RICHARD COTTONE,as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., and PETER COTTONE, SR.,
Plaintiffs,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO:

CIV-ZLOCH

00-7545

KENNETH C. JENNE, II, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida; PATRICK TIGHE, individually and in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Department of Detention, Broward Sheriff’s Office; JOHN DOES, individually and in their official capacity as Directors and/or Supervisors of the North Broward Detention Center; JOHN and JANE DOES, individually and in their official capacities as Deputy Sheriffs and/or Corrections Officers of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office; JOSEPH D’ELIA, and GEORGE WILLIAMS, individually and in their official capacities as Deputy Sheriffs and/or Corrections Officers of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office; EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC., a Florida Corporation and general partner of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and an affiliate of PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.; J. and J. DOES, individually and in their official capacities as certain unnamed Doctors and Nurses employed by EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC., a general partner of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and an affiliate of PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.; and THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,

Defendants.

:~° ~ ~~ ~

COI~L~T

~ ~ ~ ~

of the Estate of Peter Anthony Cottone, Jr. and PETER COTTONE, SR. sue Defendants, jointly and severally, and alleges:

JURISDICTION

i.

This is an action for damages arising out of one or

more violations of State and Federal law detailed below.

2.

This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, and

the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United

States Constitution. Jurisdiction is based upon 28 U.S.C. §1331,

§1343, and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1988 and the constitutional provisions mentioned above.

3.

It is further alleged that these violations were

committed as a result of the deliberate indifference of all of

the Defendants and in direct violation of the Consent Decree

entered on July 27, 1994 in Carruthers v.__C.ochran, et al., Case

No: 76-6086-CIV-HOEVELER. (Exhibit A).

4.

The acts and practices constituting the violations

alleged below have occurred within the jurisdiction of the United

Statep District Court in and for the Southern District of

Florida. In connection with the acts, practices and violations alleged herein, each Defendant has, directly or indirectly, violated the constitutional rights of the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.
5. Notice to the Defendants has been provided.(Exhibit B). 6. The Plaintiffs seek an award of damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., and their loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, and for

2

funeral and burial expenses, under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute. The Plaintiff, PETER COTTONE, SR., seeks an award of damages for permanent mental and emotional injuries due to the death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. The Plaintiffs further seek an award for punitive damages, court costs and attorney fees.

PARTIES

7.

The Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR., has been a United

States citizen at all times material hereto.

8.

The decedent, Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.,

died of injuries sustained on or about April 7, 1999, while

incarcerated at the North Broward Detention Center.

9.

The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE is the personal

representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.,

pursuant to the laws of the State of Florida. Said Plaintiff is

authorized by law to bring this action.

i0. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II is the Sheriff of Broward County, Florida. Said Defendant is responsible, as Sheriff, for the conduct of the deputies and/or corrections officers in his employ and ensuring that his deputies,

corrections officers, employees, servants and agents obey the laws of the State of Florida and the United States. Said Defendant is being sued in his individual and official capacities.

3

II. The Defendant PATRICK TIGHE is the Executive Director of the Department of Detention at the Broward County Sheriff’s Office. Said Defendant is responsible as the Executive Director for the conduct of the deputies and/or corrections officers in his employ, and ensuring that his deputies, corrections officers, employees, servants and agents obey the laws of the State of Florida and the United States. Said Defendant is being sued in his individual and official capacities.
12. The Defendants JOHN DOES, at all times material herein, are the Directors and/or Supervisors of the North Broward Detention Center at the Broward Sheriff’s Office. Said Defendants are responsible as the Directors and/or Supervisors for overseeing the North Broward Detention Center and supervising the administrators, staff, managers, deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers employed there. Said Defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities~
13. The Defendants JOHN and JANE DOES, at all times material herein, were duly appointed and acting Deputy Sheriffs and/or Corrections Officers of Broward County, employed by and serving under Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II. Said Defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities.
14. The Defendants JOSEPH D’ELIA and GEORGE WILLIAMS, at all times material herein, were duly appointed and acting Deputy Sheriffs and/or Corrections Officers of Broward County, employed by and serving under Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, If. Said

Defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities.
15. The Defendant EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. is a Florida Corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, conducting business in Broward County, Florida. Said Defendant is a general partner of Defendant EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Florida Limited Partnership and an affiliate of Defendant PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC..
16. The Defendant EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP is a Florida Limited Partnership, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, conducting business in Broward County, Florida. Said Defendant is a general partner of EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and an affiliate of Defendant PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
I?. The Defendant PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. is a foreign corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, conducting business in Broward County, Florida.
18. The Defendants J. and J. DOES at all times material herein, were duly appointed doctors and nurses, employed by and serving under Defendants EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC, a general partner of Defendant EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, and an affiliate of Defendant PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.. Said Defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities.
19. The Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS is the legislative and governing body of Broward County. Said Board has the powers and duties to, among other
5

things, carry on county government, make investigations of county affairs and perform acts which are in the common interest of the people of Broward County. Further, said Board is charged with the duty of maintaining, staffing and supervising all correctional activities in Broward County and, in doing so, said Board has delegated those duties to Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II.
20. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II has been subject to the orders of the Defendant BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS at all times material hereto.
21. At all times material hereto, and in all their acts described herein, the Defendants were acting under color of state law and color of their authority as public officials and public employees.
ALLEGATIONS O¥ FACT 22. On or about July 27, 1994, the Sheriff of Broward County and the Broward County Con~nissioners entered into a consent decree in the case of Carruthers,etal. v. Cochran, et al., Case Number 76-6086-CIV-HOEVELER, United States District Court, in the Southern District of Florida. (Exhibit A). 23. On January 27, 1995, the Consent Decree was approved by Judge William M. Hoeveler, making said Consent Decree binding on the former Sheriff Cochran, the Broward County Commissioners and their respective successors. (Exhibit C).
6

24. The purpose of the Consent Decree was to correct

confinement conditions within the Broward County jail system which violated the constitutional rights of the inmates within

the system.

25. Under said Consent Decree, the Sheriff and Broward County are obligated to ensure that each of their employees, agents, deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers were

informed of and complied with the terms of said Decree. 26. The Consent Decree required former Sheriff Cochran,
Broward County and/or their successors to notify any private

parties with whom they contracted about the relevant requirements of the Consent Decree and to ensure that those parties complied with the terms of the Consent Decree.
27. Based upon the Consent Decree, the Sheriff, his personnel and the Broward County Commissioners had specific obligations with respect to inmates under their custody and

control, such as:

a.

Proper classification of inmates to the most

appropriate level of custody and programming, both

on admission and on review of their status. The

primary objective of classification being "to

place inmates in the type of quarters that best

meet their needs and to provide reasonable

protection for the inmate and other inmates."

(Exhibit A, page 5).

b. To assign inmates to housing "with particular care to the assignment of persons who have a history of, or exhibit aggressiveness toward other inmates.~ (Id.).

c. To separate and closely supervise "special inmates," which include the mentally ill. "Close supervision of special inmates shall include regular, documented sight checks by correctional officers or medical staff at intervals not to exceed 15 minutes." (emphasis added) (Id., p. 6 and 7).
28. On or about August 6, 1993, former Sheriff Ronald Cochran and Defendant EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ("EMSA") entered into a three-year contract wherein EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC., would provide Comprehensive Health Services for inmates to the Broward Sheriff’s Office (i.e., Broward County Main Jail Facility; the North Broward Detention Center; Division of Community Corrections Facility and Boot Camp.) (Exhibit D).
29. On or about April 29, 1997, Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS amended and renewed the original contract for a four-year period continuing through September 30, 2000. (Exhibit E).
30. In said contract, Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., guaranteed the performance of the services of Defendant EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC..
31. On or about March 9, 1999, the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., was "Baker Acted" and sent to Memorial Hospital for observation and evaluation. Said action occurred as a result of an alleged domestic violence involving his father, PETER COTTONE,
32. On or about March 14, 1999, the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY

COTTONE, JR. was brought to the Broward County jail, based on charges arising from the alleged domestic violence.
33. On or about March 14, 1999, the Plaintiff was booked, assessed and sent to Unit 1 at the North Broward Detention Center.
34. On or about April 6, 1999, Widnel Charles was relocated by the Defendant Nurse J. DOE to the dormitory in Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center, where the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. had been housed since March 16, 1999. Said dormitory is for mentally ill inmates and has three separate cells. Widnel Charles, Albert St. Hubert and the Plaintiff, individually, occupied a cell.
35. Prior to his arrest on March I, 1999, Widnel Charles had been "Baker Acted" numerous times and had demonstrated violent propensit±eso
36. On March I, 1999, while in the booking area of the Broward County Main jail, Widnel Charles, without provocation, struck another inmate. Said incident was observed and documented by Defendants JOHN and JANE DOES, deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers, and by Defendant J.DOE, a booking nurse.
37. Despite the fact that Mr. Charles had a history of schizophrenia and the fact that his behavior on March I, 1999, was clearly inappropriate and dangerous, Mr. Charles was sent by Defendants JOHN and JANE DOES, deputy sheriffs and/or corrections
9

officers and Defendants J. and J. DOES, doctors and nurses to the general population at the Main jail.
38. Widnel Charles remained in the Broward County Main Jail general population until March 6, 1999.
39. On March 6, 1999, Widnel Charles was reassessed by Defendant J. DOE, who inappropriately categorized him for a minimum level detention. Mr. Charles was sent to the North Broward Detention Center.
40. During the week of March 27, 1999, while at the North Broward Detention Center, Widnel Charles was involved in another unprovoked physical attack of an inmate. Despite this, Widnel Charles, on April 6Lh, was inappropriately placed in Unit 1 with the Plaintiff and another inmate.
41. Despite the knowledge of his prior violent conduct, Mr. Charles’ cell door in Unit 1 was left open during the day allowing him to move about freely and interact with the Plaintiff and Mr. St. Hubert.
42. On or about April 6th, Defendants JOHN and JANE DOES and Defendants Nurses J. DOES, observed Widnel Charles verbally abusing the Plaintiff. They did nothing.
43. On or about April 7, 1999, the Defendants WILLIAMS and D’ELIA were on duty in the control room of Unit I. They were the only officers on duty at the control room.
44. On April 7, 1999, at approximately 12:20 p.m.,
i0

Defendant D’ELIA took a break from the control room, leaving Defendant WILLIAMS alone to maintain and control the area.
45. At approximately 12:32 p.m., Defendant D’ELIA returned to the control room and Defendant WILLIAMS took a break, leaving Defendant D’ELIA alone to maintain and control the area.
46. Shortly thereafter, Defendant D’ELIA was summoned by Albert St. Hubert, who was ringing a buzzer in his cell.
47. At that time, Defendant D’ELIA went into Unit 1 and observed the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., lying unconscious on the floor of his cell with ligature marks around his neck.
48~ Widnel Charles had strangled the Plaintiff with shoe laces.
49. The Plaintiff was transported to North Broward Medical Center, where he died.
50. Surveillance cameras mounted in the Day Room of Unit 1 were aimed at the three cells, however, they were not being monitored at the time of the incident.
51. At the time of the incident, a computer game was observed on the screen of the computer in the control room where the Defendants D’ELIA and WILLIAMS were stationed.
52. Prior to and at the time of the killing, Widnel Charles was in the throes of schizophrenia, was hallucinating, violent and completely out of control.
II

53. The mental condition of Widnel Charles prior to the killing of the Plaintiff, was obvious to Defendants D’ELIA, WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES, deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers and Defendants J. and J. DOES, doctors and nurses. It was ignored by said Defendants.
54. The conduct of Defendants D’ELIA, WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES and Defendants J. and J. DOES was reckless and created a substantial risk of serious harm to other inmates. Said Defendants had been placed in Unit i, a mental health unit, and were, or should have been aware, of the likelihood of harm from individuals such as Widnel Charles.
55. By their deliberate indifference, Defendants D’ELIA, WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES, and Defendants J. and J. DOES, doctors and nurses, acquiesced to the conduct of Widnel Charles, and, therefore, were active participants in the unlawful seizure, i.e. the strangulation of the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR..
56. Defendants JOHN DOES, as directors and/or supervisors of the North Broward Detention Center, had a duty to properly t~ain, supervise and/or discipline deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers under their control.
57. Defendants JOHN DOES’ failure to train, supervise and administer the Consent Decree and the Broward Sheriff’s Office’s policy regarding the housing of inmates within the North Broward Detention Center was the proximate cause of the deprivations of

rights suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR.. 58. The Defendants D’ELIA, WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES,
Defendants JOHN DOES, Defendants J. and J. DOES had a duty to ensure that reasonable measures were taken to guarantee the safety of the inmates at the North Broward Detention Center.
59. Defendant TIGHE, as the Executive Director of the Department Detention at the Broward Sheriff’s Office, had a duty to train, supervise, control or otherwise ensure that Defendants D’ELIA, WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES and JOHN DOES did not violate the constitutional rights of persons such as the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR..
60. Defendant JENNE, as the Sheriff of Broward County had a duty to train, supervise, control or otherwise ensure that Defendants TIGHE, D’ELIA, WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES, JOHN DOES and J. and J. DOES did not violate the constitutional rights of persons such as the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR..
61. Defendant JENNE abdicated his policymaking and oversight responsibilities, thereby allowing the incident involving the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR. to occur.
62. All Defendants were on notice and had an absolute duty to enforce the Consent Decree. Said failure is a per se violation of the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE JR.’s constitutional rights under state and federal law.
63. The above acts and omissions of all Defendants, and
13

each of them, constitute a course of conduct and failure to act amounting to deliberate indifference to the rights, health,

safety and welfare of the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.

and those similarly situated, resulting in the deprivation of the Plaintiff’s constitutional rights under state and federal law.

64. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and

omissions of the Defendants as set forth above, the decedent

PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. suffered the following injuries and damages:

a.

Violation of his constitutional rights under the

Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United

States Constitution;

Loss of his life; Physical pain and suffering and emotional trauma and suffering.

65. As a result of the death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., his family suffered the loss of his income, services, protection,

care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance,

counsel and advice, and was forced to incur funeral and burial

expenses.

66. As a result of the death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., his father, PETER COTTONE, SR., suffered permanent mental and emotional injuries.

67. The acts and omissions of the Defendants, as set forth

14

above, violated clearly established and well settled federal constitutional rights of the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., i.e., due process of law under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, unlawful search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment and cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
68. All potential beneficiaries of a recovery for the decedent’s wrongful death are identified as follows:
a. The estate of the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.
b. PETER COTTONE, SR., father.
COUNT 1-42 U.S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS J. AND J. DOES 69. The Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs i through 55, 58, and 62 through 68. 70. At all times material hereto, the Defendants J. and J. DOES, doctors and nurses, were responsible for medically screening incoming pre-trial detainees, assigning mentally ill pre-trial detainees to the appropriate housing level, administering appropriate medication to the mentally ill, and regularly monitoring and assessing the conditions of these inmates. 71. While these Defendants were acting under color of state law as employees of Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA
15

CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., they subjected the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., to the deprivation of rights and privileges secured to him under the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
72. The death of the Plaintiff was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of said Defendants’ deliberate indifference to their obligation to provide appropriate monitoring, supervising, and medication and protection for incarcerated mentally ill persons.
73. Additionally, Defendants J. and J. DOES had a duty under the Consent Decree to separate and closely supervise mentally ill inmates.
74. Said Defendants breached their duty of care by failing to properly screen, assess, medicate, treat, and monitor Widnel Charles, despite their notice and knowledge of his mental illness and his violent tendencies.
75. The deliberate indifference of these Defendants violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. for which 42 U.S.C. §1983 provides a remedy.
76. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services,
16

protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.

W~EREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants J. and J. DOES, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.

COUNT II-

42 U.S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST

DEFENDANTS EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. AND PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.

77. The Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1 through 55, 58,

and 62 through 76.

78. At all times material hereto, the Defendants EMSA

LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON

HEALTH SERVICES, INC. were responsible for adopting and

implementing the rules and regulations regarding hiring,

screening, training, supervising, controlling, disciplining and

assigning nurses and doctors to their duties required by the

contract it entered into with the Broward Sheriff’s Office and

the Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,

to provide comprehensive health services for inmates within the

Broward County Jail System.

17

79. The Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., as service providers to the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, had a duty to ensure that its employees abided by the terms set forth in the court approved Consent Decree and cited contract. (Exhibit A, C, D, E).
80. Said Defendants failed to comply with this obligation, as its employees, the Defendants J. and J. DOES, breached their duties under said Consent Decree and cited contract, and failed to properly screen, assess, monitor, medicate, and treat Widnel Charles, causing a substantial risk of harm to inmates, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR..
81. The Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. failed to properly train and/or supervise its nurses and doctors in the screening, assessment, treatment, care and monitoring and/or supervision of pre-trial detainees. Its nurses and doctors demonstrated deliberate indifference to the health and well being of inmates such as the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., by failing to conduct appropriate health screening, assessments, treatment, care, monitoring and supervision of mentally ill inmates. Said failure resulted in mentally ill inmates with known violent propensities being housed with other non-violent inmates at substantial risk of harm to those other inmates, including PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR..
18

82. The Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC., and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. have maintained a system of review of the treatment of mentally ill pre-trial detainees and complaints thereof which has failed to identify the improper treatment by the nurses and doctors, and failed to subject nurses and doctors who improperly treated mentally ill pre-trial detainees to appropriate discipline, supervision, dismissal and/or retraining, to the extent that it has become the defacto policy and custom of said Defendants to tolerate the improper treatment of mentally ill pre-trial detainees in the Broward County Jail System.
83. The Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. acted in reckless disregard of both constitutional prohibitions and guarantees under color of state law, thereby misusing the power they possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because said Defendants were clothed with the authority of state law.
84. The previously described acts, omissions, policies or customs of said Defendants constituted a per se violation of the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.’s constitutional rights under state and federal law.
85. The deliberate indifference of these Defendants violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the decedent, for which 42 U.S.C. ~1983 provides a remedy.
19

86. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory damages against Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
COUNT IXI- 42 U.S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS D’ELIA, WILLIAMS,
qOBNAND JANE DOES 87. The Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 55, 58, and 62 through 68. 88. While Defendants D’ELIA, WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES were acting under color of state law as a deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, they subjected the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., to the deprivation of rights ~nd privileges secured to him under the
2O

Fourth, Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
89. Said Defendants were deliberately indifferent to the policy and procedure of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, as well as the Consent Decree with regard to care and housing of mentally ill pre-trial detainees.
90. Said Defendants’ deliberate indifference caused a substantial risk of harm to the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR..
91. The injuries sustained by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. were a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the Defendants’ deliberate indifference to their obligation to provide proper medical attention, security and housing for pretrial detainees.
92. The deliberate indifference of these Defendants violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., for which 42 U.S.C. §1983 provides a remedy.
93. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the
21

Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants D’ELIA, WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
COUNT IV-42 U.S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS JOHN DOES
94. The Plaintiffs realleges paragraphs 1 through 58, 62 through 68, and 87 through 93.
95. At all times material hereto, the Defendants JOHN DOES were the directors and/or supervisors of Defendants D’ELIA, WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES, deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers.
96. Said Defendants had a duty to train, supervise and ensure that deputy sheriffs/corrections officers under their control obeyed the laws of the State of Florida and the United States, the policies of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and the provisions of the Consent Decree and the cited contract.
97. Defendants JOHN DOES had a duty to ensure that there was sufficient manpower to effectively monitor the inmates housed in Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center and that said Unit was in fact being closely monitored by their deputy sheriffs
22

and/or corrections officers. 98. Notwithstanding Defendants JOHN DOES’ responsibility to
ensure that deputy sheriffs/corrections officers under their command performed their duties, they failed to uphold these responsibilities.
99. Defendants JOHN DOES’ failure to properly train, supervise and administer the agency’s policy regarding the monitoring, housing and security of inmates housed in the North Broward Detention Center was the proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR..
i00. Defendants JOHN DOES’ knew that a failure to comply with the conditions of the Consent Decree would lead to a substantial risk of harm to the inmates.
101. Said Defendants" deliberate indifference caused a substantial risk of harm to the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. and other inmates housed in the Broward County Jail System.
102. The injuries sustained by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. were the foreseeable consequence of the Defendants’ deliberate indifference to their obligation to provide properly train, supervise and/or discipline deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers under their control.
103. The deliberate indifference of these Defendants violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., for which 42 U.S.C. §1983
23

provides a remedy. 104. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal
representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
W~ER~FOB~, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants JOHN DOES, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
COUNT V-42 U.S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT~ PATRICK TIGEE
105. The Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 59, 62 through 68, and 87 through 104.
106. At all times material hereto, the Defendant PATRICK TIGHE was the Executive Director of the Department of Detention for the Broward County Sheriff’s Office.
107. Said Defendant had a duty to train, supervise and ensure that deputy sheriffs/corrections officers under his control and that they obeyed the laws of the State of Florida and
24

the United States, the policies of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and the provisions of the Consent Decree and cited contract.
108. Notwithstanding Defendant TIGHE’s responsibility to ensure that deputy sheriffs~corrections officers under his command performed their duties under the Consent Decree and the Broward Sheriff’s Office policies, he failed to uphold these responsibilities.
109. Defendant TIGHE’s failure to properly train, supervise and administer the agency’s policy regarding the monitoring, housing and security of inmates housed in the North Broward Detention Center was the proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.
110. Defendant TIGHE knew that a failure to comply with the conditions of the Consent Decree would lead to a substantial risk of harm to the inmates.
iii. Defendant TIGHE’s deliberate indifference caused a substantial risk of harm to the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. and other inmates housed in the Broward County Jail System.
112. The injuries sustained by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. were the foreseeable consequence of Defendant TIGHE’s deliberate indifference to his obligation to provide properly train, supervise and/or discipline deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers under his control.
25

113. The deliberate indifference of this Defendant violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., for which 42 U.S.C. ~1983 provides a remedy.
114. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. ~1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendant PATRICK TIGHE, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
CO%~NT VI- 42 U.S.C. ~1983 CI~KIM AGAINST EE~I~ETH C.~NNE~ ~I
115. The Flaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 114. 116. At all times material hereto, the Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II was responsible for adopting and implementing the rules and regulations regarding hiring, screening, training, supervising, controlling, disciplining, assigning deputies and/or
26

corrections officers and/or employees to their duties within the Broward County Sheriff’s Office.
117. At all times material hereto, the Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II was responsible for adopting and implementing rules and regulations with regard to medical treatment, housing, security and monitoring of mentally ill pre-trial detainees. Additionally, said Defendant was responsible for ensuring that his employees and agents performed their duties in compliance with the Consent Decree. (Exhibit A, C).
118. Said Defendant was deliberately indifferent to his duties in that he either expressly or impliedly acknowledged and assented to the failure to train, supervise, control or otherwise screen employees of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office including, but not limited to, Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC, PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., PATRICK TIGHE, JOHN DOES, JOSEPH D’ELIA, GEORGE WILLIAMS, JOHN and JANE DOES, J. and J. DOES, for dangerous propensities, lack of training and/or skill or other characteristics making said officers, employees and/or agents unfit to perform their duties at the Broward County Jail facilities.
119. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, If, was aware of the problems and conditions existing in the Broward County Jail System such as inadequate manpower, monitoring, classification, screening, assessment, medical care and medication of mentally
27

ill inmates. 120. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II, was deliberately
indifferent to the safety of the inmates by failing to remedy these problems, even though he had notice of them.
121. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE II’s deliberate indifference to these problems caused a substantial risk of harm to the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. and other inmates housed in Broward County Jail facilities.
122. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II has failed to properly train, and/or supervise his deputies and/or corrections officers and/or employees and/or agents in the treatment, care, security and housing of mentally ill pre-trial detainees. Despite clear warnings, his officers, agents and/or employees have fafled to adequately monitor, classify, screen, assess, house, and/or protect mentally ill pre-trial detainees.
123. The conduct of Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II in his failure to train, supervise and/or discipline his deputies and/or corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees, was deliberately indifferent to the constitutional rights of all persons, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., in violation of 42 U.S.C. §1983.
124. Defendant JENNE abdicated his policymaking and oversight responsibilities, thereby allowing the deputy sheriffs/corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees to
28

ignore the requirements of the Consent Decree and the policies of the Broward Sheriff’s Office.
125. The Defendant JENNE has maintained a system of review of the treatment, care, security and housing of the mentally pretrial detainees, and complaints thereof, which has failed to identify the improper treatment by his officers and/or agents and/or employees and to subject officers and/or agents and/or employees who fail to properly classify, monitor, treat, assess, medicate, protect, and house mentally ill pre-trial detainees to appropriate discipline, supervision, dismissal and/or retraining, to the extent that it has become a defacto policy and custom of Defendant JENNE to tolerate the improper treatment, security and housing of mentally ill pretrial detainees.
126. The foregoing acts, omissions, policies or customs of Defendant JENNE caused deputies and/or corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees to believe there exists no duty to properly classify, monitor, treat, assess, medicate, protect and house mentally ill pre-trial detainees, with the foreseeable result that deputies and/or corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees are likely to ignore mentally ill pre-trial detainees and endanger the safety and lives of inmates, thereby risking their safety and continued life.
127. The deliberate indifference of this Defendant violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the decedent
29

PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. for which 42 U.S.C. §1983 provides a remedy.
128. The above acts and omissions of Defendant JENNE constitute a course of conduct and failure to act amounting to deliberate indifference to the rights, health, safety and welfare of the decedent and those similarly situated, resulting in the deprivation of the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE JR.’s constitutional rights under state and federal law.
129. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
COUNT VII- 42 U,S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMM~SSIO~RS 130. The Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 129.
3O

131. With respect to the duties and powers of the Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, said Defendant fa±led in all aspects with regard to control of the Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II.
132. At all times material hereto, the Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS permitted and tolerated a pattern and practice of abuse of lawful authority, in reckless disregard of both constitutional prohibitions and guarantees under color of state law, thereby misusing the power possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because Defendants were clothed with the authority of state law. As a result, some Broward County Sheriff’s Office deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees were caused and encouraged to believe that members of the public such as pre-trial detainees could be subjected to abuse of lawful authority and that said abuse would in fact be permitted by the Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
133. The acts of Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II represent an official policy of THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS and the policy making authority for the County has been delegated to said Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II.
134. The Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS has maintained no meaningful system of review of incidents involving abuse of lawful authority and complaints
31

thereof, and, therefore, has failed to identify incidents of abuse of lawful authority by said law enforcement officers and/or agents and/or employees, and to subject said law enforcement officers and/or agents and/or employees to appropriate discipline, dismissal, closer supervision and/or retraining, to the extent that it has become the defacto policy and custom of THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS to tolerate the abuse of lawful authority by deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees.
135. As a direct and proximate cause of the acts described above, in violation of 42 U.S.C. §1983, the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. has suffered the loss of his life as heretofore alleged.
136. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
32

~T~E~FO~, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory damages against Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
HEYER & ASSOCIATES, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 1311 S.E. 4~ Ave. Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33316 (954)5~22 / (561) Fax: ~.~ 522-4955 //
33

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

OLLIE CARRUTHERS, ot
Plaintiffs,
VS.
RON COCHRAN, as Sheriff of Broward County, GERALD F. THOMPSON, SYLVIA PO1TIER, JOHN P. HART, SCOTT I. COWAN, LORI N. PARRISH, SUZANNE N. GUNZBURGER, and ~OHN E. RODS’FROM, in their capacities as County Commissioners of Broward County, and HENRY L. TEMPLETON, as Director of Department of" Correctior~ and R.ehabililation,
Defendants.

Case No. 76-CIV-WMH

8TIPULATI0~ FOR gNTRY 01 CONSgNT DV~RKg

pLAINTIFF’S i
EXHIBIT I ""

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT DECREE This Stipulation is entered into by the parties to resolve cIaims asserted by the

plaintiffs in their Complaint as amended against all defendants and to provide, for ~’etention of jurisdiction and permanent injunctive relief. De~"endants withdraw their Offer of Judgment

and same shall be deemed without force and effect.

PARTIES Theindividual named plaintiffs are OLLIE CARRUTHEtLg, THOMAS ZERVOS

AND GEP~LD TICE. This action was ~rtified as a class action. The defendants aze the Sheriff of Broward County, currently RON COCHRAN, end the Broward County Commissioners, currently GERALD F. TI-IOMP$ON, SYLVIA POITIER, .IOFl~b[ P. t-[ART,

SCOT’I" I. COWAN, LORI N. PARRISH, SUZANNE N. GUNZBURGER, azzd IOHN E. RODSTROM, in their capacities es County Commissioners of Broward County, and HENRY L. TEMPLETON, as Director of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. These

persons, in their official capacities, have been substituted for the origin~l defenders by operation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d).

GENERAL PI~OVISIONS

.-

I. The original Complaint in this c~use was filed pro se against the then named

defendants in their official capacities. Thereafter, plaintiffs, then represented by counsel,

tiled First and Second Amended Complaints alleging, inter alia. that det’endants had failed to carry out their statutory and constitutional duties relating to the maintenance and operation of the Broward County jails and further alleging that, as a result of defendants’ acts and

omissions, taken under color of state law, defendants had caused plaintiffs continued confinement under conditions that violated p[aintiff‘s’ constitutional rights.
2. The Second Amended Complaint asserts causes of action against defendants arising under, and jurisdiction pursuant to, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983and 1988; 28 U.S.C..§§ 1331, 1343(a)(3) and (4), 2201 and 2202; and the Constitution of the United States, specifically but not limited to the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments thereto. The action seeks declaratory judgment and preliminary and permanent injunctive relief.
3. Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 19 of the United States District Court, in and for the Southern District of Florida, this action was certified as a class action on November 9, 1979 on behalf of all persons who have been, axe being, or will be confined in the Broward County corrections and rehabilitation facilities. By agreement of the parties this includes any jails that Broward County or the Sheriff of Broward County may in the future operate or contract with a private company to operate.
4. Conditions of confinement have previously been determined to be unconstitutional. The population caps established by this.court were essentially continuously exceeded until the summer of 1992, despite the $1,000 per day fine levied for exce,eding"the cap.
5. The parties agree that progress h~s been made in addressing the matters raised by plaintiffs during this action and that further improvement can be obtained by implementing the agreements and achieving the goals set forth herein.
6. Counsel for the plaintiffs represents that it is desirable and in the best interests of the members of" the Plaintiff’ Class to settle the issues resolved herein by entering into ~his
2

agreement. The comment of’ the members of the Class shall be solicited and considered as provided by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 2:] (e).
7. The det’endants consider it desirable and in their best interests to settle the claims brought.against them and their predecessors in office by entering into this stipulation. Implementation of this stipulation resolves the differences of the pa~ies regarding conditions of confinement in the Broward County corrections and rehabilitation system.
8. This Agreement shall bind all parties to this action as welt as their successors in office. Defendants agree to use their best efforts to make the requirements of this agreement known to each of their employees, deputies, and agents who are responsible for the operation of detention facilities within Broward County, Florids. The defendants shall ensure that the relevant requirements of this agreement are made known to and complied with by any private parties with whom the Sheriff or County now contracts or shall in the.future contract with to pro~,/de good.s or services to any Broward County correction and rehabilitation facilities.
NOTICE TO CLASS. 9. Pursuant to Rule 23(e), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Notice of Proposed Setdement shall be distributed and published to the class in the manner and format approved by the Court including posting in each housing area in a place.accessible to inmates ge.nerally, including those inmates in administrative, disciplinary or solitary confinement, which notice shall be posted and distributed in English, Spanish, and Creole. Sufficient copies of this agreement will be kept in each pod and made available to any inmate requesting same.
Class members shall have until the date ordered by the Court to file with the Clerk of the Court any written objections to this proposed serdement. The Clerk shall forward
3

copies of" any objections or inquiries to the Special Master and counsel for the parties. The Sheriff of’ Broward County shall provide tree paper, envelopes a~d postage to inmates desirous of t’iling objections to this settlement. Such communications with the Court shall be considered legal mail. All objections will be considered fully by the Court..
STATEMENT OF STANDARDS 10. It is the intent of this Agreement to achieve responsible and professional corrections and rehabilitation practice in all Broward County fac.ilities and to facilitate and encourage p~ersonal contact and interaction between staff and inmates. Accordingly, all Broward County correctional ~acilities shall be operated and maintained, at a minimum, in compliance with applicable t’ederal and Florida law, and the following standards:
a. Chapter 33-8 of the Florida Administrative Code b. American Correctional Association Standards for Adult Local Detention Facilities (currently 3rd Edition). c. National Commission on Correctional Health Care Standards of’ medical, dental and mental health services. d. Physical and operatic.hal standards (that would include policies and procedure) as developed by the defendants which shall, at a minimum,’apply the most stringent provisions of the aforementioned applicable law and standards and address all of’ the applicable standards set forth in the American Correctional Association Standards for Adult Local Detention Facilities. Pending ACA accreditation the defendants agree to make good faith efforts to substantially comply with such standards,
4

e. Realizing [he impracticality of reproducing lhe entire set of ACA Standards and 33-8 for distribution to the plaintiff c~ass as part of the comment process set forlh herein,

and recognizing the imporlance of conveying the intent and scope of various provisions of

this agreement, the parties, by way of i[]ustration~and example, hereby s~t forth some of the

standards that shah apply:

I. C]assification_ Inmates shall be classified to ~he most appropriate [eve[ of custody

~nd programming bo~h on admission and on review of their status. The classification process

shah inc[ude a[[ information available or obtainable from ~he social, legal and stir-reported

medic~[ history of the detained person. The primary objective of classification is to

inmates in th~ type of quarters that b~st meet ~heir needs and to provid~ reasonable Protection

for the inmate and oth~r inmates. Inmates shall be assigned to housing with particular .car~ to the assignment of persons who have a history of, or exhibit aggressiveness toward other-

inmates. Each facility shall have a designated classification officer. Insofar as facilities

permit, no inmate shall be subjected to more restrictive conditions of confinement, including

but not limited to freedom of movement within the institution, and out-of-cell time, than those justified by the inmate’s classification..

2. ReHg_ious Practices

"

a. The defendants shall not ~ubstantially burden an inmate’s exercise of

religion even if the burden resuRs from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in

subsection (b). b. The defendants may substantially burden an inmate’s exercise of religion
only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person is in furtherance of a

compelling governmental interest; and is the least restrictive means o£ furthering that compelling governmental interest.
c. Each facility shall appoint a chaplin to coordinate religious services and
_Use of Force Force shall be used only as a last resort to control inmates and only to the degree that is reasonably necessary in self-defense, to prevent escape, to prevent injury to a person or property, to quell a disturbance, or when the inmate exercises physical resistance to a ~awf’ul command. All security and custody personnel sha~[ be trained in approved methods of self-defense and the use of force as a last resort to control inmates. Instruments of restraint, such as handcuffs, irons, and straight-jackets, shall not be applied longer than is absolutely necessary and never applied as punishment and shall be applied only with the approval of the Facility Administrator or designee.
4. Housing The parties agree that each inmate is entitled to living facilities such that no inmate is required to sleep or eat on the floor, except as may be directed by a licensed medical or mental health professional. Temperatures shall be maintained within a normal comfort range. Special inmates, who present a threat to the staff, other inmates, or themselves, should be separated and closely supervised. Special inmates may include the mentally ill, alcoholic, drug addict, sex deviate or suicide risk, or persons with contagious or communicable diseases. Any inmate who is identified as a suicide risk shall not be housed in a "single occupancy cell" unless the inmate is observed by direct visual observation 24 hours each day. Close supervision for special inmates shall include regular, documented sight
6

checks by correctional officers or medical staff at intervals not to exceed [ 5 minutes. Special housing shall be provided to inma{es for medical reasons upon orders of’ the facility physician.
S. Recreation Absent physician restriction or discipfinary action, inmates shall have access to recreational opportunities and equipment, inciuding four hours weekly of physical exercise outside the cell and outdoors when weather permits. Sufficient space, equipment and staffing to permit both individual activities and group activities shall be provided.
6. ~Visitation Rules and regulations pertaining to the time and conduct of visitation shall be posted for the knowledge of" the inmates and prospective visitors. A copy of’ the rules shall be given to each inmate. Visitation periods shall be permitted so that each inmate in general population has the opportunity for at least two hours of visitation each week.
7. Pro_~zrams All correctional facilities Shall make maximum use of programs available through local community resources. At least one empIoyee in eaclx detention facility shall act as liaison between the facility and the community agencies that offer needed programs ~d services.
$. Medical. Dental and Mental Health Services Inmates in all facilities will be afforded medical, dental and mental he, alth services, medication, app[imaces and medical related housing consistent with the requirement~ of paragraphs 10a through d above.
PR.OCESS 1 !. The defendants recognize the importance of‘ achieving American Correctional Association accreditation pursuant to the Standards for Adult Local Detention Facilities and agree to atttdn such accreditation.
7

|2. The Broward County Sheriff, through the Director of Corrections and Rehabilitation, will cooperate with Broward County oft’icials to identi~y and plan for the

actions necessary to achieve the objectives of this Agreement.

13. The parties recognize that the objectives of" dzis Agreement can best be achieved

by formulation and implementation of’ a plan which incorporates the following elements and

which provides for a schedule and implementation. Accordingly. the parties adopt and agree

to implement the schedule set forth herein:
\
A. Organization

The Sheriff of Broward County shall develop and carry out a reorganization

plan for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation that defines the mission of the

agency and all of its facilities. The plan will include the organization and management structures, stat’fing, operational budget and implementation schedule necessary to carry out the

mission of the agency and its facilities.

Task or Activity

Due Date

A. _Or_~anizational Issues A1 Define Orgtmization

Done

A2 Define Required Resources

Done

A3 Develop Implementation Schedule

9/15/94

A4 Appoint Planning Manager A5 Schedule Required Resources A6 Schedule Funding for Required Resources

Done 10/1/94 10/1/94

AT Define Internal Monitoring and Reporting Process

10/3 !/94

8

(

B. Inmate Population Assumptions The defendants shall develop a plan to project or forecast the demand for prisoner

beds or supervision programs. Such plan shall periodically update the projection for the prisoner population.

Task or Activity B. Inmate Pooulation As~um~;~tions

Due Date

B I 5 Year Intake Assumptions

6/I/95

B2 :5 Year Average Daily Population Assumptions

6/I/95

B3 Forecast Assumptions B4 Develop Forecast Update Mechanism
C. Jail Population Management Plan

6/I/95 6/I/95

The Sheriff shall develop a Jail Population Management Plan based on policies and resources that are consistent with the population projections, The Sheriff shah develop a

plan of how the prisoner population will be managed. The plan will include, but not be

limited to, a Prisoner Classification Plan, a Housing Unit Assignment Plan, and an

Alternatives to Incarceration Plan.

Task or Activity

" Due Date

C. .Iaii P0pulati~onManagement Plan

CI Develop an Inmate Classification Plan

411/95

C2 Develop a Housing Unit Assignment Plan

4/1/95

C3 Develop an Alternatives to Incarceration Plan

4/1/95

C4 Develop an Inmate Program and Activity’Plan

4/1/95

9

(

D. Physical and Operational Standards The defendants shall develop physical and operational standards for Broward County

detention facilities which meet the standards set forth in this agreement. De~’endants shall then apply these standards in the operation of the facilities.

Task or Activity D. Physical and Operationsl~tandards DI Develop Physical Plant Standards D2 Develop Operational Standards

Due Date
4/1/95 4/1/95

D3 Audit Existing Plants and Operations

411/95

D4 Develop Improvement Plan

4/!195

D5 ACA Accreditation

e~.ghteen months from agreement

E. Capital Projects Management Plan

Broward County, with the Sheriff’s participation, shall develop a Capital

Projects Management Plan to provide funding for renovation of existing facilities and construction of proposed faciliti¢s in conformity with the intent of this agreement. Said plan

sh=di take into accoun~ the necessary management systems arid structures for tk~ proper operation of such facilities. It is understood that such plan will be subject to review and ’

revision to reflect changes in confinement population. Task or Activity E. Capital Project~ Management El. Develop a Capita[ Project Management Process E2 Develop a Funding Scheme

Due Date
5/t/95 6/!/95

l0

E3 Develop a Schedule to Meet Required Capacity F. Operational Management Plan

6/I/95

The Sheriff shall develop an operational management plan that shah address the development of a documentation system including polic~y directives, operating procedures,

post orders, staffing plan, and address all necessary training.

Task or Activity

Due Date

F. Op_e.rational Management Plan

FI Develop Documentation, Policy and Procedure System

eighteen months from agreement

F2 Develop Staffing Plan

1/1/95

F3 Develop Training Plans

1/1/95

F4 Develop Transition Plan for New Service Delivery System 1/1/95

G. Management Information Systems Plan

The Sheriff shall develop a plan to provide management information systems, to

suppon the actions called for in this agreement. To this end the Sheriff, after consultation with Broward County, shall identify what information is needed and how it will be managed

to support and perform the requirements of this.agreement. The parties recognize that the

Sheriff does not have exclusive Control over. such information. Task or Activity G. Management Information Sy~eml; PI.an GI Develop a MIS Plan to Support All Activities

Due Date 6/1/95

CAPACITY AGREEMENT II

CAPACITY AGREEMENT 14. The parties agree that each inmate shall be entitled to a be, d, as set forth in 33-8 and as otherwls© provided for herein. Authorized capacity of this system shall be determined by the number of available beds subject to the standards s~t forth in Chapter 33-8 of the Florida Administrative Code. The current authorized capacity of the Broward County Corrections and Rehabilitation system is 3°656 inmates. It is agreed that when the inmate population in the Broward County Department of’Corrections and Rehabilitation facilities reaches 3,2I 8, or within eighty-eighl; percent (88%) of its authorized capacity, the Sh~i.fl" and the Director oftheBroward" County Deparlment ofCorr~t[ons ~ Rehabilitation will ¢xer~is~ ¢veay interned me~.hanihn or option within their 14¢tl authority to speed administrative decisions and sztions to control the growth of the inmate population. The Public Ssf’¢ty Coordinating Council, or its suoces.~r, shall be notified by the Shertffwhen the inmate population ¢xce~s eighty-eight percent (88%) of|Is authorized capacity. When the inmate popolation reaches ninety-five percent (95%) of its authorized capacity, currently 3,473 inmates, ~he SheriIl’shall request the Public Safety Coordinating Counc~ or its successor, and its representative justlce agencies and their successors, to carry out the available ~sms as developed in accordance wi|h Florida Statute 95 |.26 to control the inmate population. The Broward County Department el’ Corre~t|ons and Rehabilitation shail not retain more than 3,656 Inmates at any given time. Upon attaining the rated capacity o/’:I,656 inmates no further inmate admission shall be permitted. This admi~on moratorium may not be avoided except upon extreme conditions created by disaster, insurrection, riot or a shrd[ar emergency or catastrophe. IIowever, nothing in this agreement prohibits the Shcri/1’ofBroward County from transf’en’Ing inmates to other loc~ or out of county facilities or petitioning appropriate local crlminai just/ce authoHtles for relict" from these overcrowded conditions. COMPLIANCE MONI TOR} NO
12

Judge Hoeveler’s Objection:
Page 12, last paragraph should read:
or catastrophe. "Nothing in this agreement prohibits the Sheriff from transferring prisoners to other local or out-of-county facilities or from petitioning appropriate local criminal Justice authorities for relief from the over crowded conditions."

15. On submission of each plan required by the planning process described in the "Process" section of this agreement, together with that ptan’s implementation schedule, the Special Master shall insure that Plaintiff’s counsel receives copies of the materials submitted. Plaintiff’s counsel shall have fifteen (15) days from receipt to submit any comment.
16. If plaintiffs object to defendant’s proposed plan or its implementation schedule, the parties, with the assistance of the Special Master, or if he is unavailable an assigned federal magistrate, shall attempt to resolve these differences. If such differences are not
,..
resolved within thirty (30) days of the submission of the objections, the defendant’s plan, the objections, and any recommendations of the Special Master or magistrate will be submitted to the CouP. Copies of any such recommendations shall be furnished to counsel for the parties. Within ten (10) days or" the submission to the Court and parties, either party may request a hearing, or the Court may order a hearing. If a hearing is not timely requested, the recommendation shall be accepted as uncontested by the parties.
17. Once a plan and its implementation schedule are approved by the Court, defendants shall carry it out. Whenever practical, parts of each plan shall be presumed to be separable such that objection to one part of a plan shall not delay implementation of other parts that can proceed independently so long asno objection exists to those other parts.
18. The Special Master or his desighee shall monitor compliance with the terms of this agreement including implementation of the plans approved by the Court, the schedule set forth in the "Process" section, and the standards set forth in the "Statement of Standards’. section. The Special Master shall provide the Court and counsel for the parties with status reports on compliance with the schedule, standards, and all approved plans and the status of
13

each required plan, beginning three (3) months after approval of this agreement by the Court and at three (3) month intervals thereafter or with such other frequency or at any time as the Court may direct. The compliance status will be rated using the following classifications:
a. The Special Master concludes that the defendants are in substantial compliance with the particular requirement.
b. The Special Master concludes that the defendants are in compliance with a particular requirement, subject to specified exceptions and/or qualifications as noted in the report.
, c. The Special Master cannot make a finding because of insufficient evidence, unresolved ambiguity as to what actions are necessary for compliance, or a need for additional professional expertise.
d. The Special Master concludes that the defendants are not in compliance with the particular requirement.
19. Prior to submitting a status report.to the court the Special Master shall furnish each party with a copy of his proposed report. The parties will then have ten (10) days .to comment directly to the Special Master on the contents of his report. The Special Master will submit his final report to the Court and the parties within ten (10) days of receipt of the parties’ comments. The parties will then have ten (10) days in which to request a hearing regarding any remaining disagreements with the final report. If a hearing is not requested in a timely manner, the Special Master’s findings Shall be accepted as uncontested.
20. Hearings on defendant’s eomplihace shall be scheduled not earlier than thirty (30) days from the submission of the Special Master’s status report.
2i. In the event a hearing is requested, the Special Master will hold a pre-hearing conference with the parties, at least five (5) days prior to the compliance hearing before the
14

Court. The subject report and compliance issues will be reviewed by the parties at the preheating conference.
22. The current practice which affords prisoners free telephone access to plaintiff’s counsel for reporting of complaints of conditions of confinement, which allegations are then investigated by plaintiff’s counsel or his staff, will be modified in practice by this agreement as follows:
a. The Sheriff will implement within five (5) days of this agreement a Grievance policy. This policy and operational procedure will provide for the written submission of prisoner grievances and complaints. The Sheriff will forward to plaintiff’s counsel copies of same on a weekly b~is. Determinations of all grievan, ces and complaints shall be forwarded to plaintiff’s counsel on a weekly basis.
b. Upon implementation of the aforementioned policy and procedure, plair~tiff’s counsel, upon receipt of a telephone call from a prisoner shall record the caller’s name, necessary identification information, and the nature of the complaint or grievance. Except in the case of serious medical complaint or where the matter is in the nature of an emergency, the prisoner shall be informed that he or she is required to. utilize and exhaust the administrative remedies set forth in the grievance procedure before requesting direct assistattce from plaintiffs counsel. By way of response to such non-emergency or non-serious medical calls, plaintiff’s counsel shall forward to each caller a letter confirming the call, the nature of the call, and the requirement of exhaustion of administrative remedies pursuant to the grievance procedure. Copies of such confirming correspondence shall be forwarded to John Tiedeberg, Federal Court Liaison, and to the person designated by the Sheriff to receive same.
15

c. This provision and modification of plaintiff counsel’s practice in receiving and responding to prisoner complaints is intended to record and report complaints and grievances and to record and report their disposition. It does not prohibit any member of the class from calling or communicating with plaintiff’s counsel. Free telephone access to plaintiff’s counse~ shall continue during the monitoring period and notice shall be posted in each housing unit identifying plaintiff counsel, the phone number and explaining the proc provided in subparagraph (b) above.
\
23. Compliance monitoring wil! be by the Special Master or his designee. 24. Pending ACA accreditation the parties agree to meet to clarify issues and determine the status of" the various elements of’ this agreement.The parties will meet monthly until such time as all parties agrep upon less frequent meetings. 25. Compliance monitoring shall c~ntinueuntil ACA accreditation or order of the Court. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT
26. Upon Court approval of this stipulation the terms of this agreement shall be
incorporated into the Consent Decree. The defendants shall be permanently enjoined from violating the terms of the Consent Decree. Defendants’ obligations regarding ACh~ compliance shall terminate upon defendant’s achieving ACA accreditation. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms and conditions of the Consent Decree.
ALLOCATION OF FINE MONEY 27. The individual plaintiffs named in the Second Amended Complaint, OLLIE CARRUTHERS. THOMAS ZERVOS, and GERALD "lICE are each awarded the sum of
16

$25,000 as damages. Such sums to be paid from the fine monies paid into the registry of the Court. The parties will make good faith efforts to locate these individuals, including appropriate publication and records search. Any portion of this award not paid by the end of the Compliance Monitoring period shall be disbursed by the Court for the welfare of" the inmate population as determined by agreement of the parties or hearing before the Court.
28. Fine monies may be disbursed to pay for expert fees incurred by the Special Master during the Compliance Monitoring period or [’or such other purposes as may be appropriate in conjunction with such monitoring.
29. During the compliance monitoring period, and upon its conclusion, any remaining fine monies may be disbursed by agreement of the parties for the welfare of the inmates. Absent such agreement, any party may apply to the Court for disbursement of fine monies for such purposes as the Court, upon notice and hearing, shall determine to be appropriate.
FEES AND COSTS 30. During the Compliance Monitoring period provided herein the Special Master, the Federal Court Liaison, and plaintiffs’ counsel shall submit itemized monthly statements of time and costs to the Office of the General Counsel, Broward County, for payment within ten (I0) days of their submission, H0ur[y billing Of the Special Master and plainti~s’ counsel shall be paid at the.rate of $125.00 per hour. Hourly billing of the Federal Court Liaison shall be paid at the rate of $75.00 per hour. If a dispute arises regarding fees set forth in the statements, and such dispute cannot be resolved among the parties, the matter will be assigned to a federal magistrate in Broward County for arbitration.
17

ENTIRE AGREEMENT 3 I. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties. All prior

negotiations, discussions and agreements are merged into this agreement.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF BR.OWARD COUNTY COMMISSION .

32. Attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement is a certified copy of the

minutes of the County Commission held on

, I994 wherein the Browatd

County Commission. approved this agreement.
’STIPULATED AND AGREED this

day of ,}’uly, 1994.

~komey for Sheriff Cochrm and Director Templeton ALEXANDER COCALIS Attorney f.o#-Broward County Commissi~mers ,
15

Barbara A. Heyer (FL)

9 eyer Associates, P.A.
Attorneys at Law

1311 5.E. 4th Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316

June 21, 1999

Broward: (954) 522-4922 Palm Beach: (561) 833-1068
Fax: (954) 522-4955

CERTIFIED MAIL NO: P157-886-142
Sheriff Kenneth C. Jenne, II 2601 W. Broward Blvd. Fort Lauderdale, F1 33311

Re: Peter Cottone, Jr. Date of Incident: 4/7/99
Dear Sheriff Jenne:
Please be informed that our firm represents the interests of the family of Peter Cottone, Jr. with regard to his death as a result of the incident at the North Broward Detention Center on April 7, 1999.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Florida Statutes §768.28 of, our intent to bring a lawsuit on behalf of the Estate of Peter Cottone, Jr.. In addition, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Chapter 119, I am requesting that we be provided copies of the following materials:
1. All documents reflecting the incident at issue. These materials shall include all statements, photographs,
reports, audio and video tapes, witness lists, lists of persons interviewed, etc.
2. All documentation reflecting the follow-up investigation of the incident at issue. These materials shall include all reports or other materials prepared in anticipation of, or as a result of, any such investigation including all statements, photographs, reports, video tapes, witness lists, lists of persons interviewed, etc.
3. All documentation reflecting Peter Cottone, Jr. ’s stay at the North Broward Detention Center and any other Broward County Detention facility These materials shall include all daily reports, medical re)orts, incident reports, etc..
~ pLAII~iTIFF’S EXHIBIT
,,

Heyer & Associates, P.A.
Cottone ltr. - p.2

4. All documentation reflecting Widnel Charles’ stay at the North Broward Detention Center and any other Broward County Detention facility. These materials shall include all daily reports, medical reports, incident reports, etc..

5. The contract between the Broward County Sheriff’s office and the health care provider which was in effect on April 7, 1999.

6. Any consent decrees and/or court orders pertaining to the Broward County Detention/Jail facilities for the period from January i, 1995 to the present.

7.

Any grand jury findings pertaining to the Broward County

Detention/Jail facilities for the period from Januar~ i, 1995 to

the present.

Finally, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Chapter 119, please make the following materials available for my review:

I. Any logbooks, lists or other materials in your possession or control reflecting incidents of inmate misconduct, injuries and/or deaths. These materials shall include all incidents, whether investigated or not, and whether filed by inmates or internally, covering the period from January i, 1995 to the present.

2. The personnel and internal affairs files of all members of the Broward County Sheriff’s office who came in contact with either Peter Cottone, Jr. and/or Widnel Charles during their incarceration at the Broward County Jail Facility. These files shall include any supervisory personnel of the officers who had direct contact with either Peter Cottone, Jr. and/or Widnel Charles.

3. Any documentation which reflects the responsibilities and duties of the health care provider at the North Broward Detention Center on the date of the incident.

4. All Broward County Detention/Jail facilities inspection reports done by the Florida Department of Corrections from January I, 1995 to the present.

5. Any and all reports pertaining to the staffing of the Broward County mail jail facility and the North Broward Detention Center, i.e. number of employees, number of employees required, etc., from January i, 1995 to the present.

6. Any and all reports relating to claimed or actual

¯-qTeyer & Associate, P.A.
Cottone itr. p.3
medical shortcomings within the Broward County main jail and the North Broward Detention Center, including the forensic unit, from January I, 1995 to the present.
7. Any records or reports pertaining to any inmate injuries or deaths from January i, 1995 to the present.
I would appreciate it if copies of the requested items be provided to me within forty-five days. We will, of course, pay reasonable copy charges for these documents. With regard to the documents being requested for review, please have these documents available to me by July 30, 1999.
Thank you for your anti.operation"

BAH/phr cc: Peter Cottone

~

bara A Heyer

US Postal Serv/ce

Fleceipt for Certified Mail

No }r~sutance

Do r

Coverage Provide~.

O S~NDER: Complete items 1, ~nd 2 when additional services are demre~, and com~)ete items 3 and 4. Put your address i~ the "RE~URN TO’" S~ace e~ ~he reverse stde. F~ture to do th~s will ~rever~t rh~s card from bei~ ~eturned to ~ou. ~£~ £ece~9[ ~e wi~zq~ ~he nam~ ~ ~he person d~tiwred ~o and tahned dcahetec~ofbdoxe[leivse)[{~o.r Faodrdiatidonda~lnsaelrveiecesrs} requested.

~. ~ Show to whom delivered, date. and addresses’s.addreas. {~tr~ c~r~eJ

2. ~ Restricted Delive:y ~lro thorpe)

3. Article Addressed to:

4, Article Number

Sheriff Kenneth Jenne

5. Signature -- Addressee
x

._.9-.~- ~1/

P157 886 142

Type of Service:

F~ Registered

[] Insured

L_/ Cer~ilied [] Express Mail

l_J COD ~ RefotruMrneRrcehcaen;dpisre

Always obtain signature of addressee Or agent and DATE D6LIV6RED.

8. Addressee’s Address (ONLY ~/ requested and fee paid~

6, Signature - Agent X

7. Date o,~iver// /~

,,~ c~,~ :4H1 1. ~. 1989

,u.s.~.RO. 19~9-238-8~5

DOMESTIC RETURN RECE|PT

Barbara A. Heyer

HE YER & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
Attomevs at Law
January 28, 2000

1311 $.E. 4~’ Avenue 5o~ Lauderdale, Florida 33316
Broward: (954) 522-4922 Palm Beach: (561) 833-1068
Fax: (954) 522-4955

CERTIFIED ~O: P 157 886 149

Jean Byasse, Esq. Prison Health Services Office of General Counsel 105 West Park Drive Suite 300 Brentwood, Tennessee 47027

Dear Ms. Byasse:

RE: Peter Cottone Date of Incident: 4/7/99

Please be informed that our firm represents the interests of the family of Peter Cottone, Jr. with regard to his death as a result of the incident at North Broward Detention Center on April 7, 1999.

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Florida Statutes §768.28 and ~768.57, of our intent to bring a lawsuit on behalf of the Estate of Peter Cottone, Jr.. In addition, pursuant to
Chapter 119., Florida Statutes, I am requesting that we be provided copies of the following materials:

i. All documents, materials, etc. reflecting the incident
at issue. These materials shall include all statements, photographs, reports, audio and video tapes, witness lists, lists of persons interviewed, etc..

2. All documentation reflecting the follow-up investigation of the incident at issue. These materials shall include all reports or other materials prepared in anticipation of, or as a result of any such investigation including all statements, photographs, reports, video tapes, witness lists, lists of persons interviewed, etc..

3. All documentation reflecting Peter Cottone’s Jr.’s

stay at the North Broward Detention Center and any other Broward County Detention facility. These materials shall include all daily reports, medical reports, incident reports, etc.. Enclosed please find a medical release signed by Richard Cottone, Personal Representative of the Estate of Peter Cottons, Jr..
4. The contract between the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and EMSA which was in effect on April 7, 1999.
5. Any documentation which reflects the responsibilities and duties of the health care provider at the North Broward Detention Center on the date of the incident.
6. Any and all reports pertaining to the staffing of the Broward County main jail facility and the North Broward Detention Center, i.e. number of employees, number of employees required, etc., from January i, 1995 to the present.
7. Any and all reports relating to claimed or actual medical shortcomings within the Broward County main jail and the North Broward Detention Center, including the forensic unit, from January l, 1995 to the present.
8. Any records or reports pertaining to any inmate injuries or deaths at the Broward County main jail and/or the North Broward Detention Center from January i, 1995 to the present.
I would appreciate it if copies of the requested items be provided to me within forty-five days. We will, of course, pay reasonable copy charges for these documents.
Thank you for your anticipated cQ0P.~tion.

P 157 886
US Postal Service
Receipt for Certified Mail
No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use for International Mail (See reverse)

VeD~/t rulz~ yours,

Barba a . geyer

O SENDER: Complete items 1 and 2 when additional services are desired, end complete items 3 and 4.

Put your sddtess in the "RETURN ,70" Space dO the reverse side. Failu,e to do this will prevent this card

from being returned to you. The return receipt fee will prQ~ide yo., the name ot the person delivered to and

the date of delivery. For additional fees the fol[ow~ng serwces are availaSle. Consult p~stmaster for fees

and check boxles) fer additional service(s) reques}ed.

1. [] Show to whom delivered,~date, and addressee’s address. (Erlra.charge)

2. L~ RreEsxttrriacctehadrgDe)elivery

3. Article Addressed to:

¢..,~rticle Number.

"~y’pe of Servi6e:

5, S~gnatu~e -- AddressSe X 6 " natur~- Ag

for ~e~chandise Always obta,n slgnalure of adaressee
8. Addressee’s Address (ONL~ i/ requested and fee paid)

,S ,o,m 3811, .~p,. m~9 ~ ~r~

. ~oMEsTIC ,ETURN RECE,PT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case Number 76-6086-CV-Hoeveler

0LLIE CARRUTHERS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

RON COCHRAN, et al., Defendants.

~cSLlD£CRAOKRFLIUOF.tSS.~,,AJDU. °I~S’M~TKtA-EMCIT,

ORDER APPROVING~SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND~SM~SS~NG CASE

This case came before the court on the Stipulation for Entry

of Consent Decree agreed to by the parties on July 27, 1994. The

court held a fairness hearing on. class objections to the consent

decree on January 20, .1995. After consideration and review of the class objections, the court finds that the consent decree is .fair

and reasonable as to all parties. Notice to the class was provided by publication and posting to

the extent demonstrated by the record. None of the parties or

counsel present at the fairness hearing on January 20, 1995

contended that the matter Should not proceed to conclusion due to

failure of adequate notice.

,r

There has been a shared understanding of principles by counsel

for the parties herein which is reflected in a binding agreement

entered into by and among the parties on July 27, 1994 (as amended

and approved). That agreement is incorporated herein by reference;

it is approved by the court and, pursuant to these understandings and the court’s approval, all parties conclude that there is no

need to further litigate this cause.

A true original of the

agreement is attached to this order as Exhibit A. Late requests by class members for exclusion from the
settlement will be accepted within thirty days of the entry of this order. Requests for exclusion filed after the expiration of the thirty day period, however, will be rejected.
In view of the above, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED, and the parties do consent, that the attached stipulation and agreement of settlement be entered as a consent order in this case and be binding upon the parties on both sides as well as their successors in interest and in office; that this cause be dismissed; that the court will retain jurisdiction pursuant to the terms of the agreement (for a reasonable period of time) for the purpose of implementation and enforcement of the agreement and such other matters as may be germane to the effective administration of. the agreement.
It is further ORDERED that, for the period described in the agreement, Professor Howard Messing will continue to serve as Special Master and Mr. John Tiederberg will continue to serve as the court’s Monitor. Magistrate Judge Lurana Snow is appointed to act, when requested by the parties and in the absence of ~he Special Master, to resolve such problems as may arise during the remaining workout period during which this court will retain jurisdiction.
It is further ORDERED that as of January 20, 1995, with the dismissal of this case as an active file, there shall be no additional fines as the parties will be proceeding under the
2

consent agreement. The Clerk of this court is presently holding fins payments mad~ by Broward County. It has been the purpose of this court to use the fine monies to benefit the citizens and county government of Broward in ways agreeable to the, parties herein; the court retains jurisdiction over these funds during the workout period above described and pending further orders of this court.
DONE AND ORDERED in chambers in Miami, this January 1995.

Copies furnished to parties and counsel of record.

WILLIAM M. HOEVELER SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

S

CONTRACT BETWEEN THE
BR 0 WARD SHERIFF’S OFFICE
AND
EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SCOPE OF WORK

Ao

Standards

B. Administrative

C. Medical Director

D. Health Service Administrator

E. Health Services Monitor

II. PERSONNEL A. General Policies B. ~. Non-Competition Clauses C. ~ Employee Training and Orientation ......................................................5. D. Staffing and Schedules ...........................................................6.

Ill. FACILITIES ............................................................

6

A. Space, Equipment and Commodities ....................................................6

B. Security ............................................................

6

IV. MEDICAL RECORDS ............................................................6

V. SICK CALLS ............................................................

7

Vl. INFIRMARY CARE AND HOSPITALIZATION ..............................................7....

VII. MENTAL HEALTH ..........................................................8..

VIII. DIET ............................................................

10

IX, PHARMACY SERVICES (ON-SITE OR OFF-SITE) ...........................................1. 0

X. LABORATORY SERVICES

Xl, RADIOLOGIC SERVICES

XII, REFERRALS

XIII. OPTICAL SERVICES

XIV. EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE

XV. MEDICAL DISASTER PLAN

SPECIAL MEDICAL PROGRAMS A. Special Programs B. Inmate Health Education

XVll. TREATMENT PLANS

XVIIL QUALITY MANAGEMENT

XIX. INFECTION CONTROL

XX. SCREENING

XXl. INMATE GRIEVANCES, COMPLAINTS ........................................................1..7

XXlI. INMATE TRANSFERS

XXIII. Hb.ALTH ASSESSMENT

XXlV. ACCOUNTING RECORDS

XXV. HOUSEKEF~PING

XXVl. NONDISCRIMINATION

XXVlI. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

A.

Contractor’s Insurance

B. Worker’s Compensation Insurance .......................................................20

C. Liabilit¥finsurance ...........................................................2. 1

XXVIII. LIMITATIONS ON CATASTROPHIC ACCIDENT OR ILLNESS .....................2..1

XXlX. INDEPENDENT CONTRACI:OR STATUS ..................................................2.. 1

XXX. TERMS OF THE CONTRACT A. Term B. Termination

XXXI. BROKERING OF CONTRACT

XXXll. COMMUNICATIONS

XXXIII. MEETINGS

XXXlV. BASIC COMPENSATION

XXXV. ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION

A.

For Other Services

B. For Excess Population

XXXVI. ADJUSTMENTS

XXXVII. ADJUSTMENTS FOR STAFFING

A.

Calculation

B. Application

C. Changes

XXXlX. A. B.

ADJUSTMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE LEVEL ........................................28

General ............................................................

28

Performance Level Penalties Defined ....................................................28

XL. OFF-THE-STREET INJURIES ............................................................30

XLI. INMATES OUTSIDE THE FACILITIES ....". ......................................................3. 1

XLll. COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND NATIONAL COMMISSION ON CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE STANDARDS ..................3..1

XLIII. COMPLIANCE WITH STATE MINIMUM JAIL STANDARDS .........................3..1.

XLIV. INVOICING AND OFFICIAL PAYEE

XLV. ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS

XLVI. NOTICE AND ADDRESS OF PAYEE

XLVII. ASSIGNMENT

XLVIII. SEVERABILITY

XLIX. PARTIES BOUND

L. MISCELLANEOUS

CONTRACT BETWEEN THE
BROWARD SHERIFF’S OFFICE AND
EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
This Contract made and entered into this 6th day of August, 1993, and renewed this 1st day of October, 1996 by and between Ron Cochran, as Sheriff of E~roward County and Chief Correctional Officer of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (hereinafter referred to as the "BSO") and EMSA Limited Partnership (hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor") which are the parties hereto.
W|TNESSETH:

WHEREAS, the BSO is required by Section 945.04, Florida Statutes, to ensure that all inmates in the Broward County Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (hereinafter referred to as "DCR’) are provided care, custody, treatment, housing and general handling of prisoners in accordance with FIodda Statutes; and

WHEREAS, said Department presently consists of the following facilities, to wit: Broward County Main Jait Facility; the North Broward Detention Comptex; Division of Community Corrections Facility; and Boot Camp (hereinafter collectively the "Facilities"); and

WHEREAS, EMSA Limited Partnership is a qualified and willing participant with the. Sheriff to provide t~ealth services for medical, dental, mental health, and program support services for inmates at the facilities.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements contained herein, the parties agree:

I.

SCOPE OF WORK

A. Standards

1. All medical services shall be provided according to medically accepted community standards of care and meet American Correctional Association (hereinafter referred to as "ACA") and National Commission on Correctional Health Care (hereinafter referred to as "NCCHC") Standards.

2. Contractor wilt request documentation of ticensing and accreditation for afl hospitals, clinics and other providers used by the contractor. All hospitals used by the Contractor for the care of inmates shall be fuIly licensed and preferably accredited by the Joint Commission and Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO).

3. BSO’s Health Services Monitor shalt provide periodic contract monitoring at the direction of the BSO Health Services Administrator. Contractor shall provide all documentation necessary to facilitate this monitoring.
II. PERSONNEL
A. General Policies
’[. Contractor shall employ only candidates who have provided documentation of past health care experience and letters of recommendation. Each candidate will be subject to a credentialing process. BSO’s Health Service Administrator shall participate in the interviewing process for Contractor’s Medical Director and the Contractor’s Health Services.Administrator. The final selection of a~l employees and subcontractors shall be subject to review~by the BSO. All physicians, ARNP’s, psychologists, PA’s and Dentists employed by the Contractor shall be credentia[ed.
2. Contractor shall require Flodda licensed and qualified personnel to provide professional coverage for the facilities according to the schedule of specifications and job descriptions. Contractor shall ensure that its staff complies with all terms of the contract specifications.
3. An on-site visit to one or more of the facilities shall be made by a~t screened candidates prior to employment,
4. The BSO reserves the dght to instruct, in writing, the Contractor to prohibit any of Contractor’s employees and/or independent contractors from performing any services with regard to this Contract. In such event, Contractor shall have a reasonable period ¯ not to exceed thirty (30) days to find replacement(s) for such prohibited employees or sub-contractors.
5. AIr contract personnet wilt be subject to a security background check by the Office of the Sheriff. Following the completion of the security background check, each of Contractor’s employees will be issued a BSO contractor’s ID badge. Upon resignation or termination of employment by Contractor, EMSA shall be responsible to return each badge to BSO within 5 (five) working days of the emplbyee’s last day of work.
6. All contract personnel shall comply with all current State, County and Local laws and regulations, Court Orders, BSO rules, applicable nursing protocols, Institutional Directives, and Policies and Procedures of the BSO and Institution. During the term of this Contract, policies, regulations and laws may change. These changes may impact Contractor’s service .delivery in terms of mater~ally increasing Contractor’s cost of providing health care services. While Contractor recognizes that changes may occur, there is no way to anticipate what those changes will be nor is there any way to anticipate the related cost associated with the changes. Therefore, Contractor and the BSO will agree to negotiate in advance for additional compensation to cover costs associated with the changes in service delivered in compliance with State or Federal laws, statute or regulations, BSO policy or regulations. As
3

new beds are added to the system, Contractor and BSO agree to negotiate in advance additional compensation to cover cost associated with these changes.
7. Personnel files on all contractor employees, independent contractors or any individual providing a contract service shall be on file with the health care, unit of the institution. These personnel records shall be made available, as required by law to the Director of Corrections or designee for any purpose. These files shall include, but not be limited to, copies of current Florida licenses or proof of professional certification, and evaluation records and position responsibilities.
8. The Contractor shall promptly complete an employee performance evaluation upon request by the Director or designee. The Contractor and its staff shall participate in any disciplinary headng of any employees as requested by the Director or designee.~
9. In any urgent administrative matter, the Contractor shall respond within two (2) hours after contact by BSO. In a non-urgent administrative matter, the Contractor shall respond within forty-eight (48) hours after contact by BSO.
10. The on-site Medical Director shall serve as the medical authority, and sha~[ work with the physicians in the execution of their duties. The Medical Director shall operate the health care program in accordance with BSO Rules, ACA, and NCCHC Standards, or as may be amended during this contract.
11. The on-site Medical Director shall p~an, implement, direct and control clinical and administrative aspects of the health care program. In addition to administrative responsibilities, the Medical Director shall also provide primary health care services on a routine. basis and meet the same standards as the Contractor’s physicians.
12. Contractor shall provide the Medical Director or physician on call with a pager service so that they may be contacted by Contractor’s employees, while off-site.
13. Contractor will not take retaliatory action against any Contractor’s employee solely because that employee has made a good faith effort to comply or ensure compliance with the provisions of this Contract. Contractor shall provide BSO with Wdtten notification of the removal or termination of administrative personnel, including a summary of the reasons therefor.
B. Non-Competition Clauses
1. Contractor is prohibited from entering into covenants Not-To-Compete, or Non-Competition Clauses with non-physician employees or independent contractors, or any non-physician parties specifically related to the performance or any obligation required under this Agreement, which would prohibit said independent contractor or employee from competing directly or indirectly, in any way with Contractor. For the purpose of this paragraph, the term "competing directly or indirectly, in any way with Contractor" shall mean the entering into or attempting to enter into any similar business with that carded on by Contractor with any
4

individual, partnership, corporation or association that was or is the same or related business as is Contractor.
2. BSO shall not be held financially responsible for the employment of any of the Contractor’s employees, including administrative staff or physicians by BSO or any subsequent vendor at the expiration or conclusion of this agreement. The Contractor agrees to indemnify BSO, or otherwise hold BSO harmless from any liability connected thereto.
C. Employee Training and Orientation
1. Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that all new health care personnel are provided with orientation and appropriate training-regarding medical practices on-sireat the Institution. Orientation regarding other facility and secudty operations will be the responsi~)ility of the BSO upon notification by Contractor. Contractor shall ensure that all full-time health care staff receive forty (40) hours of in-service training (including on-the-job training) within the first ninety (90) days of employment. The Medical Director shall receive the same in-service training and orientation.
2. Contractor shall establish an on-site medical library for use by the health care staff. The library shall minimally include basic reference texts related to diagnosis and treatment in a pdmary care setting, as well as a current medical dictionary, pharmacology reference book and a Physician’s Desk Reference, etc. At the expiration of the contract, the library shall become the proper~y of the BSO.
3. Contractor shall provide appropriate in-service education programs for employees of contractor and BSO to facilitate the health care program. All full-time health care staff shall receive 40 hours of in-service training per year with the exception of cledcal which. require 20 hours. Selected topics which require staff training shall be identified on an on-going basis through the Contractor’s Quality Management Program. Contractor shall document attendance at such training in accordance with ACA standards.
4. Contractor shall distribute a written job description to each member of the health care staff with all assigned responsibilities to each member of the health care staff. In addition, contract staff shall be provided a copy of the appropriate attached job descriptions and General Specifications. Contractor shall monitor and document performance of health care staff to ensure adequate job performance in accordance with these job descriptions and other provisions of this Contract.
5. Contractor shall assist on-site BSO personnel in developing, coordinating, and evaluating health education for BSO staff. Programs shaft minimally include training on the following topics:
CPR; First Aid; Response to medicat emergency or disaster; Recognizing signs and symptoms of mental disorders or chemical dependency;

AIDS; and Additional topics as requested and agreed upon by the Director, Assistant Directors, Superintendents and Contractor’s staff.
D. Staffing and Schedules
1. Working hours shall be spent on-site at the institution, except as is otherwise required for the provision of services or training, or expressly agreed to by the Director and the Contractor. Institution staffing work schedules may be modified upon the parties’ mutual agreement and written consent.
Attachment "A" describes the minimum qualifications required for each position.
3. Attachment "A" reflects position descriptions for each position.
Ill. FACILITIES
A. Space, Equipment and Commodities
1. The BSO shall provide and maintain the space, fixtures and other similar items required for the efficient operation of the health care unit as agreed upon by the parties unless expressly excluded by provisions of this agreement. The Contractor shall provide input on the selection of the health care facilities as appropriate. All medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, prosthetics devices and medical supplies shall be provided or arranged for by the Contractor.
2. BSO shall be solely responsible for housekeeping services, food/dietary services, building maintenance, linen, and normal transportation (excluding medical emergency transportation). (See Section X.XV.)
Security
1. Contractor and its personnel shall be subject to and shall comply with all secudty regulations and procedures of each BSO facility. Violation of regulations may result in the employee being denied access to the facility. In this event, the Contractor shall be given a reasonable pedod of time to provide alternate personnel to supply services described herein, subject to the BSO approval.
2. The BSO will provide security for the Contractor’s employees and agents consistent with the secudty provided at other BSO facilities.
IV. MEDICAL RECORDS

A. The Contractor shall ensure that all health care staff document each health care encounter in the Problem-Oriented Medical Record utilizing the Subjective, Objective, Assessment Plan Education ("SOAPE") format.
B. The Contractor shall ensure that each health record is complete, accurate and contains sufficient documentation to warrant the treatment rendered; and that each entry is made in a timely manner to comply with aforementioned procedures. This shall include requesting and documenting the request for, all available previous medical records and composing a medical history as needed by the physician.
C. The Contractor shall ensure specific compliance regarding confidentiality and medicolegal access/disclosure, assist in providing documentation to support BSO automation, and participate in the BSO’s evaluation of any Quality Management Program.
D. The Contractor shall ensure that each Medical Record meets the provisions in Florida Statutes, Flodda Administrative Code, BSO Rules, and the Health Record Manual. Inactive medical records will be maintained in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida.
E. The Contractor shall provide name stamps for all employees signing medical records to assure the determination of record signatures.
V. SICK CALLS
A. AIt physician and nurse sick calls shall be provided in compliance with ACA and NCCHC standards. Nurse sick calls shall be provided seven (7) days a week. Referrals shall be made to the appropriate medical personnel as required. Non-emergency physician’s sick calls shall be provided within twenty-four (24) hours of any pdodty referrals and seventy-two (72). hours on weekends. Physician sick call will be provided a minimum of five (5) days a week.
Vl. INFIRMARY CARE AND HOSPITALIZATION
A. Infirmary care shall be available for inmates requiring skilled nursing care, chronic illness care, convalescent care, and all acute and chronic conditions which can be managed on-site. Contractor shall ensure the following is provided:
24-hour coverage, supervised on-site by a Registered Nurse; 2. Daily infirmary rounds by nursing staff; 3. 24-hour Physician on-call coverage; 4. A manual of nursing care procedures; 5. A separate and comptete medical record for each patient; 6. Infirmary rounds will be conducted by the Physician no
less than one (1) time per day, Monday through Friday.
B. All infirmary encounters by a heatth care provider shall be documented in the inmate’s medical record.

C. Those inmates requiring care beyond the capability of the infirmary shall be hospitalized at a licensed community facility within Broward County or pursuant to other written
agreements. Recommendations for hospitalization, with the exception of emergency situations, shall require review and approval by the on-site physician. Hospital admissions that adse from
emergency situations shall be informally reviewed by a physician within forty-eight (48) hours of admission.

D. Any specialty consultations of inmates are the financial responsibility of the Contractor, subject to the maximums set forth herein.

E. Routine transportation of inmates as directed by Contractor, for medical visits, consultations, diagnostic studies and hospital admissions which utilize Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation vehicles and staff shall be the responsibility of the Department of Correctior~s and Rehabilitation. BSO shall not be directed by Contractor to transport
emergency~ seriously ifl or otherwise medically unstable inmates.

F. Contractor’s personnel shall establish regu]ar meetings with representatives from the designated hospital and other providers to coordinate the referral of inmates. Policies and
Procedures shall be developed regarding referral methods, scheduling, transportation, reporting of test results, medical records, acute care hospitalization and patient follow-up, subject to approval by the BSO. Contractor shall be responsib[e for maintaining confidential and secure communications with outside providers so as not to compromise the secure transportation of
inmates.

G. Contractor shall provide on-site emergency medical treatment for BSO employees, visitors, and contractors injured or who become ill while working at each facility, consisting of stabilization and referral to personal physician or local hospital.

VII. MENTAL HEALTH

A. The mental health services that shall be provided at each facility include:

1. Basic screening of all intakes/admissions and appropriate referrals for detectab[e mental health disorders.

2. Development of a system-wide menta[ health program for evaluation, treatment and/or referral to include but not be limited to:

When isolated for psychiatric purposes, inmate shall be examined by a licensed mental health provider or designee within forty-eight (48) hours after confinement.

bo

Mental health evaluation must support mental health confinement

of inmate based on risk of physical danger to self or others.

Medical service must continue to provide follow up care and treatment dudng the entire time an inmate is held in mental health confinement on at teast a five (5) days per week basis.
A licensed mental health provider will be responsible to determine when aninmate should be sent to or returned to general population, with documentation in the medical record regarding these decisions.
All inmates referred for mental health evaluation will receive a comprehensive diagnostic examination including a psychosocial history and mental status evaluation. This examination will include an assessment of suicidal dsk, potential for violence, and special housing needs.
Psychotropic medication in liquid form will be used where appropriate. To maximize the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy and to reduce the toxicity and side effects of medication, an intensive program of drug monitoring shall exist. All inmates placed on drug therapy will be seen within one (1) week by the psychiatrist. Precautions to be followed will include:
(i) The psychiatrist will review the inmate’s medical record to
determine which medications the patient has been receiving pdor to prescription of psychotropic medication.
Pdor to the prescription of psychotropic medication, allinmates will be informed by a member of the mental health ¯ staff about the risks of taking such medication, in accordance with applicable standards of care. All female inmates will be so informed by a member of the mental health staff about the risks of taking such medications while pregnant, and will be required to sign a release. A pregnancy test will be provided prior to the prescription of the psychotropic medication to all female inmates wishing such a test, if such a test has not already been provided upon intake.
All patients placed on medication will be evaluated for signs of toxicity. Blood pressure will be regularly checked and drug levels monitored where appropriate with documentation of this information to be placed routinely in the inmate’s medical record.
Substance abuse services will be offered to those inmates who are referred to the program for mental health problems and who also have substance abuse related problems. These services will be provided by licensed mental health professionals and
9

psychiatrists and-should include case findings, referrals, liaison work and post release planning.

Clinical supervision of non-doctoral psychology staff by a doctoral psychologist.

Initiation of Out-Patient Mental Health Care for identified inmates, must include at least the following:

a.

Psychotropic medications when clinically indicated.

b. Case management, individualized treatment planning, and

~

supportive group and/or individual counseling, all provided by staff

~

having at least the qualifications of a Psychological Specialist.

c. Psychiatric consultation on a regular basis for identified inmates.

d. Appropriate laboratory studies for inmates taking psychotropics.

4. Full range of out-patient mental health care for all inmates at the facilities, when indicated, including at [east the following:

a. Mental status examination at least every 30 days for each inmate continuously housed in confinement.

b. Individualized treatment planning and implementation for each identified inmate.

c. Post-release continuity of care planning for all permanently assigned inmates who will need continued care in the community.

VIII. DIET

A. The Contractor shall establish a nutrition program and coordinate with the contracted Food Service Supervisor and BSO Health Services Administrator to ensure the provision of food service needs to include:

1. nutdtionist.

Menus planned for twenty-eight (28) days in advance and certified by a

2. Therapeutic diets modified and certified by a qualified nutritionist available for inmates when ordered by the physician.

IX, PHARMACY SERVICES (ON-SITE OR OFF-SITE)
A. Contractor will provide for pharmaceutical services to assure the availability to the patient of prescribed medications within twenty-four (24) hours (forty- eight (48) hours on
[0

weekends) of the order being wdtten. Certain medications as determined by the Medical Director will be available on-site for emergencies or in cases where more immediate initial dosing is clinically indicated. Pharmacy services consistent with State and Federal regulations, monitored by a licensed, qualified pharmacist must be maintained or contracted. BSO personnel shall at all times have a right to review and inspect the pharmacy storage and records. An independent audit of the pharmacy services must be performed monthly at the expense of the Contractor. The results will be distributed to both BSO and the Contractor.
B. 1. The Contractor shall record the administration of medications in a manner and on a form approved by BSO to include documentation of the fact that inmates are receiving and ingesting their prescribed medications. Documentation will also be required when an inmate’s ordered medication was not administered and the reason given.
2. The Contractor shall provide and fill all prescriptions for inmates leaving on writ, participating in the work release program, transferred or discharged for a maximum of three (3) days, or if clinically indicated, in sufficient quantity to ensure that the. patient can continue medication until such time as they are able to be seen by an outside provider to continue their required medications or to complete the current prescription.
C. 1. The Contractor shall provide a licensed pharmacist to participate monthly with the Quality Management Committee.
2. The Contractor shall provide a licensed pharmacist to perform third party drug utilization review as requested by the Quality Management Committee.
3. The Contractor shait provide a licensed consultant pharmacist to conduct monthly inspections of all institutional areas where medications are maintained and provide for. the destruction/disposal of medications as required by law. Inspection shall include expiration dates, storage and review of medication records. The consultant pharmacist’s monthly inspection report shall be completed in a timely manner, with one copy to remain in the pharmacy and a second copy to be provided to the Medical Director or designee.
X. LABORATORY SERVICES
A. All laboratory services shall be the financial responsibility of the Contractor.
B. All stat laboratory work shall be promptly performed at the local hospital or laboratory accredited by the College of Amedcan Pathologists. Results shall be telephoned immediately to the requesting physician and a wdtten report shall follow within twenty-four (24) hours.
C. Non-urgent laboratory services shall be provided by the Contractor to the BSO under a sub-contract arrangement. The most cost effective process may be utilized subject to mutual agreement.
b. Services shall include:
t]

Laboratory Supplies; 2. Pick-up and delivery on a daily basis, or as needed, Monday through
Fdday; 3. Pdnter, installed at the Institution, to provide test results (FAX NOT
ACCEPTABLE); and 4. Reporting capability within twenty-four (24)-hours.
E. A physician shall check, initial and date all abnormal laboratory results within an appropriate time, not to exceed twenty-four (24) hours upon receipt of results (weekends excluded) to assess the follow-up care indicated and to screen for discrepancies between the clinical observations and the laboratory results. In the event that the laboratory report and the clinical condition of the patient do not appear to correlate, it shall be the responsibility of the physician’to make a clinical assessment, and to provide appropriate follow-up, which ordinarily will include reordering of the lab tests.
XI. RADIOLOGIC SERVICES
A. Radiology services are the financial responsibility of the Contractor. All routine x-rays shall be provided on-site at the facilities, by the Contractor or an appropriately licensed subcontractor. For procedures beyond the capability of the equipment on-site, the inmates shall be referred to an off-site health care facility.
B. All fluoroscopy and special studies, including, but not limited to, MRI, CAT Scans, and ultra sounds, shall be provided by the Contractor.
C. Contractor shall ensure that all x-ray films are read by a radiologist. TheContractor’s Radiologist shall meet the BSO’s Credentialing standards. The radiologist shall call the Contractor’s physician with any report requiring immediate intervention.
D. Contractor shall ensure that a wdtten report is forwarded by the Radiologist within twenty-four (24) hours of interpretation of the films. All emergency x-rays that are required at times other than normal working hours shall be performed at a local facility. A physician shall promptly review, initial and date all abnormal x-ray reports.
Xll. REFERRALS
A. All routine referrals shall be approved by the Medical Director and outside referrals shall be made only when appropriate. However, coordination and compliance with the Contractor’s Utilization Review Program requirements is mandatory. Approprfate referral logs shall be maintained and available for review by BSO staff. All inmates returning from a hospital stay will be admitted to the infirmary until cleared by the on-site physician or medical director.
Xlll. OPTICAL SERVICES
A. Eye examinations shall be performed on-site. A qualified Optometrist shall examine inmates with specific complaints.
12

B. Eyeglasses shall be provided by the Contractor. Other prosthetics shall be provided at the inmate’s expense unless clinicalfy mandated by an Ophthalmologist in which case the Contractor is financially responsible.
XIV. EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE
A. Emergencies shall be taken to the hospital agreed to by BSO. Contractor shall ensure the availability of emergency treatment through predetermined arrangements with local hospitals. All ambulances utilized shall be equipped with life support systems and certified by the State of Florida. Contractor shall obtain documentation of State Certification and keep it on file. The Contractor shall be responsible for the cost of all helicopter or ambulance transporta~tion unless otherwise provided by the inmate’s insurance carder.
B. The MD/Physician shall ensure capable on-site emergency treatment is provided by the Contractor’s employees, including the following:
1. In-service education on first aid and emergency procedures;
Written policies and procedures concerning emergency transfer and transportation of inmates:
3. Arrangements for emergency twenty-four (24) hour on-call physician coverage;
4. Coordination with BSO staff for secudty arrangements when the immediate transfer of an inmate is indicated;
5. Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Basic Training for all staff;
Treatment for visitors and staff consisting of stabilization and referral to personal physi(:ian or local hospital~,
No unconscious person or a person who appears to be seriously !njured shall be booked in to a BSO facility. They must be referred to the nearest hospital; return to the facility is predicated upon written medical clearance by a qualified physician.
C. The Contractor shall provide, in a form mutually agreed to, a monthly report of emergency referralslhospitalizations. This report shal~ include the detainee’s name, arrest number, reason, date and time, means of transportation, and facility to which the inmate was sent.
XV. MEDICAL DISASTER PLAN
A. Subject to the Director’s approval, the Contractor shall maintain procedures from the effective date of the Contract for the delivery of medical services in the event of a disaster

such as fire, tornado, epidemic, riot, stdke or mass arrests. Such procedures shall be maintained and/or modified by the Medical Director working closely with the BSO staff, and may include:
Communications system; 2. Recall of key staff; 3. Assignment of health care staff; 4. Establishment of command post; 5. Safety and secudty of the patient and staff areas; 6. Use of emergency equipment and supplies; 7. Establishment of a triage area; 8. Triage procedures; 9. Medical records - identification of injured;
Use of ambulance services; Transfer of injured to local hospitals; 12. Evacuation procedures (to be coordinated with secudty personnel); and Practice drills annually.
B. In addition, the Contractor shall maintain a Familiarization Staff Training Program from the effective date of the Contract for all Health Care Unit employees in case of an institutional emergency. Emergencies shall be handled in the following manner:
All in-house measures for dealing with the emergency shall be taken; The Disaster Plan, as discussed above, shall be put into effect; All facility medical disaster plans and emergency measures shalbl e coordinated with the nearest local disaster agency.
XVI. SPECIAL MEDICAL PROGRAMS
Ao Special Programs
1. The Contractor’s Medical Director Shall develop, subject to BSO approval, "special medical programs" for inmates who require close medical supervision including chronic and convalescent care. The plan of treatment shall include directions for health care staff and correctional staff regarding their roles in the care and supervision of these inmates. The special medical program shall address a broad range of health problems including but not limited to seizure disorders, pregnancy, STD’s, diabetes, hypertension and AIDS.
B. Inmate Health Education
1. Contractor shall maintain, subject to BSO approval, an inmate health education program to include health education posters and literature for placement throughout the facilities, especially in program areas and program intensive housing units. To further this health education process, formal sessions shall be made available to inmates based on the assessed educational needs and upon approval by the BSO. Selected topics for this information may include but are not limited to:
]4

Personal hygiene; Nutrition; Physical fitness; Stress management; Sexually transmitted diseases; Chemical dependency; Tuberculosis and other communicabfe diseases; Effects of smoking; AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome); Hypertension/Cardiac; Epilepsy; Diabetes; m. Dermatology; n. Rehabilitation; and o. Pregnancy.
B. Explanation of procedures for access to health and dental services shall be provided to inmates both orally and in writing via the Inmate Handbook. The Handbook will be published and distributed by the BSO. The Contractor will be provided with an opportunity to submit material and review material which will be included in the Handbook.
XVII. TREATMENT PLANS
A. Contractor shall ensure that a medical and /or mental health treatment plan is developed for each inmate requiring on-going care. The treatment plan shall include a written statement specifying the particular course of therapy and the roles of medical and non-medical personnel in carrying out the course of therapy. It shall be individualized and based on an assessment of the inmate’s needs and short and long term goals and the methods by which the goals shall be pursued. When clinically indicated, the treatment plan may provide inmates with access to a range of supportive and rehabilitative services (e.g., individuals or group counseling and/or self-help groups) that the physician deems appropriate. Treatment plans will be reviewed on a regular basis and revised as clinically indicated.
XVIII. QUALITY MANAGEMENT
A. In order to ensure compliance with the Quality Management Program, the Contractor shall establish and maintain an Institutional Quality Management Committee which will include the following members:
Chair, Appointed by the Director of Corrections Medical Director Health Services Administrator Nursing Supervisor Psychologist Physician Dentist Pharmaceutical Consultant

Quality Management Coordinator Medical Records Administrator Ancillary Service Representative Superintendent or designee
B. The Institutional Quality Management Committee is assigned the following responsibilities and functions:
1. Establish and oversee the institutional quality management (QM) program in keeping with the accepted QM program.
implement system-wide QM studies consistent with the data collection schedule developed by the Contractor.
Conduct ongoing studies which monitor and evaluate the quality and appropriateness of patient care, and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
Collect data regarding the quality and appropriateness of drug usage and resistance and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
Review findings from any mortality review and recommend corrective action when indicated.
Review data from health record reviews for the quality, clinical appropriateness, accuracy and completion of documentation and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
o Review for appropriateness and over/under utilization of ancillary services, contract services, consultations, and drugs and antibiotics and report ail findings to the Contract Monitor.
Review infections within the health services with regard to their proper management, nosocomial nature and .communicability and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
Review risk patterns and trends of unexpected inmate health care events, employee and visitor incidents and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
10. Review findings generated from institutional specific studies, make recommendations for corrective action when indicated and conduct follow-up.
11. Recommend continuing education programs based on the results of institutional QM activities for the health services staff.

12. Provide feedback to the clinical, ancillary and corrections departments.

13. Reports and minutes of meetings and activities of the Quality Management Program shall-be maintained, which shall be reported through confidential QM channels to the Contract Monitor.

14. Review confidentiaiity policies.

XIX. INFECTION CONTROL

A. An infection control program shall be implemented by the Contractor. The infection control program will include, but is not limited to, concurrent surveillance of patients
and staff~ prevention techniques, and treatment and reporting of infections in accordance with local and ~tate laws.

XX. SCREENING

A. All new inmate admissions will be screened in accordance with the Policies and Procedures developed by the BSO. Screenings will be completed by a licensed health
professional and medically cleared before the inmate enters the facility’s population. If the screening is not performed, the reason must be documented in EMSA’s monthly report.

B. A screening shall include:

1. Inquiry into:

Current illness and health problems including mental, dental, and-

communicable diseases;

bo

Medication currently being taken;

Alcohol/chemical abuse history;

(Females) History for GYN problems and pregnancies;

Chronic health problems, and

2. Observation of:

ao State of consciousness, mental stability, behavior, tremors, bodily
deformities, and ease of movement. Signs of trauma, bruises, needle marks, jaundice, lesions. Indication of drug abuse.

XXI. INMATE GRIEVANCES, COMPLAINTS

A. Any inmate grievances regarding health care shall be referred to the Contractor’s Health Services Administrator or designee. The Health Services Administrator shall promptly review the grievance, gather all information concerning the complaint, and take appropriate action consistent with BSO grievance procedures. All inmate grievance shall be responded to within seventy two (72) hours of receipt of Contractor.
]7

XXII. INMATE TRANSFERS
A. All inmates transferred among the BSO facilities shall have their medical records screened by health care personnel prior to the transfer and immediately upon arrival at the receiving facitity, provided their is adequate notification given to Contractor from BSO. The health record must accompany the inmates to the receiving facility.
B. Documentation will include:
Medication; Medical Status; Chronic Health problems, and All other relevant medical information which must be transferred with the inmate.
C. Transfers:
Transfers include intersystem and State Prison transfers; every effort will be made by BSO to provide the names of inmates to be routinely transferred to other jurisdictions to Contractor, twenty-four (24) hours prior to scheduled transfer. All inmates transferred to other jurisdictions will have their medical records screened by health care personnel prior to the transfer and appropriate medical information and medications will be sent with the inmate to the receiving jurisdiction at the time of transfer.
XXIII. HEALTH ASSESSMENT
A. Each new inmate shall receive a comprehensive health examination within. fourteen (14) days after admission. This assessment will be conducted under the supervision of a physician in accordance with Florida’s Sheriff’s Association/Florida Association of Counties Model Jail Standards, ACA, NCCHC and BSO guidelines for the intake process.
B. This assessment shall be conducted under the supervision of a licensed physician by appropriately licensed individuals who have received documented training in physical assessment and who are qualified to conduct such examinations. Such record~ of this training must be maintained on-site at the facility. The results of the physical assessment shall be recorded in the inmate’s medical record. Extent of the health appraisal will include:
Review of Intake Screening 2. Collection of additional data 3. Lab tests 4. Vital signs 5. Review of physical examination and test results to determine appropriate
care of identified problem TB screening (PPD test or chest x-ray) Assessment of mental health

C. Inmates assigned to work or training in the facility must be medically cleared before being placed in any work assignment. Clearances and examinations, if medically required, must be done within five (5) working days from the receipt by Contractor of wdtten request. C~earance should be based on the essentia~ function of the work assignment as provided by BSO, relevant past medical history and general examination for p.hysical and mental health with special note of communicable diseases, skin rashes, wounds, sores, boils, etcetera.
D. A clearance form will be completed and placed in the inmate’s medical record before assignment. This form will indicate whether the inmate can perform, the .essential functions of the job assignment with or without an accommodation. If an accommodation is recommend, the BSO Health Service Administrator will review and act upon the request.
Physical assessment for Boot Camp eligibility shall be completed within a forty-eight (48) hour pedod of receipt of the written request.
XXIV. ACCOUNTING RECORDS
A. Director of the Department of Corrections, Contract Monitor, Representative of the Department of Corrections, or their duly authorized representatives shall have access, for purposes of examinations, to any financial books, documents, papers and records of the Contractor as they may re,ate sotely to this contract.
B. The Contractor shall maintain such books, records and documents in accordance with accounting procedures and practices which sufficiently and propedy reflect expenditures of funds provided by the BSO under this project.
C. The Contractor shall maintain and file with the BSO such progress, fiscal, inventory and other reports as the BSO may reasonably require within the period of this Contract.
D. The Contractor shall include these aforementioned audit and record-keeping requirements in all approved subcontracts and assignments.
E. The BSO may unilaterally cancel this Contract for refusal by the Contractor to allow public access to such accounting documents, papers, letters or other materials originated or received by the Contractor in conjunction with this Contract. These "records" are subject to the provisions of the Florida Public Records Act, Chapter 119, Fforida Statutes, other than medical records or other exempt materials.
F. The Contractor shall provide progress reports including data reporting. These reports will be used for monitoring progress or performance to determine conformity with intended program purposes.
G. The Contractor shall provide access to or furnish whatever information is reasonably necessary to effect this monitoring.

XXV. HOUSEKEEPING
A. The Contractor’s staff shall be responsible for all housekeeping duties in the infirmary and clinic area with the exception of the floors, bathrooms and showers, windows and walls.
B. Copies of all inspection reports must be provided to the BSO and the Director of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
C. The Contractor shall be responsible for the disposal of all contaminated waste per OSHA Standards as required and in compliance with alf Federal, State and County laws and regulations.
XXVI. NONDISCRIMINATION
A. The Contractor shall not discriminate against any client, employee or applicant for employment because of race, age, color, religion, sex or national odgin, disability or medical status. The Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that inmates, applicants, and employees are treated without discrimination in regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national odgin, disability or medical status. In the event of the Contractor’s noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses, or with any other such rules, regulations, or orders, this contract may be canceled, terminated [or suspended in whole or in part] and the Contractor may be declared ineligible for further business with the BSO.
XXVII. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
A. Contractor’s Insurance
1. The Contractor shall not commence any work in connection with this agreement until Contractor has obtained all the following types of insurance and such insurance coverage has been approved by the BSO. All insurance policies shall be with insurers qualified and doing business in Florida. The BSO shall be furnished proof" of coverage of insurance by an executed certificate of insurance accompanying the contract documents. The BSO shall be named as an additional named insured.
2. The BSO shall be exempt, under any circumstances, from liability for any sums of money which may represent a deductible in any insurance policy. The payment of such deductible shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor providing such insurance.
B. Worker’s Compensation Insurance
1. The Contractor shall secure and maintain during the life of this agreement Worker’s Compensation Insurance for all employees connected with the work of the contract. Such insurance shall comply fully with the Florida Worker’s Compensation Law.
2o

C. Liability/Insurance
1. The Contractor shall be solely liable, and agrees to be liable for, and shall indemnify, defend and hold the BSO harmless from all liability, claims, suits, judgments, expenses or damages including court costs and attorney’s fees arising solely out o.f intentional acts, negligence or omissions by the Contractor during the normal performance of their duties. This also includes the indemnification of the BSO for any such liabilities set forth in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes. The Contractor shall purchase Comprehensive General Liability insurance in the amount of $500,000.00, and Professional Liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 per occurrence and $6,000,000.00 in aggregate.
2. The BSO shall be solely liable, and agrees to be liable for, and shall indemnify, defend and hold the Contractor harmless for a~l liability, claims, suits, judgments, expenses~, or damages including court costs and attorney’s fees adsing solely out of intentional acts, negligence or omissions by the BSO during the performance of their normal duties. BSO shall not be liable for any medical treatment or care rendered by the Contractor.
XXXVIII. LIMITATIONS ON CATASTROPHIC ACCIDENT OR ILLNESS
A. The Contractor shall not be responsible for health care costs for any catastrophic illness or injury which exceeds a cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) for any inmate or for any contagious illness or injuries to more than one (1) inmate arising from the same occurrence which exceeds a cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) for the treatment of all such inmates. In this regard, the Contractor shall enter into a contract with the County Administrator of Broward as to the terms, regarding any payments to be made to Contractor by the County of Broward for any treatment of a single inmate, which exceeds a cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00).
B. Contractor shall not be responsible for payment of outside hospital costs associated solely with the diagnosis or treatment of BSO inmates with tuberculosis who, with the provision of negative air flow, could be managed in a facility infirmary. In the event that these inmates do not require acute hospitalization, every effort will be made to transfer such individuals to a negative air flow detention facility or arrange for release from secure incarceration. If the inmates’ medical condition requires acute care hospitalization and could not be appropriately managed in an infirmary setting even if negative air flow were provided, the cost of such hospitalization will be the responsibility of the Contractor.
XXIX. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS
A. In the Contractor’s performance of its duties and responsibilities under the contract, it is mutually understood and agreed that the Contractor is at all times acting in and performing as an independent contractor. The BSO shall neither have nor exercise any control or direction over the methods by which the Contractor shall perform its work and functions other than as provided herein. Nothing in the contract is intended to or shall be deemed to constitute a partnership or a joint venture between the parties.
2]

XXX. TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
A. Term
1. This contract shall cover a four (4) year period commencing.October 1, 1996, and continuing through September 30, 2000. Upon mutual agreement, ~he contract may be renewed for four (4) additional years based upon negotiations of service delivery and cost. Said negotiations should commence at least ninety (90) days prior to the termination of the agreement.
Any decision to increase the scope of this agreement shall require mutual written assent and amendment to the existing contract.
B. ~ Termination
1. Either party shall have the right to unilaterafly cancel, terminate or suspend the Contract, in whole or in part, with or without cause, by providing the other party ninety (90) days wdtten notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, or in person with proof of delivery. This provision is personal solely to the parties to this agreement and shall not be available to either party’s successor or assignee or any entity claiming a right to operate the facilities.
2. In light of the substantial start-up, close-out, and other costs that will be incurred by the Contractor, in the event that BSO should cancel, terminate or suspend this contract, Contractor shall be entitled to payment on the effective date of termination of compensation and liquidated damages equivalent to six (6) months of the basic compensation, as set forth in Section XXXIV herein at the rate then in effect.
3. In the event funds to finance this Contract become unavailable, the BSO may terminate the contract upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to the Contractor. Said notice shall be delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested, or in person with proof of delivery. However, the unavailability of funds cannot be utilized to avoid the concept of changed circumstances (XXXIV C.) and any rights inuring to the benefitof the Contractor. This provision is personal solely to the parties to this agreement and shall not be available to either party’s successor or assignee or any entity claiming a right to operate the facilities. The BSO shall be the final authority as to the availability of funds.
4. Any dispute concerning the interpretation of or performance under the contract shall be reviewed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s Director, who shall attempt to resolve it. In the event resolution is not accomplished, they shall forward their recommendation to the Chief of Staff. The Contractor’s representative, working with the Director, shall also forward a recommendation to the Contractor’s Contract Supervisor. The decision of the Chief of Staff shall be final and conclusive unless within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of this decision the Contractor files an objection with the Sheriff.
5. In the event that either party believes that a matedal breach has been occasioned by the other, it shall be required to provide the other party with prior written notice
22

of such proposed material breach and shall permit the ot]ner party thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of such notification to cure any perceived matedal breach. If the purported material breach is not cured within thirty (30) days from the date of notification of such alleged material breach, then the non-breaching party may terminate this Agreement forthwith.
6. Upon termination of the contract for any reason, including expiration, each party shaII, after notice of termination:
Place no further orders or subcontracts for material or service, except as may be necessary for the delivery of medical services until the date of termination.
Satisfy all its debts and obligations incurred at all the facilities dudng the term of the Contract.
Allow access to representatives of a successor contractor to interview current staff for positions with the successor contractor.
7. Neither the anticipated termination nor expiration relieves any employee from the ethical obligation to provide or arrange .for medical services to patients until the date (~f termination as defined by the contract.
8. Neither termination nor expiration relieves either party from the obligation to defend and indemnify claims filed after the time of termination or expiration, but which arose during the period of this contract.
9. Waiver of breach of any provision of this contract shall not be deemed to ¯ be a waiver of any other breach and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of this contract. The provisions herein do not ~imit the BSO’s right, remedies at law or to damages.
10. This contract will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Flodda.
XXXI. BROKERING OF CONTRACT
A. The contractor shall not broker this contract.
XXXII. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Contract communications will be in three forms: routine, informal and formal. For the purposes of this Contract, the following definitions shall apply:
1. Routine All normal communication, wdtten or oral, to facilitate performance of the scope of services by either party.
2. Informal - Special wdtten communication deemed necessaryby authorized persons addressing the performance of the Contract, by FAX and hard copy mail.
23

3. Formal - The same as informal but more limited in nature and usually reserved for significant contract issues, by FAX and hard copy mail.
B. Formal contract communications should be dated and numbered by.fiscal year, 11/96 -3/97, etc. Formal contract communication is for an issue considered to be of serious magnitude requiring an answer/response within a reasonable time, but never to exceed 10 working days. The deadline can be extended for 7 additional working days, upon request and mutual agreement.
C. The only personnel authorized to use formal contract communications are the Medical Director, Regional Administrator, Corporate Medical Director, HSA, President of EMSA, Chief of,.Staff, and the Director of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation or their designee~. A copy of any such communication shall be provided to the Shedff.
D. With informal contract communications, the same date/numbering system shall be implemented and the same response time frame is in effect.
E. In addition to the personnel named under formal contract communication, personnel authorized to use informal contract communications are the Nurse Supervisor, HSA, Assistant Directors, Facility Superintendents and Health Service Monitor.
XXXIII. MEETINGS
A. A monthly meeting will be scheduled between the Contractor and the BSO. Agendas will be provided by each party seven (7) days prior to the meeting. Director will schedule the meeting. The minutes of the meeting will be taken by the Contractor.
XXXIV. BASIC COMPENSATION
A. For the purpose of this contract, the contract renewal period shall be from October 1, 1996 through September 30, 2000.
B. In consideration of the mutual agreements, covenants and promises contained herein, the BSO agrees to pay Contractor, in equal monthly installments, the following basic fee for health care services:
1. Dudng the first contract period, the sum of Eight Million Four Hundred Nine Thousand Thirty Dollars ($8,409,030.00) subject to the adjustments, credits or debits as hereinafter set forth.
2. During the ensuing three (3) contract years and any subsequent renewal years the price for services will be adjusted by either the Consumers Price Index for all Urban Consumers U.S. City Average, Medical Care Services Expenditure Category from September to September as published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics or by 3.0%, whichever is less.
24

3. All payments pursuant to this contract shall be made on a monthly basis. Contractor will bill the BSO through the Contract Monitor at the end of each calendar month in which services are rendered and the BSO shall render payment to Contractor within fourteen (14) days of receipt of such monthly billing by Contractor.
C. In the event changed circumstances occur, as defined herein, Contractor shall have the exclusive right to renegotiate the price of the contract to reflect all of its increased costs of operation and to maintain its [eve[ of profit based on the initia~ costs to Contractor at the date of inception of the contract and the profit to the Contractor throughout the initial contract term. Upon notice in wdting of these changed circumstances to the Contractor, the contract shall continue under all of its terms and condition, except as subject to modification as specified in this section, through its complete term. Changed circumstances, as used in this section, shall include only the following: change in the Chief Correctional Officer, assignment of the contract or matedat change in the operational and managerial structure of jail and detention facilities.
XXXV. ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION
In addition to the above stated basic fee for service, the BSO agrees to pay Contractor additional compensation as follows:
A. For Other Services
1. For all TB testing $2.25 per test.
2. For all Hepatitis vaccines administered to BSO employees or applicants for employment, fifty percent (50%) of actual cost not to exceed $62.50 per vaccination series.
B. For Excess Population
1. a. In the event that the monthly average inmate~detainee population of persons incarcerated in all the Broward County Correctional Facilities combined exceeds a total of three thousand (3000) persons (calculated on the basis of a daily inmate count taken at 1700 hours each day) during the first contract period, or as a court may order, Contractor shall be entitled to receive Five Dollars and Forty Nine Cents ($5.49)per inmate/detainee per day for each inmate/detainee housed in the facility in excess of three thousand (3000) persons.
b. During the ensuring three (3) contract years, and any subsequent renewal years, the price for excess population will be adjusted by either the Consumers Price Index for all Urban Consumers U.S. City Average Medical Care Services Expenditure Category from September to September, as published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics or by 3.0%, whichever is less.
XXXVI. ADJUSTMENTS

The following adjustments shall be subtracted from the compensation paid to Contractor by the BSO as hereinafter set forth:

A. In the event that the monthly average inmate/detainee population of persons incarcerated in all the Broward County Correctional Facilities combined f~lls below a total of two thousand eight hundred (2800) persons (calculated on the basis of a daily inmate count taken at 1700 hours each day) during the first contract period, the BSO shall be entitled to subtract Five Dollars and Forty Nine Cents ($5.49) per inmate/detainee per day for each inmate/detainee housed in the facilities fewer than the two thousand eight hundred (2800) persons, which credit sha~l be assessed against the basic fee due Contractor on a monthly basis.

,. B. During the ensuing three (3) contract years and any subsequent renewal years the~price for lower population will be adjusted based on the Consumers Price Index for all Urban Consumers U.S. City Average, Medical Care Services Expenditure Category from September to September as published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

C. Monthly adjustments will be made for actual staffing provided, average daily population, performance level adjustments, performance requirement adjustments, and costs defined as payable by Contractor which have been paid by the BSO or costs defined as payable by the BSO which have been paid by the Contractor. Adjustments will be debited or credited to the subsequent monthly payment after reconciliation between the BSO and the Contractor. The last payment of the Contract wilt be withheld until final reconciliation adjustments have been determined.

XXXVII. ADJUSTMENTS FOR STAFFING

A, Calculation

1. Staffing adjustment for vacancies for physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists, dentists, RN’s, ARNP’s, and PA’S shall be calculated on a monthly basis as foIlows:

a=

For purposes of this contract, a "vacancy" shall occur when a

position required under this contract is not fil~ed, either on a

temporary or long-term basis, by an individual qualified for, and

functioning in, that position.

Actual hours provided on-site during the month shall be determined by using an automated time clock system approved by the BSO. BSO shall have unlimited access to the automated
time clock system.

The number of hours required for each month for each position listed herein will be determined on a pre-approved work schedule.

26

The parties will agree on a salary schedule for purposes of the adjustment for staffing only which reflects salaries and fringe benefits for each position and lists the number of FTE’s by position.
The number of hours actually worked by each position will be totaled.
If the number of hours worked is less than the number of hours required, the difference is multiplied by each position’s total compensation.
Application
1. For professional medical staff (physicians, dentists, psychiatrists, P/ks, and/kRNP’s):
Full Time Equivalent position(s) (hereinafter referred to as "FTE’), may be filled by an employee hired in temporary status. However, if the FTE is vacant for more than thirty (30) days, the staffing adjustment set forth above shall be subtracted from the monthly payment retroactive to the first day of the vacancy.
b. If an FTE vacancy is filled by a permanent replacement within thirty (30) days, staffing adjustments shall apply only to the actual number of required hours not worked.
c. If an FTE position is filled by one or more temporary employees for more than thirty (30) days, the position may be deemed vacant, and the staffing adjustment may be subtracted from the monthly payment as of the thirtieth day of the vacancy. However, Contractor may request approval in writing from BSO to continue filling an FTE position with a qualified temporary employee beyond the thirty day period. Such approval by BSO shall not be unreasonably withheld, and if granted, the position shall not be considered vacant.
2. For other listed positions:
If a position is vacant for more than thirty (30) days, the staffing adjustment set forth above shall be subtracted from the monthly payment retroactive to the first day of the vacancy.
C. Changes
1. The BSO shalt give the Contractor thirty (30) days notice of any change in the staffing or mandates or schedule. For any additional personnel requested, the Contractor

sha~l have a thirty (30) day period foI~owing the date of notification during which any penalty or adjustment for the specific non-filled staff position shall not be levied.
XXXVIII. THIRD PARTY REIMBURSEMENT
A. Contractor will seek third party or insurance reimbursement for inmate medical services performed by the Contractor and will agree to equally share with the Broward Sheriff’s Office any reimbursement. In the event that third party insurance reimbursement exceeds the catastrophic cost limit, collection of said amount will be shared with Broward County.
ADJUSTMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE LEVEL
A... General
\
1. Monthly adjustments will also be made for deficiencies in performance based on a penalty for failure to maintain the expected program level, including unfilled positions and unsatisfactory service. Unsatisfactory service is defined as service which consistently does not satisfy the material provisions of this Contract. Compensation shall be adjusted by a fiat fee for each day the program level is deficient. No performance level adjustments will be made until written notice has been provided to the Contractor and the Contractor has been given a pedod of 10 working days to rectify any deficiencies. The procedure for implementing penalties for performance level adjustments for unsatisfactory services will not be initiated until the level of service is unsatisfactory, as determined by the Contract Monitor in consultation with the Director, Assistant Directors, and these services do not meet the minimum level of services as more fully specified herein. Contractor shall be given the opportunity to have its representatives be present during any audit or monitor examinations of records that have financial implications, and to review wdtten specifics without ¯ unduly delaying or interfering with the process.
B. Performance Level Penalties Defined
1. Unfilled FTE: (A regularly scheduled on-site FTE which is vacant.)
a. Within thirty (30) day notice pedod
With coverage - no adjustments Without coverage - Average Compensation per futl-time FTE per day for each day without coverage.
b. After thirty (30) day notice period
With coverage - No adjustment Without coverage - $500 per day.
2. Unsatisfactory Service:
Within thirty (30) day notice period - No adjustment 28

After 30 day notice (without correction or if services remain unsatisfactory) - A $1,000 maximum daily penalty.

Performance Requirements:

ao

The following applicable performance requi~ements will be

reviewed on a quarterly basis by the BSO with the exception of

paragraphs i, ii, iii and vii, below. Failure of Contractor to comply

with any of the following performance requirements will cause a

penalty in the amount indicated to be assessed against

Contractor, and deducted from the next monthly payment.

Booking medical screenings will be completed as required by the contract.

PENAL-FY: $1,000 PER MONTH FOR NONCOMPLIANCE

ii. Monthly Quality Management Report shall be submitted to the BSO Health Services Administrator by the 10th day of the following month.

PENALTY: $1,000 PER MONTH FOR NONCOMPLIANCE

iii. Number of new inmate admission screenings should be. 100% compliance of number of inmates admitted.

PENALTY: $1,000 PER MONTH FOR NONCOMPLIANCE

iV. Physician orders shall be acknowledged in the medical record and carded out and documented by an appropriately credentialed contract employee.

PENALTY: $10,000 QUARTERLY FOR NONCOMPLIANCE OF GREATER THAN 10% OF THE SAMPLE.

Telephone and verbal orders by a physician will be countersigned by the physician.

PENALTY: $10,000 QUARTERLY FOR NONCOMPLIANCE OF GREATER THAN 5% OF SAMPLE.

29

vi. Inmates identified at Intake as having been previously under mental health treatment in the past six (6} months, or currently on psychotropic medication, shalt be evaluated by a psychiatrist within seventy-two (72) hours.
PENALTY: $10,000 QUARTERLY FOR NONCOMPLIANCE OF GREATER THAN 5% OF THE SAMPLE.
vii. History and physical scheduled or completed within fourteen (14) days of admission.
PENALTY. $1,000 MONTHLY FOR NONCOMPLIANCE OF GREATER THAN 5% OF MONTHLY SAMPLE.
Contractor’s QA criteria fall 20% or more below established threshold for 2 of 3 consecutive months of the quarter as determined by legal counsel.
PENALTY - $10,000 QUARTERLY FOR 2 OF 3 MONTHS OF QUARTER.
The BSO shall prepare an analysis of all monthly adjustments which identifies each adjustment made, including any performance penalties.
Performance level adjustments, matedal increases to staffing or other components of the Contract, shall be communicated by formal wdtten notice.
Deductions provided for in this agreement shall not be construed as penalties, but rather are liquidated damages, nor shall the provision of these deductions or the terms of this agreement be construed to limit or otherwise affect the parties remedies for failure of one of the parties to comply with any of the terms of the agreement.
XL. OFF-THE-STREET INJURIES
A. Payment for medical care for "off-the-street injuries" sustained by an individual shall not be the responsibility of Contractor and responsibility shall be in compliance with Section 901.35, Florida Statutes. For purposes of this Agreement, the term "off-the-street injuries" shall mean injudes or illnesses other than minor medical services, as determined by the Contractor, incurred or occasioned by an individual prior to the individual being committed to the custody of the BSO. Contractor will not be responsible for non-minor injuries to any
30

individuals caused by a municipality during or at the time of the arrest. However, Contractor shall be responsible for follow-up care of an applicable individual suffedng from an off-the-street injury after they are officially booked and processed by BSO at any of the facilities.
XLI. INMATES OUTSIDE THE FACILITIES
A. Contractor’s health care services are intended only for those inmates who are committed to the custody and control of BSO. This includes inmates under guard in outside hospitals, and inmates sentenced to work release or similar programs who sleep in a BSO facility each night. Such inmates will be included in the daily population count. Inmates on any sort of temporary release or furlough, in-house restriction by any type of electrical or telecommunication device, including, but not limited to, inmates on escape status where such an escape activity has ventured beyond the perimeters of a BSO facility, inmates on pass, parole or’supervised custody who do not sleep in the jail at night will not be included in the daily population count. The Contractor will not be responsible with respect to the payment or furnishing of health care services. Inmates in the custody of other police or penal institutions are likewise excluded from the population count and the Contractor is not responsible to furnish or pay for health care services.
XLII. COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND NATIONAL COMMISSION ON CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE STANDARDS
A. Contractor will provide health care services which meet or exceed the American Medical Association and National Commission on Correctional Health Care Standards and the Cont,’actor will formally maintain accreditation as required after signing of contract renewal. The Contractor’s will maintain accreditation by the National Commission on Correctional Health Care each year throughout the term of the contract. The Contractor will agree to pay the. Broward Sheriffs Office a One Hundred Thousand Dollar ($100,000.00) penalty fee if National Commission accreditation is not maintained for any facility throughout the term of the contract. The Contractor will maintain accreditation under the rules proscribed by NCCHC.
XLIII. COMPLIANCE WITH STATE MINIMUM JAIL STANDARDS AND THE AMERICAN CORRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION
A. Contractor will provide services which comply with the Florida Shedff’s Association/Florida Association of /Counties Model Jail Standards and the Amedcan Correctional Association.
XLIV. INVOICING AND OFFICIAL PAYEE
A. The Contractor shall be required to invoice the BSO monthly as outlined in the Compensation Section, and designate an Official Payee and their address.
B. Invoices for compensation for services or expenses will be submitted in detail sufficient to facilitate a proper pre-audit and post-audit thereof.
XLV. ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS 31

A. All administrative functions, i.e., support staff, telephone, supplies and word processing shall be provided by the Contractor at its expense.
XLVI. NOTICE AND ADDRESS OF PAYEE
A. Any notices required or permitted hereunder shall be effective on the day on which delivery is made in person with proof of delivery or on the date on which delivery is made to any party at the address set forth below, or at such other address as such party shall specify to the other in notice given hereunder, and, if sent by registered or certified mail return receipt requested, such notice shall be deemed to have been delivered to the party to whom such notice was addressed on the third business day after the day on which mailed.
Contractot-:
President EMSA Limited Partnership 1200 S. Pine Island Road, Suite 600 Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33324
BSO: Sheriff Public Safety Building 2601 West ~3roward 13oulevard Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33312
with copy to:
Director of Corrections and Rehabilitation E~roward County Sheriff’s Office Public Safety Building 2601 West Broward Boulevard Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33312
XLVII. ASSIGNMENT
A. Neither party shall assign the Contract, in whole or in part, or any payment arising therefrom without the prior written consent of the other party.
XLVI[I. SEVERABILITY
A. The invalidity or unenforceability of any particular provision of this Contract shall not affect the other provisions hereof and this Contract shall be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provision was omitted.
XLIX. PARTIES BOUND 32

A. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of BSO and
Contractor and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors, assigns, or other parties claiming a right to the operation of the facilities.

L. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This Contract contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties, and may be amended or modified only by the written agreement of both parties.

CONTRA C TOR:

EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP By x.,~=:szx~xxx ~ x x ~x.,Y..,v~:~,x x x xi x,.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.~x ~.x.x,,x
Ih~HYNET HOSPI~ S~S, ~C.
i~ General Pa~ner, ~x~.=z~

BSO: BRO~ SHE~ OFF, CE
AND " -
S~an McCampbel’t, Dir~tor Approved as to form and legality subject to execu~y the pa~ies.
~~s T. Whitelock, Esq. ~1)-~ ~ Counsel to the Sheriff

33

ATTACHMENT A

STAFF POSITION MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

This section specifies the minimum qualifications which must be met by persons filling individual positions required by the Institution, whether employee of the contractor or a person providing services as a subcontractor.

TITLE

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS

PREFERRED EXPERIENCE

Medical Director

Licensed to practice medicine in the State of Florida in accordance with Florida Statute 958.
2. Current DE.A Registration Number.

1. Correctional Health Care
2. Famity Practice
3. Emergency Medicine
4. Management

Physician

Licensed to practice family medicine in the State of Ftorida in accordance with Florida Statute 958.

1. Family Practice
2. Emergence Medicine

,2. Current DEA Registration Number.

3. Internal Medicine

Registered Nurse Supervisor

Licensure as a registered professional nurse in accordance with Florida Statute 464 or eligible to practice nursing in accordance with Florida Administrative Code 210-8.27 and three years of professional nursing, psychiatric nursing, psychiatric nursing or nursing instruction
34

1. Two years administrative experience
2. Correctional Nursing

Registered Nurse
Physician (Psychiatrist) Psychologist

experience. A bachelor’s degree in nursing or nursing education can substit.ute for one year of the required experience. A master’s degree in nursing, psychiatric nursing or nursing education can substitute for two years of the required experience.
1. Licensure as a registered professional nurse in accordance with Florida Statute 464 or eligible to practice nursing in accordance with Florida Administrative Code 210-8.27 and one year of professional nursing experience; o._Er
2, A bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university with a major in nursing and licensure as a registered professional nurse in accordance with Florida Statute 464 or eligible to practice nursing in accordance with Florida Administrative Code 210-8.27.
A current Public Psychiatry Certificate issued by the Florida Board of Medical Examiners pursuant to Florida Statute 458.3165.
1. A doctorate from an accredited college or university in psychology,
35

1. Correctional Nursing

Psychological Specialist Medical Record Administrator
Paramedic/EMT
LPN

one year of supervised internship experience in professional psycholegy, and two years of professional experience psychotogy; or
Licensure as a Psychologist in accordance with F~orida Statute 490 and two years of professional psychology experience.

A master’s degree from an accredited college or university in counseling or psychology.
1. Certification as an Accredited Record
Technician by the American Medical Record Association;
or
2. Three years of experience in compiling, maintaining, and coding medical records.

Familiar with JCAHO, ACA, and Department and Rules.

Certification as an Emergency Medical Technician or Paramedic in accordance with Florida Statute 401 and two years of experience in providing health support services in a hospital, c~inic, infirmary, nursing or convalescent home or ambulance or rescue service.

Licensure as a practical nurse in in accordance with FIodda Statute

Health Services Administrator
Nurse Practitioner
Physician’s Assistant Registered Nurse Specialist F/C

464 or eligible to practice nursing in accordance with Florida Administrative Code 210-8.22 or 8.27 and two years of experience in providing health support services in a hospital, clinic, infirmary, or nursing or convalescent home.

1. A bachelor’s degree from

1. Correctional

an accredited college or

Management

university and two years of

2. MBA or MHA

professional administrative or consultative experience

in hospital, institutional

or health care administration.

2. A master’s degree from an accredited college or university with major

course of study in hospital or

health care administration or

business can substitute for one

year of the required experience.

Certification as an advanced registered nurse
practitioner in accordance with Flodda Statute 464.

Certification as a physician’s assistant in
accordance with Flodda Statute 458.

Licensure as a registered professional nurse in accordance with Florida Statute 464 or eligible to practice nursing in accordance with Florida Administrative Code 210-8.27 and three years of professional experience in a specialty field as determined by the employing agency.

POSITION DESCRIPTIONS
ARNPICLINICAL ASSOCIATES
The incumbent in this position is responsible for conducting physical examinations and providing primary health care services to inmates. The employee in this position spends a minimum of 75% of his/her time performing duties which involve contact with inmates in a correctional institution. Duties may include but will not be limited to the following:
Performs t’outine physicals for inmates and compiles and evaluates medical histories. Orders appropriate tab tests and prescribed medications as established in physician protocots.
Makes daily rounds to observe and record progress of inmates in confinement. Conducts sick calls, identifies and evaluates illnesses and inquiries and administers treatment in accordance with physician approved protocols.
Coordinates referrals to outside medical facilities. Arranges consultations with institution health care staff as needed.
Provides emergency health care to inmates with life endangering traumatic injuries.
Performs other related duties as assigned.

MEDICAL DIRECTOR
The incumbent is responsible for:
Directing the overall health care program at the institution under the general supervision of the Director.
Perform examinations, make medicat diagnoses and prescribe medications and/or treatment on a routine an(:[ emergency basis.
Supervise all Health Service staff. Assure a continuing in-service health training program for all staff andhealth education for inmates.
Periodically review all areas of the ~nstitution to ensure a safe and healthy environment, coordinating the correction of any deficiencies with the Superintendent, local county health facilities and Health Services. as needed.
Supervise the preparation of inmates’ medical records.
Investigate cases of contagious diseases and take necessary action to ensure the disease is isolated.
Provide consultative services to other medical staff. Coordinate medical services from specialty areas within the community and medica~ services from the community hospitals.
Supervise activities of out-patient clinic, record room, medical library, medical laboratory,. pharmacy, x-ray, dental clinics, psychiatric service, psychology service and other specialized services.

PHYSICIAN The incumbent in this position is responsible for providing diagnoses, medical treatment and care of inmate patients. Duties may include but will not be limited to the following: Performs examinations, makes medical diagnoses and prescribes medications and/or treatment. Supervises nurses and others engaged in inmate patient care in providing prescribed medication and treatment. Performs physical examinations as prescribed in Department policies for inmate patients. Also conducts pre--employment and pedodic physical examinations for certain staff required to have such examinations by law. Consults with other health services staff to ensure proper health care and treatment is provided to inmate patients. Investigates cases of contagious disease and takes necessary action to ensure disease is isolated Initiates, interprets and eva~uates diagnostic c]inical tests. Performs other related duties as assigned.
4O

REGISTERED NURSE SUPERVISOR The incumbent in this position is responsible to the Medical Director in an out-patient clinic for the Inmate Health Care Program and the supervision of all professional and paraprofessional nursing personnel. The employee in this position spends a minimum of 75% of his/her time performing duties which involves contact with inmates in a correctional institution. Supervise the activities of nurses providing out-patient care on a daily basis. Directs the work of employees to ensure maximum use of time and resources through efficient planning of work loads, work flows, deadlines, work objectives and time utilization with employees. Motivates employees to improve the quality and quantity of work performed. Supervises and participates in the preparation of plans and reports, teaching elementary and advanced nursing arts including housekeeping, care of patients, charting procedures and administration of medication. Trains employees in methods for performing and effective and efficient job.
Initiates new and revised treatment approaches and incorporates them into nursing practices, developing inter-departmental communication with other treatment teams for continuous service delivery. Identifies and evaluates illnesses and injuries, participates in conducting nursing practices research to improve the medical treatment rendered to inmates and supervises in teaching nursing practices and methods to professional nursing staff and non-professional medical staff. Evaluates employees through establishing evaluation criteda and responsibilities and meeting regularty with employees to ensure the pre-established criteria are met. Performs other related duties as assigned.
4]

REGISTERED NURSE The incumbent in this position is responsible for performing professional nursing work in the care and treatment of inmate patients. The employee in this position spends a minimum of 75% of his/her time performing duties which invotve contact with inmates in a correctional institution. Participate in the screening of inmates for sick call and perform physical assessments. Provide treatment and administer medications in non-emergency and chronic illnesses per physician protocols or directions. Initiate appropriate treatment and/or meclications in emergency situations within the guidelines of physical protocol. Responsible for complete and accurate documentation in the inmate patient’s health care record for~care provided. Coordinate the work of paraprofessional nursing staff with professional nursing functions to insure an efficient working environment Participate in the maintenance, requisition and record keeping of medications and clinic supplies. Supervise inmate orderlies as needed. Participate in educational health programs such as diabetic education for inmate patients. Participate in continuing education and in-service training to maintain professional capability and proficiency. Perform other related duties as assigned.
42

PHYSICIAN (PSYCHIATRIST) Provides diagnostic psychiatric consultation and evaluation of inmates. Provides psychiatric treatment and follow-up for those inmates inneed of psychotropic medication. Responsible for developing and maintaining the Individual Wdtten Treatment Plan when indicated. Provides in-patient rounds at Cdsis Stabilization Units (CSU) and Transitional Care Un.its (TCU). Participates in case conference and staff reviews for inmates at CSU’s and TCU’s. Wdtes discharge summaries for inmates at CSU’s and TCU’s. Admits and discharges inmates at CSU’s and TCU’s. Performs on-call and weekend rounds responsibilities as required by each institution. Supervision of out-patient psychiatric nurses.
43

PSYCHOLOGIST
The incumbent in this position is responsible for the coordination and delivery of psychological services. The employee in this position spends a minimum of 75% of his/her time performing duties which involves contact with inmates in a correctional institution. Duties and responsibilities include but will not be limited to the following:
Responsible for administering, supervising and coordinating the institution’s psychological program ,. to ensure compliance with hea~th care policies and procedures and institution operating procedures.
Conducts counseling or therapeutic interviews to assist individual inmates in gaining insight into personal prob}ems and define goals, as well as plan actions to assist in alleviating stress through increasing awareness of the inmates’ interests, abilities and needs. Evaluates data to identify causes of problems and to determine advisability of counseling or referral to other specialists or facilities.
Coordinates and conducts group and individual counseling sessions and prepares notes and reports on progress as it relates to inmates’ treatment plans.
Administers and interprets individual intelligence, personality and other psychological tests as appropriate. Interprets test results in fight of standard norms and limitations of tests in terms of validity and reliability with regard to certain socio-economic factors.
Participates in diagnostic and other staff meetings for the purpose of treatment p~anning. Discusses inmates who display behaviora~ or adjustment problems and makes recommendations to assist in a~leviating problems through appropriate c}inical treatments.
Consults with medical staff as welt as employees in other institutional areas, such as classification, education and recreation, in obtaining information used for assessment and treatment plans as appropriate.
Develops, coordinates and provides in-service training for Psychological Services staff within assigned institution. Participates in training programs as required, by teaching and demonstrating various techniques of counseling which may be used on a daily basis by lay personnel.
Performs other related duties as required.
44

AGREEMENT Between
BROWARD COUNTY
and
EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

AGREEMENT
Between
BROWARD COUNTY
and
_EMSA LIMITEDPARTNERSHIP
This Agreement, entered into this ~day of’"~ ,19’71, by and between BROWARD COUNTY, a political subdivision of the/State of Florida, hereinafter referred’to as "COUNTY";
and
EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a limited Florida partnership corporation, its successor and assigns, hereinafter referred to as "EMSA";
WHEREAS, COUNTY and the Broward County Sheriff, as the chief correctional officer of the Broward County jail system, desire to provide reasonably necessary medical care to inmates in Broward County jail and detention facilities; and
Wt-IEREAS, EMSA and RON COCHRAN, as Sheriff of Broward County, (hereinafter referred to as "BSO") entered into a three-year contract on August 6, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the "1993 BSO Agreement"), which required EMSA to provide medical services to inmates in the Broward County jail system for the period October 1, 1993 through September 30, 1996; and
WHEREAS, Article XXlX of the 1993 BSO Agreement limited the financial responsibility of EMSA and anticipated that EMSA would enter into a contract with COUNTY for reimbursement to EMSA for health care treatment of a single inmate which exceeds the cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00); and
WHEREAS, Article XYO(IX of the 1993 BSO Agreement requires EMSA to seek third party insurance reimbursement for medical services performed and to share such third party insurance reimbursements it receives with BSO and COUNTY; and
WHEREAS, in December 1996, EMSA and BSO entered into an amendment (hereinafter 1996amendments) to the parties’ 1993 Agreement to extend the term on a month-to-month basis; and

WHEREAS, the 1996 amendment to the 1993 agreement between EMSA and BSO also requires EMSA to enter into a contract with COUNTY to reimburse EMSA for health care treatment of a single inmate which exceeds a cumulative tota~ of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00); NOW, THEREFORE,
IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual terms, conditions, promises, covenants and payments hereinafter set forth, COUNTY and EMSA agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
EERM
1.1 This Agreement shall be effective commencing upon the date of its execution by both parties and shall continue to September 30, 1997, unless either party elects to terminate. Any such termination shall be in accordance with the termination provisions of this Agreement. Any other term notwithstanding, this Agreement shall automatically terminate upon any termination or expiration of the 1996 amended agreement between BSO and EMSA which extended the terms of the parties’ 1993 agreement on a month-to-month basis.
ARTIC.LE 2
SCOPE OF SERVICES
2.1 EMSA has agreed to provide medical and health care services for inmates at BSO’S detention centers as set forth in its 1996 amended agreement with BSO.
2.2 EMSA shall bill and pursue collection of payment and reimbursement from all parties where appropriate including, without limitation, individuals, Medicaid, and insurance companies, for services rendered under this Agreement. Each request by EMSA to COUNTY for reimbursement is deemed to include the express representations by EMSA to COUNTY that no other reimbursement was obtained for the services invoiced and that COUNTY may rely upon such representation. EMSA shall include documentation demonstrating that it pursued the collection of medical charges from third parties in any requests for payment it submits to the COUNTY.
-2-

ARTICLE 3
P____A_~_~ E N T
3.1 COUNTY shall reimburse EMSA, in accordance with and.subject to the requirements set forth in Article 3 herein, for those qualifying amounts of medical and health care payments it makes for treatment of a single inmate during his or her continuous incarceration in the Broward County jail system which exceeds the cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00).
3.2 In addition, EMSA may seek reimbursement from COUNTY, in accordance with and subject to the requirements and guidelines set forth in Article 3 herein, for qualifying amounts of medical and health care payments on the attached Exhibit A which ex~,eed the cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) which it made for treatment of a single inmate during his or her continuous incarceration in the Broward County jail system during the period of October 1, 1993 to September 30, I996. After determining that an item qualifies for reimbursement, in accordance with the requirements and guidelines on the attached Exhibit A, COUNTY shall reimburse EMSA in the appropriate amount. COUNTY shall not be obligated to pay interest on amounts provided for under this provision.
3.3 EMSA represents to COUNTY that it has complied with Article XXXIX of its 1993 Agreement with BSO and that it will comply with the 1996 amendment to its 1993 agreement with BSO which provides that EMSA will seek third party insurance reimbursement for medical services provided to BSO’S inmates. EMSA further represents that it has fully complied with its agreement to share equally with BSO any such third party insurance reimbursement it receives. EMSA agrees to seek reimbursement under this Agreement only for those cases for which there is no third party insurance reimbursement and only for those cases which exceed the catastrophic cost limit.
3.4 The COUNTY agrees to process for payment the portion of any request, billing or invoice for which there is adequate supporting documentation and further agrees to advise EMSA in writing of the additional required information and documentation. EMSA further agrees that COUNTY has the right to withhold or deny payment if EMSA submits insufficient or incomplete documentation.

ARTICLE 4
METHOD OF PAYMENT
4.1 EMSA and COUNTY agree that the guidelines, documentation, and procedures for reimbursement of catastrophic payments set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, shall be fully complied with prior to payment of invoices by COUNTY.
4.2 EMSA shall submit monthly billing statements in the form specified in Exhibit B for all qual~ying medical and health care services provided during the previous month, untess a written extension has been granted by the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement. The requirement to submit a statement for the previous month’s payments shal} not app)y to amounts to be paid pursuant to Section 3.2 and for amounts to be paid beginning October 1, 1996, to the date of execution of this Agreement. COUN’I-Y agrees to pay EMSA for properly submitted invoices as specified in Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof. Invoices are due on or before the tenth of the following month, beginning on the tenth of the first month following contract execution by COUNTY. EMSA shall be reimbursed on a monthly basis upon complying with the billing requirements of this Agreement. COUNTY shall pay EMSA within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of EMSA’S properly submitted invoice in accordance with the provisions of the COUNTY’S Prompt Payment Ordinance 89-49. To be deemed proper as defined by the Florida Prompt Payment Act, all invoices must comply with the requirements set forth in this Agreement and must be submitted using the form prescribed by COUNTY in Exhibit B. Invoices or documentation returned to EMSA for corrections shall be cause for delay in reimbursement.
4.3 COUNTY shall not be obligated to pay interest on any amounts invoiced to COUNTY prior to the date of the execution of this Agreement by COUNTY.
4.4 Monthly invoices submitted by EMSA shall include a certification statement, signed by an authorized person as referenced in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
4.5 Invoices unacceptably submitted within thirty (30) days of the closing date of this Agreement shall not be payable, unless a written extension has been granted by the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement. COUNTY agrees to make payments to EMSA for qualifying services performed prior to the closing date of the Agreement as set forth in the term provisions in Article 1. Invoices and documentation returned to EMSA for corrections shall not be considered as submitted to COUNTY.
-4-

In the event of termination of this Agreement for any reason as set forth in the termination provisions in Article 5, COUNTY agrees to make payments to EMSA for qualifying services performed prior to the date of termination of the Agreement. tn such event, COUNTY’s responsibility for making any such payments will be contingent upon the COUNTY receiving all billing invoices-and supporting documentation from EMSA within thirty (30) days of the termination date of the agreement. Invoices and documentation returned to EMSA for corrections shall not be considered as submitted to COUNTY.
4.6 EMSA shall provide signature authorization.to COUNTY as shown in Exhibits C and D attached hereto and made a part hereof. In the event that it becomes necessary for EMSA to replace signature authorization, EMSA shall submit a certificate from thQ corporate secretary or a notarized copy of the authorizing resolution as passed by EMSA’S Board of Directors or Trustees to the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement, along with replacement Exhibits C and D.
4.7 EMSA shall keep accurate and complete records of any fees collected, reimbursement, or compensation of any kind received from any inmate, Medicaid, or other party for services covered by this Agreement, and shall make all such records available to the COUNTY upon request. EMSA shall deduct such fees, reimbursement, compensation or funding from its invoices.
4.8 Payment will be made to EMSA at:
EMSA Limited Partnership Correctional Care Division Cornerstone Building, Suite 600 1200 South Pine Island Road Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33324-4460
Federal ID Number: /#,. ~--" ~qO~
ARTICLE 5
TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
5.1 This Agreement may be terminated by COUNTY or EMSA for cause upon verbal notice, confirmed in writing within the seven (7) day period subsequent to the giving of the verbal notice. This Agreement may also be terminated by the COUNTY for convenience upon not less than thirty (30) days’ advance written notice thereof, or by the COUNTY upon verbal notice confirmed in writing within the seven (7) day period subsequent to giving of the verbal notice of termination for convenience. In
-5-

the event this Agreement is terminated for convenien"ce, EMSA shall be paid for any services performed to the date the Agreement is terminated; however, upon being notified of COUNTY’S election to terminate, EMSA shall refrain from performing further services or incurring additional expenses under the terms of this Agreement unless directed by the Contract Administrator. COUNTY’S obligation to pay for qualifying services rendered prior to the termination date of this Agreement is set forth in Section 4.5 above.
5.2 If EMSA fails to provide services or fails to adequately provide services required by this Agreement, or if EMSA fails to perform any of the other provisions of this Agreement, COUNTY, through its Contract Administrator, may immediately terminate this Agreement upon written notice with such termination becoming eff.ective upon delivery of notification.
5.3 EMSA acknowledges and agrees that ten ($10.00) of the compensation has been paid by COUNTY, the adequacy and receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by EMSA, is given as specific consideration to EMSA for COUNTY’S right to terminate this Agreement for convenience.
ARTICLE 6
INSURANCE
6.1 EMSA shall maintain in force for the term of this Agreement comprehensive general liability in the minimum amount of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) per occurrence bodily injury and property damage combined single limits. Such policy will be evidenced by Certificate of Insurance which reflects COUNTY as an additional insured and provides thirty (30) days prior written notice of cancellation. Certification also to be evidenced of compliance with Florida Statute 440 (Workers’ Compensation Law).
Further, EMSA shall maintain professional liability insurance in the minimum amount of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) each claim.
N’~ invoices shall be paid until the files of COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement contain a Certificate or acceptable documentation approved by COUNTY’S Risk Management personnel. A copy of the Certificate of Insurance as approved by the COUNTY’S Risk Management personnel which shall be maintained by EMSA during the term of this Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit F, and made a part hereof.

6.2 If EMSA’S insurance is provided by a municipality and at any time the municipality is unable or unwilling or otherwise ceases to provide insurance to COUNTY for injury, damages, or liability which may arise out of the performance of this Agreement, EMSA shall be responsible for providing sufficient insurance in amounts and under terms required by COUNTY. It shall be the sole discretion of COUNTY what constitutes sufficient insurance. Documentation shall be submitted by EMSA for approval through COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement to CQUNTY’S Risk Management personnel.
No invoices shall be paid until the files of COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement contain documentation approved by COUNTY’S Risk Management personnel.
ARTICLE 7
INDEMNIFICATION
7.1 EMSA shall indemnify and save harmless and defend COUNTY, its agents, servants and employees from and against any claim, demand or cause of action of whatsoever kind or nature, including COUNTY’S attorney’s fees and costs, arising out of error, omission, negligent act, conduct or misconduct of EMSA, its agents, servants or employees in the performance of services under this Agreement.
7.2 EMSA further agrees to indemnify, save harmless and defend COUN-FY, its agent, servants and employees from and against any claim, demand or cause of action of whatsoever kind or nature, including COUNTY’S attorney’s fees and costs, arising out of any conduct or any misconduct of EMSA not included in Paragraph 7.1 above, and for which the COUNTY, its agents, servants or employees are alleged to be liable.
7.3 EMSA’S obligation to defend COUNTY in Article 7 herein includes the option of the COUNTY to select the attorney(s) of its choice to defend COUNTY, subject to acceptance by EMSA, which acceptance shall not be unreasonably withheld.
7.4 The parties agree that the indemnification obligations set forth in Article 7 herein shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
-7-

ARTI .CLE 8
MISCELLANEOUS
8.1 QWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
Any and all reports, photographs, surveys and other data and documents provided or created in connection with this Agreement are and shall remain the property of COUNTY. In the event of termination of this Agreement, any reports, photographs, surveys and other data and documents, whether finished or unfinished, prepared by CONSULTANT shall become the property of COUNTY and shall be delivered by CO N SULTANT to the Contract Administrator.
8.2 ALIDIT RIGHT AND RETENTION OF RECORDS
EMSA and COUNTY agree that COUNTY has the right to audit, including conduct financial audits, of all invoices, bills, and payments received both before payment and after payment. If overpayment is identified, EMSA shall reimburse COUNTY for all amounts of the overpayment made to EMSA by COUNTY.
EMSA shall preserve and make available all financial records and financial audits, supporting documents, statistical records, and any other documents pertinent to this Agreement for a period of five (5) years after termination of this Agreement; or, if an audit has been initiated and audit findings have not been resolved at the end of the five (5) years, the records shall be retained until resolution of the audit findings EMSA will cooperate with the COUNTY to facilitate the duplication and transfer of any said records or documents during the required retention period.
To make all records pertaining to reimbursements requested subject at all times to inspection, review and/or audit by COUNTY, provided Federal and State laws or regulations and applicable professional standards of ethics requiring confidentiality are not violated.
That "records pertaining to reimbursements requested" as referenced in the foregoing section shall include but not be limited to: client flies; case and/or progress notes; individual treatment plans; individual case management plans; residential occupancy logs; admission/discharge logs; telephone logs; service delivery records including treatment schedules; purchase records; accounting records; professional credentials: consumer satisfaction surveys; internal evaluation procedures; agency and project records of goals and objectives and attainment/accomplishment.
-8-

8.3 ASSIGNMENT
This Agreement, or any interest herein, shall not be assigned, transferred or otherwise encumbered without the written consent of the other party.
8.4 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR EMPLOYMENT OR SERVICES
EMSA shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, age, religion, color, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, physical or mental disability. EMSA shall take affirmative action to insure applicants are employed and employees treated during employment without regard to race, age, religion, color, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, ma, rital status, physical or mental disability. Such actions shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff, termination, rates of pay, other forms of compensation, terms and conditions of employment, training, including apprenticeship, accessibility, reasonable accommodation or other considerations arising from Title Vtl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; or the Americans W~th Disabilities Act of 1990.
EMSA’S decisions regarding client eligibility shall be made without regard to, or consideration of race, age, religion, color, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, physical or mental disability or other factor which cannot be lawfully or appropriately used as basis for service delivery, as specified under Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; or the Americans With Disabilities Act of 199O.
EMSA shall comply with Title I and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act regarding nondiscrimination on the basis of disability in employment and in state and local government services, in the course of providing any services funded in whofe or in part by Broward County.
EMSA agrees to furnish COUNTY with a copy of its Equal Employment Opportunity Policy, including its affirmative action plan/procedures, to be submitted with the first invoice. Such documents must be forwarded through CQUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement to the Director of the Office of Equal Opportunity. EMSA agrees to comply with all federal, state, and local taws and ordinances applicable to its work, the services provided or to be provided hereunder or payment for work or services thereof.
8.5 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
EMSA is an independent contractor under this Agreement. Services provided by EMSA shall be by employees of EMSA and subject to supervision by EMSA, and not as officers, employees, or agents of Broward County. Employee compensation,
-9-

personnel policies, tax responsibilities, Social Security and health insurance, employee benefits, travel, per diem policies and other similar administrative procedures applicable to services rendered under this Agreement shalI be those of EMSA.
8.6 NOTICES
Whenever either party desires to give notice to the other, such notice must be in writing, sent by certified United States mail, with return receipt requested, or by hand-delivery, addressed to the party for whom it is intended at the place last specified. The place for giving notice shall remain the same as set forth herein until changed in writing in the manner provided in this section. For the present, the parties designate the following:
FOR COUNTY:
Director Health Care Management Division 101 Northeast 3 Avenue, 4th Floor Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301
FOR EMSA:
EMSA Limited Partnership Correctional Care Division Cornerstone Building, Suite 600 1200 S. Pine Island Road Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33324
8.7 PUBLIC ENTITY CRIMES ACT
EMSA represents that the execution of this Agreement will not violate the Public Entity Crimes Act (Section 287.133, Florida Statutes), which essentially provides that a person or affiliate who is a contractor, consultant or other EMSA and who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a Public Entity Crime may not submit a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to the county, may not submit a bid on a contract with the County for the construction or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real propeity to the County, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with the County, and may not transact any business with the County in excess of the threshold amount provided in Section 287.017, Florida Statues, for category two purchases ($10,0000) for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list.
-10-

Violation of this section shall resutt in cancellation of this contract and recovery of all monies paid hereto, and may result in debarment from the County’s competitive procurement activities.
8.8 DRUG-FREE WORKPLAC..E
EMSA certifies that, by means of Exhibit E, attached hereto and made a part hereof, that it will provide a drug-free workplace program, pursuant to Section 112.0455, Florida Statutes, and will continue to make a good faith effort to maintain a drugfree workplace program during implementation of this Agreement.
8.9 WAIVER OF BREACH
Waiver of breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of this Agreement.
8.10 NO CONFLICTS
EMSA agrees that none of its employees shaII, during the term of this Agreement, voluntarily serve as an adverse or hostile witness against COUNTY in any legal or administrative proceeding, nor shall such persons voluntarily give sworn testimony or issue a report or writing, as an expression of his or her opinion, which is adverse or prejudicial to the interests of COUNTY in any pending or threatened legal or administrative proceeding. The limitations of this section shall not apply to those cases where an employee of EMSA is subpoenaed to testify in a legal or administrative proceeding where said empioyee is not serving as a paid witness against the COUNTY. Further, the limitations of this section shall not preclude such persons from representing themselves as a Defendant in any action or in any administrative or legal proceeding regarding this Agreement.
8.11 APPLICABLE LAW AND VENUE
This Agreement shall be governed, construed, and controlled according to the laws of the State of Florida. Any claim, objection or dispute arising out of the terms of this Agreement shall be litigated in the Seventeenth Judicial Court in and for Broward County, Florida.
8.12 PRIOR AGREEMENTS
This document incorporates and includes all prior negotiations, correspondence, conversations, agreements or understandings applicable to the matters contained herein; the parties agree that there are no commitments, agreements or
-11-

understandings concerning the subject matter of this Agreement that is not contained in this document. Accordingly, the parties agree that no deviation from the terms hereof shall be predicated upon any prior representations or agreements, whether oral or written. 8.13 AMENDMENTS No modification, amendment, or alteration in the terms or conditions contained herein shall be effective unless contained in a written document of the same formality and of equal dignity herewith and executed by the Board. 8.14 PRIORI"I-Y OF PROVISIONS If t6ere is a conflict or inconsistency between any term, statement, requirement, or provision of any exhibit attached hereto, any document or events referred to herein, or any document incorporated into this Agreement by reference and a term, statement, requirement, or provision of this Agreement, the term, statement, requirement, or provision contained in Articles 1 through 8 of this Agreement shall prevail and be given effect.
(The remainder of this page intentionally left blank).
-12-

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement on the respective dates under each signature: BROWARD COUNTY through

its BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, signing by and through th._e,C.C~ir or Vice

Chair, authorized to execute same by Board action on the ~

day of

C-’~..,..~ ¯ . , 19#7 ., and EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,.signing by and

through~t~ . .,~...M_~.~_~

, duly authorized to execute same.

COUNTY

ATTEST:

BROWARD COUNTY, through its BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

’(~"~ y"~m’i~ ~ r-E-x-Officio
Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners, Broward County, Florida

/ - /

Chair

S Y~da of"-"~-~]

, 19

Approved as to form by~Off]ce of County Attorney Broward County, Florida JOHN J. COPELAN, JR., County Attorney Governmental Center, Suite 423 115 South Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 357-7600 Telecopier: (954) 357-7641

Andrea S. Froome Assistant County Attorney

-13-

AGREEMENT BETWEEN BROWARD COUNTY AND EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP RELATING TO CATASTROPHIC PAYMENTS.

AI-rEST:

F_MSA EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP:

Secretary (CORPORATE SEAL)

J. Cliffo~’~n’deiss, President InPhyNet Hospital Services, Inc.,
as General Partner
,1997.

ASF/LEL:smc 04/28/97 emsa.a01 96-025, 96-044, 96-070
-14-

EXHIBIT A
GUIDELINES, DOCUMENTATION AND PROCEDURES REC~UIRED FOR REIMBURSEMENT O.F CATASTROPHIC PAYM ENTS
I. GUIDELINES AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED FOR REIMBURSEMENT:
EMSA agrees to adhere to the following guidelines in requesting catastrophic health care reimbursement from COUNTY which are as follows:
a) Claims submitted must comply with each arrest report giving rise to the
provision of services in order for COUNTY to verify and approve the dates that qualifying services were provided to the individual. If requested, EMSA shall provide a copy of the relevant arrest report to COUNTY.
b) Copies of applications or claim forms submitted for third party reimbursement
and copies of third party payments made and copies of all final dispositions.
c) Copies of all pages comprising the complete invoice. A summary sheet will
not be deemed acceptable.
d) Copies of all signed, executed and notarized affidavits showing compliance
with all state statutes and county resolutions and ordinances.
e) Expfanations for all charges or expenses that are exceptionally large or
having special circumstances over and above the ordinary circumstances.
For example, charges on a hospital bill prior to admission or after discharge date, procedures not typically associated with a particular diagnosis long term inpatient care or such types of circumstances. In such unusual cases, the COUNTY may request a copy of the medical report in unusual cases.
f) Copies of any and all documentation to indicate denial of funding for
Medicare or insurance coverage based on a particular diagnosis.
g) Copies of invoices to support reimbursement requests and health insurance
claim forms. Copies of checks or logs will not be deemed acceptable.

~1. PROCEDURES FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF CATASTROPHIC PAYMENTS:
EMSA agrees to provide verbal notification, followed by written notification within three (3) business days, to both COUNTY and BSO when a patient approaches the amount of Forty-Five Thousand Dollars ($45,000) near the catastrophic limit which is Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000)..Said notification will include a statement as to the nature of the illness(es) and the progression of the condition of the patient.
EMSA agrees to work with both COUNTY and BSO and the appropriate judicial agency to identify the most cost-effective health care EMSA for individuals approaching the catastrophic limit.
EMSA and COUNTY agree that catastrophic payments to be made to EMSA by COUNTY will be calculated for separate illness(es) and separate incarcerations.
EMSA’S agreement with BSO provides that in the event the third party insurance reimbursement exceeds the catastrophic cost limit, the collection of said amount will be shared with COUNTY. EMSA agrees that it will pursue collection of third party insurance reimbursement which exceeds the catastrophic cost limit. All amounts collected by EMSA shall be shared equally with the COUNTY. EMSA’S agreement with BSQ, or its addendum to its agreement with BSO, or EMSA’S documentation to BSQ shall contain the following requirements:
a) EMSA shall provide completed legible invoices and appropriate
supporting documentation to BSO and shall further require BSO to conduct its investigation and determination within thirty (30) days of receipt;
b) EMSA shall require BSO to insure that the individual was
incarcerated when the services were provided. It shall further require BSO to insure that the Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) limit for catastrophic payment required by COUNTY was reached for payment, tn the event that BSO finds that there is a problem with the documentation or that the documentation is insufficient to support the catastrophic payment, EMSA and BSQ shall both attempt to resolve the problem prior to BSO forwarding the invoice to the COUNTY for payment.
c) EMSA shall require that after BSO determines that the catastrophic
limit of $50,000 has been reached and that all third party reimbursement options were explored, thereby requiring payment by COUNTY, the authorized signatory for payment of invoices for BSO shall sign at an approval space for BSQ and insert the date of its

approval of the invoice which is being submitted to COUNTY for processing of payment to EMSA.
d) EMSA shall require that after BSO executes its approval and inserts
the date as set forth in paragraph (c) above, BSQ shall forward the approved invoices and supporting documentation to the COUNTY’S agency responsible for payment which is the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator, the Director of Health Care Management Division, located at 101 Northeast 3 Avenue, 4th Floor, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301.
Upon receipt of the invoices, the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator, or its designee, review of the documentation for processing of the invoices shall include the following:
1 ) Insure that all supporting documentation is included to support payment;
2) Review, evaluate and calculate the amounts on the invoices;
3) Determine that the dates the services were rendered correspond to the
dates of incarceration;
4) The COUNTY may review case files, cases and request that IEMSA provide
copies of the medical charts for the Individual served;
5) COUNTY shall confirm and determine that all third party reimbursement
options were explored by EMSA and BSO based on documentation provided to the COUNTY by EMSA.
IV. V~thin thirty (30) days of COUNTY’S receipt of the invoice from BSO, COUNTY will either forward payment to EMSA; forward a notice of deficiencies due to insufficient supporting documentation; and/or request for further information or documentation; and/or denies the request for payment.
EMSA and COUNTY agree that COUNTY has the sole and exclusive right to determine and decide the adequacy of the supporting documentation submitted for reimbursement.

DATE: INVOICE NO. VENDOR’S FULL NAME: VENDOR’S ADDRESS:

EXHIBIT B
BILLING INVOICE

VENDOR’s FEDERAL TAX I,D. NO.: TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: $. PATIENT’S NAME: DATE OF ARREST: NAME OF SERVICE FACILITY: ADDRESS OF SERVICE FACILITY:

SERVICES PROVIDED

SERVICES PROVIDED

FROM:

TO:

TOTAL AMOUNT OF DAYS:

TOTAL AMOUNT FOR SERVICE PROVIDED:

TOTAL AMOUNT PAID BY 8SO:

TOTAL ,~’~MOUNT PAID BY THIRD PARf-Y:

TOTAL AMOUNT DUE FROM COUNTY:

By, Authorized Invoice Signatory for EMSA

Total Amount of

due from County approved by BSO on the

day

of

,199

BY

Authorized Invoice Signatory for BSO

EXHIBIT C AUTHORIZED INVOICE SIGNATURES

EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, through the Board of Directors of its General Partner by

Unanimous Written Consent, duly recorded in the minutes thereof, or ~is seen from the

Certificate of Corporate Secretary dated Nay 7, 1997

, which is being

simultaneously provided to Broward County, did authorize

Maria Prado~ ~ice Premident

and

Name & Title (Typewritten)

Robert A. Caatille, Administrator

Name & Title (Typewritten)

to sign monthly

invoices and certification statements as required by the contract for the term effective on October 1, 1996, between Broward County and, appearing below are samples of signatures authorized by the Board of Directors or authorized as seen from the Certificate of Corporate Secretary for Secretary for InPhyNet Hospital Services, ~nc. as General Partner of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP as required by COUNTY.

Signature
~ ,.~
Signature

Signature Witness Signatures

Date

~ ~Print or Type)

(Print or Type) (CORPORATE SEAL)

EXHIBI.T D

CERTIFICATION OF EMPOWERMENT

Maria Prado, V£ce President
(Typewritten) Name and Office

¯ , hereby certify that:

I am duly authorized to sign this Agreement between Broward County and

EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, by Unanimous Written Consent of the Board of

Directors of InPhyNet Hospital Services, Inc., its General Partner, taking place on

May 7, 1997

, or by Certificate of Corporate Secretary

(Date of Board’s Resolution)

dated

May 7, 1997

My signature on this Agreement on behalf of the agency binds it to the Term and Scope of Services and all other conditions appearing in this Agreement.

All information supplied by the agency appearing in this Agreement or used in its development is accurate and true and I acknowledge that failure to supply accurate, truthful information may result in termination of the Agreement.

Signature

Name

Maria Prado

(Print or Type)

Title

Vice President

(Print or Type)

Date:

~ay 7, 1997

(CORPORATE SEAL)

Witness Signatures Signature /~3~"z- ~-

Date

(Print or Type) /f’~"~ ~

Signature

Name

(Print or Type)

Date

EXHIBIT E
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATION
The undersigned vendor hereby certifies that it will provide a drug-free wo~-kplace program by:
Publishing a statement notifying its employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the offeror’s workplace, and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violations of such prohibition;
Establishing a continuing drug-free awareness program to inform its employees about:
(i) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
(ii) The offeror’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace;
(iii) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and
(iv) The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for dru9 abuse violations occurring in the workplace;
(3) Giving all employees engaged in performance of the contract a copy of the
statement required by subparagraph (1);
(4) Notifying all employees, in writing, of the statement required by subparagraph (1), that as a condition of employment on a covered contract, the employee shall:
(i) Abide by the terms of the statement; and
Notify the employer in writing of the employee’s conviction under a criminal drug statute for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than 5 calendar days after such conviction;
(5) Notifying Broward County government in writing within 10 calendar days
after receiving notice under subdivision (4) (ii) above, from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. The notice shall include the position title of the employee;

EXHIBIT E - Pa~e 2
Within 30 calendar days after receiving notice under subparagraph (4) of a conviction, taking one of the following actions with respect to an employee who is convicted of a drug abuse violation occurring in the workplace:
(i) Taking appropriate personnel action against such employee, up to
and including termination; or
Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a federal, state, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency; and
(7) Making a good faith effort to maintain a drug-free workplace program
through implementation of subparagraphs (1) through~).

STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF BROWARD

(EMSA ~re)

/V ,4¢ZT-4

5 o

(Print EMSA Name)

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~.4~

dayof ~

.,19~3 ,by ~D,r-~r~ (name of person whose signature is being notarized)

as tl’CP_~, ~(-~’~t’E~£-r~dF of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

(title)

(name of corporation/company)

known to me to be the person described herein, or who produced .(10£r-.SOr~-1 tu as identification, and who did/did not take (type of identification) an oath. "-"

My commission expires:

20o0

EXHIBIT "F" (CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE SHALL BE ATTACHED HERETO)

TH~ L~TO CERTIFY TI-IAT YKE POUC~.S OF INSUIt.~NCE IJSTEO BEI_O~ HAVE BEEN t53UE~ TO THE INSURE~ NAME-O ABX:T~E FOR THE POUCY tNDICA’]I~3, NO’IYdTTH~"TANOJNQ ~,NY REQUIP.~MBcr. TERM OR CO/4Ol’rlON OF ANY O~T OR OTHER OOCUMEN3" WITH RE~IPECT TO WHICH TH~S CF.LRTIFICAT~ MAY B~ 1:~8UF.O OR MAY PERT, aJN. T~E IN~UR/~C...E AFFOR;QEO EYTHE POLICIES OET~..,~EIE:D HF-..q~N iS S, UB, JF.CT TO ~LL THE TERMS ~CLU~ION~ AND CoNor’RoH~ OF ~UCH POUC:;U~L UIJ4T8 $HOw~ k~,y H,&VE BF..,~N RJ~DUGF.O BY PAI~ CL~klS.
CF._RTIFZCATE HOLDER

PROQUCER
WILLIAM J. REE3E. JR.. INDiViDUAL
C/O HEA .THCAJ~E INSURANCE AGENCY, iNC. 8Z0 GES~NER. SUITE HOUSTON, T~S ~0~

Tills CF__~TI~c|C~T~ L.R~LfFr,.D A,~ A ~ OF IN~TIOf ONLY AND CON~. NO ~G~ UPON
HOLDE~ ~lS C~F~TE DOES NOT AMEND, AL~R ~HE CO~G~ A~FORDED BY ~E POLICIES ~ELOV

....... C:_O..M.PAN{ES AFFO_R..D. i__N. _G. _O.VEFL~GE

COMPA.N’,r
A

LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY

~NPHYN~ MED[C~ ~GEME~, iNC. 12~ S. P~NE IS~ND, RD, ~ ~. ~UDERDA~, FL

~PAN’t D

THI~ I£ I-Q C.,ERTIFY THAT THE POLIG1E5 OF INSURANCE ~ BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE IHSUR~ED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE PQUCY PEPJOD

|NDtEATE..~I NOTW~T~Ei’AND[NG ANY REQULREMI~NT, ~ OR COI~DI"I"~O~Q OF ANY COEI’~ACT OR OT~-IER DC~JJME.~"V~7"H, I;:r.£c~’PF_L"T’T~ V’,,’~}CH Tilts

CERTIFICATI~ MAY BE I.R.RUED OR I~t.A¥ PERTAIN. EXCLUSIONS/~ID CQND.r’RQNS OF SUCH POLIC~E,S.

THE IN.~UR,~,ICE AFFORDED B LfMrr8 SHOWN MAY HAVE BEE.N

YTHE POLICJE$ OE$CRIBF.D REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS,

HER,~IN

LR

.SUI~IECTTQ

.~UJ.

THE

~SI

"tYPE OF INSURAAC~

POLICY NUCI~E~

¯ [ IC LAIRS MAD E ~ .~.~ OCEU R

~Y AUTO ~ O~E~ A~5 SCH~ULED A~O~ HIRED A~OS NON~ A~OS
-
OAR.AGE "~ ANY AUTO
IF...,Im:C~S LIAB~IJTY
"--; U~B’~ FOP,.M,
I ’ 0T~C..R T~.AN ’IJ~BRELL.~ FOt°J~,
VVC1-1--0131781

ME9 EXP {~Y or~
COMt~U~ED SINGLE LIMrT
~ ODtLY INJURY pROPERTY~
.s

E.AC~ OCCURR~ENCE

, 08/01/’3~

08J01/97

EL EAI::~H AC.C..~rlNT ....

EL OISF.A~E - POUCY

=

$

I O0o#goC
I .000 i~

DF..,ScRIPTION OF OPE.I~LA"I3Oh~tl..OGAT’~N-T.."VF--1"4.1~PEP..LK.L ITF.M3
BROWARD COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE IS NAMED AS AN ADDE[ONAL INSURED AS RESPECTS THEIR AGREF_.MEN’I: V~ITH THE NAMED INSURED.

The JS 44 ciwl cover sheet and the reformation contained hereto neither replao

h

[ pleadings or other papers as requ~-~l

by law~ except as prowded by local rules of court. This ?orm. approved by the Ju I(ciat Con?erence oY the united States F~ .,September 1974 is [equ~-ed ~r me use

of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of in~tiat:ng the civil docket sheet (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM I

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS

DEFENDANTS

RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal
Representative of the Estate of
PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. , .,and
PETER COTTONE, SRo
co,,,~ oF ~.FSIDI~NCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF
(EXCEPT IN U S PLAINTIFF CASES)

KENNETH C. JENNE, II; PATRICK TIGHE; JOHN DOES, etc., et al.

BROWARD COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED DEFENDArJT

(~N U S PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

i’-JOTE

Ir.j LAr’-JD COrJDEk4r-JAT~©rJ CASES USE THE LOCATION ID~ THE TRACT C,F LAND INVOLVED

ATTORNEYS ~IRM NAME ~DDRES5 ~ND TELEPHONE NLIMB~j ’

HEYER & ASSOCEATES, P.A. 1311 SE 4 Avenue

954522-4922

--~~~e, ~L 333! 6

Unknown

C~RCLE COUN~ WHERE ACTION AROSE: DADE.

MONROE, ~.~OWARD. ) PALM BEACH¯ MAHTIN, ST LUCJE.

~u~
INDIAN RIVEB

~
OKEECHOSEE HIGHLANDS

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION ,PU~C~ AN X IN ONE BOX ONLYI

~q~ U S Government Plainlifl

~ 3 Federal Question (UIS Government Not a Party)

III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES r~_Acs A~ x ~ ONE BOX FOq

(For Diversity Cases Only)

AND ON6 BOX FOR

PTF DEF

PTF DEF

Cilizen of Th~s State

[] ~ [] 1 Incoof rBpuosrainteedssorInPTrihnicsipSatlaPtela-c;e []

[] 2 U S Government Defendant

[] 4 Diversity (Indicate Citizenship of Parlies ~n Item II1)

Citizen of Another Slate Citizen or Subject of a
Foreign Country

of BU~ Anger S~/

IV. ORIGIN
.-~t O,flginal ~ .~’ Proceeding

Removed l~om Stale Court

(PLACE AN "X" IN ONE BOX ONLY}

Transferred from

¯ -" a Remanded trom D 4 Reinstated ot ~ s another d~stnct

Appe#ate Coud Reopened

(specie)

V. NATURE OF SUIT (PLACE AN ilXl’ ;N ONE BOX ONLY)

A CONTRACT
[] 120 Maririe [] 130 M,l~er [] 140 Ne~ofiable Iri%lrLimenT

A TORTS

!FORFEITURE/PENALTY; A BANKRUPTCY/~

PERSONAL INJURY [] 310 ~,lrplane [] ~1~5 ~l~liDbllallrl~ye FarOducI
[] 320 ~5Saull LrDel & qlanOe~
E] 330 Federal En pore ~

PERSONAL INJURY [] 362 Personal Injur~ -
Med Malpia~llCe

iB[] !i10 Aghculture
r B~ 62~ Drug RP~aled Seizure

~ ~ ¢:ePr:~0ndu~clrI~Li1a~bl~h[y

,1 a~ 630 L’q"O’ La%II~

r~

36,8

AInsbjuersy~r oP~I~, oPdeurCsloLn,aatlIIIt%

I BF1 64(] R R ~8~ 650 A~Jin=

[] 422 Appeal 28 LISC ~ 4,23
I A PROPERTY’ RIGHTS ~ ,820 C,~Fy’,g~r~-

~ 40O~e Pe~po~nmenl
~ 430 B~ 4S0 Commerce. ICC

El 340 Mahne

~ReO~A[ P~OPE~TY I,

Safe~# Heallh

I [] ~130 Pale~I

~ 850

Ei 345

~ 350

JR SOCIAL SECURITY

~ 97S 12 L%C 3J 10

REAL PROPERTY
~tl0 I~en[ Lea.,~ .& El~llrienL

Q 3,613
A CIVIL RIGHTS
L.2 441 @:lllP.~
I r- 443 H:,~S,ng
I

~ PRISONER PETITIONS

I~ 8[= 510 ~,IL~ll(.r,", 1L’ ,’r~,:al+ HABEAS CORPUS:
I S~ &;~ Ge~le~&’

~ 74(] ~all,,~3, _.it’[,I Ai::

EL 900 FEDERAL TAX SUITS
,[] 950

J ~,---"~

I BO 5SS P ..... COndltl(m

2~ U~C

AOR8

DO NOT CITE JURISDICTIONAL STATUTES UNLESS DIVERSITY ~

LENGTH OF TRIAL

42 U.S.C. ss 1983

Via ~ days eMimateG Ifol bOlD s~des to In/entire case)

VII. REQUESTED IN

CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION

COMPLAINT:

t~ UNDER FR C P 23

DEMAND $ None speci fied

CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint r~ NO
JURY DEMAND: c~YEs

VIII.RELATED CASE(S) ~See mstr~ctions):

IF ANY

JUDGE

DOCKET r’.~DMBE R

DATE
October 4~ 2000
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

/

~

. l.-S<_..

.../ -(C ~.- ~z_ ~.-~.,.< ;." ~ ~k.~

./

JUDGE

MAG JUDGE

 
 0-cv-07545-WJZ Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/05/2001 P

RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER fu~THONY COTTONE, JR., and PETER COTTONE, SR.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
KENNETH C. JENNE, II, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, et al.,
_________D_e_f_en_d_a_n_t_s.________ /

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 00-7545-CIV-ZLOCH
I \ if: tL~c'I:Y:=-~T,~c:~
0 RDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the Defendant, Broward

County Board of County Commissioners', Motion To Dismiss And

Supporting Memorandum Of Law (DE 14). The Court has carefully

reviewed the merits of said Motion and is otherwise fully advised

in the premises.

The Court notes that only a generalized statement of facts

needs to be set out to comply with the liberal Federal Rules of

Pleading.

A classic formulation of the test often applied to

determine the sufficiency of the Complaint was set out by the

United States Supreme Court in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46

(1957), wherein the Court stated:

0-cv-07545-WJZ Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/05/2001 P

. In appraising the sufficiency of the Complaint we follow . . the accepted rule that a Complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.

The Court adds that a Complaint may not be dismissed because

the plaintiff's claim does not support the legal theory he relies

on since the Court must determine if the allegations provide relief

on any possible theory. See, Robertson v. Johnston, 376 F.2d 43

(5th Cir. 1967).

The Court further notes that the legal issues raised by the

Defendant's aforementioned Motion To Dismiss may be more properly

addressed in a Motion For Summary Judgment.

Accordingly, after due consideration, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Defendant's Motion To Dismiss

(DE 14) be and the same is hereby DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chayers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward

O:f!j

County, Florida, this '-_5

day of January, 2001.

Copies furnished: See attached Mailing List

WILLIAM J. ZLOCH Chief United States District Judge

2

0-cv-07545-WJZ Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/05/2001 P
RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. , and PETER COTTONE, SR. vs. KENNETH C. JENNE, II, et al. CASE NO. 00-7545-CIV-ZLOCH
Barbara A. Heyer, Esq. Heyer & Associates, P.A. 1311 S.E. 4'h Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316 For Plaintiffs
Stephanie W. Noe, Esq. Office of the County Attorney 115 So. Andrews Ave., Room 423 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 For Defendant, Broward County Board of County Commissioners RichardT. Woulfe, Esq. P. 0. Box 030340 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33303 For Defendants, EMSA, Prison Health and J. and J. Does Michael R. Piper, Esq. Johnson, Anselmo, Murdoch, Burke & George 790 E. Broward Blvd., Suite 400 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 For Defendants, Jenne, Tighe, D'Elia & Williams
3

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO: 00-7545-CIV-ZLOCH

RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., and PETER COTTONE, SR.,
Plaintiffs,
Vo

JAN 1 8 200t
CL~R£NCE MADDOX CLERK U.~. DI~,T, CT. S.O, OF FLA. FT, LAUD~

KENNETH C. JENNE, II, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida; PATRICK TIGHE, individually and in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Department of Detention, Broward County Sheriff’s Office; BARBARA LAW, individually and in her official capacity as Superintendent of the North Broward Detention Center, Broward County Sheriff’s Office; DWIGHT ST. CLAIRE, DELORES WATSON, JOSEPH D’ ELIA, and GEORGE WILLIAMS, individually and in their official capacities as Deputy Sheriffs and/or Corrections Officers of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office; EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC., a Florida Corporation and general partner of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and an affiliate of PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. ; ANDREW PERFILIO, M. D. , MAURICE WALDMAN, M.D. and ELMA McKENZIE, L. P. N. , individually and in their official capacities as Doctors and Nurses employed by EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC., a general partner of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and an affiliate of PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. ; and THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,

Defendants.

AMENDED COMPLAINT
The Plaintiffs, RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Peter Anthony Cottone, Jr. and PETER COTTONE, SR. sue Defendants, jointly and severally, and alleges:

JURISDICTION

i.

This is an action for damages arising out of one or

more violations of State and Federal law detailed below.

2.

This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, and

the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United

States Constitution. Jurisdiction is based upon 28 U.S.C. §1331,

§1343, and 42 U.S.C. ~§ 1983, 1988 and the constitutional

provisions mentioned above.

3.

It is further alleged that these violations were

committed as a result of the deliberate indifference of all of

the Defendants and in direct violation of the Consent Decree

entered on July 27, 1994 in Carruthers v. Cochran, et al., Case

No: 76-6086-CIV-HOEVELER. (Exhibit A).

4.

The acts and practices constituting the violations

alleged below have occurred within the jurisdiction of the United

States District Court in and for the Southern District of

Florida. In connection with the acts, practices and violations

alleged herein, each Defendant has, directly or indirectly,

violated the constitutional rights of the decedent, PETER ANTHONY

COTTONE, JR.

5. Notice to the Defendants has been provided.(Exhibit B). 6. The Plaintiffs seek an award of damages for the

wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., and their loss of

his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society,

companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, and for

2

funeral and burial expenses, under 42 U.S.C. ~1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute. The Plaintiff, PETER COTTONE, SR., seeks an award of damages for permanent mental and emotional injuries due to the death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. The Plaintiffs further seek an award for punitive damages, court costs and attorney fees.

PARTIES

7.

The Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR., has been a United

States citizen at all times material hereto.

8.

The decedent, Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.,

died of injuries sustained on or about April 7, 1999, while

incarcerated at the North Broward Detention Center.

9.

The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE is the personal

representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.,

pursuant to the laws of the State of Florida. Said Plaintiff is

authorized by law to bring this action.

I0. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II is the Sheriff of

Broward County, Florida. Said Defendant is responsible, as

Sheriff, for the conduct of the deputies and/or corrections

officers in his employ and ensuring that his deputies,

corrections officers, employees, servants and agents obey the

laws of the State of Florida and the United States. Said

Defendant is being sued in his official capacities.

Ii. The Defendant PATRICK TIGHE, at all times material herein, was the Executive Director of the Department of Detention at the Broward County Sheriff’s Office. Said Defendant is responsible as the Executive Director for the conduct of the deputies and/or corrections officers in his employ, and ensuring that his deputies, corrections officers, employees, servants and agents obey the laws of the State of Florida and the United States. Said Defendant is being sued in his individual and official capacities.
12. The Defendant BARBARA LAW, at all times material herein, was the Superintendent of the North Broward Detention Center at Broward County Sheriff’s Office. Said Defendant is responsible as the Superintendent for the conduct of the deputies and/or corrections officers in her employ, and ensuring that her deputies, corrections officers, employees, servants and agents obey the laws of the State of Florida and the United States. Said Defendant is being sued in her individual and official capacities.
13. The Defendants DWIGHT ST. CLAIRE and DELORES WATSON, at all times material herein, were duly appointed and acting deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers of Broward County, employed by, and serving under Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE. Said Defendants are responsible as Supervisors for overseeing the North Broward Detention Center and supervising the deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers employed there. Said
4

Defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities.
14. The Defendants JOSEPH D’ ELIA and GEORGE WILLIAMS, at all times material herein, were duly appointed and acting Deputy Sheriffs and/or Corrections Officers of Broward County, employed by and serving under Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II. Said Defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities.
15. The Defendant EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. is a Florida Corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, conducting business in Broward County, Florida. Said Defendant is a general partner of Defendant EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Florida Limited Partnership and an affiliate of Defendant PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC..
16. The Defendant EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP is a Florida Limited Partnership, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, conducting business in Broward County, Florida. Said Defendant is a general partner of EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and an affiliate of Defendant PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
17. The Defendant PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. is a foreign corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, conducting business in Broward County, Florida.
18. The Defendants ANDREW PERFILIO, M.D. , MAURICE WALDMAN, M.D. and ELMA McKENZIE, L.P.N., at all times material herein, were duly appointed doctors and nurses, employed by and serving
5

under Defendants EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC, a general partner of Defendant EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, and an affiliate of Defendant PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.. Said Defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities.
19. The Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS is the legislative and governing body of Broward County. Said Board has the powers and duties to, among other things, carry on county government, make investigations of county affairs and perform acts which are in the common interest of the people of Broward County. Further, said Board is charged with the duty of maintaining, staffing and supervising all correctional activities in Broward County and, in doing so, said Board has delegated those duties to Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II.
20. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II has been subject to the orders of the Defendant BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS at all times material hereto.
21. At all times material hereto, and in all their acts described herein, the Defendants were acting under color of state law and color of their authority as public officials and public employees.
6

ALLEGATI ONS OF FACT 22. On or about July 27, 1994, the Sheriff of Broward County and the Broward County Commissioners entered into a consent decree in the case of Carruthers, et al. v. Cochran, et al., Case Number 76-6086-CIV-HOEVELER, United States District Court, in the Southern District of Florida. (Exhibit A). 23. On January 27, 1995, the Consent Decree was approved by Judge William M. Hoeveler, making said Consent Decree binding on the former Sheriff Cochran, the Broward County Commissioners and their respective successors. (Exhibit C). 24. The purpose of the Consent Decree was to correct confinement conditions within the Broward County jail system which violated the constitutional rights of the inmates within the syste~ 25. Under said Consent Decree, the Sheriff and Broward County are obligated to ensure that each of their employees, agents, deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers were informed of and complied with the terms of said Decree. 26. The Consent Decree required former Sheriff Cochran, Broward County and/or their successors to notify any private parties with whom they contracted about the relevant requirements of the Consent Decree and to ensure that those parties complied with the terms of the Consent Decree. 27. Based upon the Consent Decree, the Sheriff, his personnel and the Broward County Commissioners had specific
7

obligations with respect to inmates under their custody and
control, such as:
Proper classification of inmates to the most appropriate level of custody and programming, both on admission and on review of their status. The primary objective of classification being "to place inmates in the type of quarters that best meet their needs and to provide reasonable protection for the inmate and other inmates." (Exhibit A, page 5).
To assign inmates to housing "with particular care to the assignment of persons who have a history of, or exhibit aggressiveness toward other inmates." (Id.).
3. To separate and closely supervise "special inmates," which include the mentally ill. "Close supervision of special inmates shall include regular, documented sight checks by correctional officers or medical staff at intervals not to exceed 15 minutes. " ( emphasis added) ( Id. , p. 6 and 7) .
28. On or about August 6, 1993, former Sheriff Ronald
Cochran and Defendant EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ("EMSA") entered
into a three-year contract wherein EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC.,
would provide Comprehensive Health Services for inmates to the
Broward Sheriff’s Office (i. e., Broward County Main Jail
Facility; the North Broward Detention Center; Division of
Community Corrections Facility and Boot Camp. ) (Exhibit D).
29. On or about April 29, 1997, Defendants EMSA LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP and BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
amended and renewed the original contract for a four-year period
continuing through September 30, 2000. (Exhibit E).

30. In said contract, Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., guaranteed the performance of the services of Defendant EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC..
31. On or about March 9, 1999, the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., was "Baker Acted" and sent to Memorial Hospital for observation and evaluation. Said action occurred as a result of an alleged domestic violence involving his father, PETER COTTONE, SR..
32. On or about March 14, 1999, the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. was brought to the Broward County jail, based on charges arising from the alleged domestic violence.
33. On or about March 14, 1999, the Plaintiff was booked, assessed and sent to Unit 1 at the North Broward Detention Center.
34. On or about April 6, 1999, Widnel Charles was relocated by the Defendant ELMA McKENZIE, L.P.N. and Corrections Deputy Jerdeline Heath to the dormitory in Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center, where the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. had been housed since March 16, 1999. Said dormitory is for mentally ill inmates and has three separate cells. Widnel Charles, Albert St. Hubert and the Plaintiff were, individually, housed in separate cells.

35. Prior to his arrest on March i, 1999, Widnel Charles had been ’~Baker Acted" numerous times and had demonstrated violent propensities.
36. On March i, 1999, while in the booking area of the Broward County Main jail, Widnel Charles, without provocation, struck another inmate. Said incident was observed and documented by Kevin Moher, a deputy sheriff and/or corrections officer, and by Calvin Murray, R.N., a booking nurse.
37. Despite the fact that Mr. Charles had a history of schizophrenia and the fact that his behavior on March I, 1999, was clearly inappropriate and dangerous, he was placed in the general population at the Main jail.
38. Widnel Charles remained in the Broward County Main Jail general population until March 6, 1999.
39. On March 6, 1999, Widnel Charles was reassessed and sent to the North Broward Detention Center.
40. Defendants ANDREW PERFILIO, M.D. and MAURICE WALDMAN, M.D. were staff psychiatrists at the North Broward Detention Center. It was their duty to properly treat and assess the mentally ill inmates at the North Broward Detention Center. As such, it was their duty to ensure that the mentally ill inmates received the proper medication and were properly housed so as not to create a danger to themselves or others.
i0

41. On April i, 1999, Defendant Dr. MAURICE WALDMAN made an

assessment of Widnel Charles and determined that he was stable.

Dr. WALDEN then reduced the psychotropic medications being

administered to Charles Widnel. This was done despite the fact

that, during the week of March 27, 1999, while at the North

Broward Detention Center, Widnel Charles was involved in another

unprovoked physical attack on an inmate.

42.

On April 6:~, Defendant McKENZIE inappropriately

placed Widnel Charles in Unit 1 with the Plaintiff and another

inmate. Despite the knowledge of his prior violent conduct, Mr.

Charles’ cell door in Unit 1 was left open during the day,

thereby allowing him to move about freely and interact with the

Plaintiff and Mr. St. Hubert.

43. Neither Defendants PERFILIO, M.D. or WALDMAN, M.D. ,

assessed Widnel Charles to determine the appropriateness of

moving him to Unit 1 and allowing him access to the Plaintiff and

the other inmate by leaving his cell door open.

44. On or about April 7, 1999, the Defendants WILLIAMS and

D’ ELIA were on duty in the control room of Unit i. They were the

only officers on duty at the control roon~

45. On April 7, 1999, at approximately 12:20 p. n~ ,

Defendant D’ ELIA took a break from the control room, leaving

Defendant WILLIAMS alone to maintain and control the area.

ii

46. At approximately 12:32 p. ~ , Defendant D’ ELIA returned to the control room and Defendant WILLIAMS took a break, leaving Defendant D’ ELIA alone to maintain and control the area.
47. Shortly thereafter, Defendant D’ ELIA was summoned by Albert St. Hubert, who was ringing a buzzer in his cell.
48. At that time, Defendant D’ ELIA went into Unit 1 and observed the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., lying unconscious on the floor of his cell with ligature marks around his neck.
49. Widnel Charles had strangled the Plaintiff with shoe laces.
49. The Plaintiff was transported to North Broward Medical Center, where he died.
50. Surveillance cameras mounted in the Day Room of Unit 1 were aimed at the three cells, however, they were not being monitored at the time of the incident.
51. At the time of the incident, a computer game was observed on the screen of the computer in the control room where the Defendants D’ ELIA and WILLIAMS were stationed.
52. Prior to and at the time of the killing, Widnel Charles was in the throes of schizophrenia, was hallucinating, violent and completely out of control.
53. The mental condition of Widnel Charles prior to the killing of the Plaintiff, was obvious to Defendants D’ ELIA and
12

WILLIAMS, deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers and Defendants PERFILIO, WALDMAN and McKENZIE, doctors and nurses. It was ignored by said Defendants.
54. The conduct of Defendants D’ ELIA and WILLIAMS and Defendants PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE was reckless and created a substantial risk of serious harm to other inmates. Said Defendants had placed Widnel Charles in Unit i, a mental health unit, and were, or should have been aware, of the likelihood of harm said individual would cause to persons such as the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR.
55. By their deliberate indifference, Defendants D’ ELIA and WILLIAMS and Defendants PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE, doctors and nurses, acquiesced to the conduct of Widnel Charles, and, therefore, were active participants in the unlawful seizure, i.e. the strangulation of the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR..
56. Defendants DWIGHT ST. CLAIRE and DELORES WATSON, as sergeants and/or supervisors of the North Broward Detention Center, had a duty to properly train, supervise and/or discipline deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers under their control.
57. Defendants ST. CLAIRE and WATSON’s failure to train, supervise and administer the Consent Decree and the Broward Sheriff’s Office’s policy regarding the housing of inmates within the North Broward Detention Center was the proximate cause of the
13

deprivations of rights suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR..
58. The Defendants D’ ELIA, WILLIAMS, ST. CLAIRE, and WATSON and Defendants PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE had a duty to ensure that reasonable measures were taken to guarantee the safety of the inmates at the North Broward Detention Center.
59. Defendant LAW, as the Superintendent of the North Broward Detention Center at the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, had a duty to train, supervise, control or otherwise ensure that Defendants D’ ELIA, WILLIAMS, ST. CLA/RE, WATSON, PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE did not violate the constitutional rights of persons such as the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR..
60. Defendant TIGHE, as the Executive Director of the Department of Detention at the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, had a duty to train, supervise, control or otherwise ensure that Defendants LAW, D’ ELIA, WILLIAMS, ST. CLAIRE, WATSON, PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE did not violate the constitutional rights of persons such as the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR..
61. Defendant JENNE, in his official capacity as the Sheriff of Broward County, had a duty to train, supervise, control or otherwise ensure that Defendants TIGHE, LAW, D’ ELIA, WILLIAMS, ST. CLAIRE, WATSON, PERFILIO, WALDMAN, MCKENZIE and EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC., a Florida Corporation and general partner of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and an affiliate of PRISON
14

HEALTH SERVICES, INC. did not violate the constitutional rights of persons such as the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR..
62. Defendant JENNE abdicated his policymaking and oversight responsibilities, thereby allowing the incident involving the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR. to occur.
63. Defendant EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC., a Florida Corporation and general partner of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and an affiliate of PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. had a duty to train, supervise, control or otherwise ensure that the doctors and nurses under their control, including, but not lira/ted to, Defendants PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE did not violate the constitutional rights of persons such as the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, JR..
64. All Defendants were on notice and had an absolute duty to enforce the Consent Decree. Said failure is a per se violation of the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE JR.’s constitutional rights under state and federal law.
65. The above acts and omissions of all Defendants, and each of the~ constitute a course of conduct and failure to act amounting to deliberate indifference to the rights, health, safety and welfare of the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. and those similarly situated, resulting in the deprivation of the Plaintiff’s constitutional rights under state and federal law.
15

66. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and

omissions of the Defendants as set forth above, the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. suffered the following injuries and

damages: i.

Violation of his constitutional rights under the

Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United

States Constitution;

Loss of his life; 3. Physical pain and suffering and emotional trauma and suffering.

67. As a result of the death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.,

his family suffered the loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance,

counsel and advice, and was forced to incur funeral and burial expenses.

68. As a result of the death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., his father, PETER COTTONE, SR., suffered permanent mental and

emotional injuries.

69. The acts and omissions of the Defendants, as set forth above, violated clearly established and well settled federal constitutional rights of the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.,

i.e., due process of law under the Fifth and Fourteenth

Amendments, unlawful search and seizure under the Fourth

16

Amendment and cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
70. All potential beneficiaries of a recovery for the decedent’s wrongful death are identified as follows:
ao The estate of the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.
b. PETER COTTONE, SR., father.
COUNT 1-42 U.S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS ANDREW PERFILIO, M D., MAURICE WALDMAN, M D.
and ELMA MCKENZIE, L P. N. 71. The Plaintiffs reaiiege paragraphs 1 through 55, and 63 through 70. 72. At all times material hereto, the Defendants PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE, doctors and nurses, were responsible for medically screening incoming pre-trial detainees, assigning mentally ill pre-trial detainees to the appropriate housing level, administering appropriate medication to the mentally ill, and regularly monitoring and assessing the conditions of these inmates. 73. While these Defendants were acting under color of state law as employees of Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., they subjected the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., to the
17

deprivation of rights and privileges secured to him under the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
74. The death of the Plaintiff was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of said Defendants’ deliberate indifference to their obligation to provide appropriate monitoring, supervising, and medication and protection for incarcerated mentally ill persons.
75. Additionally, Defendants PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE had a duty under the Consent Decree to separate and closely supervise mentally ill inmates.
76. Said Defendants breached their duty of care by failing to properly screen, assess, medicate, treat, and monitor Widnel Charles, despite their notice and knowledge of his mental illness and his violent tendencies.
77. The deliberate indifference of these Defendants violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. for which 42 U.S.C. §1983 provides a remedy.
78. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and
18

for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U. S.C. ~1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.

COUNT II-

42 U. S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST

DEFENDANTS EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC.

AND PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.

79. The Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1 through 55,

and 63 through 78.

80. At all times material hereto, the Defendants EMSA

LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SER%qCES, INC. were responsible for adopting and

implementing the rules and regulations regarding hiring,

screening, training, supervising, controlling, disciplining and

assigning nurses and doctors to their duties required by the

contract it entered into with the Broward Sheriff’s Office and

the Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,

to provide comprehensive health services for inmates within the

Broward County Jail Systen~

19

81. The Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., as service providers to the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, had a duty to ensure that its employees abided by the terms set forth in the court approved Consent Decree and cited contract. ( Exhibit A, C, D, E).
82. Said Defendants failed to comply with this obligation, as its employees, the Defendants PERFILIO, WALDMAN and MCKENZIE, breached their duties under said Consent Decree and cited contract, and failed to properly screen, assess, monitor, medicate, and treat Widnel Charles, causing a substantial risk of harm to inmates, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR..
83. The Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. failed to properly train and/or supervise its nurses and doctors in the screening, assessment, treatment, care and monitoring and/or supervision of pre-trial detainees. Its nurses and doctors demonstrated deliberate indifference to the health and well being of inmates such as the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., by failing to conduct appropriate health screening, assessments, treatment, care, monitoring and supervision of mentally ill inmates. Said failure resulted in mentally ill inmates with known violent propensities being housed with other non-violent
2O

inmates at substantial risk of harm to those other inmates, including PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR..
84. The Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC., and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. have maintained a system of review of the treatment of mentally ill pre-trial detainees and complaints thereof which has failed to identify the improper treatment by the nurses and doctors, and failed to subject nurses and doctors who improperly treated mentally ill pre-trial detainees to appropriate discipline, supervision, dismissal and/or retraining, to the extent that it has become the defacto policy and custom of said Defendants to tolerate the improper treatment of mentally ill pre-trial detainees in the Broward County Jail System
85. The Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC. acted in reckless disregard of both constitutional prohibitions and guarantees under color of state law, thereby misusing the power they possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because said Defendants were clothed with the authority of state
law.
The previously described acts, omissions, policies or customs of said Defendants constituted a per se violation of the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.’s constitutional rights under state and federal law.
21

87. The deliberate indifference of these Defendants violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the decedent, for which 42 U. S.C. §1983 provides a remedy.
88. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U. S.C. 51983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory damages against Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC. and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
COUNT III- 42 ~ S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS D’ELIAANDWILLIAMS 89. The Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 55, 58, and 64 through 70. 90. While Defendants D’ELIA and WILLIAMS were acting under color of state law as a deputy sheriffs and/or correctional
22

officers of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, they subjected the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., to the deprivation of rights and privileges secured to him under the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
91. Said Defendants were deliberately indifferent to the policy and procedure of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, as well as the Consent Decree with regard to care and housing of mentally ill pre-trial detainees.
92. Said Defendants’ deliberate indifference caused a substantial risk of harm to the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR..
93. The injuries sustained by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. were a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the Defendants’ deliberate indifference to their obligation to provide proper medical attention, security and housing for pretrial detainees.
94. The deliberate indifference of these Defendants violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., for which 42 U.S.C. ~1983 provides a remedy.
95. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection,
23

care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants D’ELIA and WILLIAMS, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
COUNT IV-42 U.S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS LAW, ST. CLAIRE AND WATSON 96. The Plaintiffs realleges paragraphs 1 through 59, 64 through 70, and 89 through 95. 97. At all times material hereto, the Defendants ST. CLAIRE and WATSON were the supervisors of Defendants D’ELIA and WILLIAMS, deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers. 98. Said Defendants had a duty to train, supervise and ensure that deputy sheriffs/corrections officers under their control obeyed the laws of the State of Florida and the United States, the policies of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and the provisions of the Consent Decree and the cited contract. 99. Defendants ST. CLAIRE and WATSON had a duty to ensure that there was sufficient manpower to effectively monitor the inmates housed in Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center
24

and that said Unit was in fact being closely monitored by their deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers.
I00. Notwithstanding Defendants ST. CLAIRE and WATSON’s responsibility to ensure that deputy sheriffs/corrections officers under their command performed their duties, they failed to uphold these responsibilities.
i01. Defendants ST. CLAIRE and WATSON’s failure to properly train, supervise and administer the agency’s policy regarding the monitoring, housing and security of inmates housed in the North Broward Detention Center was the proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR..
102. Defendants ST. CLAIRE and WATSON knew that a failure to comply with the conditions of the Consent Decree would lead to a substantial risk of harm to the inmates.
103. Said Defendants’ deliberate indifference caused a substantial risk of harm to the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. and other inmates housed in the Broward County Jail Syste~
104. The injuries sustained by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. were the foreseeable consequence of the Defendants’ deliberate indifference to their obligation to provide properly train, supervise and/or discipline deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers under their control.
105. The deliberate indifference of these Defendants violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the
25

Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. , for which 42 U. S.C. ~1983 provides a remedy.
106. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U. S.C. ~1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
~.~FO~]~, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants ST. CLAIRE and WATSON, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
COUNT V- 42 U.S.C. ~1983 AGAINST DEFENDANT BARBARA I2%W
107. The Plaintiffs realleges paragraphs 1 through 59, 64 through 70, and 89 through 106.
108. At all times material hereto, the Defendant LAW was the supervisor of Defendants ST. CLAIRE, WATSON, D’ELIA and WILLIAMS, deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers.
109. Said Defendant had a duty to train, supervise and ensure that deputy sheriffs/corrections officers under their control obeyed the laws of the State of Florida and the United
26

States, the policies of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and the provisions of the Consent Decree and the cited contract.
ii0. Defendant LAW had a duty to ensure that there was sufficient manpower to effectively monitor the inmates housed in Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center and that said Unit was in fact being closely monitored by their deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers.
iii. Notwithstanding Defendant LAW’s responsibility to ensure that deputy sheriffs/corrections officers under their command performed their duties, she failed to uphold these responsibilities.
112. Defendant LAW’s failure to properly train, supervise and administer the agency’s policy regarding the monitoring, housing and security of inmates housed in the North Broward Detention Center was the proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR..
113. Defendant LAW knew that a failure to comply with the conditions of the Consent Decree would lead to a substantial risk of harm to the inmates.
114. Said Defendant’s deliberate indifference caused a substantial risk of harm to the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. and other inmates housed in the Broward County Jail Syste~
115. The injuries sustained by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. were the foreseeable consequence of the Defendant’s
27

deliberate indifference to her obligation to provide properly train, supervise and/or discipline deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers under her control.
116. The deliberate indifference of this Defendant violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. , for which 42 U. S.C. ~1983 provides a remedy.
117. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U. S.C. ~1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
~{~.RZFO~, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendant LAW, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.

COUNT VI- 42 U. S. C.

§1983 CLAIM AGAINST

DEFENDANT PATRI CK TI GHE

118. The Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 60, 64 through 70, and 89 through 117.
28

119. At all times material hereto, the Defendant PATRICK TIGHE was the Executive Director of the Department of Detention for the Broward County Sheriff’s Office.
120. Said Defendant had a duty to train, supervise and ensure that deputy sheriffs/corrections officers under his control and that they obeyed the laws of the State of Florida and the United States, the policies of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and the provisions of the Consent Decree and cited contract.
121. Notwithstanding Defendant TIGHE’s responsibility to ensure that deputy sheriffs/corrections officers under his command performed their duties under the Consent Decree and the Broward Sheriff’s Office policies, he failed to uphold these responsibilities.
122. Defendant TIGHE’s failure to properly train, supervise and administer the agency’s policy regarding the monitoring, housing and security of inmates housed in the North Broward Detention Center was the proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the decedent, PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.
123. Defendant TIGHE knew that a failure to comply with the conditions of the Consent Decree would lead to a substantial risk of harm to the inmates.
29

124. Defendant TIGHE’s deliberate indifference caused a substantial risk of harm to the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. and other inmates housed in the Broward County Jail Syste~
125. The injuries sustained by the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. were the foreseeable consequence of Defendant TIGHE’s deliberate indifference to his obligation to provide properly train, supervise and/or discipline deputy sheriffs and/or correctional officers under his control.
126. The deliberate indifference of this Defendant violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., for which 42 U.S.C. ~1983 provides a remedy.
127. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendant PATRICK TIGHE, attorney fees, costs,
3O

and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
COUNT 9-1I - 42 U. S.C. 91983 CLAIM AGAINST KENNETH C. JENNE, II
128. The Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 127. 129. At all times material hereto, the Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II was responsible for adopting and implementing the rules and regulations regarding hiring, screening, training, supervising, controlling, disciplining, assigning deputies and/or corrections officers and/or employees to their duties within the Broward County Sheriff’s Office. 130. At all times material hereto, the Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II was responsible for adopting and implementing rules and regulations with regard to medical treatment, housing, security and monitoring of mentally ill pre-trial detainees. Additionally, said Defendant was responsible for ensuring that his employees and agents performed their duties in compliance with the Consent Decree. (Exhibit A, C). 131. Said Defendant was deliberately indifferent to his duties in that he either expressly or impliedly acknowledged and assented to the failure to train, supervise, control or otherwise screen employees of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office including, but not limited to, Defendants EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EMSA CORRECTIONAL CARE, INC, PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., PATRICK TIGHE, BARBARA LAW, DWIGHT ST. CLAIRE, DELORES
31

WATSON, JOSEPH D’ ELIA, GEORGE WILLIAMS, ANDREW PERFILIO, M.D. , MAURICE WALDMAN, M.D. and ELMA MCKENZIE, for dangerous propensities, lack of training and/or skill or other characteristics making said officers, employees and/or agents unfit to perform their duties at the Broward County Jail facilities.
I9o0~. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II, was aware of the problems and conditions existing in the Broward County Jail System such as inadequate manpower, monitoring, classification, screening, assessment, medical care and medication of mentally ill inmates.
133. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II, was deliberately indifferent to the safety of the inmates by failing to remedy these problems, even though he had notice of them
134. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE II’s deliberate indifference to these problems caused a substantial risk of harm to the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. and other inmates housed in Broward County Jail facilities.
135. The Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II has failed to properly train, and/or supervise his deputies and/or corrections officers and/or employees and/or agents in the treatment, care, security and housing of mentally ill pre-trial detainees. Despite clear warnings, his officers, agents and/or employees
32

have failed to adequately monitor, classify, screen, assess, house, and/or protect mentally ill pre-trial detainees.
136. The conduct of Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II in his failure to train, supervise and/or discipline his deputies and/or corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees, was deliberately indifferent to the constitutional rights of all persons, including the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., in violation of 42 U. S.C. ~1983.
137. Defendant JENNE abdicated his policymaking and oversight responsibilities, thereby allowing the deputy sheriffs/corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees to ignore the requirements of the Consent Decree and the policies of the Broward Sheriff’s Office.
138. The Defendant JENNE has maintained a system of review of the treatment, care, security and housing of the mentally pretrial detainees, and complaints thereof, which has failed to identify the improper treatment by his officers and/or agents and/or employees and to subject officers and/or agents and/or employees who fail to properly classify, monitor, treat, assess, medicate, protect, and house mentally ill pre-trial detainees to appropriate discipline, supervision, dismissal and/or retraining, to the extent that it has become a defacto policy and custom of Defendant JENNE to tolerate the improper treatment, security and housing of mentally ill pretrial detainees.
33

139. The foregoing acts, omissions, policies or customs of Defendant JENNE caused deputies and/or corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees to believe there exists no duty to properly classify, monitor, treat, assess, medicate, protect and house mentally ill pre-trial detainees, with the foreseeable result ~ha~ ~i~ and/or ...... ~ .... ~ficers and/or agents and/or employees are likely to ignore mentally ill pre-trial detainees and endanger the safety and lives of inmates, thereby risking their safety and continued life.
140. The deliberate indifference of this Defendant violated the constitutional rights of all persons, including the decedent PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. for which 42 U.S.C. §1983 provides a remedy.
141. The above acts and omissions of Defendant JENNE constitute a course of conduct and failure to act amounting to deliberate indifference to the rights, health, safety and welfare of the decedent and those similarly situated, resulting in the deprivation of the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE JR.’s constitutional rights under state and federal law.
142. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance,
34

counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U.S.C. ~1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory and punitive damages against Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.
COUNT VIII - 42 ~ S.C. ~1983 CLAIM AGAINST THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 143. The Plaintiffs reallege paragraphs 1 through 142. 144. With respect to the duties and powers of the Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, said Defendant failed in all aspects with regard to control of the Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II. 145. At all times material hereto, the Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS permitted and tolerated a pattern and practice of abuse of lawful authority, in reckless disregard of both constitutional prohibitions and guarantees under color of state law, thereby misusing the power possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because Defendants were clothed with the authority of state law. As a result, some Broward County Sheriff’s Office deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees were
35

caused and encouraged to believe that members of the public such as pre-trial detainees could be subjected to abuse of lawful authority and that said abuse would in fact be permitted by the Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
146. The acts of Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II represent an official policy of THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS and the policy making authority for the County has been delegated to said Defendant KENNETH C. JENNE, II.
147. The Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS has maintained no meaningful system of review of incidents involving abuse of lawful authority and complaints thereof, and, therefore, has failed to identify incidents of abuse of lawful authority by said law enforcement officers and/or agents and/or employees, and to subject said law enforcement officers and/or agents and/or employees to appropriate discipline, dismissal, closer supervision and/or retraining, to the extent that it has become the defacto policy and custom of THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS to tolerate the abuse of lawful authority by deputy sheriffs and/or corrections officers and/or agents and/or employees.
148. As a direct and proximate cause of the acts described above, in violation of 42 U.S.C. ~1983, the Plaintiff PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. has suffered the loss of his life as heretofore alleged.
36

149. The Plaintiff RICHARD COTTONE, as the personal representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR. claims damages for the wrongful death of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR.. Said damages include loss of his income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, companionship, comfort, guidance, counsel and advice, funeral and burial expenses, and for the permanent mental and emotional injuries suffered by the Plaintiff PETER COTTONE, SR. under 42 U. S.C. ~1983 and the Florida Wrongful Death Statute.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand compensatory damages against Defendant THE BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, attorney fees, costs, and trial by jury for all issues so triable by right.

HEYER & ASSOCIATES, P. ~,

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 1311 S.E. 4:~ Ave.

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316

( 954 52Z-~922 / (561) 833-1068

Fax: (95~~ 522~/4955

/’

<i?/ /,,"

B~B~A ~ HE?Eh ~’" B~ NO. 3446691

, ’,/ ,//
/ ~/

37

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DIS .TRICT OF FLORIDA

OLLIE CARRUTHERS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
¯ VS.
RON COCHRAN, as Sheriff of Broward County, GERALD F. THOMPSON, SYLVIA POITIER, JOHN P. HART, SCOTT I. COWAN, LORI N. PARRISH, SUZANNE N. GUNZBURGER, and IOHN E. RODSTROM, in their capacities as County Commissioners of Broward County, and HENRY L. TEMPLETON, as Director of Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation,
Def~ndams.

Case No. 76-CIV-WMH

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT DECREE

PLAINTIFF’S EXHIBIT

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT DECREE This Stipulation is entered into by the parties to resolve claims asserted by the

plaintiffs in their Complaint as amended against all defendants and to provide, for i’etention of jurisdiction and permanent injunctive relief. Defendants withdraw their Offer of.J’udgment

and same shall be deemed without force and effect.

PARTIES The ’individual named plaintiffs are OLLIE CARRLU’I-’IERS, THOMAS ZERVOS

AND GERALD TICE. This action was certified as a class action. The defendants are the

Sheriff’ of Broward County, currently RON COCHRAN, and the Broward County Commissioners, currently GERALD F. THOMPSON, SYLVIA POITIER., JOI-12q P. I-/.ART,

SCOTT I. COWAN, LORI N. PARRISH, SUZANNE N. GUNZBURGER, and JOHN E. RODSTROM, in their capacities as County Commissioners of Broward County, and HENRY L. TEMPLETON, as Director of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. These

persons, in their official capacities, have been substituted for the original defend.ants by operation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d).

GENERAL PROVISIONS

..

1. The original Complaint in this e~iuse was filed pro se against the then named

defendants in their official capacities. Thereafter, plaintiffs, then represented by counsel, filed First and Second Amended Complaints alleging, inter alia, that defendants had failed to

carry out their statutory and constitutional duties relating to the maintenance and operation of the Broward County jails and further alleging that, as a result of defendants’ acts and

1

omissions, taken under color of state law, defendants had caused pl.aintiffs continued confinement under conditions that violated plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.
2. The Second Amended Complaint asserts causes of action against defendants arising under, and jurisdiction pursuant to, 42 U.S.C. §§ :1983and 1988; 28 U.S.C..§§ 1331, 1343(a)(3) and (4), 2201 and 2202; and the Constitution of the United States, spe/:ifically but not limited to the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments thereto. The action seeks declaratory judgment and preliminary and permanent injunctive
Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedureand Local Rule 19 of’ the United States District Court, in and for the Southern District of Florida, this action was certified as a class action on November 9, 1979 ~n behalf of all persons who have been, are being, or will be confined in the Broward County corrections and rehabilitation facilities. By agreement of the parties this includes any jails that Broward County or the Sheriff of Broward County may in the future oper.ate or contract with a private company to operate.
4. Conditions of confinement have previously been determined to be unconstitutional. The population caps established by this~court were essentially continuously exceeded until the ¯ summer of 1992, despite the $I,000 per day fine levied for exceeding’the cap.
5. The parties agree that progress h~s been made in addressing the matters raised by plaintiffs during this action and that further improvement can be obtained by implementing the agreements and achieving the goals set forth herein.
6. Counsel for the plaintiffs represents that it is desirable and in the best interests of the members of the Plaintiff Class to settle the issues resolved herein by entering into ~is
2

agreement. The comment of the members of the Class shall be solicited and considered as provided by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 (e).
’7. The defendants consider it desirable and in their best interests to settle the claims brought, against them and their predecessors in oS’rice by entering into this stipulation. Implementation of this stipulation resolves the differences of the parties regarding conditions of confinement in the Broward County corrections and rehabilitation system.
8. This Agreement shall bind all parties to this action as well as their successors in office. Defendants agre~ to use their best efforts to make the requirements of this agreement known to each of their employees, deputies, and agents who are responsible for the operation of detention facilities within Broward County, Florida. The defendants shall ensure thatthe relevant requirements of this agreement are made known to and complied with by any private parties with whom the Sheriff or County now contracts or shall in the.future contract with to provide good.s or services to any Broward County correction and rehabilitation facilities.
NOTICE TO CLASS. 9. Pursuant to Rule 23(e), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Notice of Proposed Settlement shall be distributed and published to the class .in the manner and format approved by the Court including posting in each housing area in a place...accessible to inmates ge.nerally, including those inmates in administrative, disciplinary or solitary confinement, which notice shall be-posted and distributed in English, Spanish, and Creole. Sufficient copies of this agreement will be kept in each pod and made available to any inmate requesting same.
Class members shall have until the date ordered by the Court to file with the Clerk of the Court any written objections to this proposed settlement. The Clerk shall forward

copies of’ any objections or inquiries to the Special Master and counsel f.or the parties. The Sheriff of. Broward Coun~ shall provide free paper, envelopes and postage to inmates desirous of filing objections to this settlement. Such communications with the Court shall be considered legal mail. All objections will be considered fully by the Court.
STATEMENT OF STANDARDS 10. It is the intent of this Agreement to achieve responsible and professional corrections and rehabilitation practice in all Broward County. fac.ilities and to facilitate and .encourage p~ersonal contact and interaction between staff’ and inmates. Accordingly, all ]E3roward County correctional facilities shall be operated and maintained, at a minimum, in compliance with applicable federal and Florida law, and the following standards:
a. Chapter 33-8 of’ the Florida Administrative Code b. American Correctional Association Standards for Adult Local Detention Facilities (currently 3rd Edition). c. National Commission on Correctional Health Care Standards of. medical, dental and mental health services. d. Physical and operatio,nal standards (that would include policies and procedures) as developed by the def.endants which shall, at a mini.mum,"apply the most stringent provisions of. the aforementioned applicable law and standards and address all Of’ the applicable standards set forth in the American Correctional Association Standards for Adult Local Detention Facilities. Pending ACA accreditation the defendants agree to make good faith efforts to substantially comply with such standards.
4

e. Realizing the impracticality ot" reproducing the entire set of" ACA Standards and 33-8 t’or distribution to the plaintiff class as part ol~ the comment process set forth herein, and recognizJng the importance of’ conveying the intent and scope of’ various provisions this agreement, the parties, by way of’ illustration:and ~xample, hereby set forth some or" the

standards that shall apply:

1. (~las. sification Inmates shall be classified to the most appropriate level of custody and programming both on admission and on review of their status. The classification process

shall include all information available or obtainable from the social, legal and self-reported

medical history o£ the detained person. The primary objective of classification is to place

inmates in the type of quarters that best meet their needs and to provide reasonable PrOtection for the inmate and other inmates. Inmates shall be assigned to housing with particular .care to the assignment o£ persons who have a history of, or exhibit aggressiveness toward other-

inmates. Each facility shall have a designated classification officer. Insofar as facilities

permit, no inmate shall be subjected to more restrictive conditions of confinement, including

but not limited to freedom of movement within the institution, and out-of-cell t/me, than those justified by the inmate’s classification..

2. Reli_~ous Practices

-

a. The defendants shall not ~;ubstantially burden an inmate’s exercise of’

religion even if the burden re, suits from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in

subsection (b). b. The defendants may substantially burden an inmate’s exercise o£ religion
only if’ it demonstrates that application of’ the burden to the person is in furtherance of a

compelling governmental interest; and is the least restrictive means of" furthering that compelling governmental interest.
c. Each facility shall appoint a chaplin to coordinate religious services and activities.
3. Use of Force Force shall be used 0nly as a last resort to control inmates and only to the degree that is reasonably necessary in self-defense, to prevent escape, to prevent injury to a person or property, to quell a disturbance, or when the inmate exercises physical .resistance t3 a lavd’ul command. All security and custody personnel shall be trained in approved methods of self-defense and the use of force as a last resort to control inmates. Instruments of restraint, such as handcuffs, irons, and straight-jackets, shall not be applied longer than is absolutely necessary and never applied as punishment and shall be applied only with the approval of the Facility Administrator or designee.
4. Housing The parties agree that each inmate is entitled to living facilities such that no inmate is required to sleep or eat on the floor, except as may be directed by a licensed medical or mental health professional. Temperatures shall be maintained within a normal comfort range. Special inmates, who present a threat to the staff, other inmates, or themselves, should be separated and closely supervised. Special inmates may include the mentally ill, alcoholic, drug addict, sex deviate or suicide risk, or persons with contagious or communicable_diseases. Any inmate who is identified as a suicide risk shall not be housed in a "single occupancy cell" unless the inmate is observed by direct visual observation 24 hours each day. Close supervision for special inmates shall include regular, documented sight
6

checks by correctional officers or medical staff at intervals not to exceed 1:5 minutes. Special housing shall be provided to inmates for medical reasons upon orders of the facility physician.
5..Recreation Absent physician restriction or disciplinary action, inmates shall have access to recreational opportunities and equipmentl including four hours weekly of physical exercise outside the cell and outdoors when weather permits. Sufficient space, equipment and Staffing to permit both individual activities and group activities shall be provided.
6. Visitation Rules and regulations pertaining to the time and conduct of visitation Shall be posted for the knowledge of the inmates and prospective visitors. A copy of the rules shall be given to each inmate. Visitation periods shall be permitted so that each inmate in general population has the opportunity for at least two hours of visitation each week.
7. Programs All correctional facilities Sha.ll make maximum use of programs available through local community resources. At least one employee in each. detention facility
shall act as liaison between the facility and the community agencies that offer needed
programs and services. 8..M. edical, Dental ~d Mental Health Services Inmates in all facilities will be
afforded medical, dental and mental health services, medication, appliances and medical related housing consistent with the rcquiremenB of paragraphs 10a through d above.
PROCESS 11. The defendants recognize the importance of achieving American Correctional Association accreditation pursuant to the Standards for Adult Local Detention Facilities and agree to attain such accreditation.
7

12. The Broward County Sheriff, through the Director of Corrections and

Rehabilitation, wilt cooperate with Broward County officials to identify and plan for-the

actions necessary to achieve the objectives of this Agreement.

13, The parties recogni~ that the objectives of ~is Agreement can best be achieved

by formulation and implementation of a plan which incorporates the following elements and

which provides for a schedule and implementation. Accordingly, the parties adopt and agree

to implement the schedule set forth herein:

A. Organization

The Sheriff of Broward County shall develop and carry out a reorganization

plan for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation that defines the mission of the

agency and all of its facilities. The plan will inelude the organization and management

structures, staffing, operational budget and implementation schedule necessary to carry oul the

mission of the agency and its facilities.

Task or Activity

Due Date

A. Organizational .Issues

A 1 Define Organization

Done

A2 Define Required Resources

." Done

A3 Develop Implementation Schedule

9/15/94

A4 Appoint-Planning Manager

Done

A5 Schedule Required Resources

I0/1/94

A6 Schedule Funding for l~equired R.esourees

10/I/94

A7 Define Internal Monitoring and Reporting Process

10/3 !/94

B. Inmate Population Assumptions

The defendants shall develop a plan to project or forecast the demand for prisoner

beds or supervision programs.Such plan shall periodically update the projection for the prisoner population.

Task or Activity B. Inmate Population Assumptions

Due Date

BI 5 Year Intake Assumptions

6/1/95

B2 5 Year Average Daily Population Assumptions

6/1/95

B3 Forecast Assumptions

6/1/95

Develop Forecast Update Mechanism

6/1/95

C. Jail Population Management Plan

The Sheriff shall develop a J’ail Population Management Plan based on policies

and resources that are consistent with the population projections. The Sheriff shall develop a

plan of how the prisoner population will be managed. The plan will include, but not be

limited to, a Prisoner Classification Plan, a Housing Unit Assignment Plan, and. an

Alternatives to Incarceration Plan. ;

Task or Activity

’ Due Date

C. Jail Population Management Plan

CI Dovelog an Inmate Classification Plan

4/1/95

C2 Develop a Housing Unit Assignment Plan

4/I/95

C3 Develop an Alternatives to Incarceration Plan

4/I/95

C4 Develop an Inmate Program and Activity" Plan

4/1/95

9

D. Physical and Operational Standards

The defendants shall develop physical and operational standards £or Broward County

detention facilities which meet the standards set forth in this agreement. Defendants shall

then apply these standards in the operation of the:facili~ies.

Task or Activity

Due Date

Do

Physical and Operational Standards

D1 Develop Physical Plant Standards
"q.
D2 Develop Operational Standards

4/1/95 4/1/95

D3 Audit Existing Plants and Operations

4/1/95

D4 Develop Improvement Plan

4/1/95

D5 ACA Accreditation

eighteen months from agreement

Capital Projects Management Plan

Broward County, with the Sheriff’s participation, shall develop a Capital

Projects Management Plan to provide funding for renovation of existing facilities and

construction of proposed facilities in conformity with the intent of this agreement. Said plan

shall take into account the necessary management systems and structures for tb, proper operation of such facilities. It is understood that such plan will I~e subject to review and"

revision to reflect changes in confinement population.

Task or Activity

Due Date

Capital Projects Management E1 Develop a Capital Project Management Process

5/1/95

E2 Develop a Funding Scheme

6/1/95

10

E3 Develop a Schedule to Meet Required Capacity F. Operational Management Plan

6/I/95

The Sheriff shall develop an operational management plan that shall address the

development of a documentation system including poli~y directives, operating procedures,

post orders, staffing plan, and address all necessary training.

Task or Activity

Due Date

F. Operational Management Plan

Develop Documentation, Policy and Procedure Syste.m

eighteen months from agreement

F2 Develop Staffing Plan

1/1/95

F3 Develop Training Plans

I/1/95

F4 Develop Transition Plan for New Service Delivery System 1/l/95

G. Management Information Systems Plan

The Sheriff shall develop a plan to provide management information systems, to

support the actions called for in this agreement. To this end the Sheriff, after consultation with Broward County, shall identify what information is needed and how it will be managed

to support and perform the requirements of this.agreement. The parties recognize that the
Sheriff does not have exclusive Control over such information.

Task or Activity G. Managemc:n~ Information Systems Plan GI Develop a Ntis Plan to Support All Activities

Due Date 6/1/95

CAPACITY AGREEMENT I1

CAPACITY AGREEMENT 14. The parties agree that each inmate shall be entitled to a bed, as set forth in-33-8 and as otherwise provided for herein. Authorized capacity of this system shall be detern’dnexl by the number of’available beds subject to the standards set forth in Chapter 33-8 of’the Florida Admirdstrative Code. The current authorized capacity of the Broward CountyCorrections and Rehabilitation system is 3,656 inmates. It is agreed that when the inmate population in the Broward County Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation facilities reaches 3,218, or within .. eighty-eight percent (88%)of’its authodr.~ capacity, the Shwi.fl’and the Director ofthe’Broward"" County Department of Corr~tlons and Rehabilitation v~ll exercise every internal me~hanlQn or option wlthln their legal authority to speed administrative dec-qsions and aztions to control the growth oftho inmate population. The Publio Safety Coordinating Council, or its suece.ssor, shall b~ notified by the ShedtTwhen the inmate population e, xc.eeds eighty-eight percent (88*/,) oftts authorized capacity. When the Inmate population reaches ninety-five percent (95%) ot’it~ authorized caps,city, currently 3,473 inmates, the Shedfl’sh~[ request the Public Safety Coordinating Council, or Its successor, and its representativejust|e~ agencies and thedr suers, to carry out the available m~hanisa’ns as dw,,eloped in accordance with Florida Statute 951.26 to control the inmate population. The Broward County Department el’Corrections sa’~d Rehabilitation shall not retain more than 3,656 Inmate, s at any given time. Upon attaining the rated capacity ot’3,656 inmates no further inmate admission shall be permitted. This admission moratorium may not b~ avoided except upon extreme conditions created by disaster, insurrection, dot or a ,h~dlar emergency or catastrophe. IIowever, nothing in this agre~Ttent prohibits the SherilTofBroward County from transt’c’rrtng Inmates to otlw, local or out of’county facilities or petitioning appropriate local erlmlnal justl~ authoriti~ for rdlef from the..~ overcrowded conditions. COMPLIANCE NIONITOKING
12

Judge Hoeveler’s Objection:
Page 12, last paragraph should read:
or catastrophe. "Nothing in this agreement prohibits the Sheriff from transferring prisoners to other local or out-of-county facilities or from petitioning appropriate local criminal justice authorities for relief from the over crowded conditions."

15. On submission of each plan required by the planning process described in the "Process" section of this agreement, together with that plan’s implementation schedule, the Special Master shall insure that Plaintiff’s counsel receives copies of the materials submitted. Plaintiff’s counsel shall have fifteen (15) days from receipt to submit any comment.
16. If plaintiffs object to defendant’s proposed plan or its implementation "schedule, the parties, with the assistance of the Special Master, or if he is unavailable an assigned federal magistrate, shall attempt to resolve these differences. If such differences are not resolved within thirty (30) days of the submission of the objections, the defendant’s plan, the objections, and any recommendations of the Special Master or magistrate will be submitted to the Court. Copies of any such recommendations shall be furnished to counsel for the-parties. Within ten (10) days of the submission to the Court and parties, either party may request a hearing, or the Court may order a hearing. If a hearing is not timely requested, the recommendation shall be accepted as uncontested by the parties.
17. Once a plan and its implementation schedule are approved by the Court, defendants shall carry it out. Whenever practical, parts of each plan shall be presumed to be separable such that objection to one part of a plan shall not delay implementation of other parts that cart proceed independently so long as’no objection exists to those other parts.
! 8. The Special Master or his desighee shall monitor compliance with the terms of this agreement _including implementation of the plans approved by the Court, the sehedfile set forth in the "Process" section, and the standards set forth in the "Statement of Standards". section. The Special Master shall provide the Court and counsel for the parties with status reports on compliance with the schedule, st~dards, and all approved plans and the status of
13

each required plan, beginning three (3) months after approval of th~s agreement by the Court and at three (3) month intervals thereafter or with such other frequency or at any time as the Court may direct. The compliance status will be rated using the following classifications:
a. The Special Master concludes that the defendants are in substantial compliance with the particular requirement.
b. The Special Master concludes that the defendants are in compliance with a particular requirement, subject to specified exceptions and/or qualifications as noted in the report.
, c. The Special Master cannot make a finding because of insufficient evidence, unresolved ambiguity as to what actions are necessary for compliane~, or a need for additional professional expertise.
d. The Special Master concludes that the defendants are not in compliance with the particular requirement.
19. Prior to submitting a status report.to the court the Special Master shall furnish each party with a copy of his proposed report. The parties will then have ten (10) days.to comment directly to the Special Master on the contents of his report. The Special Master will submit his final report to the Court and the parties within ten (10) days of receipt of the parties’ comments. The parties will then have ten (10) days in which to request a hearing regarding any remaining disagreements~ with the final report. If a hearing is not requested in a timely manner, the Special Master’s findings ~hall be accepted as uncontested.
20. Hearings on defendant’s eomplihnce shall be scheduled not earlier than thirty (30) days from the submission of the Special Master’s status report.
2~. In the event a hearing is requested, the Special Master will hold a pre-hearing conference with the parties, at least five (5) days prior to the compliance hearing before the
14

Court. The subject report and compliance issues will be reviewed by the parties at the prehearing conference.
22. The current practice which affords prisoners free telephone access to plaintiff’s counsel for reporting of complaints of conditions (~f cohfinement, which allegations are then investigated by plaintiff’s counsel or his staff, will be modified in practice by this agreement as follows:
a. The Sheriff will implement within five (5).days of this agreement a Grievance policy. This policy and operational procedure will provide for the written submission of prisoner grievances and complaints. The Sheriff will forward to plaintiff’s counsel copies of same on a weekly basis. Determinations of all grievances and Complaints shall be forwarded to plaintiff’s counsel on a weekly basis.
b. Upon implementation of the aforementioned policy and procedure, plairttif’f’s counsel, upon receipt of a telephone call from a prisoner shall record the caller’s name, necessary identification information, and the nature of the complaint or grievance. Except in the case of serious medical complaint or where the matter is in the nature of an emergency, the prisoner shall be informed that he or she is required to. utilize and exhaust the administrative remedies set forth in the grievan~)e procedure befo.~’e requesting direct assistartee from plaintiff’s counsel. By way of response to such non-emergency or non-serious medical calls, plaintift’s_counsel shall forward to each caller a letter confirming the call, the nature of the call, and the requirement of exhaustion of administrative remedies pursuant to the grievmaee procedure. Copies of such confirming correspondence shall be forwarded to John Tiedeberg, Federal Court Liaison, and to the person designated by the Sheriff to receive same.
15

c. This provision and modification of plaintiff counsel’s practice in receiving and responding to prisoner complaints is intended to record and report complaints and grievances arid to record and report their disposition. It does not prohibit any member of the class from calling or communicating with plaintiff’s counsel. Free telephoneaccess to plaintiff’s counsel shall continue during the monitoring period and notice shall be ~osted in each housing unit identifying plaintiff counsel, the phone number and explaining the process provided i..n subparagraph (b) above.
23. Compliance monitoring will be by the Special Master or his designee. 24. Pending ACA accreditation the parties agree to meet to clarify issues and determine the status of the various elements of this agreemeTnht.e parties will meet monthly until such time as all parties agre,~ upon less frequent meetings. 25. Compliance monitorihg shall continue’until ACA accreditation or order of the Court. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT 26. Upon Court approval of this stipulation the terms of this agreement shall be incorporated into the Consent Decree. ’The defendants shall be permanently enjoined from violating the terms of the Consent Decree. Defendants’ obligations re~arding AC,~ compliance shall terminate upon defendant’s achieving ACA accreditation. The Court shall retain jurisdietio_n to enforce the terms and conditions of the Consent Decree. ALLOCATION OF FINE MONEY 27. The individual plaintiffs named in the Second Amended Complaint, OLLIE CARRUTHERS, THOMAS ZERVOS, and GERALD TICE are each awarded the sum of
16

$25,000 as damages. Such sums to be paid from the fine monies paid into the registry of the Court. The parties will make good faith efforts to locate these individuals, includingappropriate publication and records search. Any portion of this award not paid by the end of the Compliance Monitoring period shall be disbursed by the Court for the welfare of the inmate population as determined by agreement of the parties or hearing before the’ Court.
28. Fine monies may be disbursed to pay for expert fees incurred by the Special Master during the Compliance Monitoring period or for such other purposes as may be appropriate in conjunction with such monitoring.
29. During the compliance monitoring period, and upon its conclusion, any remaining fine monies may be disbursed by agreement of the parties for the welfare of the inmates. Absent such agreement, any party may apply to the Court for disbursement of fine monies for such purposes as the Court, upon notice and hearing, shall determine to be appropri-at¢.
FEES AND COSTS 30. During the Compliance Monitoring period provided herein the Special Master, the Federal Court Liaison, and plaintiffs’ counsel shall submit itemized monthly statements of time and costs to the Office of the General Counsel, Broward County, for payment within ten (10) days of their submission. Hourly billing 6f the Special Master anel plainti~s’ counsel shall be paid at the.rate of $125.00 per hou’r. Hourly billing of the Federal Court Liaison shall be paid at the rate of $75.00 per hour. If a dispute arises regarding fees set forth in the statements, and such dispute cannot be resolved among the parties, the matter will be assigned to ~t federal magistrate in Broward County for arbitration.
17

ENTIRE AGREEMENT 31. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties. All prior

negotiations, discussions and agreements are merged into this agreement.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF BROWARD ~OUNTY COMIvlISSION 32. Attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement is a certified copy of the

minutes of the County Commission held on County Co~mmission~ approved this agreement --.~,,,.

, 1994 wherein the Broward

STIPLrLATED AND AGREED this ~1 day of Iuly,

I994.

RON COC ~ ~, Florida
Cot ec~)o~d RehE)ralon, B[oward County, Florida
CHAISES T. WHITELOCK .
~~gey for Sheriff Cochran and Director Templeton al form .and~e~j~ ~)
ALEXANDER COCALIS Attorney ~5~r--.Brow~rd County Co~missi~mers " ’ as to le fo and ufficiency
/~-/RI’.qTOP~ C. ~-’O’~i~’, _C-o-Cotm~,~

on~ehalf of the Plaintiff C~ ~.
..

¯ 18

Barbara A. Heyer (FL)

9 eyer & Associates, P.A.
Attorneys at Law

1311- S.E. 4th Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316

June 21, 1999

Broward: (954) 522-4922 Palm Beach: (561) 833-1068
Fax: (954) 522-4955

CERTIFIED MAIL NO:

P157-886-142

Sheriff Kenneth C. Jenne, II 2601 W. Broward Blvd. Fort Lauderdale, F1 33311

Re: Peter Cottone, Jr. Date of Incident: 4/7/99
Dear Sheriff Jenne:
Please be informed that our firm represents the interests of the family of Peter Cottone, Jr. with regard to his death as a result of the incident at the North Broward Detention Center on April 7, 1999.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Florida Statutes §768.28 of, our intent to bring a lawsuit on behalf of the Estate of Peter Cottone, Jr.. In addition, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Chapter 119, I am requesting that we be provided copies of the following materials:
i. All documents reflecting the incident at issue. These materials shall include all statements, photographs,
reports, audio and video tapes, witness lists, lists of persons interviewed, etc.
2. All documentation reflecting the follow-up investigation of the incident at issue. These materials shall include all reports or other materials prepared in anticipation of, or as a result of, any such investigation including all statements, photographs, reports, video tapes, witness lists, lists of persons interviewed, etc.
3. All documentation reflecting Peter Cottone, Jr.’s stay at the North Broward Detention.Center and any other Broward County Detention facility. These materials shall include all daily reports, medical reports, incident reports, etc..

Heyer Associates, P.A.
Cottone itr. - p.2

4. All documentation reflecting Widnel Charles’ stay at the North Broward Detention Center and any other Broward County Detention facility. These materials shall include all daily reports, medical reports, incident reports, etc..

5. The contract between the Broward County Sheriff’s office and the health care provider which was in effect on April 7, 1999.

6. Any consent decrees and/or cou~torders pertaining to the Broward County Detention/Jail facilities for the period from January i, 1995 to the present.

7.

Any grand jury findings pertaining to the Broward County

Detention/Jail facilities for the period from January I, 1995 to

the present.

Finally, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Chapter 119, please make the following materials available for my review:

I. Any logbooks, lists or other materials in your possession or control reflecting incidents of inmate misconduct, injuries and/or deaths. These materials shall include all incidents, whether investigated or not, and whether filed by inmates or internally, covering the period from January I, 1995 to the present.

2. The personnel and internal affairs files of all members of the Broward County Sheriff’s office who came in contact with either Peter Cottone, Jr. and/or Widnel Charles during their incarceration at the Broward County Jail Facility. These files shall include any supervisory personnel of the officers who had direct contact with either Peter Cottone, Jr. and/or Widnel Charles.

3. Any documentation which reflects the responsibilities and duties of the health care provider at the North Broward Detention Center on the date of the incident.

4. All Broward County Detention/Jail facilities inspection reports done by the Florida DePartment of Corrections from January I, 1995 to the present.

5. Any and all reports pertaining to the staffing of the Broward County mail.jail facility and the North Broward Detention Center, i.e. number of employees, number of employees required, etc., from January i, 1995 to the present.

6. Any and all reports relating to claimed or actual

Heyer & Associa. , P.A.
Cottone itr. p.3
medical shortcomings within the Broward County main jail and the North Broward Detention Center, including the forensic unit from January I, 1995 to the present.
, 7. Any records or reports pertaining to any inmate injuries or deaths from January I, 1995 to the present.
I would appreciate it if copies of the requested items be provided to me within forty-five days. We will, of Course, pay reasonable copy charges for these documents. With regard to the ’documentsavailable being to me by requested July 30, for 1999. review, please have these documents
Thank you for your anticipa/~~operation"

cc: Peter Cottone

US Postal Se~/ice

Receipt for Certif"

~o
~o

Insurance

Coy
crape

Prolveiqd~

Mail

t~

SENDER: Complete items 1 End. 2 when additional services are desired, and complete items 3 and 4.

Put your address in the "RETURN TO" Space on the reverse side. Failure to do this will prevent this card

from being returned to you. The return receipt fee will provide you the name of the person delivered to and the date .o( delivery. For additional fe’e’s the following services are available. Consult pdstmaste~ for fees

and check box(es) for additional service(s) requested; .......

1. [] Show to whom delivered, date, and addressee’s.~d~ress. 2. [] Restricted Delivery

(Extra charge)

(Extra charge)

3, Article Addressed to:

4. Article Number

Sheriff Kenneth Jenne

P157 886 142

Type of Service:

[] Registered

[] Insured

[] Certified [] Express Mail

[] COD [] Return Receipt
for Merchandise

Always obtain signature of addressee

or agent and DATE DELIVERED.

5. Signature - Addressee
x

8. Addressee’s Address (ONLY if requested and fee paid)

6. Signature -- Agent
x

7. Date
-~ (

Barbara A. Heyer

HE YER & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
Attorneys at Law

1311 S.E. 4~’ Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316

January 28, 2000

Broward: (954) 522-4922 Palm Beach: (561) 833-1068
Fax: (954) 522-4955

CERTIFIED NO: P 157 886 149

Jean Byasse, Esq. Prison Health Services Office of General Counsel 105 West Park Drive Suite 300 Brentwood, Tennessee 47027

Dear Ms. Byasse:

RE: Peter Cottone Date of Incident: 4/7/99

Please be informed that our firm represents the interests of the family of Peter Cottone, Jr. with regard to his death as
a result of the incident at North Broward Detention Center on April 7, 1999.

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Florida Statutes §768.28 and §768.57, of our intent to bring a lawsuit on behalf of the Estate of Peter Cottone, Jr.. In addition, pursuant to Chapter 119., Florida Statutes, I am requesting that we be provided copies of the following materials:

I. All documents, materials, etc. reflecting the incident
at issue. These materials shall include all statements, photographs, reports, audio and video tapes, witness lists, lists of persons interviewed, etc..

2. All documentation reflecting the follow-up investigation of the incident at issue. These materials shall include all reports or other materials prepared in anticipation of, or as a result of any such investigation including all statements, photographs, reports, video tapes, witness lists, lists of persons interviewed, etc..

3. All documentation reflecting Peter Cottone’s Jr.’s

stay at the North Broward Detention Center and any other Broward County Detention facility. These materials shall include all daily reports, medical reports, incident reports, etc.. Enclosed please find a medical release signed by Richard Cottone, Personal Representative of the Estate of Peter Cottone, Jr..

4.

The contract between the Broward County Sheriff’s

Office and EMSA which was in effect on April 7, 1999.

5.

Any documentation which reflects the responsibilities

and duties of the health care provider at the North Broward

Detention Center on the date of the incident.

6.

Any and all reports pertaining to the staffing of the

Broward County main jail facility and the North Broward

Detention Center, i.e. number of employees, number of employees

required, etc., from January I, 1995 to the present.

7.

Any and all reports relating to claimed or actual

medical shortcomings within the Broward County main jail and the

North Broward Detention Center, including the forensic unit,

from January i, 1995 to the present.

8.

Any records or reports pertaining to any inmate

injuries or deaths at the Broward County main jail and/or the

North Broward Detention Center from January I, 1995 to the

present.

I would appreciate it if copies of the requested items be provided to me within forty-five days. We will, of course, pay reasonable copy charges for these documents.

Thank you for your anticipated coop.~tion......-

" Ve~/<ruly.~ yours,

P 157 886 149

US Postal Service

Receipt for Certified Mail

No Insurance Coverage Provided.

Do not use for International Mail (See reverse

SeQt to

~

-

I ~re~el & Number ,.. ~. ~) ;

P~f~ce, State, & ZIP C~
Postage
Certified Fee
Speda~ Delivery Fee
Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt Showing 1o
~ Whom & Date Delivered Return Receipt Shoving to Whom, Date, & ,~ldressee’s A~k~s TOTAL Postage & Fees

¯ . BarBara A. Heyer .......

/_ ....

.

SENDER: Complete items 1 and 2 when additional services are desired, and complete item,,

¯ 3 and 4.

Put your address in the "RETURN~’O" Space on the reverse side. Failure to do this will prevent this card

from being returned to you. The return receipt fee will provide you the name of the person delivered to and

the and

date of delivery. For additional fees the following check box(es) for additional s~rvice(s) requested.

services

are

avai"lable.

Consult postmaster .

for

fees

1. ~ Show to whom delivered,~date, and add(essee’s address. (Extra’charge)

2. [] Re(sExtrtricdtcehdargDe)elivery

3. Article Addressed to:

~...~rticle Number.

300
B. S~gnaluFe -- Addressee
x

Type of Service:
/~1 RCegeritsiftieerded [] Express Mail

[] insured
[] COD [] RefoturrnMeRrechcaenipdtise

Always obtain signaturo of addressee ~or agent and DATE DELIVERED.

8. Addressee’s Address (ONLYif requested and fee paid)

7.~Datd~o, Deli~’ery

/ -...-. J :~i, ~

’ ~

PS Form 3811, Apr. ]989 ~ (q ~2"316~1~’.~ t’)DOMESTIC .ETURN RECEI’

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case Number 76-6086-CV-H6eveler

OLLIE CARRUTHERS, et al.,

Plaintiffs, v.

RON COCHRAN, et al.,

Defendants. /

/J cs~.,0..~ou~.~s,.~o. ,"sT. cT.

ORDER APPROVING SEaLaNT AGRE~NT ~ DISMISSING CASE

This case came before the co~t on the Stipulation of Consent Decree a~eed to by the p~ies on July 27, 1994. The

for Ent~

court held a fairness hearing on. class objections to the Consent

decree on Janua~ 20, .1~95. After consideration and review of the class objections, ~e court finds that ~e consent decree is .fair and reasonable as to all parties.

Notice to the class was provided by p~lication and posting to the extent demonstrated by the record. None of the parties or

counsel present at the fairness hearing on January 20, 1995 contended that the matter ~hould not proceed to conclusion due to

faille of ade~ate notice.

"

There has been a shared ~derstanding of principles by co~sel

for the parties herein which is reflected in a binding a~eement

entered into by and ~ong ~e parties on July 27, 1994 (as amended and approved). That a~eement is inco~orated herein by reference;

it is approved by the court and, pursuant to these understandings and the court’s approval, all parties conclude ~at there is no

need to further litigate this cause. A true original of the

agreement is attached to this order as Exhibii A. Late requests -by class members for exclusion from the
settlement will be accepted within thirty days of the entry of this order. Requests for exclusion fil~d after the expiration of the thirty day period, however, will be rejected.
In view of the above, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED, and the parties do consent, that the attached stipulation and agreement of settlement be entered as a consent order in this ~case and be binding upon the parties on both sides as well as their successors in interest and in office; that this cause be dismissed; that the court will retain jurisdiction pursuant to the terms of the agreement (for a reasonable Period of time) for the purpose of implementation and enforcement of the agreement and such other matters as may be germane to the effective administration of. the agreement.
I£ is further ORDERED that, for the period described in the agreement, Professor Howard Messing will continue to serve as Special Master and Mr. John Tiederberg will continue to serve as the court’s Monitor. Magistrate Judge Lurana Snow is appointed to act, when requested by the parties and in th~ absence of ~he Special Master, to resolve such problems as may arise during the remaining workout period during which this court will retain jurisdiction.
It is further ORDERED that as of January 20, 1995, with the dismissal of this case as an active file, there shall be no additional fines as the parties will be proceeding under the

consent agreement. The Clerk of this court is presently holding fine payments made by Broward County. It has been the purpose of this court to use the fine monies to benefit the citizens and county government of Broward in ways agreeable to the, parties herein; the court retains jurisdiction over these funds during the workout period above described and pending further orders of this court.
DONE AND ORDERED in chambers in Miami, this January 1995.

Copies furnished to parties and counsel of record.

WILLIAM M. HOEVELER SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CONTRACT BETWEEN THE
BR 0 WARD SHERIFF’S OFFICE
AND
EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SCOPE OF WORK Standards
B. Administrative C. Medical Director D. Health Service Administrator E. Health Services MOnitor

I1. PERSONNEL A. General Policies B. 4, Non-Competition Clauses C. ~ Employee Training and Orientation .....................................................5.. D. Staffing and Schedules ............................................................6

II1. FACILITIES ............................................................

6

A.

Space, Equipment and Commodities ....................................................6

B. Security ............................................................

6

IV. MEDICAL RECORDS ............................................................6

V.

SICK CALLS ............................................................

7

VI. INFIRMARY CARE AND HOSPITALIZATION ...............................................7...

VII. MENTAL HEALTH ............................................................

8

VIII. DIET ............................................................

10

IX. PHARMACY SERVICES (ON-SITE OR OFF-SITE) ...........................................1. 0

X.

LABORATORY SERVICES

Xl. RADIOLOGIC SERVICES

Xll. REFERRALS

XIII. OPTICAL SERVICES

XlV. EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE

XV. MEDICAL DISASTER PLAN

SPECIAL MEDICAL PROGRAMS A. Special Programs
B. Inmate Health Education

XVII. TREATMENT PLANS

XVIII. QUALITY MANAGEMENT

XIX. INFECTION CONTROL

XX. SCREENING
xx .

XXlI. INMATE TRANSFERS

XXIII. HEALTH ASSESSMENT

XXIV. ACCOUNTING RECORDS

XXV. HOUSEKEEPING

XXVl. NONDISCRIMINATION

XXVlI. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

A.

Contractor’s Insurance

B. Worker’s Compensation Insurance .......................................................20

C. Liability/Insurance ...........................................................2.1

XXVlII. LIMITATIONS ON CATASTROPHIC ACCIDENT OR ILLNESS ....................2...1

XXIX. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS ...................................................2. 1

XXX. TERMS OF THE CONTRACT

A.

Term

B. Termination

XXXl. BROKERING OF CONTRACT

XXXII. COMMUNICATIONS

XXXIII. MEETINGS

XXXIVo BASIC COMPENSATION

XXXV. ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION

A.

For Other Services

B. For Excess Population

XXXVl. ADJUSTMENTS

XXXVII. ADJUSTMENTS FOR STAFFING

A.

Calculation

B. Application

C. Changes

XXXVIII. THIRD PARTY REIMBURSEMENT ...............,. ....; .....................................28

XXXlX. A. B.

ADJUSTMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE LEVEL ........................................28

General ............................................................

28

Performance Level Penalties Defined ...................................................2. 8

XL. OFF-THE-STREET INJURIES

XLI. INMATES OUTSIDE THE FACILITIES "

.31

XLII. COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND NATIONAL COMMISSION ON CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE STANDARDS ..................3.. 1
XLIII. COMPLIANCE WITH STATE MINIMUM JAIL STANDARDS .........................3..1.

XLIV. INVOICING AND OEFICIAL PAYEE .........................................................3...1

XLV. ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS .........................................................3..1.

XLVI. NOTICE AND ADDRESS OF PAYEE .............................................................32 XLVII. ASSIGNMENT

XLVIII. SEVERABILITY

XLIX. PARTIES BOUND

L. MISCELLANEOUS

III

CONTRACT BETWEEN THE
BROWARD SHERIFF’S OFFICE AND
EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
This Contract made and entered into this 6th day of August, 1993, and renewed this 1st day of October, 1996 by and between Ron Cochran, as Sheriff of Broward County and Chief Correctional Officer of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (hereinafter referred to as the "BSO") and EMSA Limited Partnership (hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor") which are the parties hereto.
WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, the BSO is required by Section 945.04, Florida Statutes, to ensure that all inmates in the Broward County Department of Corre~ons and Rehabilitation (hereinafter
referred to as "DCR’) are provided care, custody, treatment, housing and general handling of prisoners in accordance with Florida Statutes; and

WHEREAS, said Department presently consists of the following facilities, to wit: Broward County Main Jail Facility; the North Broward Detention Complex; Division of Community Corrections Facility; and Boot Camp (hereinafter collectively the "Facilities"); and

WHEREAS, EMSA Limited Partnership is a qualified and willing participant with the. Sheriff to provide health services for medical, dental, mental health, and program support services for inmates at the facilities.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements contained herein, the parties agree:

I.

SCOPE OF WORK

A. Standards

1. All medical services shall be provided according to medically accepted communit~ standards of care and meet American Correctional Association (hereinafter referred to as "ACA"} and National Commission on Correctional Health Care (hereinafter referred to as "NCCHC") Standards.

2. Contractor will request documentation of licensing and accreditation for all hospitals, clinics and other providers used by the contractor. All hospitals used by the Contractor for the care of inmates shall be fully licensed and preferably accredited by the Joint Commission and Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO).

3. BSO’s Health Services Monitor shall provide pedodic contract monitoring at the direction of the BSO Health Services Administrator. Contractor shall p¢ovide all documentation necessary to facilitate this monitoring.
Ii. PERSONNEL
A. General Policies
1. Contractor shall employ only candidates who have .provided documentation of past health care experience and letters of recommendation. Each candidate will be subject to a credentialing process. BSO’s Health Service Administrator shall participate in the interviewing process for Contractor’s Medical Director and the Contractor’s Health Services-Administrator. The final selection of all employees and subcontractors shall be subject to reviewSby the BSO. All physicians, ARNP’s, psychologists, PA’s and Dentists employed by the Contractor shall be credentialed.
2. Contractor shall require Florida licensed and qualified personnel to provide professional coverage for the facilities according to the schedule of specifications and job descriptions. Contractor shall ensure that its staff complies with all terms of the contract specifications.
3. An on-site visit to one or more of the facilities shall be made by all screened candidates pdor to employment.
4. The BSO reserves the dght to instruct, in wdting, the Contractor to prohibit any of Contractor’s employees and/or independent contractors from performing any services with regard to this Contract. In such event, Contractor shall have a reasonable period ¯ not to exceed thirty (30)days to find replacement(s) for such prohibited employees or sub-contractors.
5. All contract personnel will be subject to a security background check by the Office of the Sheriff. Following the completion of the security background check, each of Contractor’s employees will be issued a BSO contractor’s ID badge. Upon resignation or termination of employment by Contractor, EMSA shall be resp.0nsible to return each badge to BSO within 5 (five) working days of the emplbyee’s last day of work.
- 6. All contract personnel shall comply with all current State, County and Local laws and regulations, Court Orders, BSO rules, applicable nursing protocols, Institutional Directives, and Policies and Procedures of the BSO and Institution. During the term of this Contract, policies, regulations and laws may change. These changes may impact Contractor’s service .delivery in terms of materially increasing Contractor’s cost of providing health care services. While Contractor recognizes that changes may occur, there is no way to anticipate what those changes will be nor is there any way to anticipate the related cost associated w~th the changes. Therefore, Contractor and the BSO will agree to negotiate in advance for additional compensation to cover costs associated with the changes in service delivered in compliance with State or Federal laws, statute or regulations, BSO policy or regulations. As
3

new beds are added to the system, Contractor and BSO agree to negotiate in advance additional compensation to cover cost associated with these changes.
7. Personnel files on all contractor employees, independent contractors or any individual providing a contract service shall be on file with the health care, unit of the institution. These personnel records shall be mad~ available, as required by law to the Director of Corrections or designee for any purpose. These files shall include, but not be limited to, copies of current Florida licenses or proof of professional certification, and evaluation records and position responsibilities.
8. The Contractor shall promptly complete an employee performance evaluation upon request by the Director or designee. The Contractor and its staff shall participate in any disciplinary headng of any employees’as requested by the Director or designee.~
9. In any urgent administrative matter, the Contractor shall respond within two (2) hours after contact by BSO. In a non-urgent administrative matter, the Contractor shall respond within forty-eight (48) hours after contact by BSO.
10. The on-site Medical Director shall serve as the medical authority, and shall work with the physicians in the execution of their duties. The Medical Director shall operate the health care program in accordance with BSO Rules, ACA, and NCCHC Standards, or as may be amended during this contract.
11. The on-site Medical Director shall plan, implement, direct and control all clinical and administrative aspects of the health care program. In addition to administrative responsibilities, the Medical Director shall also provide primary health care services on a routinebasis and meet the same standards as the Contractor’s physicians.
12. Contractor shall provide the Medical Director or physician on call with a pager service so that they may be contacted by Contractor’s employees, while off-site.
13. Contractor will not take retaliatory action against any Contractor’s employee solely because that employee has made a good faith effort to comply or ensure compliance with the provisions of this Contract. Contractor shall provide BSO with Wdtten notification of the removal or termination of administra.tive personnel, including a summary of the reasons therefor.
B. Non-Competition Clauses
1. Contractor is prohibited from entering into covenants Not-To-Compete, or Non-Competition Clauses with non-physician employees or independent contractors, or any non-physician parties specifically related to the performance or any obligation required under this Agreement, which would prohibit said independent contractor or employee from competing directly or indirectly, in any .way with Contractor. For the purpose of this paragraph, the term "competing directly or indirectly, in any way with Contractor" shall mean the entedng into or attempting to enter into any similar business with that carded on by Contractor with any
4

individual, partnership, corporation or association that was or is the same or related business as is Contractor.
2. BSO shall not be held financially responsible for the employment of any of the Contractor’s employees, including administrative staff or physicians by BSO or any subsequent vendor at the expiration or conclusion of this agreement. The Contractor agrees to indemnify BSO, or otherwise hold BSO harmless from any liability connected thereto.
C. Employee Training and Orientation
1. Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that all new health care personnel are provided with orientation and appropriate training-regarding medical practices on-site ~at the Institution. Orientation regarding other facility and security operations will be the responsibility of the BSO upon notification by Contractor. Contractor shall ensure that all full-time health care staff receive forty (40) hours of in-service training (including on-the-job training) within the first ninety (90) days of employment. The Medical Director shall receive the same in-servic~ training and orientation.
2. Contractor shall establish an on-site medical library for use by the health care staff. The library shall minimally include, basic reference texts related to diagnosis and treatment in a primary care setting, as well as a current medical dictionary, pharmacology reference book and a Physician’s Desk Reference, etc. At the expiration of the contract, the library shall become the property of the BSO.
3. Contractor shall provide appropriate in-service education programs for employees of contractor and BSO to facilitate the health care program. All full-time health care staff shall receive 40 hours of in-service training per year with the exception of clerical which. require 20 hours. Selected topics which require staff training shall be identified on an on-going basis through the Contractor’s Quality Management Program. Contractor shall document attendance at such training in accordance with ACA standards.
4. Contractor shall distribute a written job description to each member of the health care staff with all assigned responsibilities to each member of the health care staff. In addition, contract staff shall be provided a copy of the appropriate attached job descriptions and General Specifications. Contractor shall monitor and document performance of health c~re staff to ensure adequate job performance in accordance with these job descriptions and other provisions of this Contract.
5. Contractor shall assist on-site BSO personnel in developing, coordinating, and evaluating health education for BSO staff. Programs shall minimally include training on the following topics:
CPR; First Aid; Response to medical emergency or disaster; Recognizing signs and symptoms of mental disorders or chemical dependency;

eo

AIDS; and

Additional topics as requested and agreed upon by the-Director,

Assistant Directors, Superintendents and Contractor’s staff.

D. Staffing and Schedules
1. Working hours shall be spent on-site at the institution, except as is otherwise required for the provision of services or training, or expressly agreed to by the Director and the Contractor. Institution staffing work schedules may be modified upon the parties’ mutual agreement and written consent.
Attachment "A" describes the minimum qualifications required for each position.
3. Attachment "A" reflects position descriptions for each position.
III. FACILITIES
A. Space, Equipment and Commodities
1. The BSO shall provide and maintain the space, fixtures and other similar items required for the efficient operation of the health care unit as agreed upon by the parties unless expressly excluded by provisions of this agreement. The Contractor shall provide input on the selection of the health care facilities as appropriate. All medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, prosthetics devices and medical supplies shall be provided or arranged for by the Contractor.
2. BSO shall be solely responsible for housekeeping services, food/dietary services, building maintenance, linen, and normal transportation (excluding medical emergency transportation). (See Section XXV.)
B. Security
1. Contractor and its personnel shall be subject to and shall comply With all security regulations and procedures of each BSO facility. Violation of regulations may result in the employee being denied access to the facility. In this event, the Contractor shall be given a reasonable L:Ledod of time to provide alternate personnel to supply services described herein, subject to the BSO approval.
2. The BSO will provide security for the Contractor’s employees and agents consistent with the security provided at other BSO facilities.
IV. MEDICAL RECORDS

A. The Contractor shall ensure that all healt5 carestaff document each health care encounter in the Problem-Oriented Medical Record utilizing the Subjective, Objective, Assessment Plan Education ("SOAPE") format.
B. The Contractor shall ensure that each health record is complete, accurate and contains sufficient documentation to warrant the’ treatment rendered; and that each entry is made in a timely manner to comply with aforementioned procedures. This shall include requesting and documenting the request for, all available previous medical-records and composing a medical history as needed by the physician.
C. The Contractor shall ensure specific compliance regarding confidentiality and medicolegal access/disclosure, assist in providing documentation to support BSO automation, and participate in the BSO’s evaluation of any Quality Management Program.
D. ¯ The Contractor shall ensure that each Medical Record meets the provisions in FIodda Statutes, Flodda Administrative Code, BSO Rules, and the Health Record Manual. Inactive medical records will be maintained in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida.
E. The Contractor shall provide name stamps for all employees signing_ medical records to assure the determination of record signatures.
V. SICK CALLS
A. All physician and nurse sick calls shall be provided in compliance with ACA and NCCHC standards. Nurse sick calls shall be provided seven (7) days a week. Referrals shall be made to the appropriate medical personnel as required. Non-emergency physician’s sick calls shall be provided within twenty-four (24) hours of any pdodty referrals and seventy-two (72). hours on weekends. Physician sick call will be provided a minimum of five (5) days a week.
Vl. INFIRMARY CARE AND HOSPITALIZATION
A. Infirmary care shall ’be available for inmates requiring skilled nursing care, chronic illness care, convalescent care, and all acute and chronic conditions which can be managed on-site. Contractor shall ensure the following is provi..ded:
24-hour coverage, supervised on-site by a Registered Nurse; 2. Daily infirmary rounds by nursing staff; 3. 24-hour Physician on-call coverage; 4. A manual of nursing care procedures; 5. A separate and complete medical record for each patient; 6. Infirmary rounds will be conducted by the Physician no
less than one (1) time per day, Monday through Fdday.
B. All infirmary encounters by a health care provider shall be documented in the inmate’s medical record.

C. Those inmates requiring care beyond the capability of the infirmary shall be hospitalized at a licensed community facility within Broward County or pursuant to other written
agreements. Recommendations for hospitalization, with the exception of emergency situations, shall require review and approval by the on-site physician. Hospital admissions that arise from emergency situations shall be informally reviewed bY a physician within forty-eight (48) hours of
admission.

D. Any specialty consultations of inmates are the financial responsibility of the Contractor, subject to the maximums set forth herein.

E. Routine transportation of inmates as directed by Contractor, for medical visits, consultations, diagnostic studies and hospital admissions which utilize Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation vehicles and staff shall be theresponsibility of the Department of Correctior~s and Rehabilitation. BSO shall not be directed by Contractor to transport
emergencyl seriously ill or otherwise medically unstable inmates.

F. Contractor’s personnel shall establish r~gular meetings with representatives from the designated hospital and other providers to coordinate the referral of inmates. Policies and
Procedures shall be developed regarding referral methods, scheduling, transportation, reporting of test results, medical records, acute care hospitalization and patient follow-up, subject to approval by the BSO. Contractor shall be responsible for maintaining confidential and secure communications with outside providers so as not to compromise the secure transportation of inmates.

G. Contractor shall provide on-site emergency medical treatment for BSO employees, visitors, and contractors injured or who become ill while working at each facility, consisting of stabilization and referral to personal physician or local hospital.

VII. MENTAL HEALTH

A. The mental health services that shall be provided at each facility include:

1. Basic screening of all intakes/admissions and appropriate referrals for detectable mental health disorders.

2. Development of a system-wide mental health program for evaluation, treatment and/or referral to include but not be limited to:

ao

When isolated for psychiatric purposes, inmate shall be examined

by a licensed mental health provider or designee within forty-eight

(48) hours after confinement.

bo

Mental health evaluation must support mental health confinement

of inmate based on risk of physical danger to self or others.

Co

Medical service must cont~inue to provide follow up care and

treatment during the entire time an inmate is held in mental health

confinement on at least a five (5) days per week basis.

do

A licensed mental health provider will be responsible to

determine when an"inmate should be sent to or retumed to

general population, with documentation in the medical record

regarding these decisions.

eo

All inmates referred for mental health evaluation will receive a

comprehensive diagnostic examination including a psychosocial

history and mental status evaluation. This examination will

include an assessment of ~uicidal dsk, potential for violence, and

special housing needs.

Psychotropic medication in liquid form will be used where appropriate. To maximize the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy and to reduce the toxicity and side effects of medication, an intensive program of drug monitoring shall exist. All-inmates placed on drug therapy will be seen within one (1) week by the psychiatrist. Precautions to be followed will include:
(i) The psychiatrist will review the inmate’s medical record to
determine which medications the patient has been receiving prior to prescription of psychotropic medication.
Prior to the prescription of psychotropic medication, allinmates will be informed by a member of the mental health ¯ staff about the dsks of taking such medication, in accordance with applicable standards of care. All female inmates will be so informed by a member of the mental. health staff about the risks of taking such medications while pregnant, and will be required to sign a release. A pregnancy test will be prov,.ided prior to the prescription of the psychotropic medication to all female inmates wishing such a test, if such a test has not already been provided upon intake.

All patients placed on medication will be evaluated for signs of toxicity. Blood pressure will be regularly checked and drug levels
monitored where appropriate with documentation of this information to be placed routinely in the inmate’s medical record.

go

Substance abuse services will be offered to those inmates who

are referred to the program for mental health problems and who

also have substance abuse related problems. These services will

be provided by licensed mental health professionals and

9

psychiatrists and-should ir~clude case findings, referrals, liaison work and post release planning.

h. Clinical supervision of non-doctoral psychology staff by a doctoral psychologist.

3. Initiation of Out-Patient Mental Health Care for identified inmates, must include at least the following:

a. Psychotropic medications when clinically indicated.

Case management, individualized treatment planning, and supportive group and/or individual counseling, all provided by staff having at least the qualifications of a Psychological Specialist.

c. Psychiatric consultation on a regular basis for identified inmates.

d. Appropriate laboratory studies for inmates taking psychotropics.

4. Full range of out-patient mental health care for all inmates at the facilities, when indicated, including at least the following:

ao

Mental status examination at least every 30 days for each inmate

continuously housed in confinement.

bo

Individualized treatment planning and implementation for each

identified inmate.

Co Post-release continuity of care planning for all permanently assigned inmates who will need continued care in the community.

Vlll. DIET

A. The Contractor shall establish a nutrition program and coordinate with the contracted Food Service Supervisor and BSO Health Services Administrator to ensure the provision of food service needs to include:

nutdtionist.

Menus planned for twenty-eight (28) days in advance and certified by a

2. Therapeutic diets modified and certified by a qualified nutdtionist available for inmates when ordered by the physician.

IX. PHARMACY SERVICES (ON-SITE OR OFF-SITE)

A. Contractor will provide for pharmaceutical services to assure the availability to the patient of prescribed medications within twenty-four (24) hours (forty- eight (48) hours on
[0

weekends) of the order being written. Certain medications as determined by the Medical Director will be available on-site for emergencies or in cases where more immediate initial dosing is clinically indicated. Pharmacy services consistent with State and Federal regulations, monitored by a licensed, qualified pharmacist must be maintained or contracted. BSO personnel shall at all times have a right to review and inspect the pharmacy storage and records. An independent audit of the pharmacy ’services must be performed monthly at the expense of the Contractor. The results will be distributed to both BSO and the Contractor.
B. 1. The Contractor shall record the administration of medications in a manner and on a form approved by BSO to include documentation of the fact that inmates are receiving and ingesting their prescribed medications. Documentation will also be required when an inmate’s ordered medication was not administered and the reason given.
~.. ~. 2. The Contractor shall provide and fill all prescriptions for inmates leaving
on writ, participating in the work release program, transferred or discharged for a maximum of three (3) days, or if clinically indicated, in sufficient quantity to ensure that the. patient can continue medication until such time as they are able to be seen by an outside provider to continue their required medications or to complete the current prescription.
C. 1. The Contractor shall proyide a licensed pharmacist to participate monthly with the Quality Management Committee.
2. The Contractor shall provide a licensed pharmacist to perform third party drug utilization review as requested by the Quality Management Committee.
3. The Contractor shall provide a licensed consultant pharmacist to conduct monthly inspections of all institutional areas where medications are maintained and provide forthe destruction/disposal of medications as required by law. Inspection shall include expiration dates, storage and review, of medication records. The consultant pharmacist’s monthly inspection report shall be completed in a timely manner, with one copy to remain in the pharmacy and a second copy to be provided to the Medical Director or designee.
X. LABORATORY SERVICES
A. All lab(~ratory services shall be the financial resp(~nsibility of the Contractor.
B. All stat laboratory work shall be promptly performed at the local hospital or laboratory accredited by the College of Amedcan Pathologists. Results shall be telephoned immediately to the requesting physician and a written report shall follow within twenty-four (24) hours.
C. Non-urgent laboratory services shall be provided by the Contractor to the BSO under a sub-contract arrangement. The most cost effective process may be utilized subject to mutual agreement.
D. Services shall include:

Laboratory Supplies; 2. Pick-up and delivery on a daily basis, or as needed, Monday through
Fdday; 3. Printer, installed at the Institution, to provide test results (FAX NOT
ACCEPTABLE); and 4. Reporting capability within twenty-four (24)-hours.
E. A physician shall check, initial and date all abnormal laboratory results within an appropriate time, not to exceed twenty-four (24) hours upon receipt of results (weekends excluded) to assess the follow-up care indicated and to screen for discrepancies between the clinical observations and the laboratory results. In the event that the laboratory report and the clinical Condition of the patient do not appear to correlate, it shall be the responsibility of the physician~to make a clinical assessment, and to provide appropriate follow-up, which ordinarily will include reordering of the lab tests.
Xl. RADIOLOGIC SERVICES
A. Radiology services are the financial responsibility of the Contractor. All routine x-rays shall be provided on-site at the facilities, by the Contractor or an appropriately licensed subcontractor. For procedures beyond the capability of the equipment on-site, the inmates shall be referred to an off-site health care facility.
B. All fluoroscopy and special studies, including, but not limitecl to, MRI, CAT Scans, and ultra sounds, shall be provided by the Contractor.
C. Contractor shall ensure that all x-ray films are read by a radiologist. The. Contractor’s Radiologist shall meet the BSO’s Credentialing standards. The radiologist shall call the Contractor’s physician with any report requiring immediate intervention.
D. Contractor shall ensure that a wdtten report is forwarded by the Radiologist within twenty-four (24) hours of interpretation of the films. All emergency x-rays that are required at times other than normal working hours shall be performed at a local facility. A physician shall promptly review, initial and date all abnormal x-r..ay reports.
Xll. REFERRALS
A. _ All routine referrals shall be approved by the Medical Director and outside referrals shall be made only when appropriate. However, coordination and compliance with the Contractor’s Utilization Review Program requirements is mandatory. Appropriate referral logs shall be maintained and available for review by BSO staff. All inmates returning from a hospital stay will be admitted to the infirmary until cleared by the on-site physician or medical director.
Xlll. OPTICAL SERVICES
A. Eye examinations shall be performed on-site. A qualified Optometrist shall examine inmates with specific complaints.
]2

B. Eyeglasses shall be provided by the Contractor. Other prosthetics-shall be provided at the inmate’s expense unless clinically mandated by an Ophthalmologist in which case the Contractor is financially responsible.
XlV. EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE
A. Emergencies shall be taken to the hospital agreed to by BSO. Contractor shall ensure the availability of emergency treatment through predetermined arrangements with local hospitals. All ambulances utilized shall be equipped with life support systems and certified by the State of Florida. Contractor shall obtain documentation of State Certification and keep it on file. The Contractor shall be responsible for the c.ost of all helicopter or ambulance transporta~tion unless otherwise provided by the inmate’s insurance carrier.
B. The MD/Physician shall ensure capable on-site emergency treatment is provided by the Contractor’s employees, including the following:
1. In-service education on first aid and emergency procedures;
Wdtten policies and procedures concerning emergency transfer and transportation of inmates:
Arrangements for emergency twenty-four (24) hour on-call physician coverage;
4. Coordination with BSO staff for security arrangements when the immediate transfer of an inmate is indicated;
5. Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Basic Training for all staff;
o Treatment for visitors and staff consisting of stabilization and referral to personal physician or local hospital;,
7. No unconscious person or a person who.. appears to be seriously injured shall be booked in to a BSO facility. They must be referred to the r~earest hospital; return to the facility is predicated upon written medical clearance by a qualified physician.
C. The Contractor shall provide, in a form mutually agreed to, a monthly report of emergency referrals/hospitalizations. This report shall include the detainee’s name, arrest number, reason, date and time, means of transportation, and facility to which the inmate was sent.
XV. MEDICAL DISASTER PLAN
A. Subject to the Director’s approval, the Contractor shal~ maintain procedures from the effective date of the Contract for the delivery of medical services in the event of a disaster
]3

such as fire, tornado, epidemic, riot, strike or mass arrests. Such procedures, shall be maintained and/or modified by the Medical Director working closely with the BSO staff, and may include:
Communications system; 2. Recall of key staff; 3. Assignment of health care staff; 4. Establishment of command post; 5. Safety and security of the patient and staff areas; 6. Use of emergency equipment and supplies; 7. Establishment of a triage area; 8. Triage procedures; 9. Medical records - identification of injured; 10. Use of ambulance services; 11. Transfer Of injured to local hospitals; 12. Evacuation procedures (to be coordinated with secudty personnel); and 13. Practice ddlls annually.
B. In addition, the Contractor shall maintain a Familiarization Staff Training Program from the effective date of the Contract for all Health Care Unit employees in case of an institutional emergency. Emergencies shall be handled in the following manner.
All in-house measures for dealing with the emergency shall be taken; The Disaster Plan, as discussed above, shall be put into effect; All facility medical disaster plans and emergency measures shablle coordinated with the nearest local disaster agency.
XVI. SPECIAL MEDICAL PROGRAMS
A. Special Programs
1. The Contractor’s Medical Director Shall develop, subject to BSO approval, "special medical programs" for inmates who require close medical supervision including chronic and convalescent care. The plan of treatment shall include directions for health care staff and correctional staff regarding their roles in the care and supervision of these inmates. The special medical program shall address a broad range of health problems including but not limited to seizure disorders, pregnancy, STD’s, diabetes, hypertension and AIDS.
B. Inmate Health Education
1. Contractor shall maintain, subject to BSO approval, an inmate health education program to include health education posters and literature for placement throughout the facilities, especially in program areas and program intensive housing units. To further this health education process, formal sessions shall be made available to inmates based on the assessed educational ne~ds and upon approval by the BSO. Selected topics for this information may include but are not limited to:
14

Personal hygiene;

Nutrition;

Physical fitness;

Stress management;

Sexually transmitted diseases;

Chemical dependency;

g. Tuberculosis and other communicable diseases;

h. Effects of smoking;

i. AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome);

j.

Hypertension/Cardiac;

k. Epilepsy;

Ko

Diabetes;

m. Dermatology;

n. Rehabilitation; and

O. Pregnancy.

B. Explanation of procedures for access to health and dental services shall be provided to inmates both orally and in writing via the Inmate Handbook. The Handbook will be published and distributed by the BSO. The Contractor will be provided with an opportunity to submit material, and review material which will be included in the Handbook.

XVII. TREATMENT PLANS

A. Contractor shall ensure that a medical and /or mental health treatment plan is developed for each inmate requiring on-going care. The treatment plan shall include a written statement specifying the particular course of therapy and the roles of medical and non-medical personnel in carrying out the course of therapy. It shall be individualized and based on an. assessment of the inmate’s needs and short and long term goals and the methods by which the
goals shall be pursued. When clinically indicated, the treatment plan may provide inmates with access to a range of supportive and rehabilitative services (e.g., individuals or group counseling and/or self-help groups) that the physician deems appropriate. Treatment plans will be. reviewed on a regular basis and revised as clinically indicated.

XVIII. QUALITY MANAGEMENT

A. In order to ensure compliance with the Quality Management Program, the Contractor shall establish and maintain an Institutional Quality Management Committee which will include the following members:

Chair, Appointed by the Director of Corrections Medical Director Health Services Administrator Nursing Supervisor Psychologist Physician Dentist Pharmaceutical Consultant

Quality Management Coordinator Medical Records Administrator Ancillary Service Representative Superintendent or designee
B. The Institutional Quality Management Committee is assigned the following responsibilities and functions:
1. Establish and oversee the institutional quality management (QM) program in keeping with the accepted QM program.
o Implement system-wide QM studi.es consistent with the data collection schedule developed by the Contractor.
Conduct ongoing studies which monitor and evaluate the quality and appropriateness of patient care, and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
o Collect data regarding the quality and appropriateness of drug usage and resistance and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
Review findings from any mortality review and recommend corrective action when indicated.
Review data from health record reviews for the quality, clinical appropriateness, accuracy and completion of documentation and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
o Review for appropriateness and over/under utilization of ancillary services, contract services, consultations, and drugs and antibiotics and report all findin;gs to the Contract Monitor.
Review infections within the health services with regard to their proper management, nosocomial nature and ..communicability and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
o Review risk patterns and trends of unexpected inmate health care events., employee and visitor incidents and report all findings to the Contract Monitor.
10. Review findings generated from institutional specific studies, make recommendations for corrective action when indicated and conduct follow-up.
11. Recommend continuing education programs based on the results of institutional QM activities for the health services staff.

12. Provide feedback to the clinical, an~:illary-and corrections departments.

13. Reports and minutes of meetings and activities of the Quality Management Program shall-be maintained, which shall be reported through confidential QM channels to the Contract Monitor.

14. Review confidentiaiity policies.

XlX. INFECTION CONTROL

A. An infection control program shall be implemented by the Contractor. The
infection control program will include, but is not limited, to,. concurrent surveillance of patients and staff~ prevention techniques, and treatment and reporting of infections in accordance with local and ~tate laws.

XX. SCREENING

A. All new inmate admissions will be screened in accordance with the Policies and Procedures developed by the BSO. Screenings will be completed by a licensed health professional and medically cleared before the. inmate enters the facility’s population. If the
screening is not performed, the reason must be documented in EMSA’s monthly report.

B. A screening shall include:

1. Inquiry into:

ao

Current illness and health problems including mental, dental, and-

communicable diseases;

bo

Medication currently being taken;

Alcohol/chemical abuse history;

(Females) History for GYN problems and pregnancies;

Chronic" health problems, and

2. Observation of:

ao

State of consciousness, mental stability, behavior, tremors, bodily

deformities, and ease of movement.

Signs of trauma, bruises, needle marks, jaundice, lesions.

Indication of drug abuse.

XXI. INMATE GRIEVANCES, COMPLAINTS

A. Any inmate grievances regarding health care shall be referred to the Contractor’s Health Services Administrator or designee. The Health Services Administrator shall promptly review the grievance, gather all information concerning the complaint, and take appropriate action consistent with BSO grievance procedures. All inmate grievance shall be responded to within seventy two (72) hours of receipt of Contractor.

XXlI. INMATE TRANSFERS
A. All inmates transferred among the BSO facilities shall have their medical records screened by health care personnel prior to the transfer and immediately upon an-ival at the receiving facility, provided their is adequate notification given to Contractor .from BSO. The health record must accompany the inmates to the receiving facility.
B. Documentation will include:
Medication; Medical Status; Chronic Health problems, and All other relevant medical information which must be transferred with the inmate.
C. Transfers:
Transfers include intersystem and State Prison transfers; every effort will be made by BSO to provide the names of inmates to be routinely transferred to other jurisdictions to Contractor, twenty-four (24) hours prior to scheduled transfer. All inmates transferred to other jurisdictions will have their medical records screened by health care personnel prior to the transfer and appropriate ,medical information and medications will be sent with the inmate to the receiving jurisdiction at the time of transfer.
X.XIII. HEALTH ASSESSMENT
A. Each new inmate shall receive a comprehensive health examination withinfourteen (14) days after admission. This assessment will be conducted under the supervision o( a physician in accordance with Florida’s Shedffs Association/Florida Association of Counties Model Jail Standards, ACA, NCCHC and BSO guidelines for the intake process.
B. This assessment shall be conducted under the supervision of a licensed physician by appropriately .licensed individuals who have received documented training in physical assessment and who are qualified to conduct such examinations. Such record~ of this training must be maintained on-site at the facility. The results of the physical assessment shall be recorded in the inmate’s medical record. Extent of the health appraisal will include:
Review of Intake Screening 2. Collection of additional data 3. Lab tests 4. Vital signs 5. Review of physical examination and test results to determine appropriate
care of identified problem o TB Screening (PPD test or chest x-ray)
Assessment of mental health
]8

¯ C. Inmates assigned to work or training inthe facility must be medically cleared before being placed in any work assignment. Clearances and examinations, if-medically required, must be done within five (5) working days from the receipt by Contractor of written request. Clearance should be based on the essential function of the work assignment as provided by BSO, relevant past medical history and general examination for p.hysical and mental health with special note of communicable diseases, skin rashes, wounds, sores, boils, etcetera.
D. A clearance form will be completed and placed in the inmate’s medical record before assignment. This form will indicate whether the inmate can perform, the .essential " functions of the job assignment with or without an accommodation. If an accommodation is recommend, the BSO Health Service Administrator will review and act upon the request.
E~. Physical assessment for Boot Camp eligibility shall be completed within a forty-eight (48) hour period of receipt of the written request.
XXIV. ACCOUNTING RECORDS
A. Director of the Department of Corrections, Contract Monitor, Representative of the Department of Corrections, or their duly authorized representatives shall have access, for purposes of examinations, to any financial books, documents, papers and records of the Contractor as they may relate solely to this contract.
B. The Contractor shall maintain such books, records and documents in accordance with accounting procedures and practices which sufficiently and properly reflect all expenditures of funds provided by the BSO under this project.
C. The Contractor shall maintain and file with the BSO such progress, fiscal, inventory and other reports as the BSO may reasonably require within the period of this Contract.
D. The Contractor shall include these aforementioned audit and record-keeping requirements in all approved subcontracts and assignments.
E. The BSO may unilaterally cancel this Contract" for refusal by the Contractor to allow public access to such accounting documents, papers, letters or other materials originated or received by the Contractor in conjunction with this Contract. These "records" are subject to the provisions of the Florida Public Records Act, Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, other than medical records or other exempt materials.
F. The Contractor shall provide progress reports including data reporting. These reports will be used for monitoring progress or performance to determine conformity with intended program purposes.
G. The Contractor shall provide access to or furnish whatever information is reasonably necessary to effect this monitoring.
~9

XXV. HOUSEKEEPING
A. The Contractor’s staff shall be responsible for all housekeeping duties in the infirmary and clinic area with the exception of the floors, bathrooms and showers, windows and walls.
B. Copies of all inspection reports must be provided to the BSO and the Director of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
C. The Contractor shall be responsible for the disposal of all contaminated waste per OSHA Standards as required and in compliance with all Federal, State and County laws and regulations.
,~.
XXVI. NONDISCRIMINATION
A. The Contractor shall not discriminate against any client, employee or applicant for employment because of race, age, color, religion, sex or national odgin, disability or- medical status. The Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that inmates, applicants, and employees are treated without discrimination in regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin, disability or medical status. In the event of the Contractor’s noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses, or with any other such rules, regulations, or orders, this contract may be canceled, terminated [or suspended in whole or in part] and the Contractor may be declared ineligible for further business with the BSO.
XXVII. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
A. Contractor’s Insurance
1. The Contractor shall not commence any work in connection with this agreement until Contractor has obtained all the following types of insurance and such insurance coverage has been approved by the BSO. All insurance policies shall be with insurers qualified and doing business in Florida. The BSO shall be furnished proof., of coverage of insurance by an executed certificate of insurance accompanying the contract documents. The BSO shall be named as an additional named insured.
_ 2. The BSO shall be exempt, under any circumstances, from liability for any sums of money which may represent a deductible in any insurance policy. The payment of such deductible shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor providing such insurance.
B. Worker’s Compensation Insurance
1. The Contractor shall secure and maintain during the life of this agreement Worker’s Compensation Insurance for all employees connected with the work of the contract. Such insurance shall comply fully with the Florida Worker’s Compensation Law.
2o

C. Liability/Insurance
1. The Contractor shall be solely liable, and agrees to be liable for, and shall indemnify, defend and hold the BSO harmless from all liability, claims, suits, judgments, expenses or damages including court costs and attorney’s fees arising solely out o.f intentional acts, negligence or omissions by the Contractor during the normal performan.ce of their duties. This also includes the indemnification of the BSO for any such liabilities set forth in Section 768.28, Flodda Statutes. The Contractor shall purchase Comprehensive General Liability insurance in the amount of $500,000.00, and Professional Liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 per occurrence and $6,000,000.00 in aggregate.
2. The BSO shall be solely liable, and agrees to be liable for, and shall indemni~, defend and hold the Contractor harmless for all liability, claims, suits, judgments, expenses~;¯ or damages including court costs and attomey’s fees arising solely out of intentional acts, negligence or omissions by the BSO during the performance of their normal duties. BSO shall not be liable for any medical treatment or care rendered by the Contractor.
XXXVIII. LIMITATIONS ON CATASTROPHIC ACCIDENT OR ILLNESS
A. The Contractor shall not be responsible for health care costs for any catastrophic illness or injury which exceeds a cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) for any inmate or for any contagious illness or injuries to more than one (1) inmate arising from the same occurrence which exceeds a cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) for the treatment of all such inmates. In this regard, the Contractor shall enter into a contract with the County Administrator of Broward as to the terms, regarding any payments to be made to Contractor by the County of Broward for any treatment of a single inmate, which exceeds a cumulative total of FiftyThousand Dollars ($50,000.00).
B. Contractor shall not" be responsible for payment of outside hospital costs associated solely with the diagnosis or treatment of BSO inmates with tuberculosis who, with the provision of negative air flow, could be managed in a facility infirmary. In the event that these inmates do not require acute hospitalization, every effort will be made to transfer such individuals to a negative air flow detention facility or arrange for release from secure incarceration. If the inmates’ medical condition requires acute care hospitalization and could not be appropriately managed in an infirmary setting even if negative air flow were provided, the cost of such hospitalization will be the responsibility of the Contractor.
XXIX. INt)EPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS
A. In the Contractor’s performance of its duties and responsibilities under the contract, it is mutually understood and agreed that the Contractor is at all times acting in and performing as an independent contractor. The BSO shall neither have nor exercise any control or direction over the methods by which the Contractor shall perform its work and functions other than as provided herein. Nothing in the contract is intended to or shall be deemed to constitute a partnership or a joint venture between the parties.
21

XXX. TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
A. Term
1. This contract shall cover a f.our (4) year period commencing.October 1, 1996, and continuing through September 30, 2000. Upon mutual agreement, .the contract may be renewed for four (4) additional years based upon negotiations of service delivery and cost. Said negotiations should commence at least ninety (90) days prior to the termiriation of the agreement.
Any decision to increase the scope of this agreement shall require mutual written assent and amendment to the existing contract.
B. ~ Termination
1. Either party shall have the right to unilaterally cancel, terminate or suspend the Contract, in whole or in part, with or without cause, by providing the other party ninety (90) days wdtten notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, or in person with proof of delivery. This provision is personal solely to the parties to this agreement and shall not be available to either party’s successor or assignee or any entity claiming a right to operate the facilities.
2. In light of the substantial start-up, close-out, and o~her costs that will be incurred by the Contractor, in the event that BSO should cancel, terminate or suspend this contract, Contractor shall be entitled to payment on the effective date of termination of compensation and liquidated damages equivalent to six (6) months of the basic compensation, as set forth in Section XXXIV herein at the rate then in effect.
3. In the event funds to finance this Contract become unavailable, the BSO may terminate the contract upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to the Contractor. Said notice shall be delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested, or in person with proof of delivery.. However, the unavailability of fund~ cannot be utilized to avoid the concept of changed circumstances (XXXIV C.) and any rights inuring to the benefitof the Contractor. This provision is personal solely to the parties to this agreement and shall not be available to either party’s successor or assignee or any entity claiming a right to operate the facilities. The BSO shall be the final authority as to the availability of funds.
_ 4. Any dispute concerning the interpretation of or performance under the contract shall be reviewed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s Director, who shall attempt to resolve it. In the event resolution is not accomplished, they shall forward their recommendation to the Chief of Staff. The Contractor’s representative, working with the Director, shall also forward a recommendation to the Contractor’s Contract Supervisor. The decision of the Chief of Staff shall be final and conclusive unless within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of this decision the Contractor files an objection with the Sheriff.
5. In the event that either party believes that a material breach has been occasioned by the other, it shall be required to provide the other party with prior wdtten notice
22

of such proposed matedal breach and shall permit the otl~er party thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of such notification to cure any perceived matedal breach. If the purported_ material breach is not cured within thirty (30) days from the date of notification of such alleged material breach, then the non-breaching party may terminate this Agreement forthwith.
6. Upon termination of the contract for any reason, including expiration, each party shall, after notice of termination:
Place no further orders or subcontracts for material or service, except as may be necessary for the delivery of medical services until the date of termination.
Satisfy all its debts and obligations incurred at all the facilities during the term of the Contract.
Allow access to representatives of a successor contractor to interview current staff for positions with the successor contractor.
7. Neither the anticipated termination nor expiration relieves any e.mployee from the ethical obligation to provide or arrange .for medical services to patients until the date of termination as defined by the contract.
8. Neither termination nor expiration relieves either party from the obligation to defend and indemnify claims filed after the time of termination or expiration, but which arose dudng the period of this contract.
9. Waiver of breach of any provision of this contract shall not be deemed to ¯ be a waiver of any other breach and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of this contract. The provisions herein do not limit the BSO’s right, remedies at law or to damages.
10. This contract will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. ~
XXXI. BROKERING OF CONTRACT
A. The contractor shall not broker this contract.
XXXII. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Contract communications will be in three forms: routine, informal and formal. For the purposes of this Contract, the following definitions shall apply:
1. Routine - All normal communication, written or oral, to facilitate performance of the scope of services by either party.
2. Informal - Special written communication deemed necessary by authorized persons addressing the performance of the Contract, by FAX and hard copy mail.
23

3. Formal - The same as informal but more limited in nature and usually reserved for significant contract issues, by FAX and hard copy mail.
B. Formal contract communications should be dated and numbered by. fiscal year, 11/96 - 3/97, etc. F(~rmal contract communication is for an issue considered to be of serious magnitude requiring an answer/response within a reasonable time, but never to exceed 10 working days. The deadline can be extended for 7 additional working days, upon request and mutual agreement.
C. The only personnel authorized to use formal contract communications are the Medical Director, Regional Administrator, Corporate Medical Director, HSA, President of EMSA, Chief of~..Staff, and the Director of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation or their designee~. A copy of any such communication shall be provided to the Sheriff.
D. With informal contract communications, the same date/numbering system shall be implemented and the same response time frame is in effect.
E. In addition to the personnel named under formal contract communication, personnel authorized to use informal contract communications are the Nurse Supervisor, HSA, Assistant Directors, Facility Superintendents an~l Health Service Monitor.
XXXIII. MEETINGS
A. A monthly meeting will be scheduled between the Contractor and the BSO. Agendas will be provided by each party seven (7) days pdor to the meeting. Director will schedule the meeting. The minutes of the meeting will be taken by the Contractor.
XXXIV. BASIC COMPENSATION
A. For the purpose of this contract, the contract renewal period shall be from October 1, 1996 through September ’30, 2000.
B. In consideration of the mutual agreements, covenants and promises contained herein, the BSO agrees to pay Contractor, in equal monthly insiallments, the following basic fee for health care services:
1. During the first contract period, the sum of Eight Million Four Hundred Nine Thousand Thirty Dollars ($8,409,030.00) subject to the adjustments, credits or debits as hereinafter set forth.
2. During the ensuing three (3) contract years and any subsequent renewal years the price for services will be adjusted by either the Consumers Price Index for all Urban Consumers U.S. City Average, Medical Care Services Expenditure Category from September to September as published-by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics or by 3.0%, whichever is less.
2.4

3. All payments pursuant to this contract shall be made on a monthly basis. Contractor will bill the BSO through the Contract Monitor at the end of each calendar month in which services are rendered and the BSO shall render payment to Contractor within fourteen (14) days of receipt of such monthly billing by Contractor.
C. In the event changed circumstances occur, as defined herein, Contractor shall have the exclusive right to renegotiate the price of the contract to reflect all of its increased costs of operation and to maintain its level of profit based on the initial costs to Contractor at the date of inception of the contract and the profit to the Contractor throughout the initial contract term. Upon notice in wdting of these changed circumstances to the Contractor, the contract shall continue under all of its terms and condition, except as subject to modification as specified in this section, through its complete term. Changed circumstances, as used in this section, shall include o.nly the following: .change in the Chief Correctional Officer, assignment of the contract or mateda~ change in the operational and managerial structure of jail and detention facilities.
XXXV. ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION
In addition to the above stated basic fee for service, the BSO agrees to pay Contractor additional compensation as follows:
A. For Other Services
1. For all TB testing $2.25 per test.
2. For all Hepatitis vaccines administered to BSO employees or applicants for employment, fifty percent (50%) of actual cost not to exceed $62.50 per vaccination series.
B. For Excess Population
1. a. In the event that the monthly average inmate/detainee population of persons incarcerated in all the Broward County Correctional Facilities combined exceeds a total of three thousand (3000) persons (calculated on the basis of a daily inmate count taken at 1700 hours each day) during the first contract period, or as a court may order, Contractor shall be entitled to receive Five Dollars and Forty Nine Cents ($5.49)’per inmate/detainee per day for each inmate/detainee housed in the facility in excess of three thousand (3000) persons.
b. During the ensuring three (3) contract years, and any subsequenl~ renewal years, the pdce for excess population will be adjusted by either the Consumers Price Index for all Urban Consumers U.S. City Average Medical Care Services Expenditure Category from September to September, as published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics or by 3.0%, whichever is less.
XXXVI. ADJUSTMENTS .
25

The following adjustments shall be subtracted from the compensation paid to Contractor by the BSO as hereinafter set forth:

A. In the event that the monthly average inmate/detainee population of persons incarcerated in all the Broward County Correctional Facilities combined fc~lls below a total of two thousand eight hundred (2800) persdns (calculated on the basis of a daily inmate count taken at 1700 hours each day) during the first contract period, the BS0 shall be entitled to subtract Five Dollars and Forty Nine Cents ($5.49) per inmate/detainee per day for each inmate/detainee housed in the facilities fewer than the two thousand eight hundred (2800) persons, which credit shall be assessed against the basic fee due Contractor on a monthly basis.

¯ ,.. B. During the ensuing three (3) contr~actyears and any subsequent renewal years the~price for lower population will be adjusted based on the Consumers Price Index for all
Urban Consumers U.S. City Average, Medical Care Services Expenditure Category from September to September as published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics.

C. Monthly adjustments will be made for actual staffing provided,-average daily population, performance level adjustments, performance requirement adjustments, and costs defined as payable by Contractor which have been paid by the BSO or costs defined as
payable by the BSO which have been paid by the Contractor. Adjustments will be debited or credited to the subsequent monthly payment after reconciliation between the BSO and the
Contractor. The last payment of the Contract will be withheld until final reconciliation adjustments have been determined.

XXXVII. ADJUSTMENTS FOR STAFFING
A. Calculation
1. Staffing adjustment for vacancies for physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists, dentists, RN’s, ARNP’s, and PA’S shall.be calculated on a monthly basis as follows:
For purposes of this contract, a""vacancy" shall occur when a position required under this contract is not filled, either on a temporary or long-term basis, by an individual qualified for, and functioning in, that position.

bo

Actual hours provided on-site during the month shall be

determined by using an automated time clock system approved

by the BSO. BSO shall have unlimited access to the automated

time clock system.

Co The number of hours required for each month for each position listed herein will be determined on a pre-approved work schedule.

26

do

The parties will agree on a salary schedule for purposes of the

adjustment for staffing only which reflects salaries and fringe

benefits for each position and lists the number of FTE’s by

position.

eo

The number of hou’rs actually worked by each position will be

totaled.

fo

If the number of hours worked is less than the number of hours

required, the difference is multiplied by each position’s total

compensation.

So

Application

1. For professional medical staff (physicians, dentists, psychiatrists, PAs, and ARNP’s):

ao

Full Time Equivalent position(s) (hereinafter referred to as "FTE"),

may be filled by an employee hired in temporary status. However,

if the FTE is vacant for more than thirty (30) days, the staffing

adjustment set foi-th above shall be subtracted from the monthly

payment retroactive to the first day of the vacancy.

b. If an FTE vacancy is filled by a permanent replacement within thirty (30) days, staffing adjustments shall apply only to the actual number of required hours not worked.

c. If an FTE position is filled by one or more temporary employees for more than thirty (30) days, the position may be
deemed vacant, and the staffing adjustment may be subtracted from the monthly payment as of the thirtieth day of the vacancy. However, Contractor may request approval in writing from BSO to continue filling an FTE position with a qualified temporary employee beyond the thirty day period. Such approval by BSO
shall not be unreasonably withh~ld, and if granted, the position
shall not be considered vacant.

_ 2. For otherlisted positions:

If a position is vacant for more than thirty (30) days, the staffing adjustment set forth above shall be subtracted from the monthly payment retroactive to the first day of the vacancy.

C. Changes

1. The BSO shall give the Contractor thirty (30) days notice of any change in the staffing or mandates or schedule. For any additional personnel requested, the Contractor
27

shall have a thirty (30) day period following the date of notification dudng which any penalty or adjustment for the specific non-filled staff position shall not be levied.
XXXVIII. THIRD PARTY REIMBURSEMENT
A. Contractor will seek third party or .insurance reimbursement for inmate medical services performed by the Contractor and will agree to equally share with the Broward Sherifl"s Office any reimbursement. In the event that third party insurance reimbursement.exceeds the catastrophic cost limit, collection of said amount will be shared with Broward County.
ADJUSTMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE LEVEL
A. General
1. Monthly adjustments will also be made for deficiencies in performance based on a penalty for failure to maintain the expected program level, including unfilled positions and unsatisfactory service. Unsatisfactory service is defined as service which consistently does not satisfy the matedal provisions of this Contract. Compensation shall be adjusted by a flat fee for each day the program level is deficient. No performa_nce level adjustments will be made until written notice has been provided to the Contractor and the Contractor has been given a pedod of 10 Working days to rectify any deficiencies. The procedure for implementing penalties for performance level adjustments for unsatisfactory services will not be initiated until the level of service is unsatisfactory, as determined by the Contract Monitor in consultation with the Director, Assistant Directors, and these services do not meet the minimum level of services as more fully specified herein. Contractor shall be given the opportunity to have its representatives be present during any audit or monitor examinations of records that have financial implications, and to review written specifics without ¯ unduly delaying or interfering with the process.
B. Performance Level Penalties Defined
1. Unfilled FTE: (/~ regularly scheduled on-site FTE which is vacant.)
a. Within thirty (30) day notice period
With coverage - no adjustments Without coverage - Average Compensation per full-time FTE per day for each day without coverage.
b. After thirty (30) day notice period
With coverage - No adjustment Without coverage - $500 per day.
2. Unsa!isfactory Service:
Within thirty (30) day notice period - No adjustment 28

After 30 day notice (without correction or if services remain unsatisfactory) - A $1,000 maximum daily penalty.

Performance Requirements:

a. The following applicable performance requirements will be reviewed on a quarterly basis by the BSO with the .exception of
paragraphs i, ii, iii and vii, below. Failure of Contractor-to comply
with any of the following performance requirements will cause a penalty in the amount indicated to be assessed against Contractor, and deducted from the next monthly payment.

Booking medical screenings will be completed as required by the contract.

PENALTY: $1,000 PER MONTH FOR NONCOMPLIANCE

ii. Monthly Quality Management Report shall be sul~mitted to the BSO Health Services Administrator by the 10th day of the following month.

PENALTY: $1,000 PER MONTH FOR NONCOMPLIANCE

iii. Number of new inmate admission screenings should be. 100% compliance of number of inmates admitted.

PENALTY: $1,000 PER MONTH FOR NONCOMPLIANCE
iv. Physician orders shall be acknowledged in the medical record and carded out and documented by an appropriately credentialed Contract employee.

PENALTY: $10,000 QUARTERLY FOR NONCOMPLIANCE OF GREATER THAN 10% OF THE SAMPLE.

Vo

Telephone and verbal orders by a physician will be

countersigned by the physician.

PENALTY: $10,000 QUARTERLY FOR NONCOMPLIANCE OF GREATER THAN 5% OF SAMPLE.

29

vi. Inmates identified ~t Intake as having been previously under mental health treatment in the past six (6} months, or currently on psychotropic medication, shall be evaluated by a psychiatrist within seventy-two (72) hours.
PENALTY: $10,000 QUARTERLY FOR NONCOMPLIANCE OF GREATER THAN 5% OF THE SAMPLE.
vii. History and physical scheduled or completed within fourteen (14) days of admission.
PENALTY. $1,000 MONTHLY FOR NONCOMPLIANCE OF GREATER THAN 5% OF MONTHLY SAMPLE.

Contractor’s QA criteda fall 20% or more below established threshold for 2 of 3 consecutive months of the quarter as determined by legal counsel.

PENALTY - $10,000 QUARTERLY FOR 2 OF 3 MONTHS OF QUARTER.

The BSO shall prepare an analysis of all monthly adjustments which identifies each adjustment made, including any performance penalties.

Co

Performance level adjustments, matedal increases to staffing or

other components of the Contract, shall be communicated by

formal wdtten notice.

Deductions provided for in this agreement shall not be construed as penalties, but rather are liquidated damages, nor shall the provision of these deductions or {he terms of this agreement be
construed to limit or otherwise affect the parties remedies for failure of one of the parties to comply with any of the terms of the
agreement.

XL. OFF-THE-STREET INJURIES

A. Payment for medical care for "off-the-street injuries" sustained by an individual shall not be the responsibility of Contractor and responsibility shall be in compliance with Section 901.35, Flodda Statutes. For purposes of this Agreement, the term "off-the-street injuries" shall mean injudes .or illnesses other than minor medical services, as determined by the Contractor, incurred or occasioned by an individual prior to the individual being committed to the custody of the BSO. Contractor will not be responsible for non-minor injuries to any
3o

individuals caused by a municipality during or at the time of the arrest. However, Contractor shall be responsible for follow-up care of an applicable individual suffering from an off-the-street injury after they are officially booked and processed by BSO at any of the facilities.
XLI. INMATES OUTSIDE THE FACILITIES
A. Contractor’s health care services are intended only for those ir~mates who are committed to the custody and control of BSO. This includes inmates under guard in outside hospitals, and inmates sentenced to work release or similar programs who sleep in a BSO facility each night. Such inmates will be included in the daily population count. Inmates on any sort of temporary release or furloUgh, in-house restriction by any type of electrical or telecommunication device, including, but not limited to, inmates on escape status where such an escape activity has ventured beyond the perimeters of a BSO facility, inmates on pass, parole or~upervised custody who do not sleep in the jail at night will not be included in the daily population count. The Contractor will not be responsible with respect to the payment or furnishing of health care services. Inmates in the custody of other police or penal institutions are likewise excluded from the population count and the Contractor is not responsible to furnish or pay for health care services.
XLII. COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND NATIONAl_ COMMISSION ON CORRECTIONAl HEALTH CARE STANDARDS
A. Contractor will provide health care services which meet or exceed the American Medical Association and National Commission on Correctional Health Care Standards and the Contractor will formally maintain accreditation as required after signing of contract renewal. The Contractor’s will maintain accreditation by the National Commission on Correctional Health Care each year throughout the term of the contract. The Contractor will agree to pay theBroward Sheriff’s Office a One Hundred Thousand Dollar ($100,000.00) penalty fee if National Commission accreditation is not maintained for any facility throughout the term of the contract. The Contractor will maintain accreditation under the rules proscribed by NCCHC.
XLIiI. COMPLIANCE WITH STATE MINIMUM JAIL STANDARDS AND THE AMERICAN CORRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION
A. Contractor will provide services which comply with the Flodda Sheriff’s AssociationlFIodda Association of /Counties Model Jail Standards and the Amedcan Correctional Association.
XLIV. INVOICING AND OFFICIAL PAYEE
A. The Contractor shall be required to invoice the BSO monthly as outlined in the Compensation Section, and designate an Official Payee and their address.
B. Invoices for compensation for services or expenses will be submitted in detail sufficient to facilitate a proper pre-audit and post-audit thereof.
XLV. ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS

A. All administrative functions, i.e., support staff, telephone, supplies and word processing shall be provided by the Contractor at its expense.
XLVI. NOTICE AND ADDRESS OF PAYEE
A. Any notices required or permitted hereunder shall be effective on the day on which delivery is made in person with proof of delivery or on the date on which delivery is made to any party at the address set forth below, or at such other address as such party shall specify to the other in notice given hereunder, and, if sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, such notice shall be deemed to have been delivered to the party to whom such notice was addressed on the third business day after the day on which mailed.
Contractof’:
President EMSA Limited Partnership 1200 S. Pine Island Road, Suite 600 Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33324
BSO: Sheriff Public Safety Building 2601 West Broward Boulevard Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33312
with copy to:
Director of Corrections and Rehabilitation Broward County Sheriff’s Office Public Safety Building 2601 West Broward Boulevard Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33312
XLVII. ASSIGNMENT
A. _ Neither party shall assign the Contract, in whole or in part, or any payment arising therefrom without the prior wdtten consent of the other party.
XLVIII. SEVERA.BILITY
A. The invalidity or unenforceability of any particular provision of this Contract shall not affect the other provisions hereof and this Contract shall be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provision was omitted.
XLIX. PARTIES BOUND 32

A. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of BSO and Contractor and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors, assigns, or other parties claiming a right to the operation of the facilities.

L. MISCELLANEOUS

A. This Contract contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties, and may be amended or modified only by the written agreement of both parties.

CONTRACTOR:

EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

i~ General Pa~ner, ~~x~==¢x~~xx~_F x~
By: ~,~ ~. ~ J. li.or~deiss, M.D., President
BSO: BROW~ SH E..~ OFFICE

AND
S~an McCampbell, Dir~tor Approved as to form and legality subject to exec~y the parties.
.~h-~r~es T. Whitelock, Esq. ~,/).~ ~7’ Counsel to the Sheriff

33

ATTACHMENT A

STAFF POSITION MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

This section specifies the minimum qualifications which must be met by persons filling individual positions required by the Institution, whether employee of the contractor or a person providing services as a subcontractor.

TITLE

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS

PREFERRED EXPERIENCE

Medical Director

-1. Licensed to practice medicine in the State of Florida in accordance with Florida Statute 958.
2. Current DEA Registration Number.

1. Corre~:tionai
Health Care 2. Family
Practice 3. Emergency
Medicine 4. Management

Physician

Licensed to practice family medicine in the State of Florida in accordance with Florida Statute 958.

1. Family Practice
2. Emergence Medicine

~2. Current DEA Registration Number.

3. Internal Medicine

Registered Nurse Supervisor

Licensure as a registered professional nurse in accordance with Florida Statute ,$64 or eligible to practice nursing in accordance with Florida Administrative Code 210-8.27 and three years of professional nursing, psychiatric nursing, psychiatric nursing or nursing instruction
34

1. Two years administrative experience
2. Correctional Nursing

Registered Nurse
Physician (Psychiatrist) Psychologist

experience. o A bachelor’s degree in
nursing or nursing education can substitute for one year of the required experience. A master’s degree in nursing, psychiatric nursing or nursing education can substitute for two years of the required experience.
1. Licensure as a registered professional nurse in accordance with Florida Statute 464 or eligible to practice nursing in accordance with Florida Administrative Code 210-8.27 and one year of professional nursing experience; or
2. A bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university with a major in nursing and licensure as a registered professional nurse in accordance with F~orida Statute 464 or eligible to practice nursing in accordance with Florida Administrative Code 210-8.27.
A current Public Psychiatry Certificate issued by the Florida Board of Medical Examiners pursuant to Florida Statute 458.3165.
1. A doctorate from an accredited college or university in psychology,

1. Correctional Nursing

Psychological Specialist Medical Record Administrator
Paramedic/EMT
LPN

one year of supervised internship experience in professional psychology, and two years of professional experience in psychology; or
o Licensure as a Psychologist in accordance with Florida Statute 490 and two years of professional psychology experience.

A master’s degree from an accredited college or university in counseling or psychology.
_
1. Certification as an Accredited Record
Technician by the American Medical Record Association; or 2. Three years of experience in compiling, maintaining, and coding medical records.

Familiar with JCAHO, ACA, and Department and Rules.

Certification as an Emergency Medical Technician or Parame~iic in accordance with Florida Statute 401 and two years of experience in providing health support services in a hospital, clinic, infirmary, nursing or convalescent home or ambulance or rescue service.

Licensure as a practical nurse in in accordance with Florida Statute
36

Health Services Administrator
Nurse Practitioner
Physician’s Assistant Registered Nurse Specialist F/C

464 or eligible to practice nursing in
accordance with Flodda Administrative Code 210-8.22 or 8.27 and two years of experience in providing health support services in a hospital, clinic, infirmary, or nursing or
convalescent home.

1. A bachelor’s degree from

1. Correctional

an accredited college or university and two years of professional administrative

Management 2. MBA or MHA

or consultative experience

in hospital, institutional

or health care administration. 2. A master’s degree from an accredited
college or university with major
course of study in hospital or

health care administration or

business can substitute for one year of the required experience.

Certification as an advanced registered nurse practitioner in accordance with
Florida Statute 464.

Certification as a physician’s assistant in accordance w~th Florida Statute 458.

Licensure as a registered professional nurse in accordance with Flodda Statute 464 or eligible to practice nursing in accordance with Florida Administrative Code 210-8.27 and three years of professional experience in a specialty field as determined by the employing agency.

3?

POSITION DESCRIPTIONS
ARNP/CLINICAL ASSOCIATES
The incumbent in this position is responsible for conducting physical examinations and providing primary health care services to inmates. The employee in this position spends a minimum of 75% of his/her time performing duties which involve contact with inmates in a correctional institution. Duties may include but will not be limited to the following:
Performs I’outine physicals for inmates and compiles and evaluates medical histories. Orders appropriate lab tests and prescribed medications as established in physician protocols.
Makes daily rounds to observe and record progress of inmates in confinement. Conducts sick calls, identifies and evaluates illnesses and inquiries and administers treatment in accordance with physician approved protocols. Coordinates referrals to outside medical facilities. Arranges consultations with institution health care staff as needed.
Provides emergency health care to inmates with life endangering traumatic injuries.
Performs other related duties as assigned.

MEDICAL DIRECTOR The incumbent is responsible for: Directing the overall health care program at the institution under the general supervision of the Director. .Perform examinations, make medical diagnoses and prescribe medications and/or treatment on a routine and emergency basis. Supervise all Health Service staff. Assure a continuing in-service health training program for all staff and.health education for inmates. Periodically review all areas of the Institution to ensure a safe and healthy environment, coordinating the correction of any deficiencies with the Superintendent, local county health facilities and Health Services. as needed. Supervise the preparation of inmates’ medical records. Investigate cases of contagious diseases and take necessary action to ensure the disease is isolated. Provide consultative services to other medical staff. Coordinate medical services from specialty areas within the community and medical services from the community hospitals. Supervise activities of out-patient clinic, record room, medical library, medical laboratory,. pharmacy, x-ray, dental clinics, psychiatric service, psychology service and other specialized services.
39

PHYSICIAN The incumbent in this position is responsible for providing diagnoses, medical treatment and care of inmate patients. Duties may include but will not be limited to the following: Performs examinations, makes medical diagnoses and prescribes medications and/or treatment. Supervises nurses and others engaged in inmate patient care in providing prescribed medication and treatment. Performs physical examinations as prescribed in Department policies for inmate patients. Also conducts pre-employment and periodic physical examinations for certain staff required to have such examinations by law. Consults with other health services staff to ensure proper health care and treatment is provided to inmate patients. Investigates cases of contagious disease and takes necessary action to ensure disease is isolated Initiates, interprets and evaluates diagnostic clinical tests. Performs other related duties as assigned.
4O

REGISTERED NURSE SUPERVISOR The .incumbent in this position is responsible to the Medical Director in an out-patient clinic for the Inmate Health Care Program and the supervision of all professional and paraprofessional nursing personnel. The employee in this positior~ spends a minimum of 75% of his/her time performing duties which involves contact with inmates in a correctional institution. .Supervise the activities of nurses providing out-patient care on a daily basis. Directs the work of employees to ensure maximum use of time and resources through efficient planning of work loads, work flows, deadlines, work objectives and time utilization with employees. Motivates employees to improve the quality and quantity of work performed. Supervises and participates in the preparation of plans and reports, teaching elementary and advanced nursing arts including housekeeping, care of patients, charting procedures and administration of medication. Trains employees in methods for performing and effective and efficient job.
Initiates new and revised treatment approache.s and incorporates them into nursing practices, developing inter-departmental communication with other treatment teams for continuous service delivery. Identifies and evaluates illnesses and injuries, participates in conducting nursing practices research to improve the medical treatment rendered to inmates and supervises in teaching nursing practices and methods to professional nursing staff and non-professional medical staff. Evaluates employees through establishing evaluation criteria and responsibilities and meeting regularly with employees to ensure the pre-established criteda are met. Performs other related duties as assigned.
4!

REGISTERED NURSE The incumbent in this position is responsible for performing professional nursing work in the care and treatment of inmate patients. The employ.ee in this position spends a minimum of 75% of his/her time performing duties which involve contact with inmates in a c~)rrectional institution. Participate in the screening of inmates for sick call and perform physical assessments. Provide treatment and administer medications in non-emergency and chronic illnesses per physician protocols or directions. Initiate appropriate treatment and/or medications in emergency situations within the guidelines of physical protocol. Responsible for complete and accurate documentation in the inmate patient’s health care record for~care provided. Coordinate the work of paraprofessional nursing staff with professional nursing functions to insure an efficient working environment Participate in the maintenance, requisition and record keeping of medications and clinic supplies. Supervise inmate orderlies as needed. Participate in educational health programs such as diabetic education for inmate patients. Participate in continuing education and in-service training to maintain professional capability and proficiency. Perform other related duties as assigned.
42

PHYSICIAN (PSYCHIATRIST) Provides diagnostic psychiatric consultation and evaluation of inmates. Provides psychiatric treatment and follow-up for those inmates in need of psychotropic medication. ¯Responsible for developing and maintaining the Individual Written Treatment Plan when indicated. Provides in-patient rounds at Cdsis Stabilization Units (CSU) and Transitional Care Units (TCU). Participates in case conference and staff reviews for inmates at CSU’s and TCU’s. Writes discharge summaries for inmates at CSU’s and TCU’s. Admits and discharges inmates at CSU’s and TCU’s. Performs on-call and weekend rounds responsibilities as required by each institution. Supervision of out-patient psychiatric nurses.
43

PSYCHOLOGIST
The incumbent in this position is responsible for the coordination and delivery of psychological services. The employee in this position spends a minimum of 75% of his/her time performing duties which involves contact with inmates in a correctional institution. Duties and responsibilities include but will not be limited to the following:
Responsible for administering, supervising and coordinating the institution’s psychological program~..to ensure compliance with health care policies and procedures and institution operating procedures.
Conducts counseling or therapeutic interviews to assist individual inmates in gaining insight into personal problems and define goals, as well as plan actions to assist in alleviating stress through increasing awareness of the inmates’ interests, abilities and needs. Evaluates data to identify causes of problems and to determine advisability of counseling or referral to other specialists or facilities.
Coordinates and conducts group and individual counseling sessions and prepares notes and reports on progress as it relates to inmates’ treatment plans.
Administers and interprets individual intelligence, personality and other psychological, tests as appropriate. Interprets test results in light of standard norms and limitations of tests in terms of validity and reliability with regard to certain socio-economic factors.
Participates in diagnostic and other staff meetings for the purpose of treatment planning. Discusses inmates who display behavioral or adjustment problems and makes recommendations to assist in alleviating problems through appropriate clinical treatments.
Consults with medical staff as well as employees in other institutional areas, such as classification, education and recreation, in obtaining information used for assessment and treatment plans as appropriate.
Develops, coordinates and provides in-service training for Psychological Services staff within assigned institution. Participates in training programs as required, by teaching and demonstrating various techniques of counseling which may be used on a daily basis by lay personnel.
Performs other related duties as required.
44

AGREEMENT Between
BROWAR.D COUNTY and
EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
EXHIBIT

AGREEMENT
Between
BROWARD COt,JNTY
and
.EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
This Agreement, entered into this ~~day of~ , 19E~r’}, by and ¯ between BROWARD COUNTY, a political subdivisionof th"e/State of Florida, hereinafter referred’to as "COUNTY";
and
EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a limited Florida partnership corporation, its successor and assigns, hereinafter referred to as "EMSA";
WHEREAS, COUNTY and the Broward County Sheriff, as the chief correctional officer of the Broward County jail system, desire to provide reasonably necessary medical care to inmates in Broward County jail and detention facilities; and
WHEREAS, EMSA and RON COCHRAN, as Sheriff of Broward County, (hereinafter referred to as "BSO") entered into a three-year contract on August 6, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the "1993 BSQ Agreement"), which required EMSA to provide medical services to inmates in the Broward County jail system for the period October 1, 1993 through September 30, 1996; and
WHEREAS, Article XXlX of the 1993 BSO Agreement limited the financial responsibility of EMSA and anticipated that EMSA would enter into a contract with COUNTY for reimbursement to EMSA for health care treatment of a single inmat.e which exceeds the cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00); and
WHEREAS, Article XXXIX of the 1993 BSO Agreement requires EMSA to seek third party insurance reimbursement for medical services performed and to share such third party insurance reimbursements it receives with BSO and COUNTY; and
WHEREAS, in December 1996, EMSA and BSO entered into an amendment (hereinafter 1996 amendments) to the parties’ 1993 Agreement to extend the term on a month-to-month basis; and

WHEREAS, the 1996 amendment to the 1993 agreement’between EMSA and BSO also requires EMSA to enter into a contract with COUNTY to reimburse EMSA for health care treatment of a single inmate which exceeds a cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00); NOW, THEREFORE,
IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual terms, conditions, promises, covenants and payments hereinafter set forth, COUNTY and EMSA agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
.TERM
1.1 Th~s Agreement shall be effective commencing upon the date of its execution by both parties and shall continue to September 30, 1997, unless either party, elects to terminate. Any’ such termination shall be in accordance with the termination provisions of this Agreement. Any other term notwithstanding, this Agreement shall automatically terminate upon any termination or expiration of the 1996 amended agreement between BSO and EMSA which extended the terms of the parties’ 1993 agreement on a month-to-month basis.
ARTICLE 2
SCOPE OF SERVICES
2.1 EMSA has agreedto provide medical and health care services for inmates at BSO’S detention centers as set forth in its 1996 amended agreement with BSO.
2.2 EMSA shall bill and pursue, collection of payment and reimbursement from all parties where appropriate including, without limitation, individuals, Medicaid, and insurance companies, for services rendered under this Agreement. Each request by EMSA to COUNTY for reimbursement is deemed to include the express representations by EMSA to COUNTY that no other reimbursement was obtained for the services invoiced and that COUNTY may rely upon such representation. EMSA shall include documentation demonstrating that it pursued the collection of " medical charges from third parties in any requests for payment it submits to the COUNTY.
-2-

ARTICLE 3
PAYMENT
3.1 COUNTY shall reimburse EMSA, in accordance with and.subject to the requirements set forth in Article 3 hereir~, for those qualifying amounts of medical and health care payments it makes for treatment of a single inmate during his or her continuous incarceration in the Broward County jail system which exceeds the cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00).
3.2 In addition, EMSA may seek reimbursement from COUNTY, in accordance with and subject to the requirements and guidelines set forth in Article 3 herein, for qualifying amounts of medical and health care payments on the attached Exhibit A which ex~,eed the cumulative total of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) which it made for treatment of a single inmate during his or her continuous incarceration in the Broward County jail system during the period of October 1, 1993 to September 30, 1996. After determining that an item qualifies for reimbursement, in accordance with the requirements and guidelines on the attached Exhibit A, COUNTY shall reimburse EMSA in the appropriate amount. COUNTY shall not be obligate;d to pay interest on amounts provided for under this provision.
3.3 EMSA represents to COUN’I-Y" that it has complied with Article XXXIX of its 1993 Agreement with BSO and that it will comply with the 1996 amendment to its 1993 agreement with BSO which provides that EMSA will seek third party insurance reimbursement for medical services provided to BSO’S inmates. EMSA further represents that it has fully complied with its agreement to share equally with BSO any such third party insurance reimbursement it receives. EMSA agrees to seek reimbursement under this Agreement only for those cases for which there is no third party insurance reimbursement and only for those cases which exceed the catastrophic cost limit. ,
3.4 The COUNTY agrees to process for payment the portion of any request, billing or invoice for which there is adequate supporting documentation and further agrees to advise EMSA in writing of the additional required information and documentation. EMSA further agrees that COUNTY has the right to withhold or deny payment if EMS_A submits insufficient or incomplete documentation.
-3-

ARTICLE 4
METHOD OF PAYMENT
4.1 EMSA and COUNTY agree that the guidelines, documentation, and procedures for reimbursement of catastrophic payments set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, shall be fully complied with prior to payment of invoices by COUNTY.
4.2 EMSA shall submit monthly billing statements in the form specified in Exhibit B for all qualifying medical and health care services provided during the previous month, unless a written extension has been gran.ted by the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement. The requirement to submit a statement for the previous month’s payments shall not apply to amounts to be paid pursuant to Section 3.2 and for amounts to be paid beginning October 1, 1996, to the date of execution of this Agreement. COUNTY agrees to pay EMSA for properly submitted invoices as specified in Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof. Invoices are due on or before the tenth of the following month, beginning on the tenth of the first month following contract execution by COUNTY. EMSA shall be reimbursed on a monthly basis upon complying with the billing requirements of this Agreement. COUNTY shall pay EMSA within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of EMSA’S properly submitted invoice in accordance with the provisions of the COUNTY’S Prompt Payment Ordinance 89-49. To be deemed proper as defined by the Florida Prompt Payment Act, all invoices must comply with the requirements set forth in this Agreement and must be submitted using the form prescribed by COUNTY in Exhibit B. Invoices or documentation returned to EMSA for corrections shall be cause for delay in reimbursement.
4.3 COUNTY shall not be obligated to pay interest on any amounts invoiced to COUNTY prior to the date of the execution of this Agreement by COUNTY.
4.4 Monthly invoices submitted by EMSA shall include a certification statement, signed by an authorized person as referenced in Exhibit C, ’attached hereto and made a part hereof.
4.5 Invoices unacceptably submitted within thirty (30) days of the closing date of this " Agreement shall not be payable, unless a written extension has been granted by the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement. COUNTY agrees to make payments to EMSA for qualifying services performed prior to the closing date of the Agreement as set forth in the term provisions in Article 1. Invoices and documentation returned to EMSA for corrections shall not be considered as submitted to COUNTY.

In the event of termination of this Agreement for any reason as set forth in the termination provisions in Article 5, COUNTY agrees to make payments to EMSA for qualifying services performed prior to the date of termination of the Agreement. In such event, COUNTY’s responsibility for making any such payments will be contingent upon the COUNTY receiving all billing invoices-and supporting documentation from EMSA within thirty (30) days of the termination date of the agreement. Invoices and documentation returned to EMSA for corrections shall not be considered as submitted to COUNTY.
4.6 EMSA shall provide signature authorization.to COUNTY as shown in Exhibits C and D attached hereto and made a part hereof. In the event that it becomes necessary for EMSA to replace signature authorization, EMSA shall submit a certificate from th~ corporate secretary or a notarized copy of the authorizing resolution as passed by EMSA’S Board of Directors or Trustees to the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement, along with replacement Exhibits C and D.
4.7 EMSA shall keep accurate and complete records of any fees collected, reimbursement, or compensation of any kind received from any inmate, Medicaid, or other party for services covered by this Agreement, and shall make all such records available to the COUNTY upon request. EMSA shall deduct such fees, reimbursement, compensation or funding from its invoices.
4.8 Payment will be made to EMSA at:
EMSA Limited Partnership Correctional.Care Division Cornerstone Building, Suite 600 1200 South Pine Island Road Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33324-4460
Federal ID Number:
ARTICLE
TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
5.1 This Agreement may be terminated by COUNTY or EMSA for cause upon verbal notice, confirmed in writing within the seven (7) day period subsequent to the giving of the verbal notice. This Agreement may also be terminated by the COUNTY for convenience upon not less than thirty (30) days’ advance written notice thereof, or by the COUNTY upon verbal notice confirmed in writing within the seven (7) day period subsequent to giving of the verbal notice of termination for convenience, in
-5-

the event this Agreement is terminated for convenience, EMSA shall be paid for any services performed to the date the Agreement is terminated; however, upon being notified of COUNTY’S election to terminate, EMSA shall refrain from performing further services or incurring additional expenses under the terms of this Agreement unless directed by the Contract Administrator. COUNTY’S obli{gation to pay for qualifying services rendered prior to the termination date of this Agreement is set forth in Section 4.5 above.
5.2 If EMSA fails to provide services or fails to adequately provide services required by this Agreement, or if EMSA fails to perform any of the other provisions of this Agreement, COUNTY, through its Contract Administrator, may immediately terminate this Agreement upon written notice with such termination becoming eff, ective upon delivery of notification.
5.3 EMSA acknowledges and agrees that ten ($10.00) of the compensation has been paid by COUNTY, the adequacy and receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by EMSA, is given as specific consideration to EMSA for COUNTY’S right to terminate this Agreement for convenience.
ARTICLE 6
INSURANCE
6.1 EMSA shall maintain in force for the term of this Agreement comprehensive general liability in the minimum amount of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) per occurrence bodily injury and property damage combined single limits. Such policy will be evidenced by Certificate of Insurance which reflects COUNTY as an additional insured and provides thirty (30) days prior written notice of cancellation. Certification also to be evidenced of compliance with Florida Statute 440 (Workers" Compensation Law).
Further, EMSA shall maintain professional liability insurance in the minimum amount of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) each claim.
N’) invoices shall be paid until the files of COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement contain a Certificate or acceptable documentation approved by COUNTY’S Risk Management personnel. A copy of the Certificate of Insurance as approved by the COUNTY’S Risk Management personnel which shall be maintained .by EMSA during the term of this Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit F, and made a part hereof.

6.2 If EMSA’S insurance is provided by a municipality and at any time the municipality is unable or unwilling or otherwise ceases to provide insurance to COUNTY for injury, damages, or liability which may arise out of the performance of this Agreement, EMSA shall be responsible for providing sufficient insurance in amounts and under terms required by COUNTY. It shall be the sole discretion of COUNTY what constitutes sufficient insurance. Documentation shall be submitted by EMSA for approval through COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement to COUNTY’S Risk Management personnel.
No invoices shall be paid until the files of COUNTY’S Contract Administrator for this Agreement contain documentation approved by COUNTY’S Risk Management personnel.
ARTICLE.7
INDEMNIFICATION
7.1 EMSA shall indemnify and save harmless and defend COUNTY, its agents, servants and employees from and against any claim, demand or cause of action of whatsoever kind or nature, including COUNTY’S attorney’s fees and costs, arising out of error, omission, negligent act, conduct or misconduct of EMSA, its agents, servants or employees in the performance of services under this Agreement.
7.2 EMSA further agrees to indemnify, save harmless and defend COUN1-Y, its agent, servants and employees from and against any claim, demand or cause of action of whatsoever kind or nature, including COUNTY’S attorney’s fees and costs, arising out of any conduct or any misconduct of EMSA not included in Paragraph 7.1 above, and for which the COUNTY, its agents, .servants or employees are alleged to be liable.
7.3 EMSA’S obligation to defend COUNTY in Article 7 he~:ein includes the option of the COUNTY to select the attorney(s) of its choice to defend COUNTY, subject to acceptance by EMSA, which acceptance shall not be unreasonably withheld.
7.4 The parties agree that the indemnification obligations set forth in Article 7 herein shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
-7-

ARTICLE
MISCELLANEOUS
8.1 OWNERSHIp OE DOCUMENTS
Any and all reports, photographs, surveys and other data and documents provided or created in connection with this Agreement are and shall remain the property of COUNTY. in the event of termination of this Agreement, any reports, photographs, surveys and other data and documents, whether finished or unfinished, prepared by CONSULTANT shall become the property of COUNTY and shall be delivered by CONSULTANT to the Contract Administrator.
- 8,2 AUDIT RIGHT AND RETENTION OF RECORDS
EMSA and COUNTY agree that COUNTY has the right to audit, including conduct financial audits, of all invoices, bills, and payments received both before payment and after payment. If overpayment is identified, EMSA shall reimburse COUNTY for all amounts of the overpayment made to EMSA by COUNTY.
EMSA shall preserve and make available all financial records and financial audits, supporting documents, statistical records, and any other documents pertinent to this Agreement for a period of five (5) years after termination of this Agreement; or, if an audit has been initiated and audit findings have not been resolved at the end of the five (5) years, the records shall be retained until resolution of the audit findings. EMSA will cooperate with the COUNTY to facilitate the duplication and transfer of any said records ordocuments during the required retention period.
To make all records pertaining to reimbursements requested subject at all times to inspection, review and/or audit by COUNTY, provided Federal and State laws or. regulations and applicable pr6fessional standards of ethics requiring confidentiality are not violated.
That "records pertaining to reimbursements requested" as referenced i~ the foregoing section shall include but not be limited to: client flies; case and/or progress notes; individual treatment plans; individual case management plans; residential occupancy logs; admission/discharge logs; telephone logs; service delivery records including treatment schedules; purchase records; accounting records; professional credentials; consumer satisfaction surveys; internal evaluation procedures; agency and project records of goals and objectives and attainment/accomplishment.
-8-

8.3 ASSIGNMENT
This Agreement, or any interest herein, shall not be assigned, transferred or otherwise encumbered without the written consent of the other party.
8.4 .EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR EMPLOYMENT OR SERVICES
EMSA shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, age, religion, color, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, physical or mental disability. EMSA shall take affirmative action to insure applicants are employed and employees treated during employment without regard to race, age, religion, color, gender,~ sexual orientation, national origin, ma, rital status, physical or mental disability. Such actions shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff, termination, rates of pay, other forms of compensation, terms and conditions of employment, training, including apprenticeship, accessibility, reasonable accommodation or other considerations arising from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; or the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990.
EMSA’S decisions regarding client eligibility shall be made without regard to, or consideration of race, age, religion, color, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, physical or mental disability or other factor which cannot be lawfully or appropriately used as basis for service delivery, as specified under Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; or the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990.
EMSA shall comply with Title I and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act regarding nondiscrimination on the basis of disability in employment and in state and local government services, in the course of providing any services funded in whole or in part by Broward County.
EMSA agrees to furnish COUNTY with a copy of its Equal Employment Opportunity Policy, including its affirmative action plan/procedures, to be submitted with the first invoice. Such documents must be forwarded through COUNTY’S Contract Admi~strator for this Agreement to the Director of the Office of Equal Opportunity. EMSA agrees to comply with all federal, state, and local laws and ordinances applicable to its work, the services provided or to be provided hereunder or payment for work or services thereof.
8,5 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
EMSA is an independent contractor under this Agreement. Services provided by EMSA shall be by employees of EMSA and subject to supervision by EMSA, and not as officers, employees, or agents of Broward County. Employee compensation,
-9-

personnel policies, tax responsibilities, Social Security and health insurance, employee benefits, travel, per diem policies and other similar administrative procedures applicable to services rendered under this Agreement shall be-those of EMSA.
8.6 NOTICES
VVhenever either party desires to give notice to the other, such notice must be in writing, sent by certified United States mail, with return receipt requested, or by hand-delivery, addressed to the party for whom it is intended at the place last specified. The place for giving notice shall remain the same as set forth herein until changed in writing in the manner provided in this section. For the present, the parties designate the following:
FOR COUNTY:
Director Health Care Management Division 101 Northeast 3 Avenue, 4th Floor Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301
FOR EMSA:
EMSA Limited Partnership Correctional Care Division Cornerstone Building, Suite 600 1200 S. Pine Island Road Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33324
8.7 PUBLIC ENTITY CRIMES ACT
EMSA represents that the execution of this Agreement will not violate the Public Entity Crimes Act (Section 287.133, Florida Statutes), which essentially provides that a person or affiliate who is a contractor, consultant or other EMSA and who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a Public Entity Crime_ may not submit a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to the county, may not submit a bid on a contract with the County for the construction or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real property to the County, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with the County, and may not transact any business with the County in excess of the threshold amount provided in Section 287.017, Florida Statues, for category two purchases ($10,0000) for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list.
-10-

Violation of this section shall result in cancellation of this’ contract and recovery of all monies paid hereto, and may result in debarment from the County’s competitive procurem ent activities.
8.8 DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE
EMSA certifies that, by means of Exhibit E, attached hereto and made a part hereof, that it will provide a drug-free workplace program, pursuant to Section 112.0455, Florida Statutes, and will continue to make a good faith effort to maintain a drugfree workplace program during implementation of this Agreement.
8.9 WAIVER OF BREACH
Waiver of breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of this Agreement.
8.10 NO CONFLICTS
EMSA agrees that none of its employees shall, during the term of this Agreement, voluntarily serve as an adverse or hostile witness against COUNTY in any legal or administrative proceeding, nor shall such persons voluntarily give sworn testimony or issue a report or writing, as an expression of his or her opinion, which is adverse or prejudicial to the interests of COUNTY in any pending or threatened legal or administrative proceeding. The limitations of this section shall not apply to those cases where an employee of EMSA is subpoenaed to testify in a legal or administrative proceeding where said employee is not serving as a paid witness against the COUNTY. Further, the limitations of this section shall not preclude such persons from representing themselves as a Defendant in any action or in any administrative or legal proceeding regarding this Agreement.
8.11 APPLICABLE LAW AND VENUE
This Agreement shall be governed, construed, and controlled according to the laws of the State of Florida. Any claim, objection or dispute arising out of the terms of this Agreement shall be litigated in the Seventeenth Judicial Court in and for Broward County, Florida.
8.12 PRIOR AGREEMENTS
This document incorporates and includes all prior negotiations, correspondence, conversations, agreements or understandings applicable to the matters contained herein; the parties agree that there are no commitments, agreements or
-11-

understandings concerning the subject matter of this Agreement that is not contained in this document. Accordingly, the parties agree that no deviation from the terms hereof shall be predicated upon any prior representations or agreements, whether oral or written. 8.13 AMENDMENTS No modification, amendment, or alteration in the terms or conditions contained herein shall be effective unless contained in a written document of the same formality and of equal dignity herewith and executed by the Board. 8.14 PRIORITY OF PROVISIONS If tl~ere is a conflict or inconsistency between any term, statement, requirement, or provision of any exhibit attached hereto, any document or events referred to herein, or any document incorporated into this Agreement by reference and a term, statement, requirement, or provision of this Agreement, the term, statement, requirement, or provision contained in Articles 1 through 8 of this Agreement shall prevail and be given effect.
(The remainder of this page intentionally left blank).
-12-

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have m;ade and executed this Agreement on the respective dates under each signature: BROWARD COUNTY through

its BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, signing by and through the C[:)air-or Vice Chair, authorized to execute same by Board action on the c>~"~’" day of

~-"~-~Z’ ’ . , 19~, and EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,-signing by and

through/’Its .~./~-~~

, duly authorized to execute same.

COUNTY

A’FI-EST:

BROWARD COUNTY, through its BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners, Broward County, Florida

/ -

Chair

Approved as to form bs)~)fficeof County Attorney Broward County, Florida JOHN J. COPELAN, JR., County Attorney Governmental Center, Suite 423 115 South Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 357-7600 Telecopier: (954) 357-7641

Andrea S. Froome Assistant County Attorney

-13-

AGREEMENT BETWEEN BROWARD COUNTY AND EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP RELATING TO CATASTROPHIC PAYMENTS.

ATTEST:

EMSA EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP:

Secretary (CORPORATE SEAL)

By~j. Cliffo~/.~ss, President InPhyNet Hospital Services, Inc., as General Partner

day of ~ (~

1 997.

ASF/LEL:smc 04/28/97 emsa.a01 96-025, 96-044, 96-070
-14-

EXHIBIT A
GUIDELINES, DOCUMENTATION AND PROCEDURES REQUIRED FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF CATASTROPHIC PAYM ENTS
I. GUIDELINES AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED FOR REIMBURSEMENT:
EMSA agrees to adhere to the following guidelines in requesting catastrophic health care reimbursement from COUNTY which are-as.follows:
a) Claims submitted must comply with each arrest report giving rise to the
provision of services in order for COUNTY to verify and approve the dates that qualifying services were provided to the individual. If requested, EMSA shall provide a copy of the relevant arrest report to COUNTY.
b) Copies of applications or claim forms submitted for third party reimbursement
and copies of third party payments made and copies of all final dispositions.
c) Copies of all pages comprising the complete invoice. A summary sheet will
not be deemed acceptable.
d) Copies of all signed, executed and notarized affidavits showing compliance
with all state statutes and county resolutions and ordinances.
e) Explanations for all charges or expenses that are exceptionally large or
having special circumstances over and above the ordinary circumstances.
For example, charges on a hospital bill prior to admission or after discharge date, procedures not typically associated with a particular diagnosis long term inpatient care or such types of circumstances. In such unusual cases, the COUNTY may request a copy of the medical report in unusual cases.
f) - Copies of any and all documentation to indicate denial of funding for
Medicare or insurance coverage based on a particular diagnosis.
g) Copies of invoices to support reimbursement requests and health insurance
claim forms. Copies of checks or logs will not be deemed acceptable.

II. PROCEDURES FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF CATASTROPHIC PAYMENTS:

Ao

EMSA agrees to provide verbal notification, followed by written notification

within three (3) business days, to both COUNTY and BSO when-a patient

approaches the amount of Forty-Five Thousand Dollars ($45,000) near the

catastrophic limit which is Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000)..Said notification

will include a statement as to.the nature of the illness(es) and the

progression of the condition of the patient.

B°

EMSA agrees to work with both COUNTY and BSO and the ~ppropriate

judicial agency to identify the most cost-effective health care EMSA for

individuals approaching the catastrophic limit.

EMSA and COUNTY agree that catastrophic payments to be made to EMSA by COUNTY will be calculated for separate illness(es) and separate incarcerations.

Do

EMSA’S agreement with BSO provides that in the event the third party

insurance reimbursement exceeds the catastrophic cost limit, the collection

of said amount will be shared with COUNTY. EMSA agrees that it will

pursue collection of third party insurance reimbursement which exceeds the

catastrophic cost limit. All amounts collected by EMSA shall be shared

equally with the COUNTY. EMSA’S agreement with BSO, or its addendum

to its agreement with BSO, or EMSA’S documentation to BSO shall contain

the following requirements:

a) EMSA shall provide completed legible invoices and appropriate
supporting documentation to BSO and shall further require BSO to ¯ conduct its investigation and determination within thirty (30) days of
receipt;

b) EMSA shall require BSQ to insure that the individual was
incarcerated when the services were provided. It shall further require BSO to insure that the Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) limit for catastrophic payment required by COUNTY was reached for payment. In the event that BSO finds that there is a problem with the documentation or that the documentation is insufficient to support the catastrophic payment, EMSA and BSO shall both attempt to resolve the problem prior to BSO forwarding the invoice to the COUNTY for payment.

c) EMSA shall require that after BSO determines that the catastrophic
limit of $50,000 has been reached and that all third party reimbursement options were explored, thereby requiring payment by
COUNTY, the authorized signatory for payment of invoices for BSO shall sign at an approval space for BSO and insert the date of its

approval of the invoice which is being submitted to COUNTY for processing of payment to EMSA.

d) EMSA shall require that after BSO executes its approval ahd inserts
the date as set forth in paragraph (c) above, BSO shall forward the approved invoices and supporting documentation to the COUNTY’S agency responsible for payment which is the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator, the Director of Health Care Management Division, located at 101 Northeast 3 Avenue, 4th Floor, Fort .Lauderdale, Florida 33301.

Ill. Upon receipt of the invoices, the COUNTY’S Contract Administrator, or its designee, review of the documentation for processing of the invoices shall include the fol)owing:
1) Insure that all supporting documentation is included to support payment;

2)

Review, evaluate and calculate the amounts on the invoices;

3) Determine that the dates the services were rendered correspor~d to the
dates of incarceration;

4) The COUNTY may review case files, cases and request that EMSA provide
copies of the medical charts for the Individual served;

5) COUNTY shall confirm and determine that all third party reimbursement
options were explored by EMSA and BSQ based on documentation provided to the COUNTY by EMSA.

IV. Within thirty (30) days of COUNTY’S receipt of the invoice from BSO, COUNTY will either forward payment to EMSA; forward a notice of deficiencies due to insufficient supporting documentation; and/or request for further information or documentation; and/or denies the request for payment.

Vo

IEMSA and COUNTY agree that COUNTY has the sole and exclusive right to

determine and decide the adequacy of the supporting documentation submitted for

reimbursement.

DATE: INVOICE NO. VENDOR’S FULL NAME: VENDOR’S ADDRESS:

EXHIBIT B
BILLING INVOICE "

VENDOR’s FEDERAL TAX I.D. NO.: TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: $. PATIENT’S NAME: DATE OF ARREST: NAME OF SERVICE FACILITY: ADDRESS OF SERVICE FACILITY:

SERVICES PROVIDED

SERVICES PROVIDED

FROM:

TO:

TOTAL AMOUNT OF DAYS:

TOTAL AMOUNT FOR SERVICE PROVIDED:

TOTAL AMOUNT PAID BY BSO:

TOTAL/\MOUNT PAID BY THIRD PARTY:

TOTAL AMOUNT DUE FROM COUNTY:

By. Authorized Invoice Signatory for EMSA

Total Amount of

due from County approved by BSO on the

day

of

, 199

BY

Authorized Invoice Signatory for BSO

EXHIBIT C AUTHORIZED INVOICE SIGNATURES

EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, through the Board of Directors of its General Partner by

Unanimous Written Consent, duly recorded in the minutes thereof, or ~is seen from the

Certificate of Corporate Secretary dated ~ay 7, 1997

, which is being

simultaneously provided to Broward County, did authorize

Harta Prado: Vice Pre.~ident
Name & Title (Typewritten)
Robert A. Castille, Administrator

and

Name & Title (Typewritten)

to sign monthly

invoices and certification statements as required by the contract for the term effective on October 1, 1996, between Broward County and, appearing below are samples of signatures authorized by the Board of Directors or authorized as seen from the Certificate of Corporate Secretary for Secretary for InPhyNet Hospital Services, Inc. as General Partner of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP as required by COUNTY.

Signature

Signature

Secretary, Board of Directors

Date

"7"-v-’-

Signature-

Name Date

5,z:~DL4 5} ,~/~50~-/ / t;Print or Type)
~-<’/~/~ q

Signature VVitness Signatures

Name

(Print or Type)

(CORPORATE SEAL)

EXHIBIT D

CERTIFICATION OF EMPOWERMEN:I"

Marta Prado, Vice President
(Typewritten) Name and Office

, hereby certify th~at:

I am duly authorized to sign this Agreement between Broward County and

EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, by Unanimous Written Consent of the Board of

Directors of InPhyNet Hospital Services, Inc., its General Partner, taking place on

May 7, 1997

, or by Certificate of Corporate Secretary

(Date of Board’s Resolution)

dated May 7, 1997

My signature on this Agreement on behalf of the agency binds it to the Term and Scope of Services and all other conditions appearing in this Agreement.
All information supplied by the agency appearing in this Agreement or used in its development is accurate and true and I acknowledge that failure to supply accurate, truthful information may result in termination of the Agreement.

W~tness Signatures Signature j~3~:., A.(,~’~

Name

Marta Prado

(Print or Type)

Title

Vice President

(Print or Type)

Date:

May 7, 1997

(CORPORATE SEAL)

(Print or Type) Date ’/f~’* ~ "~ ~-’~

Signature

Name

(Print or Type)

Date

EXHIBIT E
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATI~)N
The undersigned vendor hereby certifies that it will provide a drug-free wo~-kplace program by:
(1) Publishing a statement notifying its employees that the unlawful
manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the offeror’s workplace, and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violations of such prohibition;
(2), Establishing a continuing drug-free awareness program to inform its employees about:
(i) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
(ii) The offeror’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace;
(iii) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and
(iv) The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace;
(3) Giving all employees engaged in performance of the contract a copy of the statement required by subparagraph (1);
(4) Notifying all employees, in writing, of the statement required by subparagraph (1), that as a condition of employment on a covered contract, the employee shall:
(i) Abide by the terms of the statement; and
(ii) Notify the employer in writing of the employee’s conviction under a
criminal drug statute for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than 5 calendar days after such conviction;
(5) Notifying Broward County government in writing within 10 calendar days
after receiving notice under subdivision (4) (ii) above, from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. The notice shall include the position title of the employee;

EXHIBIT E - Page 2
(6) Within 30 calendar days after receiving notice under subparagraph (4) of a conviction, taking one of the following actions with respect to an employee who is convicted of a drug abuse violation occurring in the workplace:
(i) Taking appropriate personnel action against such employee, up to
and including termination; or
(ii) Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse
assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a federal, state, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency; and
(7)’ Making a good faith effort to maintain a drug-free workplace program through implementation of subparagraphs (1) through~).

STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF BROWARD

(EMSA ~re) (Print EMSA Name)

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ q~

dayof ~

,19~q ,by J~q~rq~ (name of person whose signature is being notarized)

as t i(--’P~, ~)(’~’~l’~£tlJI- of EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

(title)

(nam e of corporation/company)

known to m~ to be the person described herein, or who produced .(~)#.rS0q~_ J ~ as identification, and who did/did not take (type of identification) an oath.

My commission expires:

EXHIBIT "F" (CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE SHALL BE A’I-I-ACHED HERETO)

J.-’L,’~ES OF EL ; 4- 8-97 ; 15:07 ; F’I" I_kUD. SEDG?~|C~--’

3054528679;# 2/ 2

ACORD,. CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE

One Ftnmnc~l Plaza F~. L~ude~dale, F~ ::E3.394

ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHT~ UPON THE CERTIF|C.~" HOLBER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, E3ETEND ¢ ALTER THE COVEP~GE AFFORDED BY THE POUCIF-~ BELO,
COMPANIE~ AFFORENN G COVERAGE

InPhgNe¢ Medical Mgm¢. , Inc.
~200 S. Pine I~,land Road ~ui Ce 500 F¢. Laude~dal¢ FL 3~4

TH~ LR TO CERTIFY THAT THE POUC~-S OF ~URANCE Lt~TED B~ ~VE B~ I~U~ TO ~E ~U~ ~ ~ ~R ~ POU~ P~OD INO~, NO~~NG ANY RECUr,

~U3/ON~ ~D COND~O~ OF SUCH POU~ U~ ~ ~Y ~VE B~N R~U~ BY PA~ ~

-

,$

PRODUCER

WJL’LIAMJ. REESEoJR.. IND~,’]DAUL

""

ClO HEA.THCAJ~.E IHSURANCE AGENCY, INC.

8Z0 GESSNER, SUITE 1000 ........ HOUSTON, TF___XAS 7702,4

j THI~ C~TFICAT’E L.~ L.~UF_.D AS A MA’II"E_R OF INFOR.~A, TIO[
I ONLY AND CONFER.~. NO RIGHTS UPON THE CER’IIF|C.AT ] HOLDEF~ THIS CERTIFICATE DOES ,NOT AMEND, EXTEND
ALTER THE COVERAGE, AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOV I
C.Q..MPANIES AFFO_R..D.I.._N.G_. C._O. VERA.GE

A

LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY

INPHYNET MEDICAL MANAGEMENq-,INC.

~ .... B

1200 S. P,rNE ISLAND, RD, #600

c~e,,~

-:

FT, LAUDERDALE. FL 33324-4.460

... C

;

D

TH~ I$ TO CERTIFY THAT TH~ POLICIF_~ OF INSURM~..~ LI3TED BEI.O~ HAV~ BE~N ISSUED TO THE IN$URED NAMED AJ~OVE FORTHE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTVVI’r~’(ANDING ANY R~QUIRI~I~NT. ~ OR CONr~moN 01: ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DCCUMEHT WlI’H R~SP~CTTO CE’RTIF|C~TE I~,Y B~ L~LIF_~ OR MAY PERTAIN. l’~E Ie~SUR,~ICE AFFORDED B Y THE POLICJE$ DESCRIBED HER~|N 1.5 SUBJECT TO ~ EXCLUSIONS/U,(O CQNOrTIC~$ OF SUCH POLICES. LI~IT6 S~-(OW~ I,~’ H~V~ BEE.H I~EDUCEO BY PAIO CLAIMS.

~RJ I"Y~E OF INSU~MqCE

POUCY NUI,~ER

eou~ er~:eCT~ [POUCY EX~.~O~
DATE IMmDEVYY~ I O,~ll~ i’MI4/D0,YY1

i .j OWNE.R’S . cOhrTR~CTOP.S PROY
~I AUTOMOBLL~ LIABZLITY
’~ ,a~ALyLAOUvTvNOED AUTOS _’~ SCHF_DULED AUTOS ~ HIRED AUTOS ~ flON-OW~F_J3 AUTOS
GARAGE LLA~’4.J’FY --~A~Y AUTO
EXCESS Lb~B~JT~ ( UMBRELLA ,OPJ~
~ OTHER TI,~.N UMB,~ELLA FORM
I~PLO,~ I.,u~u.ny

~~1 ~ -0131781

EACH OCCURRENCE

$

08/01FJ~5

CObBlED $1NOLE LI/4R"

~OO~Y INJURY (~=

~,ODrLy INJURY

$

PP.OPE RTY DAM~AG~
AUTO ONLY. E,~, OTHER ~ ~JTO 0~1_~.
EACH A~C I~ F~T
AGGREGATE E~CH OCCURRENCE AC,,GREGATE

08J’01/97 EL f.,ACH ACC~,EI4T

I ¯

~CR,~TiON OF OPER.ATION.~LOC~’I30~E.HJCLE,S~PECJ,,AL ITFJ.~
:OWARD COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE IS NAMF_~) AS AN ADDR’IONAL INSURED AS RESPECTS THEIR AGREEMEN’T;VVITH THE ¯ JVlED INSURED,

 
 Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 125 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 00-7545-CIV-ZLOCH

FILED by _ _ _ o.C.

RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR., and PETER COTTONE I SR. I
Plaintiffs,

J"U"l. •I (,., ''l-QQrcJ.

Cl ~RENCE MAUlllJX

CLE-R~.

u .5 -

o1s1. cT. FT LAUD.

•....--- ... s.o. OF FLA. _•_- - .~ -·~

VS
KENNETH C. JENNE, II, individually and is his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, et al.,
__________D_e_f_en_d_a_n_t_s_. _________/

0 RDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the Defendants, Andrew Perfilio, M.D., and Maurice Waldman, M.D.'s Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint (DE 106), and Defendant, Elma McKenzie's Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint (DE 104). The Court has carefully reviewed said Motions and the entire court file and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
The Court notes that only a generalized statement of facts needs to be set out to comply with the liberal Federal Rules of Pleading. A classic formulation of the test often applied to determine the sufficiency of the Complaint was set out by the

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 125 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 2 of 3
United States Supreme Court in Coney v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957), wherein the Court stated:
. In appraising the sufficiency of the Complaint we follow . . the accepted rule that a Complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief. The Court adds that a Complaint may not be dismissed because the plaintiff's claim does not support the legal theory he relies on since the Court must determine if the allegations provide relief on any possible theory. See, Robertson v. Johnston, 376 F.2d 43, 44-45 (5th Cir. 1967). The Court further notes that the legal issues raised by the aforementioned motions to dismiss may be more properly addressed in a Motion For Summary Judgment. Accordingly, after due consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Defendants, Andrew Perfilio, M.D. and Maurice Waldman, M.D.'s Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint (DE 106) be and the same is hereby DENIED; 2. The Defendant, Elma McKenzie's Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint (DE 104) be and the same is hereby DENIED; and 3. The Defendants, Andrew Perfilio, M.D., Maurice Waldman, M.D., and Elma McKenzie, shall file their Answer to the Plaintiffs'
2

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 125 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 3 of 3

Amended Complaint within fifteen (15) days of the date of this

Order.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward

/\J. County, Florida, this

.-5day of July, 2002.

Copies furnished:
Jodi C. Page, Esq. Barbara A. Meyer, Esq. Michael Piper, Esq. James Rowlee, Esq.

3

 
 Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 1 of 14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 00-7545-CIV-ZLOCH
RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER ANTONY COTTONE, JR., and PETER COTTONE I SR. I
Plaintiffs,
vs.
KENNETH C. JENNE, II, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, et al.,
__________D_e_f_e_n_d_a_n_ts_.__________/

FILED by _ _ _ o.C.j
JUL l 5 2002
CLARENCE MAOl.lOX
·- _ __ s.CoL.:E.,_~oK:•U..·SF.~O,F.ITS.T_.LACUTD. .
0 RDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the Defendants, Kenneth C. Jenne, II, Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, and Delores Watson's Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint (DE 111) . The Court has carefully reviewed said Motion and the entire court file and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
The Court notes that the Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint (DE 83) seeking damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged violations of State and Federal law. Specifically, the Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants, in various ways, were deliberately indifferent to a substantial risk of serious harm that resulted in the death of Peter J. Cottone, Jr. (hereinafter "Cottone") while Cottone was being held as a pretrial detainee at the North Broward

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 2 of 14
Detention Center. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C §§ 1331, 1343, and 1367.
In the instant Motion, the Defendants argue that the Amended Complaint must be dismissed because: (1) the Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for a constitutional violation against any of the Defendants; (2) the Defendants sued in their individual capacities are entitled to qualified immunity; (3) the Plaintiffs fail to state a claim for supervisory liability; and (4) the Plaintiffs fail to state a claim for municipal liability. The Plaintiffs dispute each of these arguments.
I. Discussion At the outset, the Court notes that only a generalized statement of facts needs to be set out to comply with Rule B(a) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A classic formulation of the test often applied to determine the sufficiency of a complaint was set forth by the United States Supreme Court in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957), wherein the Court stated:
. In appraising the sufficiency of the Complaint we follow . . the accepted rule that a Complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief. The Court adds that a complaint may not be dismissed because the plaintiffs' claim does not support the legal theory they rely on since the Court must determine if the allegations provide relief on
2

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 3 of 14
any possible theory. See Robertson v. Johnston, 376 F.2d 43, 44-45 (5th Cir. 1967). With these principles in mind, the Court now turns to the Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint to determine if it survives the Defendants' Motion To Dismiss.
A. The Plaintiffs' Allegations The Plaintiffs' allegations are as follows. In July 1994 the Sheriff of Broward County and the Broward County Commissioners entered into a consent decree in the case of Carruthers, et al. v. Cochran, et al., Case No. 76-6068-CIV-HOEVELER. In January 1995 the consent decree was approved by Judge Hoeveler and became binding on the Sheriff of Broward County and the Broward County Commissioners and their respective successors. The purpose of the consent decree was to correct conditions in the Broward County jail system which violated the constitutional rights of inmates. Pursuant to the consent decree, the Sheriff and Broward County are obligated to inform their employees as well as any private parties with whom they contract that they must comply with the requirements of the consent decree. In August 1993 the Sheriff of Broward County entered into a contract with Defendant EMSA Limited Partnership to provide health services for inmates confined in the Broward County jail system. In April 1997 the contract was amended and renewed to run through September 2000. On March 9, 1999, Cottone was allegedly involved in a domestic
3

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 4 of 14
violence incident with his father. Cottone was "Baker Acted" and sent to Memorial Hospital for observation and evaluation due to this incident. 1 On March 14, 1999, Cottone was brought to the Broward County jail and booked, assessed, and sent to Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center (hereinafter "Unit 1"). Unit 1 is for mentally ill inmates.
On March 1, 1999, Widnel Charles (hereinafter "Charles") was arrested. Prior to his arrest, Charles had been "Baker Acted" numerous times and had demonstrated violent propensities. While in the booking area on March 1, Charles struck another inmate. This incident was observed and documented by a deputy sheriff and a booking nurse. Despite a history of schizophrenia and the March 1 incident, Charles was initially placed in general population at the Broward County Main Jail. On March 6, after being reassessed, Charles was sent to the North Broward Detention Center.
On April 1, 1999 Dr. Maurice Waldman, the staff psychiatrist at the North Broward Detention Center, determined that Charles was stable and reduced the psychotropic medication being administered to Charles. On April 6, 1999, Ellie McKenzie, staff nurse, placed Charles in Unit 1 with Cottone and another inmate. On April 7, 1999, Albert St. Hubert, the third inmate housed in Unit 1,
1 The phrase "Baker Acted" refers to Florida Statute Section 394.467, which permits a person to be involuntarily placed in a treatment facility if the person is found by clear and convincing evidence to be mentally ill, and, inter alia, there is a substantial likelihood that the person will inflict serious bodily harm on himself or herself, or the person of another, as evidenced by recent behavior.
4

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 5 of 14
summoned the officers on duty, Defendants Joseph D'Elia and George Williams, to his cell. When the officers arrived they found Cottone unconscious on the floor of his cell with ligature marks around his neck. Charles had allegedly strangled Cottone with shoe laces. Cottone was taken to North Broward Medical Center where he died.
With regards to each of the Defendants, the Plaintiffs further allege as follows. In Count III of the Amended Complaint, the Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants Joseph D'Elia (hereinafter "D'Elian) and George Williams's (hereinafter "Williamsn) deliberate indifference to the care and housing of mentally ill patients deprived Cottone of his rights under the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
In Count IV, the Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants Dwight St. Claire (hereinafter "St. Clairen) and Delores Watson (hereinafter "Watsonn) were the supervisors of D'Elia and Williams and that they failed to train or supervise D' Elia and Watson regarding the monitoring, housing, and security of inmates at North Broward Detention Center. The Plaintiffs further allege that St. Claire and Watson knew that failing to train D' Elia and Watson would result in a serious risk of harm to inmates and that they were deliberately indifferent to such risk.
In Count V, the Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Barbara Law (hereinafter "Lawn) was the supervisor of Defendants St. Claire,
5

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 6 of 14
Watson, D'Elia, and Williams, and that she failed to properly train or supervise said Defendants. The Plaintiffs further allege that Law was deliberately indifferent to the serious risk of harm to inmates and that her failure to properly train her subordinates was the proximate cause of Cottone's constitutional deprivations.
In Count VI, the Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Patrick Tighe (hereinafter "Tighe") failed to properly train or supervise Law, St. Claire, Watson, D'Elia, and Williams and that such failure amounted to deliberate indifference resulting in Cottone's constitutional deprivations.
In Count VII, the Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Kenneth C. Jenne, II (hereinafter "Jenne"), as Sheriff of Broward County, had the duty of adopting and implementing regulations regarding the medical treatment, housing, security, and monitoring of mentally ill patients confined in the Broward County jail system. The Plaintiffs further allege that Jenne was deliberately indifferent to his duties and that his failure to carry out his duties resulted in Cottone's constitutional deprivations.
B. The Defendants' Motion The Court notes that in order to overcome a Rule 12(b) (6) motion based upon qualified immunity the Plaintiffs must allege facts that, in light of clearly established law at the time of the incident, obviously amount to a constitutional violation. Marsh v. Butler County, Ala. 268 F.3d 1014, 1028 (11th Cir. 2001). "In the
6

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 7 of 14
qualified immunity analysis, we generally first determine whether a plaintiff has stated a constitutional violation at all. Id.; see also Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001) ("A court required to rule upon the qualified immunity issue must consider, then, this threshold question: Taken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, do the facts alleged show the officer's conduct violated a constitutional right?"); Lee v. Ferraro, 284 F . 3d 118 8 , 119 4 (11th Ci r . 2 0 02 ) (same ) . If the Plaintiffs have stated a constitutional claim, the Court must then consider whether the law was clearly established at the time of the events in question. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201.
The Court next notes that because Cottone was a pretrial detainee the relevant constitutional guarantee is not the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, but rather the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. See Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 671-72 n.40 (1977) (when State seeks to impose punishment without adjudication of guilt in accordance with due process of law the pertinent constitutional guarantee is the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, not the Eighth Amendment); see also Bozeman v. Orium, III, 199 F.Supp.2d 1216, 1230 (M.D.Ala. 2002) (same). Nevertheless, the Eleventh Circuit has held that in circumstances implicating the denial of the basic needs of a pretrial detainee, the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment protections are co-extensive. Hamm v. Dekalb
7

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 8 of 14
County, 774 F.2d 1567, 1574 (11th Cir. 1985). The Court further notes that "[a] prison official's 'deliberate indifference' to a substantial risk of serious injury to an inmate violates the Eighth Amendment." Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 828 (1994). Therefore, to state a claim that the Defendants violated Cottone's Fourteenth Amendment rights the Plaintiffs must adequately allege that the Defendants acted with deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious injury to Cottone.
In Marsh, the Eleventh Circuit held that an Eighth Amendment violation will occur when (1) a substantial risk of serious harm exists; (2) the official is subjectively aware of that risk; (3) the official does not respond reasonably to that risk; and (4) the constitutional violation caused the plaintiff's injury. Marsh, 268 F.3d at 1028.
In regards to Defendants D'Elia and Williams, the Court finds that the Plaintiffs have stated a constitutional claim against these Defendants in their individual capacities. First, the Court finds that the Plaintiffs have adequately alleged that an objective, substantial risk of serious harm to inmates existed. Simply stated, the presence of Charles posed an objective, substantial risk to other inmates. Second, the Court finds that the Plaintiffs have adequately alleged that D'Elia and Williams were subjectively aware of the risk. The Plaintiffs allege that both D'Elia and Williams were on duty at the time of the events in
8

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 9 of 14
question, that prior to the killing Charles was in the throes of schizophrenia, hallucinating, and violent, and that his mental condition was obvious to both D'Elia and Williams. Third, the Court finds that the Plaintiffs have adequately alleged that D'Elia and Williams responded in an objectively unreasonable manner. The Plaintiffs allege that inmates housed in Unit 1 were not being monitored at the time of the incident, and that a computer game was being run on the monitor in the control room where D' Eli a and Williams were stationed. And finally, the Plaintiffs allege that allowing a violent inmate like Charles to move freely among other inmates caused Cottone's death. This allegation is adequate to show that the constitutional violation caused Cottone's death.
Taken as a whole the Court finds that these allegations are sufficient to satisfy the pleading requirements of Rule 8(a) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Having found that the Plaintiffs have stated a constitutional claim against D'Elia and Williams in their individual capacities, the Court must now consider whether the law was clearly established at the time of Cottone's death. The United States Supreme Court recently clarified what is meant by the phrase "clearly established law." See Hope v. Pelzer, 70 U.S.L.W. 4710 (2002). In Pelzer, the Supreme Court held that the Eleventh Circuit's requirement that a plaintiff point to case law with "materially similar" facts to establish that the law was clearly established at the time in
9

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 10 of 14
question was a "rigid gloss on the qualified immunity standard" inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent. Id. at 4712. Instead, the Supreme Court stated that the salient question the Court of Appeals should have asked is "whether the state of the law [at the time in question] gave respondents fair warning that their alleged treatment [of the victim] was unconstitutional." Id. at 4713. Under this standard, it is "clear that officials can still be on notice that their conduct violates established law even in novel factual circumstances." Id.
Here, the Court finds that the Supreme Court's opinion in Farmer, and the Eleventh Circuit's opinion in Lamarca v. Turner, 995 F.2d 1526 (11th Cir. 1993), provided D'Elia and Williams with "fair warning" that their alleged failure to protect Cottone was unconstitutional. Pelzer, 70 U.S.L.W. at 4713. Farmer dealt with a pre-operative transsexual who was beaten and raped after being placed in the general prison population of a federal penitentiary in Indiana. Lamarca dealt with substandard conditions at a Florida correctional institution, including a prevalence of weapons, inadequate patrols by guards, a lack of reporting procedures for rapes and assaults, and rampant homosexual activity which resulted in a lack of protection and inmates being assaulted. Although the facts of these cases are not identical to the facts under review here, their "premise has clear applicability in this case." Pelzer, 70 U.S.L.W. at 4714. That is, it is clear from these cases
10

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 11 of 14
that being deliberately indifferent to a substantial risk of serious inmate on inmate violence constitutes either an actionable Eighth or Fourteenth Amendment violation. Therefore, the Court finds that Farmer and Lamarca "gave fair warning to the [Defendants] that their conduct crossed the line of what is constitutionally permissible." Id.
Accordingly, the Court finds that D'Elia and Williams in their individual capacities are not entitled to dismissal of Count III of the Amended Complaint.
With regards to Defendants Tighe, Law, St. Claire, and Watson, the Court finds that the Plaintiffs have stated a claim for a constitutional violation against these Defendants in their individual capacities. The Court notes that supervisor liability under § 1983 "occurs either when the supervisor personally participates in the alleged constitutional violation or when there is a causal connection between actions of the supervising official and the alleged constitutional deprivation." Brown v. Crawford, 906 F.2d 667, 671 (11th Cir. 1990). Here, there are no allegations that Defendants Tighe, Law, St. Claire, or Watson were personally involved in the circumstances surrounding Cottone's death. However, the Plaintiffs do allege that the Defendants failure to supervise and train their subordinates caused the alleged constitutional deprivation. The Court finds such allegations sufficient to meet the requirements of Rule 8(a) (2). Moreover, the
11

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 12 of 14
Court finds that under the standard recently set forth by the Supreme Court the law was clearly established law at the time in question that a failure to train or supervise a subordinate could result in a constitutional violation.
Accordingly, the Court finds that Defendants Tighe, Law, St. Claire, and Watson in their individual capacities are not entitled to dismissal to Counts IV, V, and VI of the Amended Complaint.
Finally, the Court notes that Defendants D'Elia, Williams, Tighe, Law, St. Claire, Watson, and Jenne have been sued in their official capacities. The Court further notes that a suit against a governmental official in his or her official capacity is a suit against the governmental entity that the official represents. Farred v. Hicks, 915 F.2d 1531, 1532 (11th Cir. 1990). A governmental entity may be found liable under § 1983 only "when a governmental 'policy or custom' is the 'moving force' behind the constitutional deprivation." Id. (quoting Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 166 (1985). Respondeat superior or vicarious liability will not do. "It is only when the 'execution of the government's policy or custom . . inflicts the injury' that the [governmental entity] may be held liable under § 1983." City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 385 (1989).
The Court further notes that in limited circumstances an allegation of failing to train or supervise employees can be the basis of § 1983 liability. Gold v. City of Miami, 151 F.3d 1346,
12

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 13 of 14
1350 (11th Cir. 1998). Those limited circumstances occur when (1) a governmental entity fails to adequately train or supervise its employees; (2) such failure to train or supervise amounts to a policy; (3) the policy causes the plaintiffs constitutional deprivation; and (4) the failure to train or supervise rises to the level of deliberate indifference. Id.; see also City of Canton, 489 U.S. at 388-89 (failure to train may serve as basis for § 1983 liability only where such failure amounts to deliberate indifference) .
Here, the Court finds that the Plaintiffs' allegations that the Defendants failure to supervise or train their subordinates amounted to a custom or policy on behalf of the Broward County Sheriffs Office are sufficient to satisfy Rule 8 (a) (2).
Accordingly, the Court finds that the Defendants D' El ia, Williams, Tighe, Law, St. Claire, Watson, and Jenne are not entitled to dismissal of Counts III, IV, V, VI, and VII in their official capacities.
In closing, the Court notes that the legal issues raised by the Defendants in their Motion To Dismiss may be more properly addressed in a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Accordingly, after due consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Defendants, Kenneth C. Jenne, II, Patrick Tighe,
13

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2002 Page 14 of 14

Barbara Law, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, and

Delores Watson's Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint (DE 111) be

and the same is hereby DENIED; and

2. The Defendants, Kenneth C. Jenne, II, Patrick Tighe,

Barbara Law, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, and

Delores Watson shall file their Answer to the Plaintiffs' Amended

Complaint within fifteen (15) days of the date of this Order.

DONE AND ORDERED in Cha,ers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward

County, Florida, this

1~.::!! day of July, 2002.

WILLIAM J. ZLOCH ~ Chief United States District Judge
Copies furnished:
Jodi C. Page, Esq. Barbara A. Meyer, Esq. Michael Piper, Esq. James Rowlee, Esq.

14

 
 Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 337 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/07/2005 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO . 00-7545-CIV-ZLOC H
RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR ., and PETER COTTONE, SR . ,
Plaintiffs , vs .
KENNETH C . JENNE, II, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, et al .,
Defendants .

FILE D by D .C .

, t l r2J 0 6 2005

CLEUK S .D. OF

U .S . FLA .

DIST . CT. FT . LAUD

.

ORDE R

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Defendant Broward County Board of County Commissioners' Motion For Summary Final Judgment (DE 159) and Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D ., Elma McKenzie, L .P .N ., and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc .'s Motion For Summary Judgment (DE 169) . The Court has carefully reviewed said Motions and the entire court file and is otherwise fully advised in the premises .
I . Summary Judgment Standar d The Court notes that under Rule 56(c), summary judgment is prope r . . . if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 337 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/07/2005 Page 2 of 7
issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law . Fed . R . Civ . P . 56(c) . The party seeking summary judgment "always bears the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis for its motion, and identifying those portions of `the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any,' which it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact ." Celotex Corp . v . Catrett , 477 U .S . 317, 323 (1986) . Indeed, "the moving party bears the initial burden to show the district court, by reference to materials on file, that there are no genuine issues of material fact that should be decided at trial . Only when that burden has been met does the burden shift to the non-moving party to demonstrate that there is indeed a material issue of fact that precludes summary judgment ." Clark v . Coats & Clark, Inc . , 929 F .2d 604, 608 (11th Cir . 1991) . The moving party is entitled to "judgment as a matter of law" when the non-moving party fails to make a sufficient showing on an essential element of the case to which the non-moving party has the burden of proof . Celotex Corp . , 477 U .S . at 322 ; Everett v . Napper , 833 F .2d 1507, 1510 (11th Cir . 1987) . In other words, the standard for granting summary judgment is the same as th e
2

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 337 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/07/2005 Page 3 of 7
standard for granting a directed verdict . Anderson v . Liberty Lobby, Inc . , 477 U .S . 242, 250 (1986) . The appellate courts generally, therefore, will affirm the granting of summary judgment if on any part of the prima facie case there would be insufficient evidence to require submission of the case to a jury . Id . at 252-256 ; Barnes v . Southwest Forest Industries, Inc . , 814 F .2d 607, 609 (11th Cir . 1987) . The evidence of the non-movant is to be believed, however, and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his or her favor . Anderson , 477 U .S . at 255 ; Adickes v . S .H . Kress & Co . , 398 U .S . 144, 158-59 (1970) ; Barnes , 814 F .2d at 609 ; Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp . v . Davis , 804 F .2d 1580, 1582 (11th Cir . 1986) . Where the moving party properly supports its motion for summary judgment, "the nonmoving party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of its pleadings, but must, through affidavits or as otherwise provided in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, designate specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial ." L .S .T ., Inc . v . Crow , 49 F .3d 679, 684 (11th Cir . 1995) (internal quotations and citations omitted) . If the non-movant fails to respond to a summary judgment motion, however, summary judgment will be entered against that party only "if appropriate ." FED . R . Czv . P . 56(e) ; see also Kinder v . Carson , 127 F .R .D . 543, 545 (S .D .Fla . 1989) (clear implication of "if appropriate" is tha t
3

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 337 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/07/2005 Page 4 of 7
summary judgment may not be appropriate even if non-movant fails to respond) . For summary judgment to be appropriate when the non-movant fails to respond, "the record must support summary judgment as a matter of law, irrespective of whether the nonmovant has filed an opposing memorandum . Kinder , 127 F .R .D . at 545 .
II . Broward County Board of County Commissioners' Motion Upon review of the instant Motion For Summary Final Judgmen t (DE 159) and the entire court file herein, the Court finds that there exist genuine issues of material fact which preclude entry of judgment as a matter of law . For example, the Court notes that it is clear that municipal liability pursuant to 42 U .S .C . § 1983 may not be based on a theory of respondeat superior, City of Canton v . Harris , 489 U .S . 378, 385 (1989), and that a county is "liable under section 1983 only for acts which [the county] is actually responsible ." Marsh v . Butler County , 268 F .3d 1014, 1027 (11th Cir . 2001) . To establish that a county is actually responsible, a plaintiff must identify either "(1) an officially promulgated county policy or (2) an official custom or practice of the county shown through repeated acts of a final policymaker for the county ." Grech v . Clayton County, Georgia , 335 F .3d 1326, 1329 (11th Cir . 2003) (citation omitted) . Whichever avenu e
4

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 337 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/07/2005 Page 5 of 7
the plaintiff chooses, he "(1) must show that the local governmental entity, here the county, has authority and responsibility over the governmental function and (2) must identify those officials who speak with final policymaking authority for that local governmental entity concerning the act alleged to have caused the particular constitutional violation in issue ." Id . at 1330 .
The Court notes that during his deposition (DE 207, Ex . C), County Commissioner John Rodstrom stated that "the County Commission and the taxpayers will always be responsible ultimately for anything that happens with the jail, financially and otherwise ." DE 207, Ex . C, p . 18 . He also repeatedly stated that he was unaware of any complaints or official reports calling into question the practices of running the jails . Id . pp . 20, 21, and 22 . Plaintiffs allege, however, that there were numerous reports filed that could have had the effect of making the Broward County Board of County Commissioners aware of Constitutionally violative conduct, and possibly triggered the Board's duty under Florida Statutes chapter 951 .06 to take adverse action against the official selected by the Board to oversee the County's prisons . See DE 183, pp . 7-8 ; see also DE 180, Exs . H, I, J, K, L, M . In other words, what the Board wa s
5

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 337 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/07/2005 Page 6 of 7
aware of regarding possible unconstitutional practices in the jails, and when they were aware if it, create an issue of material fact .
III . The EMSA Defendants' Motio n Upon review of the instant Motion For Summary Judgment (DE 169) and the entire court file herein, the Court again finds that there exist genuine issues of material fact which preclude entry of judgment as a matter of law . For example, the Court notes that in the instant Motion (DE 169), the EMSA Defendants characterize Widnel Charles' behavior in the days before the murder of Peter Cottone as seemingly "under control" thereby arguing that Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D ., Elma McKenzie, L .P .N . were not the cause of a deprivation of Peter Cottone's Constitutional rights because they did not disregard any known risk to him . DE 169, p . 6 . This type of factual characterization however, is the type that the Court may not make at the summary judgment stage, particularly when that characterization is contradicted by the non-moving party . See DE 183, pp . 1-3, 14-21 ; see also DE 180, Exs . CC, FF, GG, and HH . In sum, considering these factors in light of the evidence presented, or lack thereof, leads the Court to conclude that genuine issues of material fact exist and that the record at thi s
6

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 337 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/07/2005 Page 7 of 7

time does not support the granting of summary judgment as a

matter of law .

See Kinder , 127 F .R .D . at 545 (record must

support granting of summary judgment) ; see also FED . R . Civ . P .

56(e) advisory committee's notes ("Where the evidentiary matter

in support of the motion does not establish the absence of a

genuine issue, summary judgment must be denied even if no

opposing evidentiary matter is presented .") .

Accordingly, after due consideration, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows :

1 . Defendant Broward County Board of County Commissioners'

Motion For Summary Final Judgment (DE 159) be and the same is

hereby DENIED ; an d

2 . Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D .,

Elma McKenzie, L .P .N ., and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc .'s Motion

For Summary Judgment (DE 169) be and the same is hereby DENIED .

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Browar d

County, Florida this

day of June, 2005 .

Copies furnished : All counsel of record

WfLLIAM J . ZLOC H Chief United States District Judg e

7

 
 Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 1 of 17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORID A
CASE NO . 00-7545-CIV-ZLOC H
RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR ., and PETER COTTONE, SR . ,

[PILED by ,'
JAN 13 2006
CLARENCE MADDOk CLERK U .S . DIST . CT. S .D . OF FLA . FT. LAUD .

Plaintiffs ,

vs .

ORDE R

KENNETH C . JENNE , II, et al . ,

Defendants .

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D ., Elma McKenzie, L .P .N ., and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc .'s Motion To Limit Damages (DE 358) and Defendants Kenneth C . Jenne, II, Joseph D'Elia and George Williams' Motion To Apply Damages Provisions Of The Florida Wrongful Death Act (DE 359) . The Court has carefully reviewed said Motions and the entire court file and is otherwise fully advised in the premises .
I . Backgroun d The above-styled cause arises from the death of Peter Anthony Cottone, Jr . (hereinafter "Cottone") while he was being held as a pretrial detainee at the North Broward Detention Center on April 7, 1999 . Cottone died after being choked with shoelaces by fellow inmate, Widnel Charles . At the time of his death, Cottone was 49 years old, had never married, and had no children . See DE 358, Ex . A, pp . 9, 15 . This action was initiated by Cottone's father, Peter Cottone, Sr ., and Richard Cottone as the representative of Cottone's estate . See DE 83, 9191 7-9 . The currently operative Complaint is Plaintiffs' Amende d Complaint (DE 83) wherein Plaintiffs state causes of action against

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 2 of 17
multiple Defendants pursuant to 42 U .S .C . § 1983 and the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution . Plaintiffs allege, in essence , that each Defendant acted with deliberate indifference to a known substantial risk of harm to Cottone while he was incarcerated .
On February 18, 2002, Peter Cottone, Sr . died, and the Cottone family subsequently had Richard Cottone named as representative of his estate . By prior Order (DE 122), the Court substituted Richard Cottone, as Executor of the estate of Peter Cottone, Sr ., for Peter Cottone, Sr . as a Plaintiff in the above-styled cause .
In the instant Motions (DE Nos . 358 and 359), Defendants aver that the Florida Wrongful Death Act, Florida Statutes §§ 768 .16-768 .26 (2005) (hereinafter the "Wrongful Death Act" or the "Act") should constitute the sole measure of damages available in the above-styled cause . Defendants argue, in essence, that federal law does not provide a sufficient mechanism for determining available damages, and that the Act should therefore provide the sole measure of damages because its terms are not inconsistent with the purpose and meaning of federal statutory and Constitutional law . Plaintiffs oppose using the Wrongful Death Act as the measure of damages . In support of this opposition, they state that they are seeking compensatory damages for pain and suffering and the loss of life of Cottone, and the pain and suffering of Peter Cottone, Sr . arising from the death of his son . They argue that the law of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit mandates that these damages be made available in § 1983 cases like the abovestyled cause . Plaintiffs further aver that because the Act does not allow for the aforementioned damages in the circumstances that currentl y
2

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 3 of 17
make up this case, federal common law must be considered as a source for
the measure of damages available .
II . Analysis .
The Court notes that its jurisdiction over an action brought
pursuant to 42 U .S .C . § 198 3
. . . shall be exercised and enforced in conformity with the laws of the United States, so far as such laws are suitable to carry the same into effect ; but in all cases where they are not adapted to the object, or are deficient in the provisions necessary to furnish suitable remedies and punish offenses against law, the common law, as modified and changed by the constitution and statutes of the State wherein the court having jurisdiction of such civil . . . cause is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be extended to and govern the said courts in the trial and disposition of the cause . . . .
42 U .S .C . § 1988 (2003) . The above-stated statutory test for
determining the appropriate law governing various aspects of § 1983
actions has been succinctly stated as follows :
First it must be decided whether the federal civil rights framework is deficient in furnishing the appropriate rule . If that question is answered affirmatively, the courts must then look to the pertinent state law to fill the vacuum . Finally, the state law must be disregarded in favor of federal common law if the state law is inconsistent with the meaning and purpose of the federal statutory and constitutional law .
Heath v . City of Hialeah , 560 F . Supp . 840, 841 (S .D . Fla . 1983) .
The Court first notes that it is axiomatic that "one specifi c
area not covered by federal law is that relating to `the survival
of civil rights actions under § 1983 upon the death of either the
plaintiff or defendant ."' Robertson v . Wegmann , 436 U .S . 584, 589
(1978) (quoting Moor v . County of Alameda , 411 U .S . 693, 702
(1973)) ; see also Heath 560 F . Supp . at 842 ("The cases uniformly
agree that the civil rights laws are facially deficient i n
3

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 4 of 17
providing rules of survivorship .") . The rules of survivorship are implicated in the above-styled cause because the action is presently maintained only by Richard Cottone as the personal representative of the party who suffered the Constitutional violation, namely Cottone, and as the personal representative of the estate of his father, Peter Cottone, Sr ., who was himself originally a Plaintiff in the above-styled cause . Based on the deficiency in federal law regarding survival of § 1983 claims, the Court finds that the exercise of its jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' claims shall take place within the analytical framework of § 1988, and that it is appropriate to look to Florida law to cure this deficiency .
The Wrongful Death Act fits squarely in the gap existent in federal law regarding survival of § 1983 claims . Florida passed the Act "to shift the losses resulting when wrongful death occurs from the survivors of the decedent to the wrong doer ." FLA . STAT . § 768 .17 (2005) . The Act, therefore, is an example of a survival statute of the type discussed in Robertson "intended to modify the simple, if harsh, 19th-century common-law rule : `[A]n injured party's personal claim was [always] extinguished . . . upon the death of either the injured party himself or the alleged wrongdoer ."' Robertson , 436 U .S . at 589 (quoting Moor , 411 U .S . at 702 n . 14) . The Act assures this remedy to survivors by providing that
[w]hen the death of a person is caused by the wrongful act [or] negligence . . . of any person, . . . and the event would have entitled the person injured to maintain an action and recover damages if death had not ensued, the person . . . that would have been liable in damages if death had not ensued shall be liable for damages a s
4

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 5 of 17
specified in this act notwithstanding the death of the person injured .
FLA . STAT . § 768 .19 (2005) . The "survivors" who may hold thos e
persons liable are defined as "the decedent's spouse, children,
parents, and when partly or wholly dependent on the decedent for
support or services, any blood relatives and adoptive brothers and
sisters ." FLA . STAT . § 768 .19 (2005) .
The Act, in pertinent part, provides that the following
damages may be awarded to survivors of a decedent :
(1) Each survivor may recover the value of lost support and services from the date of the decedent's injury to her or his death, with interest, and future loss of support and services from the date of death and reduced to present value . . . .
(2) The surviving spouse may also recover for loss of the decedent's companionship and protection and for mental pain and suffering from the date of injury .
(3) Minor children of the decedent, and all children of the decedent if there is no surviving spouse, may also recover for lost parental companionship, instruction, and guidance and for mental pain and suffering from the date of injury . . . .
(4) Each parent of a deceased minor child may also recover for mental pain and suffering from the date of injury . Each parent of an adult child may also recover for mental pain and suffering if there are no other survivors . '
(5) Medical or funeral expenses due to the decedent's injury or death may be recovered by a survivor who has paid them .
(6) The decedent's personal representative may recover for the decedent's estate the following : (a) Loss of earnings of the deceased from the date of injury to the date of death . . .
i This subsection was amended on October 1, 1990 to allow for recovery by parents of adult children . Prior to that amendment, the Act only allowed for recovery for mental pain and suffering by parents of minor children .
5

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 6 of 17
(b) Medical or funeral expenses clue to the decedent's injury or death that have become a charge against her or his estate or that were paid by or on behalf of decedent, excluding amounts recoverable under subsection (5) . FLA . STAT . § 768 .21 (2005) . Finally, a survivor's death before final judgment limits the survivor's recovery to lost support and services to the date of his death . See FLA . STAT . § 768 .24 (2005) . Summing up the damages provisions of the Act, the Court notes that liability for a decedent's death carries on after his death, and that causes of action may be brought by a personal representative of the decedent's estate, and the decedent's spouse, children, and/or parents . The Court further notes that a decedent's survivors may recover for past and future lost support and services, loss of the decedent's companionship and protection, lost parental companionship, instruction, and guidance, mental pain and suffering, and medical or funeral expenses . Additionally, the decedent's estate may recover loss of earnings and medical or funeral expenses . Accordingly, because Florida law covers the aforementioned deficiencies in federal law regarding the survival of claims and award of damages, § 1988 mandates that the Court apply the Act in considering Plaintiff's claims as long as such application "is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States ." 42 U .S .C . § 1988 (2003) . When considering the issue of inconsistency, "courts must look not only at particular federal statutes and constitutional provisions, but also at "the policies expressed in [them] ."' Robertson , 436 U .S . at 590 (quoting Sullivan v . Little Hunting Park, Inc . , 396 U .S . 229, 240 (1969)) . The policies expressed in § 1983 are well established and "include compensation of person s
6

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 7 of 17
injured by deprivation of federal rights and prevention of abuses of power by those acting under color of state law ." Id . at 591 . The Court notes that between these two policy concerns, compensation for injuries enjoys an articulated primacy . See Cary v . Piphus , 435 U .S . 247, 256 (1978) ("To the extent that Congress intended that awards under § 1983 should deter the deprivation of constitutional rights, there is no evidence that it meant to establish a deterrent more formidable than that inherent in the award of compensatory damages .") (citing Imbler v . Pachtman , 424 U .S . 409, 442 (1976) (emphasis added)) .
While the parties agree that the policy considerations underlying § 1983 must be considered by the Court, they disagree as to the resultant outcome of that consideration, and they do so by relying largely on two lines of cases . Plaintiffs rely heavily on Brazier v . Cherry , 293 F .2d 401 (5th Cir . 1961),2 wherein a surviving widow, suing in her individual capacity and as the administratrix of her husband's estate, sued certain police officers for their roles in the beating death of her husband . Upon finding that § 1983 `Id[id] not expressly refer to actions for death or the survival of claims arising from civil rights violations,' th[e] Court determined, in contravention of the common law rule, that the decedent's constitutional claims did not terminate upon his death ." Carringer v . Rodgers , 331 F .3d 844, 848 (11th Cir . 2003) (quoting and discussing Brazier , 293 F .2d at 403-
2 In Bonner v . City of Prichard , 661 F .2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir . 1981)(en banc), the Eleventh Circuit adopted as binding precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to October 1, 1981 .
7

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 8 of 17
04) . In holding that the decedent's constitutional claims must survive his death if the remedies provided for in § 1983 were to be effectuated, the Court stated that "it defies history to conclude that Congress purposely meant to assure to the living freedom from such unconstitutional deprivations, but that, with like precision, it meant to withdraw the protection of civil rights statutes against the peril of death ." Brazier , 293 F .2d at 404 .
In curing the deficiency in federal law, the Court in Brazier applied Georgia's survival statute and its wrongful death statute . See id . at 407 n . 15 . The first statute provided that where there had been a homicide or injury to person, causes of action for the same did not abate upon the death of the decedent ; rather, they could be asserted by a survivor or the personal representative of the decedent's estate . The second statute provided a cause of action to the widow, or if there was none, to the children of the decedent allowing recovery for the full value of the life of the decedent . The Court stated ,
Since Georgia now provides both for survival of the claim which the decedent had for damages sustained during his lifetime as well as a right of recovery to his surviving widow and others for homicide . . . , we need not differentiate between the two types of actions . . . . To make the policy of the Civil Rights Statutes fully effectual, regard has to be taken of both classes of victims . Id . at 409 . Plaintiffs argue that Brazier sets a threshold requirement of the damages that must be afforded to comport with § 1983, and that since, unlike the aforementioned Georgia law, the Act does not allow for the survival of claims for personal injury, the same may not be the sole measure of damages in the above-styled cause . Plaintiffs further argue that if state law does not provid e
8

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 9 of 17

for the survival of the full measure of damages that was available

to a decedent before his death and those in relationship with him,

it must be disregarded in favor of employment of federal common

law . See DE 361, p . 10 . Accordingly, since the Act does not allow

recovery for the value of decedent's life and his pain and

suffering, and prohibits recovery for pain and suffering by a

parent's estate after his death, Plaintiffs argue that its

application as the sole measure of damages would be inconsistent

with § 1983 actions .

The Court finds that Plaintiffs read Brazier too broadly . The

Court in Brazier was not attempting to define a threshold test for state law inconsistency with federal law, but rather, it

concentrated on justifying the use of state law at all to cover the

federal deficiencies regarding the survival of claims . See id . at

407 (noting that "there is nothing unusual about Congress adopting

state law" and considering other statutes that direct the adoption

of state law) and 409 (noting that such adoption does not depend on whether the state law is substantive or procedural) . While Brazier

never made an express finding regarding the fact, it can be gleaned

from the overwhelmingly positive treatment that is given to the

Georgia statutes that the Eleventh Circuit found them not

inconsistent with federal statutory and constitutional law . This

holding, therefore, established the rule for considering whether

the Georgia statutes in question comport with the policies

underlying § 1983, but the Court therein never held that all statutes must comport with the Georgia statutes to pass § 1988

muster .

See Carringer , 331 F .3d at 848 (noting that it s

9

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 10 of 17
consideration of Georgia statutes similar to those considered in Brazier was to be done in accord with the binding precedent of that case) . This Court must therefore engage in the same inquiry undertaken in Brazier and its progeny, and in accord with the same principles, but in consideration of a different statute, i .e ., the Wrongful Death Act . 3
To conduct this inquiry, the Court turns to the Supreme Court's decision in Robertson , which is the case primarily relied upon by Defendants . In that case, a plaintiff brought an action pursuant to § 1983, but died before the case reached trial . Because he was survived by no spouse, children, parents, or siblings, the executor of his estate moved the district court therein to be substituted as plaintiff, which relief the Court granted . The defendants then moved to dismiss the case arguing that the action abated upon the original plaintiff's death . The district court denied that motion and held that the state law, through correctly characterized by the defendants, was nevertheless inconsistent with federal law . The Fifth Circuit subsequently affirmed the district court's decision .
Upon review of the case, the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the lower courts . Roberts on, 436 U .S . at 588 . Th e
3 Defendants rely heavily on an Order entered by United States District Judge Donald M . Middlebrooks in the action of Fernandez v . City of Cooper, et al . , 01-7059-CIV-MIDDLEBROOKS wherein, under circumstances almost identical to those of the above-styled cause, the Court limited available damages to those provided for in the Act . See 01-7059-CIV-MIDDLEBROOKS, DE 47 . While Plaintiffs point out the limited consideration given Brazier by Judge Middlebrooks, see DE 361, p . 8, this Court notes that the lack of applicability of Brazier when considering the survival of claims under the Florida Act may account for the scant attention it was given .
10

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 11 of 17
Court in Robertson detailed how under the Louisiana law considered therein, claims for the constitutional violation suffered by a decedent could be brought by various classes of survivors, and noted that "surely few persons are not survived by one of these close relatives ." Id . at 591-92 . The Court continued, "[t]he goal of compensating those injured by a deprivation of rights provides no basis for requiring compensation of one who is merely suing as the executor of the deceased's estate ." Id . at 592 . Finally, the Court noted that "given that most Louisiana actions survive the plaintiff's death, the fact that a particular action might abate surely would not affect § 1983's role in preventing official illegality ." Id . In fact, to hold otherwise, "one would have to make the rather farfetched assumptions that a state official had both the desire and the ability deliberately to select as victims only those persons who would die before the conclusion of the § 1983 action . . . and who would not be survived by any close relatives ." Id . at n . 10 .
Likewise, under the Wrongful Death Act, state officials face continued liability for constitutional violations after the death of a decedent, and such liability can be enforced by the persons, and for the damages detailed above . The Court further notes that, under the Act, liability still attaches to defendants even in a case with circumstances as rare as the ones constituting the abovestyled cause, namely that the decedent has only one close relative entitled to substantial redress under the Act, and that relative dies before final judgment is entered in the action . The estates of Cottone and Peter Cottone, Sr . are still entitled to recove r
11

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 12 of 17
damages, albeit in an amount diminished from what was originally available . The unique circumstances that lead to this reduced damage amount are not ones that government officials would be likely to anticipate and take into account when deciding to violate the constitutional rights of citizens in their care . This lesser amount is the result of the none too frequently occurring familial situation of Plaintiffs, and the unfortunate circumstances surrounding their deaths . The Court finds that awarding damages in this diminished amount does not weaken the deterrent effect of § 1983, and at the same time, it compensates those to whom damage was actually done, thereby effectuating the policies underlying § 1983 .' Accordingly, the Court finds that application of the Act as the measure of damages in the above-styled cause is not inconsistent with federal statutory and Constitutional law .
The Court notes that in Robertson , the Supreme Court stated that it was not passing on the situation where the constitutional violation was itself the cause of death . See Robertson , 436 U .S . at 594 ("We intimate no view, moreover, about whether abatement based on state law could be allowed in a situation in which deprivation of federal rights caused death .") (citing Brazier v . Cherry , 293 F .2d 401 (5th Cir . 1961) . Although Plaintiffs alleged that Constitutional violations by Defendants resulted in the deat h
4 Indeed, Plaintiffs appear to give some credence to the framework laid out in the Act because Richard Cottone is suing as the representative of the estates of his brother and father, the only parties who would be entitled to remedies under the Act . If Plaintiffs needed only to supply a next. of kin to collect damages sustained by a principle of absolute survivorship, Richard Cottone could have been substituted under his own name to collect the damages sustained by his brother and father .
12

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 13 of 17
of Cottone, the Court finds that the reasoning contained in Robertson should guide this Court's consideration for a number of reasons . First, the Act does not allow Cottone or Peter Cottone Sr .'s claims to abate, as was anticipated in Robertson . Rather, the damages that have always been available to Cottone's estate are still available, and the damages available to Peter Cottone Sr .'s estate are merely reduced . Second, the Court finds that even if a defendant's constitutional violations caused the death of the decedent, the twin aims of compensation and deterrence are still achieved by awarding damages pursuant to the Act . Finally, the Court notes that neither § 1983 or § 1988, nor any of their accompanying provisions, direct the Court to adopt a different analysis than that set forth in § 1.988 in the event that a decedent's death is caused by a defendant's constitutional violation . If application of the Act is not inconsistent with federal law and its underlying policies ., § 1988 mandates that such application take place, and it is silent as to any further distinction to be made .
A final point should be made regarding application of federal common law in addition to the Act . Plaintiffs cite Heath for the proposition that the "federal remedy supplants the state remedy, and the latter need not be first sought and refused before the federal one is invoked . The independent vitality of 42 U .S .C . § 1983 has been reaffirmed many times by the Supreme Court . Carey v . Piphus , 435 U .S . 247 . . . (1978) ." See DE 361, citing Heath , 560 F . Supp . at 844 . The Court notes that prior to making the abovestatement, the Court in Heath stated that "[s]ince Monroe v . Pape ,
13

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 14 of 17
365 U .S . 167 . . . (1961), it has been firmly established in the law that it is no answer that a State has a law which if enforced affords relief ." Id . The Court notes, however, that in Monroe , the Supreme Court was reviewing a District Court's dismissal of an action brought pursuant to § 1983, and the government Respondents were arguing, inter alia, that dismissal was appropriate because state law provided a remedy . There was no statement therein regarding the compounding of state and federal remedies . Furthermore, no party to this action is arguing that the abovestyled cause should be dismissed and Plaintiffs' forced to bring state law claims . Plaintiffs clearly have the right to bring the claims they have brought - the only issue is which of those claims have survived the aforementioned deaths, and what damages may be recovered . Since the Court has found that the Act is not inconsistent with federal statutory and constitutional law, the damages provided for therein shall be the full measure of damages
because § 1988 ends this Court's inquiry at the point that such lack of inconsistency is found .
III . Certification of Issue for Interlocutory Appeal The Court notes that 28 U .S .C . § 1292(b) provides tha t When a district judge, in making in a civil action an order not otherwise appealable under this section, shall be of the opinion that such order involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation, he shall so state in writing in such order . The Court of Appeals which would have jurisdiction of an appeal of such action may thereupon, in its discretion, permit an appeal to be taken from such order, if application is made to it within ten days after the entry of the order .
14

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 15 of 17
28 U .S .C . § 1292(b) (1993) . For a question to be a "controlling question of law," it must be "a question of the meaning of a statutory or constitutional provision, regulation, or common law doctrine," and "does not mean the application of settled law to fact ." McFarlane v . Conseco Services, LLC , 381 F .3d 1251, 1258 (11th Cir . 2004) (quoting Ahrenholz v . Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois , 219 F .3d 674, 676 (7th Cir . 2000)) . Regarding the "substantial ground for difference of opinion" requirement, the Eleventh Circuit has "held that a question of law as to which [it] [is] in `complete and unequivocal' agreement with the district court is not one for § 1292(b) review ." Id . (citation omitted) . Finally, the resolution of a question will "materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation" when such resolution "would serve to avoid a trial or otherwise substantially shorten the litigation ." Id . at 1259 .
The Court notes that the parties commenced with trial of the above-styled cause on June 6, 2005 . See DE 350 . Based on the trial memoranda submitted, and argument of counsel, it soon became clear to the Court that the parties had substantially diverging views on the proper measure of available damages in the abovestyled cause . See DE 355, pp . 35-47 . As the Court stated the following day, the parties were "floundering because . . . [they] can't even begin to discuss settlement . . . because [they] don't know the parameters ." DE 356, p . 4 . The Court further noted that Plaintiffs were in a particular predicament because they would have to go through a trial, following a determination on the prope r
15

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 16 of 17
measure of damages by this Court, and then either file an appeal, or respond to an appeal by Defendants . Id .
Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the parties would benefit substantially from a resolution of the question of whether application of the Florida Wrongful Death Act in the above-styled cause is inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, and whether it may be applied as the full measure of damages in the above-styled cause . The Court finds that this is a controlling question of law because its resolution requires consideration of the Wrongful Death Act in light of the decisions of the Eleventh Circuit, the United States Supreme Court, and federal statutory and Constitutional law . Second, regarding substantial grounds for difference of opinion, it will be the opinion of Plaintiffs, at least, that the findings of the Court articulated in this Order are in conflict with the law of the United States and this Circuit . Finally, it cannot be doubted that a determination of the appropriate measure of damages may eliminate the need for a trial in the above-styled cause, and will almost certainly shorten the litigation . See Allapattah Servs ., Inc . v . Exxon Corp . , 333 F .3d 1248, 1252-53 (11th Cir . 2003) (granting interlocutory review to consider, inter alia, whether the district court should have awarded aggregate damages) ; Tucker v . Fearn , 333 F .3d 1216, 1218 (11th Cir . 2003) (granting interlocutory review of whether a nondependent parent may recover certain damages for the wrongful death of his minor child) .
Accordingly, after due consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows :
16

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 369 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/17/2006 Page 17 of 17
1 . Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D ., Elma McKenzie, L .P .N ., and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc .'s Motion To Limit Damages (DE 358) and Defendants Kenneth C . Jenne, II, Joseph D'Elia and George Williams' Motion To Apply Damages Provisions Of The Florida Wrongful Death Act (DE 359) be and the same are hereby GRANTED ;
2 . The Florida Wrongful Death Act, Florida Statutes §§ 768 .16-768 .26 (2005) shall provide the full measure of damages available to Plaintiffs in the above-styled cause ; an d
3 . The Court hereby certifies this Order for interlocutory review pursuant to 28 U .S .C . § 1292 (b) and renews the findings made above that the issues contained herein involve a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation .
DONE AND ORDERED in/ Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this /~Y '-'day of January, 2006 .

Copies furnished : All counsel of record

WILLIAM J . ZLOC H Chief United States District Judg e

17

 
 Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 1 of 29

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORID A
CASE NO . 00-7545-CIV-ZLOC H
RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE, JR ., and PETER COTTONE, SR . ,
Plaintiffs ,
vs .
KENNETH C . JENNE, II, et al . ,
Defendants .

L (C.

JU L ., `! C

I

CLNHt N1 .1 " . r.,,:y'U A
CLERK U .S . DIST. CT. S .D . OF FLA . FT . LAUD .

ORDE R

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D ., Elma McKenzie, L .P .N ., and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc .'s ore tenus Motion For Judgment As A Matter Of Law and Defendants Kenneth C . Jenne, II, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, Joseph D'Elia and George Williams's ore tenus Motion For Judgment As A Matter Of Law . Both Motions were made in open Court on April 14, 2006, and were made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a) once Plaintiffs' case in chief was fully heard . The Court has carefully considered said Motions and the entire court file and is otherwise fully advised in the premises .
I . Backgroun d The above-styled cause arises from the tragic and senseless death of Peter Anthony Cottone Jr . (hereinafter "Cottone") on April 7, 1999 while he was being held as a pre-trial detainee at the

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 2 of 29
North Broward Detention Center (hereinafter the "NBDC") . Cottone died after being choked by fellow inmate, Widnel Charles (hereinafter "Charles") .1 Charles is a schizophrenic who was identified as such during his jail intake based upon his own admission, and the observation of an intake psychiatrist, Mel Limia, M .D . (hereinafter "Dr . Limia") . Before murdering Cottone, Charles was involved in numerous altercations with other inmates, the first occurring the day he arrived at the jail, and the last occurring the day before the murder at issue in the above-styled cause . As a result of this last altercation, Charles was transferred to a three man pod located in the mental health unit of the NBDC where he was housed with Cottone and a third inmate, Albert St . Hubert (hereinafter "St . Hubert") . The pod contained three one-man cells which faced a day room that operated as an enclosed common area and to which all three cells had access . At the time of Cottone's murder, the doors of each cell were open . At some point between 12 :20 p .m . and approximately 12 :36 p .m ., Charles entered Cottone's cell and strangled him using shoelaces taken from his own shoes . Cottone was transported to North Broward Medical Center where he died a few hours later .
This action was initiated by Cottone's father, Peter Cottone Sr ., and Cottone's brother, Richard Cottone, as the representativ e
This fact, and those that follow, are taken from the evidence presented at trial unless otherwise noted .
2

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 3 of 29
of Cottone's estate . See DE 83, 991 7-9 . On February 18, 2002, Peter Cottone, Sr . died, and the Cottone family subsequently named Richard Cottone as representative of his estate . By prior Order (DE 122), the Court substituted Richard Cottone, as Executor of the estate of Peter Cottone, Sr ., for Peter Cottone, Sr . as a Plaintiff in the above-styled cause . '
The currently operative Complaint is the Amended Complaint (DE 83) wherein Plaintiffs state causes of action against the following remaining Defendants : (1) Kenneth C . Jenne, II, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida (hereinafter "Sheriff Jenne" or "BSO") ; (2) Joseph D'Elia (hereinafter "Deputy D'Elia") and George Williams (hereinafter "Deputy Williams"), individually and in their official capacities as the Deputy Sheriffs on duty in the mental health unit at the time of Cottone's murder ; (3) EMSA Correctional Care, Inc . (hereinafter "EMSA"), a Florida corporation that contracted with BSO to provide health care, including mental health care, to inmates in the custody and control of BSO ; and (4) Andrew Perfilio, M .D . (hereinafter "Dr . Perfilio"), Maurice Waldman, M .D . (hereinafter "Dr . Waldman"), and Elma McKenzie, L .P .N . (hereinafter "Nurse McKenzie"), individually and in their official capacities as doctors and a nurse employed b y
2 Richard Cottone, therefore, brings this action as the Representative of two Estates - that of his brother and that of his father . The two estates are denominated collectively in this Order as "Plaintiffs" .
3

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 4 of 29
EMSA, each of whom allegedly treated or oversaw treatment of Charles . Plaintiffs state claims against these Defendants pursuant to 42 U .S .C . § 1983 and the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution . Plaintiffs allege, in essence, that each Defendant acted with deliberate indifference to a known substantial risk of serious harm to Cottone while he was incarcerated .
Based upon the state of the record as it stood at the close of Plaintiffs' case in chief, the Court granted the instant Motions in open Court on April 17, 2006 . The Court enters this Order for the purpose of setting forth its reasoning .
II . Judgement As A Matter Of Law Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50 provides tha t [i]f during a trial by jury a party has been fully heard on an issue and there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for that party on that issue, the court may determine the issue against that party and may grant a motion for judgment as a matter of law against that party with respect to a claim or defense that cannot under the controlling law be maintained or defeated without a favorable finding on that issue . FED . R . Civ . P . 50 (a) (1) . In granting the instant Motions, the Court resolved all the factual disputes and drew all logical inferences in favor of Plaintiffs to determine whether those facts and inferences "so strongly favor one party `that reasonable people, in the exercise of impartial judgment, could not arrive at a contrary verdict ."' Rankin v . Evans , 133 F .3d 1425, 1435 (11 t
4

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 5 of 29

Cir . 1998) (quoting Bailey v . Bd . of County Comm'rs of Alachua

County , 956 F .2d 1112, 1119 (11th Cir . 1992) ) . A mere scintilla of

evidence does not create a jury question ; rather, a jury question

is only created by a substantial conflict in the evidence . Rankin ,

133 F .3d at 1435 .

III . Municipal Liability Pursuant To 42 U .S .C . § 198 3

The Court begins by considering the claim stated against

Sheriff Jenne . 42 U .S .C . § 1983, originally enacted as part of the

Civil Rights Act of 1871, provides tha t

[e]very person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . , subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States . . . 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 . . . .

42 U .S .C . § 1983 (2003) . It should be noted from the outset that

§ 1983 forecloses the possibility of municipal vicarious liability,

or more specifically, respondeat superior liability . This is so

because § 1983 liability may only attach to the person who

"subjects, or causes to be subjected" a citizen to a constitutional

violation . See Monell v . Dep't of Soc . Serv . of the City of New

York , 436 U .S . 658, 692 (1978) .

In 1978, the United States Supreme Court held that a local governmental entity can be held liable under § 1983 "when execution

of [the] government's policy or custom . . . inflicts the injur y

...

Id . at 694 (overruling Monroe v . Pape , 365 U .S . 167, 18 7

5

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 6 of 29
(1961) which held that "Congress did not undertake to brin g municipal corporations within the ambit of [§ 1983]") . In applying this holding to the facts before it, the Monell court found that the municipality in question was liable under § 1983 because its policy was the "moving force" behind the constitutional violation of which the plaintiff therein complained . Id . The Supreme Court stated further, however, that it was not addressing "what the full contours of municipal liability under § 1983 may be ." Monell , 436 U .S . at 695 .
Those contours became clearer with the decision of City of Canton v . Harris , 489 U .S . 378 (1989) , where the Supreme Court held that "the inadequacy of police training may serve as the basis for § 1983 liability [but] only where the failure to train amounts to deliberate indifference to the rights of persons with whom the police come into contact ." City of Canton , 489 U .S . at 388 . The Court held that inadequate training would only amount to the municipal "policy or custom" required by Monell where "a deliberate choice to follow a course of action is made from among various alternatives," and that choice amounts to "deliberate indifference to the rights of [the municipality's] inhabitants ." Id . at 389 (internal quotations and citations omitted) . Recognizing that there was still uncertainty regarding the parameters of deliberate indifference, the Supreme Court subsequently clarifie d
that a prison official cannot be found liable under th e
6

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 7 of 29
Eighth Amendment' for denying an inmate humane conditions of confinement unless the official knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health or safety ; the official must both be aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists, and he must also draw the inference . Farmer v . Brennan , 511 U .S . 825, 837 (1994) ( emphasis added) . I t is important to note that in adopting actual notice as the standard, the Supreme Court expressly rejected the civil recklessness standard for deliberate indifference, which would have imposed liability where an official disregards a risk of harm that either is known or should be known . Id . The holdings of City of Canton and Farmer make clear the high burden imposed upon plaintiffs alleging municipal liability based on deliberate indifference, as are Plaintiffs in the above-styled cause . They are not without guidance, however, as to how the burden is to be met because the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has instructed that this actual notice requirement "may be demonstrated in one of two ways ." Young v . City of Augusta, Georgia , 59 F .3d 1160, 1172 (11'n Cir . 1995) . First, a plaintiff may make a showing that "a pattern o f
3 While a convicted prisoner receives the protection from cruel and unusual punishment afforded by the Eighth Amendment, a pretrial detainee, like Cottone, cannot lawfully receive "punishment" and so is provided the protections of due process guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment . See Hamm v . DeKalb County , 774 F .2d 1567, 1572 (11r ` Cir . 1985) . The Court notes, however, that "with respect to the provision of basic necessities to individuals in the state's custody, the two provisions necessarily yield the same result ." Id . at 1574 .
7

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 8 of 29
constitutional violations exists such that the municipality knows or should know that corrective measures are needed ." Id . (citing Belcher v . City of Foley, Ala . , 30 F .3d 1390, 1397-98 (11'tr' Cir . 1994)) . Alternatively, a plaintiff may make a showing of the existence of an "obvious need" for a certain course of action based upon "clear constitutional duties in recurrent situations ." Id . (citing City of Canton , 489 U .S . at 390 n . 10) ; see also Bd . of County Comm'rs of Bryan County, Oklahoma v . Brown , 520 U .S . 397, 409 (1997) (leaving open the possibility that, in addition to showing a pattern of constitutional violations, a plaintiff "hypothetically" can succeed in stating a failure to train claim by showing that "a violation of federal rights may be a highly predictable consequence of a failure to equip law enforcement officers with the specific tools to handle recurring situations .") . The Court notes that there exists some tension between allowing for the "obvious need" or "highly predictable" form of notice, while requiring that notice be actual . The tension is resolved, however, by allowing only the highest degree of obviousness to satisfy the notice requirement . See City of Canton , 489 U .S . at 390 n . 10 . (providing as an example of such obvious need the need to train officers in the constitutional limits of deadly force after equipping them with firearms) .
While Youna articulates the means of showing notice of a substantial risk, the Court turns elsewhere for guidance as to th e
8

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 9 of 29
type of notice a defendant must have of that risk . The Eleventh Circuit has construed very strictly the Supreme Court's holding in Farmer requiring a plaintiff to show that a prison official was aware of facts from which an inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm existed, and further showing that he in fact drew the inference . In Carter v . Galloway , 352 F .3d 1346 (11rr' Cir . 2003), an inmate alleged that deliberate indifference by a deputy warden and a jail unit supervisor led to him being assaulted and stabbed by his cell mate . The evidence showed that the defendants knew plaintiff's cell mate was a "`problem inmate' with a well documented history of prison disobedience and . . . prone to violence" and that at the time in question, the cell mate was "act[ing] crazy, [and] roaming his cell like a `caged animal ."' Carter , 352 F .3d at 1349 . The evidence further showed that, in addition to alerting them to the above facts, the plaintiff informed the defendants that his cell mate wanted to fake a hanging, and that the cell mate had told the plaintiff that the plaintiff would help fake the hanging "one way or another ." Id .
Notwithstanding the aforementioned state of the record i n Carter , the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendants because there was no evidence showing that they were aware "of a particularized threat or fear felt" by the plaintiff . Id . at 1350 . The court therein further held tha t
9

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 10 of 29
to find that the defendants had drawn the inference that the above facts amounted to a substantial threat, as required by Farmer , the district court would have been making a finding based on an assumption, and not on the state of the record . Id . ; see also McBride v . Rivers , 2006 WL 622591, * 5 (l1'r' Cir . March 14, 2006) (citing Carter , 352 F .3d at 1349) (holding that "before a defendant's awareness rises to a sufficient level of culpability, there must be much more than mere awareness of an inmate's generally problematic nature .") .
In sum, the Court notes that a municipality may be held liable pursuant to § 1983 only where its official policy is the "moving force" behind the alleged constitutional violation . A failure to train, supervise, or discipline employees may amount to just such a policy, but only where the municipality's failure to train is the result of deliberate indifference to the rights of its citizens . A municipality will not be said to have shown such deliberate indifference absent a conscious choice made in the face of notice of facts giving rise to an inference of substantial risk of serious harm . The two means by which a plaintiff can show that a municipality had notice of such a risk are by establishing the existence of a pattern of prior constitutional violations, or the existence of an obvious need for training due to recurring situations with constitutional implications . Finally, if a plaintiff, by one of these means, establishes that a defendant ha d
10

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 11 of 29
notice of facts as stated above, this must be accompanied by a showing that the defendants drew the requisite inference from those facts . With this analysis in mind, the Court turns to the reasoning for its determination that even when viewing all of the evidence presented by Plaintiffs in the light most favorable to them, there existed no legally sufficient basis upon which a reasonable jury could have found that Sheriff Jenne had the required notice that there existed an excessive or substantial risk of serious harm to Cottone .
A . Widnel Charles's Violent Histor y Plaintiffs presented testimonial and documentary evidence clearly establishing that Charles was involved in numerous altercations from the time he was admitted to the Broward County jail system on March 1, 1999 until the day he murdered Cottone on April 7, 1999 . The evidence showed that Charles' first altercation occurred during his intake, and the last altercation took place the night before he was transferred into the mental health unit pod where he murdered Cottone . Indeed, Sheriff Jenne admitted that during Charles' time in jail, he was involved in 7 altercations . The testimony from numerous witnesses established that while each of these fights should have been documented, only 2 in fact were . It is clear that BSO employees were not properly following BSO policy of documenting altercations that would let other employees know the frequency with which Charles was fighting .
11

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 12 of 29
The Court finds, however, that making the inference most favorable to Plaintiffs that this evidence allows, it establishes only that Charles posed a fight risk . There was no evidence presented to show Charles posed an excessive or substantial risk to any other inmate during the period of incarceration leading up to Cottone's murder . Nurse McKenzie provided the only testimony describing the aftermath of an altercation in which Charles was involved, and she testified that Charles had bruised knuckles and his cell mate had a swollen face . It cannot be said that this type of injury put BSO on notice that Charles posed some excessive or substantial threat to his fellow inmates . At most, the evidence presented at trial established Charles's "generally problematic nature," which is not sufficient to put Sheriff Jenne on notice for the purpose of § 1983 deliberate indifference analysis . See Carter , 352 F .3d at 1349 .
This finding of a lack of § 1983 notice is especially appropriate in an environment where, as BSO Deputies Kevin Moher and Douglas Wendt testified, fighting among inmates is not unusual . In fact, retired EMSA Psychiatric Site Supervisor Mercedes Nelson testified that if she was called every time there was a fight between inmates, she would be called "every two seconds ." While the Court notes Nelson's use of hyperbole, her testimony does make clear that fighting was not an extraordinary occurrence in the jail . Plaintiffs presented no evidence showing that Charles wa s
12

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 13 of 29
exceptional in his penchant for fighting, or that his altercations were of an exceptionally violent or egregious nature such that they created a pattern of constitutional violations providing the required notice to Sheriff Jenne . Absent such a showing, the Court finds that there was no legally sufficient basis for a jury to find that Sheriff Jenne was on notice that Charles posed an excessive or substantial threat to his fellow inmates .
The Court notes that Plaintiffs argued at various times during trial that the aforementioned failure of documentation was a means by which BSO wrongfully protected itself from liability . In other words, there was no way to know if Charles' fights were severe enough to put BSO on notice that he posed an excessive threat to his fellow inmates because documentation of the same does not exist due to BSO's deliberate indifference . The Court finds, however, that such an absence does not relieve Plaintiffs of their burden to satisfy the legal standard for municipal liability . If the documentation that should exist as to Charles's fighting does not exist, the Court may not take Plaintiffs' word for it that what is missing would have put Sheriff Jenne on the required notice of the threat posed to Cottone . Perhaps resourcefulness could have turned up other sources of proof ; perhaps there exists no way to establish that Sheriff Jenne had notice of any threat posed to Cottone by Charles, or inmates like him . While the answers to these questions are unknown, it is clear that the Court may not fill in the gaps i n
13

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 14 of 29
Plaintiffs' case with evidence establishing a pattern of behavior by Charles so egregious as to put Sheriff Jenne on notice that there existed a serious risk of substantial harm to Cottone . Rule 50 requires that the Court resolve all disputes in favor of the Plaintiffs, and that it draw in favor of Plaintiffs all reasonable inferences from the evidence actually presented . Rule 50 does not, however, require that the Court conjure into existence legally sufficient evidence not otherwise presented which will satisfy the standard Plaintiffs are required to meet .
B . Windel Charles' Mental Illnes s Plaintiffs also presented irrefutable evidence that Charles was suffering from schizophrenia at the time in question . The testimony from Charles gave the clearest view as to the extent to which his interior condition deteriorated . In a deposition taken on May 16, 2003 and read into the record at trial, Charles testified that at the time in question, he felt everything going on was somehow related to him, and that everyone was against him . He testified, in fact, that his murder of Cottone was directly attributable to these symptoms, and that he killed Cottone because he felt that the decedent was against him . Additionally, Charles testified that he told certain unnamed guards that he needed more medication, as well as the type of medication he needed . Testimony from other witnesses also established that Charles was exhibiting signs of schizophrenia . Upon his psychiatri c
14

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 15 of 29
intake, for example, Charles asked Dr . Limia to "fix his third eye" and asked Nurse Patricia Rell, an intake nurse, to "clean his third eye ." Dr . Limia testified that he believed Charles was an undifferentiated schizophrenic, which he characterized as the type of schizophrenic who would "have a tough time keeping it together ." As an example of what he meant by this phrase, Dr . Limia stated that such a schizophrenic might have a difficult time maintaining employment, and may hold ten jobs in a year . Dr . Limia further testified that despite believing that Charles exhibited the aforementioned level of schizophrenia, and despite the fact that Charles admitted to hallucinations, he did not believe that Charles posed a threat . He recommended that Charles be housed at the NBDC in the mental health population, but testified that this was for Charles's own protection .
Plaintiffs also introduced evidence showing that Charles's condition was deteriorating during his time in jail .' Nurse Maud Boleman, for example, testified that she witnessed Charles pacing in an agitated condition, and further testified that she often found Charles naked . Nurse McKenzie testified that in the early days of April 1999, she found Charles to be sad, anxious, and disheveled . On the day of the murder, Nurse McKenzie observed that Charles was "rambling," by which she meant talking to himself .
4 Although not all testimony received supports this characterization, the Court resolves such dispute in favor of Plaintiffs pursuant to Rule 50 .
15

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 16 of 29
Based upon the contrast of this testimony when considered next to Dr . Limia's testimony, a reasonable jury could have found that Charles was in an increasingly psychologically agitated state as the date of Cottone's murdered neared .
The Court finds, however, that even when drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of Plaintiffs, there is insufficient evidence in the record to establish that Sheriff Jenne had notice that Charles posed a substantial risk of serious harm to his fellow inmates . Such notice would have to be provided from Charles' statements that he wanted someone to tend to his "third eye," his disheveled or even naked appearance, his sad and anxious demeanor, and his pacing about and talking to himself . These facts do not provide a legally sufficient basis for putting Sheriff Jenne on notice that Charles posed an excessive threat of violence .
Indeed, the presented testimony established that not a single witness believed Charles posed a threat of violence to anybody . First, while Charles's deposition testimony established that he asked guards for medication, it lacked any indication that he informed anyone that he felt everyone was against him . There was no other evidence that tended to show that anyone was aware of this aspect of Charles's mental condition . Furthermore, two inmates, St . Hubert and Aaron Cass (hereinafter "Cass") testified as to Charles's strange behavior, but neither felt threatened by him . Numerous other witnesses who encountered Charles testified that they did not find him to be threatening ; even less a substantia l
16

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 17 of 29
risk of serious harm . While there is testimony from witnesses who noted the strange behavior arising from his schizophrenia, there is a total absence from the record of any witness who, prior to the murder, felt Charles posed a threat to other inmates . Accordingly, the Court finds that the evidence in the record establishing Charles's mental illness does not give rise to an inference that Sheriff Jenne was on notice that Charles posed a substantial or excessive risk of serious harm .
C . The Danger Posed By Shoelace s Plaintiffs also presented evidence that shoelaces were used by inmates prior to Cottone's murder in attempting and committing suicide . Yet no evidence was presented of prior assaults or murders in which an aggressor used shoelaces against a victim, or where shoelaces were used as a weapon in inmate on inmate violence . Testimony from former BSO Director of Detention Patrick Tighe (hereinafter "Tighe") confirmed that prior to the incident in question, there was not a single instance where one inmate used shoelaces as a weapon against another . The Court notes, therefore, that the evidence Plaintiffs presented regarding suicidal conduct by inmates involving shoelaces must have provided a pattern of constitutional violations, or an obvious need for action, sufficient to put Sheriff Jenne on notice that their presence in the jail amounted to a substantial risk of serious harm, namely of serious inmate on inmate violence . The Court finds that under controlling law, this evidence cannot provide a legally sufficien t
17

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 18 of 29
basis for finding for Plaintiffs that the aforementioned instances provided notice of any substantial risk of serious harm posed by mentally ill inmates with shoelaces .
The Court finds this lack of notice because of the lack of particularity of the notice provided by the suicides . Specifically, there is a lack of any evidence that Sheriff Jenne drew the inference, as required by Farmer and Carter , from suicidal conduct involving shoelaces that they posed a substantial risk of being used by inmates to inflict serious harm on one another . The evidence clearly established that Sheriff Jenne did not disregard the substantial risk of suicide posed by shoelaces because anyone who testified to the issue stated that suicidal inmates were not allowed to have shoelaces . There was no evidence, however, showing that Sheriff Jenne was aware of facts giving rise to the inference mentally ill inmates were to be treated like suicidal inmates for the purpose of possession of shoelaces . For this reason, the Court finds the evidence showing past suicidal conduct involving shoelaces insufficient to establish that Sheriff Jenne was on notice that their presence in the jail, or in the mental health unit in particular, presented a substantial risk of serious harm to inmates .
D . Use of Games by Deputie s Each unit at the NBDC had a central area manned by a deputy known as the "control room ." The control room is a locked enclosure used for the observation of inmates, record keeping, an d
18

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 19 of 29
communication with the rest of the facility . The testimony of computer consultant Eric Berzok (hereinafter "Berzok") established that beginning shortly before the murder, new computers were installed throughout the jail facilities, including the control rooms, and that these computers were to assist deputies in record keeping . Although the computers had various games that were included as part of their operating system, steps were taken by BSO to disable the direct links used to open the games .
Berzok testified, however, that it became known to him that computers in other departments at BSO, namely the Classification Department, had been manipulated through a "back door" allowing employees to access the games . This discovery prompted a removal of the back door which was being so used . Although Berzok did not know initially whether games had been accessed on the control room computers, he was asked after Cottone's murder to inspect the computer from the control room of the unit in question . This inspection led him to discover that after the computer was placed in the control room on March 18, 1999, there were two games accessed, as well as several drawings created . Berzok testified that there was no way to tell when the games were in fact played .
Additionally, Cass testified that he observed guards gathered around the computer in the control room in question playing games, and that he overheard discussions among guards describing a pool involving the computer games and their various performances . Furthermore, the evidence suggests, and the Court must take a s
19

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 20 of 29
true, that Deputy D'Elia accessed a computer game on the computer in the control room overseeing the unit in question at some point between 12 :32 p .m . and 12 :36 p .m . on the day of the murder . Deputy D'Elia made a statement in October 1999 indicating that he returned to the unit in question from a break which began at 12 :20 p .m . and concluded somewhere between 12 :32 p .m . and 12 :36 p .m . Deputy D'Elia relieved Deputy Williams after having made rounds in the unit and not having seen anything out of the ordinary . Deputy D'Elia testified that because he had not seen any trouble, he accessed a computer game in the control room, but before he could play it, he was summoned by St . Hubert . As noted above, Charles murdered Cottone at some point between 12 :20 p .m ., when D'elia saw Cottone with St . Hubert in the day room, and 12 :36 p .m ., the latest possible time that St . Hubert summoned Deputy D'Elia into the unit . It was then that Deputy D'Elia discovered Cottone on the floor of his cell having been strangled .
The Court finds that even when accepting the testimony regarding the games as true, there is not a legally sufficient basis for finding that Sheriff Jenne knew of a risk of serious harm which he disregarded . First, testimony from Berzok established that to the extent deputies were playing games , they were doing so in violation of BSO policy . Furthermore, Berzok's testimony established that the computers were being installed in the weeks immediately preceding Cottone's death . To the extent that deputies had begun playing games, which the evidence has established, it i s
20

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 21 of 29

not reasonable to infer that those with policy making authority

within BSO knew of such conduct, and of the risk posed by such game

playing, and then consciously ignored that risk . The Court finds such inference particularly untenable because each BSO employee in

a supervisory position who testified, namely Willis Robinson,

Barbara Law, and Tighe all stated that they were either unaware of

allegations of computer game playing, or heard rumors of such only

after Cottone's murder . There was no evidence presented to

contradict the testimony of these witnesses and show that BSO

policy makers were, in fact, aware that deputies were playing computer games prior to Cottone's murder . Accordingly, the Court finds that there is no legally sufficient basis to support a

finding for Plaintiffs that BSO had notice of, and disregarded, a

substantial risk of serious harm posed by deputies incompetently

fulfilling their duties by playing computer games . E . The Carruthers v . Cochran Consent Decre e

The Court turns now to a discussion of the Stipulation For

Entry Of Consent Decree (hereinafter the "Consent Decree") entered

into by the parties in the case styled Ollie Carruther, et al . v . Ron Cochran, et al . , Case No . 76-6086-CIV-Hoevler, United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, and approved by

United States District Court Judge William M . Hoevler on January

31, 1995 .

See DE 1, Ex . A . Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint

contained allegations against Defendants seeking to impose

liability for violations of the Consent Decree . See DE 83, 11 3 ,

21

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 22 of 29
22-27, 91, 130, and 137 . On the eve of the first trial of the above-styled cause, Sheriff Jenne, D'Elia, and Williams filed a Motion In Limine Concerning Carruthers v . Cochran Consent Decree (DE 338), arguing that mention of the Consent Decree should be excluded because Plaintiffs plainly intended to allege liability based upon violation of the Consent Decree, but that violation of the same was not the proper standard when alleging claims pursuant to § 1983 . Upon re-commencing trial, the Court granted Defendants' Motion (DE 338), and the reasoning for this decision is set forth by separate Order .
For the purpose of completion regarding the reasoning of this Order, however, the Court notes herein that the Consent Decree was excluded because, where such a document does not include a finding that its terms are necessary to remedy a constitutional violation, it cannot create or expand constitutional rights . See Cagle v . Sutherland , 334 F . 3d 980, 986-87 (l1"" Cir . 2003) . The Court further notes, however, that the terms of the Consent Decree can be relevant to the instant analysis inasmuch as they provide Sheriff Jenne notice of a substantial risk of serious harm . See id . at 987 . For this reason, the Court ruled that Plaintiffs were allowed to question witnesses regarding the terms of the Consent Decree, but to refer to those terms simply as requirements of law . '
5 While the Court's ruling on the first day of trial simply foreclosed the mention of the Consent Decree, the issue was revisited a number of times in the following days, and the full nature of the Court's ruling, including the manner in which terms of the Consent Decree could be introduced, was made clear to counsel for Plaintiffs .
22

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 23 of 29
As noted in the Court's separate Order granting Defendants' Motion In Limine (DE 338), the Consent Decree is largely irrelevant to the above-styled cause . The few portions that are relevant to this action are immaterial to the instant analysis because they impose duties, which as noted above, cannot create or expand constitutional rights . The Court finds, however, that the Consent Decree's requirement that special inmates be checked every 15 minutes is the only one of its terms that may provide Sheriff Jenne with notice of a standard below which a substantial risk of serious harm exists . The Court makes this finding based on the specificity of this requirement .
Most BSO employees who testified believed that special inmates were supposed to be checked every 30 minutes . The testimony established that BSO failed to communicate to its employees a policy requiring more frequent checks . The Court notes, however, that there was no evidence presented establishing that Sheriff Jenne was aware that checking special inmates every 30 minutes subjected them to a substantial risk of serious harm they were not subject to if checked every 15 minutes . This lack of notice is supported by the fact that prior to the event in question, the Eleventh Circuit held that a jailer's failure to check inmates held in a group cell, who had yet to be separated by classification, for one hour did not amount to deliberate indifference . Hale v . Tallapoosa County , 50 F .3d 1579, 1582 (11th Cir . 1995) . '
6 Although decided after the events giving rise to the above-styled cause, the court in Cagle found that a jailer who knew an inmat e
23

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 24 of 29
The Court further finds that even if it were to be determined that the 15 minute check requirement amounted to notice to Sheriff Jenne that he disregarded at the risk of being deliberately indifferent, there is no evidence upon which a finding could be made that such deliberate indifference caused Cottone's death . The undisputed testimony from Deputy D'Elia established that he checked the inmates at 12 :20 p .m ., and that at that time, Cottone was in the day room with St . Hubert . Upon undertaking his next check sometime after 12 :32 p .m ., Deputy D'Elia saw only Charles in the day room . Deputy D'Elia then entered the control room, and was summoned almost immediately by St . Hubert, at a time not later than 12 :36 p .m . It is therefore clear that, at the time of Cottone's murder, his unit was checked at an interval compliant with the Consent Decree . Accordingly, even accepting as true that the 15 minute check requirement provided notice to Sheriff Jenne, and Sheriff Jenne's deliberate indifference to that notice in failing to implement checks at that interval, there is no evidence that will support a finding that Sheriff Jenne's failure caused Cottone's death .
Based on the forgoing, the Court finds that there was no evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that the 15 minute check requirement amounted to notice to Sheriff Jenne that a les s
was suicidal, yet allowed one hour and forty minutes to elapse between cell checks, was not deliberately indifferent to the rights of that inmate . See Cagle , 334 F .3d at 989 . The Eleventh Circuit made this finding notwithstanding a consent decree covering jail operations which required inmate checks at least every hour .
24

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 25 of 29
frequent interval for checks amounted to subjecting inmates to a substantial risk of serious harm . The Court further finds, however, that even if the 15 minutes check requirement did provide such notice, Sheriff Jenne's deliberate indifference to that notice did not cause Cottone's death because at the time in question, Deputy D'Elia's checks of the mental health unit were at least as frequent as required by the Consent Decree, if not more frequent .
III . The Liability of the Remaining Defendant s The claims stated against the remaining Defendants are also based upon deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious harm posed to Cottone . See DE 83, 9[9[ 77, 87, and 94 . The allegations stated against EMSA are similar to those made against BSO in that they involve a failure to train, discipline and supervise employees . When considering the evidence presented by Plaintiffs under the standard set forth by Rule 50 and articulated above, the Court finds that EMSA was likewise without notice as to any excessive or substantial threat of serious harm posed by Charles . There was no additional evidence presented other than that already considered which would have provided EMSA with notice of which Sheriff Jenne was unaware . Accordingly, the Court, relying on the above-stated reasoning, finds that there was no legally sufficient basis for a jury to find for Plaintiffs on the issue of whether EMSA had notice that Charles posed a substantial risk of serious harm to Cottone . Regarding Deputy D'Elia, Deputy Williams, Dr . Perfilio, Dr .
25

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 26 of 29
Waldman, and Nurse McKenzie, the Eleventh Circuit has articulated the burden of proof that must be met by a plaintiff alleging deliberate indifference against individuals such as these :
A Fourteenth Amendment violation occurs when a substantial risk of serious harm, of which the official is subjectively aware, exists and the official does not respond reasonably to the risk . Furthermore, such risk must be an objectively substantial risk of serious harm to prisoners, and the prison official must respond to that risk in an objectively unreasonable manner . Finally, a plaintiff must show that the constitutional violation caused the injury . Cottone v . Jenne , 326 F . 3d 1352, 1358 (11r1i Cir . 2003) (internal citations omitted) . Upon a full hearing from Plaintiffs, the Court finds that, with regard to these individual Defendants, there is no legally sufficient basis upon which to find that they were subjectively aware of any substantial risk of serious harm posed by Charles . In affirming in part the Court's prior Order (DE 126) which, inter alia, denied Deputy D'Elia and Deputy William's Motion To Dismiss Amended Complaint (DE 111), the Eleventh Circuit focused primarily on Plaintiffs' allegations in the Amended Complaint (DE 83) that the two Deputies were subjectively aware of a substantial risk of serious harm posed by Charles primarily because they were aware of his "violent, schizophrenic outbursts which occurred prior to the murder incident ." Id . Having heard all the evidence, however, it is now clear that none of the individual Defendants were aware of any behavior that could be characterized as "violent, schizophrenic outbursts ." As noted above, McKenzie was the only Defendant who had direc t
26

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 27 of 29
knowledge of the aftermath of one of Charles's fights, and neither the condition of Charles, nor his cell mate, would have given her reason to believe he posed a substantial risk of serious harm due to his violence and mental illness . The Court again adopts the reasoning set forth above, and again finds that there was no legally sufficient basis for a jury to find that the individual Defendants were subjectively aware of a substantial threat of serious harm posed by Cottone .
IV . Conclusio n When viewing the evidence presented in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs, there is no legally sufficient basis for a jury to find that any of the Defendants had actual notice of any substantial threat of serious harm posed by Charles sufficient to impose § 1983 liability on them . It is clear that Charles was fighting, and that his mental condition was deteriorating . It is also clear that BSO employees were not following procedure as far as proper documentation of inmate altercations, and that there were instances where they were playing computer games while on duty . Furthermore, Plaintiffs established that, at a minimum, Defendants BSO and Deputy D'Elia were aware of the threat of suicide posed by shoelaces . All of this taken together, however, does not meet the high burden of establishing actual notice placed upon Plaintiffs by the Supreme Court and the Eleventh Circuit . It is worth noting the words of the Supreme Court upon articulating the requirement that a plaintiff show actual notice b y
27

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 28 of 29
a defendant against whom the plaintiff alleges deliberat e
indifference :
An act or omission unaccompanied by knowledge of a significant risk of harm might well be something society wishes to discourage, and if harm does result society might well wish to assure compensation . The common law reflects such concerns when it imposes tort liability on a purely objective basis . But an official's failure to alleviate a significant risk that he should have perceived but did not, while no cause for commendation, cannot under our cases be condemned as the infliction of [a constitutional injury] .
Farmer , 511 U .S . at 837-38 (internal citation omitted) . Plaintiffs
chose to bring their claims as deliberate indifference claims
pursuant to § 1983, thereby yoking themselves with the heavy burden
that must be met by plaintiffs who do so .7 While the facts of this
case are tragic, and the evidence shows that the policies of BSO
and the conduct of its employees are wanting, the Court finds that
the evidence was not sufficient to establish that Plaintiffs met
that burden .
Accordingly, after due consideration, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows :
1 . Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D .,
Elma McKenzie, L . .P .N ., and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc . Is ore tenus
Motion For Judgment As A Matter Of Law made in open Court on Apri l
7 At the close of their case in chief, Plaintiffs made an ore tenus Motion To Amend Complaint To Conform To The Evidence . In making the Motion, Plaintiffs attempted to state vicarious liability claims for negligence against Sheriff Jenne and EMSA . Finding that the Motion failed under Rule 15, however, the Court denied the same . The Court's reasoning is set forth by separate Order .
28

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 405 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 29 of 29
14, 2006 be and the same is hereby GRANTED ; 2 . Defendants Kenneth C . Jenne, II, in his official capacity
as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, Joseph D'Elia and George Williams' ore tenus Motion For Judgment As A Matter Of Law made in open Court on April 14, 2006 be and the same is hereby GRANTED ; an d
3 . Final Judgment in favor of the aforementioned Defendants will be entered by separate Order of the Court .
DONE AND ORDERED in Chaml rs at Fort Lauderdale, Browar d County, Florida, this 67 ~- ; ~ day of July, 2006 .
WILLIAM J . ZLOC H Chief United States District Judg e Copies furnished : Barbara A . Heyer, Esq . For Plaintiff s Michael R . Piper, Esq . For Defendants Kenneth C . Jenne, II, George Williams, and Joseph D'Eli a Gregg A . Toomey, Esq . For Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D . , Maurice Waldman, M .D ., Elma McKenzie, L .P .N ., and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc .
29

 
 Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 406 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO . 00-7545-CIV-ZLOCH
RICHARD COTTONE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER ANTHONY COTTONE JR ., and PETER COTTONE SR . ,
Plaintiffs ,
vs .
KENNETH C . JENNE, II, et al . ,
Defendants .

FFILEDby D .C .
JUL2 U
CLAkLf4CL M,{ , UUX CLERK U .S . Dior CT. S.D . OF FLA . F! LAUD ,
FINAL JUDGMEN T

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D ., Elma McKenzie, L .P .N ., and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc .'s ore tenus Motion For Judgment As A Matter Of Law and Defendants Kenneth C . Jenne, II, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, Joseph D'Elia and George Williams' s ore tenus Motion For Judgment As A Matter Of Law, both Motions made in open Court on April 14, 2006 . For the reasons stated in the Court's separate Order granting said Motions, and pursuant to Rules 50 and 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it i s
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows : 1 . Final Judgment be and the same is hereby ENTERED in favor of Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D ., Elma McKenzie, L .P .N ., EMSA Correctional Care, Inc ., Kenneth C . Jenne, II, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, Joseph D'Elia and George Williams, and against Plaintiffs Richard Cottone, as Personal Representative of the Estates of Peter Anthony Cottone Jr . and Peter Cottone Sr ., upon the Amended Complaint (DE

Case 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ Document 406 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2006 Page 2 of 2

83) filed herein . Said Plaintiffs shall take nothing by this action, and said Defendants shall go hence without day ; an d
2 . To the extent not otherwise disposed of herein, all

pending motions are hereby DENIED as moot .

DONE AND ORDERED in Cham ers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward

County, Florida, this

t~Y

day of July, 2006 .

Copies furnished :

WILLIAM J . ZLOC H Chief United States District Judg e

Barbara A . Heyer, Esq . For Plaintiff s

Michael R . Piper, Esq . For Defendants Kenneth C . Jenne, II, George Williams, and Joseph D'Eli a

Gregg A . Toomey, Esq . For Defendants Andrew Perfilio, M .D ., Maurice Waldman, M .D ., Elma McKenzie, L .P .N .,

 
 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

APPEAL, CLOSED
U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (Ft. Lauderdale) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ

Cottone, et al v. Jenne, et al Assigned to: Chief Judge William J. Zloch Demand: $0 Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act Plaintiff Richard Cottone as personal representative of the Estate of Peter Anthony Cottone, Jr.
Plaintiff Peter Cottone, Sr.
V. Defendant Kenneth C. Jenne, II individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida
Defendant

Date Filed: 10/19/2000 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question
represented by Barbara A. Heyer Heyer & Associates 1311 SE 4th Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316 954-522-4922 Fax: 522-4955 Email: civilrtslaw@hotmail.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Barbara A. Heyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael Ross Piper Johnson Anselmo Murdoch Burke Piper & McDuff International Building 2455 E Sunrise Boulevard Suite 1000 PO Box 030220 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33304-0220 954-463-0100 Fax: 954-463-2444 Email: piper@jambg.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

1 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report
Broward County Sheriff's Office
Defendant John Does individually and in their official capacity as Directors and/or supervisors of the North Broward Dentention Center
Defendant John and Jane Does individually and in their official capacities as Deputy Sheriffs and/or Correctios Officers of the Broward County Sheriff's Office
Defendant Joseph D'Elia
Defendant George Williams individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Sheriff and/or Correction Officer of the Broward County Sheriff's Office
Defendant EMSA Correctional Care, Inc. a Florida corporation and general partner of EMSA Limited Partnership and an affiliate of Prisons Health Services, Inc.

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...
represented by Michael Ross Piper (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael Ross Piper (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael Ross Piper (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregg Alan Toomey Bunnell Woulfe Kirschbaum Keller McIntyre & Gregoire 100 SE 3rd Avenue Suite 900 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394 954-761-8600 Fax: 525-2134 Email: gat@bunnellwoulfe.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jodi Chase Page Ricci~Leopold PA 2925 PGA Blvd Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500

2 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report
Defendant Does Defendant Broward County Board of Commissioners
Defendant EMSA Limited Partnership TERMINATED: 04/04/2006
3 of 35

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...
Fax: 561-697-2383 Email: jpage@riccilaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard Thomas Woulfe Bunnell Woulfe Kirschbaum Keller McIntyre & Gregoire 100 SE 3rd Avenue Suite 900 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394 954-761-8600 Fax: 525-2134 Email: rtw@bunnellwoulfe.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Richard Thomas Woulfe (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by James David Rowlee Broward County Attorney's Office 115 South Andrews Avenue Suite 423 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-1801 954-357-7638 Fax: 357-7641 Email: jrowlee@broward.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Stephanie W. Noe Broward County Attorney's Office 115 South Andrews Avenue Suite 423 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-1801 954-357-7600 Fax: 357-7641 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Richard Thomas Woulfe (See above for address) TERMINATED: 04/04/2006 LEAD ATTORNEY
7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report
Defendant Prison Health Services, Inc. TERMINATED: 04/04/2006
Defendant Patrick Tighe individually and in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Department of Detention, Broward Sheriff's Office
Defendant Dwight St. Claire
Defendant Delores Watson
Defendant Barbara Law

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Jodi Chase Page (See above for address) TERMINATED: 04/04/2006 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard Thomas Woulfe (See above for address) TERMINATED: 04/04/2006 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Christine Maria Duignan Shavitz Law Group 1515 S Federal Highway Suite 404 Boca Raton, FL 33432 561-447-8888 Fax: 447-8831 Email: cduignan@shavitzlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Michael Ross Piper (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael Ross Piper (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael Ross Piper (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael Ross Piper (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

4 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report
Defendant Elma McKenzie
Defendant Maurice Waldman
Defendant M.D. Andrew Perfilio
5 of 35

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...
represented by Gregg Alan Toomey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jodi Chase Page (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard Thomas Woulfe (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregg Alan Toomey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jodi Chase Page (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard Thomas Woulfe (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregg Alan Toomey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jodi Chase Page (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard Thomas Woulfe (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

Date Filed 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000
10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 10/19/2000 11/09/2000 11/09/2000 11/13/2000

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT filed; FILING FEE $150.00 RECEIPT # 520725; A-7; BSS (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/19/2000)
Magistrate identification: Magistrate Judge Barry S. Seltzer (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/19/2000)
2 SUMMONS(ES) issued for John Does (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
3 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Broward Sheriff's Office by serving Patrick Tighe, Executive Director, Department of Detention (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
4 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Kenneth C. Jenne II (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
5 SUMMONS(ES) issued for George Williams (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
6 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Joseph D'Elia (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
7 SUMMONS(ES) issued for John Does (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
8 SUMMONS(ES) issued for J and J Does (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
9 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Broward County Board of County Commissioners (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
10 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Jane Does (Former Deputy Clerk) Modified on 10/20/2000 (Entered: 10/20/2000)
11 SUMMONS(ES) issued for EMSA Limited Partnership by serving CT Corporation Systems (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
12 SUMMONS(ES) issued for EMSA Correctional Care, Inc. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
13 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Prison Health Services, Inc. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2000)
14 MOTION with memorandum in support by Broward County Board to dismiss complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/13/2000)
15 NOTICE of Absentia by Broward County Board (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/13/2000)
16 UNOPPOSED MOTION by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams to extend time to serve responsive pleadings (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

6 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

11/17/2000
11/20/2000 11/30/2000
12/07/2000 12/11/2000 12/11/2000 12/11/2000 12/11/2000 12/11/2000 12/12/2000 12/12/2000 12/12/2000 12/12/2000 12/18/2000
01/03/2001
01/11/2001 01/11/2001

17 ORDER denying [16-1] motion to extend time to serve responsive pleadings ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 11/17/00) CCAP [EOD Date: 11/20/00] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/20/2000)
18 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [14-1] motion to dismiss complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/21/2000)
19 Answer and affirmative defenses by EMSA Correctional, J and J Does, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Servic (Attorney Richard Thomas Woulfe),; jury demand (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/01/2000)
20 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 1/29/01 through 2/2/01 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/08/2000)
21 Answer and affirmative defenses by Kenneth C. Jenne II ,; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2000)
22 Answer and affirmative defenses by George Williams ; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2000)
23 Answer and affirmative defenses by Joseph D'Elia ,; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2000)
24 Answer and affirmative defenses by Patrick Tighe,; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2000)
25 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [19-1] answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2000)
26 Denial/Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [24-1] answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2000)
27 Denial/Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [23-1] Joseph D'Elia answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2000)
28 Denial/Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [22-1] George Williams' answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2000)
29 Denial/Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [21-1] Kenneth C. Jenne, II's answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2000)
30 JOINT STATUS REPORT by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff, John Does, John and Jane Does, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, EMSA Correctional, J and J Does, Broward County Board, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Servic (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/19/2000)
31 ORDER denying [14-1] motion to dismiss complaint ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/3/01) CCAP [EOD Date: 1/5/01] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/05/2001)
32 ANSWER to Complaint by Broward County Board (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/12/2001)
33 CORRECTED NOTICE of Absence by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/12/2001)

7 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

01/16/2001 01/16/2001 01/16/2001 01/16/2001 01/31/2001
02/12/2001 02/14/2001
02/16/2001
02/20/2001 02/21/2001 02/26/2001 02/26/2001 03/12/2001 03/21/2001 04/06/2001

34 ORDER referring case to mediation. 15 days to appoint mediator ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/16/01) CCAP [EOD Date: 1/17/01] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/17/2001)
35 ORDER for pretrial conference for 9:30 1/18/01 , pretrial stipulation due for 1/4/02 ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/16/01) CCAP [EOD Date: 1/17/01] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/17/2001)
36 ORDER Re: Trial Instructions ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/16/01) CCAP [EOD Date: 1/17/01] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/17/2001)
37 Denial/Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [32-1] answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/17/2001)
38 NOTICE of selection of Arthur Parkhurst as Mediator by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, George Williams, EMSA Correctional, J and J Does, Broward County Board, Prison Health Servic (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/01/2001)
39 MOTION by EMSA Correctional to extend time to respond to discovery , and to compel better answers to interrogatories (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/13/2001)
40 AMENDED MOTION by EMSA Correctional to extend time to respond to discovery , and to compel better answers to interrogatories to include exhibits referring to [40-1] motion, [40-2] motion (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/15/2001)
41 ORDER granting [40-1] motion to extend time to respond to discovery, granting [40-2] motion to compel better answers to interrogatories to include exhibits ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 2/16/01) CCAP [EOD Date: 2/20/01] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/20/2001)
42 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. in opposition to [40-1] motion to extend time to respond to discovery (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/21/2001)
43 MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to strike [41-1] order (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/22/2001)
44 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [39-2] motion to compel better answers to interrogatories (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/27/2001)
45 NOTICE of filing Exhibit D to objection to Defendant EMSA Correctional Care, Inc.'s motion for extension of time to respond to discovery by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/27/2001)
46 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to Discovery Re: second request for production (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/13/2001)
47 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 5/30/01 through 6/5/01 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/22/2001)
48 ORDER mooting [39-1] motion to extend time to respond to discovery ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 4/6/01) CCAP [EOD Date: 4/9/01] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/09/2001)

8 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

04/06/2001 04/06/2001 04/09/2001 08/27/2001 11/02/2001 11/06/2001 11/06/2001 11/26/2001 12/11/2001 12/12/2001 12/18/2001 12/18/2001
12/18/2001 12/19/2001 12/19/2001
12/19/2001

49 ORDER denying [40-3] amended motion ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 4/6/01) CCAP [EOD Date: 4/9/01] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/09/2001)
50 ORDER denying [43-1] motion to strike [41-1] order ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 4/6/01) CCAP [EOD Date: 4/9/01] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/09/2001)
51 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 8/31/01 through 9/14/01 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/10/2001)
52 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of George Williams 9/21/01 at 1:30 and Joseph D'Elia at 3:00 PM (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/28/2001)
53 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Deputy Jacquelyn McLeod et al 11/15/01 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/06/2001)
54 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 2/1/02 through 2/8/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/07/2001)
55 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 2/15/02 and 2/19/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/07/2001)
56 RE-NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Eric Berzok, BSO Project Consultant 11/26/01 at 4:30 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/27/2001)
57 CONSENT to Trial by Magistrate by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., George Williams (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/12/2001)
58 ORDER denying [57-1] Magistrate consolidated ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 12/12/01) [EOD Date: 12/13/01] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/13/2001)
59 MOTION with memorandum in support by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for leave to file amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/19/2001)
60 MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Broward Sheriff, EMSA Correctional, Broward County Board to continue pre-trial conference, discovery deadlines and request for date certain for trial (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/19/2001)
61 Preliminary Witness list by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/19/2001)
62 NOTICE of attorney appearance for Broward County Board by James David Rowlee (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/20/2001)
63 JOINT MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff, John Does, John and Jane Does, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, EMSA Correctional, Does, Broward County Board, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc. for reconsideration of [58-1] order (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/20/2001)
64 JOINT NOTICE of Amendment to joint status report by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff, John Does, John and Jane

9 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

12/20/2001 12/26/2001 12/28/2001 12/28/2001 12/28/2001 12/28/2001 12/31/2001 01/04/2002
01/07/2002 01/08/2002 01/08/2002 01/08/2002 01/10/2002 01/10/2002

Does, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, EMSA Correctional, Does, Broward County Board, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc. (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/20/2001)
65 NOTICE of Unavailability by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams for dates of: 1/7/02 through 1/11/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/21/2001)
66 NOTICE of conflict as to the jury trial dockt by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams and Patrick Tighe (dp, Deputy Clerk) Modified on 12/27/2001 (Entered: 12/27/2001)
67 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Scott Cowan 1/9/02 at 2:00 and Broward County at 3:00 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/31/2001)
68 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Kenneth Jenne, Sheriff et al 1/8/02 at 9:00 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/31/2001)
69 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Henry Templeton, et al 1/10/02 at 9:00 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/31/2001)
70 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Andrew Perfilio, M.D. et al 1/11/02 at 9:00 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/31/2001)
71 NOTICE of Mediation Hearing on 1/9/02 at 11:00 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/02/2002)
72 JOINT PRETRIAL STIPULATION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff, John Does, John and Jane Does, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, EMSA Correctional, Does, Broward County Board, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc. (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/07/2002)
73 Notice of filing Witness list by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/08/2002)
74 ORDER granting [59-1] motion for leave to file amended complaint ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/8/02) [EOD Date: 1/9/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/09/2002)
75 ORDER granting [60-1] motion to continue pre-trial conference, discovery deadlines and request for date certain for trial ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/8/02) [EOD Date: 1/9/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/09/2002)
76 ORDER denying [63-1] joint motion for reconsideration of [58-1] order ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/8/02) [EOD Date: 1/9/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/09/2002)
77 MOTION by EMSA Correctional, Prison Health Inc. to extend time to mediate and unopposed motion to allow attendance by telephone (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/11/2002)
78 REQUEST for Production of Documents by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/11/2002)

10 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

01/10/2002 01/10/2002 01/11/2002 01/11/2002 01/18/2002
01/18/2002 01/18/2002 01/18/2002 01/18/2002 01/18/2002 01/18/2002 01/18/2002 01/24/2002 01/28/2002 01/30/2002 01/31/2002

79 REQUEST for Production of Documents by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/11/2002)
80 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 1/24/02 and 1/25/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) Modified on 01/22/2002 (Entered: 01/11/2002)
81 RE-NOTICE of Mediation Hearing on 1/17/02 at 3:00 PM Robert C. Scott added as mediator (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/14/2002)
82 ORDER granting [77-1] motion to extend time to mediate and unopposed motion to allow attendance by telephone ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/11/02) [EOD Date: 1/14/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/14/2002)
83 AMENDED COMPLAINT by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. , (Answer due 1/28/02 for Prison Health Inc., for EMSA Limited Partner, for Broward County Board, for Does, for EMSA Correctional, for George Williams, for Joseph D'Elia, for John and Jane Does, for John Does, for Broward Sheriff, for Kenneth C. Jenne II ) amending [1-1] complaint adding Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/22/2002)
84 NOTICE of filing plaintiffs' amended complaint by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/22/2002)
85 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Dwight St. Claire (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/22/2002)
86 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Delores Watson (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/22/2002)
87 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Barbara Law (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/22/2002)
88 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Elma McKenzie (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/22/2002)
89 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Maurice Waldman (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/22/2002)
90 SUMMONS(ES) issued for Andrew Perfilio (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/22/2002)
91 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 4/4/02 through 4/7/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/25/2002)
92 EMERGENCY MOTION by Widnel Charles and Drs. Michael Brannon and Sherrie Bourg-Carter to quash subpoena for deposition or alternatively motion for protective order (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/29/2002)
93 ANSWER by Broward County Board to amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/31/2002)
94 AMENDMENT to: Emergency [92-1] motion to quash subpoena for deposition or alternatively motion for protective order (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/01/2002)

11 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

02/01/2002 02/04/2002 02/13/2002 02/13/2002 02/13/2002 02/28/2002
03/01/2002
03/07/2002 03/12/2002 03/18/2002 03/18/2002 03/18/2002 03/18/2002 03/18/2002 04/01/2002 04/01/2002

95 ORDER denying [92-1] motion to quash subpoena for deposition or alternatively motion for protective order ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 2/1/02) [EOD Date: 2/4/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/04/2002)
96 ANSWER AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES by EMSA Correctional, Prison Health Inc. (Attorney Jodi Chase Page) to amended complaint; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/05/2002)
97 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [96-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/14/2002)
98 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [93-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/14/2002)
99 RE-NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Dep. William Wall et. al. 3/27/02 at 9:30 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/14/2002)
100 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Joan Bauersmith, RN 3/18/02 at 10:00, Robin Thurston, LPN at 10:30, Lt. D. Wendt at 11:00, Willis Robinson at 11:30, Scott Cowan at 1:30 & Peter Corwin at 2:30 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/01/2002)
101 ORDER Directing response to amended emergency motion to quash subpoena for deposition or alternatively motion for protective order by 3/7/02 (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 3/1/02) [EOD Date: 3/4/02] (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/04/2002)
102 RESPONSE by Kenneth C. Jenne II to [92-1] motion to quash subpoena for deposition or alternatively motion for protective order (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/08/2002)
103 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 5/16/02 and 5/17/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/13/2002)
104 MOTION by Elma McKenzie to dismiss amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/19/2002)
105 MEMORANDUM by Elma McKenzie in support of [104-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/19/2002)
106 MOTION by Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio to dismiss amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/19/2002)
107 MEMORANDUM by Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio in support of [106-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/19/2002)
108 ORDER quashing the Defendant, Broward County Sheriff's Office's Subpoena Duces Tecum without prejudice ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 3/18/02) [EOD Date: 3/19/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/19/2002)
109 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [106-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/02/2002)
110 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [104-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/02/2002)

12 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

04/19/2002 04/22/2002 04/22/2002 05/02/2002 05/02/2002 05/03/2002 05/13/2002 05/13/2002 05/28/2002 05/29/2002 06/05/2002 06/13/2002 06/28/2002 07/02/2002 07/15/2002

111 MOTION with memorandum in support by Broward Sheriff, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law to dismiss amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/22/2002)
112 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 5/31/02 through 6/3/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/23/2002)
113 RESPONSE by EMSA Correctional, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc. to Discovery Re: Plaintiff's Request for admissions (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/23/2002)
114 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [111-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint, [106-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint, [104-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/03/2002)
115 AMENDED NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 5/29/02 through 6/1/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/03/2002)
116 MOTION with memorandum in support by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff to compel production of records from Memorial Regional Hospital (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/06/2002)
117 REPLY by Broward Sheriff, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law to response to [111-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/14/2002)
118 UNOPPOSED MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to substitute Richard Cottone, as executor.. as party (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/14/2002)
119 RESPONSE by Kenneth C. Jenne II to plaintiff's request for admissions (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/29/2002)
120 NOTICE of Unavailability by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams for dates of: 7/19/02 through 7/22/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/30/2002)
121 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 8/19/02 through 9/2/02 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/06/2002)
122 ORDER granting [118-1] motion to substitute Richard Cottone, as executor Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 6/13/02) [EOD Date: 6/14/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/14/2002)
123 NOTICE OF FILING SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [114-1] motion response (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/01/2002)
124 SECOND NOTICE OF FILING SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [114-1] motion response (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/02/2002)
125 ORDER denying [106-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint, denying [104-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 7/15/02) [EOD Date: 7/16/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/16/2002)

13 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

07/15/2002 08/01/2002 08/06/2002 08/12/2002 08/13/2002
08/13/2002 08/20/2002
08/23/2002
08/27/2002 08/27/2002 08/27/2002 08/27/2002 08/27/2002

126 ORDER denying [111-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 7/15/02) [EOD Date: 7/16/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/16/2002)
127 ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES by Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio (Attorney Richard Thomas Woulfe) to amended complaint (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/02/2002)
128 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [127-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/07/2002)
129 NOTICE OF APPEAL by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Patrick Tighe of [126-1] order EOD Date: 7/16/02; Filing Fee: $ 105.00; Receipt #: 525926 Copies to USCA and Counsel of Record. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/13/2002)
Certified copies of Notice of Appeal, Docket, and Order under appeal to USCA: [129-1] appeal by Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, George Williams, Joseph D'Elia, Kenneth C. Jenne II as to Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Patrick Tighe (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/13/2002)
130 ORDER granting [116-1] motion to compel production of records from Memorial Regional Hospital ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 8/13/02) [EOD Date: 8/14/02] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/14/2002)
131 Transcript Information Form re: as to Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Patrick Tighe [129-1] appeal by Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, George Williams, Joseph D'Elia, Kenneth C. Jenne II . No transcript requested. Appeal Record due on 9/3/02 for Patrick Tighe, for Barbara Law, for Delores Watson, for Dwight St. Claire, for George Williams, for Joseph D'Elia, for Kenneth C. Jenne II (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/21/2002)
NOTICE of Receipt of Notice of Appeal Transmittal Letter from USCA on 8/23/02as to Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Patrick Tighe Re: [129-1] appeal by Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, George Williams, Joseph D'Elia, Kenneth C. Jenne II USCA NUMBER: 02-14529-JJ (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/26/2002)
132 ANSWER AND DEFENSES by Patrick Tighe to amended complaint; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/28/2002)
133 ANSWER AND DEFENSES by Dwight St. Claire to amended complaint; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/28/2002)
134 ANSWER AND DEFENSES by George Williams to amended complaint; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/28/2002)
135 ANSWER AND DEFENSES by Delores Watson to amended complaint; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/28/2002)
136 ANSWER AND DEFENSES by Barbara Law to amended complaint; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/28/2002)

14 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

08/27/2002 08/27/2002 09/06/2002 09/06/2002 09/06/2002 09/06/2002 09/06/2002 09/06/2002 09/06/2002 09/12/2002
09/13/2002
09/26/2002
09/26/2002 09/26/2002
11/04/2002

137 ANSWER AND DEFENSES by Joseph D'Elia to amended complaint; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/28/2002)
138 ANSWER by Kenneth C. Jenne II to amended complaint; jury demand (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/28/2002)
139 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [134-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/09/2002)
140 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [137-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/09/2002)
141 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [135-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/09/2002)
142 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [133-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/09/2002)
143 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [136-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/09/2002)
144 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [138-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/09/2002)
145 Reply to Affirmative Defenses by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. re: [132-1] complaint answer (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/09/2002)
146 AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL by Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Patrick Tighe of [126-1] order EOD Date: 7/16/02; Filing Fee: $ 105.00; Receipt #: 525926 Copies to USCA and Counsel of Record. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/13/2002)
Certified copies of Amended Notice of Appeal, Docket, and Order under appeal to USCA: [146-1] appeal by Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, George Williams, Joseph D'Elia as to Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Patrick Tighe (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/13/2002)
NOTICE of Receipt of Notice of Appeal Transmittal Letter from USCA on 9/26/02as to Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Patrick Tighe Re: [146-1] appeal by Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, George Williams, Joseph D'Elia USCA NUMBER: -02-14529-JJ (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/27/2002)
147 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Barbara Law 10/14/02 at 11:00 and Roy Vrchota at 1:00 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/27/2002)
148 RE-NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take deposition of Maurice Waldman, M.D. 10/15/02 at 1:00, Lona Davidson, RN at 2:00; Colleen Henry, RN at 2:30 and Robin Thurston, RN at 3:00 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/27/2002)
149 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 1/31/03 through 2/7/03 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/05/2002)

15 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

11/20/2002
11/27/2002 12/02/2002 05/08/2003
05/19/2003 05/28/2003
05/28/2003
05/30/2003 06/10/2003 08/08/2003 09/22/2003 09/22/2003

150 Certificate of Readiness and Transmittal of Record on Appeal as to Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, Barbara Law, Patrick Tighe transmitted to USCA Re: [146-1] appeal by Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, George Williams, Joseph D'Elia, [129-1] appeal by Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, George Williams, Joseph D'Elia, Kenneth C. Jenne II USCA NUMBER: 02-14529-JJ (Former Deputy Clerk) Modified on 11/20/2002 (Entered: 11/20/2002)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT of receipt by U.S.C.A. of: COR on 11/27/02; U.S.C.A. # 02-14529-JJ (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/02/2002)
151 NOTICE of Unavailability by Broward County Board for dates of: 5/23/03 through 6/16/03 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/03/2002)
152 Amended Joint Scheduling Report of Scheduling Meeting by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff's, John Does, John and Jane Does, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, EMSA Correctional, Does, Broward County Board, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio, Patrick Tighe (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/09/2003)
153 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 7/7/03 through 7/15/03 (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/20/2003)
155 MANDATE OF USCA (certified copy) [146-1] appeal, [129-1] appeal reverse the district court's denial of the defendants Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity; and affirm the district court's denial of the defendants D'Elia and Williams Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity. Mandate Issued Date: 5/23/03; USCA Appeal #: 02-14529-JJ; Copy to Judge. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/04/2003)
Record on appeal returned from U.S. Court of Appeals: [146-1] appeal by Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, George Williams, Joseph D'Elia, [129-1] appeal by Patrick Tighe, Barbara Law, Delores Watson, Dwight St. Claire, George Williams, Joseph D'Elia, Kenneth C. Jenne II USCA #: 02-14529-JJ (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/04/2003)
154 REQUEST for copies by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/02/2003)
156 ORDER resetting pretrial conference for 9:30 11/21/03 , pretrial stipulation due for 11/7/03 ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 6/10/03) [EOD Date: 6/10/03] (lh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/10/2003)
157 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 9/18/03 through 10/3/03 (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/11/2003)
158 NOTICE of conflict regarding the scheduling matter for trial by Richard Cottone (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
159 MOTION by Broward Sheriff's for summary judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)

16 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

09/22/2003 09/22/2003 09/22/2003 09/22/2003 09/22/2003 09/22/2003 09/22/2003 09/22/2003 09/22/2003 09/23/2003
09/24/2003 09/29/2003
09/29/2003
09/30/2003
10/15/2003 10/15/2003 10/17/2003

160 Statement of undisputed material facts by Broward Sheriff's in support of [159-1] motion for summary judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
161 NOTICE of filing depositions by Broward Sheriff's (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
162 DEPOSITION of Peter Corwin (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
163 DEPOSITION of Joseph Gerwens (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
164 DEPOSITION of Jacquelyn McCleod (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
165 DEPOSITION of Terry Leonard (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
166 DEPOSITION of Detective Glenn Bukata (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
167 DEPOSITION of Widnel Charles (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
168 DEPOSITION of Deputy Joseph D'Elia (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/23/2003)
169 MOTION with memorandum in support by Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio for summary judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/24/2003)
170 DISCLOSURE of trial experts by EMSA Correctional (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/25/2003)
171 NOTICE of filing preliminary witness and exhibit lists (witness and exhibit lists attached) by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
172 UNOPPOSED MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to extend time to respond to defendants Perfilio, Waldman, and McKenzie's motion for summary judgment and memorandum of law and defendant Broward County's motion for summary final judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
173 ORDER granting [172-1] motion to extend time to respond to defendants Perfilio, Waldman, and McKenzie's motion for summary judgment and memorandum of law and defendant Broward County's motion for summary final judgment Response to motion reset to 4:00 10/23/03 for [169-1] motion for summary judgment, reset to 4:00 10/23/03 for [159-1] motion for summary judgment ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 9/30/03) [EOD Date: 10/1/03] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/01/2003)
174 MOTION by Broward County Board for protective order relating to depositions scheduled for 10/21/03 (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/15/2003)
175 NOTICE of disclosure of expert witness by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/16/2003)
176 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [174-1] motion for protective order relating to depositions scheduled for 10/21/03 (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/20/2003)

17 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

10/21/2003 10/22/2003 10/23/2003 10/23/2003
10/23/2003 10/23/2003 10/23/2003
10/24/2003 10/24/2003
10/27/2003 10/28/2003
10/30/2003

177 EMERGENCY MOTION with memorandum in support by Kenneth C. Jenne II for protective order directing that Sheriff Jenne's deposition not be had in this matter (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/22/2003)
178 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [177-1] motion for protective order directing that Sheriff Jenne's deposition not be had in this matter (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/22/2003)
179 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [159-1] motion for summary judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/23/2003)
180 NOTICE of filing re: plaintiff's statement of disputed material facts and evidence in support of his response to defendants' Perfilio, Waldman, and McKenzie's motion for summary judgment and memorandum in support and in support of plaintiff's response to defendant Broward County's motion for summary final judgment by Richard Cottone (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/23/2003)
181 UNOPPOSED MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for leave to file response to defendants Andrew Perfilio, M.D., Maurice Waldman, M.D. and Elma McKenzie, L.P.N.'s motion for summary judgment and memorandum in support in excess of page limit (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/23/2003)
182 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [169-1] motion for summary judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/23/2003)
183 Statement of disputed material facts and evidence by Richard Cottone in support of [182-1] response to defendants Andew Perfilio, M.D., Maurice Waldman, M.D. and Elma McKenzie, LPN's motion for summary judgment, and memorandum in support, and [179-1] response to defendant Broward County's motion for summary final judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/23/2003)
184 REPLY by Kenneth C. Jenne II to response to [177-1] motion for protective order directing that Sheriff Jenne's deposition not be had in this matter (dp, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/27/2003)
185 ORDER granting [177-1] motion for protective order directing that Sheriff Jenne's deposition not be had in this matter, granting [174-1] motion for protective order relating to depositions scheduled for 10/21/03 ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 10/24/03) [EOD Date: 10/27/03] (dp, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/27/2003)
186 NOTICE of conflict by Broward County Board (dg, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/28/2003)
187 ORDER granting [181-1] motion for leave to file response to defendants Andrew Perfilio, M.D., Maurice Waldman, M.D. and Elma McKenzie, L.P.N.'s motion for summary judgment and memorandum in support in excess of page limit ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 10/28/03) [EOD Date: 10/29/03] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/29/2003)
188 NOTICE of Unavailability by EMSA Correctional for dates of 11/7/03 through 11/11/03 (mh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/31/2003)

18 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

10/30/2003 10/30/2003 10/30/2003 10/30/2003 11/04/2003 11/04/2003 11/05/2003
11/05/2003 11/05/2003 11/05/2003
11/06/2003
11/06/2003 11/06/2003

189 NOTICE of filing affidavit of Elma McKenzie by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/31/2003)
190 AFFIDAVIT of Elma McKenzie by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional Re: medication administration record (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/31/2003)
191 NOTICE of Mediation Hearing on 11/6/03 at 3:30 Charles N. Tetunic added as mediator (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/31/2003)
192 AGREED MOTION by Broward County Board for enlargement of time to serve and file its reply in support of its motion for summary final judgment (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 10/31/2003)
193 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone to emergency motion for protective order regarding depositions and mediation (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/06/2003)
194 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone to emergency motion to continue trial (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/06/2003)
195 EMERGENCY MOTION by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional for protective order regarding depositions and mediation (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/06/2003)
196 EMERGENCY MOTION by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional to continue trial (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/06/2003)
197 NOTICE of filing affidavit of Gregg A. Toomey, Esq. by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/06/2003)
198 AFFIDAVIT of Gregg A. Toomey, Esq. by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional Re: [195-1] motion for protective order regarding depositions and mediation, [196-1] motion to continue trial (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/06/2003)
199 ORDER granting [192-1] motion for enlargement of time to serve and file its reply in support of its motion for summary final judgment and Defendant shall have up to 11/10/03. ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 11/6/03) [EOD Date: 11/7/03] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/07/2003)
200 ORDER denying [195-1] motion for protective order regarding depositions and mediation ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 11/6/03) [EOD Date: 11/7/03] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/07/2003)
201 ORDER granting [196-1] motion to continue trial, which the Court construes as a motion to reset pretrial conference and reset pretrial conference for 9:30 1/16/04 before Judge William J. Zloch , and reset pretrial stipulation due for 1/2/04 ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 11/6/03) [EOD Date: 11/7/03] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/07/2003)

19 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

11/06/2003
11/07/2003 11/10/2003 11/10/2003 11/12/2003 11/24/2003 11/26/2003
12/11/2003
12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003

202 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE of filing by Richard Cottone re: Plaintiff's statement of disputed material facts and evidence in support of his response to defendants' Perfilio, Waldman, and McKenzie's motion for summary judgment and memorandum of law in support and response to defendant Broward County's motion summary judgment final judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/07/2003)
203 RESPONSE to and NOTICE of joinder in co-defendants (Perfilio, etc., et al.) emergency motion to continue trial by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/10/2003)
204 REPLY MEMORANDUM by Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio regarding their [169-1] motion for summary judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/10/2003)
205 REPLY by Broward Sheriff's in support of [159-1] motion for summary judgment (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/12/2003)
206 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 1/30/04 through 2/6/04 (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/13/2003)
207 SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL Notice of filing by Richard Cottone re: [183-1] Statement of (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
208 MOTION by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Limited Partner, EMSA Correctional to strike first and second supplemental notices of filing documents in response to their motion for summary judgment (ra, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/26/2003)
209 NOTICE of filing original deposition transcripts of Eric Berzok, Maud Boleman, Det. Glenn Bukata, Widnel Charles, Erin Cody, M.D., Peter Corwin, Dep. Shatawn Daily, Dep. Jace Davis, Dep. Joseph D'Elia, James Clifford Findeiss, Joseph Gerwens, Det. James Harrison, Dep. Jerdeline Heath, Judith Jones, LPN, Det. Kenneth Kaminsky, Margaret Kaye, R.N., Dep. Linda Kinne, Barbara Law, Det. Terry Leonard, Mel Limia, M.D., Elma McKinzie, LPN, Dep. Jacquelyn McLeod, Dep. Kevin Moher, Melsaldes Nelson, Sgt. Robert O'Neil, Andrew Perfilio, M.D., Patricia Rell, R.N., Major Willis Robinson, John Rodstrom, Jr., Lt. Andrew Smalling, Sgt. Dwight St. Claire, Henry Templeton, Det. Elias Thomasevich, Robin Thurston, LPN, Asst. Inspector General Roy Vrchota, Jr., Maurice Waldman, M.D., Sgt. Delores Watson, Jeffrey Watts, R.N., Lt. Douglas Wendt and Dep. George Williams by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
210 DEPOSITION of Eric Berzok (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
211 DEPOSITION of Maud Boleman (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
212 DEPOSITION of Glenn Bukata (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
213 DEPOSITION of Widnel Charles (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
214 DEPOSITION of Erin Cody (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
215 DEPOSITION of Peter Corwin (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)

20 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003

216 DEPOSITION of Deputy Shatawn Dailey (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
217 DEPOSITION of Jace Davis (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
218 DEPOSITION of Joseph D'Elia (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
219 DEPOSITION of James Clifford Findeiss, M.D. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
220 DEPOSITION of Joseph Gerwens (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
221 DEPOSITION of Detective James Harrison (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
222 DEPOSITION of Deputy Jerdeline Heath (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
223 DEPOSITION of Judith Jones, L.P.N. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
224 DEPOSITION of Detective Kenneth Kaminsky (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
225 DEPOSITION of Margaret Kaye (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
226 DEPOSITION of Deputy Linda Kinne (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
227 DEPOSITION of Barbara Law (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
228 DEPOSITION of Deputy Terry Leonard (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
229 DEPOSITION of Dr. Mel E. Limia (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
230 DEPOSITION of Elma McKenzie, LPN (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
231 DEPOSITION of Deputy Jacquelyn McCleod (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
232 DEPOSITION of Deputy Kevin Moher (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
233 DEPOSITION of Melsaldes Nelson (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
234 DEPOSITION of Sergeant Robert O'Neil (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
235 DEPOSITION of Andrew Perfilio, M.D. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
236 DEPOSITION of Patricia Rell, R.N. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
237 DEPOSITION of Willis Robinson (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)

21 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003 12/11/2003
12/24/2003 12/29/2003 12/30/2003
12/30/2003

238 DEPOSITION of John Rodstrom, Jr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
239 DEPOSITION of Lieutenant Andrew Smalling (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
240 DEPOSITION of Sergeant Dwight St. Claire (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
241 DEPOSITION of Henry Templeton (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
242 DEPOSITION of Detective Elias Thomasevich (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
243 DEPOSITION of Robin Thurston, LPN (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
244 DEPOSITION of Assistant Inspector General Roy Vrchota, Jr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
245 DEPOSITION of Maurice Waldman, M.D. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
246 DEPOSITION of Segeant Delores Watson (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
247 DEPOSITION of Jeffrey Watts (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
248 DEPOSITION of Lieutenant Douglas Wendt (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
249 DEPOSITION of Deputy George Williams (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
250 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [208-1] motion to strike first and second supplemental notices of filing documents in response to their motion for summary judgment (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/12/2003)
251 NOTICE of Mediation Hearing on 12/29/03 at 1:00 pm James A. McCauley added as mediator (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/29/2003)
252 NOTICE of Mediation Hearing on 12/29/03 at 1:00 PM George B. Pomeroy added as mediator (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/30/2003)
253 JOINT PRETRIAL STIPULATION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff's, John Does, John and Jane Does, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, EMSA Correctional, Does, Broward County Board, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio, Patrick Tighe (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/02/2004)
254 JOINT stipulation by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff's, John Does, John and Jane Does, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, EMSA Correctional, Does, Broward County Board, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law,

22 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

12/30/2003 01/02/2004 01/02/2004 01/02/2004 01/02/2004
01/05/2004
01/06/2004 01/06/2004 01/06/2004 01/07/2004 01/07/2004 01/07/2004 01/07/2004 01/07/2004 01/07/2004

Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio, Patrick Tighe to extend time for completion of discovery (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/02/2004)
255 NOTICE of conflict by Broward County Board (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/02/2004)
256 NOTICE of Change of Address of Attorney by EMSA Correctional (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/05/2004)
257 OBJECTIONS by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to Defendants Kenneth C. Jenne, II, Et Al's list of trial exhibits (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/05/2004)
258 OBJECTIONS by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to Defendant Broward County's list of trial exhibits (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/05/2004)
259 OBJECTIONS by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to defendants Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited, Prison Health Services and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc's exhibit list (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/05/2004)
260 ORDER approving, adopting nd ratifying [254-1] joint motion to extend time for completion of discovery resetting discovery deadline for 1/12/04 ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/5/04) [EOD Date: 1/6/04] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/06/2004)
261 MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for leave to Take Deposition of defendant Kenneth C. Jenne, II (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/07/2004)
262 MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to strike defendant EMSA, et al's expert witness, Jim Degroot, Ph.D. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/07/2004)
263 FINAL report of Mediator. Disposition: Impasse (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/07/2004)
264 DISCLOSURE of trial experts by Andrew Perfilio, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/08/2004)
265 RULE 7.3 Certification with respect to Plaintiffs' motion for leave to take the deposition of Defendant Kenneth C. Jenne, II by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/08/2004)
266 NOTICE of filing original deposition transcripts of Major Michael Goldstein, Inspector General Martin Rahinsky, Major Patrick Tighe by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/08/2004)
267 DEPOSITION of Major Michael Goldstein (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/08/2004)
268 DEPOSITION of Inspector General Martin Rahinsky (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/08/2004)
269 DEPOSITION of Patrick Tighe (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/08/2004)

23 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

01/08/2004 01/13/2004 01/14/2004 01/16/2004 01/16/2004
01/20/2004 01/22/2004 01/23/2004
01/30/2004
02/26/2004 03/01/2004 03/01/2004 03/01/2004 03/01/2004

270 NOTICE of filing Report of James F. Degroot, Ph.d by EMSA Correctional, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew (ra, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/08/2004)
271 SUPPLEMENT by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to: [262-1] motion to strike defendant EMSA, et al's expert witness, Jim Degroot, Ph.D. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/13/2004)
272 NOTICE of conflict by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/15/2004)
273 FINAL SUPPLEMENT by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to: [262-1] motion to strike defendant EMSA, et al's expert witness, Jim Degroot, Ph.D. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/20/2004)
274 JOINT STIPULATION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff's, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, EMSA Correctional, Broward County Board, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Elma McKenzie, Maurice Andrew Perfilio, Patrick Tighe for the scheduling of trial period to begin after 3/1/04 (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/20/2004)
275 MOTION by Broward County Board to strike [209-1] notice of filing transcript excerpts of John Rodstrom's deposition , and/or in limine of transcript excerpts of John Rodsrom's deposition (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/21/2004)
276 OBJECTIONS by EMSA Correctional, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio to plaintiffs' trial exhibits (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/23/2004)
277 RESPONSE by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited Partner, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional to [262-1] motion to strike defendant EMSA, et al's expert witness, Jim Degroot, Ph.D. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/26/2004)
278 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [275-1] motion to strike [209-1] notice of filing transcript excerpts of John Rodstrom's deposition, [275-2] motion in limine of transcript excerpts of John Rodsrom's deposition (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/02/2004)
279 NOTICE of Unavailability of Counsel by Broward County Board for dates of: 4/7/04 through 4/13/04 (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/27/2004)
280 NOTICE of filing original deposition transcripts of Calista Chukwu, Deputy Tim Langelier, Homer Reed and Colonel James Wimberly by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/02/2004)
281 DEPOSITION of Calista Chukwu (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/02/2004)
282 DEPOSITION of Deputy Tim Langelier (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/02/2004)
283 DEPOSITION of Homer Reed (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/02/2004)

24 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

03/01/2004 04/20/2004 04/22/2004 08/02/2004 08/03/2004 08/12/2004
08/12/2004
08/18/2004 08/27/2004 11/04/2004 11/05/2004 12/02/2004
12/17/2004 01/18/2005 01/27/2005

284 DEPOSITION of Colonel James Wimberly (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/02/2004)
285 NOTICE of Change of Firm Name and Address of Attorney by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff's (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/21/2004)
286 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 5/19/04 through 5/21/04 and 7/19/04 through 7/30/04 (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/23/2004)
287 ORDER denying [262-1] motion to strike defendant EMSA, et al's expert witness, Jim Degroot, Ph.D. ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 8/2/04) [EOD Date: 8/3/04] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/03/2004)
288 REQUEST by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for status conference (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/04/2004)
289 ORDER denying [208-1] motion to strike first and second supplemental notices of filing documents in response to their motion for summary judgment ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 8/12/04) [EOD Date: 8/12/04] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/12/2004)
290 ORDER denying [275-1] motion to strike [209-1] notice of filing transcript excerpts of John Rodstrom's deposition, denying [275-2] motion in limine of transcript excerpts of John Rodsrom's deposition ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 8/12/04) [EOD Date: 8/12/04] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/12/2004)
291 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 10/15/04, 10/18/04, 10/26/04 and 10/27/04 (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/18/2004)
292 NOTICE of Unavailability by Broward Sheriff's for dates of: 10/11/04, 10/12/04, 10/28/04 and 10/29/04 and 12/23/04 through 12/31/04 (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/27/2004)
293 SECOND REQUEST by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for status conference (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/05/2004)
294 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 1/28/05 through 2/7/05 (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/08/2004)
295 NOTICE OF FILING SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional in support of: [169-1] motion for summary judgment (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/06/2004)
296 NOTICE of Unavailability by Broward Commission for dates of: December 27-31, 2004, January 7, 21-28, 2005 (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/20/2004)
297 REQUEST by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for a trial date (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/19/2005)
298 NOTICE of objection to this matter being tried before a Magistrate Judge by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited, Prison

25 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

02/02/2005 02/10/2005 02/10/2005 02/15/2005 03/16/2005 03/18/2005 03/18/2005 03/28/2005 03/28/2005 03/28/2005 03/28/2005 03/28/2005 03/29/2005 03/30/2005 03/30/2005 03/30/2005

Health Inc., EMSA Correctional (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/28/2005)
299 ORDER Specially Setting Cause For Trial: Set Jury trial for 10:00 4/18/05 before Judge William J. Zloch (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 2/2/05) [EOD Date: 2/3/05] (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/03/2005)
300 NOTICE of CONFLICT/Unavailability by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional for dates of: Trial Commencing 4/18/05 (gp, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/10/2005)
301 NOTICE of conflict by Richard Cottone (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/11/2005)
302 NOTICE of conflict by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Patrick Tighe (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/16/2005)
303 NOTICE of filing supplmental witness list by Richard Cottone (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/17/2005)
304 ORDER Granting [261-1] motion for leave to take deposition of defendant Kenneth C. Jenne, II (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 3/18/05) [EOD Date: 3/21/05] (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/21/2005)
305 ORDER Denying [288-1] request for status conference (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 3/18/05) [EOD Date: 3/21/05] (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/21/2005)
306 MOTION with memorandum in support by Kenneth C. Jenne II to amend [304-1] order , and/or for protective order (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/29/2005)
307 NOTICE of filing second supplemental witness list by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/29/2005)
308 NOTICE of filing original deposition transcript of James DeGrott, Ph.D. by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/29/2005)
309 DEPOSITION of James DeGroot, Ph.D. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/29/2005)
310 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [306-1] motion to amend [304-1] order, [306-2] motion for protective order (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/29/2005)
311 NOTICE of conflict by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/29/2005)
312 REPLY by Kenneth C. Jenne II to response to [306-1] motion to amend [304-1] order, [306-2] motion for protective order (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/31/2005)
313 MOTION by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams to be excused from portion of trial docket (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/31/2005)
314 ADDENDUM by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to: [310-1] response to motion to amend order of 3/18/05 and/or motion for limited order of protection and incorporated memorandum of law (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered:

26 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

04/05/2005 04/05/2005 04/07/2005 04/07/2005 04/07/2005 04/07/2005 04/08/2005
04/25/2005 05/03/2005 05/16/2005 05/17/2005
05/19/2005 05/20/2005 05/23/2005

03/31/2005)
315 MOTION by Kenneth C. Jenne II to strike [314-1] addendum, etc. dated 3/30/05 and/or sur- reply to addendum (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/06/2005)
316 NOTICE OF FILING SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/06/2005)
317 NOTICE of filing trial memorandum by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/08/2005)
318 TRIAL MEMORANDUM by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/08/2005)
319 ORDER Denying [313-1] motion to be excused from portion of trial docket (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 4/7/05) [EOD Date: 4/8/05] (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/08/2005)
320 ORDER Specially Setting Cause for Trial: Set Jury trial for 10:00 5/23/05 before Judge William J. Zloch (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 4/7/05) [EOD Date: 4/8/05] (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/08/2005)
321 ORDER denying [306-1] motion to amend [304-1] order, denying [306-2] motion for protective order granting [315-1] motion to strike [314-1] addendum, etc. dated 3/30/05 and/or sur- reply to addendum striking [314-1] addendum from the record ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 4/8/05) [EOD Date: 4/11/05] (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/11/2005)
322 MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to revalidate trial subpoenas (Former Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/26/2005)
323 NOTICE of conflict by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Patrick Tighe, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/04/2005)
324 EMERGENCY MOTION by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams for one week continuance of trial (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/18/2005)
325 ORDER SPECIALLY SETTING CAUSE FOR TRIAL granting [324-1] motion for one week continuance of trial Resetting Trial for 10:00 6/6/05 before Judge William J. Zloch **Please see order for further details. (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 05/17/05) [EOD Date: 5/20/05] (gp, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/20/2005)
326 TRIAL BRIEF by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/24/2005)
327 ORDER denying as moot [293-1] motion for status conference; denying as moot [297-1] motion for a trial date ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 5/20/05) [EOD Date: 5/24/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/24/2005)
328 ORDER granting [322-1] motion to revalidate trial subpoenas. All trial subpoenas previously issued in the above-styled cause shall remain in full force and effect for the current trial docket commencing on 6/6/05, and all individuals served with trial subpoenas shall comply with the same as directed by counsel

27 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

05/23/2005
05/23/2005 06/03/2005
06/03/2005 06/03/2005 06/03/2005 06/03/2005 06/03/2005 06/03/2005 06/06/2005
06/06/2005
06/06/2005
06/06/2005
06/06/2005 06/06/2005 06/06/2005

issuing said subpoenas. (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 05/23/05) [EOD Date: 5/25/05] (gp, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/25/2005)
329 NOTICE of Filing attached Original Deposition Transcript of Kenneth C. Jenne, II and Exhibits by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (gp, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/25/2005)
329 DEPOSITION of Kenneth C. Jenne, II, taken 4/12/05 (gp, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/25/2005)
330 Amended Witness list by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/03/2005)
331 Amended Exhibit list by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, EMSA Limited, Prison Health Inc., EMSA Correctional (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/03/2005)
332 TRIAL BRIEF by Broward Commission (at, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/03/2005)
333 Notice of filing Exhibit list by Broward Commission (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/06/2005)
334 Noitce of filing Witness list by Broward Commission (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/06/2005)
335 Proposed Jury instructions and verdict form by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/06/2005)
336 Sepcial Voir dire questions by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/06/2005)
337 ORDER denying [159-1] motion for summary judgment; denying [169-1] motion for summary judgment ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 6/6/05) [EOD Date: 6/7/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
338 MOTION with memorandum in support by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams in limine concerning Carruthers v Cochran consent decree (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
339 MOTION with memorandum in support by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams in limine concerning professional compliance and employee discipline matters (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
340 MOTION with memorandum in support by Broward Sheriff's in limine concerning trial testimony of Sheriff Ken Jenne (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
341 TRIAL BRIEF by Joseph D'Elia, George Williams on qualified immunity and 1983 liability (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
342 TRIAL BRIEF by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams on damages recoverable by plaintiff (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
343 Proposed Jury instructions by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)

28 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

06/06/2005 06/06/2005 06/06/2005 06/06/2005
06/06/2005 06/06/2005 06/06/2005 06/06/2005 06/06/2005 06/09/2005 06/09/2005 06/13/2005 06/13/2005 06/13/2005 06/13/2005 06/14/2005

344 Proposed jury verdict (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
345 Special Voir dire questions by Broward Commission (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
346 Proposed Jury instructions and verdict form by Broward Commission (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
347 The Parties' Joint STIPULATION with respect to cause of death of Peter Cottone, Jr. by Richard Cottone, Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff's, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Broward Commission, EMSA Correctional, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, EMSA Limited, Elma McKenzie, Maurice Waldman, Andrew Perfilio, Patrick Tighe (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
348 Notice of filing trial Exhibit list by Richard Cottone (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
349 ORDER granting ore tenus motion to bring electronic equipment into the courtroom ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 6/6/05) [EOD Date: 6/7/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
350 Minutes of jury selection/trial held before Judge William J. Zloch on 6/6/05; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
Jury selection held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/07/2005)
MOTION in open court by Broward Commission to be dismissed from the action upon the commencement of trial on 6/6/05 (at, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/15/2005)
351 SUPPLEMENT by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to: trial memorandum with respect to damages (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/10/2005)
352 NOTICE of filing original deposition transcripti of Judith M. Johnson by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/10/2005)
353 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take video deposition in lieu of trial testimony of Judith Johnson 6/1/05 at 6:30 (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/14/2005)
354 Re-NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to take video deposition in lieu of trial testimony of Judith Johnson 6/2/05 at 5:00 (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/14/2005)
355 Transcript filed re: jury trial held Monday, 6/6/05 before Judge Willaim J. Zloch Pages: 1-48 (ga, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/15/2005)
356 Transcript filed re: jury trial held Tuesday, 6/7/05 before Judge William J. Zloch Pages: 1-22 (ga, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/15/2005)
357 FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL AS TO DEFENDANT BROWARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS granting [0-0] motion to be dismissed from the action upon the commencement of trial on 6/6/05. Defendant

29 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

06/22/2005 06/22/2005 07/08/2005 07/08/2005 07/21/2005 07/22/2005 07/27/2005 07/29/2005 11/18/2005 11/25/2005 01/11/2006 01/13/2006
01/27/2006 03/15/2006

Broward County Board of County Commissioners be and the same is hereby DISMISSED from the styled cause. (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 6/14/05) [EOD Date: 6/15/05] (at, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/15/2005)
358 MOTION with memorandum in support by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Correctional (Attorney Gregg Alan Toomey) to limit damages (at, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/23/2005)
359 MOTION by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams to apply damages provisions of the Florida wrongful death act (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/23/2005)
360 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [358-1] motion to limit damages (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/11/2005)
361 RESPONSE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to [359-1] motion to apply damages provisions of the Florida wrongful death act (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/11/2005)
362 REPLY by Kenneth C. Jenne II, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams to response to [359-1] motion to apply damages provisions of the Florida wrongful death act (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/22/2005)
363 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 8/17/05 through 8/22/05 and 9/12/05 through 9/23/05 (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/25/2005)
364 REPLY by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Correctional to response to [358-1] motion to limit damages (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/28/2005)
365 ORDER denying as moot [274-1] joint motion for the scheduling of trial period to begin after 3/1/04 ( Signed by Judge J. Zloch on 7/29/05) [EOD Date: 8/1/05] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/01/2005)
366 NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 1/30/05 through 2/3/06 (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/21/2005)
367 Amended NOTICE of Unavailability by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for dates of: 2/6/06 through 2/10/06 (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/29/2005)
368 Unoposed Request by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. for status conference , or alternatively for ruling on pending motions (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/12/2006)
369 ORDER Granting [358-1] motion to limit damages, Granting [359-1] motion to apply damages provisions of the Florida Wrongful Death Act (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/13/06) [EOD Date: 1/17/06] (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/17/2006)
370 NOTICE by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. that cause is ready for trial (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 01/30/2006)
371 ORDER denying without prejudice [338-1] motion in limine concerning Carruthers v Cochran consent decree; denying without prejudice [339-1] motion in limine concerning professional compliance and employee discipline matters;

30 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

03/15/2006 03/17/2006 03/22/2006 03/30/2006 04/03/2006 04/03/2006 04/03/2006 04/03/2006 04/04/2006
04/04/2006 04/04/2006 04/05/2006 04/05/2006 04/06/2006

denying without prejudice [340-1] motion in limine concerning trial testimony of Sheriff Ken Jenne ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 3/15/06) [EOD Date: 3/15/06] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/15/2006)
372 ORDER Specially Setting Cause for Trial set Jury trial for 10:00 4/3/06 before Judge William J. Zloch ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 3/15/06) [EOD Date: 3/15/06] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/15/2006)
373 MOTION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. to revalidate trial subpoenas (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/20/2006)
374 ORDER Granting [373-1] motion to revalidate trial subpoenas (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 3/22/06) [EOD Date: 3/22/06] (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/22/2006)
375 MOTION by Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Limited (Attorney ) to bring electronic equipment into the courtroom (lk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 03/31/2006)
376 Minutes of jury trial held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/3/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/04/2006)
Jury trial held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/04/2006)
377 ORDER granting [375-1] motion to bring electronic equipment into the courtroom ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 4/3/06) [EOD Date: 4/4/06] (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/04/2006)
378 TRIAL BRIEF by Broward Sheriff's on liability under 42:1983 (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/04/2006)
379 FIANL ORDER granting ore tenus dismissing EMSA Limited Partnership and Prison Health Services All claims against EMSA and Prison Health Services are hereby dismissed with prejudice ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 4/4/06) [EOD Date: 4/5/06] (gz, Deputy Clerk) Modified on 04/05/2006 (Entered: 04/05/2006)
385 Minutes of trial - day 2 held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/4/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Barry S. Seltzer (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
Jury trial day 2 held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
380 MEMORANDUM of law by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. with respect to plaintiffs' damages and moiton in limine (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/06/2006)
381 Proposed Supplemental Jury instruction number 17 by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/06/2006)
382 MOTION with memorandum in support by Joseph D'Elia to quash subpoena ad testificandum (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/07/2006)

31 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

04/06/2006 04/06/2006 04/07/2006 04/07/2006 04/07/2006 04/10/2006 04/10/2006 04/10/2006 04/10/2006 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 04/12/2006 04/12/2006 04/13/2006 04/13/2006

386 Minutes of jury trial day 3 held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/6/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
Jury trial day 3 held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
383 STIPULATION by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr., Kenneth C. Jenne II, EMSA Correctional with respect to the contract (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/10/2006)
387 Minutes of jury trial day 4 held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/7/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
Jury trial day 4 held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
384 Transcript filed re: jury trial held 4/4/06 before Judge William J. Zloch Volume #: 1 Pages: 1-36 (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/11/2006)
388 Minutes of jury trial day 5 held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/10/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
Jury trial day 5 held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
389 MEMORANDUM of law by Richard Cottone with respect to investigations and expert testimony (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
390 MEMORANDUM of law by Richard Cottone with respect to investigations and expert testimony (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
391 AFFIDAVIT by Richard Cottone of Joseph D'Ella (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
392 Minutes of jury trial day 6 held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/11/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2006)
Jury trial held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/13/2006)
395 Minutes of jury trial day 7 held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/12/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/18/2006)
Jury trial held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/18/2006)
396 Minutes of jury trial day 8 held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/13/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/18/2006)
Jury trial day 8 held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/18/2006)

32 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

04/14/2006 04/14/2006 04/17/2006 04/17/2006 04/17/2006 04/17/2006 04/17/2006 05/02/2006
05/31/2006
06/01/2006
07/20/2006
07/20/2006
07/20/2006 07/20/2006

397 Minutes of jury trial day 9 held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/14/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/18/2006)
Jury trial day 9 held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/18/2006)
393 Pursuant to Rule 15(b) plaintiffs' amend their complaint by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/17/2006)
394 Second Proposed Supplemental Jury instructions by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/17/2006)
398 Minutes of jury trial day 10 held before Judge William J. Zloch on 4/17/06; Court Reporter Name or Tape #: Carl Schanzleh (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/18/2006)
Jury trial day 10 held before Judge William J. Zloch (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/18/2006)
398 Exhibit list by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/18/2006)
399 ORDER Denying as moot [368-1] unopposed request for status conference, Denying as moot [368-2] motion for ruling on pending motions (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 5/2/06) [EOD Date: 5/3/06] (ss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/03/2006)
400 NOTICE of filing by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. of supplemental authority in opposition to defendant Jenne's rule 50 motion and in support of plainitffs' memoarndum of law with respect to investigations and expert testimony (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/01/2006)
401 Second NOTICE of filing by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. of supplemental authority in opposition to defendant Jenne's rule 0 motion and in support of plaintiffs' memorandum of law with respect to investigations and expert testimony (gz, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/02/2006)
402 ORDER stating that the Court found there had been no implied consent to trial of any negligence claims, and that amendment pursuant to Rule 15B was inappropriate. (Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 7/20/06) [EOD Date: 7/21/06] (lk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/21/2006)
403 ORDER: The Court found it unnecessary to put the Consent Decree as such before the Jury for its consideration, Therefore, plaintiffs were not permitted to to mention the Consent Decree as the terms of settlement. ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 7/20/06) [EOD Date: 7/21/06] (lk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/21/2006)
404 ORDER: The Court was compelled to limit the scope of Dr. Appel's testimony. ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 7/20/06) [EOD Date: 7/21/06] (lk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/21/2006)
405 ORDER granting defendants ore tenus motions for judgment as a matter of law made in open Court on 4/14/06 be and the same hereby GRANTED. ( Signed by

33 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

07/20/2006
07/20/2006 08/17/2006
08/25/2006 09/07/2006 09/08/2006 10/18/2006 10/18/2006 10/18/2006 10/18/2006 10/18/2006 10/18/2006

Judge William J. Zloch on 7/20/06) [EOD Date: 7/21/06] (lk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/21/2006)
406 FINAL JUDGMENT for Defendants Andrew Perfilio, Maurice Waldman, Elma McKenzie, EMSA Correctional, George Williams, Joseph Kenneth C. Jenne II, Broward Sheriff's and against Peter Cottone Sr., Richard Cottone. All pending motions are denied as moot: [382-1] motion to quash subpoena ad testificandum ( Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 7/20/06) [EOD Date: 7/21/06] (lk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/21/2006)
CASE CLOSED. Case and Motions no longer referred to Magistrate. (lk, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/21/2006)
407 NOTICE OF APPEAL by Peter Cottone Sr., Richard Cottone of [406-1] judgment order, EOD Date: 7/21/06; [405-1] order, EOD Date: 7/21/06; [404-1] order, EOD Date: 7/21/06; [403-1] order, EOD Date: 7/21/06; [402-1] order EOD Date: 7/21/06; Filing Fee: $ 455.00; Receipt #: 537956 Copies to USCA and of Record. (vl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/25/2006)
Certified copies of Notice of Appeal, Docket, and Order under appeal to USCA: [407-1] appeal by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. as to Peter Cottone Sr., Richard Cottone (vl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/25/2006)
408 TRANSCRIPT INFORMATION FORM by Peter Cottone Sr., Richard Cottone re: [407-1] appeal by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. received on 9/7/06 from Court Reporter. (Returned to Court Reporter Coordinator) (pc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/08/2006)
409 NOTICE of Receipt of Notice of Appeal Transmittal Letter from USCA on 8/28/06as to Richard Cottone Re: [407-1] appeal by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone Sr. USCA NUMBER: 06-14631-E (vl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/11/2006)
410 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for dates of Monday, 4/3/06; pages: 1-148 before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
411 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for dates of Tuesday, 4/4/06; pages 149-343 before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
412 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for dates of Thursday, 4/6/06; pages 344-561 before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
413 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for dates of Friday, 4/7/06; pages: 562-802 before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
414 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for dates of Monday, 4/10/06; pages: 803-1038 before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
415 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for dates of Tuesday, 4/11/06; pages: 1039-1235 before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court

34 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd - Docket Report

https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?472057651833024-L_92...

10/18/2006 10/18/2006 10/18/2006 10/18/2006 10/18/2006 10/27/2006 01/16/2007

Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
416 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for the dates of Wednesday, 4/12/06; pages: 1236-1324; before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
417 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for dates of Thursday, 4/13/06; pages 1325-1538 before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
418 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for dates of Friday, 4/14/06; pages: 1539-1620 before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
419 TRANSCRIPT filed of Jury Trial for dates of Monday, 4/17/06; pages: 1621-1627 before Judge William J. Zloch, re 407 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Carl Schanzleh. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
420 TRANSCRIPT INFORMATION FORM by Richard Cottone, Peter Cottone, Sr re 407 Notice of Appeal,. Transcripts of Jury trial filed on 10/18/06. (bg) (Entered: 10/19/2006)
421 NOTICE Of Filing Original Trial Exhibits by Richard Cottone (dm) (Entered: 10/30/2006)
422 ORDER requiring payment of transcript by Noon, 1/19/2007. Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on 1/16/2007. (bc) (Entered: 01/16/2007)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

07/17/2007 12:51:48

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 22

Cost:

clearinghouse 0:00-cv-07545-WJZ 1.76

35 of 35

7/17/2007 11:51 AM

 
 US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289
(404) 335-6100

02-14529-JJ Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II

Closed
Docket #: 02-14529-JJ Short Style: Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II Docket Date: 08/19/2002 Lead Case:
Agency: Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Misc. Type: Clerk: Lewis, Carol P.
Clerk Phone: (404) 335-6179

District Information

Docket #: 00-07545-CV-WJZ Judge: William J. Zloch

Dkt Date: 10/19/2000

District: Florida-Southern

NOA Date: 08/12/2002

Office: SFL-Fort Lauderdale

Secondary Case Information

Docket #: Judge: Dkt Date: / /
Case Relationships

Docket #

Short Style

Relation Status

06-14631-EE Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II Related Open

Pending Motions
No Pending Motions

1 of 8

7/17/2007 12:45 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289
(404) 335-6100

02-14529-JJ Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II
RICHARD COTTONE, as personal representative of the Estate of Peter Anthony Cottone, Jr., PETER COTTONE, SR.,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

versus

KENNETH C. JENNE, II, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida,
JOSEPH D'ELIA, GEORGE WILLIAMS, individually and in his
official capacity as Deputy Sheriff and/or Correction Officer of the Broward County
Sheriff's Office, PATRICK TIGHE, individually and in his
official capacity as Executive Director

2 of 8

7/17/2007 12:45 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX

of the Department of Detention, Broward Sheriff's Office,
DWIGHT ST. CLAIRE, DELORES WATSON,
BARBARA LAW,

Defendants-Appellants,

BROWARD COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, JOHN DOES, individually and in their official capacity as Directors and/or
supervisors of the North Broward Detention Center, et al.,

Defendants.
United States Court OF Appeals FOR the Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289
(404) 335-6100

02-14529-JJ Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II

Appellant
Kenneth C. Jenne, II Address Not On File No Briefing Information Found. Fees: Paid on 08.12.2002

Appellant Attorney
Christine M. Duignan Shavitz Law Group, P.A. 7800 CONGRESS AVE STE 108 BOCA RATON, FL 33487-1350 (561) 447-8888 Fax: (561) 447-8831

3 of 8

7/17/2007 12:45 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Joseph D'Elia Address Not On File Reply Brief Filed filed on 11.21.2002
George Williams Address Not On File No Briefing Information Found.
Patrick Tighe Address Not On File Appellant Brief Filed filed on 09.27.2002 Record Excerpts filed on 09.27.2002
Dwight St. Claire Address Not On File No Briefing Information Found.
Delores Watson Address Not On File No Briefing Information Found.
Barbara Law Address Not On File No Briefing Information Found.
4 of 8

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX
cduignan@shavitzlaw.com No Briefing Information Found.
Christine M. Duignan Shavitz Law Group, P.A. 7800 CONGRESS AVE STE 108 BOCA RATON, FL 33487-1350 (561) 447-8888 Fax: (561) 447-8831 cduignan@shavitzlaw.com No Briefing Information Found.
Christine M. Duignan Shavitz Law Group, P.A. 7800 CONGRESS AVE STE 108 BOCA RATON, FL 33487-1350 (561) 447-8888 Fax: (561) 447-8831 cduignan@shavitzlaw.com No Briefing Information Found.
Christine M. Duignan Shavitz Law Group, P.A. 7800 CONGRESS AVE STE 108 BOCA RATON, FL 33487-1350 (561) 447-8888 Fax: (561) 447-8831 cduignan@shavitzlaw.com No Briefing Information Found.
Christine M. Duignan Shavitz Law Group, P.A. 7800 CONGRESS AVE STE 108 BOCA RATON, FL 33487-1350 (561) 447-8888 Fax: (561) 447-8831 cduignan@shavitzlaw.com No Briefing Information Found.
Christine M. Duignan Shavitz Law Group, P.A. 7800 CONGRESS AVE STE 108 BOCA RATON, FL 33487-1350 (561) 447-8888 Fax: (561) 447-8831 cduignan@shavitzlaw.com No Briefing Information Found.
Christine M. Duignan Shavitz Law Group, P.A. 7800 CONGRESS AVE STE 108 BOCA RATON, FL 33487-1350 (561) 447-8888 Fax: (561) 447-8831
7/17/2007 12:45 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Appellee Richard Cottone Address Not On File
Peter Cottone, Sr. Address Not On File
Initial Service Richard T. Woulfe Office of the Attorney General 100 SE 3RD AVE STE 900 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33394-0002 (954) 761-8600 rtw@bunnellwoulfe.com Jodi Chase Page 515 N FLAGLER DR STE 1600 WEST PALM BCH, FL 33401-4346 (561) 655-1500 Stephanie W. Noe 115 S ANDREWS AVE STE 423 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301-1826 James David Rowlee Office of the Broward County Attorney 115 S ANDREWS AVE STE 423 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301-1826 (954) 357-7600 Fax: (954) 357-7641 jrowlee@br.org
5 of 8

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX
cduignan@shavitzlaw.com No Briefing Information Found. Michael Ross Piper Johnson Anselmo Murdoch Burke Piper & McDuff 2455 E SUNRISE BLVD STE 1000 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304-3113 (954) 463-0100 Fax: (954) 463-2444 piper@jambg.com No Briefing Information Found.
Appellee Attorney Barbara Ann Heyer Heyer & Associates, P.A. 1311 SE 4TH AVE FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33316-1913 (954) 522-4922 civilrtslaw@hotmail.com E-Brief Tendered: Appellee filed on 11.06.2002 Barbara Ann Heyer Heyer & Associates, P.A. 1311 SE 4TH AVE FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33316-1913 (954) 522-4922 civilrtslaw@hotmail.com Appellee Brief Filed filed on 11.05.2002
7/17/2007 12:45 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Barbara Jean Elizabeth Brush Attorney at Law 515 E LAS OLAS BLVD STE 1150 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301-4220 (954) 764-8811

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289
(404) 335-6100

02-14529-JJ Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II

File Date

Entry

Party Pending

08/12/2002 Fee Status: Paid (08/12/02) for Kenneth C. Jenne, II

Kenneth C. Jenne, II

No

08/19/2002

Civil Appeal Statement Christine M. Duignan)

Form:

Appellant-D'Elia,

Joseph

(Atty:

Joseph D'Elia

No

DKT7CIV (Docketing 7) issued. cc: Clarence Maddox To: Piper,

08/21/2002

Michael Ross cc: Duignan, Christine M. cc: Heyer, Barbara Ann cc: Woulfe, Richard T. cc: Page, Jodi Chase cc: Noe, Stephanie

No

W. cc: Rowlee, James David cc: Brush, Barbara Jean Elizabeth

08/21/2002 No hearings to be transcribed.

No

08/21/2002 Briefing Notice Issued

No

08/21/2002 Probable Jurisdiction Noted: Appellant-Jenne, Kenneth C. II

Kenneth C. Jenne, II

No

08/29/2002 Appearance Form Submitted: Christine M. Duignan

Christine

M.

No

Duignan

09/04/2002 Appearance Form Submitted: Barbara Ann Heyer

Barbara Ann Heyer

No

DIS-1 (Dismissal Notice) issued. To: Duignan, Christine M. cc:

09/09/2002

Heyer, Barbara Ann cc: Piper, Michael Ross cc: Woulfe, Richard T. cc: Page, Jodi Chase cc: Noe, Stephanie W. cc: Rowlee,

No

James David cc: Brush, Barbara Jean Elizabeth

09/12/2002

MOT2 M.

(Motion

-

Court

Action)

issued.

To:

Duignan,

Christine

No

09/25/2002 Probable Jurisdiction Noted-amended NOA

No

09/27/2002

Appellant Brief Filed: Appellant-Tighe, Christine M. Duignan)

Patrick

et

al.

(Atty:

Patrick Tighe

No

6 of 8

7/17/2007 12:45 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX

09/27/2002

Record Excerpts: M. Duignan)

Appellant-Tighe,

Patrick

et

al.

(Atty:

Christine

Patrick Tighe

No

Over the Phone Extension to File Appellee Brief Granted by AR

10/08/2002

Until November 5, 2002: Appellee-Cottone, Peter Sr. (Atty: Barbara Ann Heyer): Appellee-Cottone, Richard (Atty: Barbara

Richard Cottone

No

Ann Heyer)

11/05/2002

Appellee Brief Ann Heyer)

Filed:

Appellee-Cottone,

Peter

Sr.

(Atty:

Barbara

Peter Cottone, Sr.

No

30pages 11/06/2002 E-Brief Tendered: Appellee by Barbara Ann Heyer.

Richard Cottone

No

11/21/2002

Reply Brief Filed: Appellant-D'Elia, Duignan)All Appellants

Joseph

(Atty:

Christine

M.

Joseph D'Elia

No

11/22/2002 Certificate of Readiness

No

11/22/2002 Record on Appeal

No

03/18/2003 Oral Argument Scheduled: 03/18/03

No

03/18/2003 Appearance Form Submitted: Michael Ross Piper

Michael Ross Piper

No

03/27/2003

Michael Ross Piper argued argued for Appellee

for

Appellant;

Barbara

Ann

Heyer

No

04/11/2003 Judgment Entered

No

OPIN1A (Opinion - Issuance with Costs) issued. each party

04/11/2003

bears their own costs on appeal. cc: Piper, Michael Ross cc: Duignan, Christine M. cc: Heyer, Barbara Ann cc: Zloch,

No

William J. cc: Farris, Jerome

04/11/2003 Opinion Issued AFFIRMED IN PT/REVERSED IN PT.

No

05/01/2003 WRAP-1 (Wrappers w/ addresses) issued. To: Farris, Jerome

No

05/01/2003 Petition for Rehearing: (Atty: Barbara Ann Heyer)

Peter Cottone, No Sr.

05/15/2003

The petition DENIED.

for

rehearing

filed

by

Appellees'

Cottone

is

No

05/15/2003

REHG1 (Rehearing - Transmittal) issued. cc: Piper, Michael Ross cc: Duignan, Christine M. cc: Heyer, Barbara Ann

No

05/23/2003 CASE CLOSED-Mandate Issued

No

05/23/2003 Mandate Issued

No

MDT1 (Mandate - Issuance) issued. cc: Piper, Michael Ross cc:

05/23/2003 Duignan, Christine M. cc: Heyer, Barbara Ann To: Clarence

No

Maddox

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

7 of 8

7/17/2007 12:45 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX

Send Comment

PACER Login: Description: Billable Pages:

07/17/2007 13:46:10

hs0328

Client Code:

docket sheet Case Number:

6

Cost:

clearinghouse 02-14529-JJ 0.48

Change Client Code View Billing History

Search

8 of 8

7/17/2007 12:45 PM

 
 US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX?DKTNO=200614631
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289
(404) 335-6100

06-14631-EE Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II

Docket #: 06-14631-EE Short Style: Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II Docket Date: 08/28/2006 Lead Case:
Agency: Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Misc. Type: Clerk: Wiegmann, Brenda
Clerk Phone: (404) 335-6174

District Information

Docket #: 00-07545-CV-WJZ Judge: William J. Zloch

Dkt Date: 10/19/2000

District: Florida-Southern

NOA Date: 08/17/2006

Office: SFL-Fort Lauderdale

Secondary Case Information
Docket #: Judge: Dkt Date: / /
Case Relationships

Docket #

Short Style

Relation Status

02-14529-JJ Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II Related Closed

Pending Motions
No Pending Motions

1 of 7

7/17/2007 12:47 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX?DKTNO=200614631
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289
(404) 335-6100

06-14631-EE Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II
RICHARD COTTONE, as personal representative of the Estate of Peter Anthony Cottone, Jr., PETER COTTONE, SR.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

KENNETH C. JENNE, II, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida,
BROWARD COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, JOHN DOES, individually and in their official
capacity as directors and/or supervisors of the North Broward Detention Center,
JOHN AND JANE DOES, individually and in their official capacity as Deputy Sheriffs and or Correction
Officers of the Broward County Sheriff's Office, JOSEPH D'ELIA,

2 of 7

7/17/2007 12:47 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX?DKTNO=200614631

GEORGE WILLIAMS, individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Sheriff and/or Correction Officer of the Broward County Sheriff's Office, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.
United States Court OF Appeals FOR the Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289
(404) 335-6100

06-14631-EE Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II

Appellant Richard Cottone Address Not On File No Briefing Information Found. Fees: Paid on 08.17.2006
Peter Cottone, Sr. Address Not On File Appellant Brief Filed filed on 03.07.2007 Record Excerpts filed on 03.07.2007
Appellee Kenneth C. Jenne, II Address Not On File

Appellant Attorney
Barbara Ann Heyer Heyer & Associates, P.A. 1311 SE 4TH AVE FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33316-1913 (954) 522-4922 civilrtslaw@hotmail.com No Briefing Information Found.
Barbara Ann Heyer Heyer & Associates, P.A. 1311 SE 4TH AVE FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33316-1913 (954) 522-4922 civilrtslaw@hotmail.com No Briefing Information Found.
Appellee Attorney
Michael Ross Piper Johnson Anselmo Murdoch Burke Piper & McDuff 2455 E SUNRISE BLVD STE 1000 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304-3113 (954) 463-0100 Fax: (954) 463-2444 piper@jambg.com No Briefing Information Found.

3 of 7

7/17/2007 12:47 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Broward County Sheriff's Office Address Not On File John Does Address Not On File John and Jane Does Address Not On File Joseph D'Elia Address Not On File
George Williams Address Not On File
Andrew Perfilio Address Not On File
Initial Service Richard T. Woulfe Office of the Attorney General 100 SE 3RD AVE STE 900 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33394-0002 (954) 761-8600 rtw@bunnellwoulfe.com Gregg Alan Toomey 100 SE 3rd Avvenue, Suite 900 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394 (954) 761-8600 Stephanie W. Noe 115 S ANDREWS AVE STE 423
4 of 7

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX?DKTNO=200614631
No Briefing Information Found.
No Briefing Information Found.
No Briefing Information Found. Michael Ross Piper Johnson Anselmo Murdoch Burke Piper & McDuff 2455 E SUNRISE BLVD STE 1000 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304-3113 (954) 463-0100 Fax: (954) 463-2444 piper@jambg.com No Briefing Information Found. Michael Ross Piper Johnson Anselmo Murdoch Burke Piper & McDuff 2455 E SUNRISE BLVD STE 1000 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304-3113 (954) 463-0100 Fax: (954) 463-2444 piper@jambg.com Appellee Brief Filed filed on 06.26.2007 Nancy Wood Gregoire Bunnell, Woulfe, Kirschbaum, Keller, McIntyre & Gregoire, P.A. 1 FINANCIAL PLZ FL 9 100 SE 3rd AVENUE, STE 900 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33394-0032 (954) 761-8600 Fax: (954) 525-2134 nwg@bunnellwoulfe.com E-Brief Tendered: Appellee filed on 05.01.2007 Appellee Brief Filed filed on 05.03.2007
7/17/2007 12:47 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301-1826 James Davis Rowlee 115 South Andrews Avenue Suite 423 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-1801
Christine M. Duignan Shavitz Law Group, P.A. 7800 CONGRESS AVE STE 108 BOCA RATON, FL 33487-1350 (561) 447-8888 Fax: (561) 447-8831 cduignan@shavitzlaw.com

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX?DKTNO=200614631
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W. Atlanta, GA 30303-2289
(404) 335-6100

06-14631-EE Richard Cottone v. Kenneth C. Jenne, II

File Date

Entry

Party Pending

08/17/2006 Fee Status: Paid (08/17/06) for Richard Cottone

Richard Cottone

No

DKT2 (Docketing Notice) issued. To:Barbara Ann Heyer;

08/29/2006

c:Christine M. Duignan; c:Clarence Maddox; c:Gregg Alan Toomey; c:James Davis Rowlee; c:Jodi Chase Page; c:Michael

No

Ross Piper; c:Richard T. Woulfe; c:Stephanie W. Noe

08/29/2006 Probable Jurisdiction Noted:

Richard Cottone

No

09/06/2006 Appearance Form Submitted.

Barbara Heyer

Ann

No

09/06/2006 Transcript Order Form: (Atty: Barbara Ann Heyer)

Richard Cottone

No

09/06/2006 Civil Appeal Statement Form: (Atty: Barbara Ann Heyer)

Richard Cottone

No

09/11/2006 Appearance Form Submitted.

Nancy

Wood

No

Gregoire

09/11/2006 Motion for Extension to File Transcript:

Carl Schanzleh

No

09/13/2006 Motion for Extension to File Transcript is GRANTED. (SKE)

No

5 of 7

7/17/2007 12:47 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX?DKTNO=200614631

MOT2 (Notice of court action) issued. To:Carl Schanzleh;

09/13/2006 c:Barbara Ann Heyer; c:Clarence Maddox; c:Nancy Wood

No

Gregoire

10/18/2006 Notice of Transcript Filing Rec. from Ct. Rptr.:

Carl Schanzleh

No

10/18/2006 Transcript Filed in D.C. (4/3/06 thru 10/18/06 trial):

Carl Schanzleh

No

10/24/2006 Briefing Notice Issued

No

10/24/2006

BR1 (Letter confirming brief due Heyer; c:Nancy Wood Gregoire

date)

issued.

To:Barbara

Ann

No

03/06/2007 E-Brief Tendered: Appellant by Barbara Ann Heyer

No

30pages

03/07/2007 Appellant Brief Filed: (Atty: Barbara Ann Heyer)

Peter Cottone, Sr.

No

03/07/2007 Record Excerpts: (Atty: Barbara Ann Heyer)

Peter Cottone, Sr.

No

03/23/2007

Attorney Changed Nancy Wood.

for:

Andrew

Perfilio

From:

To:

Gregoire,

Andrew Perfilio

No

03/23/2007

Motion for Extension Wood Gregoire)

to

File

Appellee

Brief:

(Atty:

Nancy

Andrew Perfilio

No

Aples Andrew Perfilio, M.D., Maurice Waldman, M.D., Elma

03/28/2007 McKenzie, L.P.N. and EMSA Correctional Care, Inc.'s motion

No

for extension to May 5, 2007 to file brief is GRANTED.(SFB)

03/28/2007

MOT2 (Notice of court action) issued. Gregoire; c:Barbara Ann Heyer

To:Nancy

Wood

No

04/04/2007

Appellee's Kenneth C. Jenne, II, Joseph D'elia Williams Motion for Extension of Time

and

George

No

Appellee's Kenneth C. Jenne, II, Joseph D'elia and George

04/09/2007 Williams motion for extension to May 7, 2007, to file brief is

No

granted as unopposed.(WHP)

04/09/2007

MOT2 (Notice of court action) c:Barbara Ann Heyer; c:Nancy

issued. To:Michael Wood Gregoire

Ross

Piper;

No

04/12/2007 Appearance Form Submitted.

Michael Ross Piper

No

04/12/2007

Attorney Changed Michael Ross.

for:

George

Williams

From:

To:

Piper,

George Williams

No

04/12/2007

Attorney Ross.

Changed

for:

Joseph

D'Elia

From:

To:

Piper,

Michael

Joseph D'Elia

No

05/01/2007 E-Brief Tendered: Appellee by Nancy Wood Gregoire
30pages

Andrew Perfilio

No

05/03/2007 Appellee Brief Filed: (Atty: Nancy Wood Gregoire)

Andrew Perfilio

No

6 of 7

7/17/2007 12:47 PM

US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

http://pacer.ca11.uscourts.gov/CHMSDKTP.FWX?DKTNO=200614631

05/09/2007

MOT2 (ret'd mot ext oot) issued. To:Michael Ross c:Barbara Ann Heyer; c:Nancy Wood Gregoire

Piper;

No

Motion for Leave to File Appellees(Jenne, D'Elia, Williams) 06/18/2007 Brief Out of Time: (Atty: Michael Ross Piper): (Atty: Michael
Ross Piper): (Atty: Michael Ross Piper)

George Williams

No

06/18/2007

Rule 31-2(b) Barbara Ann

Motion for Extension to File Reply Brief: Heyer): (Atty: Barbara Ann Heyer)

(Atty:

Richard Cottone

No

The motion to file Appellees' answer brief out of time is

06/26/2007

GRANTED. Appellants' motion for an extension of time to file their reply brief to and including July 16, 2007 is GRANTED.

No

RLA

06/26/2007

MOT2 (Notice of court action) c:Michael Ross Piper; c:Nancy

issued. c:Barbara Wood Gregoire

Ann

Heyer;

No

06/26/2007

Appellee Brief Filed: (Atty: Michael Ross Piper): Michael Ross Piper): (Atty: Michael Ross Piper)

(Atty:

George Williams

No

07/16/2007 E-Brief Tendered: Reply by Barbara Ann Heyer

No

30pages

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

PACER Login: Description: Billable Pages:

07/17/2007 13:46:57

hs0328

Client Code:

docket sheet Case Number:

5

Cost:

clearinghouse 06-14631-EE 0.40

Send Comment

Change Client Code View Billing History

Search

7 of 7

7/17/2007 12:47 PM

 
 Cottone ex rel. Estate of Cottone v. Jenne, 288 Fed.Appx. 620 (2008)

288 Fed.Appx. 620 This case was not selected for publication in the
Federal Reporter. Not for Publication in West’s Federal Reporter See
Fed. Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 generally governing citation of judicial decisions issued on or after Jan. 1, 2007. See also Eleventh Circuit Rules 36-2, 36-3. (Find CTA11 Rule 36-2 and Find CTA11
Rule 36-3) United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.
Richard COTTONE, as personal representative of the Estate of Peter Anthony Cottone, Jr., Peter Cottone, Sr., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Kenneth C. JENNE, II, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, Broward County Sheriff’s Office, John
Does, individually and in their official capacity as directors and/or supervisors of the North Broward
Detention Center, John and Jane Does, individually and in their official capacity as Deputy Sheriffs and/or Correction Officers of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, Joseph D’Elia, George Williams, individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Sheriff and/or Correction Officer of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, et
al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 06-14631. | July 30, 2008.

Attorneys and Law Firms

Barbara Ann Heyer, Heyer & Associates, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Michael Ross Piper, Johnson Anselmo Murdoch Burke Piper & McDuff, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for Kenneth C. Jenne, II, Joseph D’Elia, and George Williams.

Nancy Wood Gregoire, Bunnell, Woulfe, Kirschbaum, Keller, McIntyre & Gregoire, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for Andrew Perfilio.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. D.C. Docket No. 00-07545-CV-WJZ. Before ANDERSON, HULL and SILER,* Circuit Judges.

*

The Honorable Eugene E. Siler, Jr., United States

Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by

designation.

Opinion
PER CURIAM:
This is the second appeal of this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case, which arises out of the death of Peter Cottone, Jr. while he was detained at the North Broward Detention Center in Broward County, Florida. Another inmate, Widnel Charles, strangled Cottone, Jr. to death in the mental health unit of the Detention Center, and Cottone, Jr.’s estate sued, inter alios: (1) Kenneth C. Jenne, II, in his official capacity as the Sheriff of Broward County; (2) Deputy Joseph D’Elia and Deputy George Williams, the deputy sheriffs on duty in the mental health unit at the time of Cottone, Jr.’s murder, in their individual and official capacities; (3) EMSA Correctional Care, Inc., a Florida Corporation that contracted with the Sheriff’s Office to provide health care to inmates; and (4) Andrew Perfilio, M.D., Maurice Waldman, M.D., and Nurse Elma McKenzie, two doctors and a nurse employed by EMSA and each of whom treated or oversaw treatment of inmate Charles. In essence, Cottone, Jr.’s estate asserted that each defendant violated Cottone Jr.’s constitutional rights by acting with deliberate indifference to a known substantial risk of serious harm to Cottone, Jr. while he was incarcerated at the Detention Center.
After our partial reversal and remand in Cottone v. Jenne, 326 F.3d 1352 (11th Cir.2003), in which we determined that certain defendants were entitled to qualified immunity while others were not, there was a two-week jury trial as to the four groups of defendants listed above (collectively, the “defendants-appellees”). At the close of plaintiff-appellant Richard Cottone’s case-in-chief, the district court granted all of the defendants-appellees’ motions for judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The district court also subsequently entered a twenty-nine page order outlining in detail the basis of its Rule 50 rulings.
*622 Plaintiff-appellant Richard Cottone timely filed this appeal, arguing that the district court erred by: (1) granting judgment as a matter of law to the defendants-appellees; (2) excluding certain expert testimony and other evidence; and (3) denying his motion to amend his complaint to conform to the trial evidence.
After oral argument and thorough review of the record, we find no reversible error in the district court’s rulings.
1

Cottone ex rel. Estate of Cottone v. Jenne, 288 Fed.Appx. 620 (2008)

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s entry of judgment as a matter of law in favor of the defendants-appellees.
AFFIRMED.

Parallel Citations 2008 WL 2909610

2

 
 326 F.3d 1352 (2003)
Richard COTTONE, as personal representative of the Estate of Peter Anthony Cottone, Jr., Peter Cottone, Sr., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v.
Kenneth C. JENNE, II, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Sheriff and/or Correction Officer of the Broward County Sheriff's Office, Patrick Tighe, individually and in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Department of
Detention, Broward Sheriff's Office, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, Barbara Law, Defendants-Appellants,
Broward County Sheriff's Office, John Does, individually and in their official capacity as Directors and/or supervisors of the North Broward Detention Center, et al., Defendants.
No. 02-14529.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
April 11, 2003.
13534 *1353 *1354 Christine M. Duignan, Michael Ross Piper, Johnson, Anselmo, Murdoch, Burke & George, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for Defendants-Appellants.
Barbara Ann Heyer, Heyer & Associates, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.
1355 *1355 Before HULL, MARCUS and FARRIS[*], Circuit Judges.
HULL, Circuit Judge:
In this § 1983 suit, defendants Joseph D'Elia, George Williams, Patrick Tighe, Dwight St. Claire, Delores Watson, and Barbara Law, all in their individual capacities, appeal the district court's order denying their Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss raising the defense of qualified immunity. After review and oral argument, we affirm the district court's denial of qualified immunity for defendants D'Elia and Williams, and reverse its denial of qualified immunity for defendants Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law.
I. BACKGROUND
This appeal involves the death of Peter Cottone, Jr. ("Cottone") while he was detained in the North Broward Detention Center. Given the Rule 12(b)(6) posture of the case, we first review the allegations of the amended complaint as if all the allegations contained therein were true.[1]
A. Cottone's Detention
On March 9, 1999, Cottone was involved in a physical altercation with his father, Peter Cottone, Sr. As a result of this violent incident, Cottone involuntarily was transported to Memorial Hospital in Broward County, Florida under Florida Statute § 394.467, for observation and evaluation.[2] On March 14, 1999, Cottone was moved to the Broward County Jail and was booked, assessed, and classified. As a result of the assessment and classification, Cottone was transferred from the Broward County Jail to Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center, which houses mentally ill inmates.
At the time of Cottone's detention, the Broward County Sheriff, employees working at the jail, and the Broward County Board of Commissioners were subject to a consent decree stemming from Carruthers v. Cochran, Case

No. 76-6068-CIV-HOEVELER (S.D.Fla.), which was intended to ameliorate unconstitutional conditions of confinement in the Broward County jail system. The consent decree prescribed, inter alia, requirements for classification, separation, housing, and monitoring of inmates, as well as acceptable use-of-force levels, minimum medical care requirements, and availability of recreational activities.
B. Charles's Detention
On March 1, 1999, Widnel Charles ("Charles") was arrested. Prior to his arrest, Charles had been detained involuntarily under Florida Statute § 394.467 on numerous occasions due to his violent tendencies and a history 1356 of schizophrenia. While in the booking area of the Broward County Jail on March 1, Charles struck *1356 another inmate. Both a deputy sheriff and a nurse in the booking area observed and documented Charles's outburst. Charles originally was placed in the general population at the Broward County Jail. On March 6, however, he was reassessed and transferred from the Broward County Jail to the North Broward Detention Center.
On April 1, a staff psychiatrist at the North Broward Detention Center determined that Charles was mentally stable and reduced the psychotropic medicine to be administered to him. On April 6, Charles was placed into Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center with Cottone and Albert St. Hubert, the third and only other inmate in Unit 1. Although there were three separate cells in Unit 1, the doors to the cells remained unlocked, allowing the three inmates to interact with each other.
C. Charles Attacks Cottone
On April 7, guards D'Elia and Williams were summoned to Unit 1 by inmate St. Hubert. When D'Elia and Williams arrived, they found Cottone unconscious on the floor with ligature marks around his neck. During a schizophrenic episode, Charles allegedly strangled Cottone with shoelaces. After Charles's attack, Cottone was taken to North Broward Medical Center, where he died.
The amended complaint alleges that Charles's mental condition and the risk of serious harm that Charles posed to the other inmates was known by D'Elia and Williams. Specifically, the amended complaint alleges that prior to the murder incident, Charles was violent, out-of-control, and experiencing a schizophrenic episode and that Charles's mental condition would have been obvious to D'Elia and Williams if they had been watching the monitor. The amended complaint further alleges that D'Elia and Williams did not monitor the inmates housed in Unit 1 that day but were watching computer games, as follows:
Surveillance cameras mounted in the Day Room of Unit 1 were aimed at the three cells, however, they were not being monitored at the time of the incident.
At the time of the incident, a computer game was observed on the screen of the computer in the control room where the Defendants D'ELIA and WILLIAMS were stationed.
Amended Complaint, para. 50-51.
D. Procedural History
Plaintiffs Richard Cottone, on behalf of the Estate of Peter Cottone, Jr., and Peter Cottone, Sr. brought this § 1983 action against numerous defendants, including defendants D'Elia, Williams, Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law in their individual capacities as a result of Cottone's death while he was detained in Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center.[3] In their amended complaint, the plaintiffs allege two separate claims against the defendants. First, the plaintiffs allege that the defendants D'Elia's and Williams's reckless indifference toward a substantial risk of serious inmate harm at the North Broward Detention Center, which led to Cottone's death, 1357 violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.[4] Second, the plaintiffs *1357 allege that defendants Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law have supervisory liability for Cottone's death due to their failure to train and to supervise deputy sheriffs and corrections officers under their control.

On April 18, 2002, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court denied the defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion, concluding, inter alia, that the defendants in their individual capacities are not entitled to qualified immunity. The defendants subsequently filed this interlocutory appeal.[5]
II. STANDARD OF REVIEW
We review de novo a district court's denial of qualified immunity. See Jordan v. Doe, 38 F.3d 1559, 1563 (11th Cir.1994); Hutton v. Strickland, 919 F.2d 1531, 1536 (11th Cir.1990). The determination of whether a complaint sufficiently alleges a constitutional violation also is a matter of law reviewed de novo. See GJR Invs., Inc. v. County of Escambia, 132 F.3d 1359, 1367 (11th Cir.1998). In reviewing a complaint, we accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true and construe the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. See id.; Williams v. Alabama State Univ., 102 F.3d 1179, 1182 (11th Cir.1997).
III. DISCUSSION
A. Rule 12(b)(6) Motions
A complaint is subject to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) when its allegations, on their face, show that an affirmative defense bars recovery on the claim. Marsh v. Butler County, 268 F.3d 1014, 1022 (11th Cir.2001) (en banc). "Once the affirmative defense of qualified immunity is advanced ... [u]nless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Absent such allegations, "[i]t is ... appropriate for a district court to grant the defense of qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss stage." Gonzalez v. Reno, 325 F.3d 1228, 1233 (11th Cir.2003). Thus, if the defendants in this case are entitled to qualified immunity, then their Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss must be granted and the plaintiffs' suit must be dismissed.
B. Qualified Immunity Principles
"The defense of qualified immunity completely protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suit in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates `clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.'" Gonzalez, 325 F.3d at 1233 (quoting Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 122 S.Ct. 2508, 2515, 153 L.Ed.2d 666 (2002)); Vinyard v. Wilson, 311 F.3d 1340, 1346 (11th Cir.2002). To receive qualified immunity, a government official first must prove that he was acting within his 1358 discretionary *1358 authority. Gonzalez, 325 F.3d at 1234 (citing Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1346). In this case, it is clear-and undisputed-that defendants D'Elia, Williams, Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law were acting within their discretionary authority.
Once a defendant establishes that he was acting within his discretionary authority, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that the defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity. Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1346. The Supreme Court has established a two-part test to determine the applicability of qualified immunity. "The threshold inquiry a court must undertake in a qualified immunity analysis is whether [the] plaintiff's allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation." Hope, 122 S.Ct. at 2513. If, under the plaintiff's allegations, the defendants would have violated a constitutional right, "the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established." Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151, 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001).

C. Liability of Guards D'Elia and Williams
We first examine whether the plaintiffs' amended complaint alleges a Fourteenth Amendment violation committed by defendants D'Elia and Williams.
1. Constitutional Violation Under the Fourteenth Amendment
"A prison official's deliberate indifference to a known, substantial risk of serious harm to an inmate violates the [Fourteenth] Amendment." Marsh, 268 F.3d at 1028. A Fourteenth Amendment violation occurs when a substantial risk of serious harm, of which the official is subjectively aware, exists and the official does not respond reasonably to the risk. Id. Furthermore, such risk must be an objectively substantial risk of serious harm to prisoners, and the prison official must respond to that risk in an objectively unreasonable manner. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834, 844-845, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994). Finally, a plaintiff must show that the constitutional violation caused the injury. Marsh, 268 F.3d at 1028.
We conclude that the plaintiffs' amended complaint sufficiently alleges a violation of Cottone's Fourteenth Amendment rights. According to the amended complaint, Cottone's co-inmate, Charles, had a history of violent outbursts and mental instability and was in the midst of a violent schizophrenic outrage prior to his murdering Cottone. Given his visibly violent, mentally unstable state, Charles posed an objective risk of serious harm to other inmates, including Cottone.
Furthermore, based on the allegations in the plaintiffs' amended complaint, D'Elia and Williams were subjectively aware of the substantial risk of serious harm that Charles posed to the other inmates. First, D'Elia and Williams were assigned to Unit 1 in the North Broward Detention Center. Thus, D'Elia and Williams knew they were monitoring mentally ill inmates, who were so mentally ill that they had been assessed, classified, and separated for housing in Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center. Second, they were aware of the substantial risk of serious harm that Charles individually posed to other inmates based on his violent, schizophrenic outbursts which occurred prior to the murder incident. They were the guards on duty when Charles entered the throws of a violent schizophrenic outburst prior to murdering Cottone.
D'Elia's and Williams's response to the risk also was objectively unreasonable. According to the plaintiffs' 1359 amended complaint, neither D'Elia nor Williams was *1359 monitoring the inmates at all during the time either of
Charles's violent schizophrenic outburst prior to the murder or of Charles's murder of Cottone. Plaintiffs allege that D'Elia and Williams took consecutive breaks during this time and that a computer game was observed on the computer screen at their monitoring station at the time of the murder.
Plaintiffs' amended complaint also alleges that the total lack of monitoring and supervision of Charles caused Cottone's death. They further allege that D'Elia's and Williams's failure to monitor a known violent, unstable inmate, like Charles, caused Cottone's death.
In sum, at this Rule 12(b)(6) stage, we conclude that the plaintiffs' amended complaint adequately alleges (1) an objective, substantial risk of serious harm to inmates existed, (2) D'Elia and Williams subjectively were aware of the substantial risk of serious harm, (3) D'Elia and Williams responded in an objectively unreasonable manner to that risk, and (4) this constitutional violation caused Cottone's death.
2. Violation of Clearly Established Law
Because the plaintiffs' amended complaint sufficiently alleges a constitutional violation, we next determine whether preexisting law clearly established that the defendants' conduct amounted to a constitutional violation. Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1349 ("Because [the defendant]'s conduct violated a constitutional right, the next question is whether that constitutional right was `clearly established' at the time of the violation."); Marsh, 268 F.3d at 1030-31 ("A government-officer defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless, at the time of the incident, the preexisting law dictates, that is, truly compels, the conclusion ... that what Defendant was doing violated Plaintiffs'

federal rights.") (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). "`The relevant, dispositive inquiry in determining whether a right is clearly established is whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted.'" Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1350 (quoting Saucier, 533 U.S. at 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151). In making this inquiry, "the salient question ... is whether the state of the law ... gave [the guards] fair warning that their alleged [conduct] was unconstitutional." Hope, 122 S.Ct. at 2516.
We can locate at least two factually similar cases, decided prior to the conduct in question, in which a lack of monitoring and supervision of known violent inmates, which led to inmate-on-inmate violence, constituted impermissible unconstitutional conduct. In LaMarca v. Turner, 995 F.2d 1526, 1536-38 (11th Cir.1993), this Court determined that a prison official's failure to ensure adequate supervision and monitoring of inmates with a history of inmate-on-inmate violence was a violation of the Eighth Amendment. In LaMarca, despite reported incidents of prior inmate-on-inmate violence, prison authorities did not station officers to patrol throughout the inmate dormitories, particularly at night. Id. at 1538. Prison authorities also allowed inmates to hang sheets, obstructing the guards' views, and preventing them from adequately supervising the inmates. Id. Thus, in LaMarca, there was an absence of adequate supervision despite a substantial risk of serious harm from inmate-on-inmate violence.
Similarly, in Hale v. Tallapoosa County, 50 F.3d 1579, 1584 (11th Cir.1995), an inmate was assaulted by another inmate during the lengthy time between the jailer's scheduled rounds. Id. at 1581. This assault occurred despite past incidents of inmate-on-inmate violence because, other than making rounds, the jailer in Hale was "stationed 1360 out of eyesight and earshot" of *1360 the inmates. Id. at 1584. Based on these facts, this Court in Hale recognized unconstitutional conditions of confinement existed because there was a lack of inmate supervision and a substantial risk of serious harm from known violent inmates.
The plaintiffs have made similar allegations in this case. Under the plaintiffs' version of the facts, the guards knew that Charles represented a substantial risk of serious harm because he was violent, out-of-control and in the throes of schizophrenia during his detention in Unit 1 prior to the murder incident. D'Elia and Williams were assigned to supervise Charles as one of the mentally ill inmates in Unit 1, but did not do so. Instead, they took consecutive breaks and watched video games. Thus, just as there was no supervision of known violent inmates in LaMarca and Hale, in this case guards D'Elia and Williams did not monitor and supervise Charles, a known violent inmate who posed a substantial risk of serious harm to the other inmates.
We conclude that prior factually similar case law gave fair and clear warning to D'Elia and Williams that it was their duty to monitor and to supervise known violent inmates who posed a substantial risk of serious harm to other inmates. See Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1346. The law of this circuit "clearly establishes" that their total failure to monitor a known violent inmate housed in Unit 1, a housing unit for mentally ill inmates, constitutes unconstitutional deliberate indifference to Cottone's Fourteenth Amendment rights. Thus, given the plaintiffs' version of the events, defendants D'Elia and Williams are not entitled to qualified immunity at this Rule 12(b)(6) stage.
D. Supervisory Liability of Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law
"It is well established in this Circuit that supervisory officials are not liable under § 1983 for the unconstitutional acts of their subordinates on the basis of respondeat superior or vicarious liability." Hartley v. Parnell, 193 F.3d 1263, 1269 (11th Cir.1999) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); Gonzalez, 325 F.3d at 1234 (concluding supervisory officials are not liable on the basis of respondeat superior or vicarious liability). Instead, supervisory liability under § 1983 occurs either when the supervisor personally participates in the alleged unconstitutional conduct or when there is a causal connection between the actions of a supervising official and the alleged constitutional deprivation. Gonzalez, 325 F.3d at 1234; Brown v. Crawford, 906 F.2d 667, 671 (11th Cir.1990). The necessary causal connection can be established "when a history of widespread abuse puts the responsible supervisor on notice of the need to correct the alleged deprivation, and he fails to do so." Gonzalez, 325 F.3d at 1234 (quoting Braddy v. Fla. Dept. of Labor & Employment, 133 F.3d 797, 802 (11th Cir.1998)); Brown, 906 F.2d at 671. Alternatively, the causal connection may be established when a supervisor's "`custom or policy ... result[s] in deliberate indifference to constitutional rights'" or when facts support "an inference that the

supervisor directed the subordinates to act unlawfully or knew that the subordinates would act unlawfully and failed to stop them from doing so." Gonzalez, 325 F.3d at 1235 (quoting Rivas v. Freeman, 940 F.2d 1491, 1495 (11th Cir.1991)); Hartley, 193 F.3d at 1263; see also Post v. City of Ft. Lauderdale, 7 F.3d 1552, 1560-61 (11th Cir.1993). "The standard by which a supervisor is held liable in [his] individual capacity for the actions of a 1361 subordinate is extremely rigorous." Gonzalez, *1361 325 F.3d at 1234 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
The plaintiffs do not allege that defendants Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law personally participated in the alleged unconstitutional conduct which led to Cottone's death. Instead, the plaintiffs allege that there is a causal connection between these defendants and Cottone's death based on the defendants' failure to train and to supervise guards D'Elia and Williams. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants were on notice of the widespread unconstitutional conduct at the Broward County Jail through the consent decree and that the defendants failed to rectify such conduct.
The consent decree generally addresses unconstitutional practices at the Broward County Jail with respect to conditions of confinement, specifically the classification, separation, housing, and monitoring of inmates. In broad terms, the consent decree requires that assessment and classification of inmates be ongoing, that inmates continuously be assessed and classified based on an inmate's "social, legal, and ... medical history," and that each Broward County detention facility have its own classification officer. The consent decree also requires prison officials to separate and to supervise inmates closely, particularly those "who present a threat to the staff, other inmates, or themselves." With respect to monitoring these types of inmates, the consent decree requires "regular, documented sight checks ... at intervals not to exceed 15 minutes." Other than a time interval, however, the consent decree does not specify any details as to how such monitoring should be performed.
The problem for the plaintiffs here is that the allegations in the amended complaint itself show that the supervisors complied with the relevant terms of the consent decree. According to the amended complaint, Broward County Jail officials, including Dr. Maurice Waldman,[6] assessed Charles and classified him as a mentally ill inmate. As part of the ongoing inmate assessment procedures in place, Dr. Waldman reduced Charles's psychotropic medication. Based on the assessment and classification procedures in place, Charles was transferred to separate housing for mentally ill inmates in Unit 1 of the North Broward Detention Center. Furthermore, there were surveillance cameras installed that allowed the guards to monitor continuously the inmates housed in Unit 1. Indeed, two guards, D'Elia and Williams, specifically were assigned to monitor the inmates in Unit 1. By its own allegations, the amended complaint itself acknowledges that the supervisors put in place the necessary procedures to abide by the consent decree. Thus, the consent decree itself does not provide notice to establish a causal connection between the supervisors and Cottone's death.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs do not allege any specific facts at all connecting the supervisors to D'Elia's and Williams's failure to monitor the inmates in Unit 1. There is no allegation that supervisors directed the subordinate guards not to monitor inmates or to act unlawfully. The amended complaint also does not make any allegations that the supervisors had any knowledge of D'Elia's and Williams's failure to monitor inmates or that D'Elia and Williams had any past history, or even one prior incident, of failing to monitor inmates or of watching computer 1362 games. *1362 The supervisors were not on any notice of D'Elia's and Williams's unconstitutional conduct so as to put the supervisors on notice of the need to correct or to stop the conduct of D'Elia and Williams by further training or supervision. Thus, the plaintiffs fail to establish the necessary causal connection between the supervisors and the unconstitutional conduct in issue for supervisory liability to be imposed. See Gonzalez, 325 F.3d at 1236 (concluding that in the absence of a causal connection between the supervisors and the alleged unconstitutional conduct, there is no basis for supervisory liability).
The plaintiffs also do not allege any affirmative custom or policy implemented by the supervisory defendants that played a role in Cottone's death. See id. Nor do they allege that the supervisors instructed D'Elia and Williams to commit constitutional violations. See id. As a result, the amended complaint does not allege the causal connection required to impose supervisory liability against these defendants.[7]
Thus, the plaintiffs have failed to allege that defendants Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law committed a constitutional violation.[8] Because the amended complaint fails to allege a constitutional violation committed by

the supervisory defendants, we need not reach the "clearly established law" prong of the qualified immunity inquiry with respect to supervisory liability. See Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1346 ("If a constitutional right would have been violated under the plaintiff's version of the facts, the next, sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established.") (internal quotation marks and citation omitted) (emphasis added). Accordingly, we conclude that defendants Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law are entitled to qualified immunity and that the district court erred in failing to grant these defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
IV. CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, we reverse the district court's denial of the defendants Tighe, St. Claire, Watson, and Law's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity and affirm the district court's denial of defendants D'Elia and Williams's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.
[*] Honorable Jerome Farris, United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation.
[1] See Marsh v. Butler County, 268 F.3d 1014, 1023 (11th Cir.2001) (en banc) (setting forth the facts in the case by "[a]ccepting all well-pleaded factual allegations (with reasonable inferences drawn favorably to Plaintiffs) in the complaint as true"). Because we must accept the allegations of plaintiffs' amended complaint as true, what we set out in this opinion as "the facts" for Rule 12(b)(6) purposes may not be the actual facts. Cf. Swint v. City of Wadley, 51 F.3d 988, 992 (11th Cir.1995).
[2] Florida Statute § 394.467, known as the "Baker Act," allows a person to be placed involuntarily in a treatment facility if clear and convincing evidence indicates that the person is mentally ill, and, inter alia, there is a substantial likelihood that, based on recent behavior, the person will inflict serious bodily harm on himself or another person. Fla. Stat. § 394.467(1)(a).
[3] All parties agree that Sheriff Kenneth C. Jenne, II is not a party to this appeal. The amended complaint names Sheriff Jenne as a defendant solely in his official capacity.
[4] Because Cottone was a pretrial detainee at the time of the incident, the relevant constitutional guarantee is not the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, but rather the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 671 n. 40, 97 S.Ct. 1401, 51 L.Ed.2d 711 (1977). Nonetheless, we previously have stated that "the standard for providing basic human needs to those incarcerated or in detention is the same under both the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments." Marsh, 268 F.3d at 1024 n. 5. The plaintiffs' amended complaint notwithstanding, we will refer to their claims as arising under the Fourteenth Amendment.
[5] The denial of qualified immunity on a motion to dismiss is an appealable interlocutory order. See Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 530, 105 S.Ct. 2806, 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985).
[6] Although not a party to this appeal, Dr. Waldman is a defendant in this case before the district court.
[7] In examining the factual allegations in a complaint, we must keep in mind the heightened pleading requirements for civil rights cases, especially those involving qualified immunity. GJR Invs., Inc. v. County of Escambia, 132 F.3d 1359, 1367 (11th Cir.1998). However, as to supervisory liability in this case, the plaintiffs' amended complaint fails to meet even a relaxed pleading requirement.
[8] At all times, the plaintiffs have been represented by legal counsel. Never in the district court did the plaintiffs seek to amend the complaint (for example, by adding facts), even after the complaint's sufficiency had been challenged specifically and the qualified immunity defense expressly advanced by opposing counsel. Thus, we decline to remand this case to the district court for further amendments to the plaintiffs' already amended complaint.

Save trees - read court opinions online on Google Scholar.