2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 1 of 19 Pg ID 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
NORTHERN DIVISION

MICHAEL DUNMIRE, MARCUS JACKSON, and AMANDA HESTER, on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated inmates, and ASHLEY BUSH and SARA DUNMIRE,

Plaintiffs,
v.
ISABELLA COUNTY, a municipal corporation; LEO MIODUSZEWSKI, Isabella County Sheriff, in his official capacity; and LT. THOMAS RECKER, Jail Administrator, Isabella County Correctional Facility, in his official and individual capacity.

Hon. Case No.

CLASS ACTION

Defendants. _______________________________________/

Sarah L. Mehta (P76024) Michael J. Steinberg (P43085) Kary L. Moss (P49759) American Civil Liberties Union
Fund of Michigan 2966 Woodward Avenue Detroit, MI 48201 (313) 578-6823 smehta@aclumich.org msteinberg@aclumich.org kmoss@aclumich.org

Daniel E. Manville (P39731) Cooperating Attorney, American Civil
Liberties Union Fund of Michigan Michigan State University College of Law Civil Rights Clinic 610 Abbot Rd. East Lansing, MI 48823 (517) 336-8088, ext. 1137 daniel.manville@law.msu.edu

_______________________________________/

COMPLAINT Plaintiffs Michael Dunmire, Amanda Hester, Marcus Jackson, Ashley Bush, and Sara Dunmire, by their attorneys, bring this Complaint for Declaratory, Injunctive Relief and

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 2 of 19 Pg ID 2
Other Relief against Defendants Isabella County, Sheriff Leo Mioduszewski and Lt. Tom Recker for the reasons that follow:
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT 1. Plaintiffs are current and former inmates at Isabella County Correctional Facility in Mount Pleasant, Michigan. The facility holds both male and female pre-trial detainees and sentenced inmates from not only Isabella County but also other municipalities in Michigan. 2. Although male and female inmates may be detained at Isabella County Correctional Facility (ICCF) for over a year, they are not permitted any out-of-cell exercise for the duration of their detention. Not only do inmates lack the chance to exercise but they have very limited opportunities to leave their cells at all. Inmates eat, sleep, and shower in their cells, which they share with several other inmates, and, with some limited exceptions, are essentially on lockdown 24 hours a day, seven days a week. 3. Additionally, female inmates at ICCF are denied opportunities available to male inmates. For example, certain male inmates at ICCF may serve as trustees, a position that entitles them to time off their sentence. However, female inmates have been repeatedly told that they will never be allowed to serve as trustees because “this is a man’s jail.” Similarly, male inmates are permitted to perform their court-ordered community service during their jail sentence, but women inmates have been told they cannot enroll. 4. Plaintiffs Michael Dunmire, Amanda Hester, and Marcus Jackson bring this action, on behalf of themselves and a proposed class of all current and future inmates at ICCF, to vindicate their Eighth Amendment rights against cruel and unusual punishment. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, these plaintiffs seek declaratory relief and a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring the facility to provide inmates with regular out-of-cell exercise.
2

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 3 of 19 Pg ID 3
Additionally, Plaintiffs Ashley Bush and Sara Dunmire seek damages for the violation of their clearly established Eighth Amendment rights.
5. Plaintiffs Ashley Bush, Sara Dunmire and Amanda Hester also bring this action against Defendants Isabella County, Sheriff Leo Mioduszewski and Lt. Thomas Recker to vindicate their rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, they seek a declaration that the facility’s custom, policy or practice violates the right to be free from gender discrimination. Further, Plaintiff Hester seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring the facility to provide her an opportunity to participate in the trustee and community services programs at the facility on an equal basis as male applicants. Additionally, Plaintiffs Ashley Bush and Sara Dunmire seek damages for the violation of their clearly established rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.
PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE 6. Plaintiff Michael Dunmire is an inmate at Isabella County Correctional Facility in Isabella County, which falls within the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Michigan. 7. Plaintiff Marcus Jackson is an inmate at Isabella County Correctional Facility in Isabella County, which falls within the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Michigan. 8. Plaintiff Amanda Hester is an inmate at Isabella County Correctional Facility in Isabella County, which falls within the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Michigan. 9. Plaintiff Sara Dunmire, during the events at issue in this complaint, was an inmate at Isabella County Correctional Facility in Isabella County, which falls within the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Michigan. She currently resides in Battle Creek. 10. Plaintiff Ashley Bush, during the events at issue in this complaint, was an inmate at Isabella County Correctional Facility in Isabella County, which falls within the Northern
3

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 4 of 19 Pg ID 4
Division of the Eastern District of Michigan. She was released in December 2010 and now lives in Grandville, Michigan.
11. Defendant Isabella County is located within the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Michigan.
12. Defendant Leo Mioduszewski is sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Isabella County. Upon information and belief, he resides within the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Michigan.
13. Defendant Lt. Thomas Recker is sued in his official capacity as Jail Administrator at Isabella County Correctional Facility in Isabella County. Upon information and belief, he resides within the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Michigan.
14. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343, because federal questions are presented in this action under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
15. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) and (2) because this is a judicial district where either or both defendants reside and where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred and/or will occur.
STATEMENT OF FACTS General Allegations
16. Isabella County Correctional Facility (“ICCF”) houses close to 200 inmates on a daily basis, including inmates from Isabella County and inmates from several other Michigan cities, including Livonia, Midland and Westland. On June 4, 2012, ICCF had 192 inmates, approximately 17% of whom were women.
4

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 5 of 19 Pg ID 5
17. Neither male nor female inmates receive any out-of-cell exercise while at ICCF. Prisoners can spend up to a year in detention at ICCF with no opportunity to exercise outside of their cells.
18. Inmates not only sleep in their cells but eat their meals, wash, use the toilet, and spend all their time in the cell unless they are able to participate in a class, have a medical appointment or a visitor, or have the opportunity to attend religious services.
19. The size of the cells varies but most are roughly 20 feet by 25 feet. While most cells have four bunk beds for eight inmates, the cells routinely hold more people, with some inmates sleeping on mattresses on the floor.
20. ICCF inmates spend the vast majority of their time in detention in one room with several other people, 24 hours a day, without any opportunity to exercise outside of the cell.
21. Some of the cells have no windows or access to natural light. 22. There is a recreation room at ICCF, and in the past, inmates had the ability to exercise outside the cell at the facility both inside and outdoors. However, neither option is currently provided to inmates. The recreation room is currently used for some classes and religious services, when they occur. 23. Inmates who participate in the trustee program at ICCF have the opportunity to “work off” some of their criminal sentence time. For every week that inmates work as trustees, a certain number of days are removed from their sentences, thereby enabling them to be released from ICCF sooner. 24. The ICCF Inmate Guide provides the eligibility requirements for prisoners to serve as trustees, which include the requirement that they have at least 30 days remaining on
5

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 6 of 19 Pg ID 6
their sentence, medical clearance, and minimum custody status. It does not mention the gender of the inmate.
25. Male inmates regularly serve as trustees at ICCF. 26. However, women at ICCF, including the named Plaintiffs, have asked to be trustees, but their requests have either been explicitly rejected or ignored. 27. On several occasions, Defendant Lt. Recker rejected requests by women to be trustees, telling the women who requested to be trustees, and sometimes all the women in the cell, that ICCF is a “male-oriented jail” or a “man’s jail” and that that he will not allow women to be trustees because they cause too much trouble. 28. Both male and female inmates at ICCF have received sentences that contain a community service component. 29. Eligible male inmates who participate in the community service program are released from the jail during the day and able to complete all or part of the community service component of their sentence while at ICCF. 30. Upon information and belief, prior to July 2010, women were permitted to participate in a community service program at ICCF that allowed them, like men, to complete the community service part of their sentence while incarcerated. 31. However, women at ICCF are now excluded from participation in the community service program. Allegations Regarding Denial of Exercise Opportunities Michael Dunmire 32. Michael Dunmire arrived at ICCF on April 12, 2012 and expects to be released in July 2013.
6

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 7 of 19 Pg ID 7
33. Mr. Dunmire is confined to a cell roughly 20 feet by 20 feet in size. 34. The cell has four bunk beds for eight inmates, although ten inmates are sometimes placed in the cell, with two sleeping on the cell floor. 35. The cell also contains a picnic table and leaves only a little room in the cell to walk around it. 36. Like all inmates at ICCF, Mr. Dunmire is required to eat his meals, sleep, wash, and spend virtually all his time in the cell. 37. The cell has only a small window near the ceiling which looks into the recreation within the facility, but even that window is covered with tape. 38. Mr. Dunmire has not had any out-of-cell exercise and has had few, if any, opportunities to see natural light since he arrived at ICCF in April 2012, more than six months ago. 39. The lack of exercise and natural light, combined with the constant confinement in a cell with several other inmates, has significantly impacted Mr. Dunmire’s mental and emotional health. 40. Mr. Dunmire has written two grievances regarding the lack of exercise but never received any response. 41. When Mr. Dunmire asked correctional officers why prisoners were not able to have any exercise time, and the officers have told him that that the television is their “recreation.” Marcus Jackson 42. Marcus Jackson arrived at ICCF on April 20, 2012 and expects to be released in February 2013.
7

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 8 of 19 Pg ID 8
43. Mr. Jackson is confined to a cell with four bunk beds for eight inmates, although the cell currently houses 10 inmates. Two men sleep on the cell floor.
44. The cell is roughly 24 feet by 26 feet in size. 45. Like all inmates at ICCF, Mr. Jackson is required to eat his meals, sleep, wash, and spend virtually all his time in the cell, which does not have a window. 46. Mr. Jackson has not had any exercise outside of his cell since he arrived in April 2012 and is only able to move outside his cell to walk to his GED class within the facility. 47. Because of the lack of exercise and the stress of being in one crowded cell throughout his time at ICCF, Mr. Jackson is experiencing emotional and mental stress. 48. Mr. Jackson wrote a grievance on the lack of any out-of-cell exercise, and Defendant Lt. Recker verbally told him the grievance was denied. 49. When Mr. Jackson asked why there were no exercise opportunities for inmates, Defendant Lt. Recker told him that it is because ICCF is a “maximum” facility and that television is their recreation. Amanda Hester 50. Ms. Hester has been detained at ICCF since May 2012 and expects to be released in March 2013. 51. Since arriving at ICCF over four months ago, Ms. Hester has not had any exercise outside of her cell. 52. Ms. Hester is in a cell with four bunk beds for eight inmates, although there are currently nine inmates in the cell, one of whom sleeps on the floor. 53. At times there have been 13 women in the cell. 54. Given these crowded conditions, there is little to no space to exercise in the cell.
8

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 9 of 19 Pg ID 9
55. Ms. Hester has mental health difficulties, which are exacerbated by the lack of any opportunity for exercise outside of the cell at ICCF.
56. Ms. Hester has sent over a dozen written complaints or “kites” on the issue of exercise but has never received a response. Sara Dunmire
57. Ms. Dunmire was detained at ICCF from April 7, 2012 until September 20, 2012. 58. During her nearly-six months at ICCF, Ms. Dunmire did not have any exercise time outside of her cell. 59. Except for her last three weeks at ICCF, when she participated in a drug recovery class three hours a week, Ms. Dunmire had few opportunities to leave her cell at all in her nearlysix months at ICCF. 60. Ms. Dunmire was detained in a cell roughly 20 feet by 25 feet in size. For most of her time at ICCF, Ms. Dunmire was held in a cell with no window. 61. She had little space to exercise or even move around inside the cell. 62. Ms. Dunmire’s cell had bunk-beds for eight women but the cell sometimes held up to 13 women. 63. During her last three weeks at ICCF, in September 2012, there were 13 women in the cell. 64. On or around August 14, 2011, Ms. Dunmire grieved the lack of ability to exercise but her grievance was rejected. 65. On September 20, 2012, Ms. Dunmire was transferred to Calhoun County Correctional Facility.
9

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 10 of 19 Pg ID 10
66. At the Calhoun County Correctional Facility, Ms. Dunmire is able to exercise in an outdoor yard for several hours a day. Inmates are only locked down in their cells during the day for meals and are otherwise able to move around the facility. Ashley Bush
67. Ms. Bush was an inmate at ICCF from April 26, 2010 until December 24, 2010. 68. While at ICCF, Ms. Bush was detained in a cell that was roughly 15 feet by 20 feet. 69. There were four bunk beds for eight inmates in the cell; however, the cell sometimes held up to 12 women with four sleeping on mats on the floor. 70. Ms. Bush participated in a GED class and work release program but did not receive any out-of-cell exercise during her eight months at ICCF.
Class allegations on denial of exercise claim 71. Plaintiffs Michael Dunmire, Amanda Hester and Marcus Jackson seek to
represent a class of all current and future inmates at ICCF pursuant to Rule 23(a) and Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
72. On information and belief, the current number of inmates at ICCF is approximately 192.
73. Given the likely size of the class, and the inherent difficulty in identifying all class members—many of whom will be admitted while this action proceeds—the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.
74. All class members are, or will be, harmed by Defendants’ policy or practice of denying any exercise time or space outside of the cell to all inmates at ICCF. There are questions
10

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 11 of 19 Pg ID 11
of law and fact that are common to the class, namely whether ICCF provides any out-of-cell exercise time to inmates, and whether the failure to provide out-of-cell exercise opportunities violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
75. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the class because ICCF does not provide any out-of-cell exercise time or space to any inmate, and so all class members are affected by ICCF’s policies and practices.
76. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class. Plaintiffs are committed to vigorous prosecution of the class’s claims, and they have retained attorneys who have extensive experience in civil rights, prisoner rights, and class action litigation.
77. Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the class, and final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief with the respect to the class as a whole would therefore be appropriate.
78. The common questions of fact and law enumerated above would predominate in this litigation.
79. Moreover, a class action is superior to other methods for the speedy and efficient adjudication of this controversy, and a class action regarding the issues in this case would not create any problems of manageability.
Gender Discrimination Sara Dunmire
80. Sara Dunmire was detained at ICCF from April 7, 2012 until September 20, 2012. 81. In May 2012, Ms. Dunmire and several other inmates made written requests or wrote “kites” to Defendant Lt. Recker, asking to be made trustees. In response, Defendant Lt.
11

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 12 of 19 Pg ID 12
Recker came into the cell and said that women will never be trustees at ICCF as long as he was in charge, and told them not to bother “kiting” this issue again because “this is a man’s jail.”
82. When Ms. Dunmire and the others asked why women couldn’t be trustees, Lt. Recker said something to the effect of “because I run this jail and that’s what I say.”
83. In June, Ms. Dunmire and her cellmates tried again to become trustees. On behalf of the whole cell, one female inmate wrote a kite asking if women could be trustees. They received a written response on the kite— “No”—which was shoved under the door of their cell.
84. On August 11, 2012, Ms. Dunmire requested a grievance form from corrections officer J.C. Carrier. Officer Carrier asked her why she needed the grievance form, and when Ms. Dunmire explained that she wanted to grieve the lack of recreation time and the facility’s policy or custom of excluding women from the trustee program, the officer refused to give her a grievance form.
85. Officer Carrier said these were “not grievable issues” as women were not allowed to participate in the trustee program and the facility does not provide recreation time. Officer Carrier then told Ms. Dunmire that if she attempted to grieve these issues, she would get the same response.
86. Later that day, however, Officer Carrier returned and said she had changed her mind and would give Ms. Dunmire a grievance form. Ms. Dunmire then wrote a grievance addressing the lack of out-of-cell exercise and women’s exclusion from the trustee program.
87. On or around August 14, 2012, Defendant Lt. Recker came to Ms. Dunmire’s cell and called her to the hallway, with her grievance in his hand. Defendant Lt. Recker said that taxpayers did not pay for recreation time so the facility would not provide it.
12

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 13 of 19 Pg ID 13
88. Regarding the trustee issue, Defendant Lt. Recker said he had to keep men and women separate.
89. Ms. Dunmire asked why they couldn’t have separate shifts for men and women, to which Defendant Lt. Recker replied that this issue was “not a negotiable situation.”
90. Ms. Dunmire then asked if he would write that explanation on the grievance form, and Defendant Lt. Recker said there was no need to as she had received his verbal answer.
91. Ms. Dunmire had received a court-ordered community service sentence of 104 hours and wanted to participate in the ICCF community service program.
92. Ms. Dunmire also asked Defendant Lt. Recker if she could participate in the community service program.
93. Defendant Lt. Recker said that while women might be able to participate in the program, there were few spots available and the open slots went to male prisoners first. He explained that it was therefore unlikely a woman would be able to join.
94. Defendant Lt. Recker also said Ms. Dunmire would need to have a lower classification to participate in the community service program.
95. Ms. Dunmire then asked how to get reclassified and Defendant Lt. Recker told her to write a kite requesting reclassification.
96. Ms. Dunmire submitted approximately seven kites requesting reclassification but never received a response.
97. On September 20, 2012, Ms. Dunmire was transferred to Calhoun County Correctional Facility.
98. Upon arrival at Calhoun County Correctional Facility, Ms. Dunmire filled out an application to be a trustee and was approved.
13

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 14 of 19 Pg ID 14
Ashley Bush 99. Plaintiff Ashley Bush was incarcerated at ICCF from April 2010 to December
2010 and was classified as minimum security. 100. In July 2010, Ms. Bush and several of her cellmates wrote kites to Defendant Lt.
Recker and requested to become trustees. When Ms. Bush was out of the cell, Defendant Lt. Recker came to the cell and said that this was a “male-oriented” jail and women could not be trustees.
101. In July, Ms. Bush also applied in a kite to participate in the ICCF community service program but was rejected. When the kite was returned to her, on the bottom, it was written that ICCF was no longer accepting women in the program and she should instead apply to be in the school.
102. Ms. Bush’s boyfriend also called ICCF to find out why she was rejected and was told by a program coordinator that women were not permitted to participate in the community service program.
103. Ms. Bush was released from ICCF in December 2010.
Amanda Hester 104. Ms. Hester was admitted to ICCF in May 2012 and expects to be released in
March 2013. 105. Ms. Hester was in a mental health class at the jail that consisted of both female
and male inmates, including one male inmate who was a trustee. The male inmate told Ms. Hester that trustees could earn days off their sentence from the work they did at the facility.
14

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 15 of 19 Pg ID 15
106. Ms. Hester wanted to apply to be a trustee in order to reduce her sentence. 107. In May 2012, before Ms. Hester had been sentenced, she was in a cell when several of her cellmates requested to be trustees. 108. Defendant Lt. Recker came to the cell and, in Ms. Hester’s presence, told the women that ICCF is “a man’s jail” and women could not be trustees. 109. Since she was sentenced in June, Ms. Hester has written approximately four kites to become a trustee but has never received a response. 110. Correctional officers have told Ms. Hester that she would never be allowed to be a trustee because she is a woman. 111. In August or September 2012, in response to a request to be a trustee from another of Ms. Hester’s cellmates, one correctional officer came into Ms. Hester’s cell and said that women could not be trustees because they cause too much trouble 112. In August 2012, Ms. Hester was in a cell with Plaintiff Sara Dunmire and heard her ask Defendant Lt. Recker if she could participate in the community service program. Ms. Hester heard Defendant Lt. Recker say that there were not enough spots for women to join the program. 113. Ms. Hester would like to participate in the community service program but believes she needs to be reclassified as minimum security. In order to participate in both the community service and trustee programs at ICCF, Ms. Hester has requested to be reclassified as minimum security. 114. Ms. Hester has never received a reply to her written requests to be reclassified.
CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT 1
15

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 16 of 19 Pg ID 16
EIGHTH AMENDMENT AND 42 U.S.C. § 1983 For Injunctive and Declaratory Relief—Plaintiffs Michael Dunmire, Amanda Hester and
Marcus Jackson Against All Defendants For Damages—Plaintiffs Ashley Bush and Sara Dunmire Against All Defendants
115. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the previous paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
116. The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects prisoners from cruel and unusual punishment.
117. Persons violating the Eighth Amendment under color of state law are liable at law and in equity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
118. By denying, as a rule, out-of-cell exercise all inmates at ICCF, Defendants have violated and continue to violate Plaintiffs’ rights under the Eighth Amendment.
119. Plaintiffs were denied the opportunity to exercise out of their cells pursuant to Defendants’ practice, policy and/or custom.
120. Plaintiffs’ rights to exercise are clearly established.
COUNT 2 EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT For Injunctive and Declaratory Relief—Plaintiff Amanda Hester Against All Defendants For Damages—Plaintiffs Ashley Bush and Sara Dunmire Against All Defendants 121. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the previous paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
16

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 17 of 19 Pg ID 17
122. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides all persons equal protection of the law and so prohibits the state from discriminating against a person on the basis of sex.
123. Persons violating the Equal Protection Clause under color of state law are liable at law and in equity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
124. In refusing to allow women to participate in the trustee programs at ICCF, Defendants have violated and continue to violate the clearly established constitutional rights of female inmates to equal protection of the laws.
125. In refusing to allow women to participate in the community service at ICCF, Defendants have violated and continue to violate the clearly established constitutional rights of female inmates to equal protection of the laws.
126. Plaintiffs were denied the opportunity to participate in the trustee and community service program pursuant to Defendants’ practice, policy and/or custom of excluding women from these programs.
127. Plaintiffs’ rights to equal protection of the law are clearly established.
REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:
1. Certify a class of all current and future inmates at ICCF who have been, and continue to be, denied the ability to exercise outside their cells.
17

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 18 of 19 Pg ID 18
2. Declare that Plaintiffs’ and proposed class members’ constitutional rights under the Eighth Amendment have been and are being violated by the absence of out-of-cell exercise space and time;
3. Declare that Defendants violated Plaintiffs Ashley Bush and Sara Dunmire’s Eighth Amendment rights by denying them the opportunity to exercise outside their cells;
4. Declare that Plaintiff Hester’s constitutional right to equal protection is being violated by defendants’ practice or policy of excluding women from trustee positions and the community service program;
5. Declare that Plaintiffs Bush and Dunmire’s constitutional right to equal protection was violated by defendants’ practice and policy of excluding women from trustee positions and the community service program;
6. Grant a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining defendants from denying out-ofcell exercise to current and future inmates;
7. Grant a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining defendants from excluding Plaintiff Hester from applying for trustee positions and the community service program on an equal footing with male inmates;
8. Award Plaintiffs Ashley Bush and Sara Dunmire compensatory damages on their equal protection claims and Eighth Amendment claims;
9. Award plaintiffs reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988; and 10. Grant any other relief the Court deems appropriate.
18

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 1 Filed 10/30/12 Pg 19 of 19 Pg ID 19

Respectfully submitted,
s/Sarah L. Mehta Sarah L. Mehta (P76024) Michael J. Steinberg (P43085) Kary L. Moss (P49759) American Civil Liberties Union
Fund of Michigan 2966 Woodward Avenue Detroit, MI 48201 (313) 578-6823 smehta@aclumich.org msteinberg@aclumich.org kmoss@aclumich.org

Dated: October 30, 2012

s/_Daniel E. Manville_ Daniel E. Manville (P39731) Cooperating Attorney, American Civil Liberties
Union Fund of Michigan Michigan State University College of Law
Civil Rights Clinic 610 Abbot Rd East Lansing, MI 48823 (517) 336-8088, ext 1137 daniel.manville@law.msu.edu

19

 
 2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 1 of 16 Pg ID 117

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

MARCUS JACKSON, AMANDA HESTER, ASHLEY BUSH, SARA DUNMIRE, and MICHAEL DUNMIRE,

Plaintiffs, v.

Case No. 12-14807 Honorable David M. Lawson

COUNTY OF ISABELLA, LEO MIODUSZEWSKI, and THOMAS RECKER,

___________D_e_fe_n_d_an_t_s.________________./

STIPULATED ORDER OF DISMISSAL The parties hereby agree that this case has been settled and that all issues and controversies have been resolved to their mutual satisfaction. The parties have informed the Court that their settlement is conditional upon the Court retainingjurisdiction to enforce the terms oftheir settlement agreement under the authority of Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. ofAmerica, 51 1 U.S. 375, 38 1-82 (1994). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: I. The parties shall comply with the tenns of their settlement agreement entered into on August 15, 2013 and provided to the Court as Exhibit A, which are incorporated herein by reference. 2. By consent of the parties, the Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing the terms of the settlement agreement tlu·ough August 15, 20 18. 3. Except as provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this case is DISMISSED with prejudice and without costs.

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 2 of 16 Pg ID 118

Dated: August 23, 2013 Stipulated and agreed to by: For the Plaintiffs:
Is/ Michael J. Steinberg
Michael J. Steinberg Dated: August 19, 2013

s/David M. Lawson DAVID M. LAWSON United States District Judge
For the Defendants:
Is/ Todd A. Grav
Todd A. Gray Dated: August 19, 2013

J>ROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned cenifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on August 23, 2013.
s/Shawntel Jackson SHAWNTEL JACKSON

-2-

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 3 of 16 Pg ID 119 Durmtire, et al.; v. Isabella County, et al., Case No. 12-cv-14807 (B.D. Mich.) Hon. David M. Lawson
Exhibit A

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 4 of 16 Pg ID 120

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE

This Settlement Agreement and Release (the "Settlement Agreement") is made and

A"'5 "' !- entered into this l.~, f\1 day of

~

, 2013 by and between:

Plaintiffs: Michael Dunmire, Marcus Jackson, Amanda Hester, Ashley Bush, and Sara Dunmire
Defendants: Isabella County, Leo Mioduszewski, and Thomas Recker
Insurer: Trident Insurance Company

RECITALS
A. On October 30, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint against Isabella County, Leo Mioduszewski, and Thomas Recker (collectively referred to herein as the "Isabella County Defendants") in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, styled Michael Dunmire, et al. v. Isabella County, et al.,1 Case No. 1:12-cv-14807 (the "Complaint" or "Litigation").
B. The persons whose names and signatures appear below affinn that the Parties they represent consent to this Settlement Agreement and have authorized them to sign this paper on their behalf.
C. In the Complaint, Plaintiffs sought injunctive and monetary relief as a result of the alleged
course of events referenced in the Complaint, which Plaintiffs allege resulted in injuries and other damages to them, including alleged deprivations of their civil rights arising under the gth and 14tli Amendments to the United States Constitution, compensatory damages, costs, and attorney's fees.
D. The Isabella County Defendants hereby expressly deny all allegations made against them by Plaintiffs, including all allegations of wrongful conduct (negligent or intentional), deliberate indifference, gross negligence, or any other liability as it relates to the occurrences referenced in the Complaint.
E. Insurer is the liability insurer of the Isabella County Defendants, and as such, would be
obligated to pay any claim made or judgment obtained against the Isabella County Defendants which is covered by its policies with the Isabella County Defendants, up to the applicable limits of coverage.
F. Plaintiffs, the Isabella County Defendants, and their Insurer (hereinafter the "Parties") have settled all claims in the underlying action (hereinafter "Settlement with the Plaintiffs").

1 Sometimes referred to as Marcus Jackson, et a/. v. Isabella County et a/.

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 5 of 16 Pg ID 121
G. The American Civil Liberties Union Fund of Michigan (hereinafter the "ACLU'') sponsored this Litigation, and attorneys who work for or with the ACLU represent Plaintiffs, but the ACLU is not a Party to this Litigation or this Settlement Agreement.
Accordingly, the Parties hereby desire to enter into this Settlement Agreement in order to set forth the rights and responsibilities ofthe Parties.
AGREEMENT
Tite Parties agree as follows:
1.0 Release and Discharge
1.1 In exchange for and consideration of the payments, acts, and promises set forth in Section
2 below, the Plaintiffs do for themselves, their principals, agents, heirs, administrators, executors, representatives, and assigns hereby completely release, relieve, acquit and forever discharge the Isabella County Defendants from any and all past, present or future claims, liabilities, demands, obligations, actions, causes of action, rights, damages, costs, losses of services, expenses and compensation of any nature whatsoever, whether based on a tort, contract or other theory of recovery, which the Plaintiffs now have, or which may hereafter accrue or otherwise be acquired, on account of, or may in any way grow out of, or which are the allegations contained in the
Complaint and all related pleadings, including, without limitation, any and all known or unknown
claims for insurance proceeds; breach of contract; real and personal property damage; loss of use; annoyance inconvenience; mental anguish or any like claim, to the Plaintiffs and any future claim of the Plaintiffs' representatives or heirs, economic damages, emotional damages, pain and suffering, consequential damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees or any other damages whether known or unknown, which have resulted or may result from the alleged acts or omissions of the Isabella County Defendants.
1.2 Plaintiffs acknowledge and agree that the release and discharge set forth above is a general release. The Plaintiffs expressly waive and assume the risk of any and all claims for damages
which exist as of this date, and of which the Plaintiffs do not know or suspect to exist, whether
through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence, or otheiWise, and which, if known, would materially affect. the Plaintiffs' decision to enter into this Settlement Agreement. The Plaintiffs further agree that they have entered into this Settlement Agreement as a complete compromise of the matters involving disputed issues of law and fact. The Plaintiffs assume the risk that the facts or law may be other than what the Plaintiffs believe. It is understood and agreed to by the Plaintiffs that this settlement is a compromise of a disputed claim, and the payments and agreement set forth in Section 2 below are not to be construed as an admission of liability on the part of the Isabella County Defendants by whom any and all liability is expressly denied.
1.3 This release and discharge shall also apply to the IsabeiJa County Defendants past, present and future officers, directors, stockholders, attorneys, agents, insurers, servants, representatives, employees, subsidiaries, affiliates, partners, predecessors and successors in interest, parent companies, assigns and all other persons, finns or corporations with whom any of the former have been, are now, or may hereafter be affiliated.
2

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 6 of 16 Pg ID 122

2.0 Payments and Agreement

In consideration of the release and discharge set forth in Section I above, Trident Insurance Company, on behalf of the Isabella County Defendants, agrees to pay to the individual(s) named below (the "Payee(s)") the sums outlined in Sections 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 below:

2.1 Payment of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) payable to Sara Dunmire on or before September 15,2013. Payment shall be made payable by check or draft to Plaintiff Sara Durunire and shall be complete upon mailing by first-class mail.

2.2 Payment of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) payable to Ashley Bush on or before ___

September 15,2013. Payment shall be made payable by check or draft to Plaintiff Sara nre~~;)

and shall be complete upon mailing by first-class mail.

Ask? ~.s · !'~

....

2.3 Payment of Sixty Thousand Dollars ($60,000.00) payable to the American Civil Liberties

Union Fund of Michigan, representing attorneys' fees and costs, on or before September 15,

2013. Payment shall be made payable by check or draft to the American Civil Liberties Union

Fund of Michigan and shall be complete upon mailing by first-class mail.

2.4. The payments set forth in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 will be provided without withholdings for taxes or any other deductions. The Insurer, on behalf of the Isabella County Defendants, will issue an IRS Form I 099-MISC to Sara Dunmire and Ashley Bush in relation to such payments. Sara Dunmire and Ashley Bush shall be solely responsible for complying with any and all income tax and/or other tax liabilities and obligations which are or may become due or payable in connection with the payments described in Sections 2.1 and 2.2.

2.5 In consideration of the release and discharge set forth in Section 1 above, the Parties further agree to the following acts and promises enumerated below:

a. The Isabella County Sheriff's Department shall maintain and follow a written policy stating that: "It is the policy of the Isabella County Sheriffs Department to provide recreational opportunities for inmates housed in the facility. Depending upon factors such as inmate participation, security concerns, and other daily activities such as court. appearances, visitation hours, work activities, and inmate participation in programs such as substance abuse counseling, religious services, and educational services, each inmate shall be offered a minimum of one (1) hour of out-of-cell recreation five (5) days per week. Best efforts shall be made to continue out-of-cell recreation opportunities on a daily basis. Inmates are also permitted to engage in in-cell recreation."

b. Current recreation policy prohibits inmates who are co-defendants, enemies, have gang associations or who would otherwise create unsafe conditions from using the recreation room during the same time period. The Isabella County Sheriff's Department shall maintain and follow a written policy stating that when inmates are barred from using the recreation room for one of these reasons, "such inmates shall be offered the opportunity to attend a different recreation period."

3

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 7 of 16 Pg ID 123

c. The Isabella County Sheriffs Depat1ment shall acquire and maintain exercise equipment in the recreation room of the Isabella County Correctional Facility to allow inmates to exercise. At a minimum, the Isabella County Sheriff's Department shall acquire and maintain two (2) E-Line Air Walker Plus exercise machines, exercise mats and a television with video equipment to be used for playing exercise videos or similar exercise programs.

d. The Isabella County Sheriff's Department shall maintain and follow a written policy stating that "both male and female inmates shall be eligible for trustee/community service status."

e. The Isabella County Sheriff's Department shall maintain and follow a written policy that provides, "Best efforts shall be made to maintain a ratio of male to female trustee/community service status consistent with the inmate population ratios."

f.

It is acknowledged by the Parties that the community-service program is directed

and controlled by the Isabella County Trial Court and not the Isabella County

Sheriff's Department.

g. The Isabella County Defendants shall allow Plaintiffs' counsel to enter the Isabella County Correctional Facility and observe the recreation room and the
work areas once the exercise equipment is installed. The purpose of such an entry on land is to ensure that the provisions of this agreement are being honored and
not to discover problems that are not the subject of this Litigation.

3.0 Attorneys' Fees

Except for the payment set forth in Section 2.3 above and except as provided in Section 5.0(c)
below, the Parties shall bear all attorneys' fees and costs arising from the actions of their own
counsel, if any, in connection with the Complaint, this Settlement Agreement and the matters and
documents referred to herein, the filing of an Order of Dismissal, and matters related to the Litigation.

4.0 Delivery of Dismissal with Prejudice

Concurrently with the execution of this Settlement Agreement, counsel for the Plaintiffs shall deliver to counsel for the Isabella County Defendants, an executed Order of Dismissal, with
prejudice, of the Complaint. As agreed to in the stipulated Order of Dismissal, the Parties agree that the Court will retain jurisdiction over the enforcement of this Settlement Agreement for a
period of 5 years, from the date of execution (the "Enforcement Period"). The obligations of the Insurer and the Isabella County Defendants as set forth in Section 2 of this Settlement Agreement shall be contingent upon delivery and execution by Plaintiffs of the Order of Dismissal.

4

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 8 of 16 Pg ID 124
5.0 Breach of Agreement
The Parties agree that the Court will retain jurisdiction over the enforcement of this Settlement Agreement for a period of 5 years, from the date of execution (the "Enforcement Period"), as agreed to in the stipulated Order of Dismissal. The Parties do not anticipate a breach of this Settlement Agreement. However, in the event of a breach, the Parties agree:
a. The non-breaching Party or Parties will have lost the benefit of their bargain and therefore may take action to enforce this Settlement Agreement, subject to the procedures set forth below;
b. The appropriate and hereby stipulated remedy upon proof of a breach is an order of specific performance; and
c. After ordering specific performance, the Court may, in its discretion, award reasonable attorneys' fees under the legal standards applicable to fee awards under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
5.I While the Parties do not anticipate a breach of this Settlement Agreement, in the event a Party or Parties believe(s) that the tenns of this Settlement Agreement have been breached during the Enforcement Period, the Parties agree that the following procedure will govern:
a The Party or Parties that believe(s) the terms of this Settlement Agreement have been breached will notify the other Party or Parties of the specific nature of the alleged breach in writing by certified mail to the attention of counsel for the Parties identified below:
Plaintiffs' Counsel: Michael J. Steinberg, Esq. ACLU Fund of Michigan 2966 Woodward Avenue Detroit, MI 4820 I
Isabella County Defendants' Counsel: Todd A. Gray, Esq. Mannion & Gray Co., L.P.A. 1375 East 9th Street, Suite 1600 Cleveland, OH 44114
b. After the notification set forth above, the Party or Parties believed to have breached the terms of this Settlement Agreement shall have fourteen (14) days from the date of notification to respond in writing to the attention of counsel for the Parties identified above as to the specific nature of the alleged breach, identifying reasonable penological justification(s) for the alleged breach and/or its good faith efforts to remedy the alleged breach.
5

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 9 of 16 Pg ID 125

c. If after the fourteen (14) day period, the Party or Parties believed to have breached the terms of this Settlement Agreement have not responded in writing to the attention of counsel for the Parties identified above as to the specific nature of the alleged breach, identifying reasonable penological justification(s) for the alleged breach and/or its good faith efforts to remedy the alleged breach, the Party or Parties that believe(s) the tenns of this Settlement Agreement have been breached may take action to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement by filing an appropriate motion with the Court, which will retain jurisdiction over the enforcement of this Settlement Agreement during the Enforcement Period and to resolve any motion to enforce this Settlement Agreement that is tiled prior to the expiration ofthe Enforcement Period.

d. If the Party or Parties believed to have breached the tern1s of this Settlement Agreement responds in writing to the attention of counsel for the Parties identified above as to the specific nature of the alleged breach, identifying reasonable penological justification(s) for the alleged breach and/or its good faith efforts to remedy the alleged breach within the fourteen (14) day period, the Party or Parties that believe(s) the terms of this Settlement Agreement have been breached will not take action to enforce the tenns of the Settlement Agreement, except as set forth in the following paragraphs:

1.

If after receiving a written response set forth above, a Party or Parties still

believe(s) the terms of this Settlement Agreement have been breached,

they will notify the other Party or Parties of the specific nature of the

alleged breach and/or the alleged deficiency in the identified penological

justification(s) and/or good faith efforts to remedy the alleged breach in

writing, to the attention of counsel for the Parties identified above.

u.

After the notification set forth above, the Party or Parties believed to have

breached the terms ofthis Settlement Agreement shall have seven (7) days

from the date of notification to respond in writing to the attention of

counsel for the Parties identified above setting forth any additional

penological justification(s) for the alleged breach and/or good faith efforts

to remedy the alleged breach.

111.

Following the seven (7) day period, a Party or Parties that still believe(s)

the terms of this Settlement Agreement have been breached may take

action to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement by filing an

appropriate motion with the Court, which will retain jurisdiction over the

enforcement of this Settlement Agreement during the Enforcement Period

and to resolve any motion to enforce this Settlement Agreement that is

filed prior to the expiration of the Enforcement Period.

5.2 With respect to the acts and promises enumerated in Section 2.5 above, the Parties agree that a "breach" shall mean an ongoing failure to perform one or more of the acts and promises enumerated in Section 2.5 above. The Parties further agree that a singular and/or isolated

6

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 10 of 16 Pg ID 126
instance to perform one or more of the acts and promises enumerated in Section 2.5 above shall not be considered a breach ofthe terms of this Settlement Agreement.
5.3 The Parties recognize that numerous penological interests must be weighed with respect to each inmate housed at the Isabella County Correctional Facility, including but not limited to inmate participation; security concerns; inmate activities such as court appearances, visitation hours, and work activities; and imnate participation in programs such as substance abuse counseling, religious services, and educational services. Accordingly, the Parties agree to act reasonably in (1) identifying an alleged breach under this Section; (2) accepting identified reasonable penological justi:fication(s) for an alleged breach and/or good faith efforts to remedy an alleged breach under this Section; and (3) mutually cooperating to give full force and effect to the basic terms and intent ofthis Settlement Agreement without Court intervention.
6.0 Representation of Comprehension of Document
In entering into this Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs represent that they have relied upon the advice of their attorneys, who are the attorneys of their own choice, concerning the legal and income tax consequences of this Settlement Agreement; that the terms of this Settlement Agreement have been completely read and explained to the Plaintiffs by their attorney; and that the terms ofthis Settlement Agreement are fully understood and voluntarily accepted by the Plaintiffs.
7.0 Warranty of Capacity to Execute Agreement
Plaintiffs represent and warrant that no other person or entity has, or has had, any interest in the claims, demands, obligations or causes of action referred to in this Settlement Agreement, except as otherwise set forth herein; that the Plaintiffs have the sole right and exclusive authority to execute this Settlement Agreement and, if applicable, receive the sums specified in it; and that the Plaintiffs have not sold, assigned, transferred, conveyed or otherwise disposed ofany ofthe claims, demands, obligations or causes ofaction referred to in this Settlement Agreement
8.0 Indemnification
Plaintiffs agree to defend, indemnify and hold hannless the Isabella County Defendants, their attorneys, insurers, representatives, executors, administrators, heirs, successors and assigns, of and from any loss, claim, liability, cost or expense by anyone claiming entitlement to the payments set forth in Section 2 of this Settlement Agreement, including claims for living expenses, personal property expenses, child support obligations, or other sums wherein a subrogation interest or lien is claimed by any party or entity, including Medicare/Medicaid, and the State ofMichigan, including any amounts claimed to be due under the law, state or federal regulations or contracts. The Plaintiffs further acknowledge that all obligations to satisfy such liens are that ofthe Plaintiffs.
9.0 Medicare
This Settlement Agreement is based upon a good faith determination of the Parties to resolve a disputed claim. The Parties have not shifted responsibility of medical treatment to Medicare in contravention of 42 U.S.C. §1395y(b). The Parties resolved this matter in compliance with both
7

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 11 of 16 Pg ID 127
state and federal law. The Parties made every effort to adequately protect Medicare's interest and incorporate such into the settlement terms. Plaintiffs and their counsel warrant that the Plaintiffs are not a Medicare beneficiary as of the date of this release. Because the Plaintiffs are not Medicare recipients as of the date of this release, no conditional payments have been made by Medicare. 10.0 Governing Law This Settlement Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State ofMichigan. I I.0 Additional Documents All Parties agree to cooperate fully and execute any and all supplementary documents and to take all additional actions, which may be necessary or appropriate to give :full force and effect to the basic terms and intent ofthis Settlement Agreement. 12.0 Entire Agreement and Successors in Interest This Settlement Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Isabella County Defendants and the Plaintiffs with regard to the matters set forth in it and shall be binding upon and endure to the benefit of the executors, administrators, personal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns of each. 13.0 Effectiveness This Settlement Agreement shall become effective immediately following execution by the Plaintiffs. --143F CunfidtBtlulift>.
8

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 12 of 16 Pg ID 128
15.0 No Admission
By entering into this Settlement Agreement, the Parties do not intend to make, nor shall they be deemed to have made, any admission of any kind. The Parties agree that they are entering into this Settlement Agreement solely for the purpose ofsettling certain disputes between them and to avoid the cost of further litigation with respect to these disputes. This Settlement Agreement is the product of informed negotiations and compromises of previously stated legal positions. Nothing contained in this Settlement Agreement shall be construed as an admission by any Party as to the merit or lack of merit of any particular theory relating to the payment of claims arising from or relating to the occurrences referenced in the Complaint.
16.0 Use of Agreement
In addition to the confidentiality provisions contained herein and not by way of limitation thereof, the Parties agree that this Settlement Agreement and any acts in the performance of this Settlement Agreement are not intended to be, nor shall they in fact be, used in any case or other proceeding for any purpose. Provided, however, that nothing contained in this Section shall be interpreted to restrict the right of any Party: (1) to disclose the tenns of the Settlement Agreement where not prohibited by Section 14 herein; (2) to bring a claim or to introduce evidence predicated on a breach of this Settlement Agreement as pennitted by Section 5 herein; or (3) to provide proof as to the fact of settlement and release provided herein if necessary to respond to a suit or claim.
17.0 Protection Afforded
In addition to the confidentiality provisions contained herein and not by way of limitation thereof, this Settlement Agreement shall be deemed to fall within the protection afforded compromises and offers to compromise by Rule 408 of the Federal Rules of Evidence and any similar state law provision.
18.0 No Precedential Value
This Settlement Agreement is without prejudice or value as precedent and shall not be used in any proceeding or hearing to create, prove, or interpret the obligations under, or terms· and conditions of, any other agreement or any insurance policy. For purposes of this paragraph, "any other agreement" does not include the stipulated Order ofDismissal.
19.0 Authorship
The Parties agree that this Settlement Agreement reflects the joint drafting efforts of all Parties. In the event any dispute, disagreement or controversy arises regarding this Settlement Agreement, the Parties shall be considered joint authors and no provision shall be interpreted against any Party because of authorship or because the Insurer is an insurance company. Each Party also agrees that it is fully informed as to the meaning and intent of this Settlement Agreement and has been advised by independent counsel of its choosing in that regard.
9

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 13 of 16 Pg ID 129
20.0 Notices Except as provided in Paragraph 5.l(a) above, any statements, communications or notices to be provided pursuant to this Settlement Agreement shall be sent by first-class mail to the attention of counsel for the Parties identified below, until such time as notice of any change of person to be notified or change of address is forwarded to all Parties:
Plaintiffs' Counsel: Michael J. Steinberg, Esq. ACLU Fund of Michigan 2966 Woodward Avenue Detroit, MI 48201 Isabella County Defendants' Counsel: Todd A. Gray, Esq. Mannion & Gray Co., L.P.A. 1375 East 9th Street, Suite 1600 Cleveland, OH 44114 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Settlement Agreement by their duly authorized representatives:
[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK]
10

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 14 of 16 Pg ID 130

The foregoing Settlement Agreement and Release is executed by attorneys for the Parties as follows:

For Plaintiffs Michael Dunmire, Marcus Jackson and Amanda Hester:

For Defendants Isabella County,
Reck::

Michael J. St ber ACLU Fund ofMichigan Plaintiffs' Attorney
Dated: 1JIt& /13

Bradley Barmen
Mannion & Gray Co., L.P.A.
Defendants' Attorney
Dated:~

[The notarized signatures ofPlaintiffs Sara Dunmire and Ashley Bush appear on the following pages.]

11

2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 15 of 16 Pg ID 131
NOTICE: This Settlement Agreement may limit or eliminate rights afforded to you by lalv. You should fully understand its contents before signing.

Date: &: X"- I S

STATE OF MICHIGAN

+: coUNTY oF Ken

: ss

I, Sho..nnoc +-\u.li 0 , a Notary Public in and for the aforesaid county and

· state, do hereby certify that Ashley Bush whose name is signed to the writing above, has this day

acknowledged the same before me.
Given tinder my hand this ___3_ day of____,.....r..x.;~-=--...;..._- 2013.

NOTARY PUBLIC

IHANNCNHWN NOTAfN PUBUe, STAlE OF M1
COlMV OF OTTAWA Mf COMMISSION EXPIRES
iPrJ.c N0/8,2016
ACnNS IN 1HE COUNJY OF

14

I H\.11:. CJJ.( CJJ.
2:12-cv-14807-DML-MKM Doc # 23 Filed 08/23/13 Pg 16 of 16 Pg ID 132

NOTICE: This Settlexnent Agreement may limit or eHm.inate rights afforded to you by law. You should fnlly understand its eontents before signing.
Plaintiff: Sara Dunmire

1-.3-1- Date:

t}l) l~

STATBOFMICIDOAN
COUNTYOF c /) aJ- A. ~) : ss

t'..e.cttl (e ttlvJ'r ' I, (\)

~otary a

Public in and for the aforesaid county and

state, do hereby certify that Sam Dunmire whose name is signed to the writing above, has this

day acknowledged the same before me.
Given undermy band tbis 3J<S/:d,ay o~=~L~L\~~---- 2013.
My commission :J_,__ expires:.~__,_,.J)L--dJ....;;;;;....._,..;;4_-.;;:;c9();-.=,""-l _ _ _ _ _.

NIECHELLE HUNT NOTARY PUBUC, CAUIOUN CotJNIY, PI MY COMMISSION EXPIRES ON NOV 24 TH2017

15

 
 Case: 2:12-cv-14807 As of: 11/13/2013 01:30 AM EST 1 of 5
U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:12−cv−14807−DML−MKM

CLOSED

Jackson et al v. Isabella, County of, et al Assigned to: District Judge David M. Lawson Referred to: Magistrate Judge Mona K. Majzoub Cause: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 10/30/2012 Date Terminated: 08/23/2013 Jury Demand: Defendant Nature of Suit: 555 Prisoner: Prison Conditions Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Marcus Jackson

represented by Daniel S. Korobkin American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan 2966 Woodward Avenue Detroit, MI 48201 (313) 578−6824 Fax: (313) 578−6811 Email: dkorobkin@aclumich.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Daniel E. Manville Civil Rights Clinic 610 Abbot East Lansing, MI 48823 51−336−8088, x1137 Fax: 517−336−0646 Email: daniel.manville@law.msu.edu ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael J. Steinberg American Civil Liberties Union Fund of Michigan 2966 Woodward Avenue Detroit, MI 48201 313−578−6814 Email: msteinberg@aclumich.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sarah L. Mehta American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan 2966 Woodward Ave Detroit, MI 48201 313−578−6823 Fax: 313−578−6811 Email: smehta@aclumich.org (Inactive) TERMINATED: 05/17/2013 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Amanda Hester

represented by Daniel S. Korobkin (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Daniel E. Manville (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael J. Steinberg (See above for address)

Case: 2:12-cv-14807 As of: 11/13/2013 01:30 AM EST 2 of 5

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sarah L. Mehta (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/17/2013 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Ashley Bush

represented by Daniel S. Korobkin (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Daniel E. Manville (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael J. Steinberg (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sarah L. Mehta (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/17/2013 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Sara Dunmire

represented by Daniel S. Korobkin (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Daniel E. Manville (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael J. Steinberg (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sarah L. Mehta (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/17/2013 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Michael Dunmire

represented by Daniel S. Korobkin (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Daniel E. Manville (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael J. Steinberg (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sarah L. Mehta (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/17/2013 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.

Case: 2:12-cv-14807 As of: 11/13/2013 01:30 AM EST 3 of 5

Defendant Isabella, County of

represented by Joseph H. Gutkoski Mannion &Gray, Co., LPA 1375 East 9th Street Suite 1600 Cleveland, OH 44114 216−344−9422 Fax: 216−344−9421 Email: jgutkoski@manniongray.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Todd A. Gray Mannion Gray 1375 E. Ninth Street Suite 1600 Cleveland, OH 44114 216−344−9422 Fax: 216−344−9421 Email: tgray@manniongray.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Leo Mioduszewski Isabella County Sheriff

represented by Joseph H. Gutkoski (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Todd A. Gray (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Thomas Recker Lieutenant, Jail Administrator, Isabella County Correctional Facility

represented by Joseph H. Gutkoski (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Todd A. Gray (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 10/30/2012
10/30/2012 10/30/2012 10/30/2012 11/02/2012 11/08/2012 11/23/2012 11/27/2012

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT filed by All Plaintiffs against All Defendants. Plaintiff requests summons issued. Receipt No: 0645−3787463 − Fee: $350. County of 1st Plaintiff: Isabella − County Where Action Arose: Isabella − County of 1st Defendant: Isabella. [Previously dismissed case: No] [Possible companion case(s): None] (Mehta, Sarah) (Entered: 10/30/2012)
2 SUMMONS Issued for *Isabella, County of* (DPer) (Entered: 10/30/2012)
3 SUMMONS Issued for *Leo Mioduszewski* (DPer) (Entered: 10/30/2012)
4 SUMMONS Issued for *Thomas Recker* (DPer) (Entered: 10/30/2012)
5 MOTION to Certify Class by All Plaintiffs. (Mehta, Sarah) (Entered: 11/02/2012)
6 CERTIFICATE of Service/Summons Returned Executed. All Defendants. (Mehta, Sarah) (Entered: 11/08/2012)
7 NOTICE of Appearance by Todd A. Gray on behalf of All Defendants. (Gray, Todd) (Entered: 11/23/2012)
8 ORDER Extending Time to Respond to 1 Complaint, filed by Amanda Hester, Marcus Jackson, Michael Dunmire, Ashley Bush, Sara Dunmire, and 5 MOTION to Certify Class filed by Amanda Hester, Marcus Jackson, Michael Dunmire,

Case: 2:12-cv-14807 As of: 11/13/2013 01:30 AM EST 4 of 5

11/29/2012 12/19/2012 12/19/2012 12/26/2012 01/04/2013 01/08/2013 01/16/2013
01/18/2013 02/19/2013 02/28/2013 04/02/2013
05/02/2013 05/02/2013 05/02/2013 05/10/2013 05/16/2013 05/17/2013
06/25/2013

Ashley Bush, Sara Dunmire. Responses due by 12/26/2012 − Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (DTof) (Entered: 11/27/2012)
9 NOTICE TO APPEAR: Scheduling Conference set for 1/8/2013 09:30 AM before District Judge David M. Lawson *SEE NOTICE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION* (DTof) (Entered: 11/29/2012)
10 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Daniel E. Manville appearing on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Manville, Daniel) (Entered: 12/19/2012)
11 NOTICE of Appearance by Michael J. Steinberg on behalf of All Plaintiffs. (Steinberg, Michael) (Entered: 12/19/2012)
12 ANSWER to Complaint with Affirmative Defenses with Jury Demand by Isabella, County of, Leo Mioduszewski, Thomas Recker. (Gray, Todd) (Entered: 12/26/2012)
13 RESPONSE to 5 MOTION to Certify Class filed by All Defendants. (Gray, Todd) (Entered: 01/04/2013)
Minute Entry − Scheduling Conference held on 1/8/2013 before District Judge David M. Lawson. (SJa) (Entered: 01/08/2013)
14 SCHEDULING ORDER: Initial Disclosures due by 1/22/2013; Plaintiff's Expert Disclosures due by 5/2/2013; Defendant's Expert Disclosures due by 5/31/2013; Status Conference set for 5/2/2013 03:00 PM; Discovery due by 7/12/2013; Dispositive Motion Cut−off set for 7/26/2013. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (Refer to image for additional dates) (SJa) (Entered: 01/16/2013)
15 NOTICE TO APPEAR: Motion Hearing as to 5 MOTION to Certify Class by All Plaintiffs set for 4/15/2013 at 4:00 PM before District Judge David M. Lawson (SJa) (Entered: 01/18/2013)
Set/Reset Deadlines as to 5 MOTION to Certify Class . Motion Hearing RESET for 4/17/2013 04:00 PM before District Judge David M. Lawson *From 4/15/2013* (DTof) (Entered: 02/19/2013)
16 NOTICE of Appearance by Joseph H. Gutkoski on behalf of Isabella, County of, Leo Mioduszewski, Thomas Recker. (Gutkoski, Joseph) (Entered: 02/28/2013)
17 STIPULATED ORDER Adjourning Scheduling Order Dates re: 5 MOTION to Certify Class :( Supplemental briefs due by 5/8/2013; Motion Hearing set for 6/25/2013 04:00 PM before District Judge David M. Lawson) − Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (DTof) (Entered: 04/02/2013)
Minute Entry − Status Conference held on 5/2/2013 before District Judge David M. Lawson. (DTof) (Entered: 05/02/2013)
TEXT−ONLY ORDER suspending all dates/deadlines in the case. Entered by District Judge David M. Lawson. (DTof) (Entered: 05/02/2013)
18 NOTICE TO APPEAR : Status Conference set for 6/28/2013 03:00 PM before District Judge David M. Lawson (DTof) (Entered: 05/02/2013)
19 MOTION to Withdraw Sarah L. Mehta, MOTION for Withdrawal of Attorney Sarah L. Mehta by All Plaintiffs. (Mehta, Sarah) (Entered: 05/10/2013)
20 ORDER granting 19 Motion to Withdraw.. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (KKra) (Entered: 05/17/2013)
TEXT−ONLY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE re 20 Order on Motion to Withdraw, Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney on Sarah L. Mehta, American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, 2966 Woodward Ave, Detroit, MI 48201. (SJa) (Entered: 05/17/2013)
Set Deadlines/Hearings: Status Conference reset for 6/28/2013 09:00 AM before District Judge David M. Lawson (SJa) (Entered: 06/25/2013)

Case: 2:12-cv-14807 As of: 11/13/2013 01:30 AM EST 5 of 5

06/28/2013 06/28/2013 07/09/2013 08/14/2013 08/15/2013 08/23/2013

21 NOTICE of Appearance by Daniel S. Korobkin on behalf of All Plaintiffs. (Korobkin, Daniel) (Entered: 06/28/2013)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before District Judge David M. Lawson: Status Conference held on 6/28/2013 (SJa) (Entered: 07/12/2013)
22 NOTICE TO APPEAR: Hearing to place settlement on the record set for 8/15/2013 04:30 PM before District Judge David M. Lawson (SJa) (Entered: 07/09/2013)
Reset Hearing: The hearing to put the settlement on the record has been reset for 8/15/2013 at 2:30 PM before District Judge David M. Lawson. (SPin) (Entered: 08/14/2013)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before District Judge David M. Lawson: Miscellaneous Hearing held on 8/15/2013. Disposition: Hearing placed on the record(Court Reporter Rene Twedt) (SJa) (Entered: 08/16/2013)
23 STIPULATED ORDER of DISMISSAL Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (SJa) (Entered: 08/26/2013)