Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 39 07/24/17 Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

LAWRENCE LEVY, ET AL. Plaintiffs,

V.
LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS, ET AL.,
Defendants.

Case No. 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD

STIPULATION & AGREEMENT This Joint Stipulation and Agreement (the "Agreement") is entered into by and between Lawrence Levy, Cedric Hammond, and Bradley Casto (collectively, the "Named Plaintiffs"), and the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections ("LDPSC"), and its Secretary, James M. LeBlanc (collectively, "Defendants," and together with Named Plaintiffs, the "Parties"). WHEREAS, on August 16, 2016, Named Plaintiffs filed a putative class action lawsuit under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq., and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, No. 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD, captioned Lawrence Levy, et al. v. Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, et al., (the "Action") on behalf of themselves and all present and future probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments and who are or will be within the control and supervision of the LDPSC and who allege they have been denied, are being denied, or will be denied the assistance they need to effectively communicate and pmiicipate in, and obtain the benefits of, LDPSC services, programs and activities ("Affected Individuals") and seek relief as described in the complaint;
1

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 39 07/24/17 Page 2 of 5
WHEREAS, Defendants deny the Named Plaintiffs' allegations and further deny that class action certification is appropriate in this matter;
WHEREAS, the Parties agree and acknowledge that the number of Affected Individuals changes from time to time as individuals come on and go off probation or parole and that there may be additional Affected Individuals in the future, each included within the definition of "Affected Individuals";
WHEREAS, by entering into this Agreement it is the intent of the Parties to avoid the expenditure of considerable time and resources litigating whether this Action should be certified as a class action, while ensuring any subsequent relief obtained by Named Plaintiffs shall extend to all Affected Individuals;
WHEREAS, the Parties are satisfied that the terms and conditions of this Agreement are fair, reasonable, and adequate and that this Agreement is in the best interests ofNamed Plaintiffs, Affected Individuals, and Defendants;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE: 1. Judgment. For purposes of this Stipulation and Agreement, "Judgment" shall mean a final order in the above-captioned action from any Court (district court, appellate court and/or Supreme Court) providing for relief as described in the Complaint to any of the Named Plaintiffs in this Action. 2. Notice of Judgment. On the date a Judgment rendered in full or in part against Defendants in this Action becomes final, if ever, the following notice provisions shall apply without any further order of the Court being required:
(a) Affected Individuals. Within twenty-one (21) days of a Judgment, Defendants, at their sole expense, shall provide written notice of the terms, conditions,
2

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 39 07/24/17 Page 3 of 5
remedies and/or relief set forth in the Judgment to all Affected Individuals identifiable as of the date of the Judgment (the "Notice of Judgment"). The Notice of Judgment shall be jointly drafted and agreed to by Plaintiffs and Defendants. The Notice of Judgment must state prominently at the beginning of the Notice of Judgment that Defendants will, at their own expense, make available an appropriate auxiliary aid (e.g., a qualified American Sign Language Interpreter) if requested by the Affected Individual to ensure that each Affected Individual understands the Notice of Judgment. At their own expense, Defendants shall either deliver by hand the Notice of Judgment to each Affected Individual, or mail the Notice of Judgment via First Class United States Mail, postage prepaid, to the last known address of each Affected Individual that Defendants then have on file.
(b) Future Affected Individuals. If, at any time after the Notice of Judgment is hand-delivered or mailed to Affected Individuals, Defendants learn that there are additional Affected Individuals, Defendants, at their sole expense, shall provide those Affected Individuals with the Notice of Judgment within twenty-one (21) days of the date on which Defendants discover that such individual is an Affected Individual. At their own expense, Defendants shall either deliver by hand the Notice of Judgment to the Affected Individual, or mail the Notice of Judgment via First Class United States Mail, postage prepaid, to the current address of the Affected Individual.
(c) Posting. The Notice of Judgment shall be posted prominently at all probation and parole district offices within twenty-one (21) days of a Judgment. 3. Enforcement of Judgment Against Defendants.
(a) A Judgment in favor of Named Plaintiffs shall bind Defendants as to all
3

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 39 07/24/17 Page 4 of 5

Affected Individuals whether or not such Affected Individual is a Named Plaintiff or party in this Action.
(b) Any Affected Individual who believes that she or he is not being provided relief as set forth in the Judgment may seek to enforce any and all of the terms, conditions, remedies and/or relief provided in the Judgment. Defendants reserve all of their rights and defenses to any such claim, with the exception of the provisions of Paragraph 3(c).
(c) Defendants shall be bmTed and forever precluded from asserting a defense that an Affected Individual is not permitted to enforce a Judgment solely because they were not a party to this Action. 4. Scope of agreement. This agreement does not affect rights or defenses otherwise available to any person or party. 5. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. Any Named Plaintiff and/or Affected Individual who seeks to enforce a Judgment shall be permitted to pursue reasonable expenses and attorneys' fees in connection with any determination that Defendants are not complying with the Judgment. Defendants reserve all of their rights and defenses to any claim for attorneys' fees and costs, with the exception ofthe provisions of Paragraph 3(c).

DATED: July /J!, 2017

FOR PLAINTIFFS:
By m~ ~----~-

4

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 39 07/24/17 Page 5 of 5
FORrrA:I:S_ .. - -~ .
By: ~~~-------------------------
5

 
 Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 1 of 18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

LAWRENCE LEVY, CEDRIC HAMMOND, *

BRADLEY CASTO, individually and on behalf *

of all others similarly situated,

*

*

Plaintiffs,

*

*

VS.

*

*

LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC

*

SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS, JAMES

*

LEBLANC, SECRETARY OF THE LOUISIANA *

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND *

CORRECTIONS,

*

*

Defendants.

*

*

COMPLAINT-CLASS ACTION

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT Plaintiffs Lawrence Levy, Cedric Hammond, and Bradley Casto, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, hereby allege as follows:
INTRODUCTION 1. Nearly a decade ago, the U.S. Department of Justice investigated the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections (the “LDPSC”) for failure to provide auxiliary aids and services to prisoners under its control and supervision whenever necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals who are deaf or have hearing impairments, i.e., qualified individuals with disabilities. That investigation led to a 2008 Resolution Agreement that established procedures to provide auxiliary aids and services to these prisoners. 2. The Resolution Agreement does not, however, address probationers and parolees and, to this day, the LDPSC does not take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 2 of 18
probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments are effective, including furnishing adequate and appropriate auxiliary aids and services, in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C § 12101 et seq., (“ADA”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794 (“Rehabilitation Act”).
3. Plaintiffs are probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments and who are under the control and supervision of the LDPSC and its Secretary, James LeBlanc (“LeBlanc”) (collectively, “Defendants”). While on probation and/or parole, Plaintiffs must comply with certain terms and conditions imposed on them, or be subject to punishment, including an extension of their probation or parole, or incarceration.
4. Plaintiffs have been unable to comply with all of the terms and conditions of their probation and/or parole, or to participate meaningfully in Defendants’ programs, because Defendants have not ensured effective communications with Plaintiffs by providing the requisite auxiliary aids and services, e.g., American Sign Language (“ASL”) interpreters: (a) when the terms and conditions of their probation and/or parole are initially discussed with them; (b) during Plaintiffs’ required meetings with their probation and/or parole officers; (c) during random, unannounced home inspections by Plaintiffs’ probation and/or parole officers; and (d) during required post-release counseling or other educational classes.
5. Because Defendants have not made available the requisite auxiliary aids and services during such times, Plaintiffs have had no choice but to resort to trying to communicate: (a) orally or through written notes even though they have very limited English speaking and writing skills, and (b) through unqualified interpreters such as other probationers/parolees or prisoners. As a consequence, Plaintiffs often have very little, if any, understanding of what transpired at these meetings, inspections and classes.
2

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 3 of 18
6. Plaintiffs have repeatedly informed LDPSC officials of their disabilities and corresponding limitations, yet Defendants have inexplicably denied Plaintiffs the requisite auxiliary aids and services.
7. Thus, as detailed more fully below, Defendants have violated and continue to violate the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act, which prohibit public entities from discriminating against people with disabilities on the basis of disability.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 8. This action arises under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. 9. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because it is a civil action arising under the laws of the United States. 10. This Court also has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(3), which confers jurisdiction on district courts to hear cases involving a deprivation of rights claim. 11. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the LDPSC because it is domiciled in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. See La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 36:401. 12. This Court likewise has personal jurisdiction over Secretary LeBlanc because he works at the LDPSC, which is domiciled in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and he has significant contacts with Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 13. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) because the LDPSC is domiciled in Baton Rouge. See La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 36:401. Venue also is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because many of the events complained of occurred in this district, Plaintiffs Lawrence Levy and Cedric Hammond reside in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and all of their home and office visits have taken place in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
3

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 4 of 18
PARTIES 14. Plaintiff Lawrence Levy (“Mr. Levy”) is a parolee who has a hearing impairment and resides in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. In 2013, he was released from Rayburn Correctional Center (“RCC”) in Washington Parish, Louisiana, and commenced an eight-year parole requirement under the control and supervision of the LDPSC. He is a qualified individual with a disability, as that term is used and defined in the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. 15. Plaintiff Cedric Hammond (“Mr. Hammond”) is a parolee who has a hearing impairment and resides in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. In 2002, he was released from prison and commenced his parole under the control and supervision of the LDPSC. Mr. Hammond returned to prison in 2006 for a parole violation. He was again released on parole in 2013 from RCC in Washington Parish, Louisiana, and commenced his parole under the control and supervision of the LDPSC. He is a qualified individual with a disability as that term is used and defined in the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. 16. Plaintiff Bradley Casto (“Mr. Casto”) is a probationer who has a hearing impairment and resides in West Monroe, Louisiana. In January 2015, Mr. Casto commenced a four-year probation requirement under the control and supervision of the LDPSC. He is a qualified individual with a disability as that term is used and defined in the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. 17. Defendant LDPSC is a subdivision of the State of Louisiana, which oversees the state prison system and parolees and probationers of that system. The LDPSC is a public entity as that term is used and defined in the ADA. By virtue of its acceptance of funding from various federal agencies, it is a recipient of federal financial assistance, as that term is used and defined in the Rehabilitation Act.
4

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 5 of 18
18. Defendant Secretary LeBlanc is the Secretary of the LDPSC, which is a position in the Governor of Louisiana’s cabinet appointed by the Governor.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 19. The LDPSC consists of several departments, including the Louisiana Department of Corrections Services (the “DOC”). The DOC is further divided into divisions, including the Division of Probation and Parole (the “DPP”). The DPP oversees the custody and care of adult offenders, including individuals on probation and parole. The DPP and DOC are overseen by Secretary LeBlanc. 20. DPP officers are charged with ensuring that probationers and parolees abide by the conditions of supervision, identifying problems and solutions, making appropriate referrals, providing general counseling, and performing arrests as needed to protect public safety. DPP officers carry out their duties by visiting offenders in their homes, at work, other places in the community, and in the offices of the DPP officers. 21. As probationers and parolees, Plaintiffs are, among other things, required to appear for office visits; subjected to random, unannounced home inspections; and required to attend post-release counseling and other educational classes. 22. Defendants have failed to ensure that communications with probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments are as effective as communications with other probationers and parolees. Defendants have thus denied Plaintiffs an equal opportunity to successfully complete their probation and parole and to effectively participate in post-release rehabilitative programs. Among other things, because Plaintiffs are not afforded the requisite auxiliary aids and services to comply with their probation and parole requirements they face the risk of having been found – and in fact at least one Plaintiff has been found – to have violated
5

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 6 of 18
their probation and/or parole. Lawrence Levy
23. Mr. Levy is 51 years old and currently resides in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He has been virtually deaf since the age of seven, and ASL is his primary language. He did not complete high school and has difficulty speaking, reading, and writing English. Mr. Levy was incarcerated for seventeen years and was released in 2013 from RCC in Washington Parish, Louisiana. He then commenced an eight-year parole requirement. After Mr. Levy was granted parole, he attended a meeting where he was required to sign documents related to his parole. There was no interpreter at the meeting and his limited ability to comprehend written English prevented him from fully understanding the documents.
24. ASL is the most effective means of communication for Mr. Levy, particularly when new or complicated information is being presented or discussed. Except for simple transactions, Mr. Levy must use sign-language interpretation to converse with others.
25. Mr. Levy has had several dozen office and home visits with his parole officer in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He has not had an interpreter at the majority of these meetings even though he has repeatedly requested that an interpreter be present. Instead, he was forced to try to communicate through written notes. Mr. Levy was told by his parole officer that if he needed an interpreter at office visits he would have to bring his own interpreter with him.
26. Mr. Levy is unable to communicate effectively, either receptively or expressively, through written notes.
27. As a condition of his parole, Mr. Levy was required to attend classes. When he first tried to attend these mandatory classes, there were no interpreters in attendance and he was instructed to go home. More recently, there has been an attempt to provide sign language
6

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 7 of 18
interpretation at the classes through video remote interpreting services with inmate interpreters. However, these services have been ineffective and inadequate to allow him to understand and be understood. The inmate interpreters’ sign language skills are basic, it is difficult to see the interpreters, and there are frequent problems with the internet. Cedric Hammond
28. Mr. Hammond is 56 years old and currently resides in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He has been deaf since birth, and ASL is his primary language. ASL is the most effective means of communication for Mr. Hammond, particularly when new or complicated information is being presented or discussed. Except for simple transactions, Mr. Hammond must use sign-language interpretation to converse with others.
29. After serving over twelve years in prison in Louisiana, Mr. Hammond was released in 2002, and commenced his parole.
30. Mr. Hammond returned to prison in 2006 for a parole violation, and was released on parole in 2013 from RCC in Washington Parish, Louisiana. Mr. Hammond subsequently had a brief meeting at the Probation and Parole district office in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He received paperwork related to his parole, but no interpreter was present and the terms and conditions of his parole were never explained to him in a manner that he could reasonably understand.
31. In or around October 2014, the DPP determined that Mr. Hammond violated his parole and he spent ten days in jail for the alleged parole violation although he was unaware that he was allegedly violating his parole because the terms and conditions of his parole were never adequately explained to him.
32. Mr. Hammond has had several dozen office and home visits with his parole
7

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 8 of 18
officer in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He has not had an interpreter at the majority of these meetings. He was told by his probation officer that interpreters are too expensive. Mr. Hammond was forced to try to communicate through written notes, although he has a very limited understanding of written English.
33. Mr. Hammond also is required to pay for and attend monthly classes in which unqualified inmate interpreters are provided through video remote interpreting. He often does not understand what is being taught. Bradley Casto
34. Mr. Casto is 29 years old and currently resides in West Monroe, Louisiana. He was born 100% deaf in his left ear, lost 90% of the hearing in his right ear at age 5, and can only communicate effectively through ASL. Mr. Casto has a very limited vocabulary and knowledge of English.
35. In January 2015, Mr. Casto commenced a four-year probation requirement. Mr. Casto reviewed the terms of his probation with a probation officer, but there was no interpreter at this meeting and he was required to try to communicate orally.
36. Mr. Casto’s probation officer visited his house without an ASL interpreter and entered the house after a young child opened the door. Mr. Casto was awakened while in bed by the probation officer, who then attempted to communicate with him orally.
37. The terms of Mr. Casto’s probation require that he attend classes, but the LDPSC has refused to provide interpreters for standard group sessions. He is thus forced to pay for and attend one-on-one sessions twice per month where he has to try to communicate orally with an instructor.
38. Since his release from prison, Mr. Casto has had several dozen office and home
8

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 9 of 18
visits with his probation officer in West Monroe, Louisiana. There has never been an interpreter present during the meetings. Mr. Casto was forced to try to communicate through oral communication although he has very limited hearing and a very limited understanding of English. Department of Justice Investigation
39. In 2008, after being prompted by the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the adequacy of services provided to individuals under its control and supervision who were deaf or had hearing impairments, the LDPSC entered into a Resolution Agreement Between the United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs and the LDPSC (“Resolution Agreement”). The purpose of the Resolution Agreement was to establish procedures to provide auxiliary aids and services to inmates under its control and supervision whenever necessary to ensure effective communication with qualified individuals with disabilities.
40. Although Defendants have begun implementing these changes for prisoners who are deaf or have hearing impairments, probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments have been routinely denied auxiliary aids and services.
41. The Resolution Agreement specifically states that even when inmate interpreters are properly trained, “impartiality concerns remain,” and that “in many – if not most – situations, inmate interpreters should not be used.” The same language is contained in LDPSC regulations.
CLASS ALLEGATIONS 42. Class Definition. Plaintiffs bring this action as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a), (b)(1) and (b)(2) on behalf of the following class (the “Class”): All present and future probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments and who are within the control and supervision of the LDPSC, and who have been denied, are being denied, or will be denied the assistance they need to effectively communicate and participate in, and obtain the benefits of,
9

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 10 of 18
LDPSC services, programs and activities. Rule 23(a) Requirements
43. Ascertainability. The Class is readily ascertainable as Defendants have or should have records regarding all probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments.
44. Numerosity. The exact number of putative class members is unknown and can only be determined through appropriate discovery. Based on a preliminary investigation, Plaintiffs believe that the members of the Class are so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.
45. Commonality. Questions of law and fact common to the Class include, but are not limited to:
a. Whether Defendants have policies in place to address the needs of probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments.
b. Whether the requisite auxiliary aids and services are available and provided when the terms and conditions of probation or parole are explained to probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments.
c. Whether the requisite auxiliary aids and services are available for and provided to probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments during required and other post-release treatment classes.
d. Whether the requisite auxiliary aids and services are available for and provided to probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments during home inspections with probation and parole officers.
e. Whether the requisite auxiliary aids and services are available for and provided to probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments during
10

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 11 of 18
office visits with probation and parole officers. f. Whether Defendants are required to provide education and training to
probation and parole officers and key administrators in issues that affect probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments and, if so, whether such education and training is being provided. 46. Typicality. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the members of the Class because Plaintiffs’ claims, and the claims of all Class members, arise out of the same conduct, policies, and practices of Defendants as alleged herein, and all members of the Class are similarly affected by Defendants’ wrongful conduct. Individual cases would require each member of the Class to prove the same claims, based on the same conduct of Defendants, using the same legal theories, and seek the same relief. 47. Adequacy. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of Class members. Plaintiffs have no interests antagonistic to, or in conflict with, those of the Class. Plaintiffs will vigorously protect the interests of absent Class members. Plaintiffs have retained counsel who are competent and have extensive experience in complex, class action litigation and in disability and civil rights claims against governmental entities. Rule 23(b) Requirements 48. Class action status is warranted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(1)(A) because prosecution of separate actions by Class members would create a risk of establishing incompatible standards of conduct for Defendants. 49. Class action status is also warranted under Rule 23(b)(1)(B) because prosecution of separate actions by Class members would create a risk of adjudications with respect to individual Class members that, as a practical matter, would be dispositive of the interests of other
11

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 12 of 18
members who are not parties to this action, or that would substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their interests.
50. Certification under Rule 23(b)(2) is warranted because Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class, thereby making final injunctive, declaratory, or other equitable relief appropriate with respect to the Class as a whole.
CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT I
Violation of Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C § 12101 et seq. 51. Paragraphs 1-50 are incorporated as if set forth fully herein. 52. Title II of the ADA provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subject to discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132. 53. Public entities, such as the LDPSC, are covered by the ADA. 54. The ADA defines an individual with a disability as someone who: (i) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; (ii) has a record of such impairment; or (iii) is regarded as having such impairment. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2). 55. The term “major life activities” includes hearing. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(A). 56. Plaintiffs are deaf or have hearing impairments and, thus, are disabled under these provisions and entitled to the protections of the ADA. 57. In addition to being aware that Plaintiffs are deaf or have hearing impairments, Defendants were aware and knew that Plaintiffs were limited by their disabilities because, among
12

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 13 of 18
other things, Plaintiffs informed Defendants that they did not understand fully the terms and conditions of their probation or parole; Plaintiffs informed Defendants that they were unable to communicate sufficiently with, or understand, their parole or probation officers during mandatory office visits and home inspections; and Plaintiffs informed Defendants that they were not able to understand what was being taught during mandatory and other classes, thus preventing Plaintiffs from participating meaningfully in those classes.
58. The ADA requires that Defendants take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with individuals with disabilities, including probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments, are as effective as communications with others.
59. Once aware of ADA-protected limitations, the ADA requires that state agencies “furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford individuals with disabilities . . . an equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, a service, program, or activity of a public entity.” 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(b); see also, 28 C.F.R. § 41.51(e). “Auxiliary aids” include qualified sign language interpreters. See 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.104. Defendants have repeatedly rejected Plaintiffs’ requests for qualified interpreters at mandatory office visits and home inspections, post-release educational classes, and other meetings.
60. Further, “[a] public entity shall not require an individual with a disability to bring another individual to interpret for him or her” and “shall not rely on an adult accompanying an individual with a disability to interpret or facilitate communication except [i]n an emergency . . . or [w]here the individual with a disability specifically requests that the accompanying adult interpret or facilitate communication, the accompanying adult agrees to provide such assistance, and reliance on that adult for such assistance is appropriate under the circumstances.” 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(c)(1)-(2). Defendants have violated this provision by requiring others to act as
13

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 14 of 18
interpreters and by requiring Plaintiffs to bring their own interpreters to meetings. 61. As a result of Defendants’ failure to provide adequate access to qualified
interpreters, Plaintiffs have not been adequately informed of their probation or parole requirements, have not understood what was communicated to them at mandatory office visits and home inspections, and have not been able to take or fully participate in post-release classes. In some cases, individuals have been incarcerated because they unknowingly violated the terms of their probation or parole.
COUNT II Violation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794. 62. Paragraphs 1-61 are incorporated as if set forth fully herein. 63. The Rehabilitation Act provides that “[n]o otherwise qualified individual with a disability . . . shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency or by the United States Postal Service.” 29 U.S.C. § 794. 64. State and local probation and parole departments receiving federal financial assistance are covered by the Rehabilitation Act. The LDPSC has been, and is, a recipient of federal funds, and thus is covered by the Rehabilitation Act. 65. The Rehabilitation Act defines an individual with a disability as someone who: (i) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; (ii) has a record of such impairment; or (iii) is regarded as having such impairment. See 29 U.S.C. § 705(20)(B). 66. The term “major life activities” includes hearing. See 28 C.F.R. § 41.31(b)(2).
14

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 15 of 18
67. Plaintiffs are deaf or have hearing impairments and, thus, are disabled under these provisions and entitled to the protections of the Rehabilitation Act.
68. In addition to being aware that Plaintiffs are deaf or have hearing impairments, Defendants were aware and knew that Plaintiffs were limited by their disabilities because, among other things, Plaintiffs informed Defendants that they did not understand fully the terms and conditions of their probation or parole; Plaintiffs informed Defendants that they were unable to communicate sufficiently with, or understand, their parole or probation officers during mandatory office visits and home inspections; and Plaintiffs informed Defendants that they were not able to understand what was being taught during mandatory and other classes, thus preventing Plaintiffs from participating meaningfully in those classes.
69. Once aware of these limitations, state agencies must “take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with their applicants, employees, and beneficiaries are available to persons with impaired . . . hearing.” 28 C.F.R. § 41.51(e). Defendants have repeatedly rejected Plaintiffs’ requests for qualified interpreters at mandatory office and home visits, post-release educational classes, and other meetings.
70. As a result of Defendants’ failure to provide adequate access to qualified interpreters, Plaintiffs have not been adequately informed of their probation or parole requirements, have not understood what was communicated to them at home and office visits, and have not been able to take or fully participate in post-release classes. In some cases, individuals have been incarcerated because they unknowingly violated the terms of their probation or parole.
15

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 16 of 18
PRAYER FOR RELIEF 71. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court issue the following relief:
A. An order certifying this action as a class action; B. An order mandating that the LDPSC establish a remediation program
requiring the following steps be taken by Defendants: a. Provide qualified ASL interpreters at all classes offered by the
LDPSC that probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments are required to take or would like to take so they can fully and effectively participate in and benefit from the programs and classes. b. Provide qualified ASL interpreters at meetings with probation or parole officers, including office and home visits. c. Ensure that probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments are able to communicate effectively (e.g., with an ASL interpreter) at all proceedings. d. Undertake education and training of probation and parole officers and key administrators in issues that affect probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments. Such training is essential to ensuring that the federal rights of probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments are protected. e. Retain an independent monitor approved by counsel listed below. The monitor must be given access to LDPSC facilities and records
16

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 17 of 18
adequate to provide effective oversight of Defendants’ compliance with its statutory and constitutional obligations to provide adequate and appropriate auxiliary aids and services to probationers and parolees who are deaf or have hearing impairments. The monitor will issue yearly reports to Defendants and counsel listed below for at least five (5) years. C. An order enjoining Defendants and their staff from retaliating against Plaintiffs and class members due to the filing of this Complaint; D. An order enjoining Defendants from further violations of the ADA and Rehabilitation Act; E. An order granting declaratory and injunctive relief, as set out in this Complaint. F. An order declaring that Plaintiffs are the prevailing party in this case and awarding them attorneys’ fees, court costs, expert costs, and litigation expenses pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205 and 29 U.S.C. § 794a(b); and, G. Such other and further relief as appears reasonable and just, to which Plaintiffs may be entitled.
Respectfully submitted, Dated: August 16, 2016
By: s/ Madeline C. Rea Madeline C. Rea
Proskauer Rose LLP 650 Poydras Street Suite 1800 New Orleans, LA 70130 (504) 310-2037 mrea@proskauer.com
17

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 1 08/16/16 Page 18 of 18
Russell L. Hirschhorn (pro hac vice to be filed) Proskauer Rose LLP Eleven Times Square New York, NY 10036 (212) 969-3286 rhirschhorn@proskauer.com Nell Hahn Advocacy Center 600 Jefferson Street Suite 812 Lafayette, LA 70501 (337) 237-7380 ext. 311 nhahn@advocacyla.org Susan Meyers Advocacy Center 8325 Oak Street New Orleans, LA 70118 (504) 522-2337 ext. 138 smeyers@advocacyla.org Elliot Mincberg (pro hac vice to be filed) Washington Lawyers’ Committee For Civil Rights And Urban Affairs 11 Dupont Circle, NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 319-1000 elliot_mincberg@washlaw.org
18

 
 Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 4 of 15
EXHIBIT A

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 5 of 15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

LAWRENCE LEVY, CEDRIC HAMMOND, BRADLEY CASTO, individually and on behalf

of

*

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS, JAMES
LEBLANC, SECRETARY OF THE LOUISIANA *
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS,
Defendants.

NO. 16-cv-542-JWD-EWD

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT is entered into by and between Plaintiffs and Defendants. Capitalized terms and phrases have the meanings provided in Section 1 below or as specified elsewhere in this Settlement Agreement.
1. DEFINITIONS
1.1. "Action" means Levy et al. v. Louisiana Department ofPublic Safety ck Corrections, et
al. , No. 16-cv-542-JWD-EWD, an action pending in the United States District Court for the
Middle District of Louisiana.
1.2. "ADA" means Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C $ 12101 et seq.
1.3. "Adverse Action" means any decision made by an agent of the Louisiana Department of
Public Safety and Corrections that has the potential to result in re-incarceration, additional
probation restrictions or an extension of the probation period for the Affected Individual.
1.4. "Affected Individuals" means all current and future probationers and parolees who are deaf or hard of hearing and who are or will be under the control and supervision of the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections.
1.5. "ASL" means American Sign Language.
1.6. "Auxiliary Aids and Services" means qualified sign language or oral interpreters,
notetakers, transcription services, written materials, telephone handset amplifiers, assistive

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 6 of 15
listening devices, telephones compatible with hearing aids, closed caption decoders, open and closed captioning, telecommunications devices for deaf persons (TDDs), videotext displays, or
other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing. See Docket No. 37.
1.7. "Claim" means any and all manner of claims, actions, causes of actions, potential actions,
suits, controversies, costs, damages, losses, obligations, liabilities, judgments, and demands whatsoever, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, accrued or unaccrued, whether class,
individual, or otherwise, arising under the laws, regulations, or common law of the United States of America, any state or political subdivision thereof, or any foreign country or jurisdiction, in law, in contract, or in equity, and regardless of legal theory.
1.S. "Certified Interpreter" means a person who has achieved a passing score from one of the psychometrically sound, nationally recognized tests measuring proficiency in the interpretation of ASL. As of the Effective Date, nationally recognized ASL interpretation exams include the Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA), the Board of Evaluation Interpreters (BEI), and/or the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID). A Certified Interpreter must maintain
his or her certification as required by the certifying organization; failure to maintain certification means that the person is no longer deemed to be a Certified Interpreter.
1.9. "Communication Assessment" means an evaluation by a qualified individual of the communication needs of an Affected Individual to facilitate Effective Communication with deaf or hard of hearing individuals, and a determination of the Auxiliary Aids and Services necessary
to meet those needs. The Communication Assessment, completed in consultation with the
Affected Individual, will include an evaluation of the Affected Individual's literacy in written
English as well as his or her ability to communicate effectively via ASL and VRI.
1.10. "Complaint" means the Class Action Complaint filed in this Action on August 16, 2016.
1.11. "Court" means the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana.
1.12. "Defendants" means the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, and its
Secretary, James LeBlanc.
1.13. "Defendants' Released Claims" means any and all Claims, including unknown claims that Defendants asserted, or could have asserted, against the Plaintiffs' Releasees that arise out of or relate in any way to the institution, prosecution or settlement of the Action, except for claims relating to the enforcement of this Settlement Agreement.
1.14. "Defendants' Releasees" means Defendants named in the Complaint and any and all of their related entities, including, without limitation, any and all of their past or present parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, predecessors, or successors, successors-in-interest, as well as any and all of their current or former officers, directors, employees, associates, members of their immediate
families, agents or other persons acting on their behalf, underwriters, insurers, reinsurers, attorneys, advisors, financial advisors, publicists, independent certified public accountants, auditors, accountants, assigns, creditors, administrators, heirs, estates or legal representatives.
Page 2 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 7 of 15
1.15. "Effective Communication" means communication with persons with disabilities that is
substantially as effective as communication with others. Effective Communication is achieved by furnishing appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services where necessary to afford qualified individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate in or benefit from the services, programs, or
activities of the LDPSC.
1.16. "Effective Date" means the date on which the Court enters the Agreement and Order of
Dismissal.
" 1.17 "Field Visit" means unscheduled face to face contact with the offender at his/her residence,
employment, or other location outside of the designated office.
1.18. "High Risk Interaction" means proceedings that impact the freedom or sentence of an
Affected Individual, including criminal investigations and internal investigations that could result
in the filing of criminal charges or revocation hearings.
1.18. "Intake Meeting" means the initial meeting between an Affected Individual and LDPSC during which the terms and conditions of probation and parole are explained by LDPSC to the
Affected Individual and a Communication Assessment is conducted.
1.19. "LDPSC" means Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections and its
Secretary, employees, volunteers, and independent contractors, including, without limitation, probation and parole officers, and any other administrative personnel, who have or are likely to have direct contact with the Affected Individuals.
1.20. "Parties" means Plaintiffs and Defendants.
1.21. "Plaintiffs" means Lawrence Levy, Cedric Hammond, and Bradley Casto.
1.22. "Plaintiffs' Released Claims" means any and all manner of Claims, including unknown claims that Plaintiffs asserted in the Action or could have asserted in any forum, that arise out of
or are based upon, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, any allegations, transactions, facts, matters, occurrences, representations, actions, omissions, failures to act, statements or disclosures involved, set forth or referred to in the Complaint filed in this Action. Notwithstanding the foregoing, claims to enforce the Settlement Agreement and claims for compensatory or punitive
damages related thereto are not included in this definition of Plaintiffs' Released Claims.
1.23. "Plaintiffs' Releasees" means Plaintiffs, and any and all of their related parties, including, without limitation, any and all members of their immediate families, agents or other persons acting
on their behalf, attorneys, advisors, financial advisors, accountants, assigns, creditors, heirs, estates and legal representatives.
1.24. "Qualified Interpreter" means a person who has passed a psychometrically sound, nationally recognized test of interpreter proficiency and who maintains such certification as
required by the certifying body, and is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary, with the Affected Individual for whom the interpreter is interpreting, using any necessary specialized vocabulary.
See 28 C.F.R. $35.104.
Page 3 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 8 of 15
1.25. "Rehabilitation Act" means Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C.
$ 794.
1.26. "Scheduled Encounter" means any interaction between an Affected Individual and
LDPSC that is scheduled by either party. Scheduled Encounters do not include Field Visits.
1.27. "Settlement Agreement" means this Settlement Agreement and Release between
Plaintiffs and Defendants.
1.28. "Unscheduled Encounter" means any interaction between an Affected Individual and LDPSC that was not scheduled by either party. Field Visits are Unscheduled Encounters.
1.29. "Video Remote Interpreting" or "VRI" means a video-telecommunication interpreting
service, which uses Qualified Interpreters, is delivered over a high-speed Internet or cellular
connection, and complies with all applicable legal requirements. See 28 C.F.R. $ 35.160(d).
2. RECITALS
2. 1. On August 16, 2016, Plaintiffs filed the Complaint in this Action alleging that Defendants violated the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act because: (i) Qualified Interpreters were not present during the explanation to one or more of the Plaintiffs of the terms and conditions of their probation or parole and, as a consequence, Plaintiffs were released with no meaningful explanation of the terms and conditions of their probation or parole, and no understanding of their obligations; (ii)
Qualified Interpreters were not present during Plaintiffs' home and office visits with their parole and probation officers even though it is mandatory for such visits to occur; and (iii) Qualified Interpreters and/or the necessary Auxiliary Aids and Services were not provided during classes or at treatment programs that Affected Individuals are required or are permitted to participate in, which precludes Plaintiffs from participating meaningfully in those classes.
2.2. Defendants disputed the allegations in the Complaint and vigorously defended the lawsuit.
Defendants maintain that their actions were reasonable and lawful at all times.
2.3. Plaintiffs have conducted extensive discovery, including, the review of documents produced by Defendants, taking deposition of testimony of LDPSC and several of its employees
and/or contractors, and engaging in expert discovery.
2.4. Following the close of discovery, Plaintiffs moved for summary judgment and, on March 4, 2019, the Court denied that motion.
2.5. The Parties now seek resolution of the Action and to settle it with finality, thereby avoiding the risk, expense, inconvenience, burden, distraction and diversion of personnel and resources, and uncertainty of outcome that is inherent in any litigation, that are associated with the Action.
2.6. The Parties have thus reached this Settlement Agreement by and through their respective
counsel on the terms and conditions set forth herein.
Page 4 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 9 of 15
3. COMMUNICATION ASSESSMENTS
LDPSC shall arrange for a Communication Assessment to be conducted at the initial Intake Meeting with an Affected Individual. The Communication Assessment will be used to determine
whether and to what extent the Affected Individual requires the assistance of a Qualified, Certified
Sign Language Interpreter or other reasonable accommodation to communicate effectively in his
or her interactions with LDPSC. If an Affected Individual appears for an Intake Meeting on an
unscheduled basis, LDPSC will reschedule the Intake Meeting until the Communication Assessment can be conducted. After the initial Communication Assessment, LDPSC agrees to
conduct an annual review of an Affected Individual's communication assessment to determine if
there have been any material changes to an Affected Individual's need for interpreters or other reasonable accommodations for so long as the Affected Individual is under LDSPC supervision.
4. PROVISION OF QUALIFIED INTERPRKTERS
4.1. LDPSC shall provide live, in-person Qualified, Certified Sign Language Interpreters to
Affected Individuals at all Intake Meetings.
4.2. LDPSC shall provide a Qualified, Certified Sign Language Interpreter to an Affected
Individual who requires an interpreter for effective communication (as determined by the Communication Assessment) at all Scheduled Encounters, either in-person or by VRI.
4.3. LDPSC need not provide an interpreter to Affected Individuals at Unscheduled Encounters,
except as otherwise provided by law.
4.4. If an Unscheduled Encounter becomes a High Risk Interaction, LDPSC shall provide a
Qualified, Certified Interpreter, either in-person or by VRI to any Affected Individual who requires
the assistance of a Qualified, Certified Sign Language Interpreter at the earliest practicable time, but in no event longer than twelve (12) hours, except in extraordinary circumstances. Nothing in
this clause shall be construed to waive an Affected Individual's Fourth, Fifth, or Fourteenth Amendment rights.
4.5. Defendants shall ensure that all vendors providing classes or treatment programs to Affected Individuals that are required as a condition of their probation or parole provide Qualified, Certified Sign Language Interpreters either in-person or by VRI.
5. RECORDS RETENTION
5.1. Defendants shall maintain Settlement Compliance Documentation in accordance with the records retention schedule mandated by the Department and the Louisiana Secretary of State and to furnish same upon request in accordance with Louisiana Public Records Law, La. R.S. 44:1, et
seq.
5.2. For purposes of this Section 5, Settlement Compliance Documentation means documentation demonstrating fulfillment of the terms of this Settlement Agreement, including, at
a minimum:
Page 5 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 10 of 15

5.2.1. the names and contact information of Affected Individuals, their assigned
probation and parole officers;

5.2.2.

requests for auxiliary aids and services, the types provided, refusals thereof by an
Affected Individual, and grievances related to the provision of auxiliary aids and
services;

5.2.3. records documenting Communication Assessments performed by LDPSC on
Affected Individuals;

5.2.4. records documenting certification and certification maintenance of interpreters;
and

5.2.5.

records documenting the provision of Qualified, Certified Sign Language Interpreters to an Affected Individual, including the provision of an interpreter to an Affected Individual as a result of any Unscheduled Encounter that became a
High Risk Interaction.

To the extent any of the documents described above would be exempt from the Public Records
Law, Defendants agree to furnish these documents to the Advocacy Center on request no more frequently than semi-annually, subject to a confidentiality agreement.

6. TRAINING

6.1 Defendants agree to continue to provide annual training to its officers, employees, and
agents on providing effective communication to Affected Individuals.

7. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE

7.1. The existing ADA coordinator at each LDSPC district office shall serve as a representative of LDPSC who will be responsible for responding to grievances related to or arising from this
Settlement Agreement.

7.2. Should an Affected Individual have a grievance concerning an issue addressed by this
Settlement Agreement, the designated individual at LDSPC shall reasonably investigate that
grievance. The designated individual at LDSPC shall explain, with the assistance of a Qualified,
Certified Sign Language Interpreter (if one is appropriate and necessary pursuant to the Affected
Individual's Communication Assessment) within fourteen (14) days to the Affected Individual
what, if any, action will be taken in response to the grievance.

7.3. The Grievance Procedure shall be explained to each Affected Individual at his or her Intake Meeting, or if already a probationer or parolee at the time the Parties enter into this Settlement
Agreement, at the probationer or parolee's next scheduled office visit. The Grievance Procedure
will be explained in the presence, either in person by remotely, of a Qualified, Certified Sign
Language Interpreter.

Page 6 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 11 of 15
8. DISMISSAL
Promptly after this Agreement is fully executed, Plaintiffs will file a Stipulation and Order dismissing the Action in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Stipulation and Order is
conditioned upon the Middle District of Louisiana retaining jurisdiction of the settlement
agreement.
9. RELEASES
9.1. Release of Defendants' Releasees by Plaintiffs. Upon the Effective Date of the Settlement
Agreement, Plaintiffs, absolutely and unconditionally release and forever discharge the
Defendants' Releasees from any and all of Plaintiffs' Released Claims that Plaintiffs directly,
indirectly, derivatively or in any other capacity ever had, now have or hereafter may have. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Plaintiffs do not release the Defendants' Releasees from claims to enforce the Settlement Agreement.
9.2. Release of the Plaintiffs' Releasees by Defendants. Upon the Effective Date of Settlement,
Defendants absolutely and unconditionally release and forever discharge Plaintiffs' Releasees and
Plaintiffs' Counsel from any and all of Defendants' Released Claims.
10. NO ADMISSION OF LIABILITY
The Parties understand and agree that this Settlement Agreement embodies a compromise
and settlement of disputed claims, and that nothing in this Settlement Agreement, including the furnishing of consideration for this Settlement Agreement, shall be deemed to constitute any finding of wrongdoing by any of the Defendants, or give rise to any inference of wrongdoing or admission of wrongdoing or liability in this or any other proceeding. The Settlement Agreement made hereunder is made in compromise of disputed claims and is not an admission of any liability of any kind, whether legal or factual. Moreover, Defendants specifically deny any and all such liability or wrongdoing. Neither the fact nor the terms of the Settlement Agreement shall be
offered or received in evidence in any action or proceeding for any purpose, except in an action or proceeding to enforce this Settlement Agreement.
11. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES
The Parties will work in good faith to resolve any violations alleged through the Grievance
Procedure. If, after thirty (30) days, the Parties are unable to resolve a dispute related to a violation
alleged under the Grievance Procedure, they shall present their dispute to the court.
12. ATTORNEYS' FEES AND EXPENSES
In settlement of all claims for attorneys' fees and costs, any disbursements and expenses, including expert fees, incurred on behalf of Plaintiffs in this litigation up to and including the Effective Date, the Parties agree that within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Settlement
Agreement, Defendants shall pay Four Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($425,000) as
directed by Plaintiffs' counsel.
Page 7 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 12 of 15

13. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

13.1. Continuing Jurisdiction. This Settlement Agreement is expressly conditioned upon the
Court's entering an order requiring the parties to comply with its terms, and retaining jurisdiction
of the Action for the purpose of resolving any dispute between Affected Individuals and the
Defendants that may arise regarding this Settlement Agreement, including any dispute regarding
validity, performance, interpretation, administration, enforcement, enforceability or termination of the Settlement Agreement. The Court shall retain jurisdiction of the Action for the purpose of
resolving any dispute between Affected Individuals and Defendants.
13.2. Governing Law. This Settlement Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the United States, including federal common law, except to the extent that, as a matter of federal law, state law controls, in which case Louisiana State Law will apply without regard to conflict of law
principles.

13.3. Severability. The provisions of this Settlement Agreement are not severable.

13.4. Amendment. This Settlement Agreement may be modified or amended only by written agreement signed on behalf of all Parties.

13.5. Waiver. The provisions of this Settlement Agreement may be waived only by an instrument in writing executed by the waiving party. The waiver by any Party of any breach of this Settlement Agreement shall not be deemed to be or construed as a waiver of any other breach, whether prior, subsequent or contemporaneous, of this Settlement Agreement.
13.6. Construction. None of the Parties hereto shall be considered to be the drafter of this Settlement Agreement or any provision hereof for the purpose of any statute, case law or rule of
interpretation or construction that would or might cause any provision to be construed against the drafter hereof.

13.7. Principles of Interpretation.
Settlement Agreement:

The following principles of interpretation apply to this

13.7.1.Headings. The headings of this Settlement Agreement are for reference purposes only and do not affect in any way the meaning or interpretation of this Settlement
Agreement.

13.7.2. Singular and Plural. Definitions apply to the singular and plural forms of each
term defined.
" 13.7.3. Terms ofInclusion. Whenever the words "include, "includes" or "including" are " used in this Settlement Agreement, they shall not be limiting but rather shall be
deemed to be followed by the words "without limitation.

13.8. Survival. All representations, warranties and covenants set forth in this Settlement Agreement shall be deemed continuing and shall survive the Effective Date of this Settlement
Agreement.

Page 8 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 13 of 15

13.9. Notices. Any notice, demand or other communication under this Settlement Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly given upon receipt if it is addressed to each of the
intended recipients as set forth below and personally delivered, sent by registered or certified mail (postage prepaid), sent by confirmed facsimile, delivered by reputable express overnight courier,
or sent by email transmission, with confirmation of receipt:
IF TO PLAINTIFFS:
Russell L. Hirschhorn
Proskauer Rose LLP Eleven Times Square New York, NY 10036 (212) 969-3000 rhirschhorn roskauer. com

Ronald K. Lospennato
Laura Thornton Stratton
Advocacy Center 8325 Oak Street
New Orleans, LA 70118 (504) 522-2337
rlos ennato advocac la.or

IF TO DEFENDANTS:

Phil Fornaci Washington Lawyers' Committee For Civil Rights and Urban Affairs 11 Dupont Circle, NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036
(202) 319-1000
hil fornaci washlaw. or
Jonathan Vining General Counsel Susan Wall Griffin Attorney for the Secretary
4 Department of Public Safety Corrections
P.O. Box 94304, Capitol Station Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9304 (225) 342-6743
JVinin corrections. state. la.us s 'ffin corrections. state. la.us

Page 90f11

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 14 of 15

Any Party may change the address at which it is to receive notice by written notice delivered to the other Parties in the manner described above.

13.10. Entire Agreement. This Settlement Agreement contains the entire agreement among the
Parties relating to this Settlement. It specifically supersedes any settlement terms or settlement agreements relating to Defendants that were previously agreed upon orally or in writing by any
of the Parties. No representations, agreements, understandings, or inducements (whether written, unwritten, verbal or otherwise) shall affect the construction or enforcement of this Settlement Agreement (including all Claims released herein), it being agreed that the rights of the Parties
hereto against any opposing party hereto shall be governed exclusively by this Settlement Agreement.
13.11, Counterparts, This Settlement Agreement may be executed by exchange of faxed or
scanned executed signature pages, and any signature transmitted by facsimile or by email
attachment for the purpose of executing this Settlement Agreement shall be deemed an original signature for purposes of this Settlement Agreement, This Settlement Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of
which, taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument.

13.12. Binding Effect. This Settlement Agreement binds and inures to the benefit of the Parties
hereto, their assigns, heirs, administrators, executors and Successors-in-Interest.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Settlement Agreement on the dates set forth below.

of, FOR PLAINTIFFS
Dated this day

2019.

B Russell L. Hirschhom Russell T. Gorkin
Proskauer Rose LLP
Eleven Times Square New York, NY 10036
(212) 969-3000
I'hh schhoi'n ff I'osl, finer. coul
rgol kli1 ff proskaucr. coul

Rachel T. Gulotta
Samantha Shear Proskauer Rose LLP
650 Poydras Street, Suite 1800 New Orleans, LA 70130 (504) 310-4088
I'"iiloiiQ'ff glosL. Qucl, col11 sslleal off &I oskauci', con1

Page IO of 1 I

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 102 05/23/19 Page 15 of 15

Dated this

of, y

2019.

Ronald Ltepentutto
Laura Thornton Straint
Advocacy Center 8325 Oak Street
New Orleans, LA 7011$ (504) 522-2337
rlos~nnato a'advocac la. or Itllornton''1l'ad% ocac 'Ia. ol u
Phil Fomaci Washington Lawyers' Committee For Civil Rights and Urban Affairs 11 Dupont Circle, NW Suite 400
Washington, DC 20036 (202) 319-1000
&Il I I fornacl rl' l1 asl1laM, or~~

Civil Division
P. O. Box 94005 Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9005 (225) 326-6006 6 t lton 'rt ilu. Iott Isla na. aov
Susan Wall Griffin Attorney for the Secretary
4 Department of Public Safety Cortections
P.O. Box 94304, Capitol Station Baton Rouge, LA 70$04-9304 (225) 342-6743
sari A tn ri corrections. state. Ia.us

Page t t of t t

 
 Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 1 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 2 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 3 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 4 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 5 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 6 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 7 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 8 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 9 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 10 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 11 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 12 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 13 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 14 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 15 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 16 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 17 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 18 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 19 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 20 of 21

Case 3:16-cv-00542-JWD-EWD Document 93 03/04/19 Page 21 of 21

 
 U.S. District Court Middle District of Louisiana (Baton Rouge) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:16−cv−00542−JWD−EWD

CLOSED

Levy et al v. Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections Assigned to: Judge John W. deGravelles Referred to: Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 08/16/2016 Date Terminated: 04/01/2019 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 446 Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities − Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Lawrence Levy individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

represented by Madeline Chimento Rea Ogletree Deakins 701 Poydras Street Suite 3500 New Orleans, LA 70139 504−648−2602 Email: madeline.chimento@gmail.com TERMINATED: 08/17/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Russell L Hirschhorn Proskauer Rose LLP Eleven Times Square New York, NY 10036 212−969−3286 Email: rhirschhorn@proskauer.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ellen B Hahn 2223 W St Mary Blvd Lafayette Lafayette, LA 70506 3372983831 Email: nellhahn2@gmail.com TERMINATED: 12/22/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Laura Thornton Stratton 2120 Atchison Ave. 66047 Lawrence, KS 66047 434−466−9974 Email: thorntonlauralee@gmail.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Lindsey Harreld Chopin Jackson Lewis P.C. 650 Poydras Street Suite 1900 New Orleans, LA 70130 504−208−1755 Fax: 504−208−1759 Email: lindsey.chopin@jacksonlewis.com TERMINATED: 03/25/2019 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Om Alladi

Plaintiff
Cedric Hammond individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Proskauer Rose LLP Eleven Times Square New York, NY 10036 212−969−3633 PRO HAC VICE
Philip Jerome Fornaci Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affa 11 Dupont Circle, NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202−319−1000 PRO HAC VICE
Rachel Gulotta Proskauer Rose LLP 650 Poydras Street Suite 1800 New Orleans, LA 70130 504−310−4089 Email: rgulotta@proskauer.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ronald Kenneth Lospennato Advocacy Center 8325 Oak Street New Orleans, LA 70118 504−208−4679 Fax: 504−335−2890 Email: rlospennato@disabilityrightsla.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Russell Todd Gorkin Proskauer Rose LLP Eleven Times Square New York, NY 10036 212−969−3496 PRO HAC VICE
Samantha Shear Proskauer Rose LLP 650 Poydras Street Suite 1800 New Orleans, LA 70130 504−310−2046 Email: sshear@proskauer.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Susan M. Meyers Louisiana Department of Health 648 N. 4th St. Baton Rouge, LA 70802 225−942−8055 Email: smeyers@advocacyla.org TERMINATED: 03/19/2019 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Madeline Chimento Rea (See above for address) TERMINATED: 08/17/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Bradley Casto individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Russell L Hirschhorn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ellen B Hahn (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/22/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Laura Thornton Stratton (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lindsey Harreld Chopin (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/25/2019 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Om Alladi (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE
Philip Jerome Fornaci (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE
Rachel Gulotta (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ronald Kenneth Lospennato (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Russell Todd Gorkin (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE
Samantha Shear (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Susan M. Meyers (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/19/2019 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Madeline Chimento Rea (See above for address) TERMINATED: 08/17/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Russell L Hirschhorn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ellen B Hahn

V.
Defendant
Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections

(See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/22/2016 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Laura Thornton Stratton (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lindsey Harreld Chopin (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/25/2019 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Om Alladi (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE
Philip Jerome Fornaci (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE
Rachel Gulotta (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ronald Kenneth Lospennato (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Russell Todd Gorkin (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE
Samantha Shear (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Susan M. Meyers (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/19/2019 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Patricia Hill Wilton Louisiana Department of Justice − B.R. P.O. Box 94005 Baton Rouge, LA 70804−9005 225−326−6020 Fax: 225−326−6498 Email: wiltonp@ag.state.la.us LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Susan Wall Griffin Department of Public Safety & Corrections P. O. Box 94304 Baton Rouge, LA 70804 225−342−6743 Fax: 225−342−3278 FAX Email: sgriffin@corrections.state.la.us ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant James LeBlanc

represented by Patricia Hill Wilton (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Susan Wall Griffin (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 08/16/2016
08/23/2016 08/23/2016 08/24/2016
08/24/2016
08/29/2016 08/30/2016 08/31/2016
09/20/2016 09/20/2016 09/20/2016 09/20/2016 09/21/2016

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against James LeBlanc, Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 053N−1453333.), filed by Lawrence Levy, Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 08/16/2016)
2 Summons Submitted (Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 08/23/2016)
3 Summons Submitted (Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 08/23/2016)
4 Summons Issued as to James LeBlanc, Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections. (NOTICE: Counsel shall print and serve both the summons and all attachments in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.) (Attachments: # 1 summons)(EDC) (Entered: 08/24/2016)
5 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER: Scheduling Conference set for 10/20/2016 at 02:00 PM in chambers before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes. Status Report due by 10/6/2016.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 08/24/2016. (NLT) (Entered: 08/24/2016)
6 MOTION for Russell Hirschhorn to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee $100.00, Receipt Number 053N−1458223) by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Ex. A − Hirschhorn Aff., # 2 Proposed Order)(Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 08/29/2016)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 6 MOTION for Russell Hirschhorn to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee $100.00, Receipt Number 053N−1458223). This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (ELW) (Entered: 08/30/2016)
7 ORDER granting 6 Motion for Russell Hirschhorn to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 8/31/2016. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 08/31/2016)
8 MOTION and Order for Extension of Time by James LeBlanc, Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Pleading;)(Griffin, Susan) Modified on 9/20/2016 to edit the text (TNB). (Entered: 09/20/2016)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 8 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer to 1 Complaint, . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (TNB) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Lawrence Levy, Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond. Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections served on 8/25/2016, answer due 9/15/2016. (Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
10 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Lawrence Levy, Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond. James LeBlanc served on 8/25/2016, answer due 9/15/2016. (Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
11 ORDER granting 8 Motion and Order for Extension of Time to Answer. James LeBlanc and Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections shall have twenty (20) days from the date of this Order within which to file responsive pleadings in this matter. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 9/21/2016. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 09/21/2016)

10/06/2016 10/11/2016 10/11/2016 10/11/2016 10/12/2016 10/19/2016
10/20/2016 10/25/2016
11/04/2016 11/08/2016
11/28/2016 12/01/2016 12/01/2016 12/12/2016

12 Joint STATUS REPORT by All Plaintiffs. (Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 10/06/2016)
13 MOTION to Enroll Patricia H. Wilton as Additional Attorney by All Defendants. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Pleading;)(Griffin, Susan) (Entered: 10/11/2016)
14 ANSWER and Defenses to 1 Complaint, by James LeBlanc, Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections.(Wilton, Patricia) Modified on 10/11/2016 to edit text. (EDC). (Entered: 10/11/2016)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 13 MOTION to Enroll Patricia H. Wilton as Additional Attorney . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (EDC) (Entered: 10/11/2016)
15 ORDER granting 13 Motion to Enroll as Co−Counsel of Record. Added attorney Patricia Hill Wilton for James LeBlanc,Patricia Hill Wilton for Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 10/12/2016. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 10/12/2016)
16 Notice to Counsel: The Scheduling Conference set for 10/20/2016 at 02:00 PM is CONVERTED to a Telephone Conference set for 10/20/2016 at 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes. Plaintiffs' counsel is to initiate the call and contact the court at (225) 389−3584 once all counsel are on the phone. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.)(BLR) (Entered: 10/19/2016)
17 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes. Telephone Conference held on 10/20/2016. The court and counsel discussed and agreed on such deadlines. The court will issue a separate limited scheduling order. (ELW) (Entered: 10/21/2016)
18 LIMITED SCHEDULING ORDER: In accordance with FRCP 16(b), the following discovery deadlines are established. Amended Pleadings due by 1/31/2017. Discovery due by 5/31/2017. Plaintiff`s Expert Reports due by 12/21/2016. Defendant`s Expert Reports due by 1/27/2017. Discovery from Experts due by 2/28/2017. Motion for Class Certification shall be filed by 3/24/2017. Opposition due by 4/21/2017. Reply due by 5/12/2017. Certification Hearing set for 5/19/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 5 before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 10/25/2016. (BLR) (Entered: 10/25/2016)
19 ORDER Vacating 18 Limited Scheduling Order. A revised limited scheduling order will be issued. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 11/4/2016. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.)(BLR) (Entered: 11/04/2016)
20 LIMITED SCHEDULING ORDER: In accordance with FRCP 16(b), the following discovery deadlines are established. Amended Pleadings due by 1/31/2017. Plaintiff`s Expert Reports due by 12/21/2016. Defendant`s Expert Reports due by 1/27/2017. Discovery from Experts due by 2/28/2017. Motion for Class Certification shall be filed by 3/24/2017. Opposition due by 4/21/2017. Reply due by 5/12/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 11/8/2016. (BLR) (Entered: 11/08/2016)
21 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER: Settlement Conference set for 12/9/2016 at 09:00 AM in chambers before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 11/28/2016. (EDC) (Entered: 11/28/2016)
22 Notice to Counsel: Due to an unforeseen scheduling conflict, the Settlement Conference set for 12/9/2016 is CANCELLED. Counsel is to contact the chambers at 225−389−3588 as soon as possible to reset settlement conference. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 12/01/2016)
23 Notice to Counsel: Settlement Conference has been RESET to 12/12/2016 at 09:00 AM in chambers before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 12/01/2016)
24 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes: Settlement Conference held on 12/12/2016. The parties reached an agreement in

12/13/2016
12/13/2016 12/19/2016
12/19/2016 12/21/2016 12/21/2016 12/22/2016 12/22/2016 12/22/2016 01/24/2017 01/24/2017

principle, which was recited into the record under seal. Counsel will continue efforts to memorialize a written settlement agreement. A Telephone Status Conference set for 1/24/2017 at 10:00 AM in chambers before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes. Counsel for plaintiffs shall initiate the call and contact the court at (225) 389−3584 when all participants are on the line. (SGO) (Entered: 12/13/2016)
25 AMENDED LIMITED SCHEDULING ORDER: In accordance with FRCP 16(b), the following discovery deadlines are established. Amended Pleadings due by 5/31/2017. Plaintiff`s Expert Reports due by 4/21/2017. Defendant`s Expert Reports due by 5/26/2017. Discovery from Experts due by 6/28/2017. Motions for Class Certification shall be filed by 7/24/2017. Opposition to Motion for Class Certification shall be filed by 8/21/2017. Reply to Opposition to Motion for Class Certification shall be filed by 9/11/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 12/13/2016. (SGO) (Entered: 12/13/2016)
26 TRANSCRIPT REQUEST by Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond, Lawrence Levy for proceedings held on December 12, 2016 before Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes.. (Rea, Madeline) Modified on 12/14/2016 "form forwarded to the Magistrate Judge's CRD via email."(EDC). (Entered: 12/13/2016)
27 SEALED TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings: Settlement Conference held on 12/12/2016 before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes
NOTICE RE: REDACTION OF TRANSCRIPTS: The parties have seven (7) calendar days to file with the Court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this transcript. The policy is located on our website at www.lamd.uscourts.gov.
(NLT) (Entered: 12/19/2016)
28 MOTION to Substitute Laura Thornton in place of Nell Hahn as Attorney by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Hahn, Ellen) Modified to substitute per rec. doc. 30 on 12/22/2016 (SGO). (Entered: 12/19/2016)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 28 MOTION to Substitute Laura Thornton in place of Nell Hahn as Attorney . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (EDC) (Entered: 12/21/2016)
29 MOTION to Substitute Pleading by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Pleading;, # 2 Proposed Order)(Hahn, Ellen) Modified on 12/22/2016 to edit text.(EDC). (Entered: 12/21/2016)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 29 MOTION for Leave to File Corrected Motion to Substitute Counsel . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (EDC) (Entered: 12/22/2016)
30 ORDER granting 29 MOTION for Leave to File Corrected Motion to Substitute Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 12/22/2016. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (SGO) (Entered: 12/22/2016)
31 ORDER granting 28 Motion to Substitute Counsel. Laura Lee Thornton added for Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond and Lawrence Levy replacing Nell Hahn. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 12/22/2016. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (SGO) (Entered: 12/22/2016)
32 AMENDED LIMITED SCHEDULING ORDER: In accordance with FRCP 16(b), the following discovery deadlines are established. Amended Pleadings due by 5/31/2017. Discovery due by 6/28/2017. Motions shall be filed by 7/24/2017. Opposition to Motion for Class Certification due by 8/21/2017. Replies due by 9/11/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 01/24/2017. (SGO) (Entered: 01/24/2017)
33 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes: Telephone Status Conference held on 1/24/2017. Counsel first discussed the status of efforts to memorialize the agreement in principle they reached at the settlement conference held with the court on December 12, 2016. Counsel advised the court that they have reached an impasse and will not be able to execute a written settlement

03/17/2017 03/24/2017
03/30/2017
07/21/2017 07/24/2017
07/24/2017 08/11/2017 08/15/2017 08/22/2017
09/20/2017 09/20/2017 09/21/2017

agreement. Counsel agreed that they anticipated being able to meet the deadlines contained in the Amended Limited Scheduling Order. The court discussed with counsel whether it would be beneficial to scheduled monthly telephone status conferences in this matter. At this time, counsel agree they will continue to confer in an effort to resolve issues without court intervention. (SGO) (Entered: 01/24/2017)
34 TRANSCRIPT REQUEST by Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond, Lawrence Levy for proceedings held on January 24, 2017 before Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes.. (Rea, Madeline) Modified on 3/20/2017 form forwarded to the Magistrate Judge's CRD via email (KAH). (Entered: 03/17/2017)
35 Notice: In reference to the 34 Transcript Request, counsel was advised via telephone that telephone conferences in chambers are not recorded. Accordingly, there is no transcript from 1/24/2017 Telephone Conference. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 03/24/2017)
36 Notice: In response the correspondence from plaintiff's counsel date 3/27/2017, the 17 Telephone Conference Report and Order specifically references the fact that the limited Scheduling Order deadlines are limited to information required for a class certification hearing. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 03/30/2017)
37 Joint MOTION for Entry of Stipulation and Agreement by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Ex. A)(Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 07/21/2017)
38 Considering the Joint Motion for Entry of Stipulation and Agreement by All Plaintiffs, it is ORDERED that the stipulation attached as Exhibit A is hereby entered into the record. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 07/24/2017. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KDC) (Entered: 07/24/2017)
39 STIPULATION & AGREEMENT filed by All Parties. (LLH) (Entered: 07/25/2017)
40 Letter dated 8/11/2017 from Madeline Rea to Magistrate Judge Wilder−Doomes Re: Request to enter scheduling order on the merits. (BLR) (Entered: 08/15/2017)
41 ORAL ORDER: Grating 40 Request to enter scheduling order on the merits. The court will issue a separate limited Scheduling. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 8/15/2017. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.)(BLR) (Entered: 08/15/2017)
42 AMENDED LIMITED SCHEDULING ORDER: In accordance with FRCP 16(b), the following discovery deadlines are established. Plaintiff`s Expert Reports due by 9/22/2017. Defendant`s Expert Reports due by 10/13/2017. Expert Depositions due by 11/13/2017. Rebuttal Expert Reports due by 12/4/2017. Opening Summary Judgment Motions shall be filed by all parties by 1/26/2018. Briefs in Opposition to Summary Judgment due by 2/26/2018. Reply Briefs in Support of Summary Judgment due by 3/26/2018. The parties shall file Joint Status Report in form of R. Doc. 5 pp. 3−10 no later than 10 days after a ruling is issued on Summary Judgment Motion(s). Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 8/18/2017. (EDC) (Entered: 08/22/2017)
43 MOTION to Amend the Amended Limited Scheduling Order by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Rea, Madeline) Modified to edit event on 9/21/2017 (SGO). (Entered: 09/20/2017)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 43 MOTION to Amend the Amended Limited Scheduling Order. This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (KAH) (Entered: 09/20/2017)
44 AMENDED LIMITED SCHEDULING ORDER granting 43 MOTION to Amend the Amended Limited Scheduling Order. Plaintiff`s Expert Reports due by 10/6/2017. Defendant`s Expert Reports due by 10/27/2017. Last day for Expert Depositions is 11/29/2017. Rebuttal Expert Reports due by 12/18/2017. Opening Summary Judgment Motions due by 2/9/2018. Oppositions due by 3/12/2018. Replies due by 4/9/2018. Parties shall file joint status report in the form of R. Doc. 5 pp. 3−10 no later than 10 days after ruling on Summary Judgement Motion(s). Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 9/21/2017. (SGO) (Entered: 09/21/2017)

11/27/2017 11/28/2017 11/29/2017 11/29/2017 12/15/2017 12/15/2017 12/15/2017
01/10/2018
01/11/2018 01/17/2018
01/25/2018 03/28/2018 03/28/2018 03/28/2018
03/29/2018
04/03/2018 04/04/2018

45 Joint MOTION To Extend Deadlines in Amended Limited Scheduling Order by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 11/27/2017)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 45 Joint MOTION To Extend Deadlines in Amended Limited Scheduling Order. This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (ELW) (Entered: 11/28/2017)
46 ORDER granting 45 Motion To Extend Deadlines in Amended Limited Scheduling Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 11/29/2017. (ELW) (Entered: 11/29/2017)
Reset Deadlines: Last Day for Expert Depositions due by 12/15/2017. Rebuttal Expert Report due by 12/28/2017. (ELW) (Entered: 11/29/2017)
47 MOTION to Amend Scheduling Order by Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections. (Attachments: # 1 proposed order)(Wilton, Patricia) Modified on 12/15/2017 to edit text. (EDC). (Entered: 12/15/2017)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 47 MOTION for Extension of Discovery Deadlines . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (EDC) (Entered: 12/15/2017)
48 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER granting 47 Unopposed Motion to Amend Scheduling Order.Last Day for Expert Depositions: January 5, 2018. Rebuttal Expert Reports: January 19, 2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 12/15/2017. (SGO) (Entered: 12/15/2017)
49 Joint STIPULATION to Adjourn Scheduling Deadlines to Engage in Mediation by Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond, Lawrence Levy. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Pleading;)(Hirschhorn, Russell) Modified on 1/11/2018 to edit even(LLH). (Entered: 01/10/2018)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 49 MOTION to Dismiss Deadlines. This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (LLH) (Entered: 01/11/2018)
50 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER: Motion for Entry of Stipulation to Adjourn Scheduling Deadlines (Dkt. 49) is GRANTED for good cause shown. Parties will promptly focus their attention on trying to mediate a resolution of this action with goal of signing a term sheet no later than March 15, 2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 01/17/2018. (ELW) Modified on 1/25/2018 to correct entry (ELW). (Entered: 01/19/2018)
Set Deadlines: Opening Brief due by 4/4/2018. Opposition Brief due by 5/9/2018. Reply Briefs due by 5/30/2018. (ELW) (Entered: 01/25/2018)
51 MOTION for Russell T. Gorkin to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee $100.00, Receipt Number 053N−1744873) by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − Affidavit of Russell T. Gorkin, # 2 Proposed Order)(Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 03/28/2018)
52 MOTION for Om V. Alladi to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee $100.00, Receipt Number 053N−1744901) by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − Affidavit of Om V. Alladi, # 2 Proposed Order)(Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 03/28/2018)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 52 MOTION for Om V. Alladi to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee $100.00, Receipt Number 053N−1744901), 51 MOTION for Russell T. Gorkin to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee $100.00, Receipt Number 053N−1744873). This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (EDC) (Entered: 03/28/2018)
53 ORDER granting 51 and 52 Motions for Russell Todd Gorkin and Om Vasudevan Alladi to appear Pro Hac Vice for Plaintiffs Lawrence Levy, Cedric Hammond, andBradley Casto. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 3/29/2018. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 03/29/2018)
54 MOTION for Philip J. Fornaci to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee $100.00, Receipt Number 053N−1747991) by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − Affidavit of Philip Fornaci, # 2 Proposed Order)(Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 04/03/2018)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 54 MOTION for Philip J. Fornaci to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee $100.00, Receipt Number 053N−1747991). This motion is now pending

04/04/2018
04/04/2018 04/05/2018
04/05/2018 04/05/2018 04/05/2018 04/25/2018
04/26/2018 04/30/2018 05/09/2018

before the USMJ. (ELW) (Entered: 04/04/2018)
55 MOTION for Summary Judgment by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Lawrence Levy, # 2 Declaration of Cedric Hammond, # 3 Declaration of Bradley Casto, # 4 Declaration of Russell Gorkin, # 5 Ex. A to Gorkin Declaration, # 6 Ex. B to Gorkin Declaration, # 7 Ex. C to Gorkin Declaration, # 8 Ex. D to Gorkin Declaration, # 9 Ex. E to Gorkin Declaration, # 10 Ex. F to Gorkin Declaration, # 11 Ex. G to Gorkin Declaration, # 12 Ex. H to Gorkin Declaration, # 13 Ex. I to Gorkin Declaration, # 14 Ex. J to Gorkin Declaration, # 15 Ex. K to Gorkin Declaration, # 16 Ex. L to Gorkin Declaration, # 17 Ex. M to Gorkin Declaration, # 18 Ex. N to Gorkin Declaration, # 19 Ex. O to Gorkin Declaration, # 20 Ex. P to Gorkin Declaration, # 21 Ex. Q to Gorkin Declaration, # 22 Ex. R to Gorkin Declaration, # 23 Ex. S to Gorkin Declaration, # 24 Ex. T to Gorkin Declaration, # 25 Ex. U to Gorkin Declaration, # 26 Ex. V to Gorkin Declaration, # 27 Ex. W to Gorkin Declaration, # 28 Ex. X to Gorkin Declaration, # 29 Ex. Y to Gorkin Declaration, # 30 Statement of Undisputed Facts, # 31 Memorandum in Support, # 32 Certificate of Service)(Hirschhorn, Russell) (Entered: 04/04/2018)
56 MOTION for Oral Argument on 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Hirschhorn, Russell) (Entered: 04/04/2018)
57 NOTICE of Briefing Schedule on 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment : Opposition to the motion shall be filed within 21 days from the filing of the motion and shall not exceed 10 pages excluding attachments. The mover may file a reply brief within 14 days of the filing of the opposition and shall be limited to a total of 5 pages. No motion for leave will be required. Sur−Reply briefs will be permitted only with leave of Court for extraordinary reasons supported by sufficient facts. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.)(KDC) (Entered: 04/05/2018)
58 ORDER granting 56 Motion for Oral Argument on 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment . Motion Hearing set for 8/23/2018 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 1 before Judge John W. deGravelles. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 04/05/2018. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KDC) (Entered: 04/05/2018)
59 NOTICE of Hearing on Motion 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment :Motion Hearing reset for 11/15/2018 at 2:30 PM in Courtroom 1 before Judge John W. deGravelles. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KDC) (Entered: 04/05/2018)
60 ORDER granting 54 Motion for Philip J. Fornaci to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 04/05/2018. (ELW) (Entered: 04/05/2018)
61 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by All Defendants. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Contested Facts, # 2 Wilton Declaration, # 3 Bordelon Declaration, # 4 Oertel Declaration, # 5 Exhibit A, # 6 Exhibit B, # 7 Exhibit C, # 8 Exhibit D, # 9 Anderson Declaration)(Wilton, Patricia) (Attachment 4 replaced on 4/26/2018) (ELW). Modified on 4/26/2018 to correct page orientation (ELW). (Additional attachment(s) added on 5/29/2018: # 13 Attachment Declaration of Maria Pollage−Toups, # 14 Exhibit, # 15 Exhibit) (ELW). (Entered: 04/26/2018)
62 MOTION to Accept Late Filed Memorandum and Attachments by All Defendants. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Wilton, Patricia) Modified on 4/26/2018 to edit text (ELW). (Entered: 04/26/2018)
63 ORDER granting 62 Motion to Accept Late Filed Memorandum and Attachments. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 04/29/2018. (ELW) (Entered: 04/30/2018)
64 REPLY to 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment , 61 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion, filed by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Reply Declaration of Russell Gorkin, # 2 Ex. A to Gorkin Reply Declaration, # 3 Ex. B to Gorkin Reply Declaration, # 4 Ex. C to Gorkin Reply Declaration, # 5 Ex. D to Gorkin Reply Declaration)(Hirschhorn, Russell) (Entered: 05/09/2018)

05/23/2018 05/24/2018 05/29/2018 05/30/2018
06/04/2018 06/08/2018 06/13/2018 06/14/2018
08/15/2018 08/15/2018 08/16/2018
08/16/2018 08/17/2018

65 MOTION for Leave to File Declaration of Maria Pollage−Toups by All Defendants. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Pleading;, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Proposed Order)(Wilton, Patricia) (Entered: 05/23/2018)
66 ORDER granting 65 MOTION for Leave to File Declaration of Maria Pollage−Toups filed by James LeBlanc, Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 05/24/2018. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (JHF) (Entered: 05/24/2018)
67 MOTION for Reconsideration of 65 MOTION for Leave to File Declaration of Maria Pollage−Toups by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit A to Memorandum, # 3 Exhibit B to Memorandum)(Hirschhorn, Russell) (Entered: 05/29/2018)
68 NOTICE of ABBREVIATED Briefing Schedule on 67 MOTION for Reconsideration of 65 MOTION for Leave to File Declaration of Maria Pollage−Toups : Opposition to the motion shall be filed within 10 days from the filing of the motion and shall not exceed 10 pages excluding attachments. The mover may file a reply brief within 5 days of the filing of the opposition and shall be limited to a total of 5 pages. No motion for leave will be required. Sur−Reply briefs will be permitted only with leave of Court for extraordinary reasons supported by sufficient facts. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (JHF) (Entered: 05/30/2018)
Set Deadlines as to 67 MOTION for Reconsideration of 65 MOTION for Leave to File Declaration of Maria Pollage−Toups . (THIS EVENT WAS ENTERED FOR CALENDARING PURPOSES ONLY.) (Entered: 06/04/2018)
69 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to 67 MOTION for Reconsideration of 65 MOTION for Leave to File Declaration of Maria Pollage−Toups filed by All Defendants. (Attachments: # 1 Wilton Declaration, # 2 EX A to Wilton Declaration)(Wilton, Patricia) (Entered: 06/08/2018)
70 REPLY in Support of 67 MOTION for Reconsideration of Order Granting 65 MOTION for Leave to File Declaration of Maria Pollage−Toups filed by All Plaintiffs. (Hirschhorn, Russell) Modified on 6/13/2018 to edit text. (EDC). (Entered: 06/13/2018)
71 RULING: The Court has carefully reviewed Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 67) of its granting of Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Declaration of Maria Pollage−Toups (Doc. 66), as well as Defendants' Opposition (Doc. 69) and Plaintiffs' Reply (Doc. 70). The Court finds no error in its original ruling. Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 67) is therefore DENIED. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 06/14/2018. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KDC) (Entered: 06/14/2018)
72 MOTION for Madeline Chimento Rea to Withdraw as Attorney by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Rea, Madeline) (Entered: 08/15/2018)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 72 MOTION for Madeline Chimento Rea to Withdraw as Attorney . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (EDC) (Entered: 08/15/2018)
73 ORDER denying 72 Motion to Withdraw Appearance of Counsel. The motion seeks to withdraw Madeline C. Rea, who is local counsel for Proskauer Rose, LLP, but does not request the appearance of new local counsel for Proskauer Rose, LLP. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 8/16/2018. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 08/16/2018)
74 MOTION for Madeline Chimento Rea to Withdraw as Attorney , MOTION to Substitute Lindsey H. Chopin in place of Madeline Chimento Rea as Attorney by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Chopin, Lindsey) (Entered: 08/16/2018)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 74 MOTION for Madeline Chimento Rea to Withdraw as Attorney MOTION to Substitute Lindsey H. Chopin in place of Madeline Chimento Rea as Attorney . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (ELW) (Entered: 08/17/2018)

08/17/2018
08/28/2018 08/29/2018
09/11/2018
09/12/2018 09/19/2018 09/19/2018 09/19/2018
09/19/2018 09/25/2018 10/12/2018
10/12/2018 01/30/2019 01/31/2019

75 ORDER granting 74 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Chimento Rea is withdrawn; granting 74 Motion to Substitute Attorney. Lindsey Harreld Chopin for Bradley Casto Cedric Hammond and Lawrence Levy replacing Chimento Rea. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 08/17/2018. (ELW) (Entered: 08/17/2018)
76 NOTICE of Plaintiffs' Expert's Death by Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond, Lawrence Levy (Hirschhorn, Russell) (Entered: 08/28/2018)
77 NOTICE of TELEPHONE CONFERENCE: Telephone Conference set for 9/11/2018 at 9:00 AM before Judge John W. deGravelles. Counsel for Plaintiffs is responsible for coordinating the call to the Court (225−389−3568). Counsel shall call the Court from a land−line, if possible, in order to eliminate any extraneous noise. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.)(KDC) (Entered: 08/29/2018)
78 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge John W. deGravelles.Telephone Status Conference held on 9/11/2018. The letter written to the Court, filed as document 76, advising the Court of the death of Plaintiffs expert, Dr. Dennis Cockley was discussed. This case is referred to Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes to schedule a conference to select a trial date and any other necessary deadlines. (ELW) (Entered: 09/11/2018)
79 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER: Scheduling Conference set for 10/25/2018 at 02:30 PM in chambers before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes. Status Report due by 10/11/2018.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 09/12/2018 (ELW) (Entered: 09/12/2018)
80 Letter dated 9/18/2018 from Russell L. Hirschhorn to Magistrate Judge Wilder−Doomes Re: advising the court that the 10/25/2018 scheduling conference is unnecessary. (BLR) (Entered: 09/19/2018)
81 Notice to Counsel: In light of the 80 Letter filed, the Scheduling Conference set for 10/25/2018 is CANCELED. No status report is due at this time. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 09/19/2018)
82 SCHEDULING ORDER: In accordance with FRCP 16(b), the following discovery deadlines are established. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 5/20/2019. Pretrial Conference set for 6/20/2019 at 02:00 PM before Judge John W. deGravelles. Motions In Limine shall be filed by 7/1/2019. Affidavit of Settlement Efforts due by 7/15/2019. Joint jury instructions, voir dire, verdict forms, and trial briefs due by 8/5/2019. Bench Trial set for 8/19/2019 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 1 before Judge John W. deGravelles. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 09/19/2018. (ELW) (Entered: 09/19/2018)
Reset Trial and Related Deadlines: Bench Trial set for 8/19/2019 to 8/23/2019 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 1 before Judge John W. deGravelles. (NLT) (Entered: 09/20/2018)
83 NOTICE of Compliance by James LeBlanc, Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections to 78 Telephone Conference, (Wilton, Patricia) (Entered: 09/25/2018)
84 NOTICE of Hearing on Motion 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment :Motion Hearing reset for 1/31/2019 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 1 before Judge John W. deGravelles. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KDC) Modified on 10/12/2018 to edit date (LLH). (Entered: 10/12/2018)
Set/Reset Deadlines (Court Use Only) (SGO) (Entered: 10/12/2018)
85 NOTICE of Hearing on Motion 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment (TIME CHANGE ONLY): Motion Hearing reset for 1/31/2019 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 1 before Judge John W. deGravelles. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KDC) (Entered: 01/30/2019)
86 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge John W. deGravelles. Motion Hearing / Oral Argument held on 1/31/2019 re 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Dfts are granted until 2/7/2019 to file a supplemental brief. Counsel for pla will have 7 days

02/04/2019 02/04/2019 02/07/2019 02/14/2019 02/20/2019
02/25/2019 02/26/2019 03/04/2019 03/15/2019 03/15/2019 03/19/2019 03/19/2019 03/20/2019

thereafter to file a reply. The pending motion for summary judgment (Doc. 55) is taken under advisement. (Court Reporter G. Delatte−Richard.) (ELW) Modified on 2/4/2019 to edit text (SGO). (Entered: 02/01/2019)
Set/Reset Deadlines (Court Use Only)(SGO) (Entered: 02/04/2019)
87 TRANSCRIPT REQUEST by Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond, Lawrence Levy for proceedings held on 1/31/2019 before Judge John deGravelles.. (Chopin, Lindsey) (Entered: 02/04/2019)
88 Supplemental MEMORANDUM in Opposition to 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by James LeBlanc, Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Declaration of Patricia Wilton, # 4 Exhibit 3)(Wilton, Patricia) (Entered: 02/07/2019)
89 REPLY to Supplemental Memorandum in further Support of 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Russell T. Gorkin, # 2 Exhibit 1)(Hirschhorn, Russell) Modified on 2/19/2019 to edit text (SGO). (Entered: 02/14/2019)
90 NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of the Motion for summary judgment before Judge John W. deGravelles held on January 31, 2019. Court Reporter: Gina Delatte−Richard. Phone Number: 225−389−3564.
NOTICE RE: REDACTION OF TRANSCRIPTS: The parties have seven (7) calendar days to file with the Court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this transcript. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript will be made remotely electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days. The policy is located on our website at www.lamd.uscourts.gov.
Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER.. Redaction Request due 3/13/2019. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 3/25/2019. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 5/21/2019. (Delatte−Richard, Gina) (Entered: 02/20/2019)
91 TRANSCRIPT REQUEST Susan Griffin by Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections for proceedings held on 01/31/2019 before Judge Degravelles.. (Griffin, Susan) (Entered: 02/25/2019)
92 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER: Settlement Conference set for 3/27/2019 at 01:30 PM in chambers before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 02/26/2019. (ELW) (Entered: 02/26/2019)
93 RULING AND ORDER denying 55 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 3/4/2019. (SWE) (Entered: 03/04/2019)
94 MOTION for Susan M. Meyers to Withdraw as Attorney by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Meyers, Susan) (Entered: 03/15/2019)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 94 MOTION for Susan M. Meyers to Withdraw as Attorney . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (ELW) (Entered: 03/15/2019)
95 ORDER granting 94 Motion to Withdraw Attorney Susan Meyers as Attorney. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 3/19/2019. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 03/19/2019)
96 MOTION to Withdraw and Substitute Rachel T. Gulotta and Samantha Shear in place of Lindsey H. Chopin as Attorney by All Plaintiffs. (Chopin, Lindsey) Modified on 3/20/2019 to edit the text (KAH). (Entered: 03/19/2019)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 96 MOTION for Lindsey H. Chopin to Withdraw as Attorney MOTION to Substitute Rachel T. Gulotta and Samantha Shear in place of Lindsey H. Chopin as Attorney . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (KAH) (Entered: 03/20/2019)

03/20/2019 03/20/2019 03/25/2019
03/25/2019 03/27/2019
04/01/2019
05/23/2019 05/28/2019

97 MOTION to Enroll Ronald K. Lospennato as Additional Attorney by All Plaintiffs. (Stratton, Laura) (Entered: 03/20/2019)
MOTION(S) REFERRED: 97 MOTION to Enroll Ronald K. Lospennato as Additional Attorney . This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (SWE) (Entered: 03/20/2019)
98 ORDER granting 97 Motion to Enroll Additional Attorney. Added attorney Ronald Kenneth Lospennato for Bradley Casto,Ronald Kenneth Lospennato for Cedric Hammond,Ronald Kenneth Lospennato for Lawrence Levy. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 3/25/2019. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BLR) (Entered: 03/25/2019)
99 ORDER granting 96 Motion to Withdraw Attorney Lindsey H. Chopin as Attorney; granting 96 Motion to Substitute Attorney. Rachel Gulotta,Samantha Shear for Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond,and Lawrence Levy. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 3/25/2019. (SWE) (Entered: 03/25/2019)
100 Settlement Conference Report and Recommendation for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes: Settlement Conference held on 3/27/2019. The parties reached an agreement. The Court recommends a 60−day conditional order of dismissal be issued. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder−Doomes on 3/29/2019. (SWE) (Entered: 03/29/2019)
101 ORDER OF DISMISSAL: This action is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice to the right, upon good cause shown within sixty (60) days, to reopen the action if the settlement is not consummated. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 04/01/2019. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.)(KDC) (Entered: 04/01/2019)
102 STIPULATION of Settlement/Dismissal and Proposed Order by Bradley Casto, Cedric Hammond, Lawrence Levy. (Hirschhorn, Russell) Modified on 5/24/2019 to edit event (LLH). (Entered: 05/23/2019)
103 ORDER granting 102 Stipulation and Order. The Court retains jurisdiction of this action for the limited purpose of enforcing the Settlement Agreement. The action is otherwise dismissed and the Clerk is directed to close the docket. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 5/28/2019. (SWE) (Entered: 05/28/2019)