 14 00 20th Street, N.W. S'dte 117 V-ishington, D.C. 20036 (202) 775-0323
For the plaintiffs

Jo Anne Robinson, Interim Corporation Counsel Michael E. Zielinski, Deputy Corporation Counsel William Earl, Assistant Deputy Corporation
-ounsel Maria Amato, (#414935) Assistant Corporation Counsel Office of the Corporation
Counsel 441 Fourth Street, N.W. Sixth Floor, South Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 727-6295
For the defendant

The foregoing settlement is, this ex I ~ day of V7\s<i*A.h r 1997, preliminarily approved. Proceedings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e) shall proceed in accordance with the schedule proposed by the parties.
Paul L. Friedman United States District Judge

Games v. D.C.

»V H

••••••HH

•• H • 1

PC-DC-002-002

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

KEVIN GARNES, e t a i .
Plaintiffs,
V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
Defendant.

)

MMAARR J 7 ffgggggg

)

aierK, U.S. District Court

)

District of Cofumbfe

)

) Civil Action No. 97-240 (PLF)
) ) ) )

ORDER The parties have moved pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e) that this Court approve a proposed settlement of this class action on behalf of the wheelchair-bound prisoners confined to the Correctional Treatment Facility. On June 16, 1997, the Court certified a class of all current and future prisoners who are mobility impaired due to a physical disability and are incarcerated in the District of Columbia Department of Corrections and housed at the Correctional Treatment Facility. The plaintiffs claimed that the District of Columbia had violated their rights to equal access to programs under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq.. and the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §701 et seq. Notice of the proposed settlement agreement was served on each member of the class, and class members have been given an opportunity to note any objections with the Court. On December 10, 1997 and March 17, 1998, the Court conducted hearings on the settlement. Five class members appeared and provided testimony. Plaintiffs' counsel has filed a status report regarding the implementation of the settlement agreement.
Garnes v. D.C.

•* • •

• • • • • • • • • • * VHMV • • • I I S B I • •

••• • •

••

PC-DC-002-003

»

'

"K /

Based on these proceedings, the Court finds:

1. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, the defendant has

taken certain steps to ensure that the plaintiffs have equal access

to programs, and the defendant is required to take additional steps

in the future.

2. The agreement provides for an adequate period of

monitoring to ensure the defendant's compliance with this

agreement.

3. During this monitoring period, the parties may return to

Court if there has been a material breach of the settlement.

4. The terms of the settlement, if fully executed, will

adquately address the issues raised in the complaint.

In accordance with these findings, the representations of the

parties and the record in this case, the Court concludes that the

proposed settlement agreement is fair, adequate and reasonable.

Accordingly, this /I day of /W* r ^

1998, it is

hereby

ORDERED that the Court approves the Stipulation of Settlement

and Order, filed by the parties on August 28, 1997; and it IF

further

ORDERED that this action is stayed for six months; and it is

further

ORDERED that if the defendant breaches the agreement, the stay

will be lifted and the action will be reinstated; and it is further

#
ORDERED that during the stay, the defendant shall make reports to the plaintiffs' counsel pursuant to section II of the Agreement; and it is further
ORDERED that if the stay has not been lifted during the six month monitoring period, the case shall be dismissed.
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN ^-^ United States District Judge

Service to:
Aurie T. Hall D.C. Prisoners1 Legal Services Project, Inc. 1400 20th Street, N.W. Suite 117 Washington, D.C. 20036
Maria Amato Office of the Corporation Counsel Correctional Litigation Unit 441 Fourth Street, N.W. Sixth Floor, South Washington, D.C. 20001

 
 District of Columbia live database - Docket Report

Page 1 of 6

CLOSED, TYPE-E
U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:97-cv-00240-PLF

GARNES, et al v. DC Assigned to: Judge Paul L. Friedman Demand: $0 Cause: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

Date Filed: 02/04/1997 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
KEVIN GARNES DCDC No. 174-873, Correctional Treatment Facility

represented by Aurie Talbor Hall OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE 201 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21201 (410) 234-1091 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
MICHAEL PENNY DCDC No. 183-608, Correctional Treatment Facility

Jonathan Mark Smith PUBLIC JUSTICE CENTER 500 East Lexington Street Baltimore, MD 21202-3559 (410) 625-9409 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Aurie Talbor Hall (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
FREDDIE DAVIS DCDC 224-604, Correctional Treatment Facility

Jonathan Mark Smith (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Aurie Talbor Hall (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff

Jonathan Mark Smith (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?646845696661941-L_280_0-1

6/16/2005

District of Columbia live database - Docket Report

Page 2 of 6

JAMES WITHERSPOON DCDC No. 250-699, Correctional Treatment Facility and all others similarly situated
V. Defendant DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

represented by Aurie Talbor Hall (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonathan Mark Smith (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Maria-Claudia T. Amato CORPORATION COUNSEL FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 441 Fourth Street, NW Sixth Floor Washington, DC 20011 (202) 724-6642 Fax: (202) 727-3625 Email: maria.amato@dc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 02/04/1997
02/04/1997 02/05/1997
03/03/1997
03/05/1997 03/27/1997 03/31/1997

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT filed by plaintiffs KEVIN GARNES, MICHAEL PENNY, FREDDIE DAVIS, and JAMES WITHERSPOON (bm) (Entered: 02/05/1997)

SUMMONS (2) issued for defendant DC (bm) (Entered: 02/05/1997)

2 NOTICE OF FILING by plaintiffs KEVIN GARNES, MICHAEL PENNY, FREDDIE DAVIS, JAMES WITHERSPOON re: letter sent to Charles Ruff, Corporation Counsel; attachment (1) (blj) (Entered: 02/06/1997)

3 MOTION (CONSENT) filed by defendant DC to extend time to 3/28/97 to answer complaint [1-1] (blj) Modified on 03/04/1997 (Entered: 03/04/1997)

4 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : granting motion to extend time to 3/28/97 to answer complaint [1-1] [3-1] by DC (N) (bm) (Entered: 03/05/1997)

5 MOTION filed by defendant DC to extend time to 4/10/97 to respond to complaint [1-1] (blj) (Entered: 03/28/1997)

6 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : granting motion to extend time to 4/10/97 to respond to complaint [1-1] [5-1] by DC ; Answer extended to 4/10/97 for DC (N) (ks) (Entered: 03/31/1997)

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?646845696661941-L_280_0-1

6/16/2005

District of Columbia live database - Docket Report

Page 3 of 6

04/10/1997 04/11/1997 05/05/1997 05/12/1997 05/19/1997 05/21/1997 05/23/1997 05/30/1997
05/30/1997
06/05/1997 06/13/1997 06/17/1997

7 MOTION (SECOND CONSENT) filed by defendant DC to extend time to 5/12/97 to answer complaint [1-1] (blj) (Entered: 04/11/1997)
8 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : granting motion to extend time to 5/12/97 to answer complaint [1-1] [7-1] by DC; Meet and Confer hearing set for 9:15 5/30/97; Meet Confer Statement due 5/23/97 (N) (bm) (Entered: 04/11/1997)
9 MOTION filed by plaintiffs KEVIN GARNES, MICHAEL PENNY, FREDDIE DAVIS, JAMES WITHERSPOON for class certification (blj) (Entered: 05/06/1997)
10 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT [1-1] by defendant DC . (ks) (Entered: 05/13/1997)
11 MOTION (CONSENT) filed by defendant DC to extend time to 5/30/97 to respond to plaintiff's motion for certification (blj) (Entered: 05/20/1997)
12 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : granting motion to extend time to 5/30/97 to respond to plaintiff's motion for certification [11-1] by DC (N) (bm) (Entered: 05/21/1997)
13 MEET AND CONFER STATEMENT/REPORT PURSUANT TO L.R. 206(d) filed by plaintiffs KEVIN GARNES, MICHAEL PENNY, FREDDIE DAVIS, JAMES WITHERSPOON, defendant DC . (blj) (Entered: 05/27/1997)
MEET AND CONFER STATUS HEARING before Judge Paul L. Friedman: defendant shall respond to class certification motion due by 6/13/97; discovery closes 10/30/97; Plaintiff's expert report due by 11/14/9; Defendant's expert report due by 12/3/97; Status conference set for 9:15 12/10/97 Reporter: Santa Zizzo (bm) (Entered: 05/30/1997)
14 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : Case assigned to the Complex track (track three) ; confirming dates set at the Meet and Confer Status Conference held 5/30/97; limiting each paraty to a maximum of 25 interrogatories to any other party; responses due 30 days after service; limiting each side to a maximum of 10 depositions; plaintiff shall inform the Court in writing by 6/20/97 of plaintiffs' position regarding the case of Melvin Thomas C.A. 96-1074; setting forth instructions to counsel. (N) (bm) (Entered: 05/30/1997)
15 NOTICE by plaintiffs KEVIN GARNES, MICHAEL PENNY, FREDDIE DAVIS, JAMES WITHERSPOON pursuant to Court's Order of 5/30/97 regarding Melvin Thomas v. District of Columbia (blj) (Entered: 06/06/1997)
16 RESPONSE by defendant DC to motion for class certification [9-1] by JAMES WITHERSPOON, FREDDIE DAVIS, MICHAEL PENNY, KEVIN GARNES (blj) (Entered: 06/16/1997)
17 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : granting motion for class certification [9-1] by JAMES WITHERSPOON, FREDDIE DAVIS,

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?646845696661941-L_280_0-1

6/16/2005

District of Columbia live database - Docket Report

Page 4 of 6

07/02/1997 08/01/1997 08/04/1997 08/28/1997 08/29/1997
09/12/1997 10/06/1997 11/21/1997 12/10/1997 12/19/1997
03/09/1998

MICHAEL PENNY, KEVIN GARNES; certifying the plaintiff's class under FRCP 23(b)(1) and 23(b)(2); setting forth the class definition. (N) (bm) (Entered: 06/17/1997)
18 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman: plaintiffs' discovery requests shall not be filed; discovery materials shall not be filed in this case. (N) (bm) (Entered: 07/02/1997)
19 MOTION filed by defendant DC to extend time to 8/22/97 to respond to plaintiffs' discovery requests (dbw) (Entered: 08/04/1997)
20 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : granting motion to extend time to 8/21/97 to respond to plaintiffs' discovery requests [19-1] by DC (N) (bm) (Entered: 08/04/1997)
21 MOTION filed by plaintiffs KEVIN GARNES, MICHAEL PENNY, FREDDIE DAVIS, JAMES WITHERSPOON, defendant DC requesting preliminary approval of settlement (blj) (Entered: 08/29/1997)
22 STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT AND ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : granting motion requesting preliminary approval of settlement [21-1] by DC, JAMES WITHERSPOON, FREDDIE DAVIS, MICHAEL PENNY, KEVIN GARNES; setting forth terms of settlement; staying the proceedings for a six month period; a fairness hearing shall be scheduled at the Court's convenience. (N) (bm) (Entered: 08/29/1997)
23 NOTICE OF FILING by plaintiffs KEVIN GARNES, MICHAEL PENNY, FREDDIE DAVIS, JAMES WITHERSPOON, defendant DC pursuant to Court's order of 8/29/97 notice to disabled prisoners; attachment (1) (blj) (Entered: 09/15/1997)
24 RESPONSE by plaintiff FREDDIE DAVIS to proposed settlement [22-1] (ks) (Entered: 10/09/1997)
25 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman: fairness hearing set for 9:15 12/10/97 ; the six class members who responded to the Notice of Proposed Settlement shall be personally served with notice of this hearing. (N) (bm) (Entered: 11/21/1997)
FAIRNESS HEARING before Judge Paul L. Friedman begun and continued to 3/17/98 at 9:30 a.m.; plaintiffs will conduct an inspection of the facility and report to the defendants of their findings. reporter: Vernell Marshall (bm) (Entered: 12/10/1997)
26 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman: confirming dates set at the Fairness Hearing held 12/10/97; directing the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to each of the six objecting class members at the DC Correctional Treatment Facility and shall make arrangements for their attendance at the 3/17/98 hearing if they are still in the custody of the DC Correctional Treatment Facility. (N) (bm) (Entered: 12/19/1997)
27 LETTER to the Court from John H. Davis, CCA Treatment Facility; "Let this be filed" (fiat) J. Friedman. (bm) (Entered: 03/09/1998)

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?646845696661941-L_280_0-1

6/16/2005

District of Columbia live database - Docket Report

Page 5 of 6

03/11/1998 03/17/1998 03/17/1998
03/31/1998 04/01/1998 05/06/1998 05/07/1998 05/26/1998 10/22/1998 11/04/1998 11/17/1998

28 STATUS REPORT by plaintiffs pursuant to Court's Order of 12/18/97; Exhibits (6). (ks) (Entered: 03/12/1998)
FAIRNESS HEARING before Judge Paul L. Friedman: held; the Court approved settlement over the objections by two class members; case stayed for 6 months. Reporter: Edward Hawkins (bm) (Entered: 03/17/1998)
29 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman: the Court approves the Stipulation of Settlement and Order filed by the parties on 8/28/97; staying case for six months ; if the defendant breaches the agreement, the stay will be lifted and the action be reinstated; during the stay, the defendant shall make reports to the plaintiffs' counsel pursuant to section II of the Agreement; if the stay has not been lifted during the six month monitoring period, the case shall be dismissed. (N) (bm) (Entered: 03/17/1998)
30 MEMORANDUM by plaintiffs in compliance with FRCP 54 and request for a scheduling order regarding fees and costs; Attachment (1). (ks) (Entered: 04/01/1998)
31 SCHEDULING ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman plaintiffs shall have until 5/8/98 to submit their motion for the award of attorneys' fees and costs; defendants shall respond to motion due 5/22/98 ; parties shall appear for a status conference on further order of Court. (N) (bm) (Entered: 04/01/1998)
32 JOINT MOTION by plaintiffs and defendant to extend time to 5/22/98 for filing attorney fee petition. (ks) (Entered: 05/07/1998)
33 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : granting joint motion to extend time to 5/22/98 for filing attorney fee petition [32-1] by DC, JAMES WITHERSPOON, FREDDIE DAVIS, MICHAEL PENNY, KEVIN GARNES; defendant shall respond to motion by 6/5/98 (N) (bm) (Entered: 05/07/1998)
34 CONSENT ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman: entering judgment in favor of plaintiffs and against the District of Columbia on the attorneys' fees and costs associated with the litigation up to and including 5/15/98 in the amount of $61,000.00; setting forth payment of attorneys fees. (N) (bm) (Entered: 05/26/1998)
35 ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman: dismissing complaint [1-1] ; directing the Clerk of the Court shall remove this case from the docket of the Court. (N) (bm) (Entered: 10/22/1998)
36 MEMORANDUM by plaintiff KEVIN GARNES, plaintiff MICHAEL PENNY, plaintiff FREDDIE DAVIS, plaintiff JAMES WITHERSPOON in compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 54 and request for a scheduling order regarding fees and costs; exhibits (4) (bjsp) (Entered: 11/05/1998)
37 SCHEDULING ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman plaintiffs shall submit their motion for award of attorneys' fees and costs due 12/21/98;

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?646845696661941-L_280_0-1

6/16/2005

District of Columbia live database - Docket Report

Page 6 of 6

12/21/1998 12/22/1998 12/23/1998

defendants shall respond to motion due 1/4/99 ; the Court urges the parties to reach an agreement on this matter as they did with respect to fees up through 5/19/98. (N) (bm) (Entered: 11/17/1998)
38 MOTION filed by plaintiff KEVIN GARNES, plaintiff MICHAEL PENNY, plaintiff FREDDIE DAVIS, plaintiff JAMES WITHERSPOON to extend time to 12/28/98 within which to file a response to defendants motion (bjsp) (Entered: 12/22/1998)
39 MOTION filed by plaintiff KEVIN GARNES, plaintiff MICHAEL PENNY, plaintiff FREDDIE DAVIS, plaintiff JAMES WITHERSPOON to extend time to 12/28/98 within which to respond to defendants filing (bjsp) (Entered: 12/23/1998)
40 CONSENT ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman: entering judgment in favor of plaintiffs and against the District of Columbia in the amount of $5,875.50; this judgment, being the nature of a settlement, shall bear no interest; the District of Columbia shall pay the judgment issuing the check made payable to D.C. Prisoners' Legal Services Project, Inc. (N) (bm) (Entered: 12/23/1998)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

06/16/2005 16:18:53

PACER Login: hs0328

Client Code:

Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 1:97-cv-00240-PLF

Billable Pages: 4

Cost:

0.32

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?646845696661941-L_280_0-1

6/16/2005