Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD

Document 1

Filed 10/13/14

Page 1 of 42

FILED
2014 Oct-14 AM 10:17 U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

ANTONIO CHEATHAM; MARK *

DUKE; JAMES EDWARDS; DALE *

GILLEY; FRANKY JOHNSON; *

MICHAEL MAYS; DERRICK

*

WHITE; ALLAN WILLIAMS

*

and ROBERT WOODS, on behalf *

of themselves and all others

*

similarly situated

*

*

PLAINTIFFS,

* Civil Action No. _____________

vs.

*

*

COMMISSIONER KIM THOMAS; *

ASSOCIATE COMMISSIONER *

JAMES DELOACH; ASSOCIATE *

COMMISSIONER TERRANCE *

MCDONNELL; DEPUTY

*

COMMISSIONER GREG

*

LOVELACE; INSTITUTIONAL *

COORDINATOR GRANT

*

CULLIVER; WARDEN CARTER *

DAVENPORT; ASSISTANT

*

WARDEN ERIC EVANS;

*

ASSISTANT WARDEN KAREN *

CARTER; CAPTAIN CARL

*

SANDERS; CAPTAIN GARY

*

MALONE, in their official

*

capacities,

*

*

DEFENDANTS.

*

_________________________

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT ________________________

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 2 of 42
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Plaintiffs are men presently confined in the custody of the Alabama Department of Corrections (“ADOC”) at St. Clair Correctional Facility (“St. Clair” or “the Facility”), where mismanagement, poor leadership, overcrowding, inadequate security, and unsafe conditions, including broken and nonfunctioning locks on the majority of cell doors, have lead to an extraordinarily high homicide rate, weekly stabbings and assaults, and a culture where violence is tolerated, creating conditions of confinement that violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Because of poor management, drugs and other contraband – in many cases contraband that is brought into the Facility and sold to prisoners by officers or DOC staff – are prevalent. Furthermore, correctional staff fail to follow policies and procedures and sometimes ignore urgent pleas for assistance that then results in serious violence. The potential for violence is exacerbated by the dearth of basic hygiene supplies, including soap, toilet paper, and underclothing, that can only be obtained by purchase or favor. It is also exacerbated by new policies eliminating or severely cutting back mental health and drug treatment services, rehabilitative programming, and removing books and other constructive activities from the housing units. The lack of basic hygiene supplies and opportunities to engage in activities, including reading, creates an oppressive and monotonous environment that
2

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 3 of 42
accommodates abuse and violence, as well as drug abuse in a population with a high rate of mental illness and prior addiction.
Defendants have failed to reasonably and adequately respond to this extremely high rate of prisoner-on-prisoner assaults and homicides and the dangerous conditions that facilitate the incidents and culture of violence. Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for injunctive and declaratory relief to redress Defendants’ violations of their rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
Each paragraph in this complaint incorporates, repeats, and realleges every other paragraph in this complaint.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343(a). Plaintiffs seek declaratory relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201. Venue is proper pursuant to § 1391(b).
PARTIES PLAINTIFFS:
2. Plaintiffs Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, and Robert Woods are prisoners at St. Clair Correctional Facility. Each named Plaintiff has suffered
3

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 4 of 42
physical harm or is in immediate danger of future harm. They seek to represent themselves and all other current and future prisoners at St. Clair. DEFENDANTS:
3. Defendant Kim Thomas is the Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections. As Commissioner, Defendant Thomas is responsible for the direction, supervision, and control of the Department of Corrections. He is the highest ranking official in the Alabama Department of Corrections. Defendant Thomas is sued in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections.
4. Defendant James Deloach is the Associate Commissioner for Operations for the Alabama Department of Corrections. As Associate Commissioner, Defendant Deloach is responsible for ensuring the effective daily operations of prison facilities. He supervises the Classification Review Board, the Training Division, the Transfer Division, and the Institutional Coordinators. Defendant Deloach is sued in his official capacity.
5. Defendant Terrance G. McDonnell is the Associate Commissioner for Plans and Programs for the Alabama Department of Corrections. As Associate Commissioner, Defendant McDonnell is responsible for the Central Records Division, Research and Planning Division, Supervised Reentry Program, Religious Programs, Educational and Vocational Education Programs, and Victim-Constituent Services.
4

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 5 of 42
Defendant McDonnell is sued in his official capacity. 6. Defendant Greg Lovelace is the Deputy Commissioner for Maintenance
for the Alabama Department of Corrections. As Deputy Commissioner, Defendant Lovelace is responsible for the maintenance and construction of correctional facilities. Defendant Lovelace is sued in his official capacity.
7. Defendant Grant Culliver is the Institutional Coordinator for the Northern Region of the Alabama Department of Corrections. Defendant Culliver is responsible for planning, monitoring, and reviewing day-to-day operations of correctional institutions in his assigned area, including St. Clair Correctional Facility. Defendant Culliver is sued in his official capacity.
8. Defendant Carter Davenport is the Warden of St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama. As warden, Defendant Davenport is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the prison, as well as the safety of all inmates at the Facility and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Davenport is sued in his official capacity.
9. Defendant Karen Carter is an Assistant Warden of St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama. As assistant warden, Defendant Carter is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the prison, as well as the safety of all inmates at the Facility and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Carter is sued
5

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 6 of 42
in her official capacity. 10. Defendant Eric Evans is an Assistant Warden of St. Clair Correctional
Facility in Springville, Alabama. As assistant warden, Defendant Evans is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the prison, as well as the safety of all inmates at the Facility and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Evans is sued in his official capacity.
11. Defendant Carl Sanders is a Captain at St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama. As a Captain, Defendant Sanders is responsible for safety of all inmates at the Facility, for supervising the security activities of St. Clair, and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Sanders is sued in his official capacity.
12. Defendant Gary Malone is a Captain at St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama. As a Captain, Defendant Malone is responsible for safety of all inmates at the Facility, for supervising the security activities of St. Clair, and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Malone is sued in his official capacity.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 13. Defendants are aware of the extremely high rate of violence at St. Clair. There have been six homicides at the Facility in the past 36 months, three of which
6

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 7 of 42
occurred in 2014. This constitutes a rate of prisoner-on-prisoner homicides at St. Clair that is drastically higher than the national average in state prisons. Based on the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ most recent available annual data from 2011, the national homicide rate in state prisons was approximately 5.4 homicides per 100,000 prisoners. The homicide rate at St. Clair during the same time period was approximately 75.4 homicides per 100,000 prisoners. The homicide rate at St. Clair in 2012 was 75.6 per 100,000 prisoners, 77.7 per 100,000 prisoners in 2013, and the homicide rate to date for 2014 is approximately 232.4 per 100,000 prisoners.
14. There is also a high rate of stabbings and serious assaults. Based on the most recent data made available by the Alabama Department of Corrections, the rate of serious assaults at St. Clair from January to May 2014 was 848.8 serious assaults per 100,000 prisoners and the rate of fights and assaults combined was 4,321 per 100,000 prisoners.
15. Defendants are aware of this extreme level of serious life endangering violence at St. Clair. In a news article from March 16, 2012, Defendant Davenport referred to the overcrowding, contraband, and violence at St. Clair as a “security nightmare.” There has been media coverage of each of the prisoner-on-prisoner homicides, which has included official statements from ADOC.
16. Furthermore, undersigned counsel sent a letter to Defendant Thomas on
7

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 8 of 42
April 22, 2014, regarding the alarming rise in violence and unprecedented homicide rate at St. Clair under Warden Davenport’s leadership and met with the Commissioner to emphasize these concerns.
17. Less than two months after this meeting regarding the alarming rise in fatalities at St. Clair, another homicide occurred. Jodey Waldrop was killed inside his cell on June 3, 2014.
18. On June 9, 2014, following the murder of Mr. Waldrop, undersigned counsel sent a second letter to Defendant Thomas which documented the high rate of violence and the number of homicides at St. Clair in the preceding 30 months. In this letter, and in meetings with the Commissioner and his staff, undersigned counsel detailed the mismanagement and violent conditions at St. Clair and called for immediate reform and change in leadership.
19. No changes were made following these communications and the violence at St. Clair continued. On September 16, 2014, another prisoner was killed at St. Clair.
20. Defendants’ knowledge of the violent and dangerous conditions is also established by institutional reports prepared by Defendants’ employees describing violent incidents and lawsuits filed by prisoners challenging the abuse of authority and conditions of confinement.
8

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 9 of 42
21. Defendants are responsible for the care, custody and control of prisoners in their custody, and, through their acts and omissions, Defendants have allowed a dangerous and violent environment to flourish. Upon information and belief, Defendants have not made significant efforts, and have not implemented adequate changes in policy or practice to address, or to improve, the conditions at St. Clair that allows violence to proliferate. Despite the extraordinary rate of violence and homicides at St. Clair, Defendants have failed to take reasonable, necessary and appropriate steps to prevent and remedy these dangerous conditions.
22. Where Defendants have responded, their response has been unreasonable. Verbally abusive and physically aggressive intervention by staff heightens the tension and makes the prison more dangerous. This behavior is modeled by the highest ranking staff in the prison including Defendants Warden Davenport, Captain Sanders, and Captain Malone.
23. It has been widely publicized that in 2012, Defendant Warden Davenport reportedly punched a handcuffed prisoner in the face. Warden Davenport was not demoted or removed from his command.
24. Upon information and belief, Defendant Captain Sanders engages in arbitrary and unpredictable bullying tactics that keep the prison on edge including an incident in 2013 when Captain Sanders snatched a food tray from a prisoner’s hands
9

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 10 of 42
causing a dangerous and volatile situation to erupt leading to serious injuries to officers and prisoners. Upon information and belief, Captain Sanders has taunted prisoners and responded to their safety concerns by telling them to, “get a knife,” “kill him or kill yourself,” and “if you really don’t like him, stab him.”
25. A group of high ranking officers have used excessive force and promulgated the culture of violence through their own actions. This, combined with Defendants’ failure to appropriately supervise staff with patterns of incidents involving excessive force or abusive interactions, has created an environment where the risk of physical harm is likely. This is reflected in the numerous assaults on prisoners by a group of correctional staff who have been the subject of repeated complaints of abuse, including but not limited to:
a. In 2014, Captain Carl Malone punched a prisoner, who was handcuffed, in the head, chipping the prisoner’s tooth. b. In July 2014, Correctional Officers Donald Lukima and Christopher Smith, officers on Lt. Carter’s shift beat a prisoner. Officers Lukima and Smith ordered the prisoner out of his cell in the middle of the night, took him into the hallway outside his block, handcuffed him, and then hit him in the back of the head with handcuffs wrapped around their knuckles, causing injuries requiring staples. Upon information and belief, Lt. Carter observed the assault but did
10

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 11 of 42
not intervene. c. In May 2014, Lt. Carter put his hands around an inmate’s neck and applied pressure until he lost consciousness. The inmate had to be taken to UAB hospital due to his injuries. d. In May 2014, Lt. Carter forced Dale Gilley to stand outside the shift office facing the wall for fourteen hours and, at one point during that period of time, slammed his head against the wall and punched him in the face. e. Jermaine Tillman was assaulted in February 2013, by Officers Chad Cleveland, M. Desnides, and W. Howard. The officers assaulted Mr. Tillman when he was returning to his cell from the showers and was restrained in handcuffs behind his back. The officers hit Mr. Tillman in the face, slammed his head into a window, and continued to punch, kick, and beat him when he fell to the floor. Mr. Tillman’s injuries included swelling to his head and bruising on his face. f. Upon information and belief, inmate Richardo Eason was beaten by multiple St. Clair officers while handcuffed in February 2013. While assigned to the segregation unit, Mr. Eason was placed in handcuffs before being allowed to leave his cell for a shower. Officer JaMichael Howard left his post and approached Mr. Eason, asked him a question, then punched Mr. Eason
11

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 12 of 42
several times in the face. Officers Taylor Knight and Chad Cleveland then assisted Howard in slamming Mr. Eason onto the floor. g. Upon information and belief, inmate Darrious Mabry was beaten by Officer Matthew Moore in October 2012. In a dispute over Mr. Mabry leaving the dining hall with extra cake, Officer Moore left his post and attacked Mr. Mabry, who suffered a broken nose, split lip, broken tooth, injured eye, and head contusions. h. Upon information and belief, on January 20, 2012, inmate Joseph Shack was beaten by Sgt. John Mason and suffered hearing loss as a result. Mr. Shack was handcuffed and shackled during the beating. Sgt. Mason punched him in the head, face, and ear, stomped on his back, kicked him and yelled racial epithets at him. Mr. Shack had requested the presence of a witness at a disciplinary hearing, and Sgt. Mason responded: “This is what I do to a [n . . .] that tries to tell me how to do my job.” Mr. Shack was treated for a ruptured ear, fractured thumb, internal bleeding, and possibly fractured ribs. He was fitted for a hearing aid following the rupture. i. Upon information and belief, James Bonds was beaten by officers and suffered a severe eye injury in September 2011. Three correctional officers shook down his cell, forced him to remove clothes and to squat and cough.
12

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 13 of 42
After they found a cell phone in his cell, the officers sprayed Mr. Bonds with a chemical agent and struck him with batons, then handcuffed him. After Mr. Bonds was handcuffed, Officer Donald Lukima arrived at the scene and struck Mr. Bonds in the eye while Mr. Bonds was handcuffed. Mr. Bonds suffered a serious eye injury, including an orbital wall fracture to his left eye and massive bleeding. His injuries required multiple treatments and surgeries at outside hospitals. 26. Defendants have also failed to promulgate, implement and enforce adequate policies, procedures, and practices necessary to adequately supervise and monitor the housing units and common areas in the Facility and to maintain the safety and security of prisoners at St. Clair. Defendants are aware that the inadequate supervision by correctional staff has created a dangerous environment, has contributed to numerous homicides and assaults in the Facility, and creates a substantial risk of serious harm. As stated by Defendant Davenport, the conditions at St. Clair make it a “security nightmare.” They have failed to take reasonable measures to change their practices, policies, procedures to improve safety and security of the prisoners in the general population housing units. 27. Defendants fail to adequately supervise and monitor the housing blocks in general population. Upon information and belief, St. Clair has six cellblocks, J, K,
13

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 14 of 42
L, M, N, O, P, and Q, that house prisoners in general population. Each cellblock is divided into two separate sides, so that they are designated as J1, J2, K1, K2, etc. Blocks J and K are paired blocks that are connected by a hallway, as are L and M, N and O, and P and Q. Each side of a cellblock is comprised of 24 two-man cells, so that 48 prisoners live on each side of a block and 96 prisoners live in each block as a whole. Each cell has a steel door through which prisoners enter and exit their cell. The locking mechanisms on the majority of cell doors are broken or ineffectual and provide no protection. (See ¶¶ 40-44 below.)
28. A single officer is assigned to supervise and monitor each of the housing blocks and the 96 prisoners housed there. The officer is stationed in a “cube,” which has windows that allow the officer to see into both sides of the block. Upon information and belief, the cube officer is not permitted to leave their post during their shift. Random patrols of the housing blocks by additional officers occur extremely infrequently. Upon information and belief, most days, officers only walk through the blocks during scheduled count times that occur three to five times in a 24 hour period. Therefore, the cube officer is the only officer monitoring both sides of each block the vast majority of the time. Upon information and belief, the officers in the cube are, at times, asleep, on the telephone, or otherwise not paying attention to the prisoners they are supervising.
14

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 15 of 42
29. Upon information and belief, there are blind spots in all of the blocks that cannot be seen by the cube officer, including the shower area, the TV/day room, and inside all of the cells. There are few, if any, functioning cameras in the housing blocks. Consequently, large sections of the housing blocks in general population are not within the view of any officer the majority of the day.
30. The only means for prisoners to communicate with the officer in the cube is by banging on the glass windows. If a prisoner is in a locked cell, there is no way for a prisoner in his cell to contact the officer in the cube except by banging on his cell door.
31. Each of the cellblocks open onto a common yard, referred to as the “GYard” and doors leading to the G-Yard from the blocks are located in the hallways that connect the paired blocks together. The gymnasium used by all of the prisoners in general population is located on the G-Yard. The prisoners who live in H-dorm and G-dorm also use the G-Yard and the gymnasium.
32. There are between 200 and 400 prisoners on the yard or in the gym during yard call and gym call. Upon information and belief, there is one officer assigned to supervise the yard and the gym during yard and gym call and between two and four roving officers. However, there are often less officers present than are assigned to the gym and yard.
15

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 16 of 42
33. There are also two open bay dorms at St. Clair. The first is known as “HDorm,” where prisoners enrolled in the Therapeutic Communities program (“TC”), a substance abuse treatment program, reside. Upon information and belief, there are approximately 260 prisoners who currently reside in H-Dorm. The other dorm is known as G-Dorm. It is a part of the infirmary and typically, prisoners requiring medical care live there. Upon information and belief, there are approximately 58 prisoners who live in G-dorm.
34. Upon information and belief, there is one officer who is assigned to sit at a desk at the entrance of H-dorm and who is responsible for supervising the prisoners who reside in the dorm. That officer is not permitted to leave his assigned post during his shift and is unable to see inside the bathrooms, as well as the back of the dorm where some prisoners’ beds are located, from the desk where he sits. Upon information and belief, random patrols of the dorms by additional officers occur extremely infrequently. Most days, officers only walk through the blocks during scheduled count times that occur three to five times in a 24 hour period. Therefore, the officer assigned to the desk is the only officer monitoring each block the vast majority of the time and the officers at the desk are, at times, asleep, on the telephone, or otherwise not paying attention to the prisoners they are supervising.
35. Upon information and belief, there are blind spots in the dorms. The
16

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 17 of 42
officer assigned to monitor the dorm from the desk near the entrance is not able to see a portion of the back of the dorm where some prisoners’ beds are located. Additionally, the officer is not able to see into the bathrooms from his or her post. There are few, if any, functioning cameras in the dorms. Consequently, portions of the dorms are not within the view of any officer for large parts of the day.
36. Defendants are aware that the inadequate supervision in general population contributes to the high rate of prisoner-on-prisoner violence. Inattentive officers, the inability to contact officers in an emergency, and blind spots in the units have contributed to numerous violent incidents, many of which have been stabbings, that have resulted in serious injury or death, including but not limited to:
a. In June 2014, Jodey Waldrop was stabbed and killed inside his cell, a blind spot to the cube officer, by a prisoner who entered his cell, when the blocks are supposed to be on lock down and no prisoner should have been out of his cell. b. In June 2014, Derrick White, who lived in P block, was assaulted in the hallway between P and Q blocks during a movement time by a prisoner who, upon information and belief, was not assigned to either block. There were no officers present when Mr. White was assaulted. He was strangled and then dragged while unconscious into the showers in Q. He was in the showers from
17

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 18 of 42
approximately 7:30 a.m. until 1 p.m. and was never found by staff, despite the fact that, upon information and belief, a count was conducted during the time he was missing. c. In May 2014, Derrick White was stabbed in the gym by another prisoner. Mr. White’s assailant also stabbed another prisoner during this incident. There were approximately 20 prisoners present in the gym and 200 prisoners in the yard at the time of the stabbing. Upon information and belief, there was one officer supervising the yard and no officers present in the gym. d. In May 2014, Antonio Cheatham was assaulted by another prisoner in the bathroom of the H-dorm, a known blind spot, while no correctional officers were in view. Part of his ear was bitten off and flushed down a toilet before any officers responded to the struggle. e. In February 2014, a prisoner was stabbed inside his cell, a blind spot to the cube officer. f. In January 2014, Marquette Cummings was stabbed and killed in the TV room, a blind spot to the cube officer. g. In January 2014, Michael Mays was stabbed by another prisoner on the way to the chow hall. Mr. Mays was stabbed in the neck, in the back, and in the elbow. Mr. Mays had to be taken to an outside hospital for treatment.
18

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 19 of 42
h. In September 2013, Franky Johnson was burned in his cell in the middle of the night by a prisoner who was able to exit his own cell and enter Mr. Johnson’s cell. That prisoner threw powder hair remover that had been heated in a microwave on Mr. Johnson while he was sleeping, resulting in severe chemical burns. i. In July 2013, Mark Duke was stabbed several times by another prisoner in the G-Yard and suffered a punctured lung. j. In 2013, a prisoner was stabbed multiple times with an ice pick outside the gym by another prisoner. At the time there were approximately 200 inmates in the area, but no officers were present to intervene in the conflict. The prisoner made it to the infirmary unassisted and was eventually transported by ambulance to an outside hospital because of the seriousness of his wounds. k. In May 2012, John Rutledge was strangled to death inside his cell in the middle of the night when the cells should have been locked down. Multiple assailants were able to enter Mr. Rutledge’s cell and hog-tie and strangle him without being observed by officers. His cell mate discovered him and reported his condition to the cube officer. By the time officers reached the cell, Mr. Rutledge was dead from strangulation. l. Upon information and belief, Muhammad Al-Ameen, also known as
19

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 20 of 42
Terry Rivers, was repeatedly stabbed on the yard by another inmate in May 2012. There were numerous inmates on the yard, but no officers were present when Mr. Al-Ameen was stabbed. Mr. Al-Ameen underwent surgery on his neck and surgery on his hand to repair damaged tendons. m. In October 2011, Jabari Bascomb was stabbed to death in his cell, a blind spot to the cube officer, after another prisoner broke into his cell. n. Upon information and belief, in January 2011, Anthony Moss was assaulted in his cell, a blind spot to the cube officer, and suffered an injury which caused him to lose the use of his left eye. 37. Defendants have also failed to promulgate and enforce adequate and effective policies, procedures and practices in the segregation housing units meant to keep prisoners isolated from one another for their protection. Upon information and belief, policy requires that prisoners in segregation be placed in handcuffs before their cell door is opened, and that only one door be open at a time so that prisoners in segregation do not come in contact with each other. In practice, the cube officer frequently rolls the doors from his cube without the placement of handcuffs, allowing for multiple people in segregation to be on the hallway and in the showers at the same time. 38. DOC staff also fail to adequately conduct searches for contraband and
20

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 21 of 42
knives in segregation. The failure to follow the policies of permitting only one prisoner out of his cell at a time and searching for contraband creates a significant risk of serious harm because these conditions have been the cause of multiple violent assaults, including but not limited to:
a. In August 2014, a prisoner was stabbed by the same prisoner that fatally stabbed Jammy Bell in 2013, after the prisoner was assigned to clean the halls in the segregation unit. The officers failed to secure the food-tray slots on the cell doors prior to sending the prisoner into the unit and the other man was able to stab the prisoner in his leg by sticking a knife attached to a broom handle through his open tray slot. b. In August 2013, Jammy Bell was fatally stabbed by another prisoner in the segregation unit after an officer failed to follow proper protocol for opening the cell doors. c. Upon information and belief, Jovar Gamble was stabbed multiple times in August 2012, while housed in the segregation unit. Mr. Govar was in handcuffs on the walk when another segregation inmate stabbed him. d. Upon information and belief, Orlando Porch was assaulted by another inmate while both men were housed in segregation in January 2012. 39. Defendants are aware of the locations and circumstances in which these
21

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 22 of 42
homicides and assaults have occurred and that inadequate supervision was one of the dangerous conditions that made it possible for these incidents to occur. However, they have failed to adequately increase patrols and supervision of the units, have not installed cameras or provided means for prisoners to call for help in an emergency, nor taken any other reasonable action to increase and improve the quality of supervision in general population, leaving the plaintiff class exposed to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm.
DEFENDANTS’ FAILURE TO PROVIDE SECURE LOCKING MECHANISMS ON INDIVIDUAL CELL DOORS PLACES INMATES AT RISK OF VIOLENT ASSAULT. 40. The locking mechanism on the majority of cells are broken and have not been repaired. Defendants rely on a system of locked, secure cells to house inmates safely, rather than visual monitoring, yet Defendants are aware that the locks in the majority of doors at the Facility can be easily tampered with so that they do not lock. Without locking cell doors, prisoners in the cell blocks have no means of protecting themselves inside their cells. Defendants have refused requests to fix cell doors and have failed to take adequate measures to repair the broken cell locks. 41. The locks on the cell doors in general population can be easily tampered with by using items such as piece of plastic, a razor blade, or paper clips to jam the locking mechanism. Once the locking mechanism is jammed, it does not engage and
22

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 23 of 42
the door can be “tricked,” meaning it can be opened from the inside or from the outside with a plastic ID card which all prisoners carry. The locks on some of the doors in general population are broken and do not work, even if nothing is jamming the mechanism. In some doors, the entire mechanism is missing. Cell doors in general population remain open all day, making it possible for prisoners to jam the locks in other prisoners’ doors. The locks on the doors in segregation can also be easily tampered with by jamming an object, such as a toothbrush, in the mechanism that rolls the door, which prevents the lock from engaging.
42. Consequently, Plaintiffs cannot keep other prisoners from entering their cells and prisoners are able to enter or exit their own and other prisoners’ cells at any time, even during lockdown. This creates a particularly dangerous environment because cells are “blind zones” in the blocks, meaning that officers in the cube cannot see inside the cells and there is no way for a prisoner to call an officer for help in the event of an emergency, other than banging on the cell to try to get the attention of the cube officer. (See ¶¶ 28-29 above) Because cube officers are frequently asleep or are otherwise inattentive, this is not an effective means for a prisoner being assaulted to get help.
43. Defendants know that the locks on most cells do not work. St. Clair staff have made comments demonstrating their knowledge, have used their own ID cards
23

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 24 of 42
to open cell doors, and have seen prisoners come out of their cells when the unit is supposed to be on lockdown. Upon information and belief, there is an indicator light panel in the cube that indicates to the cube officer when cell doors are not locked. Furthermore, Defendants are aware that the lack of functioning locks creates dangerous conditions because prisoners have been assaulted in their cells during times when the unit was on lockdown. These incidents include, but are not limited to:
a. In June 2014, Jodey Waldrop was murdered in his cell by another prisoner, who was able to enter Mr. Waldrop’s cell in the middle of the night when the block was on lockdown, due to the cell door not locking. b. In August 2013, Jammy Bell was stabbed by another prisoner in segregation after his cell door was tampered with. c. In May 2012, John Rutledge was strangled to death by other prisoners who entered his cell in the middle of the night, when the cells should have been on lockdown. d. Upon information and belief, in May 2011, Derrick Averhart was stabbed in the arm, head, and face by another inmate while handcuffed in his cell in segregation. 44. Defendants have failed to respond in a reasonable manner to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm posed to the plaintiff
24

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 25 of 42
class by the broken locks on the general population cell doors. Defendants do not adequately train younger staff how to determine if a door is tricked, do not regularly check cell doors to make sure the lock is functioning properly or repair locks they know are broken, have refused Plaintiffs’ requests to repair broken locks, and have taken no other reasonable or adequate action to ameliorate the risk of harm created by cell doors that do not lock.
VULNERABLE INMATES, INCLUDING THE DISABLED AND ELDERLY, ARE HOUSED IN VIOLENT UNITS WHERE THEIR RISK OF VIOLENT ATTACK IS INCREASED. 45. Defendants’ lack of risk assessment and classification system puts prisoners at risk of violence. Defendants fail to effectively separate prisoners who are at risk for a violent conflict. Defendants fail to adequately screen incoming prisoners to determine if they have enemies in the Facility, based either on personal conflicts, prior conflicts at other facilities in ADOC, or gang-based conflicts, and do not adequately take such considerations into account when making housing assignments. Without the ability to identify enemies and vulnerable inmates, St. Clair cannot appropriately manage risks of violence, thus exposing prisoners to harm. 46. Upon information and belief, Defendants do not adequately factor in a prisoner’s security level, including his offense of conviction, sentence, and disciplinary record, in making housing assignments. Minimum, medium, and
25

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 26 of 42
maximum custody prisoners can be, and are, assigned to the same units and cells as each other. Therefore, prisoners with short term of years sentences, convictions for relatively minor offenses and clean or only minor disciplinary histories can be assigned to the same unit, and assigned to share a cell with, prisoners who have life sentences, were convicted of more serious offenses, or with a violent institutional history. It is unreasonable of Defendants to fail to make housing assignments based on security classification status or other vulnerabilities.
47. Upon information and belief, Defendant Sanders, the captain of general population is responsible for authorizing all housing movement and has repeatedly assigned older, physically disabled, or otherwise vulnerable prisoners to units and cells with young prisoners with a history of violent conduct. He has also failed to authorize a change in housing assignment when such prisoners request a bed change based on fear for their safety. (See ¶¶ 52-53 below.)
a. James Edwards, who is 56 years old, has recently been assigned to cells with much younger prisoners who engage in risky activities that put him at risk and who steal his property. In 2012, while living in a prior block, Mr. Edwards’ cell mate would leave the cell door unlocked at night in order to obtain drugs and engage in other prohibited behavior. Mr. Edwards complained to Captain Sanders and requested a bed transfer because his cell mate was using drugs and
26

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 27 of 42
taking his property. Captain Sanders refused to move him and told him, “When I see one of y’all on a stretcher, I know it’s a problem.” b. In June 2014, a 60 year old, physically disabled prisoner, was robbed at knife point by another prisoner, who, upon information and belief, is a 23 yearold mentally ill prisoner. The prisoner was robbed less than 24 hours after being transferred from the Honor Dorm to L Block, a much more violent block, housing younger inmates. c. Robert Woods was recently reassigned by Defendant Sanders from a block where many older prisoners live, to a violent block where he is vulnerable because he is 57 years old and physically disabled. When he expressed fear for his safety to Defendant Sanders, Sanders responded “If you ain’t got a knife, I’ll give you one.” When Mr. Woods’ property box was broken into in his cell and he reported the theft to Defendant Sanders, Sanders responded that he had moved Mr. Woods so that something like that would happen to him. When Mr. Woods spoke to Defendant Davenport about Defendant Sanders’ response to his fears, Defendant Davenport responded by asking Mr. Woods if he had a knife yet. When Mr. Woods responded that he had not, Defendant Davenport told Mr. Woods to do what he needed to do to survive on his new block. Mr. Woods made one final request to Defendant
27

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 28 of 42
Sanders to move him from his new block and Defendant Sanders responded by placing several box cutters on a table and told Mr. Woods to make a knife to protect himself. 48. Upon information and belief, Defendants fail to adequately and effectively separate prisoners who have had violent confrontations at St. Clair. Defendants do not have reasonable policies and procedures in place that would enable re-classification of prisoners who may be identified as violent as a result of actions in the Facility. 49. In response to violence between prisoners, Defendants place the victim and the aggressor in punitive isolation for an indefinite period. The victim is then placed in a catch-22 position of remaining indefinitely in punitive isolation or signing a “living agreement” with the other inmate(s) involved in the altercation in order to be released from segregation back into general population. Upon information and belief, once a living agreement has been signed, Defendants can and do assign prisoners who have engaged in violence or threatened each other to the same unit. Defendants’ requirement that victims of violent assaults must either remain in segregation or sign a “living agreement,” and then be placed back in contact with the prisoner(s) who assaulted them, is not a reasonable response to violent incidents between prisoners.
28

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 29 of 42
50. Defendants do not adequately consider an inmate’s mental health status or history of violent conflict with other prisoners in making housing assignment. Upon information and belief, inmates with serious mental health problems and histories of repeated violent conflict live in general population and do not get adequate treatment or supervision. Defendants also fail to provide adequate training or supervision to staff on how to respond to prisoners who report threats of violence made by prisoners with known histories of mental instability and violent conflict. Defendants’ failure to adequately classify and treat prisoners with mental illness and histories of repeated violent assaults, as well as their failure to provide adequate training or supervision of staff on how to respond to mentally ill or violent prisoners has resulted in substantial harm to Plaintiffs.
51. Defendants have failed to create and enforce adequate procedures, practices, and policies for investigating and responding to inmate requests to be moved to a new cell assignment based on threats or fear for their safety in their current housing assignment. Defendants have rejected inmate requests for movement out of hand with little or no effort made to determine the veracity and seriousness of the threat.
52. Upon information and belief, all bed change requests must be approved by Defendant Sanders. Defendant Davenport, as well as Captain Sanders, Lieutenant
29

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 30 of 42
Carter, and Lieutenant Scott have responded to Plaintiffs’ requests to move based on threats to their safety by telling them to arm themselves with knives, by making comments to the effect that they are tough enough to handle the potential violence, by telling the threatened prisoners that Defendants do not care what happens to them, or by telling them that the only option for transfer is to be moved into segregation. If a threatened prisoner agrees to move to segregation for his safety, Defendants have also denied that request.
53. Defendants are aware that their refusal to classify prisoners and refusing to investigate and grant movement requests based on a prisoner’s safety concerns creates a substantial risk of serious harm because prisoners have been assaulted after their requests to move housing assignments were denied. These incidents include, but are not limited to:
a. In June 2014, prior to being assaulted, Derrick White requested to be moved back to segregation because he believed his life was in danger. His request was refused and he was stabbed soon after. b. In June 2014, a 60 year old, physically disabled prisoner, was robbed at knife point by another prisoner, who, upon information and belief, is a 23 yearold mentally ill prisoner. c. In February 2014, a prisoner requested to be moved out of his unit after
30

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 31 of 42
his cell mate tried to stab him and threatened to kill him. His request was denied without adequate investigation and he was later stabbed by his cell mate inside his cell. d. In September 2013, Allan Williams was stabbed by a prisoner, who, upon information and belief, is a mentally ill prisoner. Mr. Williams was stabbed while he was walking back from his shower. Upon information and belief, the man who stabbed Mr. Williams had a violent history and had stabbed another prisoner a few years before he stabbed Mr. Williams. e. Upon information and belief, Freddie James Stallworth was stabbed multiple times by another prisoner who was his cell mate. The stabbing caused serious injuries including a punctured lung, and required surgery at a free world hospital. Prior to attack, Mr. Stallworth notified Lt. Carla Graham in November 2013, that he was in danger from his cell mate, and requested a move. His request was denied without adequate investigation. He was stabbed soon thereafter. f. In 2011, a prisoner was stabbed by another prisoner, who had requested to go to segregation for his own protection but his requests were denied. Upon information and belief, the assailant feared for his safety due to outstanding debts he owed other prisoners for drugs and attacked the prisoner in order to get
31

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 32 of 42
moved into segregation where he felt he would be safer. 54. These incidents of violence demonstrate Defendants’ awareness that the failure to classify prisoners based on security status, a history of conflict, and mental health status and to investigate housing movement requests based on fear or threats of violence creates a substantial risk of serious harm. Even though Defendants know that their current policies and practices contribute to serious incidents of violence, they have failed to take adequate action to address the problems in classification. Upon information and belief, there have not been significant or effective changes to the classification system or to how Defendants respond to movement requests in response to these violent incidents, leaving the plaintiff class exposed to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm. DEFENDANTS’ FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY ENFORCE HOUSING ASSIGNMENTS PUTS PRISONERS AT RISK OF VIOLENCE. 55. Defendants do not take reasonable measures to ensure prisoners only have access to the housing unit where they are assigned. Despite the fact that prisoners are required to wear colored wristbands that correspond to their housing assignment, Defendants fail to regularly enforce dorm assignments and officers in the cube will frequently let prisoners into a unit where they are not assigned without verifying they reside in the unit. In the absence of officer enforcement, prisoners are forced to forge
32

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 33 of 42
associations with other prisoners for their protection in the blocks. In the absence of officer supervision and enforcement, movement between blocks and block occupancy is enforced through physical threats and violence.
56. Upon information and belief, despite regulations that require that only one unit at a time to move to meal, work, shower, and mail call, the doors to the housing units regularly remain unlocked during movement times and all units on GYard have yard call at the same time. Upon information and belief, during movement times, regulations require that an officer be posted to the door or hallways in and out of the unit to ensure only prisoners assigned to the unit are allowed to enter but officers are very rarely or never posted to these locations during movement times. Therefore, it is easy for prisoners to enter a unit they are not assigned to.
57. Upon information and belief, staff conduct a bed roster count twice a week, making it possible for prisoners to stay overnight in a unit or cell to which they are not assigned.
58. Defendants are aware that the failure to enforce housing assignments contributes to the high rate of violence and creates a significant risk of serious harm. There have been numerous incidents of violence where the failure to enforce housing unit assignments has contributed to the circumstances that made the assault possible and where a prisoner was assaulted in their unit by another prisoner who was not
33

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 34 of 42
assigned to that unit, including but not limited to: a. In June 2014, Derrick White was attacked when another prisoner strangled him in the hallway between P and Q and was able to drag Mr. White into Q-2, which required him to go through the main unit doors. Upon information and belief, Mr. White’s assailant was not assigned to either P or Q. b. In July 2013, Mark Duke threatened at knife point in an attempted robbery in his cell by a prisoner who was not assigned to his block. c. Upon information and belief, Stanley Joe Flambo was assaulted in July 2013, by another prisoner, who was armed with a knife and punched him and attempted to force him over the top tier railing of the cell block. His assailant was not assigned to his cell block. d. Upon information and belief, Benjamin Howlet was stabbed in his cell in November 2011, when correctional officers permitted two unauthorized inmates to enter Mr. Howlet’s cell. Mr. Howlet suffered numerous injuries to his face, rib area, and stomach requiring surgery at an outside hospital. 59. Despite Defendants’ knowledge that the failure to enforce block and cell
assignments contributes to serious violent incidents, Defendants have failed to implement adequate changes in procedure and practice to address the substantial risk of serious harm. Upon information and belief, there has been no meaningful increase
34

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 35 of 42
in enforcement of housing assignments following the incidents of violence, leaving the plaintiff class exposed to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm.
DEFENDANTS FAIL TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE REHABILITATIVE PROGRAMMING AND THERAPEUTIC SERVICES. 60. In addition to creating an environment where abuse and violence are the norm, Defendants have failed to provide adequate positive, rehabilitative, recreational, or religious programming, as well as treatment and services for drug addiction and mental illness. Upon information and belief, Defendants provide inadequate counseling services that are aimed at addressing mental illness, disability and drug addiction, despite data that show that the vast majority of prisoners suffer from one or both of these afflictions. The failure to provide adequate treatment for these conditions contributes to the high level of violence. Furthermore, rather than providing services, Defendants respond to prisoners suffering from mental illness, disability and drug addiction by placing them in punitive segregation, which isolates them and can exacerbate their symptoms. These prisoners are then released back into general population more impaired and more traumatized. 61. Upon information and belief, Defendants have severely restricted programs that are aimed at reducing violence, giving prisoners a forum to voice
35

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 36 of 42
concerns and resolve issues, incentivizing good behavior, and providing prisoners an opportunity to educate themselves. Upon information and belief, Defendants have drastically limited access to outside religious organizations that minister to prisoners. The unavailability of positive and constructive programming contributes to conflicts and tensions among prisoners and to the high rate of violence.
62. Upon information and belief, Defendant Davenport has eliminated or drastically limited prisoners’ access to books. Upon information and belief, Defendant Davenport removed most or all of the books from the housing units that were previously available to prisoners, including religious books, self-help books, educational books for men trying to earn their GEDs, and novels.
DEFENDANTS’ FAILURE TO MONITOR AND POLICE THE ROLE OF DOC STAFF IN PROFITING FROM THE CIRCULATION OF CONTRABAND PUTS PRISONERS AT RISK OF VIOLENCE. 63. Because of poor management, drugs, including methamphetamine, methadone, heroin, suboxone, and marijuana, are prevalent at St. Clair and drug abuse and addiction among prisoners is widespread. Upon information and belief, many of the drugs are brought into the Facility by DOC staff. Over the past two years, there have been dozens of reports of staff willfully violating DOC policy, including smuggling in contraband. This has enabled widespread corruption among officers and officers are able to extort money and favors from prisoners in exchange for drugs.
36

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 37 of 42
64. Drugs create a substantial risk of serious harm and are a major source of conflict at St. Clair, both because of behavior stemming from addiction, for which Defendants have failed to provide adequate services and treatment, and because of the dynamics of debt created by officers’ and prisoners’ participation in drug sales.
65. Defendants are indifferent to the circulation of drugs in the Facility and have failed to adequately prevent officers bringing in and participating in the sale of drugs to prisoners in the Facility. Upon information and belief, Defendants do not employ effective search protocols and procedures when officers enter the Facility. Furthermore, Defendants’ failure to provide meaningful incentives, programming, and treatment, contributes to prisoners engaging in risky behavior, such as gambling and drug use. (See ¶¶ 60-62 above.) Defendants’ failure to reasonably and adequately respond to the prevalence of drugs in the Facility leaves the plaintiff class exposed to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS 66. Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of all present and future prisoners at St. Clair Correctional Facility. This action is brought pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a), (b)(1), and (b)(2). The class meets the requirements of Rule 23 as follows: a. There are approximately 1,300 prisoners confined at any one time to St.
37

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 38 of 42
Clair Correctional Facility, who are subject to a substantial risk of a violent assault. The membership of this class continually changes, rendering joinder of all members impracticable. Upon information and belief, dozens of incidents of violent assaults are filed each year. Many more incidents go unreported. b. The questions of law and fact presented by the named Plaintiffs are common to all members of the class, and include whether Defendants’ policies and practices subject prisoners to a substantial and unreasonable risk of significant harm. The policies and practices include whether Defendants have failed to adequately monitor and supervise prisoners at St. Clair; whether Defendants have failed to adequately assess prisoners for risk of violence and failed to implement an adequate classification system; whether Defendants have failed to adequately enforce housing block, dorm, and cell assignments; whether Defendants have failed to adequately investigate housing movement requests based on fear of harm; whether Defendants have failed to provide secure locking mechanisms on individual cell doors; whether Defendants have failed to adequately monitor and police the role of ADOC staff in the availability of contraband items; whether Defendants have failed to adequately train, supervise, and discipline staff with a history of harassing and abusing prisoners, and whether supervisory Defendants have failed to adequately
38

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 39 of 42
screen, assign, train and supervise staff. As a result, every prisoner confined to St. Clair risks being subjected to these unlawful practices. The claims and practices alleged in this complaint are common to all members of the class. c. The violations suffered by the named Plaintiffs are typical of those suffered by the class. The entire plaintiff class will benefit from the injunctive and declaratory relief sought. d. Plaintiffs Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, and Robert Woods are presently incarcerated at St. Clair Correctional Facility. These named Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. e. The named plaintiffs are represented by The Equal Justice Initiative, a non-profit legal services organization with decades of experience challenging unconstitutional conditions of confinement. f. The Defendants have acted or failed to act, on grounds generally applicable to the class, thereby making injunctive relief appropriate with respect to the class as a whole.
EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES 67. There are no administrative remedies within the Alabama Department of Corrections for named Plaintiffs or other members of the plaintiff class to exhaust.
39

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 40 of 42
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF CAUSE OF ACTION
Cruel and Unusual Punishment 68. Defendants, through their policies, practices, acts and omissions, exhibit deliberate indifference to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious physical harm, in violation of the right of plaintiff class of prisoners to be free from cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. 69. Defendants, through their policies, practices, acts and omissions, subject the plaintiff class of prisoners to be free from unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain, and emotional and physical injury in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. 70. With deliberate indifference to the substantial risk of serious harm to the plaintiff class, Defendants failed to appropriately train, assign, and supervise staff, subjecting the plaintiff class to substantial risk of serious bodily harm in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
40

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 41 of 42
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court: 1. Assume jurisdiction over this action; 2. Personally conduct an unannounced inspection of St. Clair Correctional Facility and all relevant institutional records and files; 3. Grant Plaintiffs a full trial and discovery in this matter; 4. Adjudge and declare that the acts and omissions of the Defendants with regard to the classmembers violate the Eight and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; 5. Order Defendants to comply with the Constitution and enjoin Defendants from subjecting Plaintiffs to cruel and unusual punishment; 6. Award Plaintiffs appropriate costs for expert fees and collateral litigation expenses; and
41

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/13/14 Page 42 of 42
7. Order such additional relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Respectfully submitted this 13th day of October, 2014. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Bryan A. Stevenson Bryan A. Stevenson (ASB-3184--N75B) Charlotte R. Morrison (ASB-5897-T80M) Jennae R. Swiergula (ASB-8265-A35S) Carla C. Crowder* (ASB-8573-L74C) Ryan C. Becker* (ASB-7228-R48B) Equal Justice Initiative 122 Commerce Street Montgomery, AL 36104 PH: (334) 269-1803 FX: (334) 269-1806 email: bstevenson@eji.org cmorrison@eji.org jswiergula@eji.org ccrowder@eji.org rbecker@eji.org Counsel for Plaintiffs *Application for admission pending
42

 
 Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD

Document 20

Filed 02/17/15

Page 1 of 20

FILED

2015 Feb-17 AM 11:10 U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION

ANTONIO CHEATHAM, et al.

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

v.

) Case No.: 4:14-CV-1952-VEH

)

KIM THOMAS, Commissioner,

)

Alabama Department of Corrections, )

et al.,

)

)

Defendants.

)

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This is a civil action brought by the plaintiffs, Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, and Robert Woods, who, according to the complaint, “are men presently confined in the custody of the Alabama Department of Corrections (‘ADOC’) at St. Clair Correctional Facility (‘St. Clair’).” (Doc. 1 at 2). They bring this action on behalf of themselves, and purportedly on behalf on “all other current and future prisoners at St. Clair.” (Doc. 1 at 4). The action names the following defendants: – Kim Thomas, who is sued in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections; – James Deloach, who is sued in his official capacity as the Associate Commissioner for Operations for the Alabama Department of Corrections;

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 2 of 20
– Terrance G. McDonnell, who is sued in his official capacity as the Associate Commissioner for Plans and Programs for the Alabama Department of Corrections;
– Greg Lovelace, who is sued in his official capacity as the Deputy Commissioner for Maintenance for the Alabama Department of Corrections;
– Grant Culliver, who is sued in his official capacity as the Institutional Coordinator for the Northern Region of the Alabama Department of Corrections;
– Carter Davenport, who is sued in his official capacity as the Warden of St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama;
– Karen Carter, who is sued in her official capacity as an Assistant Warden of St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama;
– Eric Evans, who is sued in his official capacity as an Assistant Warden of St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama;
– Carl Sanders, who is sued in his official capacity as a Captain at St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama; and
– Gary Malone, who is sued in his official capacity as a Captain at St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama.
The complaint contains only one count and is brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The complaint alleges that the defendants,
through their policies, practices, acts and omissions, exhibit deliberate indifference to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious physical harm, in violation of the right of plaintiff class of prisoners to be free from cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
(Doc. 1 at 40). The plaintiffs’ claims all relate to alleged
2

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 3 of 20
mismanagement, poor leadership, overcrowding, inadequate security, and unsafe conditions, including broken and nonfunctioning locks on the majority of cell doors, [which] have lead to an extraordinarily high homicide rate, weekly stabbings and assaults, and a culture where violence is tolerated[.] (Doc. 1 at 2). The plaintiffs seek only “injunctive and declaratory relief to redress [d]efendants’ [alleged] violations of [the plaintiffs’] rights under the Eight and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.” (Doc. 1 at 3). The case comes before the court on the motion to dismiss filed by defendants Deloach, McDonnell, Lovelace, Culliver, Davenport, Evans, Carter, Sanders, and Malone, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 13). These defendants refer to themselves as the “Subordinate Defendants,” and claim that, because they are not final policymakers for the Alabama Department of Corrections, they are not subject to suit in their official capacities under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the reasons stated herein, the motion will be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. I. STANDARD Generally, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require only that the complaint provide “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). However, to survive a motion to dismiss brought under Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.”
3

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 4 of 20
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007) (“Twombly”). A claim has facial plausibility “when the plaintiff pleads factual content that
allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556) (“Iqbal”). That is, the complaint must include enough facts “to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citation and footnote omitted). Pleadings that contain nothing more than “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action” do not meet Rule 8 standards, nor do pleadings suffice that are based merely upon “labels or conclusions” or “naked assertion[s]” without supporting factual allegations. Id. at 555, 557 (citation omitted).
Once a claim has been stated adequately, however, “it may be supported by showing any set of facts consistent with the allegations in the complaint.” Id. at 563 (citation omitted). Further, when ruling on a motion to dismiss, a court must “take the factual allegations in the complaint as true and construe them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” Pielage v. McConnell, 516 F.3d 1282, 1284 (11th Cir. 2008) (citing Glover v. Liggett Group, Inc., 459 F.3d 1304, 1308 (11th Cir. 2006)). II. ANALYSIS
A. The Defendants Need Only Have the Authority To Implement the Injunctive Relief Sought
4

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 5 of 20
The movants are sued in their official capacities only. They contend that “a plaintiff in an official-capacity lawsuit has the burden of proving that the defendant is a final policymaker for the governmental entity in which the defendant serves.” (Doc. 14 at 3). They argue that only defendant Thomas has final policymaking authority for the Alabama Department of Corrections, and, therefore, they each must be dismissed.
Exactly how the defendants come to the conclusion that they must each be a final policymaker to be sued in their official capacity for prospective relief is unclear. Section 1983 itself contains no such requirement. It provides:
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . .. 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (emphasis added). In the instant case, the defendants are all state officials, sued in their official capacities, for declaratory and injunctive relief to remedy alleged deprivations of the plaintiffs’ right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court has held that “a state official in his or her official capacity, when sued for injunctive relief, would be a person under § 1983.” Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 n. 10, 109 S. Ct. 2304, 2312, 105 L.
5

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 6 of 20
Ed. 2d 45 (1989). Further, in the context of an Eleventh Amendment immunity
analysis, the Eleventh Circuit has noted that “[a] state official is subject to suit in his
official capacity when his office imbues him with the responsibility to enforce the law
or laws at issue in the suit.” Grizzle v. Kemp, 634 F.3d 1314, 1319 (11th Cir. 2011)
(citing Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 161, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908)).
The defendants argue that the rule set out in Grizzle is limited to the context of an Eleventh Amendment immunity analysis.1 However, the Eleventh Circuit, in a
more recent opinion outside of the immunity context, seems to indicate that non-
policy making officials can be sued in their official capacity for prospective relief. In
Doe v. Wooten, 747 F.3d 1317, 1326 (11th Cir. 2014), the plaintiff, a prisoner in the
custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, alleged that two BOP officials violated his
rights under the Eighth Amendment. Wooten, 747 F.3d at 1319. In addition to suing,
in his official capacity, the then-Director of the Bureau of Prisons, the plaintiff also
1 Recognizing that this suit is for declaratory and injunctive relief only, the defendants expressly disclaim any defense based on Eleventh Amendment immunity. (Doc. 19 at 2-3) (“Because [p]laintiffs request prospective relief only, [d]efendants at this time do not seek dismissal on sovereign immunity grounds.”). They contend that the Grizzle standard “does not govern § 1983; it is a constitutional standard for analyzing whether sovereign immunity applies.” (Doc. 19, at 3). They contend that “[t]o establish the Ex Parte Young exception is not to plead sufficiently a § 1983 claim.” (Doc. 19 at 4). Interestingly, the defendants cite to Grizzle in another section of their brief dealing with whether Deloach is subject to suit. Citing to the above quoted language from Grizzle, they argue that Deloach is not properly sued because he retired prior to the time this action was filed. (Doc. 14 at 18). They do not explain why the rule in Grizzle applies in that context, which also has nothing to do with sovereign immunity.
6

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 7 of 20
sued Rick Stover, in his official capacity as a Senior Designator at the BOP’s
Designation and Sentence Computation Center (“DSCC”). In particular, he alleged
that Stover and the director of the BOP violated his Eighth Amendment rights against
cruel and unusual punishment by being deliberately indifferent to the protection he
required after he assisted the BOP in the investigation of its own officer in Atlanta.
Wooten, 747 F.3d at 1321. The plaintiff objected in part to transfers which continually
placed the plaintiff in harms’ way and subjected him to attack from guards and other
inmates. Stover’s department, the DSCC, made all transfer decisions and housing
assignments. Id. at 1320.
In a footnote, the court wrote:
The two remaining individual defendants in this case are Mr. Stover, a senior member of the BOP’s DSCC, and current BOP Director Charles Samuels, Jr. Mr. Doe’s remaining claims against them are in their official capacities only. For simplicity, we refer to these two defendants collectively as the BOP. Contrary to the BOP’s arguments, Messers. Stover and Samuels—or any successors later substituted automatically pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 25(d)—have the authority through their positions at the BOP to implement the injunctive relief Mr. Doe seeks. This Court has already affirmed that the violations alleged here are appropriate for injunctive relief, and on remand the District Court found the BOP is capable of providing Mr. Doe with the requested relief.
Id. at 1321, n. 2 (citations omitted). There is no indication in the opinion that the
exact same issues before the court in the instant case were present in Wooten.
7

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 8 of 20
However, it is noteworthy that the court found that Stover, in his official capacity, had “the authority through [his] position at the BOP to implement the injunctive relief [sought].” Id. Arguably, Stover was not a “final policymaker” for the BOP–that would have been the director. This court is persuaded that, if the only proper defendant were always the person “at the top of the ladder,” the court would have said so. Similarly, in the instant case, if the plaintiffs have sued individuals who have the authority to implement the injunctive relief the plaintiffs seek, they are proper defendants.
Regardless, as is shown in the next section, the defendants have cited no case, and this court has found none, which stands for the proposition that only a final policymaker can be sued in his official capacity for prospective relief.
B. There Is No Requirement that the Defendants Be Final Policymakers in order To Be Sued in their Official Capacities
The defendants have failed to show that they must be final policymakers in order to be subject to suit. They begin by discussing the long-settled principle that “Section 1983 plaintiffs bringing official-capacity lawsuits—regardless of the underlying constitutional right involved—must prove that a governmental entity caused the constitutional deprivation via the execution of that governmental entity’s ‘policy or custom.’” (Doc. 14 at 5 (citing Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 166 (1985), in turn quoting Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of N.Y., 436 U.S. 658,
8

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 9 of 20
694 (1978)). Neither of the cases cited support the proposition that a non-final
policymaker cannot be sued in his or her official capacity.
One of the questions before the Court in Monell was whether local
governments could be held responsible for Section 1983 violations through the
doctrine of respondeat superior. The Court held that
a local government may not be sued under § 1983 for an injury inflicted solely by its employees or agents. Instead, it is when execution of a government’s policy or custom, whether made by its lawmakers or by those whose edicts or acts may fairly be said to represent official policy, inflicts the injury that the government as an entity is responsible under § 1983.
Monell, 436 U.S. at 694. In Graham, the Court, noting that the “distinction [between
personal and official capacity suits] apparently continues to confuse lawyers and
confound lower courts,” explained the difference in great detail. It wrote:
Personal-capacity suits seek to impose personal liability upon a government official for actions he takes under color of state law. See, e.g., Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 237–238, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1686–1687, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974). Official-capacity suits, in contrast, “generally represent only another way of pleading an action against an entity of which an officer is an agent.” Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690, n. 55, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 2035, n. 55, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 1978). As long as the government entity receives notice and an opportunity to respond, an official-capacity suit is, in all respects other than name, to be treated as a suit against the entity. Brandon, supra, 469 U.S., at 471–472, 105 S.Ct., at 878. It is not a suit against the official personally, for the real party in interest is the entity. Thus, while an award of damages against an official in his personal capacity can be executed only against the official’s personal assets, a plaintiff seeking
9

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 10 of 20
to recover on a damages judgment in an official-capacity suit must look to the government entity itself. On the merits, to establish personal liability in a § 1983 action, it is enough to show that the official, acting under color of state law, caused the deprivation of a federal right. See, e.g., Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 81 S.Ct. 473, 5 L.Ed.2d 492 (1961). More is required in an official-capacity action, however, for a governmental entity is liable under § 1983 only when the entity itself is a “‘moving force’ ” behind the deprivation, Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 326, 102 S.Ct. 445, 454, 70 L.Ed.2d 509 (1981) (quoting Monell, supra, 436 U.S., at 694, 98 S.Ct., at 2037); thus, in an official-capacity suit the entity’s “policy or custom” must have played a part in the violation of federal law. Monell, supra; Oklahoma City v. Tuttle, 471 U.S. 808, 817–818, 105 S.Ct. 2427, 2433, 85 L.Ed.2d 791 (1985); id., at 827–828, 105 S.Ct., at 2437, 2438 (BRENNAN, J., concurring in judgment). When it comes to defenses to liability, an official in a personal-capacity action may, depending on his position, be able to assert personal immunity defenses, such as objectively reasonable reliance on existing law. See Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 96 S.Ct. 984, 47 L.Ed.2d 128 (1976) (absolute immunity); Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 87 S.Ct. 1213, 18 L.Ed.2d 288 (1967) (same); Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (qualified immunity); Wood v. Strickland, 420 U.S. 308, 95 S.Ct. 992, 43 L.Ed.2d 214 (1975) (same). In an official-capacity action, these defenses are unavailable. Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622, 100 S.Ct. 1398, 63 L.Ed.2d 673 (1980); see also Brandon v. Holt, 469 U.S. 464, 105 S.Ct. 873, 83 L.Ed.2d 878 (1985). The only immunities that can be claimed in an official-capacity action are forms of sovereign immunity that the entity, qua entity, may possess, such as the Eleventh Amendment. While not exhaustive, this list illustrates the basic distinction between personal- and official-capacity actions.
Graham, 473 U.S. at 165-67. After citing Graham, the defendants seem to assume
that the above quoted language means that they cannot be sued in their official
capacity unless they are final policymakers. They spend the rest of their briefs
10

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 11 of 20
attempting to demonstrate that each of them are not policymakers, and that Thomas is.
The defendants misunderstand the language from Monell and Graham. The idea that an official capacity suit is actually an action against the governing body for whom that official works applies only in the context of a claim for money damages. Graham was clear that official-capacity suits only generally represent another way of pleading an action against an entity of which an officer is an agent. Graham, 473 U.S. at 165-67. The Court clearly stated that “a plaintiff seeking to recover on a damages judgment in an official-capacity suit must look to the government entity itself.” Id. (emphasis added). Thus, the “official capacity equals the entity” rule is qualified, and limited to cases where money damages are at issue.
The cases cited by the defendants are not to the contrary. The defendants cite Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469, 106 S. Ct. 1292, 89 L. Ed. 2d 452 (1986). In Pembaur, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals had held that “a single decision to take particular action, although made by municipal policymakers, cannot establish the kind of “official policy” required by Monell as a predicate to municipal liability under § 1983.” Pembaur, 475 U.S. at 477-78 (emphasis added). The Supreme Court disagreed, holding:
[I]t is plain that municipal liability may be imposed for a single decision
11

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 12 of 20
by municipal policymakers under appropriate circumstances. No one has ever doubted, for instance, that a municipality may be liable under § 1983 for a single decision by its properly constituted legislative body—whether or not that body had taken similar action in the past or intended to do so in the future—because even a single decision by such a body unquestionably constitutes an act of official government policy. See, e.g., Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622, 100 S.Ct. 1398, 63 L.Ed.2d 673 (1980) (City Council passed resolution firing plaintiff without a pretermination hearing); Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc., 453 U.S. 247, 101 S.Ct. 2748, 69 L.Ed.2d 616 (1981) (City Council canceled license permitting concert because of dispute over content of performance). But the power to establish policy is no more the exclusive province of the legislature at the local level than at the state or national level. Monell’s language makes clear that it expressly envisioned other officials “whose acts or edicts may fairly be said to represent official policy,” Monell, supra, 436 U.S., at 694, 98 S.Ct., at 2037–2038, and whose decisions therefore may give rise to municipal liability under § 1983.Indeed, any other conclusion would be inconsistent with the principles underlying § 1983. To be sure, “official policy” often refers to formal rules or understandings—often but not always committed to writing—that are intended to, and do, establish fixed plans of action to be followed under similar circumstances consistently and over time. That was the case in Monell itself, which involved a written rule requiring pregnant employees to take unpaid leaves of absence before such leaves were medically necessary. However, as in Owen and Newport, a government frequently chooses a course of action tailored to a particular situation and not intended to control decisions in later situations. If the decision to adopt that particular course of action is properly made by that government’s authorized decisionmakers, it surely represents an act of official government “policy” as that term is commonly understood. More importantly, where action is directed by those who establish governmental policy, the municipality is equally responsible whether that action is to be taken only once or to be taken repeatedly. To deny compensation to the victim would therefore be contrary to the fundamental purpose of § 1983.
Having said this much, we hasten to emphasize that not every
12

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 13 of 20
decision by municipal officers automatically subjects the municipality to § 1983 liability. Municipal liability attaches only where the decisionmaker possesses final authority to establish municipal policy with respect to the action ordered. The fact that a particular official—even a policymaking official—has discretion in the exercise of particular functions does not, without more, give rise to municipal liability based on an exercise of that discretion. See, e.g., Oklahoma City v. Tuttle, 471 U.S., at 822–824, 105 S.Ct., at 2435–2436. The official must also be responsible for establishing final government policy respecting such activity before the municipality can be held liable. Authority to make municipal policy may be granted directly by a legislative enactment or may be delegated by an official who possesses such authority, and of course, whether an official had final policymaking authority is a question of state law. However, like other governmental entities, municipalities often spread policymaking authority among various officers and official bodies. As a result, particular officers may have authority to establish binding county policy respecting particular matters and to adjust that policy for the county in changing circumstances. To hold a municipality liable for actions ordered by such officers exercising their policymaking authority is no more an application of the theory of respondeat superior than was holding the municipalities liable for the decisions of the City Councils in Owen and Newport. In each case municipal liability attached to a single decision to take unlawful action made by municipal policymakers. We hold that municipal liability under § 1983 attaches where—and only where—a deliberate choice to follow a course of action is made from among various alternatives by the official or officials responsible for establishing final policy with respect to the subject matter in question. See Tuttle, supra, at 823, 105 S.Ct., at 2436 (“ ‘policy’ generally implies a course of action consciously chosen from among various alternatives”).
Id. at 480-84. This language, quoted in pieces and out of context by the defendants,
very clearly discusses only the circumstances under which a government entity may
be liable for the acts of an official. When discussing whether “the decisionmaker
13

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 14 of 20
possesses final authority to establish municipal policy,” it was discussing only what decisions, by which officials, could be imputed to the municipality. Pembaur had nothing to do with whether an official could be sued in his official capacity for injunctive relief.
The defendants also cite Connick v. Thompson, 131 S. Ct. 1350, 179 L. Ed. 2d 417 (2011), which they contend supports their position. While the Court in Connick did note that official municipal policy includes both the decisions of a government’s lawmakers and the acts of its policymaking officials, Connick, 131 at 1359, the issue in Connick was not whether a non-policymaking official could be sued in his or her official capacity for declaratory or injunctive relief. Instead, like in Pembaur, the issue was whether a local government entity, in this case the Orleans Parish District Attorney’s Office, could be held liable for the conduct of its prosecutors. Id. at 1353.
The defendants state Consistent with Thompson, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has held that, to establish official-capacity liability against an official, a plaintiff must prove: (1) that “an official responsible for making final policy” has taken action or made final policy that caused the constitutional deprivation; or (2) that “a practice or custom . . . is so pervasive” that is “the functional equivalent of a policy adopted by the final policymaker” and that that “practice or custom” caused the constitutional deprivation. (Doc. 14 at 8 (quoting Hale v. Tallapoosa Cnty., 50 F.3d 1579, 1582 (11th Cir. 1995);
14

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 15 of 20
also citing White v. Thompson, 299 F. App’x 930, 933 (11th Cir. 2008); Church v.
City of Huntsville, 30 F.3d 1332, 1343 (11th Cir. 1994)). The defendants cite this
language out of context. The entire quote from Hale actually reads:
To prevail against the County through Smith in his official capacity, Hale was required to prove that the deprivation resulted from “(1) an action taken or policy made by an official responsible for making final policy in that area of the [County’s] business; or (2) a practice or custom that is so pervasive, as to be the functional equivalent of a policy adopted by the final policymaker.”
Hale, 50 F.3d at 1582 (quoting Church v. City of Huntsville, 30 F.3d 1332, 1343
(11th Cir.1994)) (emphasis added). Further still, the Church opinion, cited in Hale,
was clearly discussing only municipal liability for the acts of its agents. In Church,
the Eleventh Circuit wrote:
Municipal liability for the actions of a subordinate employee cannot be based solely on the theory of respondeat superior. Jett, 491 U.S. at 736, 109 S.Ct. at 2723. However, liability will attach for “constitutional deprivations visited pursuant to governmental ‘custom’ even though such a custom has not received formal approval through the [municipality’s] official decisionmaking channels.” Monell, 436 U.S. at 690–91, 98 S.Ct. at 2036. “ ‘Although not authorized by written law, such practices of state officials could well be so permanent and well settled as to constitute a “custom or usage” with the force of law.’ ” Id. at 691, 98 S.Ct. at 2036 (quoting Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 167–68, 90 S.Ct. 1598, 1613–14, 26 L.Ed.2d 142 (1970)). A municipality can be liable when “a series of decisions by a subordinate official manifest[s] a ‘custom or usage’ of which the supervisor must have been aware.” Praprotnik, 485 U.S. at 130, 108 S.Ct. at 928.22
Thus, municipal liability may be based upon (1) an action taken
15

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 16 of 20
or policy made by an official responsible for making final policy in that area of the city’s business; or (2) a practice or custom that is so pervasive, as to be the functional equivalent of a policy adopted by the final policymaker..
Church, 30 F.3d at 1342-43 (emphasis added). The issue in Hale and Church was
clearly not whether an official capacity suit could be maintained against a non-
policymaker for declaratory or injunctive relief only.
The court notes that the White case, also cited by the defendants, seems to state
the rule more broadly when it says:
In order to be held liable under § 1983 in an official capacity, the plaintiff must show the deprivation of a constitutional right resulted from: “(1) an action taken or policy made by an official responsible for making final policy in that area of the [governmental entity’s] business; or (2) a practice or custom that is so pervasive, as to be the functional equivalent of a policy adopted by the final policymaker.” Church v. City of Huntsville, 30 F.3d 1332, 1343 (11th Cir.1994). Only a final policymaker may be held liable in an official capacity. Id. at 1342.
White, 299 F. App’x at 933. Similarly, this court has found that a panel of the
Eleventh Circuit has written the following in another case:
In order to be held liable under § 1983 in an official capacity, the plaintiff must show that the deprivation of a constitutional right resulted from: “(1) an action taken or policy made by an official responsible for making final policy in that area . . . ; or (2) a practice or custom that is so pervasive, as to be the functional equivalent of a policy adopted by the final policymaker.” Church v. City of Huntsville, 30 F.3d 1332, 1343 (11th Cir.1994). Only a final policymaker may be held liable in an official capacity. Id. at 1342.
16

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 17 of 20
Lloyd v. Van Tassell, 318 F. App’x 755, 760 (11th Cir. 2009). The court finds neither
of these unreported cases persuasive,2 as each case dealt with liability of a local
official for the acts of his agent,3 not whether an official capacity suit can be
maintained for declaratory and/or injunctive relief. At the end of the day, none of the
authority cited by the defendants stands for the proposition that an official capacity
suit cannot be maintained against a non-policymaking official for declaratory and/or
injunctive relief. Accordingly, the court sees no reason to review the defendants’
argument that only defendant Thomas is the final policymaker. (Dc. 14 at 9-17).4
2 Both opinions are unpublished. “Unpublished opinions are not considered binding precedent, but they may be cited as persuasive authority.” 11th Cir. R. 36-2.
3 Each case cites to and quotes the language from Church, which addresses only local government agency liability for the acts of its agents. Also, in White, the issue was whether the official capacity defendants could be liable for the acts of others in allegedly improperly transferring a prisoner to the wrong facility. In Lloyd, the issue was whether the Sheriff, in his official capacity, could be liable for the acts of excessive force by a deputy in his department.
4 The court also finds no merit in the defendants’ underdeveloped argument that the plaintiffs will suffer no prejudice if they are dismissed because only Commissioner Thomas, “not any of the [other defendants], is the official [who] would ensure the ADOC’s compliance with any potential relief ordered by this Court.” (Doc. 14 at 17). At least some of the other defendants arguably have extensive control over aspects of the St. Clair facility that are at issue in this case. The defendants cite no authority, nor do they make any substantial argument, for why inclusion of the other defendants would be “superfluous and inappropriate.” (Doc. 14 at 18). While it is likely that all issues concerning every Alabama prison may be under the authority of the ADOC and its director, the defendants discount the effect that an injunction, aimed directly at the Warden or other local prison officials responsible for the specific issues at hand, would have in remedying the problems. Regardless, the defendants have not addressed the specific problems discussed in the complaint, or the ability of each defendant to implement injunctive relief regarding each problem, and “[t]here is no burden upon the district court to distill every potential argument that could be made based upon the materials before it . . ..” Resolution Trust Corp. v. Dunmar Corp., 43 F.3d 587, 599 (11th Cir. 1995) (summary judgment).
17

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 18 of 20
C. The Proper Person, in his Official Capacity as the Associate Commissioner for Operations for the Alabama Department of Corrections, Will Be Substituted as a Defendant in Place of James Deloach
The defendants argue that James Deloach should be dismissed because
“[e]ffective on July 1, 2014, prior to the filing of this action, [d]efendant James
Deloach retired from the ADOC.” (Doc. 14 at 18). Deloach was sued in his official
capacity as the Associate Commissioner for Operations for the Alabama Department
of Corrections. Whether Deloach himself still occupies that position is irrelevant as
[a]n action does not abate when a public officer who is a party in an official capacity dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold office while the action is pending. The officer’s successor is automatically substituted as a party. Later proceedings should be in the substituted party’s name, but any misnomer not affecting the parties’ substantial rights must be disregarded. The court may order substitution at any time, but the absence of such an order does not affect the substitution.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). The ADOC website states that Terrance G. McDonnell is the
current Associate Commissioner for Operations for the Alabama Department of Corrections.5 The plaintiffs state that defense counsel has informed them that Grantt
Culliver now occupies the position. (Doc. 18 at 22). The court also takes judicial
notice of the fact that Thomas is not longer the director of the ADOC. Accordingly,
within 14 days after the entry of this order, the parties shall file a joint motion to
5 See the Alabama Department of Corrections website at http://www.doc.state.al.us/ ExecutiveBios.aspx.
18

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 19 of 20
substitute the name of the correct persons for each official named in the complaint. D. All Claims of Plaintiff White Are Due To Be Dismissed “Absent class certification, an inmate’s claim for injunctive and declaratory
relief in a section 1983 action fails to present a case or controversy once the inmate has been transferred. Dudley v. Stewart, 724 F.2d 1493, 1494–95 (11th Cir.1984). Past exposure to illegal conduct does not constitute a present case or controversy involving injunctive relief if unaccompanied by any continuing, present adverse effects. O’Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 495–96, 94 S.Ct. 669, 675–76, 38 L.Ed.2d 674 (1974).” Wahl v. McIver, 773 F.2d 1169, 1173-74 (11th Cir. 1985). The plaintiffs admit that White, having been transferred from the St. Clair facility, no longer can maintain a claim. (Doc. 18 at 22). Accordingly, his claims are due to be and will be DISMISSED with prejudice. III. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED as follows:
1. The defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED to the extent that it seeks dismissal of the claims of Derrick White. All claims of plaintiff Derrick White are DISMISSED with prejudice.
2. In all other respects, the motion is DENIED.
19

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 20 Filed 02/17/15 Page 20 of 20
DONE and ORDERED this 17th day of February, 2015. VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS United States District Judge
20

 
 Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD

Document 53

Filed 08/28/15

Page 1 of 75

FILED

2015 Aug-28 PM 04:28 U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

*

MARK DUKE; JAMES EDWARDS; *

DALE GILLEY; FRANKIE

*

JOHNSON; MICHAEL MAYS; *

MICHAEL MCGREGOR; JOHN *

MILLER; ALLAN WILLIAMS; *

and ROBERT WOODS, on behalf *

of themselves and all others similarly *

situated,

*

*

PLAINTIFFS,

*

vs.

*

*

COMMISSIONER JEFFERSON S. *

DUNN; ASSOCIATE

*

COMMISSIONER TERRANCE *

MCDONNELL; DEPUTY

*

COMMISSIONER GREG

*

LOVELACE; INSTITUTIONAL *

COORDINATOR GRANTT

*

CULLIVER; WARDEN

*

DEWAYNE ESTES; ASSISTANT *

WARDEN ERIC EVANS;

*

ASSISTANT WARDEN KAREN *

CARTER; CAPTAIN CARL

*

SANDERS; CAPTAIN GARY

*

MALONE, in their official

*

capacities,

*

*

DEFENDANTS.

*

Civil Action No. 4:14-CV-1952-VEH

_________________________

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT ________________________

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 2 of 75
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Plaintiffs are men presently confined in the custody of the Alabama Department of Corrections (“ADOC”) at St. Clair Correctional Facility (“St. Clair” or “the Facility”), where mismanagement, poor leadership, overcrowding, inadequate security, and unsafe conditions, including broken and nonfunctioning locks on the majority of cell doors, have led to an extraordinarily high homicide rate, weekly stabbings and assaults, and a culture where violence is tolerated, creating conditions of confinement that violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Because of poor management, drugs and other contraband – in many cases contraband that is brought into the Facility and sold to prisoners by officers or DOC staff – are prevalent. Furthermore, correctional staff fail to follow policies and procedures and sometimes ignore urgent pleas for assistance that then results in serious violence. The potential for violence is exacerbated by policies eliminating or severely cutting back mental health and drug treatment services, rehabilitative programming, and removing books and other constructive activities from the housing units. The lack of opportunities to engage in constructive activities and rehabilitative programming, including reading, creates an oppressive and monotonous environment that accommodates abuse and violence, as well as drug abuse in a population with a high rate of mental illness and prior addiction.
2

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 3 of 75
Defendants have failed to reasonably and adequately respond to this extremely high rate of prisoner-on-prisoner assaults and homicides and the dangerous conditions that facilitate the incidents and culture of violence. Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for injunctive and declaratory relief to redress Defendants’ violations of their rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
Each paragraph in this complaint incorporates, repeats, and realleges every other paragraph in this complaint.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343(a). Plaintiffs seek declaratory relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201. Venue is proper pursuant to § 1391(b).
PARTIES PLAINTIFFS:
2. Plaintiffs Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Frankie Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, and Robert Woods are prisoners at St. Clair Correctional Facility.1 Each named Plaintiff has suffered physical
1Antonio Cheatham and Derrick White have been transferred to different facilities.
3

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 4 of 75
harm or is in immediate danger of future harm. They seek to represent themselves and all other current and future prisoners at St. Clair. DEFENDANTS:
3. Defendant Jefferson S. Dunn is the Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections. As Commissioner, Defendant Dunn is responsible for the direction, supervision, and control of the Department of Corrections. He is the highest ranking official in the Alabama Department of Corrections. Defendant Dunn is sued in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections.
4. Defendant Terrance G. McDonnell is the Associate Commissioner for Plans and Programs for the Alabama Department of Corrections. As Associate Commissioner, Defendant McDonnell is responsible for the Central Records Division, Research and Planning Division, Supervised Reentry Program, Religious Programs, Educational and Vocational Education Programs, and Victim-Constituent Services. Defendant McDonnell is sued in his official capacity.
5. Defendant Greg Lovelace is the Deputy Commissioner for Maintenance for the Alabama Department of Corrections. As Deputy Commissioner, Defendant Lovelace is responsible for the maintenance and construction of correctional facilities. Defendant Lovelace is sued in his official capacity.
6. Defendant Grantt Culliver is the Institutional Coordinator for the Northern 4

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 5 of 75
Region of the Alabama Department of Corrections. Defendant Culliver is responsible for planning, monitoring, and reviewing day-to-day operations of correctional institutions in his assigned area, including St. Clair Correctional Facility. Defendant Culliver is sued in his official capacity. Defendant Culliver is also serving as the Associate Commissioner for Operations for the Alabama Department of Corrections. As Associate Commissioner, Defendant Culliver is responsible for ensuring the effective daily operations of prison facilities. He supervises the Classification Review Board, the Training Division, the Transfer Division, and the Institutional Coordinators. Defendant Culliver is sued in his official capacity.
7. Defendant Dewayne Estes is the Warden of St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama. As warden, Defendant Estes is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the prison, as well as the safety of all inmates at the Facility and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Estes is sued in his official capacity.
8. Defendant Karen Carter is an Assistant Warden of St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama. As assistant warden, Defendant Carter is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the prison, as well as the safety of all inmates at the Facility and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Carter is sued in her official capacity.
5

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 6 of 75
9. Defendant Eric Evans is an Assistant Warden of St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama. As assistant warden, Defendant Evans is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the prison, as well as the safety of all inmates at the Facility and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Evans is sued in his official capacity.
10. Defendant Carl Sanders is a Captain at St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama. As a Captain, Defendant Sanders is responsible for safety of all inmates at the Facility, for supervising the security activities of St. Clair, and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Sanders is sued in his official capacity.
11. Defendant Gary Malone is a Captain at St. Clair Correctional Facility in Springville, Alabama. As a Captain, Defendant Malone is responsible for the safety of all inmates at the Facility, for supervising the security activities of St. Clair, and the supervision of all subordinate employees. Defendant Malone is sued in his official capacity.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 12. Defendants are aware of the extremely high rate of violence at St. Clair. There have been six homicides at the Facility in the 36 months prior to the filing of the original complaint, three of which occurred in 2014. This constitutes a rate of
6

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 7 of 75
prisoner-on-prisoner homicides at St. Clair that is drastically higher than the national average in state prisons. Based on the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ most recent available annual data from 2011, the national homicide rate in state prisons was approximately 5.4 homicides per 100,000 prisoners. The homicide rate at St. Clair during the same time period was approximately 75.4 homicides per 100,000 prisoners. The homicide rate at St. Clair in 2012 was 75.6 per 100,000 prisoners, 77.7 per 100,000 prisoners in 2013, and the homicide rate to date for 2014 is approximately 232.4 per 100,000 prisoners.
13. There is also a high rate of stabbings and serious assaults. Based on the most recent Alabama Department of Corrections data available at the time the complaint was filed, the rate of serious assaults at St. Clair from January to May 2014 was 848.8 serious assaults per 100,000 prisoners and the rate of fights and assaults combined was 4,321 per 100,000 prisoners. Since the complaint was filed, subsequently released data indicates that the rate of serious violence is increasing. The rate of serious assaults at St. Clair from June 2014 to March 2015 climbed to 1,086 serious assaults per 100,000 prisoners, while the rate of total fights and assaults nearly doubled, rising to 7,680 per 100,000 prisoners.
14. Defendants are aware of this extreme level of serious, life-endangering
7

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 8 of 75
violence at St. Clair. In a news article from March 16, 2012, former Warden Davenport referred to the overcrowding, contraband, and violence at St. Clair as a “security nightmare.” There has been media coverage of each of the prisoner-onprisoner homicides, which has included official statements from ADOC.
15. Furthermore, undersigned counsel sent a letter to former Commissioner Thomas on April 22, 2014, regarding the alarming rise in violence and unprecedented homicide rate at St. Clair under former Warden Davenport’s leadership and met with the Commissioner to emphasize these concerns.
16. Less than two months after this meeting regarding the alarming rise in fatalities at St. Clair, another homicide occurred. Jodey Waldrop was killed inside his cell on June 3, 2014.
17. On June 9, 2014, following the murder of Mr. Waldrop, undersigned counsel sent a second letter to former Commissioner Thomas which documented the high rate of violence and the number of homicides at St. Clair in the preceding 30 months. In this letter, and in meetings with the Commissioner and his staff, undersigned counsel detailed the mismanagement and violent conditions at St. Clair and called for immediate reform and change in leadership.
18. No changes were made following these communications and the violence
8

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 9 of 75
at St. Clair continued. On September 16, 2014, another prisoner, Tim Duncan, was killed in his block at St. Clair.
19. Defendants’ knowledge of the violent and dangerous conditions is also established by institutional reports prepared by Defendants’ employees describing violent incidents and lawsuits filed by prisoners challenging the abuse of authority and conditions of confinement.
20. Defendants are responsible for the care, custody and control of prisoners in their custody, and, through their acts and omissions, Defendants have allowed a dangerous and violent environment to flourish. Upon information and belief, Defendants have not made significant efforts, and have not implemented adequate changes in policy or practice to address, or to improve, the conditions at St. Clair that allow violence to proliferate. Despite the extraordinary rate of violence and homicides at St. Clair, Defendants have failed to take reasonable, necessary and appropriate steps to prevent and remedy these dangerous conditions.
21. Where Defendants have responded, their response has been unreasonable. Verbally abusive and physically aggressive intervention by staff heightens the tension and makes the prison more dangerous. This behavior has been modeled by the highest ranking staff in the prison including former Warden Davenport, Captain Sanders, and
9

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 10 of 75
Captain Malone. 22. It was widely publicized that in 2012, former Warden Davenport
reportedly punched a handcuffed prisoner in the face. Former Warden Davenport was not demoted or removed from his command.
23. Upon information and belief, Defendant Captain Sanders engages in arbitrary and unpredictable bullying tactics that keep the prison on edge including an incident in 2011 when Captain Sanders snatched a food tray from a prisoner’s hands causing a dangerous and volatile situation to erupt leading to serious injuries to officers and prisoners. Upon information and belief, Captain Sanders has taunted prisoners and responded to their safety concerns by telling them to “get a knife,” “kill him or kill yourself,” and “if you really don’t like him, stab him.”
24. A group of high ranking officers have used excessive force and promulgated the culture of violence through their own actions. This, combined with Defendants’ failure to appropriately supervise staff with patterns of incidents involving excessive force or abusive interactions, has created an environment where the risk of physical harm is high. This is reflected in the numerous assaults on prisoners by a group of correctional staff who have been the subject of repeated complaints of abuse, including but not limited the following assaults, all of which exceeded the authorization
10

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 11 of 75
of both the ADOC and St. Clair use of force policies: a. In July 2015, Dillon Cole was assaulted by Sergeant Hamilton and Officer McQueen in the C2 block of segregation. He was handcuffed behind his back, thrown to the ground, and kicked by the officers. Mr. Cole did not receive medical treatment and was held in a temporary holding cage outside the segregation unit for approximately eight hours. b. In May 2015, Brandon Ladd was assaulted by Officer Fife and Officer Burns in A block of segregation during a cell extraction. While laying on his stomach in handcuffs and shackles, Officer Burns kicked Mr. Ladd and Officer Fife hit Mr. Ladd repeatedly in the head with handcuffs wrapped around his fist. Mr. Ladd received stitches in the infirmary and was sent to UAB for treatment the next morning after having several seizures. This incident occurred the same afternoon that Counsel visited Brandon Ladd. c. In May 2015, Terrance Seay was assaulted by Officer Jones and Captain Malone in A block of segregation during a cell extraction when they hit him with the shield and stood on top of him. Once in the infirmary, Officer Jones and Captain Malone punched Mr. Seay while he was still handcuffed. This incident occurred the same afternoon that counsel visited Terrance Seay. Mr. Seay was
11

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 12 of 75
brought back to segregation and kept in the outside holding cages in the yard, handcuffed and shackled, for approximately three days. d. On or about April 17, 2015, Gerald Vann was assaulted by multiple officers when he attempted to comply with orders to return to his cell. Officers beat him with batons, then picked him up and rammed him head-first into a brick wall. Mr. Vann suffered large gashes on his head and required treatment at an outside hospital including dozens of staples to close and. e. On or about April 17, 2015, Darius Mines was assaulted by multiple officers who beat him with batons as he tried to comply with orders to return to his cell. The officers continued to assault Mr. Mines after he was handcuffed, and he received multiple staples to his head as a result of these injuries. f. On or about April 17, 2015, Bernard Abney was attempting to return to his cell in P-Block when officers struck him in the head with a baton, threw him to the ground, and struck him multiple times. Mr. Abney suffered a broken bone in his back and required hospitalization following the assault. g. On or about April 17, 2015, Maurice Green was attempting to return to his cell when he was assaulted by officers who threw him to the ground and kicked him, resulting in several of his teeth being chipped.
12

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 13 of 75
h. On or about April 17, 2015, Unteyus Stephens was assaulted by officers when he attempted to comply with orders to return to his cell. Officers struck him with a television stand and struck him in the chin and ribs with batons. After he was handcuffed and taken out of the cell block, Defendant Malone slammed him into a wall. Mr. Stephens required numerous stitches as a result of his injuries. i. In April 2015, Xabrian Austin was assaulted by Officers Tolliver and Burns following a strip search in his cell. Mr. Austin consented to the search. After the guards searched his cell, Mr. Austin was sprayed with a chemical spray, handcuffed him and took him to the shift office. Inside the shift office, while Mr. Austin remained in restraints, the guards punched him in the face and jaw in the presence of Lt. Carter. j. In April 2015, Gerald Ingram was assaulted by officers who struck him in the rib cage with a baton. k. On or about February 3, 2015, Demetric Pritchett was assaulted by two officers while handcuffed. Mr. Pritchett had requested to see a supervisor regarding threats he was receiving from other men in the segregation cell block.2
2Men in segregation are confined to an isolation cell for more than 23 hours per day, with only five hours of recreation per week, one five-minute shower every other
13

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 14 of 75
Officers Jason Schmid and Patton escorted him outside his cell and took him into a hallway where they repeatedly punched him in the face. l. In January 2015, Justin Jackson was assaulted by multiple officers who punched him, slammed him to the ground, kicked him, and struck him with their batons, all while he was handcuffed. The officers dragged Mr. Jackson to the infirmary, where the assault continued until Mr. Jackson was locked in a temporary holding cage. Sergeant Cook approached him in the cage, then called Officer Howard who began to beat Mr. Jackson again, all while Mr. Jackson remained handcuffed. Howard and Cook also struck him with their batons. m. On January 3, 2015, Shakil Gamble was beaten by multiple officers and was ordered to the shift office where he was directed to stand facing the wall. While Mr. Gamble was standing with his hands against the wall, Officer Tolliver repeatedly slammed his head into the wall. Additional officers entered the shift office, including Lt. Carter. Officers began to beat Mr. Gamble and strike him with their batons. Mr. Gamble’s head was also slammed against the floor. n. Upon information and belief, in January 2015, Zendarius White was assaulted by officers in L-Block. Mr. White asked officers why they were
day, and restrictions on visitation, phone calls, and other privileges. 14

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 15 of 75
harassing other inmates and the officers responded by body-slamming Mr. White. o. In December 2014, Larry Nesbitt was assaulted by four officers in the infirmary, where he was being evaluated for a toothache and high blood pressure. Officers Howard Jr., Williams, Suggs, and Howard Sr. ordered nurses to leave the room, then slapped and punched Mr. Nesbitt, who was handcuffed throughout the assault. p. On or about December 7, 2014, Antonio Johnson was assaulted by two officers when he attempted to eat in the chow hall without his identification. Mr. Johnson tried to explain his lack of identification but was ordered to go to the shift office. As he was complying with the order, Officer Burke punched him multiple times in the face. A second officer, Officer Bowman, approached and the two officers forced Mr. Johnson to the ground and kicked him in the head. q. On or about December 3, 2014, Marcus Webb was assaulted by Captain Gary Malone while handcuffed in the infirmary. Mr. Webb suffered head and arm injuries as a result of this assault. r. In November 2014, Tommy Demming was shoved into a wall and punched in the face while handcuffed in his segregation cell by Officer Padgett.
15

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 16 of 75
s. On or about November 3, 2014, James Howard was assaulted by Officer Lauolefiso Jones while walking to the chow hall. Officer Jones grabbed the front of Mr. Howard’s shirt, picked him up and slammed him into the ground. Officer Jones then rolled him over, handcuffed him, and kicked him while he was handcuffed. Officer Jones shouted homosexual slurs during the assault. t. In October 2014, Jamie Abrams, at the time a resident of the honor dorm, was beaten and cursed by Officer Lauolefiso Jones, who grabbed Mr. Abrams by the neck and slammed his head against a wall. The assault was the result of Mr. Abrams’ mistakenly sitting at the wrong table during a Kairos religious program at the prison. u. In October 2014, Officer Lauolefiso Jones entered Matthew Owens’ cell after the Kairos program, grabbed Mr. Owens by the neck and slammed his head into his bunk several times. Mr. Owens nearly passed out while being choked. Officer Jones also threatened to kill him and shouted numerous profanities at him. v. In October 2014, Joseph Royal was beaten while restrained by several officers in the segregation unit after the officers had been instructed by Captain Gary Malone to beat him.
16

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 17 of 75
w. On or about October 6, 2014, Terrence Seay was assaulted by Officer Lauolefiso Jones while handcuffed and in leg shackles in the barbershop. Officer Jones punched Mr. Seay, throwing him to the ground, then stomped on him and struck him with a broom handle. Mr. Seay was handcuffed during the assault. x. In September 2014, Arlo Townsend was beaten by Officer Burns while handcuffed and subsequently sprayed with a chemical agent. Lieutenant Ronald Carter accompanied Mr. Townsend to the infirmary, where Lt. Carter inflicted a second beating on the handcuffed Mr. Townsend, which resulted in severe injuries to his jaw, mouth, and teeth. y. On or about September 3, 2014, Michael Nelson, a partially-paralyzed stroke victim who relies on a wheelchair, was beaten by Officer Daniel Turner following a disagreement over a clothesline that Mr. Nelson used near his bunk in the G dorm, which is a medical dorm. Officer Turner cursed at Mr. Nelson, threatened to kill him, then repeatedly punched him in the face and chest. Officer Turner pushed Mr. Nelson in his wheelchair into a bathroom area, where he threw Mr. Nelson and the wheelchair into a wall, forced Mr. Nelson onto the floor, destroying his wheelchair.
17

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 18 of 75
z. On or about August 4, 2014, Charlie Bennett was sprayed with chemical spray, paraded through the prison naked, and not provided with proper medical treatment to remove the chemical from his body. Officer Chad Cleveland entered Mr. Bennett's cell and ordered him to strip, squat and cough. Mr. Bennett complied. No contraband was found, yet Officer Cleveland ordered him to squat and cough again. Mr. Bennett again complied and again no contraband was found. The third time Officer Cleveland ordered him to squat and cough, Mr. Bennett refused, believing another search was excessive. Officer Cleveland and Sergeant Truitt then sprayed him with chemical spray and walked him naked through the camp. aa. In June 2014, inmate Demetric Pritchett was assaulted multiple times while restrained in segregation. The final assault occurred at the orders of Captain Malone. While Mr. Pritchett was restrained, an officer beat Mr. Pritchett's head and face. ab. In March 2014, inmate Tommy Demming observed Officer Bryan Chapman beating a handcuffed inmate. When Mr. Demming verbally intervened, Officer Chapman opened the door to his cage and punched him three times in the head. Mr. Demming was handcuffed while he was assaulted.
18

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 19 of 75
ac. In 2014, Captain Malone punched a prisoner, who was handcuffed, in the head, chipping the prisoner’s tooth. ad. In July 2014, Correctional Officers Donald Lukima and Christopher Smith, officers on Lt. Carter’s shift, beat a prisoner. Officers Lukima and Smith ordered the prisoner out of his cell in the middle of the night, took him into the hallway outside his block, handcuffed him, and then hit him in the back of the head with handcuffs wrapped around their knuckles, causing injuries requiring staples. ae. In May 2014, Lt. Carter put his hands around an inmate’s neck and applied pressure until he lost consciousness. The inmate had to be taken to UAB hospital due to his injuries. af. In May 2014, Lt. Carter forced Dale Gilley to stand outside the shift office facing the wall for fourteen hours and, at one point during that period of time, slammed his head against the wall and punched him in the face. ag. Jermaine Tillman was assaulted in February 2013 by Officers Chad Cleveland, M. Desnides, and W. Howard. The officers assaulted Mr. Tillman when he was returning to his cell from the showers and was restrained in handcuffs behind his back. The officers hit Mr. Tillman in the face, slammed
19

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 20 of 75
his head into a window, and continued to punch, kick, and beat him when he fell to the floor. ah. Upon information and belief, inmate Richardo Eason was beaten by multiple St. Clair officers while handcuffed in February 2013. While assigned to the segregation unit, Mr. Eason was placed in handcuffs before being allowed to leave his cell for a shower. Officer JaMichael Howard left his post and approached Mr. Eason, asked him a question, then punched Mr. Eason several times in the face. Officers Taylor Knight and Chad Cleveland then assisted Howard in slamming Mr. Eason onto the floor. ai. Upon information and belief, inmate Darrious Mabry was beaten by Officer Matthew Moore in October 2012. In a dispute over Mr. Mabry leaving the dining hall with extra cake, Officer Moore left his post and attacked Mr. Mabry, who suffered a broken nose, split lip, broken tooth, injured eye, and head contusions. aj. Upon information and belief, in Janury 2012, inmate Joseph Shack was beaten by Sgt. John Mason and suffered hearing loss as a result. Mr. Shack was handcuffed and shackled during the beating. Sgt. Mason punched him in the head, face, and ear, stomped on his back, kicked him and yelled racial epithets
20

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 21 of 75
at him. Mr. Shack had requested the presence of a witness at a disciplinary hearing, and Sgt. Mason responded: “This is what I do to a [n . . . ] that tries to tell me how to do my job.” Mr. Shack was treated for a ruptured ear, fractured thumb, and internal bleeding. He was fitted for a hearing aid following the rupture. ak. Upon information and belief, James Bonds was beaten by officers and suffered a severe eye injury in September 2011. Three correctional officers shook down his cell, forced him to remove clothes and to squat and cough. After they found a cell phone in his cell, the officers sprayed Mr. Bonds with a chemical agent and struck him with batons, then handcuffed him. After Mr. Bonds was handcuffed, Officer Donald Lukima arrived at the scene and struck Mr. Bonds in the eye while Mr. Bonds was handcuffed. Mr. Bonds suffered a serious eye injury, including an orbital wall fracture to his left eye and massive bleeding. His injuries required multiple treatments and surgeries at outside hospitals. 25. In addition, subsequent to meeting with undersigned counsel, a number of the plaintiffs have experienced mistreatment by correctional officers. Such incidents of mistreatment include, but are not limited to:
21

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 22 of 75
a. For three days and two nights in October 2014, Antonio Cheatham was forced to stand outside the shift office because the prison staff refused to place him in safe housing. The situation began on or around October 3, when Captain Carl Sanders ordered Mr. Cheatham to move to L-Block. Mr. Cheatham, who had recently had part of his ear bitten off by another inmate, told Captain Sanders that he had documented enemies in L-Block and could not live there. Captain Sanders responded by telling Mr. Cheatham he could either move to LBlock or stand outside the shift office all night. Mr. Cheatham remained there for most of two nights before being sent to an isolation cell in segregation. b. In early October 2014, Robert Woods, who is 57 years old and disabled, complained to Captain Carl Sanders that another inmate was hiding contraband under his bed, and requested a move to a safe block. Captain Sanders responded by threatening to assign Mr. Woods, who is missing one leg, to a top bunk. Captain Sanders then assigned Mr. Woods to Q-Block, a notoriously violent housing unit. When he arrived, Mr. Woods was instructed by the inmates who controlled the block where he could live within the block. Soon after arriving on Q-Block, Mr. Woods witnessed an inmate being beaten by 10-15 other inmates.
22

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 23 of 75
26. Defendants have also failed to promulgate, implement and enforce adequate policies, procedures, and practices necessary to adequately supervise and monitor the housing units and common areas in the Facility and to maintain the safety and security of prisoners at St. Clair. Defendants are aware that the inadequate supervision by correctional staff has created a dangerous environment, has contributed to numerous homicides and assaults in the Facility, and creates a substantial risk of serious harm. As stated by former Warden Davenport, the conditions at St. Clair make it a “security nightmare.” They have failed to take reasonable measures to change their practices, policies, and procedures to improve safety and security of the prisoners in the general population housing units.
27. Defendants fail to adequately supervise and monitor the housing blocks in general population. Upon information and belief, St. Clair has eight cellblocks, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, and Q, that house prisoners in general population. Each cellblock is divided into two separate sides, so that they are designated as J1, J2, K1, K2, etc. Blocks J and K are paired blocks that are connected by a hallway, as are L and M, N and O, and P and Q. Each side of a cellblock is comprised of 24 two-man cells, so that 48 prisoners live on each side of a block and 96 prisoners live in each block as a whole. Each cell has a steel door through which prisoners enter and exit their cell.
23

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 24 of 75
The locking mechanisms on the majority of cell doors are broken or ineffectual and provide no protection. (See ¶¶ 40-44 below.)
28. A single officer is assigned to supervise and monitor each of the housing blocks and the 96 prisoners housed there. The officer is stationed in a “cube,” which has windows that allow the officer to see into both sides of the block. Upon information and belief, the cube officer is not permitted to leave their post during their shift. Random patrols of the housing blocks by additional officers occur extremely infrequently. Upon information and belief, most days, officers only walk through the blocks during scheduled count times that occur three to five times in a 24 hour period. Therefore, the cube officer is the only officer monitoring both sides of each block the vast majority of the time. Upon information and belief, the officers in the cube are, at times, asleep, on the telephone, or otherwise not paying attention to the prisoners they are supervising.
29. Upon information and belief, there are blind spots in all of the blocks that cannot be seen by the cube officer, including the shower area, the TV/day room, and inside all of the cells. There are few, if any, functioning cameras in the housing blocks. Consequently, large sections of the housing blocks in general population are not within the view of any officer the majority of the day.
24

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 25 of 75
30. The only means for prisoners to communicate with the officer in the cube is by banging on the glass windows. If a prisoner is in a locked cell, there is no way for a prisoner in his cell to contact the officer in the cube except by banging on his cell door.
31. Each of the cellblocks open onto a common yard, referred to as the “GYard” and doors leading to the G-Yard from the blocks are located in the hallways that connect the paired blocks together. The gymnasium used by all of the prisoners in general population is located on the G-Yard. The prisoners who live in H dorm and G dorm also use the G-Yard and the gymnasium.
32. There are generally between 200 and 400 prisoners on the yard or in the gym during yard call and gym call. Upon information and belief, there is one officer assigned to supervise the yard and the gym during yard and gym call and between two and four roving officers. However, there are often less officers present than are assigned to the gym and yard.
33. There are also two open bay dorms at St. Clair. The first is known as “H dorm,” where prisoners enrolled in the Therapeutic Communities program (“TC”), a substance abuse treatment program, reside. Upon information and belief, there are approximately 260 prisoners who currently reside in H dorm. The other dorm is known
25

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 26 of 75
as G dorm. It is a part of the infirmary and typically, prisoners requiring medical care live there. Upon information and belief, there are approximately 58 prisoners who live in G dorm.
34. Upon information and belief, there is one officer who is assigned to sit at a desk at the entrance of H dorm and who is responsible for supervising the prisoners who reside in the dorm. That officer is not permitted to leave his assigned post during his shift and is unable to see inside the bathrooms, as well as the back of the dorm where some prisoners’ beds are located, from the desk where he sits. Upon information and belief, random patrols of the dorms by additional officers occur extremely infrequently. Most days, officers only walk through the blocks during scheduled count times that occur three to five times in a 24 hour period. Therefore, the officer assigned to the desk is the only officer monitoring H dorm the vast majority of the time and the officers at the desk are, at times, asleep, on the telephone, or otherwise not paying attention to the prisoners they are supervising.
35. Upon information and belief, there are blind spots in the open bay dorms. The officer assigned to monitor the dorm from the desk near the entrance is not able to see a portion of the back of the dorm where some prisoners’ beds are located. Additionally, the officer is not able to see into the bathrooms from his or her post.
26

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 27 of 75
There are few, if any, functioning cameras in the open bay dorms. Consequently, portions of the open bay dorms are not within the view of any officer for large parts of the day.
36. Defendants are aware that the inadequate supervision in general population contributes to the high rate of prisoner-on-prisoner violence. Inattentive officers, the inability to contact officers in an emergency, and blind spots in the units have contributed to numerous violent incidents, many of which have been stabbings, that have resulted in serious injury or death. Since the filing of this lawsuit, Defendants have failed to fix the broken locks on cell doors and take appropriate measures to reduce the large number of knives and other weapons at the prison. These continuing failures, along with poor supervision of inmates at the facility, have resulted in additional inmate-on-inmate stabbings and assaults causing serious injuries. The incidents of prisoner on prisoner assaults include but are not limited to:
a. In July 2015, Omar and Jamal Denson were attacked by multiple inmates. Jamal Denson was stabbed, receiving serious wounds in his head, kidneys, and lungs that required treatment and surgery at UAB hospital. Omar Denson was stabbed multiple times. b. In July 2015, Micah Mays was assaulted by another inmate in his cell in
27

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 28 of 75
Q block. He suffered several stab wounds and a broken arm. c. In May or June 2015, Janarious Smith was stabbed by another inmate during yard time in the segregation unit. While walking in the yard area, another inmate was able to remove his handcuffs and stab Mr. Smith, who was handcuffed behind his back, several times with a knife in the back and arm. d. In May 2015, Victor Russo was robbed and assaulted shortly after returning from the prison store to his cell. Multiple prisoners were able to open his cell door and enter his cell because the door had a broken locking mechanism. They attacked Mr. Russo, who is 52, and stole all of his store items. He suffered facial injuries requiring treatment at UAB Hospital. e. In April 2015, A.Z. was raped in H dorm, the Therapeutic Community, a week after being transferred to St. Clair. A.Z. was asleep in his bunk when his assailant put a knife to his throat and raped him. After reporting the rape, A.Z. was placed in an isolation cell in segregation and was unable to participate in the Therapeutic Community. A.Z. was not provided with continuing medical or mental health treatment. When placed in an isolation cell in segregation, A.Z. reported to officers that he felt suicidal and in response he was told to kill himself. A.Z. never heard the outcome of the I&I investigation. A.Z.’s
28

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 29 of 75
assailant, a general population prisoner living in H dorm who was not a participant in Therapeutic Community and had a history of violence and sexual assault. f. In April 2015, Michael McGregor was repeatedly stabbed two days after arriving at St. Clair. Mr. McGregor was asleep in his cell, with the door locked. His assailant was able to enter his locked cell and stabbed him in his arms, chest, back, head, and neck, using two ice picks. Mr. McGregor suffered extensive injuries to his back and neck, including chipped vertebrae, requiring treatment at UAB hospital. Hours before this assault, Mr. McGregor reported to his classification officer that he needed to be moved because he was being threatened by this assailant. g. In April 2015, W.C. was raped twice at knifepoint in the middle of the night by his cell partner in P-Block. He had been required to sign a living agreement as the only means of avoiding placement in isolation. W.C. continued to face retaliation from friends of his assailant. He did not receive continuing mental health care and never heard the outcome of the I&I investigation. h. In March 2015, Jamal Woods was stabbed by three inmates in L-Block. Mr. Woods was stabbed in his head, face, shoulder, and leg, receiving serious
29

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 30 of 75
injuries that required two trips to UAB hospital. The assault was in plain sight of the cube officer, the lone officer in the block overseeing 96 inmates. i. In March 2015, James Dorriety was stabbed multiple times in his head and back, suffering a punctured lung. Mr. Dorriety, an honor dorm resident, was returning to his cell block from the prison canteen when three men armed with knives robbed him of his canteen goods and assaulted him. His injuries required treatment at UAB hospital, where he received numerous staples in his head and surgery to treat his lung injury. j. In March 2015, Nakia Echols suffered multiple stab wounds from another inmate. The inmate entered his cell in P-Block armed with a knife and ice pick in the early morning hours as Mr. Echols slept and assaulted him. Following the assault, Mr. Echols was too frightened to return to his cell and slept for a week on a bench in Q-Block, undetected by prison staff. k. In March 2015, David Beech, who is 58 years old, was stabbed and seriously injured by another inmate while both were waiting in the noon pill call line. The inmate stabbed Mr. Beech multiple times with a box cutter. Mr. Beech was treated at UAB hospital and received numerous staples on his wrist and several each on his head and back. l. In March 2015, Jeffrey Peoples was assaulted by multiple assailants while
30

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 31 of 75
he was sleeping in his cell. m. Around February 2015, Dillon Cole was stabbed multiple times in L block. n. In February 2015, Brandon Ladd was stabbed during an attempted robbery in his cell in L-Block by an inmate assigned to a different block, who was able to enter his block. Mr. Ladd suffered stab wounds to his forearm and chest, resulting in a collapsed lung, which required extensive treatment, including surgery, at UAB hospital. o. In February 2015, Larry Hill was assaulted in his cell block by multiple inmates who were allowed entry into the cell block by the cube officer. Mr. Hill was beaten with knife handles and fists and knocked unconscious. p. On or around February 1, 2015, J.M. was raped by another inmate, who approached J.M. as he was reading on his bunk and placed a knife to his throat. Both men were assigned to the Therapeutic Community or H dorm, which is where the rape occurred. J.M. remains in an isolation cell in segregation. J.M. did not have sight and sound separation from his assailant even while in segregation. J.M. does not use the shower in segregation because he continues to fear retaliation. He has not received mental health counseling and has not heard the outcome of the I&I investigation.
31

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 32 of 75
q. In January 2015, Bradley Gant was attacked as he was leaving his block during a meal time. He suffered head and facial injuries after being struck with a metal lock by an inmate who had previously harassed him. Mr. Gant required staples in the back of his head and stitches on his chin as a result of the assault. When Mr. Gant reported the earlier harassment, Captain Sanders responded that the other inmate “isn’t here to take care of you,” and advised Mr. Gant to “get a knife and do something about it.” r. In January 2015, Micah Mays was stabbed and cut multiple times, suffering injuries to his face, wrists, neck, and shoulders during a robbery attempt in N-Block. His assailants had entered N-Block from a different block. His injuries were so severe he required treatment at UAB hospital. s. In January 2015, Justen Stinson was stabbed and punched in his cell in PBlock. After being assaulted, Mr. Stinson moved undetected through several other blocks seeking help for his injuries from other inmates. t. In January 2015, Elliott Blount was robbed and stabbed in his cell in NBlock. Mr. Blount’s assailant was assigned to P/Q and was allowed to enter an unassigned living area. Mr. Blount suffered severe head injuries that required extensive surgery at UAB hospital. u. In January 2015, Derrick LaKeith Brown, an inmate who suffers from
32

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 33 of 75
hemophilia, was stabbed and seriously injured by another inmate. His wounds included a punctured liver and internal bleeding that required treatment at UAB hospital. v. In January 2015, D.C., a nonviolent offender, was raped at knifepoint in L-Block. His assailant told him that he would kill him if he reported the rape. D.C. was placed in an isolation cell in segregation after reporting the rape, but he still did not have sight and sound separation from his assailant. D.C. did not receive continuing mental health counseling. w. In December 2014, J.H. was sexually assaulted at knife point in his cell by a prisoner, the same man who later raped J.M. J.H. reported the assault and was placed in an isolation cell in segregation. J.H. never heard the results of the I&I investigation. Two months later, the same assailant sexually assaulted J.M. The assailant was then moved to segregation and placed in the same block as J.H. x. On or about December 3, 2014, Michael Stamper, who is 53 years old, was stabbed approximately eight times, including twice in his forehead and in his lung. The incident occurred in O-Block, which is typically reserved for older inmates with good disciplinary records. Mr. Stamper received over 40 stitches and required treatment at UAB hospital.
33

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 34 of 75
y. In November 2014, Frankie Johnson, a plaintiff in this lawsuit, was stabbed in the back of his head, the backs of both arms, his left side, and on one of his fingers while in the chow hall and in full view of several correctional officers. Mr. Johnson required staples to the back of his head and stitches to his finger. z. In November 2014, Mark Archer, an older inmate who has undergone surgery for severe back problems, had all of his personal property stolen from his cell while he was in the shift office. The stolen items included a special, eggcrate mattress Mr. Archer needs for his back. Neither Mr. Archer nor St. Clair staff have been able to locate the mattress, and it remains missing months later. aa. In October 2014, Dale Gilley, a plaintiff in this lawsuit, was assaulted in the dimly-lit tunnel leading to H dorm following his visit with undersigned counsel. As Mr. Gilley entered the tunnel he heard another prisoner say, “Hey, holler at me about that program,” and looked up, but did not see the man clearly. The man then punched him in the face. Mr. Gilley reported the incident and, because he was unable to identify his assailant, was given the choice of signing a liability release form or going to an isolation cell in segregation. ab. In September or October 2014, Christopher Chapple was beaten over the course of several hours by multiple assailants in Q-Block. There was only a
34

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 35 of 75
single cube officer in the block, a cadet, who never came out of the cube during Mr. Chapple’s assault, nor called for roving officers to assist as the beating continued. ac. In September 2014, Joseph Royal was attacked by his cell mate soon after being transferred to P-Block. Mr. Royal was assaulted while sleeping and woke up covered in blood. He was taken to Brookwood Hospital, where he received staples in his head. ad. In August 2014, Victor Russo, who is 52 years old, was moved out of the honor dorm for an alleged shaving infraction. He moved into his new block and soon after was accosted by three younger inmates armed with knives who robbed him. When Mr. Russo reported the robbery to correctional staff, Captain Sanders suggested he get a knife to protect himself. ae. In September 2014, Tim Duncan was murdered by another prisoner or prisoners in N-Block. Mr. Duncan had previously had conflict with individuals in N-Block and had made numerous requests to Captain Sanders to be transferred to another block. These requests were repeatedly denied. af. On or about June 3, 2014, Jodey Waldrop was murdered in his cell by another prisoner, who was able to enter Mr. Waldrop’s cell in the middle of the night when the block was on lockdown, due to the cell door not locking.
35

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 36 of 75
ag. In June 2014, Derrick White, who lived in P-Block, was assaulted in the hallway between P and Q blocks during a movement time by a prisoner who, upon information and belief, was not assigned to either block. There were no officers present when Mr. White was assaulted. He was strangled and then dragged while unconscious into the showers in Q. He was in the showers from approximately 7:30 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. and was never found by staff, despite the fact that, upon information and belief, a count was conducted during the time he was missing. ah. In May 2014, Derrick White was stabbed in the gym by another prisoner. Mr. White’s assailant also stabbed another prisoner during this incident. There were approximately 20 prisoners present in the gym and 200 prisoners in the yard at the time of the stabbing. Upon information and belief, there was one officer supervising the yard and no officers present in the gym. ai. In May 2014, Antonio Cheatham was assaulted by another prisoner in the bathroom of the H dorm, a known blind spot, while no correctional officers were in view. Part of his ear was bitten off and flushed down a toilet before any officers responded to the struggle. aj. In February 2014, a prisoner was stabbed inside his cell, a blind spot to the cube officer.
36

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 37 of 75
ak. In January 2014, Marquette Cummings was stabbed and killed in the TV room, a blind spot to the cube officer. al. In December 2013, Michael Mays was stabbed by another prisoner on the way to the chow hall. Mr. Mays was stabbed in the neck, in the back, and in the elbow. Mr. Mays had to be taken to an outside hospital for treatment. am. In September 2013, Frankie Johnson was burned in his cell in the middle of the night by a prisoner who was able to exit his own cell and enter Mr. Johnson’s cell. That prisoner threw a chemical substance that had been heated in a microwave on Mr. Johnson while he was sleeping, resulting in severe chemical burns. an. In July 2013, Mark Duke was stabbed several times by another prisoner in the G-Yard and suffered a punctured lung. ao. In 2013, a prisoner was stabbed multiple times with an ice pick outside the gym by another prisoner. At the time there were approximately 200 inmates in the area, but no officers were present to intervene in the conflict. The prisoner made it to the infirmary unassisted and was eventually transported by ambulance to an outside hospital because of the seriousness of his wounds. ap. In May 2012, John Rutledge was strangled to death inside his cell in the middle of the night when the cells should have been locked down. Multiple
37

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 38 of 75
aspsailants were able to enter Mr. Rutledge’s cell and hog-tie and strangle him without being observed by officers. His cell mate discovered him and reported his condition to the cube officer. By the time officers reached the cell, Mr. Rutledge was dead from strangulation. aq. Upon information and belief, Muhammad Al-Ameen, also known as Terry Rivers, was repeatedly stabbed on the yard by another inmate in May 2012. There were numerous inmates on the yard, but no officers were present when Mr. Al-Ameen was stabbed. Mr. Al-Ameen’s injuries required surgery. ar. In October 2011, Jabari Bascomb was stabbed to death in his cell, a blind spot to the cube officer, after another prisoner broke into his cell. as. Upon information and belief, in January 2011, Anthony Moss was assaulted in his cell, a blind spot to the cube officer, and suffered an injury which caused him to lose the use of his left eye. 37. Defendants have also failed to promulgate and enforce adequate and effective policies, procedures and practices in the segregation housing units meant to keep prisoners isolated from one another for their protection. Upon information and belief, policy requires that prisoners in segregation be placed in handcuffs before their cell door is opened, and that only one door be open at a time so that prisoners in segregation do not come in contact with each other.
38

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 39 of 75
38. DOC staff also fail to adequately conduct searches for contraband and knives in segregation. The failure to follow the policies of permitting only one prisoner out of his cell at a time and searching for contraband creates a significant risk of serious harm because these conditions have been the cause of multiple violent assaults, including but not limited to:
a. In May or June 2015, Janarious Smith was stabbed by another inmate during yard time in the segregation unit. While walking in the yard area, another inmate was able to remove his handcuffs and stab Mr. Smith, who was handcuffed behind his back, several times with a knife in the back and arm. b. In August 2014, a prisoner was stabbed by the same prisoner that fatally stabbed Jammy Bell in 2013, after the prisoner was assigned to clean the halls in the segregation unit. The officers failed to secure the food-tray slots on the cell doors prior to sending the prisoner into the unit and the other man was able to stab the prisoner in his leg by sticking a knife attached to a broom handle through his open tray slot. c. In August 2013, Jammy Bell was fatally stabbed by another prisoner in the segregation unit after an officer failed to follow proper protocol for opening the cell doors. d. Upon information and belief, Jovar Gamble was stabbed multiple times
39

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 40 of 75
in August 2012, while housed in the segregation unit. Mr. Gamble was in handcuffs on the walk when another segregation inmate stabbed him. e. Upon information and belief, Orlando Porch was assaulted by another inmate while both men were housed in segregation in January 2012. 39. Defendants are aware of the locations and circumstances in which these homicides and assaults have occurred and that inadequate supervision was one of the dangerous conditions that made it possible for these incidents to occur. However, they have failed to adequately increase patrols and supervision of the units, have not installed cameras or provided means for prisoners to call for help in an emergency, nor taken any other reasonable action to increase and improve the quality of supervision in general population, leaving the plaintiff class exposed to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm. DEFENDANTS’ FAILURE TO PROVIDE SECURE LOCKING MECHANISMS ON INDIVIDUAL CELL DOORS PLACES INMATES AT RISK OF VIOLENT ASSAULT. 40. The locking mechanism on the majority of cells are broken and have not been repaired. Defendants rely on a system of locked, secure cells to house inmates safely, rather than visual monitoring, yet Defendants are aware that the locks in the majority of doors at the Facility can be easily tampered with so that they do not lock. Without locking cell doors, prisoners in the cell blocks have no means of protecting
40

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 41 of 75
themselves inside their cells. Defendants have refused requests to fix cell doors and have failed to take adequate measures to repair the broken cell locks.
41. The locks on the cell doors in general population can be easily tampered with by using items such as a piece of plastic, a razor blade, or paper clips to jam the locking mechanism. Once the locking mechanism is jammed, it does not engage and the door can be “tricked,” meaning it can be opened from the inside or from the outside with a plastic ID card which all prisoners carry. The locks on some of the doors in general population are broken and do not work, even if nothing is jamming the mechanism. In some doors, the entire mechanism is missing. Cell doors in general population remain open all day, making it possible for prisoners to jam the locks in other prisoners’ doors. The locks on the doors in segregation can also be easily tampered with by jamming an object, such as a toothpaste cap, in the mechanism that rolls the door, which prevents the lock from engaging.
42. Consequently, Plaintiffs cannot keep other prisoners from entering their cells and prisoners are able to enter or exit their own and other prisoners’ cells at any time, even during lockdown. This creates a particularly dangerous environment because cells are “blind zones” in the blocks, meaning that officers in the cube cannot see inside the cells and there is no way for a prisoner to call an officer for help in the event of an emergency, other than banging on the cell to try to get the attention of the cube officer.
41

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 42 of 75
(See ¶¶ 28-30 above.) Because cube officers are frequently asleep or are otherwise inattentive, this is not an effective means for a prisoner being assaulted to get help.
43. Defendants know that the locks on most cells do not work. St. Clair staff have made comments demonstrating their knowledge, have used their own ID cards to open cell doors, and have seen prisoners come out of their cells when the unit is supposed to be on lockdown. Upon information and belief, there is an indicator light panel in the cube that indicates to the cube officer when cell doors are not locked. Furthermore, Defendants are aware that the lack of functioning locks creates dangerous conditions because prisoners have been assaulted in their cells during times when the unit was on lockdown. These incidents include, but are not limited to:
a. On or about June 3 2014, Jodey Waldrop was murdered in his cell by another prisoner, who was able to enter Mr. Waldrop’s cell in the middle of the night when the block was on lockdown, due to the cell door not locking. b. In August 2013, Jammy Bell was stabbed by another prisoner in segregation after his cell door was tampered with. c. In May 2012, John Rutledge was strangled to death by other prisoners who entered his cell in the middle of the night, when the cells should have been on lockdown. d. Upon information and belief, in May 2011, Derrick Averhart was stabbed
42

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 43 of 75
in the arm, head, and face by another inmate while handcuffed in his cell in segregation. 44. Defendants have failed to respond in a reasonable manner to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm posed to the plaintiff class by the broken locks on the general population cell doors. Defendants do not adequately train younger staff how to determine if a door is tricked, do not regularly check cell doors to make sure the lock is functioning properly or repair locks they know are broken, have refused Plaintiffs’ requests to repair broken locks, and have taken no other reasonable or adequate action to ameliorate the risk of harm created by cell doors that do not lock. VULNERABLE INMATES, INCLUDING THE DISABLED AND ELDERLY, ARE HOUSED IN VIOLENT UNITS WHERE THEIR RISK OF VIOLENT ATTACK IS INCREASED. 45. Defendants’ lack of risk assessment and classification system puts prisoners at risk of violence. Defendants fail to effectively separate prisoners who are at risk for a violent conflict. Defendants fail to adequately screen incoming prisoners to determine if they have enemies in the Facility, based either on personal conflicts, prior conflicts at other facilities in ADOC, or gang-based conflicts, and do not adequately take such considerations into account when making housing assignments. Without the ability to identify enemies and vulnerable inmates, St. Clair cannot
43

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 44 of 75
appropriately manage risks of violence, thus exposing prisoners to harm. 46. Upon information and belief, Defendants do not adequately factor in a
prisoner’s security level, including his offense of conviction, sentence, and disciplinary record, in making housing assignments. Minimum, medium, and maximum custody prisoners can be, and are, assigned to the same units and cells as each other. Therefore, prisoners with short term of years sentences, convictions for relatively minor offenses and clean or only minor disciplinary histories can be assigned to the same unit, and assigned to share a cell with, prisoners who have life sentences, were convicted of more serious offenses, or with a violent institutional history. Furthermore, prisoners transferred out of the honor dorm and the Therapeutic Communities dorm, housing units where there are more privileges, are particularly vulnerable to assault when they are moved into the blocks in general population. It is unreasonable of Defendants to fail to make housing assignments based on security classification status or other vulnerabilities.
47. Upon information and belief, Defendant Sanders, the captain of general population, is responsible for authorizing all housing movement and has repeatedly assigned older, physically disabled, or otherwise vulnerable prisoners to units and cells with young prisoners with a history of violent conduct. He has also failed to authorize a change in housing assignment when such prisoners request a bed change based on
44

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 45 of 75
fear for their safety. (See ¶¶ 51-53 below.) a. In September 2014, Tim Duncan was murdered by another prisoner or prisoners in N-Block. Mr. Duncan had previously had conflict with individuals in N-Block and had made numerous requested to Captain Sanders to be transferred. These requests were repeatedly denied. b. In August 2014, Victor Russo, who is 52 years old, was moved out of the honor dorm for an alleged shaving infraction. He moved into his new block and soon after was accosted by three younger inmates armed with knives who robbed him. When Mr. Russo reported the robbery to correctional staff, Captain Sanders suggested he get a knife to protect himself. c. James Edwards, who is 54 years old, has recently been assigned to cells with much younger prisoners who engage in risky activities that put him at risk and who steal his property. In 2012, while living in a prior block, Mr. Edwards’ cell mate would leave the cell door unlocked at night in order to obtain drugs and engage in other prohibited behavior. Mr. Edwards complained to Captain Sanders and requested a bed transfer because his cell mate was using drugs and taking his property. Captain Sanders refused to move him and told him, “When I see one of y’all on a stretcher, I know it’s a problem.” d. Robert Woods was recently reassigned by Defendant Sanders from a 45

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 46 of 75
block where many older prisoners live, to a violent block where he is vulnerable because he is 57 years old and physically disabled. When he expressed fear for his safety to Defendant Sanders, Sanders responded “If you ain’t got a knife, I’ll give you one.” When Mr. Woods’ property box was broken into in his cell and he reported the theft to Defendant Sanders, Sanders responded that he had moved Mr. Woods so that something like that would happen to him. When Mr. Woods spoke to former Warden Davenport about Defendant Sanders’ response to his fears, former Warden Davenport responded by asking Mr. Woods if he had a knife yet. When Mr. Woods responded that he did not, former Warden Davenport told Mr. Woods to do what he needed to do to survive on his new block. Mr. Woods made one final request to Defendant Sanders to move him from his new block and Defendant Sanders responded by placing several box cutters on a table and told Mr. Woods to make a knife to protect himself. 48. Upon information and belief, Defendants fail to adequately and effectively separate prisoners who have had violent confrontations at St. Clair. Defendants do not have reasonable policies and procedures in place that would enable re-classification of prisoners who may be identified as violent as a result of actions in the Facility. 49. In response to violence between prisoners, Defendants place the victim and the aggressor in punitive isolation for an indefinite period. The victim is then
46

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 47 of 75
placed in a catch-22 position of remaining indefinitely in punitive isolation or signing a “living agreement” with the other inmate(s) involved in the altercation in order to be released from segregation back into general population. Upon information and belief, once a living agreement has been signed, Defendants can and do assign prisoners who have engaged in violence or threatened each other to the same unit. Defendants’ requirement that victims of violent assaults must either remain in an isolation cell in segregation or sign a “living agreement,” and then be placed back in contact with the prisoner(s) who assaulted them, is not a reasonable response to violent incidents between prisoners.
50. Defendants do not adequately consider an inmate’s mental health status or history of violent conflict with other prisoners in making housing assignments. Upon information and belief, inmates with serious mental health problems or histories of repeated violent conflict live in general population and do not get adequate treatment or supervision. Defendants also fail to provide adequate training or supervision to staff on how to respond to prisoners who report threats of violence made by prisoners with known histories of mental instability or violent conflict. Defendants’ failure to adequately classify and treat prisoners with mental illness or histories of repeated violent assaults, as well as their failure to provide adequate training or supervision of staff on how to respond to mentally ill or violent prisoners has resulted in substantial
47

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 48 of 75
harm to Plaintiffs. 51. Defendants have failed to create and enforce adequate procedures,
practices, and policies for investigating and responding to inmate requests to be moved to a new cell assignment based on threats or fear for their safety in their current housing assignment. Defendants have rejected inmate requests for movement with little or no effort made to determine the veracity and seriousness of the threat.
52. Upon information and belief, all bed change requests must be approved by Defendant Sanders. Former Warden Davenport, as well as Captain Sanders, Lieutenant Carter, and Lieutenant Scott have responded to Plaintiffs’ requests to move based on threats to their safety by telling them to arm themselves with knives, by making comments to the effect that they are tough enough to handle the potential violence, by telling the threatened prisoners that Defendants do not care what happens to them, or by telling them that the only option for transfer is to be moved into an isolation cell in segregation. If a threatened prisoner agrees to move to an isolation cell in segregation for his safety, Defendants have also denied that request.
53. Defendants are aware that their refusal to classify prisoners and refusal to investigate and grant movement requests based on a prisoner’s safety concerns creates a substantial risk of serious harm because prisoners have been assaulted after their requests to move housing assignments were denied. These incidents include, but are
48

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 49 of 75
not limited to: a. In May 2015, Victor Russo was robbed and assaulted shortly after returning from the prison store to his cell. Multiple prisoners were able to open his cell door and enter his cell because the door had a broken locking mechanism. They attacked Mr. Russo, who is 52, and stole all of his store items. He suffered facial injuries requiring treatment at UAB Hospital. b. In April 2015, A.Z. was raped in H dorm, the Therapeutic Community, a week after being transferred to St. Clair. A.Z. was asleep in his bunk when his assailant put a knife to his throat and raped him. After reporting the rape, A.Z. was placed in an isolation cell in segregation and was unable to participate in the Therapeutic Community. A.Z. was not provided with continuing medical or mental health treatment. When placed in an isolation cell in segregation, A.Z. reported to officers that he felt suicidal and in response he was told to kill himself. A.Z. never heard the outcome of the I&I investigation. A.Z.’s assailant was a general population prisoner living in H dorm who was not a participant in Therapeutic Community and had a history of violence and sexual assault. c. In April 2015, W.C. was raped twice at knifepoint in the middle of the night by his cell partner in P-Block. He had been required to sign a living agreement as the only means of avoiding placement in isolation. W.C. continued 49

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 50 of 75
to face retaliation from friends of his assailant. He did not receive continuing mental health care and never heard the outcome of the I&I investigation. d. For three days in October 2014, inmate Raymond Roberts was forced to sleep outside of the shift office for days because he feared the assigned bed placement in P-Block of general population and Capt. Sanders refused to place him in an isolation cell in segregation. e. In November 2014, Mark Archer, an older inmate who has undergone surgery for severe back problems, had all of his personal property stolen from his cell while he was in the shift office. The stolen items included a special, eggcrate mattress Mr. Archer needs for his back. Neither Mr. Archer nor St. Clair staff have been able to locate the mattress, and it remained missing months later. f. In June 2014, prior to being assaulted, Derrick White requested to be moved back to an isolation cell in segregation because he believed his life was in danger. His request was refused and he was strangled and beaten soon after. g. In June 2014, a 60 year old, physically disabled prisoner, was robbed at knife point by another prisoner, who, upon information and belief, is a 23 yearold mentally ill prisoner. The prisoner was robbed less than 24 hours after being transferred from the honor dorm to L-Block, a much more violent block, housing younger inmates.
50

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 51 of 75
h. In February 2014, a prisoner requested to be moved out of his unit after his cell mate tried to stab him and threatened to kill him. His request was denied without adequate investigation and he was later stabbed by his cell mate inside his cell. i. In September 2013, Allan Williams was stabbed by a prisoner, who, upon information and belief, is a mentally ill prisoner. Mr. Williams was stabbed while he was walking back from his shower. Upon information and belief, the man who stabbed Mr. Williams had a violent history and had stabbed another prisoner a few years before he stabbed Mr. Williams. j. Upon information and belief, Freddie James Stallworth was stabbed multiple times by another prisoner who was his cell mate. The stabbing caused serious injuries including a punctured lung, and required surgery at a free world hospital. Prior to the attack, Mr. Stallworth notified Lt. Carla Graham in November 2013, that he was in danger from his cell mate, and requested a move. His request was denied without adequate investigation. He was stabbed soon thereafter. k. In November 2013, an older prisoner named Carlos Subel was assigned to L-Block and he requested to be moved to an isolation cell in segregation instead because he was worried about his safety. His request to move to
51

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 52 of 75
segregation was denied and he continued to refuse to sleep in L-Block. He was then forced to sleep outside the shift office without a mattress for about a week where he was denied his property and access to showers. He was also forced to stand for numerous hours at a time by Lt. Carter and by Lt. Scott. Mr. Subel has several medical conditions and standing for several hours caused him several complications, including bleeding from his rectum. l. In 2011, a prisoner was stabbed by another prisoner, who had requested to go to an isolation cell in segregation for his own protection but his requests were denied. Upon information and belief, the assailant feared for his safety due to outstanding debts he owed other prisoners for drugs and attacked the prisoner in order to get moved into an isolation cell in segregation where he felt he would be safer. 54. These incidents of violence demonstrate Defendants’ awareness that the failure to classify prisoners based on security status, a history of conflict, and mental health status and to investigate housing movement requests based on fear or threats of violence creates a substantial risk of serious harm. Even though Defendants know that their current policies and practices contribute to serious incidents of violence, they have failed to take adequate action to address the problems in classification. Upon information and belief, there have not been significant or effective changes to the
52

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 53 of 75
classification system or to how Defendants respond to movement requests in response to these violent incidents, leaving the plaintiff class exposed to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm.
DEFENDANTS’ FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY ENFORCE HOUSING ASSIGNMENTS AND MONITOR MOVEMENT TIMES PUTS PRISONERS AT RISK OF VIOLENCE. 55. Defendants do not take reasonable measures to ensure prisoners only have access to the housing unit where they are assigned. Defendants fail to regularly enforce dorm assignments and officers in the cube will frequently let prisoners into a unit where they are not assigned without verifying they reside in the unit. In the absence of officer enforcement, prisoners are forced to forge associations with other prisoners for their protection in the blocks. In the absence of officer supervision and enforcement, movement between blocks and block occupancy is enforced through physical threats and violence. 56. Upon information and belief, despite regulations that require that only one unit at a time to move to meal, work, shower, and mail call, the doors to the housing units regularly remain unlocked during movement times and all units on G-Yard have yard call at the same time. Upon information and belief, during movement times, regulations require that an officer be posted to the door or hallways in and out of the unit to ensure only prisoners assigned to the unit are allowed to enter but officers are
53

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 54 of 75
very rarely or never posted to these locations during movement times. Therefore, it is easy for prisoners to enter a unit they are not assigned to.
57. Upon information and belief, staff conduct a bed roster count twice a week, making it possible for prisoners to stay overnight in a unit or cell to which they are not assigned.
58. Defendants are aware that the failure to enforce housing assignments contributes to the high rate of violence and creates a significant risk of serious harm. While conducting count at the facility, officers fail to enforce housing assignment locations and focus only on ensuring the prison has an accurate number of prisoners. Prisoners are frequently present in unauthorized areas or other cell blocks at count time with no repercussions. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ method of conducting count in general population is to have three officers enter each housing block. Two officers physically count the prisoners inside a housing area, while a third officer watches the procedure from a central viewing area. The standard procedure requires the officers physically count each inmate, but does not require the officers verify that a prisoner is in his assigned housing area. The standard count procedure does not require officers to use a bed assignment roster when counting the inmates, does not require the officers to determine the prisoner’s housing assignment or determine whether the prisoner is authorized to be present in that housing block. Upon
54

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 55 of 75
information and belief, defendants conduct count at five scheduled times throughout the day: 6:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m., 6:00 p.m., 9:00 - 10:30 p.m., and between 1:30 a.m. and 3:30 a.m. The predictability of the prison count allows prisoners to be absent from their assigned areas with an awareness of when they should be back in their assigned area. There have been numerous incidents of violence where the failure to enforce housing unit assignments has contributed to the circumstances that made the assault possible and where a prisoner was assaulted in their unit by another prisoner who was not assigned to that unit, including but not limited to:
a. In July 2015, multiple inmates from dorms on the G Yard traveled to the H Dorm and stole cell phones from several inmates. Up to 15 inmates from the G Yard later returned to H Dorm with knives. b. In February 2015, Brandon Ladd was stabbed during an attempted robbery in his cell in L-Block by an inmate assigned to a different block, who was able to enter his block. Mr. Ladd suffered stab wounds to his forearm and chest, resulting in a collapsed lung, which required extensive treatment, including surgery, at UAB hospital. c. In February 2015, Larry Hill was assaulted in his cell block by multiple inmates who were allowed entry into the cell block by the cube officer. Mr. Hill was beaten with knife handles and fists and knocked unconscious.
55

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 56 of 75
d. In January 2015, Micah Mays was stabbed and cut multiple times, suffering injuries to his face, wrists, neck, and shoulders during a robbery attempt in N-Block. His assailants had entered N-Block from a different block. His injuries were so severe he required treatment at UAB hospital. e. In January 2015, Elliott Blount was robbed and stabbed in his cell in NBlock. Mr. Blount’s assailant was assigned to P/Q and was allowed to enter an unassigned living area. Mr. Blount suffered severe head injuries that required extensive surgery at UAB hospital. f. In January 2015, Justen Stinson was stabbed and punched in his cell in PBlock. After being assaulted, Mr. Stinson moved undetected through several other blocks seeking help for his injuries from other inmates. g. In June 2014, Derrick White was attacked when another prisoner strangled him in the hallway between P and Q and was able to drag Mr. White into Q-2, which required him to go through the main unit doors. Upon information and belief, Mr. White’s assailant was not assigned to either P or Q. h. In July 2013, Mark Duke was threatened at knife point in an attempted robbery in his cell by a prisoner who was not assigned to his block. i. Upon information and belief, Stanley Joe Flambo was assaulted in July 2013, by another prisoner, who was armed with a knife and punched him and
56

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 57 of 75
attempted to force him over the top tier railing of the cell block. His assailant was not assigned to his cell block. j. Upon information and belief, Benjamin Howlet was stabbed in his cell in November 2011, when correctional officers permitted two unauthorized inmates to enter Mr. Howlet’s cell. Mr. Howlet suffered numerous injuries to his face, rib area, and stomach requiring surgery at an outside hospital. 59. In addition, Defendants fail to adequately monitor movement by inmates throughout the Facility during designated movement times, such as yard call, meal times, and inmate visits to the canteen. In particular, Defendants fail to keep inmates who are designated enemies separate during movement times and fail to supervise movement as inmates return from the canteen. Such incidents include, but are not limited to: a. In May 2015, Victor Russo was robbed and assaulted shortly after returning from the prison store to his cell. Multiple prisoners were able to open his cell door and enter his cell because the door had a broken locking mechanism. They attacked Mr. Russo, who is 52, and stole all of his store items. He suffered facial injuries requiring treatment at UAB Hospital. b. In March 2015, James Dorriety was stabbed multiple times in his head and back, suffering a punctured lung. Mr. Dorriety, an honor dorm resident, was
57

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 58 of 75
returning to his cell block from the prison canteen when three men armed with knives robbed him of his canteen goods and assaulted him. His injuries required treatment at UAB hospital, where he received numerous staples in his head and surgery to treat his lung injury. c. In January 2015, Bradley Gant was attacked as he was leaving his block during a meal time. He suffered head and facial injuries after being struck with a metal lock by another inmate who had previously harassed him. Mr. Gant required staples in the back of his head and stitches on his chin as a result of the assault. When Mr. Gant reported the earlier harassment, Captain Sanders responded that the other inmate “isn’t here to take care of you,” and advised Mr. Gant to “get a knife and do something about it.” d. In February 2014, Tehron Young was stabbed by his former cell partner in the chow hall area. While they were cell mates, the two inmates had a series of confrontations culminating in a fight, as a result of which Mr. Young and his assailant signed a living agreement and the assailant was moved to another living area. Two days later Mr. Young was stabbed while walking into the chow hall area, receiving serious injuries, including a punctured lung, that required two weeks of treatment at UAB Hospital. 60. Despite Defendants’ knowledge that the failure to enforce block and cell
58

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 59 of 75
assignments or monitor movement times contributes to serious violent incidents, Defendants have failed to implement adequate changes in procedure and practice to address the substantial risk of serious harm. Upon information and belief, there has been no meaningful increase in enforcement of housing assignments following the incidents of violence, leaving the plaintiff class exposed to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm.
DEFENDANTS FAIL TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE REHABILITATIVE, EDUCATIONAL, AND VOCATIONAL PROGRAMMING AND THERAPEUTIC SERVICES. 61. In addition to creating an environment where abuse and violence are the norm, Defendants have failed to provide adequate positive, rehabilitative, recreational, or religious programming, as well as treatment and services for drug addiction and mental illness. Upon information and belief, Defendants provide inadequate counseling services to address mental illness, disability and drug addiction, despite data that show that the vast majority of prisoners suffer from one or both of these afflictions. The failure to provide adequate treatment for these conditions contributes to the high level of violence. Furthermore, rather than providing services, Defendants respond to prisoners suffering from mental illness, disability and drug addiction by placing them in punitive segregation, which isolates them and can exacerbate their symptoms. These prisoners are then released back into general population more impaired and more
59

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 60 of 75
traumatized. 62. Upon information and belief, Defendants have severely restricted
programs that are aimed at reducing violence, giving prisoners a forum to voice concerns and resolve issues, incentivizing good behavior, and providing prisoners an opportunity to educate themselves. Upon information and belief, Defendants have drastically limited access to outside religious organizations that minister to prisoners. The unavailability of positive and constructive programming contributes to conflicts and tensions among prisoners and to the high rate of violence.
63. Upon information and belief, former Warden Davenport has eliminated or drastically limited prisoners’ access to books. Upon information and belief, former Warden Davenport removed most or all of the books from the housing units that were previously available to prisoners, including religious books, self-help books, educational books for men trying to earn their GEDs, and novels.
64. Upon information and belief, in January 2015 there were significant cuts to a number of education and vocational programs. Total enrollment in these programs has been drastically reduced for all subjects including masonry, welding, electrical, and heating and air. These classes are among the very few activities available for the people incarcerated at St. Clair and reductions of this magnitude create conditions where even more inmates remain idle and without positive, rehabilitative activities of
60

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 61 of 75
any sort. DEFENDANTS’ FAILURE TO MONITOR AND POLICE THE ROLE OF DOC STAFF IN PROFITING FROM THE CIRCULATION OF CONTRABAND PUTS PRISONERS AT RISK OF VIOLENCE. 65. Because of poor management, drugs, including methamphetamine,
methadone, heroin, suboxone, and marijuana, are prevalent at St. Clair and drug abuse and addiction among prisoners is widespread. Upon information and belief, many of the drugs are brought into the Facility by DOC staff. Over the past two years, there have been dozens of reports of staff willfully violating DOC policy, including smuggling in contraband. This has enabled widespread corruption among officers and officers are able to extort money and favors from prisoners in exchange for drugs.
66. Drugs create a substantial risk of serious harm and are a major source of conflict at St. Clair, both because of behavior stemming from addiction, for which Defendants have failed to provide adequate services and treatment, and because of the dynamics of debt created by officers’ and prisoners’ participation in drug sales. Over the course of the past year, over twenty prisoners have come forward and requested protective custody because they are at risk of physical violence as a result of debt or extortion. In nearly every such incident, the individual was put into an isolation cell in segregation and was given a disciplinary infraction. The behavior of certain officers in response to some protective custody requests was particularly egregious, in particular
61

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 62 of 75
Capt. Sanders who in May 2014 responded to an inmate’s request for protective custody over a contraband-related debt by attempting to orchestrate a payment plan between the inmate and the men extorting him.
67. Defendants are indifferent to the circulation of drugs in the Facility and have failed to adequately prevent officers bringing in and participating in the sale of drugs to prisoners in the Facility. Upon information and belief, Defendants do not employ effective search protocols and procedures when officers enter the Facility. Furthermore, Defendants’ failure to provide meaningful incentives, programming, and treatment, contributes to prisoners engaging in risky behavior, such as gambling and drug use. (See ¶¶ 61-64 above.) Defendants’ failure to reasonably and adequately respond to the prevalence of drugs in the Facility leaves the plaintiff class exposed to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious harm.
DEFENDANTS FAIL TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE AND SECURE HOUSING AND THERAPEUTIC SERVICES TO INMATES ASSIGNED TO SEGREGATION 68. Defendants continue to provide unsafe and non-secure housing conditions in the facility’s Segregation Unit. These problems have been exacerbated in recent months by overcrowding in this unit, created as a result of the ongoing security failures and ensuing violence at St. Clair. The violations in and around the Segregation Unit include, but are not limited to, the following incidents:
62

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 63 of 75
a. In May and June 2015, inmate Jonathan Bishop along with another inmate were held overnight in cages outside the facility’s segregation unit because there were no cells available for them indoors. These outdoor cells, meant to temporarily house inmates who are awaiting a permanent cell assignment, are not equipped with water or protection from the elements. The men slept exposed in the outdoor cage for multiple days. b. In February 2015, Michael Stewart, an inmate who requested to be placed in an isolation cell in segregation because of threats by enemies in population, cut his wrists multiple times in his segregation cell and bled for ten hours before staff noticed his condition and provided medical intervention. Additionally, Mr. Stewart was housed in a cell with a broken window during several of the coldest winter weeks, and the prison staff failed to provide him with a jacket. c. Inmates Xavier Smith and Cordarious White were held overnight in cages outside the facility’s segregation unit because there were no cells available for them indoors. Both Mr. Smith and Mr. White were forced to stay overnight in these cages during freezing January weather with no protection aside from their DOC uniforms. d. Inmate Larry Nesbitt, who is currently incarcerated for drug possession following probation revocation based on a technical violation, should not be
63

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 64 of 75
housed at St. Clair, a maximum security prison. Mr. Nesbitt is eligible for housing at a lower-security facility and the fact that he remains in the segregation unit at St. Clair demonstrates the failure to properly classify inmates based on security status. e. In July 2014, an assailant entered A.H.’s cell in the M-Block with a knife and sexually assaulted him. A.H. escaped his cell and sought help. At the infirmary, nurses and officers laughed at A.H. while the nurses conducted an examination. A.H. reported that he was suicidal and was kept in a crisis cell for five days. He was then sent to an isolation cell in segregation in the same unit as his assailant. A.H. did not receive continuing mental health care and he did not receive the outcome of the I&I investigation. DEFENDANTS’ POLICIES AND PRACTICES WITH REGARD TO THE PREVENTION, DETECTION, AND RESPONSE TO SEXUAL ABUSE PLACE PRISONERS AT RISK OF SEXUAL ABUSE. 69. Defendants have failed to take reasonable steps to protect prisoners from a known risk of sexual assault. Defendants’ policies and practices with regard to incidents of sexual violence place prisoners at increased and unnecessary risk of sexual misconduct and abuse. 70. Defendants are aware of a history of widespread sexual abuse throughout DOC facilities including St. Clair and that DOC policies and practices unnecessarily
64

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 65 of 75
increase the risk of abuse. In 2012, the Equal Justice Initiative issued a report detailing the Department’s practices and policies that contributed to a culture of sexual violence at Tutwiler Prison including placing inmates who report sexual abuse in isolation, failure to provide continued mental health counseling, failure to provide minimally adequate classification and housing assignment to identify and protect vulnerable prisoners, failure to provide adequate staffing and monitoring, failure to investigate allegations of sexual assault, and failure to inform victims of sexual assault about the results of the investigation. In November 2012, the National Institute of Corrections issued a report identifying many of the same policies and practices as contributing to the sexualized environment and harm to prisoners at Tutwiler. In 2013, the Equal Justice Initiative issued a report about sexual violence at the men’s prisons and met with Commissioner Thomas to discuss the lack of PREA compliance and the policies and practices that contribute to sexual violence at the men’s prisons. In January 2014, the Department of Justice found that the Alabama Department of Corrections’ policies and practices at Tutwiler Prison for Women with regard to sexual misconduct and abuse placed prisoners at higher risk of sexual abuse. These reports put Defendants on notice that sexual violence is widespread at both the men’s and women’s facilities and that it must take steps throughout its facilities to ensure compliance with PREA and protect its prisoners from the substantial risk of harm due to sexual abuse. Defendants
65

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 66 of 75
are aware that these policies and practices heighten the risk of sexual assault, but continue to employ these same policies and practices at St. Clair.
71. Defendants’ policy of placing prisoners who report sexual abuse in isolation cells in segregation heightens the risk of sexual assault by discouraging prisoner reporting of sexual abuse. Policies and practices that discourage and deter prisoner reporting seriously undermine the ability to detect and prevent sexual abuse and exhibit deliberate indifference to constitutional rights of prisoners.
72. Furthermore, when prisoners report abuse, Defendants fail to adequately respond or investigate. Defendants’ policies and practices do not ensure that prisoners who report abuse are provided sight and sound separation from their assailants; protected from the assailants known associates; provided adequate counseling services; or informed of the outcome of the DOC investigation when such investigation occurs. Defendants have prevented victims of sexual abuse at St. Clair from accessing outside support and have not provided sufficient mental health care within the facility.
73. Defendants are aware that dangerously low staffing levels combined with known architectural and structural conditions significantly increase the risk of sexual abuse, yet Defendants have not taken necessary measures to address these deficiencies. Defendants do not maintain adequate staffing levels nor do they take into consideration
66

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 67 of 75
such factors as components of the physical plant (including blind spots), the composition of the population, and the number and placement of supervisory staff.
74. Defendants’ classification system does not adequately identify potential predators and victims. Without an adequate classification system, Defendants cannot appropriately manage behavior and thereby subject prisoners to an increased risk of harm.
75. Defendants fail to conduct adequate initial assessment during intake screening to assess the risk of being sexually abused or risk of being sexually abusive towards other people. Defendants’ housing and classification policies and practices do not adequately separate people at high risk of being sexually victimized from those at high risk of being sexually abusive. Defendants’ failure to conduct an adequate initial assessment has contributed to the high rate of sexual assaults occurring where vulnerable prisoners are housed in the same dorm as prisoners with a high risk of being sexually abusive. Sexual assaults have occurred within the Therapuetic Community in H dorm, where victims often had lower custody levels and were transferred to St. Clair in order to participate in the treatment program.
76. Defendants fail to protect victims of sexual abuse from further retaliation. Victims at St. Clair have faced retaliation from their abusers as they do not have sight and sound separation, even when placed in segregation. Defendants expose victims of
67

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 68 of 75
sexual abuse to continued abuse by failing to prevent retaliation. 77. Defendants’ policies and practices have led to a high rate of sexual
violence at St. Clair, including: a. In April 2015, A.Z. was raped in H dorm, the Therapeutic Community, a week after being transferred to St. Clair. A.Z. was asleep in his bunk when his assailant put a knife to his throat and raped him. After reporting the rape, A.Z. was placed in an isolation cell in segregation and was unable to participate in the Therapeutic Community. A.Z. was not provided with continuing medical or mental health treatment. When placed in an isolation cell in segregation, A.Z. reported to officers that he felt suicidal and in response he was told to kill himself. A.Z. never heard the outcome of the I&I investigation. A.Z.’s assailant, a general population prisoner living in H dorm who was not a participant in Therapeutic Community, had a history of violence and sexual assault. b. In April 2015, W.C. was raped twice at knifepoint in the middle of the night by his cell partner in P-Block. He had been required to sign a living agreement as the only means of avoiding placement in isolation. W.C. continued to face retaliation from friends of his assailant. He did not receive continuing mental health care and never heard the outcome of the I&I investigation. 68

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 69 of 75
c. On or around February 1, 2015, J.M. was raped by another inmate, who approached J.M. as he was reading on his bunk and placed a knife to his throat. Both men were assigned to the Therapeutic Community or H dorm, which is where the rape occurred. J.M. remains in an isolation cell in segregation. J.M. did not have sight and sound separation from his assailant even while in segregation. J.M. does not use the shower in segregation because he continues to fear retaliation. He has not received mental health counseling and has not heard the outcome of the I&I investigation. d. In January 2015, D.C., a nonviolent offender, was raped at knifepoint in L-Block. His assailant told him that he would kill him if he reported the rape. D.C. was placed in an isolation cell in segregation after reporting the rape, but he still did not have sight and sound separation from his assailant. D.C. did not receive continuing mental health counseling. e. In December 2014, J.H. was sexually assaulted at knife point in his cell by a prisoner, the same man who later raped J.M. J.H. reported the assault and was placed in an isolation cell in segregation. J.H. never heard the results of the I&I investigation. Two months later, the same assailant sexually assaulted J.M. The assailant was then moved to segregation and placed in the same block as J.H.
69

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 70 of 75
f. In July 2014, an assailant entered A.H.’s cell in the M-Block with a knife and sexually assaulted him. A.H. escaped his cell and sought help. At the infirmary, nurses and officers laughed at A.H. while the nurses conducted an examination. A.H. reported that he was suicidal and was kept in a crisis cell for five days. He was then sent to an isolation cell in segregation in the same unit as his assailant. A.H. did not receive continuing mental health care and he did not receive the outcome of the I&I investigation.
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS 78. Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of all present and future prisoners at St. Clair Correctional Facility. This action is brought pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a), (b)(1), and (b)(2). The class meets the requirements of Rule 23 as follows: a. There are approximately 1,300 prisoners confined at any one time to St. Clair Correctional Facility, who are subject to a substantial risk of a violent assault. The membership of this class continually changes, rendering joinder of all members impracticable. Upon information and belief, dozens of incidents of violent assaults are filed each year. Many more incidents go unreported. b. The questions of law and fact presented by the named Plaintiffs are common to all members of the class, and include whether Defendants’ policies
70

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 71 of 75
and practices subject prisoners to a substantial and unreasonable risk of significant harm. The policies and practices include whether Defendants have failed to adequately monitor and supervise prisoners at St. Clair; whether Defendants have failed to adequately assess prisoners for risk of violence and failed to implement an adequate classification system; whether Defendants have failed to adequately enforce housing block, dorm, and cell assignments; whether Defendants have failed to monitor movement times; whether Defendants have failed to adequately investigate housing movement requests based on fear of harm; whether Defendants have failed to provide secure locking mechanisms on individual cell doors; whether Defendants have failed to adequately monitor and police the role of ADOC staff in the availability of contraband items; whether Defendants have failed to adequately train, supervise, and discipline staff with a history of harassing and abusing prisoners, whether supervisory Defendants have failed to adequately screen, assign, train and supervise staff, whether Defendants have failed to provide safe and adequate housing in segregation and whether Defendants’ policies and practices has led to deliberate indifference to the risk of sexual assault. As a result, every prisoner confined to St. Clair risks being subjected to these unlawful practices. The claims and practices alleged in this complaint are common to all members of the class.
71

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 72 of 75
c. The violations suffered by the named Plaintiffs are typical of those suffered by the class. The entire plaintiff class will benefit from the injunctive and declaratory relief sought. d. Plaintiffs Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Frankie Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, and Robert Woods are presently incarcerated at St. Clair Correctional Facility. These named Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. e. The named plaintiffs are represented by The Equal Justice Initiative, a non-profit legal services organization with decades of experience challenging unconstitutional conditions of confinement. f. The Defendants have acted or failed to act, on grounds generally applicable to the class, thereby making injunctive relief appropriate with respect to the class as a whole.
EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES 79. There are no administrative remedies within the Alabama Department of Corrections for named Plaintiffs or other members of the plaintiff class to exhaust.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF CAUSE OF ACTION 72

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 73 of 75
Cruel and Unusual Punishment 80. Defendants, through their policies, practices, acts and omissions, exhibit deliberate indifference to the continuing real and imminent substantial risk of serious physical harm, in violation of the right of plaintiff class of prisoners to be free from cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. 81. Defendants, through their policies, practices, acts and omissions, subject the plaintiff class of prisoners to unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain, and emotional and physical injury in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. 82. With deliberate indifference to the substantial risk of serious harm to the plaintiff class, Defendants failed to appropriately train, assign, and supervise staff, subjecting the plaintiff class to substantial risk of serious bodily harm in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court: 1. Assume jurisdiction over this action; 2. Personally conduct an unannounced inspection of St. Clair Correctional Facility and all relevant institutional records and files;
73

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 74 of 75
3. Grant Plaintiffs a full trial and discovery in this matter;
4. Adjudge and declare that the acts and omissions of the Defendants with regard
to the classmembers violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the
United States Constitution;
5. Order Defendants to comply with the Constitution and enjoin Defendants from
subjecting Plaintiffs to cruel and unusual punishment;
6. Award Plaintiffs appropriate costs for expert fees and collateral litigation
expenses; and
7. Order such additional relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Respectfully submitted this August 28, 2015, /s/ Bryan A. Stevenson Bryan A. Stevenson (ASB-3184--N75B) Charlotte R. Morrison (ASB-5897-T80M) Jennae R. Swiergula (ASB-8265-A35S) Carla C. Crowder (ASB-8573-L74C) Ryan C. Becker (ASB-7228-R48B) Equal Justice Initiative 122 Commerce Street Montgomery, AL 36104 PH: (334) 269-1803 FX: (334) 269-1806 email: bstevenson@eji.org cmorrison@eji.org jswiergula@eji.org ccrowder@eji.org rbecker@eji.org
Counsel for Plaintiffs
74

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD Document 53 Filed 08/28/15 Page 75 of 75
Certificate of Service I hereby certify that on August 28, 2015, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following:
Albert S. Butler Alabama Department of Corrections Legal Division 301 Ripley Street P.O. Box 301501 Montgomery, AL 36130 Larry B. Childs Michael A. Fant William C. Athanas Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis LLP AmSouth Harbert Plaza 1901 Sixth Avenue North, Suite 1400 Birmingham, AL 35203
/s/ Charlotte Morrison Charlotte Morrison
75

 
 Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH Document 180 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

MARK DUKE, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

No.: 4:14-cv-01952-VEH-HGD

COMMISSIONER JEFFERSON DUNN, et al.,

Defendants.

FILED
2017 Dec-01 PM 04:31 U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT AND REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSURE

COME NOW all Plaintiffs and all Defendants, jointly, by and through their counsel of record to inform the Court that the parties have settled this matter in a private settlement agreement pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3626(c)(2). In order to facilitate the agreement, the parties jointly request that this Court administratively close the case until the agreement terminates on November 1, 2019, unless the case is reinstated before that date in the manner described herein.
In support of this request, the parties state the following: 1. On November 1, 2017, all parties via respective counsel reached a resolution and executed a private settlement agreement. 2. The parties request that this Court administratively close the case in order to allow the parties to carry out the agreement. The parties further request that the administrative closure remain in effect for the term of agreement (2 years) at which time the case will be dismissed unless, during the two year term, a motion for reinstatement is made and granted according to the procedures outlined in “Section 5. Dispute Resolution” of the private settlement agreement.

Case 4:14-cv-01952-VEH Document 180 Filed 12/01/17 Page 2 of 2
3. This Court will retain jurisdiction over this matter for the sole purpose of the potential reinstatement of the case pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3626(c)(2). 4. The Parties will not seek and will object to any Federal court enforcement of this Agreement, adoption or approval of this Agreement, and any order retaining jurisdiction over this matter or the Agreement with the sole exception being stated above. The Parties are not asking the Court to adopt the agreement as a consent decree or to retain jurisdiction over its terms for court enforcement or to otherwise approve the agreement. Nor do the parties ask the Court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the agreement.
Wherefore, all parties request this Court administratively close this case until November 1, 2019, or until, within the two year term, the case is reinstated after a motion to reinstate the case is made and granted in accordance with the private settlement agreement and 18 U.S.C. §3626(c)(2).
Jointly submitted this day, the 1st day of December, 2017. s/ Charlotte R. Morrison Charlotte R. Morrison Equal Justice Initiative 122 Commerce Street Montgomery, AL 36104 PH: (334) 269-1803; FX: (334) 269-1806 email: cmorrison@eji.org Counsel for the Plaintiffs /s/ Bart Harmon Bart Harmon ADOC Legal Division 301 S. Ripley St Montgomery, Alabama 36130 PH: (334) 353-3881; FX: (334) 353-3891 bart.harmon@doc.alabama.gov Counsel for the Defendants
2

 
 Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 1 of 26
STAYED,CLOSED,CASREF,MEDIATION,PROTECTIVE ORDER
U.S. District Court Northern District of Alabama (Middle) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:14−cv−01952−VEH

Duke et al v. Dunn et al Assigned to: Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins Referred to: Magistrate Judge John E Ott (Settlement) Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 10/13/2014 Date Terminated: 12/05/2017 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 550 Prisoner: Civil Rights Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Antonio Cheatham TERMINATED: 07/10/2015

represented by Bryan A Stevenson EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE OF ALABAMA 122 Commerce Street Montgomery, AL 36104 334−269−1803 Fax: 334−269−1806 Email: bstevenson@eji.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE 122 Commerce Street Montgomery, AL 36104 334−269−1803 Fax: 334−268−1806 Email: ccrowder@eji.org TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charlotte Randolph Morrison EQUAL JUSTICE INTITIATIVE 122 Commerce Street Montgomery, AL 36104 334−269−1803 Fax: 334−269−1806 Email: cmorrison@eji.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennae Rose Swiergula EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE 122 Commerce Street Montgomery, AL 36104 334−269−1803 Fax: 334−269−1806 Email: jswiergula@eji.org TERMINATED: 02/28/2019 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ryan Christopher Becker EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE 122 Commerce Street Montgomery, AL 36104 334−269−1803 Fax: 334−269−1806 Email: rbecker@eji.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Mark Duke

represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 2 of 26

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennae Rose Swiergula (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/28/2019 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff James Edwards

represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennae Rose Swiergula (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/15/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Dale Gilley

represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennae Rose Swiergula (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/15/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 3 of 26

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Franky Johnson

represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennae Rose Swiergula (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/15/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Michael Mays

represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennae Rose Swiergula (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/15/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Derrick White TERMINATED: 09/21/2015

represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennae Rose Swiergula

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 4 of 26

(See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/15/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Allan Williams

represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennae Rose Swiergula (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/15/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Robert Woods on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated

represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennae Rose Swiergula (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/15/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Michael McGregor

represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 5 of 26

Plaintiff John Miller

Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jennae Rose Swiergula (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/15/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Bryan A Stevenson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Carla Camille Crowder (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/20/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Charlotte Randolph Morrison (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jennae Rose Swiergula (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/15/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ryan Christopher Becker (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
Kim Thomas Commissioner TERMINATED: 03/03/2015

represented by Albert S Butler ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS LEGAL DIVISION P O Box 301501 301 South Ripley Street Montgomery, AL 36104 334−353−4859 Fax: 334−353−3891 Email: Amy.fisher@doc.alabama.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bart G Harmon ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 301 South Ripley Street Montgomery, AL 36104 334−353−4859 Fax: 334−353−3891 Email: bart.harmon@doc.alabama.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Larry B Childs

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 6 of 26

WALLER LANSDEN DORTCH & DAVIS LLP AmSouth Harbert Plaza 1901 Sixth Avenue North, Suite 1400 Birmingham, AL 35203 205−214−6380 Fax: 205−214−8787 Email: larry.childs@wallerlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A Fant , Jr WALLER LANSDEN DORTH & DAVIS LLP 1901 6th Avenue North Suite 1400 Birmingham, AL 35203 205−226−5702 Fax: 205−214−8787 Email: mike.fant@wallerlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
James Deloach Associate Commissioner TERMINATED: 03/03/2015

represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Terrance McDonnell Associate Commissioner TERMINATED: 08/12/2016

represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William C Athanas WALLER LANSDEN DORTCH & DAVIS LLP 1901 6th Avenue North, Suite 1400 Birmingham, AL 35203 205−226−5703 Fax: 205−214−8787 Email: bill.athanas@wallerlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter WALLER LANSDEN DORTCH & DAVIS LLP 1901 Sixth Avenue North Suite 1400

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 7 of 26

Birmingham, AL 35203 205−226−5735 Fax: 205−214−7342 Email: charles.prueter@wallerlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Greg Lovelace Deputy Commissioner

represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William C Athanas (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Grant Culliver Institutional Coordinator TERMINATED: 08/12/2016

represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William C Athanas (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 8 of 26

Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Carter Davenport Warden TERMINATED: 03/03/2015

represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Eric Evans Assistant Warden TERMINATED: 08/12/2016

represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William C Athanas (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Karen Carter Assistant Warden

represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William C Athanas (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 9 of 26

Defendant Carl Sanders Captain TERMINATED: 09/21/2015
Defendant Gary Malone Captain, in his official capacity
Defendant

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
William C Athanas (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 10 of 26

William G. Sharp, Jr. Interim Commissioner TERMINATED: 09/21/2015

represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant Warden Dewayne Estes

represented by Albert S Butler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William C Athanas (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Larry B Childs (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Jefferson S Dunn Commissioner

represented by Larry B Childs (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael A Fant , Jr (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William C Athanas (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 11 of 26

Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Steve Watson Asociate Commissioner for Plans and Programs for the Alabama DOC

represented by Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Cheryl Price Institutional Coordinator for the Northern Region of the ADOC

represented by Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Cedric Specks Assistant Warden of St Clair Correctional Facility

represented by Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant Warden Anthony Brooks

represented by Bart G Harmon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Charles Walton Prueter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 10/13/2014
10/14/2014 10/14/2014 10/14/2014

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Carter Davenport, James Deloach, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders, Kim Thomas, filed by Allan Williams, Michael Mays, Mark Duke, Antonio Cheatham, Derrick White, Robert Woods, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, James Edwards.(AVC) (Entered: 10/14/2014)
2 NOTICE regarding consent of a civil action to a magistrate judge. (AVC) (Entered: 10/14/2014)
3 UNIFORM INITIAL ORDER − with appendices attached. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 10/14/14. (KWC) (Entered: 10/14/2014)
4 ORDER REGARDING RULE 7.1. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 04/28/09. (KWC) (Entered: 10/14/2014)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 12 of 26

10/14/2014 10/15/2014 10/15/2014
10/20/2014
10/23/2014
11/04/2014 11/06/2014 11/07/2014
11/12/2014 12/09/2014 12/09/2014
12/09/2014 12/15/2014 12/17/2014
12/17/2014 12/23/2014 12/30/2014

Filing Fee received in the amount of $400.00, receipt number B4601056674. (JLC) (Entered: 10/15/2014)
5 Request for service by certified mail filed by Antonio Cheatham. (JLC) (Entered: 10/15/2014)
6 Summons Issued as to Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Carter Davenport, James Deloach, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders and Kim Thomas via certified U.S. Mail on this the 15th day of October, 2014. (JLC) (Entered: 10/15/2014)
7 SUMMONS Returned Executed on Karen Carter, served on 10/16/2014, answer due 11/6/2014; Carter Davenport served on 10/16/2014, answer due 11/6/2014; Eric Evans served on 10/16/2014, answer due 11/6/2014; Gary Malone served on 10/16/2014, answer due 11/6/2014; Carl Sanders served on 10/16/2014, answer due 11/6/2014. (JLC) (Entered: 10/20/2014)
8 SUMMONS Returned Executed on James Deloach, served on 10/20/2014, answer due 11/10/2014; Greg Lovelace served on 10/20/2014, answer due 11/10/2014; Terrance McDonnell served on 10/20/2014, answer due 11/10/2014; Kim Thomas served on 10/20/2014, answer due 11/10/2014. (JLC) (Entered: 10/23/2014)
9 NOTICE of Appearance by Albert S Butler on behalf of All Defendants (Butler, Albert) (Entered: 11/04/2014)
10 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Carter Davenport, James Deloach, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders, Kim Thomas. (Childs, Larry) (Entered: 11/06/2014)
11 TEXT ORDER GRANTING 10 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to file answer/response filed by Greg Lovelace, Grant Culliver, Terrance McDonnell, James Deloach, Carl Sanders, Karen Carter, Kim Thomas, Gary Malone, Eric Evans, Carter Davenport. Answer/response due by 12/9/2014. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 11/7/14. (KWC) (Entered: 11/07/2014)
12 Alias Summons Reissued as to Grant Culliver via certified U.S.Mail on this the 12th day of November, 2014. (JLC) (Entered: 11/12/2014)
13 MOTION to Dismiss by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Carter Davenport, James Deloach, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders, Kim Thomas. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 12/09/2014)
14 Brief re 13 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Carter Davenport, James Deloach, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders, Kim Thomas. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Fant, Michael) (Entered: 12/09/2014)
15 ANSWER to 1 Complaint, by Kim Thomas.(Fant, Michael) (Entered: 12/09/2014)
16 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Swiergula, Jennae) (Entered: 12/15/2014)
17 TEXT ORDER granting 16 consent Motion for Extension of Time. The Rule 26 meeting shall occur 20 days after the court rules on the pending motion to dismiss 13 . Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 12/17/14. (KWC) (Entered: 12/17/2014)
Magistrate Judge Harwell G Davis, III added. (JLC) (Entered: 12/17/2014)
18 RESPONSE to Motion re 13 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 12/23/2014)
19 RESPONSE in Support re 13 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Carter Davenport, James Deloach, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders, Kim Thomas. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 12/30/2014)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 13 of 26

02/17/2015
02/27/2015 03/03/2015 03/03/2015 03/03/2015 03/19/2015 03/24/2015 04/01/2015 04/01/2015 04/01/2015 04/02/2015 04/10/2015 04/17/2015 04/20/2015
04/22/2015 04/22/2015

20 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER−re: 13 MOTION to Dismiss. It is hereby ORDERED, that dfts' motion is GRANTED to the extent that it seeks dismissal of the claims of Derrick White. All claims of pltf Derrick White are DISMISSED with prejudice. In all other respects, the motion is DENIED. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 2/17/2015. (AVC) (Entered: 02/17/2015)
21 MOTION re 20 Order,, Terminate Motions, Motion to Amend For Certification For Interlocutory Appeal Of The Court's Order Denying Defendants' Motion to Dismiss by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Carter Davenport, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders. (Childs, Larry) (Entered: 02/27/2015)
22 Joint MOTION to Substitute Party by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Carter Davenport, James Deloach, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders, Kim Thomas. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 03/03/2015)
23 ORDER DENYING 21 MOTION TO CERTIFY ORDER FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 3/3/2015. (JLC) (Entered: 03/03/2015)
24 TEXT ORDER granting 22 Motion to Substitute Party. Further, the parties shall notify the court when Jefferson S. Dunn takes office as the Commissioner of the ADOC. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 3/3/15. (JTR) Modified on 3/3/2015 (JLC). (Entered: 03/03/2015)
25 MOTION for Extension of Time by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders, William G. Sharp, Jr. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 03/19/2015)
26 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 03/24/2015)
27 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Jefferson S Dunn of Service (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 04/01/2015)
28 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell of Taking Office (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 04/01/2015)
29 NOTICE by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Allan Williams, Robert Woods (Swiergula, Jennae) (Entered: 04/01/2015)
30 AMENDED ANSWER to Complaint 1 Complaint, by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 04/02/2015)
31 TEXT ORDER finding as moot 25 Motion for Extension of Time to file Rule 26 report. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 4/10/15. (KWC) (Entered: 04/10/2015)
32 TEXT NOTICE of Hearing: Scheduling Conference (per request in Rule 26(f) report) set for 4/22/2015 at 02:00 PM, in Hugo L Black US Courthouse, 6th floor chambers, Birmingham, AL before Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins. (KWC) (Entered: 04/17/2015)
33 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell of Service of Defendants' First Interrogatories, Defendants' First Requests for Procution and Defendants' Responses to Plaintiffs' Request for Prodcution of Documents (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 04/20/2015)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins: Scheduling Conference held on 4/22/2015. (KWC) (Entered: 04/22/2015)
34 SCHEDULING ORDER: Plaintiff(s) may amend pleadings and/or join additional parties by August 21, 2015. Defendant (s) may amend pleadings and/or join additional parties by September 18, 2015. Discovery due by 1/29/2016. See all other deadlines and instructions as set out herein. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 4/22/2015. (JLC) (Entered: 04/22/2015)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 14 of 26

04/23/2015 04/30/2015
05/13/2015
05/14/2015 05/14/2015 05/18/2015 05/20/2015 06/16/2015 06/22/2015 07/10/2015
07/24/2015 08/11/2015 08/13/2015 08/13/2015 08/13/2015 08/14/2015 08/21/2015 08/21/2015 08/24/2015

Set Deadlines: Class Certification Motions due by 10/2/2015. (KWC) (Entered: 04/23/2015)
35 Joint MOTION for Protective Order by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1 Proposed Order)(Fant, Michael) (Entered: 04/30/2015)
36 MOTION to Take Deposition from Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Allan Williams and Robert Woods by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2015)
37 TEXT ORDER granting 36 Motion to Take Deposition from listed parties. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 05/14/2015. (KWC) (Entered: 05/14/2015)
38 NOTICE of Appearance by Charles Walton Prueter on behalf of All Defendants (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 05/14/2015)
39 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell of Service of Discovery Documents (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 05/18/2015)
40 ORDER GRANTING 35 Joint MOTION for Protective Order. STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 5/20/2015. (JLC) (Entered: 05/20/2015)
41 NOTICE of USCA ORDER DENYING Petitioner's Petition for a Writ of Mandamus by Circuit Judges William Pryor and Julie Carnes. (JLC) (Entered: 06/16/2015)
42 SECOND NOTICE of USCA ORDER DENYING Petitioner's Petition for a Writ of Mandamus by Circuit Judges Jill Pryor and Julie Carnes. (JLC) (Entered: 06/22/2015)
43 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods, Michael McGregor, John Miller. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 07/10/2015)
44 ANSWER to 43 First Amended Complaint by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell (Prueter, Charles) Modified on 7/24/2015 (JLC). (Entered: 07/24/2015)
45 MOTION to Take Deposition from Michael McGregor and John Miller by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 08/11/2015)
46 MOTION for Hipaa Order by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 08/13/2015)
47 ORDER granting 45 Motion to Take Deposition. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 8/13/2015. (AVC) (Entered: 08/13/2015)
48 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell of Service of Deposition Notices (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 08/13/2015)
49 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell of Service of Interrogatories (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 08/14/2015)
50 TEXT ORDER GRANTING 46 MOTION for Hipaa Order. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 8/21/2015. (JLC) (Entered: 08/21/2015)
51 QUALIFIED HIPAA PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 8/21/2015. (JLC) (Entered: 08/21/2015)
52 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell of Service of Responses and Objections to Plaintiffs' Second Request for Production of Documents (Fant,

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 15 of 26

08/28/2015 08/31/2015
09/03/2015 09/03/2015 09/18/2015 09/18/2015 09/18/2015 09/21/2015 09/21/2015 09/22/2015 09/30/2015 10/01/2015 10/02/2015

Michael) (Entered: 08/24/2015)
53 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) Modified on 8/28/2015 (JLC). (Entered: 08/28/2015)
54 TEXT ORDER re 53 Amended Document filed by Robert Woods, Allan Williams, Franky Johnson, Derrick White, Mark Duke, Michael Mays, James Edwards, Antonio Cheatham, Dale Gilley −− The court's scheduling order, entered in this case on April 22, 2015, provides "Plaintiff(s) may amend pleadings and/or join additional parties, in accordancewith Fed. R. Civ. P. 15, until August 21, 2015." (Doc. 34 at 3). Further, Rule 15(a)(2) provides that, after the first amendment, a party may amend "only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave." The Second Amended Complaint, filed on August 28, 2015, has been filed beyond the deadline for amendments, the court has seen no indication that the opposing party has given consent to the amendment, and leave of court for the amendment has not been requested. The plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE within 7 days why the Second Amended Complaint should not be STRICKEN. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 8/31/15. (JTR) (Entered: 08/31/2015)
55 MOTION to Amend/Correct by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 09/03/2015)
56 TEXT ORDER granting 55 Motion to Amend/Correct −− The motion is GRANTED as unopposed. The prior filed Second Amended Complaint is deemed filed this date. Defendant shall file an answer, or otherwise respond by 9/24/2015. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 9/3/15. (JTR) (Entered: 09/03/2015)
57 Joint MOTION to Dismiss Official Capacity Defendant, Carl Sanders by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 09/18/2015)
58 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 09/18/2015)
59 NOTICE of Appearance by Bart G Harmon on behalf of Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Carl Sanders, William G. Sharp, Jr (Harmon, Bart) (Entered: 09/18/2015)
60 ORDER granting 58 Motion for Extension of Time as set out in the motion. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 9/21/15. (JTR) (Entered: 09/21/2015)
61 ORDER GRANTING 57 Joint MOTION to Dismiss Carl Sanders who is sued in his Official Capacity. Carl Sanders (Captain) terminated. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 9/21/2015. (JLC) (Entered: 09/21/2015)
62 Answer to 53 Second Amended Complaint by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell (Prueter, Charles) Modified on 9/23/2015 (JLC). (Entered: 09/22/2015)
63 MOTION for Extension of Time by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 09/30/2015)
64 Amended MOTION for Extension of Time by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 10/01/2015)
65 TEXT ORDER granting 64 unopposed Amended MOTION for Extension of Time filed by Robert Woods, Allan Williams, Franky Johnson, Derrick White, Mark Duke, Michael Mays, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, and terming as MOOT 63 MOTION for Extension of Time. Discovery due by 3/11/2016. Pla motion for Class Certification due by 12/1/2015; Pla expert disclosure and reports ddl is 12/1/2015; Dft response to motion for class certification is due by 2/1/2016; dft expert disclosure and reports ddl

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 16 of 26

10/20/2015 10/21/2015 10/29/2015 11/04/2015 11/11/2015 12/01/2015
12/02/2015 01/25/2016 01/25/2016 01/27/2016
01/28/2016 01/28/2016
02/08/2016

is 2/1/2016; pla reply in support of mtn for Class Certification is due by 4/1/2016. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 10/2/2015. (KWC, ) (Entered: 10/02/2015)
66 NOTICE OF SERVICE OF DISCOVERY DOCUMENTS by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) Modified on 10/20/2015 (JLC). (Entered: 10/20/2015)
67 NOTICE OF SERVICE OF DISCOVERY DOCUMENTS by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) Modified on 10/21/2015 (JLC). (Entered: 10/21/2015)
68 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell of Service (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 10/29/2015)
69 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell of Service (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 11/04/2015)
70 MOTION for Extension of Time by Mark Duke. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 11/11/2015)
71 ORDER GRANTING 70 unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time as set out in motion filed by Mark Duke. Plas motion for Class Cert ddl is 2/1/2016; plas expert reports ddl is 2/1/2016; dfts' response to Motion for Class Cert ddl is 5/2/2016; dfts' expert disclosure ddl is 5/2/2016. Discovery due by 7/1/2016. Dispositive Motions due by 8/1/2016. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 12/01/2015. (KWC) (Entered: 12/01/2015)
72 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell Of Service (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 12/02/2015)
73 MOTION for Extension of Time by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 01/25/2016)
74 MOTION for Extension of Time (Corrected) by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) Modified on 1/27/2016 (KWC) (Entered: 01/25/2016)
75 RESPONSE in Opposition re 74 MOTION for Extension of Time (Corrected) filed by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit A−1, # 3 Exhibit A−2, # 4 Exhibit A−3, # 5 Exhibit A−4, # 6 Exhibit A−5)(Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 01/27/2016)
76 REPLY to Defendants Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Extension of Time filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 01/28/2016)
77 TEXT ORDER finding as moot 73 Motion for Extension of Time; granting in part and denying in part 74 Motion for Extension of Time. All deadlines which had not expired as of the date that 73 Motion for Extension of Time was filed are hereby extended by 21 days. In all other respects, 74 Motion for Extension of Time is denied. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 1/28/2016. (Hopkins, Virginia) (Entered: 01/28/2016)
78 NOTICE of Service of Discovery Documents by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 02/08/2016)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 17 of 26

02/17/2016 02/18/2016 02/19/2016
02/22/2016 02/22/2016 02/22/2016 02/24/2016 02/24/2016 02/29/2016 03/01/2016 03/01/2016
03/01/2016

79 MOTION for Enlargement of Page Limits by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 02/17/2016)
80 Supplement to MOTION for Enlargement of Page Limits by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 02/18/2016)
81 TEXT ORDER finding as moot 79 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages AND GRANTING 80 unopposed Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages so that briefs may be no more than 100 pages; same number of excess pages is extended to dfts as well. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 2/19/2016. (KWC) (Entered: 02/19/2016)
82 MOTION to Certify Class by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
83 MOTION Motion to File Under Temporary Seal by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
84 NOTICE by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
85 RESPONSE to Motion re 83 MOTION Motion to File Under Temporary Seal filed by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 02/24/2016)
86 MOTION to Strike the Expert Report of Martin Horn by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 02/24/2016)
87 REPLY to Response to Motion re 83 MOTION Motion to File Under Temporary Seal filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 02/29/2016)
88 RESPONSE to Motion re 86 MOTION to Strike the Expert Report of Martin Horn filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit May 15 Letter)(Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 03/01/2016)
89 ORDER GRANTING 83 MOTION to File Under Seal. However, the seal is not temporary, and it will remain in place without the need for the defendants to make any showing, absent a motion by a party to lift the seal as to particular documents. Further, contemporaneous with such sealed filing, plaintiffs shall file, not under seal, a redacted version of all documents filed under seal. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 3/1/2016. (JLC) (Entered: 03/01/2016)
90 ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** Brief in Support of Class Certification and Exhibits. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Index) # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15, # 16 Exhibit 16, # 17 Exhibit 17, # 18 Exhibit 18, # 19 Exhibit 19, # 20 Exhibit 20, # 21 Exhibit 21, # 22 Exhibit 22, # 23 Exhibit 23, # 24 Exhibit 24, # 25 Exhibit 25, # 26 Exhibit 26, # 27 Exhibit 27, # 28 Exhibit 28, # 29 Exhibit 30, # 30 Exhibit 31, # 31 Exhibit 32, # 32 Exhibit 33, # 33 Exhibit 34, # 34 Exhibit 35, # 35 Exhibit 36, # 36 Exhibit 37, # 37 Exhibit 38, # 38 Exhibit 39, # 39 Exhibit 40, # 40 Exhibit 41, # 41 Exhibit 42, # 42 Exhibit 43, # 43 Exhibit 44, # 44 Exhibit 45, # 45 Exhibit 46, # 46 Exhibit 47, # 47 Exhibit 48, # 48 Exhibit 49, # 49 Exhibit 50, # 50 Exhibit 51, # 51 Exhibit 52, # 52 Exhibit 53, # 53 Exhibit 54, # 54 Exhibit 55, # 55 Exhibit 56, # 56 Exhibit 57, # 57 Exhibit 58, # 58 Exhibit 59, # 59 Exhibit 60, # 60 Exhibit 61, # 61 Exhibit 62, # 62 Exhibit 63, # 63 Exhibit 64, # 64 Exhibit 65, # 65 Exhibit 66, # 66 Exhibit 67, # 67 Exhibit 68, # 68 Exhibit 69, # 69 Exhibit 70, # 70 Exhibit 71, # 71 Exhibit 72, # 72 Exhibit 73, # 73 Exhibit 74, # 74 Exhibit 75, # 75 Exhibit 76, # 76 Exhibit 77, # 77 Exhibit 78, # 78 Exhibit 79, # 79 Exhibit 80, # 80 Exhibit 81, # 81

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 18 of 26

03/02/2016 03/03/2016 03/03/2016
04/19/2016 05/03/2016 05/04/2016 06/20/2016

Exhibit 82, # 82 Exhibit 83, # 83 Exhibit 84, # 84 Exhibit 85, # 85 Exhibit 86, # 86 Exhibit 87, # 87 Exhibit 88, # 88 89, # 89 Exhibit 90, # 90 Exhibit 91, # 91 Exhibit 92, # 92 Exhibit 93, # 93 Exhibit 94, # 94 Exhibit 95, # 95 Exhibit 96, # 96 Exhibit 97, # 97 Exhibit 98, # 98 Exhibit 99, # 99 Exhibit 100, # 100 Exhibit 101, # 101 Exhibit 102, # 102 Exhibit 103, # 103 Exhibit 104, # 104 Exhibit 105, # 105 Exhibit 106, # 106 Exhibit 107) (JLC). (Additional attachment(s) added on 3/1/2016: # 107 Exhibit 2 Part 1, # 108 Exhibit 2 Part 2, # 109 Exhibit 2 Part 3, # 110 Exhibit 2 Part 4, # 111 Exhibit 2 Part 5, # 112 Exhibit 29) (JLC, ). (Entered: 03/01/2016)
91 RESPONSE in Support re 86 MOTION to Strike the Expert Report of Martin Horn filed by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 03/02/2016)
92 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 03/03/2016)
93 REDACTION Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit List, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2 part 1, # 4 Exhibit 2 part 2, # 5 Exhibit 2 part 3, # 6 Exhibit 2 part 4, # 7 Exhibit 2 part 5, # 8 Exhibit 3, # 9 Exhibit 4, # 10 Exhibit 5, # 11 Exhibit 6, # 12 Exhibit 7, # 13 Exhibit 8, # 14 Exhibit 9, # 15 Exhibit 10, # 16 Exhibit 11, # 17 Exhibit 12, # 18 Exhibit 13, # 19 Exhibit 14, # 20 Exhibit 15, # 21 Exhibit 16, # 22 Exhibit 17, # 23 Exhibit 18, # 24 Exhibit 19, # 25 Exhibit 20, # 26 Exhibit 21, # 27 Exhibit 22, # 28 Exhibit 23, # 29 Exhibit 24, # 30 Exhibit 25, # 31 Exhibit 26, # 32 Exhibit 27, # 33 Exhibit 28, # 34 Exhibit 29, # 35 Exhibit 30, # 36 Exhibit 31, # 37 Exhibit 32, # 38 Exhibit 33, # 39 Exhibit 34, # 40 Exhibit 35, # 41 Exhibit 36, # 42 Exhibit 37, # 43 Exhibit 38, # 44 Exhibit 39, # 45 Exhibit 40, # 46 Exhibit 41, # 47 Exhibit 42, # 48 Exhibit 43, # 49 Exhibit 44, # 50 Exhibit 45, # 51 Exhibit 46, # 52 Exhibit 47, # 53 Exhibit 48, # 54 Exhibit 49, # 55 Exhibit 50, # 56 Exhibit 51, # 57 Exhibit 52, # 58 Exhibit 53, # 59 Exhibit 54, # 60 Exhibit 55, # 61 Exhibit 56, # 62 Exhibit 57, # 63 Exhibit 58, # 64 Exhibit 59, # 65 Exhibit 60, # 66 Exhibit 61, # 67 Exhibit 62, # 68 Exhibit 63, # 69 Exhibit 64, # 70 Exhibit 65, # 71 Exhibit 66, # 72 Exhibit 67, # 73 Exhibit 68, # 74 Exhibit 69, # 75 Exhibit 70, # 76 Exhibit 71, # 77 Exhibit 72, # 78 Exhibit 73, # 79 Exhibit 74, # 80 Exhibit 75, # 81 Exhibit 76, # 82 Exhibit 77, # 83 Exhibit 78, # 84 Exhibit 79, # 85 Exhibit 80, # 86 Exhibit 81, # 87 Exhibit 82, # 88 Exhibit 83, # 89 Exhibit 84, # 90 Exhibit 85, # 91 Exhibit 86, # 92 Exhibit 87, # 93 Exhibit 88, # 94 Exhibit 89, # 95 Exhibit 90, # 96 Exhibit 91, # 97 Exhibit 92, # 98 Exhibit 93, # 99 Exhibit 94, # 100 Exhibit 95, # 101 Exhibit 96, # 102 Exhibit 97, # 103 Exhibit 98, # 104 Exhibit 99, # 105 Exhibit 100, # 106 Exhibit 101, # 107 Exhibit 102, # 108 Exhibit 103, # 109 Exhibit 104, # 110 Exhibit 105, # 111 Exhibit 106, # 112 Exhibit 107)(Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 03/03/2016)
94 MOTION for Extension of Time by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 04/19/2016)
95 ORDER granting 94 UNOPPOSED Motion for Extension of Time. This is the FOURTH request by the parties to extend deadlines under the scheduling order. The motion is GRANTED in that all unexpired deadlines in this case are hereby EXTENDED by 45 days. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED absent extremely good cause shown. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 5/3/2016. (KWC) (Entered: 05/03/2016)
96 NOTICE by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 05/04/2016)
97 (REDACTED) MOTION to Compel Discovery by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit Index, # 2 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit Plaintiffs'

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 19 of 26

06/29/2016 06/30/2016 07/06/2016 07/06/2016 07/07/2016
07/07/2016 07/07/2016 07/07/2016 07/07/2016 07/07/2016 07/07/2016

Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 11, # 13 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 12, # 14 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 13, # 15 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 14, # 16 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 15, # 17 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 16, # 18 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 17, # 19 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 18, # 20 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 19, # 21 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 20, # 22 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 21, # 23 Exhibit Plaintiffs' Exhibit 22)(Morrison, Charlotte) Modified on 6/21/2016 (KWC, ). (Entered: 06/20/2016)
98 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 97 MOTION to Compel Discovery by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 06/29/2016)
99 TEXT ORDER granting 98 joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 97 MOTION to Compel Discovery. Response due by 7/18/2016; Reply due by 8/1/2016. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 6/30/2016. (KWC) (Entered: 06/30/2016)
100 MOTION to file documents under seal by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 07/06/2016)
101 ORDER granting 100 Motion for Leave to File under Seal. In order to accomplish this, the movants must comply with this District's cm/ecf requirements, which include filing a redacted version NOT under seal. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 7/6/2016. (Hopkins, Virginia) (Entered: 07/06/2016)
102 MOTION to Strike by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A to Defendants' Motion to Strike Inadmissible and Incompetent Evidence, # 2 Exhibit Exhibt B to Defendants' Motion to Strike Inadmissible and Incompetent Evidence)(Fant, Michael) (Entered: 07/07/2016)
103 Brief re 102 MOTION to Strike Memorandum In Support filed by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 07/07/2016)
104 MOTION to Strike by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A to Defendants' Motion to Exclude Steve Martin)(Fant, Michael) (Entered: 07/07/2016)
105 MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT of 104 MOTION to Strike Memorandum in Support filed by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) Modified on 7/7/2016 (JLC). (Entered: 07/07/2016)
106 MOTION to Strike by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A to Defendants' Daubert Motion to Exclude Michelle Bonner)(Fant, Michael) (Entered: 07/07/2016)
107 Brief re 106 MOTION to Strike Memorandum in Support filed by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 07/07/2016)
108 ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** Defendants' Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit Index, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit 11, # 13 Exhibit 12, # 14 Exhibit 13, # 15 Exhibit 14, # 16 Exhibit 15, # 17 Exhibit 16, # 18 Exhibit 17, # 19 Exhibit 18, # 20 Exhibit 19, # 21 Exhibit 20, # 22 Exhibit 21, # 23 Exhibit 22, # 24 Exhibit 23 Part 1, # 25 Exhibit 23 Parrt 2, # 26 Exhibit 24, # 27 Exhibit 25, # 28 Exhibit 26, # 29 Exhibit 27, # 30 Exhibit 28, # 31 Exhibit 29, # 32 Exhibit 30, # 33 Exhibit 31, # 34 Exhibit 32, # 35 Exhibit 33, # 36 Exhibit 34, # 37 Exhibit 35, # 38 Exhibit 36, # 39 Exhibit 37, # 40 Exhibit 38, # 41 Exhibit 39, # 42 Exhibit 40, # 43 Exhibit 41, # 44 Exhibit 42, # 45 Exhibit 43, # 46 Exhibit 44, # 47 Exhibit 45, # 48 Exhibit 46, # 49 Exhibit 47) (JLC) (Entered: 07/07/2016)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 20 of 26

07/07/2016 07/07/2016 07/07/2016
07/18/2016 07/18/2016 07/18/2016
07/20/2016 07/21/2016 07/21/2016 07/21/2016
07/21/2016 07/21/2016 07/21/2016

109 ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** Defendants' Daubert Motion to Exclude the Opinions and Testimony of Michelle R. Bonner. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(JLC) (Entered: 07/07/2016)
110 ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' 109 DAUBERT MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE OPINIONS AND TESTIMONY OF MICHELLE R. BONNER. (JLC) (Entered: 07/07/2016)
111 RESPONSE to Motion re 82 MOTION to Certify Class filed by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15, # 16 Exhibit 16, # 17 Exhibit 17, # 18 Exhibit 18, # 19 Exhibit 19, # 20 Exhibit 20, # 21 Exhibit 21, # 22 Exhibit 22, # 23 Exhibit 23, # 24 Exhibit 24, # 25 Exhibit 25, # 26 Exhibit 26, # 27 Exhibit 27, # 28 Exhibit 28, # 29 Exhibit 29, # 30 Exhibit 30, # 31 Exhibit 31, # 32 Exhibit 32, # 33 Exhibit 33, # 34 Exhibit 34, # 35 Exhibit 35, # 36 Exhibit 36, # 37 Exhibit 37, # 38 Exhibit 38, # 39 Exhibit 39, # 40 Exhibit 40, # 41 Exhibit 41, # 42 Exhibit 42, # 43 Exhibit 43, # 44 Exhibit 44, # 45 Exhibit 45, # 46 Exhibit 46, # 47 Exhibit 47)(Fant, Michael) (Entered: 07/07/2016)
112 MOTION to Seal Exhibits by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 07/18/2016)
113 TEXT ORDER GRANTING 112 MOTION for Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 7/18/2016. (JLC) (Entered: 07/18/2016)
114 RESPONSE in Opposition re 97 MOTION to Compel Discovery filed by Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L, # 13 Exhibit M, # 14 Exhibit N, # 15 Exhibit O, # 16 Exhibit P, # 17 Exhibit Q, # 18 Exhibit R, # 19 Exhibit S)(Fant, Michael) (Entered: 07/18/2016)
115 MOTION to Seal Document Exhibits by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 07/20/2016)
116 ORDER DENYING 86 MOTION to Strike the Expert Report of Martin Horn. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 7/21/2016. (JLC) (Entered: 07/21/2016)
117 ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** EVIDENTIARY MATERIAL. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit E, # 2 Exhibit F, # 3 Exhibit M) (JLC) (Entered: 07/21/2016)
118 ORDER granting 115 Motion to Seal Document based on the representation in the motion that it is unopposed and that "[e]ach of the documents [to be filed under seal] contain references to and disclosure of information that is currently designated as confidential under the Stipulated ProtectiveOrder." Within 3 days after the date of this Order, the documents referenced in the motion shall be filed under seal. A redacted copy, not under seal, shall also be filed. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 7/21/16. (JTR) (Entered: 07/21/2016)
119 ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** Response to Defendants' Motion to Strike the Opinions & Testimony of Steve Martin. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6) (JLC) (Entered: 07/21/2016)
120 RESPONSE to 104 Motion to Strike the Opinions & Testimony of Steve Martin filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2 − Redacted, # 3 Exhibit 3 − Redacted, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5 − Redacted, # 6 Exhibit 6)(Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 07/21/2016)
121 RESPONSE to 106 Motion to Strike the Expert Report & Testimony of Michelle Bonner filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Attachments:

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 21 of 26

07/21/2016 07/28/2016 07/28/2016 07/28/2016 08/01/2016
08/02/2016 08/05/2016 08/09/2016
08/11/2016 08/11/2016 08/16/2016 08/16/2016
09/13/2016 09/14/2016

# 1 Exhibit 1)(Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 07/21/2016)
122 RESPONSE to 102 Motion to Strike Exhibits Filed in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 07/21/2016)
123 RESPONSE in Support re 102 MOTION to Strike Inadmissible and Incompetent Evidence filed by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 07/28/2016)
124 REPLY to Response to Motion re 109 SEALED MOTION filed by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 07/28/2016)
125 RESPONSE in Support re 104 MOTION to Strike filed by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 07/28/2016)
126 REPLY to Response to Motion re 97 MOTION to Compel Discovery Redacted filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1 − Redacted, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit 2 − Redacted, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit 3 − Redacted, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit 4)(Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 08/01/2016)
127 ORDER GRANTING 97 MOTION to Compel Discovery. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that within 21 days after the date of this Order, the Defendants shall produce the discovery set out in document 97, page 8. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 8/2/2016. (JLC) (Entered: 08/02/2016)
128 NOTICE of Request for Clarification and Instruction on Compliance with the Court's Order Compelling Document Production by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 08/05/2016)
129 ORDER−re: 128 Notice of Request for Clarification and Instruction on Compliance with the Court's Order Compelling Document Production. The motion is DENIED. If Defendants are in fact unable to comply with this court's discovery order, they may file a motion for extension of time that avoids the deficiencies pointed out herein. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 8/9/2016. (AVC) (Entered: 08/09/2016)
130 Joint MOTION to Substitute Official−Capacity Defendants by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 08/11/2016)
131 TEXT ORDER granting 130 Motion to Substitute Party. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 8/11/2016. (KAM, ) (Entered: 08/11/2016)
132 MOTION for Extension of Time by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 08/16/2016)
133 ORDER granting 132 Motion for Extension of Time. All unexpired scheduling order deadlines are hereby extended by fourteen days. This Order does NOT extend the time for Defendants to provide discovery as previously ordered by this court. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 8/16/2016. (Hopkins, Virginia) (Entered: 08/16/2016)
134 MOTION for Enlargement of Page Limit by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 09/13/2016)
135 ORDER granting 134 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages −− the page limit for Plaintiffs' reply in response to Defendants' Opposition to Class Certification is enlarged by thirty pages. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 9/14/16. (JTR) (Entered: 09/14/2016)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 22 of 26

09/14/2016 09/16/2016 09/19/2016 09/19/2016
09/20/2016 09/21/2016 09/23/2016 09/23/2016 09/28/2016 09/29/2016 10/03/2016 10/05/2016

136 NOTICE of Service of Discovery Documents by Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Cheryl Price, Cedric Specks, Steve Watson, Anthony Brooks. (Fant, Michael) (Entered: 09/14/2016)
137 MOTION for Hearing re 82 MOTION to Certify Class by Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Gary Malone, Cheryl Price, Cedric Specks, Steve Watson. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 09/16/2016)
138 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 09/19/2016)
139 REPLY to Response to Motion re 82 MOTION to Certify Class filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Index, # 2 Exhibit Ex. 1, # 3 Exhibit Ex. 2, # 4 Exhibit Ex. 3, # 5 Exhibit Ex. 4, # 6 Exhibit Ex. 5, # 7 Exhibit Ex. 6, # 8 Exhibit Ex. 7, # 9 Exhibit Ex. 8, # 10 Exhibit Ex. 9, # 11 Exhibit Ex. 10, # 12 Exhibit Ex. 11, # 13 Exhibit Ex. 12, # 14 Exhibit Ex. 13, # 15 Exhibit Ex. 14, # 16 Exhibit Ex. 15, # 17 Exhibit Ex. 16, # 18 Exhibit Ex. 17, # 19 Exhibit Ex. 18, # 20 Exhibit Ex. 19, # 21 Exhibit Ex. 20, # 22 Exhibit Ex. 21, # 23 Exhibit Ex. 22, # 24 Exhibit Ex. 23, # 25 Exhibit Ex. 24, # 26 Exhibit Ex. 25, # 27 Exhibit Ex. 26, # 28 Exhibit Ex. 27, # 29 Exhibit Ex. 28, # 30 Exhibit Ex. 29, # 31 Exhibit Ex. 30, # 32 Exhibit Ex. 31, # 33 Exhibit Ex. 32, # 34 Exhibit Ex. 33, # 35 Exhibit Ex. 34, # 36 Exhibit Ex. 35, # 37 Exhibit Ex. 36, # 38 Exhibit Ex. 37, # 39 Exhibit Ex. 38, # 40 Exhibit Ex. 39, # 41 Exhibit Ex. 40, # 42 Exhibit Ex. 41, # 43 Exhibit Ex. 42, # 44 Exhibit Ex. 43, # 45 Exhibit Ex. 44, # 46 Exhibit Ex. 45, # 47 Exhibit Ex. 46, # 48 Exhibit Ex. 47, # 49 Exhibit Ex. 48, # 50 Exhibit Ex. 49, # 51 Exhibit Ex. 50, # 52 Exhibit Ex. 51, # 53 Exhibit Ex. 52, # 54 Exhibit Ex. 53, # 55 Exhibit Ex. 54, # 56 Exhibit Ex. 55, # 57 Exhibit Ex. 56, # 58 Exhibit Ex. 57, # 59 Exhibit Ex. 58, # 60 Exhibit Ex. 59, # 61 Exhibit Ex. 60, # 62 Exhibit Ex. 61, # 63 Exhibit Ex. 62, # 64 Exhibit Ex. 63, # 65 Exhibit Ex. 64, # 66 Exhibit Ex. 65, # 67 Exhibit Ex. 66, # 68 Exhibit Ex. 67, # 69 Exhibit Ex. 68, # 70 Exhibit Ex. 69)(Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 09/19/2016)
140 TEXT ORDER GRANTING 138 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Carla Camille Crowder terminated.. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 9/20/2016. (JLC) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
141 ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** EVIDENTIARY MATERIAL (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 5, # 2 Exhibit 6) (JLC) (Entered: 09/21/2016)
142 Brief re 137 MOTION for Hearing re 82 MOTION to Certify Class . (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 09/23/2016)
143 MOTION to Strike Additional Evidentiary Material by Anthony Brooks, Grant Culliver, Dewayne Estes, Gary Malone, Cheryl Price, Cedric Specks, Steve Watson. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 09/23/2016)
144 RESPONSE to Defendants Motion to Exclude Additional Evidentiary Material filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 09/28/2016)
145 RESPONSE to Motion re 137 MOTION for Hearing re 82 MOTION to Certify Class filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 09/29/2016)
146 STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. filed by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 10/03/2016)
147 RESPONSE in Support re 143 MOTION to Strike Additional Evidentiary Material filed by Anthony Brooks, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Gary Malone, Cheryl Price, Cedric Specks, Steve Watson. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 10/05/2016)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 23 of 26

10/05/2016 10/14/2016 10/15/2016 10/18/2016 10/20/2016 10/20/2016 10/27/2016
11/14/2016 11/16/2016 11/18/2016
01/24/2017 02/02/2017 02/08/2017 02/09/2017

148 RESPONSE in Support re 137 MOTION for Hearing re 82 MOTION to Certify Class filed by Anthony Brooks, Grant Culliver, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Gary Malone, Cheryl Price, Cedric Specks, Steve Watson. (Prueter, Charles) (Entered: 10/05/2016)
149 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 10/14/2016)
150 ORDER granting 149 UNOPPOSED Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages and enlarging the page limit by seventy (70) pages for Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and for Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for SummaryJudgment. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 10/15/16. (JTR) (Entered: 10/15/2016)
151 MOTION for Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 10/18/2016)
152 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 10/20/2016)
153 Brief re 152 MOTION for Summary Judgment Plaintiffs Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (Redacted). (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 10/20/2016)
154 ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MEDIATION; The parties must, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, notify the Court of the name of the person selected by the parties to serve as Mediator. Pursuant to section IV.4. of the ADR Plan this matter is STAYED for 180 days so that the Mediation may be conducted. The Stay will lift automatically at the expiration of that time period. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 10/27/2016. (JLC) (Entered: 10/27/2016)
155 ***VACATED***ORDER that the Court will give the parties one more opportunity to jointly choose a mutually agreeable private mediator, or each submit a list of three, no later than November 23, 2016. Thereafter, the Court will proceed as provided in its Order of October 27, 2016. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 11/14/2016. (JLC) Modified on 11/16/2016 (JLC). (Entered: 11/14/2016)
156 ORDER VACATING the Court's previous 155 Order and REFERRING this matter for Mediation before Chief Magistrate Judge John Ott, who has agreed to Mediate this matter. The parties shall contact Judge Ott immediately to schedule the Mediation and shall otherwise comply with this Court's 154 Order. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 11/16/2016. (JLC) (Entered: 11/16/2016)
157 ORDER that this matter is hereby SET for Mediation on Tuesday, January 24, 2017, at 9:00 a.m., in the chambers of the undersigned Magistrate Judge in the Hugo L. Black Federal Courthouse, Third Floor, Birmingham, Alabama. Any information the parties would like to submit in confidence prior to the Mediation must be submitted to chambers by 5:00 p.m. on January 18, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 11/18/2016. (JLC) (Entered: 11/18/2016)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 1/24/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 01/27/2017)
158 ORDER. In accordance with prior discussions with counsel, the mediation in this matter is continued until TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2017, at 9:00 a.m., in the jury room on the third floor of the Hugo L. Black Federal Courthouse in Birmingham, Alabama. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 2/2/2017.(Ott, John) (Entered: 02/02/2017)
159 ORDER. This matter is set for a telephone status conference on Thursday, February 9, 2017, at 4:00 p.m. The parties are to use the court's conference line at 888−808−6929, passcode 5917763. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 2/8/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 02/08/2017)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Telephone Conference held on 2/9/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/15/2017)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 24 of 26

02/10/2017
02/14/2017 02/14/2017 02/15/2017 04/03/2017
04/07/2017 04/10/2017 04/10/2017 04/25/2017
04/28/2017 04/28/2017 05/05/2017 05/05/2017 05/17/2017
05/18/2017 06/01/2017
07/05/2017

160 ORDER. This matter is set for a telephone status conference on Tuesday, February 14, 2017, at 4:00 p.m. The parties are to use the court's conference line at 888−808−6929, passcode 5917763. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 2/10/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 02/10/2017)
161 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 02/14/2017)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Telephone Conference held on 2/14/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/15/2017)
162 TEXT ORDER granting 161 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Jennae Rose Swiergula terminated. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 2/15/2017. (KWC) (Entered: 02/15/2017)
163 ORDER. This matter is set for a telephone status conference on Friday, April 7, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. The parties are to use the following number: 888−808−6929 and passcode number: 5917763. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 4/3/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 04/03/2017)
164 ORDER Telephone Conference set for 4/10/2017 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge John E Ott; parties to call 888−808−6929 and use access code 5917763 to participate; Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 4/7/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 04/07/2017)
165 ORDER Telephone Conference set for 4/28/2017 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge John E Ott; parties to call 888−808−6929 and use access code 5917763 to participate; Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 4/10/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 04/10/2017)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Telephone Conference held on 4/10/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 04/10/2017)
166 ORDER −− Upon request of the magistrate who is mediating this matter, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the stay in this matter is EXTENDED for an additional 90 days. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 4/25/17. (JTR) (Entered: 04/25/2017)
167 ORDER Telephone Conference set for 5/5/2017 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge John E Ott; parties to call 888−808−6929 and use access code 5917763 to participate; Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 4/28/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 04/28/2017)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Telephone Conference held on 4/28/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 05/05/2017)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Telephone Conference held on 5/5/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 05/05/2017)
168 ORDER Telephone Conference set for 5/12/2017 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge John E Ott; parties to call 888−808−6929 and use access code 5917763 to participate; Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 5/5/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 05/05/2017)
169 ORDER setting this matter for mediation before the undersigned on Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 8:30 a.m., at the United States District Courthouse, Montgomery, Alabama, in Courtroom 2F. All counsel are required to attend. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 5/17/2017. (JLC) (Entered: 05/17/2017)
170 ORDER Telephone Conference set for 5/30/2017 04:00 PM before Magistrate Judge John E Ott; parties to call 888−808−6929 and use access code 5917763 to participate; Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 5/18/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 05/18/2017)
171 ORDER. Defendants' mediation response is due to Plaintiffs' counsel on June 16, 2017; Plaintiffs' reply is due June 23, 2017; counsel will participate in a telephone conference call with the undersigned at 4:00 p.m. on June 23, 2017; and the next in−person mediation will be June 27, 2017, at 9:00 a.m. The location of the mediation will be set by separate order at a later time. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 6/1/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 06/01/2017)
172 ORDER. This matter is set for a conference call at 4:00 p.m., Friday, July 7, 2017. Counsel are to use 888−808−6929 and passcode 5917763. Signed by Magistrate Judge

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 25 of 26

07/07/2017
07/17/2017 07/18/2017 07/19/2017 07/24/2017 08/22/2017 09/21/2017 09/22/2017 09/25/2017 10/04/2017 10/27/2017
11/01/2017 12/01/2017
12/05/2017

John E. Ott on 7/5/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 07/05/2017)
173 ORDER. The continued mediation of this case is set for Friday, July 14, 2017, at 8:00 a.m., at the Federal Courthouse in Montgomery. Only counsel for the parties are required to attend. Mediation with counsel and experts will occur at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 18, 2017, and Wednesday, July 19, 2017, if necessary, in the Federal Courthouse in Birmingham, Alabama. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 7/7/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 07/07/2017)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Telephone Conference held on 7/17/2017. (ASL) Modified on 7/18/2017 (ASL). (Entered: 07/18/2017)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 7/18/2017. (ASL) (Entered: 07/19/2017)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 7/19/2017. (ASL) (Entered: 07/20/2017)
174 TEXT ORDER. Upon request of the magistrate judge who is mediating this matter, United States District Judge Virginia E. Hopkins has EXTENDED the stay of this matter until August 21, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 7/24/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 07/24/2017)
175 TEXT ORDER. Upon request of the magistrate judge who is mediating this matter, United States District Judge Virginia E. Hopkins has EXTENDED the stay of this matter until August 30, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 8/22/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 08/22/2017)
176 ORDER. This matter is set for an in−person status conference on Tuesday, September 26, 2017, at 8:30 a.m., in chambers, in Birmingham. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 9/21/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 09/21/2017)
Set Hearings: Per 176/Order− Status Conference set for September 26, 2017 at 8:30 AM in Hugo L Black US Courthouse, Birmingham, AL before Magistrate Judge John E Ott. (SAC ) (Entered: 09/22/2017)
177 ORDER. The September 26, 2017 status conference set for Birmingham will be conducted at 9:00 a.m. in the Federal Courthouse in Montgomery, Alabama. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 9/25/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 09/25/2017)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 10/4/2017. (BST, ) (Entered: 10/05/2017)
178 ORDER setting this matter for a Status Conference on Wednesday, November 1, 2017, at 4:30 p.m., at the Hugo L. Black Federal Courthouse, Birmingham, Alabama, in Chambers before Magistrate Judge John E Ott. All counsel and principals involved in approving the proposed settlement are required to attend. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 10/27/2017. (JLC) (Entered: 10/27/2017)
179 ORDER. The status hearing set for today is cancelled. The parties have resolved their outstanding matters. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 11/1/2017. (Ott, John) (Entered: 11/01/2017)
180 Joint MOTION for Settlement to notify the Court of Private Settlement Agreement and Request for Administrative Closure by Anthony Brooks, Karen Carter, Grant Culliver, Carter Davenport, James Deloach, Jefferson S Dunn, Dewayne Estes, Eric Evans, Greg Lovelace, Gary Malone, Terrance McDonnell, Cheryl Price, Carl Sanders, William G. Sharp, Jr, Cedric Specks, Kim Thomas, Steve Watson. (Harmon, Bart) (Entered: 12/01/2017)
181 ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE; It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Clerk of Court shall Administratively Close this case until November 1, 2019, or until, within the two year term of the settlement agreement, the case is reinstated after a motion to reinstate the case is made and granted in accordance with the private settlement agreement and 18 U.S.C. §3626(c)(2). Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 12/5/2017. (JLC) (Entered: 12/05/2017)

Case: 4:14-cv-1952 As of: 05/04/2020 06:41 PM CDT 26 of 26

01/14/2019 01/17/2019 01/23/2019 01/24/2019 02/06/2019 02/08/2019 02/14/2019 02/22/2019 02/28/2019
02/28/2019
03/05/2019 10/29/2019 10/30/2019
11/12/2019

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 1/14/2019. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/27/2019)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 1/17/2019. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/27/2019)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 1/23/2019. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/27/2019)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 1/24/2019. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/27/2019)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 2/6/2019. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/27/2019)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 2/8/2019. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/27/2019)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 2/14/2019. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/21/2019)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 2/22/2019. (BST, ) (Entered: 02/27/2019)
182 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Antonio Cheatham, Mark Duke, James Edwards, Dale Gilley, Franky Johnson, Michael Mays, Michael McGregor, John Miller, Derrick White, Allan Williams, Robert Woods. (Becker, Ryan) (Entered: 02/28/2019)
183 TEXT ORDER granting 182 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Jennae Rose Swiergula terminated. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 2/28/2019. (KWC) (Entered: 02/28/2019)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John E Ott: Settlement Conference held on 3/5/2019. (BST, ) (Entered: 03/05/2019)
184 Joint MOTION to Stay by Mark Duke. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1: Agreement)(Morrison, Charlotte) (Entered: 10/29/2019)
185 ORDER granting 184 Motion to Stay; parties are continuing to work on an acceptable resolution the Clerk of Court shall stay this matter for nine (9) months, until August 1, 2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 10/30/2019. (KAM) (Entered: 10/30/2019)
186 ORDER correcting the 10/30/2019 Order, this matter is stayed until 8/1/2020. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 11/12/2019. (KAM) (Entered: 11/12/2019)