Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 1 of 14�

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

ALBANY DIVISION


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

:

:

Plaintiff,

:

:

vs.

:

:


TERRELL COUNTY, GEORGIA et al., :


:


Defendants.

:


____________________________________

1:04-CV-76 (WLS)

ORDER

Before the Court is the United Statas of America’s (the “Goverment”) motion for

summary judgment. (Doc. No. 46). For the following reasons, the Government’s motion for

summary judgment (Doc. No. 46) is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

Defendant Terrell County, Georgia (County) is a governmental subdivision created

under the laws of the State of Georgia. Defendant Wilbur T. Gamble Jr. (“Gamble”) is the

Chairman of the Terrell County Board of Commissioners and has served as the chief

administrator of the County government for 36 years. Elected in 1992, Defendant John W.

Bowens (“Sheriff”) is the Sheriff of Terrell County and is responsible for the day-to-day

operations of the Terrell County Jail (“Jail”). In his official capacity as Sheriff, the Sheriff has

custody, control, and charge of the Jail and Jail inmates. Defendants Larry Atherton, Lucius

Holloway Sr., Bob Rainey, and Blake Vann are members of the Terrell County Board of

Commissioners, who are charged with the authority of funding and claims resolution over the

Terrell County Jail. (Docs. 46, 54).

The parties agree and it is uncontested that on October 3, 1994, the United States

notified Defendant Bowens, the Terrell County Sheriff, and Defendant Terrell County, by and

through the Terrell County Board of Commissioners, that it planned to investigate conditions

1


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 2 of 14�
at the Jail pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (“CRIPA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1997 (2005). After inspecting the Jail, the United States issued a letter of findings on June 1, 1995, in which the United States concluded that conditions at the Jail relating to, inter alia, medical care, mental health care, protection from harm, environmental health and safety, and fire safety violated the inmates’ constitutional rights. The United States detailed extensive evidence supporting its findings and included numerous suggested remedial measures to alleviate these alleged unconstitutional conditions. Id.
The Government maintains that it conducted subsequent inspections in 1997, 2001, 2002, and 2003. (Doc. 46). According to the Government, each time, the United States found that conditions at the Jail were virtually identical to the 1995 unconstitutional conditions; provided detailed evidence to Defendants supporting these findings; and recommended remedial steps to address these serious deficiencies. While the Government maintains that Defendant Sheriff has not disputed the accuracy of many of the findings from 1995 through 2002, Defendant Sheriff admits only receiving the 1995 findings letter and the 2005 Inspection Reports, but states that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Defendant received any of the other reports. (Docs. 46, 54).
It is however not disputed that Defendants received Terrell County Grand Jury Reports in 2002 and 2003 that found that conditions at the Jail were “inadequate, inhuman, and unsafe.” Defendant Sheriff Bowens concedes the accuracy of these findings. Defendant Sheriff Bowens brought in an expert consultant, John Southern, who found that conditions at the Jail were unsafe. Id. As stated earlier, Defendant Bowens does not dispute these facts, however, he maintains that the problems referenced in the Terrell County Grand Jury Reports either were beyond his control or are the result of a very old structure. (Doc. 54).
A. Current Conditions at the Jail The Government maintains that Conditions at the Jail are grossly deficient in the areas of medical care, mental health care, protection from harm, environmental health and safety,
2


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 3 of 14�
and fire safety. 1. Medical Care The Government argues, and Defendants do not dispute entirely, that systemic
deficiencies at the Jail deny or improperly delay medical treatment to inmates with serious medical needs. (Doc. 46; see also Doc. 54). The parties further agree that Terrell County Health Department nurses hired in 2004 by Defendants to oversee medical care at the Jail quit working there after several months. Id. According to the Government, the most serious deficiencies with the Jail’s medical care are as follows: 1) denial of medical care to inmates, including, from January 2003 to July 2005, the refusal 70 of 118 times to allow emergency medical services (“EMS”) transport of inmates in situations where Terrell County Emergency Medical Technicians (“EMT”) recommended emergency medical treatment, 2) improper delays in access to primary or emergency medical care due to staffing shortages, the slowness of medical approval procedures, and/or the Jail’s policy on opening cell, 3) the absence of any Jail staff onsite or on call with medical training or qualifications, 4) the failure to provide medical screenings by qualified professionals for illnesses, in particular, infectious diseases, and 5) the absence of a medical records system, medical examination room, and necessary medical equipment and supplies. (Doc. 46). While the parties agree that Jail staff are not permitted to open cell doors unless a “certified law enforcement officer” such as a Terrell County Sheriff’s Department deputy is present, they disagree sharply that the policy extends to medical emergencies. (Docs. 46, 54). The Government alleges that inmate access to emergency medical care has been improperly delayed as a result of Jail staff waiting for a law enforcement officer to arrive before staff opened a cell and provided EMTs an opportunity to examine the inmate. (Doc. 46). Defendant Sheriff disputes the foregoing and maintains there to be genuine issues of material fact as to the same. (Doc. 54).
According to the Government, inmates at the Jail have suffered serious harm as a result of these grossly inadequate practices. (Doc. 46). Inmates with serious complications
3


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 4 of 14�
from diabetes or with alarmingly high blood pressure have not received medical treatment despite suffering life-threatening symptoms. Id. Inmates have been denied access to their prescription medications, thereby exacerbating their serious illnesses. Id. Inmates with serious medical needs, including those requiring surgery, have been ignored until the inmates were transferred to another correctional facility. (Doc. 46). Defendant Sheriff disputes the foregoing and maintains there to be genuine issues of material fact as to the same. (Doc. 54).
Defendants further dispute findings made by the United States’ medical expert, Dr. Robert Greifinger, and provided to Defendant in May 2005, that the Jail’s medical care is seriously deficient. (Doc. 54; see also Doc. 46). The Government alleges that Defendants have failed to implement the recommendations from his May 2005 report that were designed to help alleviate the serious deficiencies with mental health care. Id. Defendant maintains that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the information contained within the Dr. Greifinger’s report, if proven true, supports the Government’s contention that Defendant Sheriff has been willfully indifferent to such evidence. Defendant maintains that any decisions regarding the implementation of said recommendations are beyond his control as Sheriff, and rest with Defendant Board of Commissioners. (Doc. 54). Defendant further disputes the Government’s allegation that Dr. Greifinger made findings in 2003 which were forwarded to Defendants. Id.
2. Mental Health Care Defendants maintain that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to the Government’s contention that inmates at the Jail do not receive appropriate mental health treatment, particularly when they have displayed a strong likelihood of committing suicide. (Docs. 46, 54). While the parties agree that since 2003, there have been at least two suicides and at least nine suicide attempts at the Jail, including four in 2005, Defendant Sheriff disputes the Government’s contention that said fact shows willful indifference in protecting the rights of Jail inmates. Id.
4


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 5 of 14�
The Government alleges that the following facts already discussed in relation to medical care, are equally true for mental health care at the Jail: 1) denial of mental health care for inmates with serious mental health needs, 2) improper delays in access to mental health treatment due to lack of staff, approval processes, and/or the Jail’s celldoor policy, 3) the absence of any Jail staff onsite or on call with mental health training or qualifications, 4) the failure to screen inmates properly for mental illnesses, and 5) the absence of a mental health records system. (Doc. 46). Defendants similarly dispute the same. See supra Part B, 1. The parties agree, however, that there are serious deficiencies in the handling of Jail inmates at serious risk of self-injury. Inmates suspected of being potentially suicidal are placed in isolation cells with cell bars and protruding fixtures that permit inmates to hang themselves. Id. While the parties agree that since 2003, two inmates have hung themselves to death while in these isolation cells, while other inmates placed in these same cells have attempted to do so, Defendant Sheriff maintains that the physical layout of the structure and lack of further family information are factors to be considered, the same which are beyond Sheriff’s control. Id. There is no dispute as to the fact that a suicide watch is a regularly scheduled observation of a Jail inmate in an isolation cell. The parties further agree that for acutely suicidal inmates, constant watch surveillance, i.e., direct, in-person observation of inmates, is necessary. Id.
The Government maintains that since December 2004, there have been at least three suicide attempts involving three different inmates where Jail staff improperly delayed entering the cell to intervene due to the Jail’s cell-door policy. (Doc. 46). Additionally, according to the Government, inmates who have attempted suicide or displayed other obvious signs of mental illness have not received timely mental health treatment. The Government once more proffers Dr. Greifinger for expert testimony that mental health care at the Jail is grossly inadequate. Id. The Government alleges that Defendants have failed to implement the recommendations from his May 2005 report that were designed to help alleviate the serious deficiencies with mental health care. Id. Defendant maintains that there is a genuine issue of
5


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 6 of 14�
material fact as to whether the information contained within the Dr. Greifinger’s report, if proven true, supports the Government’s contention that Defendant Sheriff has been willfully indifferent to such evidence. Defendant maintains that any decisions regarding the implementation of said recommendations are beyond his control as Sheriff, and rest with Defendant Board of Commissioners. (Doc. 54).
3. Protection from Harm The Government maintains that inmates are not sufficiently protected from violence at the hands of other inmates due to the Jail’s physical structure and Defendants’ practices and procedures. (Doc. 46). Defendants admit the same, but maintain that it is virtually impossible to isolate or segregate special needs inmates because of the physical structure which houses the inmates. (Doc. 54). The parties do not dispute that the physical configuration of the Jail obstructs the jailers’ ability to monitor inmate housing areas properly. (Docs. 46, 54). It is further undisputed that there are no security cameras in the cells except for a two-bed isolation cell. Id. However, Defendants maintain that they can neither admit or deny the Government’s allegation that as a result of poor monitoring capacity, inmate fights occur without the knowledge of Jail staff. Id. Nevertheless it is undisputed that the Jail’s physical structure prevents Defendants from sufficiently separating predatory from vulnerable inmates or those with “special needs.” The parties further agree that the Jail does not have sufficient staff to oversee the inmates and ensure their safety. Id. The Government maintains, and Defendants disagree, that the previously discussed Jail policy regarding opening cell doors applies to inmate fights as well, which has led to jailers observing fights but failing to intervene until a law enforcement officer arrived at the cell. Id. The Government claims that the consequences of these serious protections from harm problems have included mentally ill and “special needs” inmates getting into fights after being inappropriately placed in the inmate dormitories and inmates getting into fights so serious as to require medical attention at the Jail and/or a hospital. (Doc. 46). Defendant
6


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 7 of 14�
Sheriff disputes these claims to the extent that the same would suggest willful indifference on his behalf with respect to Sheriff’s actual ability to prevent injuries in this scenario. (Doc. 54). Defendants do not dispute, however, that the United States’ correctional security expert, Steve Martin, found that conditions at the Jail significantly threaten inmate safety. (Docs. 46, 54). Neither Defendant questions Mr. Carson’s qualifications. Id.
4. Environmental Health and Safety The Government maintains that living conditions at the Jail are “inadequate” and “inhumane.” (Doc. 46). While it is undisputed that roaches, mice, and other vermin are present in the facility, Defendants maintain that their presence does amount to an “infestation.” (Doc. 54; see Doc. 46). The Government maintains that plumbing and sewage fixtures either do not work, routinely leak, or even flood cells. (Doc. 46). Defendants agree in part and dispute in part; however, they do not state with specificity to which parts of the Government’s allegation they agree and to which parts they disagree. (Doc. 54). However, Defendants definitively dispute the Government’s allegation that Defendants do not take sufficient precautions to ensure food served to inmates does not cause food-borne illnesses. (Doc. 54; see also Doc. 46). Defendants further dispute the accuracy of a statement made by Leonard Rice, the Government’s environmental health and safety expert, that environmental conditions at the Jail threaten the health and safety of the inmates. Id. Defendants further maintain that they have no independent knowledge of Mr. Rice’s qualifications, and therefore, are unable at this time to ascertain the validity of any statement he may make. (Doc. 54). 5. Fire Safety The parties agree that the Jail is not safe in the event of a fire. Defendant Sheriff further admits that the physical structure which houses the Jail is inherently unsafe and can only be corrected with a new facility. (Docs. 46, 54). It is undisputed that numerous factors contribute to the unsafe conditions at the Jail, including: 1) the widespread presence of highly combustible materials, 2) the absence of fire or smoke barriers within the Jail itself or within
7


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 8 of 14�
the building housing the Jail, 3) the lack of an automatic sprinkler system, 4) the absence of smoke detectors in several cells, 5) seriously deficient evacuation procedures, 6) the lack of fire emergency training, and 7) the Jail’s policy permitting inmates to have matches and lighters. Id. It is further undisputed that the Government’s fire safety expert, Wayne Carson, concluded that inmates at the Jail are at high risk of injury and/or death due to fire and smoke, and that Defendant Sheriff does not disagree with Mr. Carson’s 2005 report, the findings contained therein, or his recommendations to correct these problems. Id. Neither Defendant questions Mr. Carson’s qualifications. Id.
DISCUSSION I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD Under Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment “shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” The Court is required to “resolve all reasonable doubts about the facts in favor of the non-movant, and draw all justifiable inferences in his or her favor.” Fitzpatrick v. City of Atlanta, 2 F.3d 1112, 1115 (11th Cir. 1993) (quotations and citations omitted). The moving party carries the initial burden of showing that there is an absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S. Ct. 2548, 2553 (1986). The substantive law governing the case determines which facts are material, and “summary judgment will not lie if the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S. Ct. 2505, 2510 (1986). For issues on which the non-movant bears the burden of proof at trial, the moving party “simply may show—that is, point out to the district court—that there is an absence of evidence to support the
8


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 9 of 14�
non-moving party's case. Alternatively, the moving party may support its motion for summary judgment with affirmative evidence demonstrating that the non-moving party will be unable to prove its case.” Fitzpatrick, 2 F.3d at 1116 (quotations and citations omitted).
If the moving party fails to overcome this initial burden, the Court must deny the motion for summary judgment without considering any evidence, if any, presented by the non-moving party. Fitzpatrick, 2 F.3d at 1116. If, on the other hand, the moving party overcomes this initial burden, then the non-moving party must show the existence of a genuine issue of material fact that remains to be resolved at trial. Id. Moreover, the adverse party may not respond to the motion for summary judgment by summarily denying the allegations set forth by the moving party. Rather, the adverse party “must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If the adverse party does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against the adverse party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e).
II. ANALYSIS The Government argues that it is entitled to summary judgment in this matter because the conditions at the Terrell County Jail (“Jail”or “Defendants”) are substandard and violates the inmates constitutional rights. Specifically, the Government contends that (1) the Jail provides constitutionally deficient medical care; (2) the Jail provides constitutionally deficient mental health care, to include but not limited to, suicide prevention; (3) the Jail provides constitutionally deficient protection from inmate-on-inmate violence; (4) the Jail provides a constitutionally deficient environment; and, (5) the Jail provides constitutionally deficient fire protection or fire safety. The Government maintains that there exist no genuine issue of material fact as to these claims and the Government is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In their response, Defendants Terrell County, Georgia, Wilbur T. Gamble, Jr, Larry Atherton, Sr, Lucius Holloway, Bob Rainey, Blake Vann (collectively “Terrell County Board of Commissioners” or “TCBOC”) state that they do not oppose a finding that the conditions at the Jail are unconstitutional. These Defendants, however, request, that they have some say
9


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 10 of 14�
in how any post-judgment jail is run. Defendant Sheriff Bowens denies that he is responsible for the mistreatment of any
inmates or is responsible for any acts or omissions that caused the Jail conditions to be constitutionally deficient. Bowens maintains that if any inmates have been subject to unconstitutional conditions or that the Jail is constitutionally deficient, it is from the lack of funding from the Co-Defendants, Terrell County and the Terrell County Board of Commissioners, which has resulted in insufficient staff, supplies, training, equipment, medical personnel and supplies and an inadequate jail facility.1 Except as discussed below, Bowens takes little issue with the Government’s statement of facts concerning the alleged constitutional conditions at the Terrell County Jail.
Pretrial detainees are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, while convicted prisoners’ rights stem from the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause. See Hamm v. De Kalb County, 774 F.2d 1567, 1572 (11th Cir. 1985). The Supreme Court has held that “the due process rights of a [detainee] are at least as great as the Eighth Amendment protections available to a convicted prisoner.” Revere v. Mass. Gen.
1. Both sets of Defendants have illustrated the unique position that Georgia Counties and Sheriffs find themselves in when it comes to enforcing federal constitutional rights. According to the Eleventh Circuit, the two are separate distinct entities under state law and have no overlapping control over the actions of the other. Manders v. Lee. 338 F.3d 1304 (11th Cir. 2003) (Sheriff’s authority derives from state). It is argued by the Defendants that the result is that the County cannot enforce policy over the Sheriff and the Sheriff cannot secure funding, and neither takes responsibility for any alleged constitutional violations of the County Jail.
The Court notes, however, that the Eleventh Circuit confined the Manders decision, and its progeny. It specifically limited the decision/holding to the issue of Eleventh Amendment immunity in the context of Sheriffs being sued for the alleged specific unconstitutional misconduct directed towards an individual or small group usually involving one incident. The Manders’ court pointed out that it was not deciding the broader question of liability between a Sheriff and County when it came to certain issues such as jail conditions. Neither is the question specifically before the Court at this time, nor does this Court intimate or decide how or if Manders will effect such a question.
10

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 11 of 14�
Hosp., 463 U.S. 239, 244 (1983) According to the Government, Defendants’ alleged conduct specifically violates the
Constitution because they display deliberate indifference to inmates’ basic needs. See Kelly v. Hicks, 400 F.3d 1282, 1284 (11th Cir. 2005)(per curiam) (applying deliberate indifference standard to medical care); Johnston v. Crosby, 135 Fed. Appx. 375, 376-77 (11th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (protection from harm); Chandler v. Crosby, 379 F.3d1278, 1289 (11th Cir. 2004) (environmental health and safety); Hadix v. Johnson, 367 F.3d 513, 525 (6th Cir. 2004) (fire safety). To establish deliberate indifference to constitutional rights, the Government must prove: (1) the existence of an objectively serious condition; (2) that Defendants have subjective knowledge of a substantial risk of serious harm to the inmates arising from that condition; and, (3) that Defendants’ disregard of the risk is more than negligent. Brown v. Johnson, 387 F.3d 1344, 1351 (11th Cir. 2004).
It is not necessary to establish actual harm to demonstrate a violation of the Constitution. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 845 (1994). Rather, Defendants are required to “protect . . . [Jail inmates] against sufficiently imminent dangers as well as current [harm].” Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 34 (1993). “It would be odd to deny [relief] to [a litigant] who plainly proved an unsafe, life-threatening condition in [a] prison on the ground that nothing yet had happened to [the inmates].” Helling, 509 U.S. at 33. Deliberate indifference can be established by showing that Defendants knew of a need to take action but consciously chose not to do so. See Gold v. City of Miami, 151 F.3d 1346, 1350 (11th Cir. 1998). Where, as alleged in the present case, there are“institutional level challenges to [Jail conditions], systemic deficiencies can provide the basis for a finding of deliberate indifference.” Harris v. Thigpen, 941 F.2d 1495, 1505 (11th Cir.1991). In reviewing conditions at the Jail, this Court should examine the totality of the circumstances to determine if a constitutional violation has occurred. Wilson v. Blankenship,163 F.3d 1284, 1292 (11th Cir. 1998). Lack of funds is not a defense to or legal justification for unconstitutional
11


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 12 of 14�
conditions of a jail. Moore v. Morgan, 922 F.2d 1553, 1557 n.4 (11th Cir. 1991). Even if a defendant argues that it is planning or working towards construction of a new jail to remedy the unconstitutional conditions at the current facility, the failure to implement interim measures to alleviate these conditions demonstrates deliberate indifference. Hale v. Tallapoosa County, 50 F.3d 1579, 1584 (11th Cir. 1995).
As noted previously, the TCBOC does not dispute that the conditions at the Terrell County Jail are unconstitutional. In other words, the TCBOC does not dispute any of the factual allegations of the Government and concedes that there are no factual issues in dispute that lead to the conclusion that the conditions at the Jail are unconstitutional. TCBOC even admits that it is planning to build a new facility in the future because the present facility is inadequate. Their only dispute is with the Sheriff and to what extent they can control policy at the jail.2
A review of Sheriff Bowens’ response brief shows that he too does not dispute the Government’s facts as they relate to the conditions at the Jail. Sheriff Bowens blames almost any and all problems with the conditions of the Jail and care for the inmates on the lack of funding from the TCBOC. As with the TCBOC, Bowens’ dispute is not with the Government’s facts or the majority of its allegations, his dispute is with the TCBOC. Sheriff Bowens maintains that the Jail and the Sheriff’s Department are underfunded and that the TCBOC is not entitled to any control over policy at the Jail, and necessarily the Sheriff’s Department.
Bowens, however, does contest in a cursory manner and as the facts might effect the ultimate remedy, some of the allegations of the Government’s complaint and assertions. In general, Bowens maintains that he was not deliberately indifferent to the safety, health and welfare of the inmates of the Jail. Specifically, Bowens argues that conditions at the Jail can be attributed to the “TCBOC’s failure to increase starting salaries for jailers [and the
2. As stated infra and discussed more fully supra, that issue is not before the Court. 12

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 13 of 14�
salaries] crippled Sheriff Bowens’ ability to hire and/or retain sufficient staff.” Other than briefly pointing out what he did to inform the TCBOC of staffing problems and the fact that because of allegations against the County of racial discrimination the starting pay was increased, Bowens does not argue the point any further.
In addition, Bowens argues that he was not deliberately indifferent to the medical needs of the inmates because “Sheriff Bowens’ efforts to provide adequate medical care to inmates were rebuffed by the TCBOC.” Specifically, he argues that he made a recommendation to the TCBOC to hire outside medical staff to provide care for the inmates, but the recommendation was rejected or rebuffed. Further, Bowens argues that he tried to hire a physician’s assistant to provide medical care, but this too was not approved by the TCBOC. Again, as with all of the allegations addressed by Bowens, he does not so much contest the facts but attributes any constitutional deficiencies in the conditions at the Jail to the TCBOC.3
Other than these isolated arguments, Bowens, does not address or contest any other allegation made by the Government. Bowens’ real dispute with the Government’s allegations are not with the facts that show that the conditions at the Terrell County Jail are unconstitutional, but with the ultimate conclusion of whether he bears any responsibility for the conditions. The extent of Bowens’ or the County’s liability, or the effect of said liability on the remedy, is not squarely before this Court, but it is clear that the Government has carried
3. While funding of the Jail and control of policy are legitimate issues raised by all of the parties, Bowens ignores his responsibilities as Sheriff and Jailor of Terrell County. See O.C.G.A. §§ 42-4-1 through 42-4-71 (statutory duties of sheriff as it relates to jails). For example, the Sheriff is responsible for staffing the jail in a manner to ensure the safety of the inmates. If he concludes it takes a POST certified officer to open a cell door, then he must adjust the scheduling of his POST officers to be on duty at the jail at all times. As argued correctly by the Government, there is no excuse for an inmate to suffer serious harm because the jailor on duty was not authorized to open a cell door to provide assistance. The Government’s statement of facts contains a plethora of examples where Bowens could have exercised his duties irrespective of funding issues.
13

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 63 Filed 09/30/2006 Page 14 of 14�
its burden of showing that the conditions at the Jail are constitutionally deficient. Further, the TCBOC does not dispute the Governments assertions of fact and in fact, agrees that the Jail, as a whole is constitutionally deficient. Bowens does not deny that the conditions at the Jail are constitutionally deficient.4 Instead, he attributes the fault for any and all constitutional deficiencies to the TCBOC for failure to provide him with adequate funding.
Accordingly, the Court finds that the Government has carried its burden of proof of showing (1) the existence of objectively serious and dangerous conditions; (2) that both sets of Defendants (Bowens and TCBOC) have subjective knowledge of these substantial risks to the inmates; and (3) that both sets of Defendants have disregarded these risks in more than a negligent manner. As such, the Court finds that there is no genuine issue of material fact concerning whether the conditions at the Terrell County Jail are unconstitutional and the Government is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Therefore, the Government’s motion for summary judgment for violation of the inmates’ rights to be free from serious risks of harm while incarcerated at the Terrell County Jail (Doc. No. 46) is GRANTED.
The Court by separate order, shall issue instructions to the parties concerning further proceedings, briefing and hearing on the issues of: (1) the Sheriff’s and/or the TCBOC’s liability or responsibility for the unconstitutional conduct; (2) the proper remedy; and (3) if necessary, the Sheriff’s and/or the TOBOC responsibilities in implementing the Court’s remedy, other subsequent necessary orders or appropriate relief.
SO ORDERED, this 29th day of September, 2006. /s/W. Louis Sands
W. LOUIS SANDS, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4. Even if Bowens’ brief and objections to the Government’s statement of facts can be read as placing certain alleged unconstitutional conditions or facts in dispute, the overwhelming evidence is that the overall conditions at the Jail are unconstitutional.
14

 
 Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 1 of 33

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

,

t

' .

O f?{_.. '

. - .~ ,.,_.

I

' .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff v.
TERRELL COUNTY, GEORGIA, et aL, Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:04-CV-76 (WLS)

)

)

)

)

)

UNITED STATES' PROPOSED ORDER On September 30, 2006, the Court granted the United States' motion for summary judgment by finding no genuine issue of material fact concerning whether the conditions at the Terrell County Jail are unconstitutionaL This order provides the remedial measures that the Defendants must undertake in order to ensure constitutional conditions of confinement at the Terrell County JaiL

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 2 of 33

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.

DEFINITIONS .......................................................... 1

II. BACKGROUND......................................................... 2

III. CORRECTIONAL ISSUES................................................. 3 A. Inmate Safety and Supervision......................................... 3 B. StaffTraining ..................................................... 5 C. Other Constitutionally Required Services ................................ 6

IV. MEDICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH CARE.................................. 6 A. General Provisions.................................................. 6 B. Medical and Mental Health Staff and Training . . ......................... 8 C. Screenings and Assessments ......................................... 10 D. Access to Treatment ............................................... 12 E. Medication....................................................... 14 F. Mental Health Care................................................ 15

V. SUICIDE PREVENTION................................................. 16

VI. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY............................... 20 A. General sanitation ................................................. 20 B. Fire safety ....................................................... 21

VII. QUALITY ASSURANCE................................................. 22

VIII. POLICIES AND PROCEDURES........................................... 23

IX. CONSTITUTIONALLY SOUND FACILITY................................. 24

X. TERMINATION, COMPLIANCE, REPORTING, AND DOl MONITORING....... 26 A. Termination and Substantial Compliance............................... 26 B. Compliance Reporting.............................................. 27 C. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement.. ............................. 28 D. General Provisions................................................. 29

XI. PRISON LITIGATION REFORM ACT, 18 U.S.C. § 3626, FINDINGS ............ 31

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 3 of 33
I. DEFINITIONS A. "United States" shall refer to the Plaintiff in this matter, the United States of America. B. "DOJ" shall refer to the United States Department of Justice, which represents the United States in this matter. C. "Defendants" shall refer collectively to Terrell County, Georgia, the Sheriff of Terrell County, in his official capacity, the members of the Terrell County Board of Commissioners, in their official capacity, and their agents and successors in office. D. "Sheriff' shall refer to the Sheriff of Terrell County. E. "Board of Commissioners" shall refer to the Terrell County Board of Commissioners. F. "Terrell County Jail" (Jail) includes the existing Jail facility as well as any other Terrell County institutions built, leased, or otherwise used, to replace the current Jail or Jail components. G. "Inmate" or "inmates" shall be construed broadly to refer to one or more individuals detained at, or otherwise housed, held, in the custody of, or confined at either the existing Jail or any institution that is built or used to replace the Jail or any part of the Jail. H. "Qualified professional" shall refer to an individual qualified to render the requisite and appropriate care, treatment,judgment(s), training and service, based on credentials recognized in the specific field.

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 4 of 33

I.

Consistent with, or in accordance with, the tenn "generally accepted professional

standards of care" shall mean a decision by a qualified professional that is

substantially aligned with contemporary, accepted professional judgment,

practice, or standards as to demonstrate that the person responsible based the

decision on such accepted professional judgment.

J. "Quality assurance" means a system of self-audit and improvement to assess the

implementation and effectiveness of all remedies instituted pursuant to this Order,

to identify deficits that may exist, and to effectuate new measures to cure deficits

identified.

K. "Substantial compliance" indicates that the Defendants have achieved compliance

with most or all components of the relevant provision ofthe Order.

L. "Non-compliance" indicates that most or all of the components of the Order

provision have not yet been met.

M. ''Effective date" shall mean the date this Order is signed and entered by the Court.

N. "Includes" (or "including") shall mean" 'includes' (or 'including'), but not

Jimited to."

II. BACKGROUND

A. The Defendant Terrell County, through the Board of Commissioners and Sheriff,

owns, operates, and has responsibility for funding the Jail, located in Terrell

County, Georgia.

2

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 5 of 33
B. The Defendant Sheriff is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the JaiL In his official capacity, the Sheriff has the custody, rule, and charge of the Jail and Jail inmates.
C. The Defendants shall ensure that all Terrell County agencies take any actions necessary to comply with the provisions of this Order.
III. CORRECTIONAL ISSUES A. Inmate Safety and Supervision
I. Qualified Staff The Defendants shall ensure that the Jail is operated and managed by adequate qualified staff. The Defendants shall hire sufficient numbers of qualified Jailers to operate the Jail safely and to carry out the requirements of this Order.
2. Jail Administrator The Defendants shall ensure that a qualified Jail Administrator oversees Jail operations. The Jail Administrator must have completed any basic jailer and jail administrator training offered by the State of Georgia or any other State or government entity prior to assuming their job responsibilities. When the Jail Administrator is absent or if the position becomes vacant, a qualified, trained replacement shall serve as Acting Jail Administrator.
3. Rounds The Defendants shall ensure that security staff conduct appropriate rounds with sufficient frequency to provide inmates with reasonable safety. Rounds shall be conducted at )east once every half hour at irregular intervals. More frequent rounds shall be conducted for inmates requiring more intensive supervision for security and safety reasons. These rounds shall include logged,
3

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 6 of 33
visual inspections of all housing areas. Video surveillance may supplement, but must not be used to replace, rounds by Jailers. 4. Supervision Jailers are responsible for the care and supervision of inmates. Those duties shall not be delegated to inmates, and no inmate shall have authority over other inmates. No inmate shall serve as the designated conduit for transmitting inmate requests for assistance to Jail staff 5. Monitoring Equipment The Defendants shall maintain in working order all cameras, alarms and other monitoring equipment at the Jail. 6. Classification The Defendants shall develop and implement an appropriate classification system to protect inmates from unreasonable risk of harm. Inmates shall be timely classified and placed in housing appropriate for security and safety. This system shall include consideration of an inmate's security level, suicide risk, and past behavior. The Defendants shall use best efforts to anticipate periods of unusual intake volume and schedule sufficient classification staff to timely classify inmates. 7. Housing of Female Inmates and Juveniles Pursuant to the general classification and housing policy, the Defendants shall ensure that female inmates shall be housed in units that have sight and sound separation from male inmates, and juvenile inmates shall be housed in units that have sight and sound separation from adult inmates. 8. Incident Reporting The Defendants shall document all serious incidents involving inmates including suicides, suicide attempts, inmate-on-inmate violence, use of
4

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 7 of 33

force by staff, fires, escapes, and deaths. Such records shall be maintained and

reviewed promptly and at regular intervals. Reviews shall include case-by-case

review of individual incidents as well as more systemic review in order to identify

patterns of incidents. The Defendants shall incorporate such information into

their management quality assurance practices and take necessary corrective action.

9.

Investigations The Defendants shall develop and implement internal

investigation policies, procedures and practices. The Defendants shall maintain

starting sufficient to implement internal investigation policies, procedures, and

practices. The Defendants shall implement appropriate remedies based upon the

results of internal investigations.

I0. Filing of Grievances The Defendants shall develop and implement an effective

inmate grievance system, ensure that grievances may be filed confidentially where

the filing of such grievance might expose the inmate or a third party to imminent

danger. The Defendants shall also ensure that grievances receive appropriate

follow-up, including informing the grievant of its outcome and tracking

implementation of resolutions.

B. Staff Training

11. Training Regarding this Order The Defendants shall provide training and

supervision to staff sufficient to implement the provisions of this Order.

12. General Training Requirements At a minimum, the Defendants shall require that

all Jailers complete the state jailer school program within one year of

employment. Additionally, the Defendants will provide an initial orientation for

5

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 8 of 33
all new Jail employees on Jail policies, security procedures and inmate rights. The Defendants shall also develop a jail training program that includes pre-service and annual in-service training for all staf£ 13. Scope of Training Jail staff must all be trained and authorized to handle basic security functions. Such functions include- (a) providing general supervision of housing units; (b) dealing promptly with emergency situations; (c) conducting cell searches; (d) opening cell doors; and (e) transporting inmates. 14. Road Deputies If road deputies are used to staff the Jail, the road deputies must meet the same jailer training requirements as regular Jailers. C. Other Constitutionally Required Services 15. Access to Information Regarding Constitutionally Required Services The Defendants shall ensure that newly admitted inmates receive information they need to comply with Jail rules and regulations, be protected from harm, report misconduct, access medical and mental health care and seek redress of grievances. IV. MEDICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH CARE A. General Provisions 16. Standard The Defendants shall ensure that services to address the serious medical and mental health needs of all inmates meet generally accepted professional standards. 17. Policies and Procedures The Defendants shall develop and implement medical and mental health care policies and procedures, including those involving intake, communicable disease screening, sick call, chronic disease management, acute
6

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 9 of 33
care, infection control, infirmary care, and dental care to ensure that staff provide adequate ongoing care to inmates determined to need such care. Medical and mental health policies and procedures shall be readily available to relevant staff. 18. Record keeping The Defendants shall develop and implement a unitary record-keeping system to ensure adequate and timely documentation of assessments and treatment and adequate and timely access by relevant staff to documents that are relevant to the care and treatment of inmates. A unitary record-keeping system consists of a system in which all clinically appropriate documents for the inmate's treatment are readily available to persons providing medical or mental health treatment. The Defendants shall maintain a unified medical and mental health file for each inmate, and all medical records, including laboratory reports, shall be timely filed in the medical file. The medical record shall be complete, and shall include information from prior incarcerations. The Defendants shall implement an adequate system for medical records management. 19. Medication and Laboratory Orders The Defendants shall develop and implement policies, procedures, and practices consistent with generally accepted professional standards to ensure timely responses to medical orders, including orders for medications and laboratory tests. Such policies, procedures, and practices shall be periodically evaluated to prevent delays in inmates' timely receipt of medications and laboratory tests. 20. Privacy The Defendants shall make reasonable efforts to ensure inmate privacy when conducting medical and mental health screening, assessments, and
7

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 10 of 33
treatment. However, maintaining inmate privacy shall be subject to legitimate security concerns and emergency situations. B. Medical and Mental Health Staff and Training 21. Staffing The Defendants shall maintain sufficient staffing levels of qualified medical staff and mental health professionals to provide care for inmates' serious medical and mental health needs. 22. Health Services Administrator The Defendants shall retain a registered nurse or physician's assistant as the Health Services Administrator (HSA) overseeing all day-to-day aspects of health care at the Jail. The HSA's responsibilities shall include conducting and coordinating- (a) initial clinical screenings; (b) 14-day health assessments; (c) communicable disease screening; (d) medical and mental health sick call; (e) physician referrals; (t) mental health referrals; (g) dental referrals; (h) emergency and other admissions to local hospitals; and (i) arrangements for specialty treatment. The Defendants shall provide the HSA with adequate space, supplies and equipment so that the HSA can provide appropriate care for inmates with serious medical needs. The HSA will be on-site at the Jail at least five days per week. 23. Licensed Physician The Defendants shall enter into a written contractual relationship with a licensed physician whose duties shall include (a) periodically visiting the Jail on a frequent enough basis to ensure timely access to medical care for serious medical needs; (b) providing regular on-site supervision of the HSA; (c) ensuring that Jail medical care complies with Jail
8

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 11 of 33
medical policies and applicable medical standards; (d) providing on-call consultations and phone orders; (e) writing prescriptions; (f) participating in quality assurance and infection control programs; and (g) evaluating and treating inmates in response to referrals from the HSA (either at the Jail or at the physician's office). 24. Qualified Mental Health Professional The Defendants shall enter into a written contractual relationship with an individual with a minimum of masters-level education and training in psychiatry, psychology, counseling, social work or psychiatric nursing, who is currently licensed by the State of Georgia, to coordinate and deliver mental health services to Jail inmates. This Qualified Mental Health Professional's (QMHP) duties shall include (a) periodically visiting the Jail on a frequent enough basis to ensure timely access to mental health care for serious needs; (b) ensuring that Jail mental health care complies with Jail policies and applicable standards; (c) providing on-call consultations and phone orders; (d) obtaining prescriptions; and (e) evaluating and coordinating treatment for inmates in response to mental health referrals from the HSA and other medical staff (either at the Jail or at the mental health professional's office). Consistent with generally accepted professional standards, the QMHP shall be appropriately supervised by a qualified medical professional, such as a psychiatrist and the Jail physician. 25. Dentist The Defendants shall enter into a written contractual relationship with a local dentist who will evaluate and treat inmates' serious dental needs in response
9

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 12 of 33
to referrals from the HSA (either at the Jail or at the dentist's office). Dental care shall not be limited to extractions. 26. Scope of Practice All persons providing medical or mental health care shall meet applicable state licensure and/or certification requirements. Health services staff shall not practice outside the scope oftheir licensure and training. 27. Medical and Mental Health Staff Training The Defendants shall ensure that all medical staff and mental health professionals are adequately trained to meet the serious medical and mental health needs of inmates. All such staff shall continue to receive documented orientation and in-service training in accordance with their job classifications, and training topics shall include suicide prevention and the identification and care of inmates with mental disorders. 28. Security Staff Health Care Training The Defendants shall ensure that security staff are adequately trained in the identification, timely referral, and proper supervision of inmates with serious medical or mental health needs. C. Screening and Assessments 29. Intake Screening The Defendants shall appropriately screen all inmates upon arrival at the Jail to identify individuals with serious medical or mental health conditions, including acute medical needs, infectious diseases, chronic conditions, physical disabilities, mental illness, suicide risk, and drug and/or alcohol withdrawal. Inmates who screen positively for any of these items shall be referred for immediate or prioritized screening by the HSA or other qualified health care staff. Jailers supervising newly arrived inmates shall physically observe the
10

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 13 of 33
conduct and appearance of these inmates to determine whether they have a more immediate need for medical or mental health attention prior to their initial heaJth screenings. The HSA shall review the initial screening forms daily in order to identify serious medical care needs. 30. Initial Clinical Health Screening The Defendants shall provide for initial clinical health screening by the HSA or other clinical staff for new inmates and inmates transferring from other correctional institutions within forty eight (48) hours of each inmate's arrival at the Jail. The Defendants shall ensure that staff performing initial health screenings are trained to complete the assessments. For this initial health screening, clinical staff shall record and seek the inmates' cooperation to provide (a) medical, surgical, and mental health history, including current or recent medications; (b) current injuries, illnesses, evidence of trauma, and vital signs, including recent alcohol and substance use; (c) history of substance abuse and treatment; (d) pregnancy; (e) history and symptoms of communicable disease; (f) suicide risk history; and (g) history of mental health treatment, including medication and hospitalization. Staff shall attempt to elicit the amount, frequency and time of the last dosage of medication from every inmate reporting that he or she is currently or recently on medication, including psychotropic medication. The HSAshall consult routinely with the supervising physician, qualified mental health professional, and dentist as needed to ensure adequate treatment for serious medical problems. This initial health screening information shall promptly become part of an inmate's medical record.
11

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 14 of 33
31. Fourteen Day Health Assessment The HSA or other qualified medical staff shall perform full physical and mental health assessments for each inmate within 14 days of an inmate's arrival at the JaiL The assessment shall include(a) a comprehensive medical history; (b) physical examination; (c) testing for tuberculosis and other relevant communicable diseases; (d) mental health history; and (e) current mental health status examination. Records documenting the assessment and results shall become part of each inmate's medical record. A re-admitted inmate or an inmate transferred from another facility who has received a documented full health assessment within the previous three months and whose receiving screening shows no change in the inmate's health status need not receive a new full physical health assessment. For such inmates, qualified personnel shall review prior records and update tests and examinations as needed.
32. Screening, Testing and Treatment of Communicable Diseases The Defendants shall develop and implement a policy for communicable disease screening, testing, and treatment that is consistent with community standards and appropriate to the inmate population of the JaiL The communicable disease policy shall be implemented within 120 days of the Effective Date of this Order. Medical staff, including the Jail physician and HSA, shall work with Defendants and the local public health department in developing the communicable disease plan.
D. Access to Treatment 33. Access to Medical and Mental Health Services The Defendants shall ensure that all inmates have adequate opportunity to request and receive timely medical and
12

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 15 of 33
mental health care through written sick call requests that are collected by the HSA without requiring Jailer involvement. The Defendants shall permit illiterate inmates to access the sick call system orally by requesting access through a Jailer, who must then fill out a request slip for the inmate within a reasonable time after the oral request. The HSA shall screen all written requests for medical and/or mental health care within twenty-four (24) hours of submission, and see patients within the next seventy-two (72) hours, or sooner if medically appropriate. The Defendants shall develop and implement a sick call policy and procedure which includes an explanation of the order in which to schedule patients, a procedure for scheduling patients, where patients should be treated, the requirements for clinical evaluations, and the maintenance of a sick call log. Treatment of inmates in response to a sick call slip shall occur in a clinical setting. 34. Referrals for Specialty Care The Defendants shall ensure that- (a) inmates whose serious medical or mental health needs exceed the services available at the Jail shall be referred in a timely manner to appropriate medical or mental health care professionals; (b) the findings and recommendations of such professionals are tracked and documented in inmates' medical files; and (c) treatment recommendations are followed as clinically indicated. The Defendants shall maintain sufficient security staff to ensure that inmates requiring treatment are escorted to appointments in a timely manner. 35. Access to Emergency Care The Defendants shall train medical and security staff to recognize and respond appropriately to medical and mental health emergencies.
13

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 16 of 33
Furthermore, the Defendants shall ensure that inmates with emergency medical or mental health needs receive timely and appropriate care, including prompt referrals and transports for outside care when medically necessary. 36. Chronic Disease Management Program The Defendants shall develop and implement a written chronic care disease management program, consistent with generally accepted professional standards, which provides inmates suffering from chronic illnesses with appropriate diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, and continuity of care. As part of this program, the Defendants shall maintain a registry of inmates with chronic diseases. 37. Drug and Alcohol Withdrawal Identification and Treatment The Defendants shall ensure that all inmates demonstrating symptoms of drug and alcohol withdrawal are timely identified. The Defendants shall provide appropriate treatment, housing and medical supervision for drug and alcohol withdrawal. 38. Pregnant Inmates The Defendants shall ensure that pregnant inmates are provided adequate pre-natal care in accordance with generally accepted professional standards of care. E. Medication 39. Medication Administration The Defendants shall ensure that all medications, including psychotropic medications, are prescribed appropriately and administered in a timely manner to adequately address the serious medical and mental health needs of inmates. The Defendants shall ensure that inmates who are prescribed medications for chronic illnesses that are not used on a routine schedule, including
14

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 17 of 33
inhalers for the treatment of asthma, have access to those medications as medically appropriate. The Defendants shall develop and implement adequate policies and procedures for medication administration and adherence. The Defendants shall ensure that the prescribing practitioner is notified if a patient misses a medication dose on three consecutive days, and shall document that notice. The Defendants shall ensure that medication administration records are appropriately completed and maintained in each inmate's medical record. 40. Continuity of Medication The Defendants shall ensure that arriving inmates who report that they have been prescribed medications shall receive the same or comparable medication as soon as is reasonably possible upon verification that the medication is appropriate, unless a medical professional determines such medication is inconsistent with generally accepted professional standards. If the inmate's reported medication is ordered discontinued or changed by a medical professional, a medical professional shall conduct a face-to- face evaluation of the inmate as medically appropriate. 41. Medication Management The Defendants shall develop and implement guidelines and controls regarding the access to, and storage of, medication as well as the safe and appropriate disposal of medication and medical waste. ,F. Mental Health Care 42. Mental Health Treatment The Defendants shall ensure that a qualified mental health professional provides timely, adequate, and appropriate screening, assessment, evaluation, treatment and structured therapeutic activities to inmates
15

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 18 of 33
requesting mental health services, inmates who become suicidal, and inmates who enter the Jail with serious mental health needs or develop serious mental health needs while incarcerated. 43. Mental Illness Training The Defendants shall conduct initial and periodic training for all security staff on how to recognize symptoms of mental illness and respond appropriately. Such training shall be conducted by a qualified mental health professional, registered psychiatric nurse, or other appropriately trained and qualified individual, and shall include instruction on how to recognize and respond to mental health emergencies. 44. Mental Health Assessment and Referral The Defendants shall develop and implement adequate policies, procedures, and practices consistent with generally accepted professional standards to ensure timely and appropriate mental health assessments by a qualified mental health professional for any inmate who becomes suicidal and those inmates whose mental health histories, whose responses to initial screening questions, or whose behavior indicate a need for such an assessment. V. SUICIDE PREVENTION 45. Suicide Prevention Policy The Defendants shall implement a suicide prevention policy that includes the following provisions (a) training; (b) intake screening/assessment; (c) communication; (d) housing; (e) observation; (f) intervention; and (g) mortality and morbidity review.
16

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 19 of 33
46. Suicide Prevention Training Curriculum The Defendants shall implement a suicide prevention training curriculum that will include the following topics(a) the suicide prevention policy as revised consistent with this Order; (b) why facility environments may contribute to suicidal behavior; (c) potential predisposing factors to suicide; (d) high risk suicide periods; (e) warning signs and symptoms of suicidal behavior; (f) case studies of recent suicides and serious suicide attempts; (g) mock demonstrations regarding the proper response to a suicide attempt; and (h) the proper use of emergency equipment.
47. Staff Training Within six months of the effective date of this Order, the Defendants shall ensure that all existing and newly hired Jailers and medical staff receive an initial eight-hour training on the suicide prevention curriculum described above. Following completion of the initial training, the Defendants shall ensure that a minimum of two hours of refresher training on the curriculum are completed by all staff each year.
48. Initial Suicide Risk Screening The Defendants shall develop and implement policies and procedures pertaining to intake screening in order to identify newly arrived inmates who may be at risk for suicide. The screening process shall include inquiry regarding- (a) past suicidal ideation and/or attempts; (b) current ideation, threat, plan; (c) prior mental health treatment/hospitalization; (d) recent significant loss (job, relationship, death of family member/close friend, etc.); (e) history of suicidal behavior by family member/close friend; (f) suicide risk
17

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 20 of 33
during prior confinement in a state facility; and (g) arresting/transporting officer(s) belief that the inmate is currently at risk. 49. Housing The Defendants shall provide safe housing in suicide-resistant cells and adequate supervision of inmates identified as suicidal. Suicide-resistant cells shall include replacement or modification of fixtures ~grates, cell bars, or faucets) that can be conducive to hanging so that they are suicide-resistant. The location of the cells shall provide full visibility to staff. 50. Observation The Defendants shall develop and implement policies and procedures pertaining to observation of suicidal inmates, whereby an inmate who is not actively suicidal, but expresses suicidal ideation (e.g., expressing a wish to die without a specific threat or plan) and/or has a recent prior history of selfdestructive behavior, or an inmate who denies suicidal ideation or does not threaten suicide, but demonstrates other concerning behavior (through actions, current circumstances, or recent history) indicating the potential for self-injury, shall be placed under "Close Observation Status" and observed by staff at staggered intervals not to exceed every 15 minutes(~, 5, 7, I0 minutes). An inmate who is actively suicidal, either threatening or engaging in self-injurious behavior, shall be placed on "Constant Watch Status" and observed by staff on a continuous, uninterrupted basis. Any observer responsible for a suicide watch shall have a clear, unobstructed view of the suicidal inmate at all times. Suicide checks shall be logged at least once every 15 minutes by Jailers. Any inmate on
18

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 21 of 33
suicide precautions shall be referred for a mental health care assessment and treatment. 51. Suicide Risk Assessment The Defendants shall ensure that a formalized suicide risk assessment by a qualified mental health professional is performed within an appropriate time not to exceed 48 hours of the initiation of suicide precautions. The assessment of suicide risk by qualified mental health professionals shall inc1ude, but not be limited to, the following- (a) description of the antecedent events and precipitating factors; (b) suicidal indicators; (c) mental status examination; (d) previous psychiatric and suicide risk history, level of lethality; (e) current medication and diagnosis; and (f) recommendations/treatment plan. Findings from the assessment shall be documented on both the assessment form and health care record. 52. Step-Down Observation The Defendants shall develop and implement a "stepdown" level of observation whereby inmates on suicide precaution are released gradually from more restrictive levels of supervision to less restrictive levels for an appropriate period of time prior to their discharge from suicide precautions. 53. Discharge from Suicide Precautions The Defendants shall ensure that inmates are not discharged from suicide precautions without an evaluation and recommendation by a qualified mental health professional. All inmates discharged from suicide precautions shall continue to receive follow-up assessment in accordance with a treatment plan developed by a qualified mental health professional.
19

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 22 of 33
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY A. General Sanitation
54. Cleanliness The Defendants shall maintain a clean and sanitary Jail. Within 60 days after entry of this Order, the Defendants will thoroughly clean, paint, and fumigate the existing Jail facility as needed. Afterwards, the Defendants shall regularly clean and maintain the Jail pursuant to a general housekeeping and maintenance plan. Inmates shall be provided cleaning materials on a daily basis, but the Defendants are ultimately responsible for the Jail's cleanliness and physical condition. The Jail Administrator shall assign a Jailer responsibility for overseeing implementation of the housekeeping and maintenance plan.
55. Plumbing and Ventilation In order to maintain sanitary living conditions, prevent inmate injuries, and reduce the risk of infectious disease transmission, the Defendants shall ensure that plumbing and ventilation systems are adequately maintained and installed.
56. Pest Control The Defendants shall develop and implement a reasonably integrated pest management program at the Jail. The Defendants shall continue to contract for routine, professional exterminator services, including routine spraying and follow up as needed.
57. Laundry The Defendants shall develop and implement policies and procedures for laundry procedures to protect inmates from risk of exposure to contagious disease, bodily fluids, and pathogens. The Defendants shall ensure that inmates are provided clean clothing, underclothing and bedding in compliance with policy,
20

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 23 of 33
and that the laundry exchange schedule provides equitable distribution and pickup service to all housing areas. 58. Infection Control Plan The Defendants shall develop and implement an infection control plan that addresses contact, blood borne, and airborne hazards and infections. The plan shall include provisions for the identification, treatment, and control of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus ("MRSA") at the Jail. 59. Hazardous waste The Defendants shall appropriately dispose of hazardous and medical waste. 60. Food Service The Defendants shall ensure that food service at the Jail is operated in a safe and hygienic manner. To reduce the risks of food-borne illnesses, the Defendants shall develop and implement a food service plan to ensure- (a) safe food preparation, handling, and storage; (b) proper sanitation of food preparation areas and equipment; and (c) appropriate training and supervision of persons responsible for food service. B. Fire Safety 61. Fire and Life Safety Equipment The Defendants shall ensure that the Jail has adequate fire and life safety equipment, including installation and maintenance of fire alarms in all housing areas. The Defendants shall ensure that all fire and life safety equipment is properly maintained and inspected, with adequate documentation thereof. 62. Fire Procedure Training The Defendants shall implement competency-based testing for staff regarding fire/emergency procedures.
21

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 24 of 33
63. Fire Safety Plan The Defendants shall develop and implement a written comprehensive fire safety and emergency/disaster plan, and ensure that staff are appropriately trained in implementing the plan.
64. Key Control The Defendants shall ensure that emergency keys are appropriately marked and identifiable by touch and consistently stored in a quickly accessible location, and that staff are adequately trained in the use of the emergency keys.
65. Exit Plans The Defendants shall post and maintain clearly labeled fire exit plans which are accepted by the Fire Marshal.
66. Flammable Materials The Defendants shall control combustibles and eliminate highly flammable materials throughout inmate living areas.
67. Emergency Preparedness The Defendants shall maintain the Jail in a manner that provides adequate fire safety. Defendants shall take all reasonable measures to ensure that- (a) inmates can be evacuated in a safe and timely manner during an emergency; (b) emergency exit routes are free of obstacles, maintained in a safe manner, and available for use; (c) emergency keys are readily accessible to staff.
VII. QUALITY ASSURANCE 68. Policies and Procedures The Defendants shall develop and implement written quality assurance policies and procedures to regularly assess and ensure compliance with the terms of this Order. These policies and procedures shall include, at a minimum- (a) provisions requiring an annual quality management plan and annual evaluation; (b) quantitative performance measurement tools; (c) tracking and trending of data; (d) creation of a multidisciplinary team;
22

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 25 of 33
(e) morbidity and mortality reviews with self-critical analysis; and (f) periodic review of emergency room visits and hospitalizations. 69. Corrective Action Plans The Defendants shall develop and implement policies and procedures to address problems that are uncovered during the course of quality assurance activities. The Defendants shall develop and implement corrective action plans to address these problems in such a manner as to prevent them from occurring again in the future. VIII. POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 70. Policy Development The Defendants shall revise and/or develop comprehensive policies and procedures for Jail operations as required to comply with this Order. Such procedures shall include -(a) intake, initial screening and objective classification; (b) use of force policies; (c) medical, dental, and mental health care; (d) general housekeeping and maintenance; (e) inmate rights; (f) inmate hygiene; (g) inmate clothing distribution and laundry; (h) disciplinary procedures; (i) staff training; G) fire safety; (k) grievance system; (1) incident reporting; (m) quality assurance; and (n) suicide prevention. 71. Associated Documents The Defendants shall revise and/or develop as necessary other written documents such as screening tools, logs, handbooks, manuals and forms, to effectuate the provisions of this Order. 72. Review by the United States Within one-hundred twenty (120) days of the execution of this Order, the Defendants shall submit all policies, procedures, and
23

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 26 of 33
other documents required by or referenced in this Order to the United States for review and approval. 73. Implementation The Defendants shall implement policies, procedures, and documents approved by the United States within ninety (90) calendar days of notice of approval, to the extent that such policies have not already been implemented. IX. CONSTITUTIONALLY SOUND FACILITY 74. Physical Plant By Aprill, 2009, the Defendants shall house all Terrell County Jail inmates at a facility that meets minimum constitutional standards. By this date, the Defendants will house inmates in a facility that complies with this Order. The parties anticipate that the Defendants will either renovate an existing facility or build a new facility in order to meet this requirement. The facility shall include adequate numbers of high security cells to address security and classification needs, appropriate security design features to ensure adequate inmate safety, and expansion or construction of service areas~. infirmary) to meet constitutional standards. Consistent with federal law, the Defendants shall ensure that any renovations or construction complies with generally accepted professional standards. 75. Design The Defendants shall obtain the services of qualified professionals to evaluate, design, plan, oversee, and implement the Jail construction or renovation process. At each major phase of the Jail renovation or construction process, the Defendants shall provide the United States with copies of design documents. This
24

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 27 of 33
includes, but is not limited to the initial evaluation of Jail renovation and construction options as well as a copy of the tinal plans and specifications for any new or renovated facility. 76. Staffing The Defendants shall consult with a qualified corrections expert as to the required services and staffing levels needed for any replacement facility. In particular, prior to moving inmates into a new or renovated Jail facility, the Defendants shall arrange for a staffing study, conducted by the qualified corrections expert, to ensure that any new or renovated facility is adequately staffed to provide inmates with reasonable safety. 77. Alternate Facility If the Defendants transfer inmates to the Terrell County Correctional Institution ("TCCI") or a facility at another County, the United States shall be given reasonable opportunities to inspect the alternate facility to ensure that it meets constitutional standards. 78. Extension of Jurisdiction The Court shall retain jurisdiction over Terrell County inmates housed in a new Jail facility or TCCL This includes jurisdiction to grant appropriate reliefifthe United States: a) seeks to enforce its inspection and access rights pertaining to Terrell County inmates housed at a new Jail facility or TCCI, orb) seeks to obtain necessary relief at a new Jail facility or TCCI to ensure compliance with this Order and constitutional requirements.
25

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 28 of 33
X. COMPLIANCE, REPORTING, DOJ MONITORING, AND TERMINATION A. Termination and Substantial Compliance
79. Termination Consistent with the Prison Litigation Reform Act and federal law, the Court's jurisdiction over the parties pursuant to this Order shall terminate, and the case will be dismissed, when the Defendants achieve substantial compliance with each and every term of this Order for a period of one year.
80. Termination Date This Order will terminate three years after entry. 81. Substantial Compliance Non-compliance with mere technicalities, or temporary
failure to comply during a period of otherwise sustained compliance, shall not constitute failure to maintain substantial compliance. At the same time, temporary compliance during a period of otherwise sustained non-compliance shall not constitute substantial compliance. After substantial compliance with all provisions of this Order for a period of one year, the DOJ and the Defendants will file a Joint Motion for Termination that confirms that the commitments contained in this Order have been satisfied and which relieves the parties from further monitoring and reporting. 82. Compliance Timeline The Defendants shall begin implementing this Order immediately upon its Effective Date. Except where otherwise specifically indicated, the Defendants shall complete implementation of all the provisions of this Order within 180 days after the Effective Date. If the Defendants are unable to complete implementation of any provision within this time period, they shall request an extension from the United States. If the United States does not agree to
26

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 29 of 33
the extension, the Defendants may seek an additional 60 day-extension from the Court by filing a motion with the Court. The Motion for Extension shall include a certification that a good faith basis exists for granting this extension. If the Defendants fail to implement the terms of this Order on a timely basis, the United States may seek appropriate relieffrom the Court, including immediate injunctive relief if the Defendants' failure to comply with the Settlement creates a condition or practice at the Jail that could present an imminent threat to the health, safety, or life of inmates. B. Compliance Reporting 83. Technical Assistance The Defendants shall obtain training and consulting services from qualified professionals in the areas of corrections and correctional health care for the development and implementation of policies and procedures that comply with the terms of this Order. Any technical assistance consultants retained by the Defendants must be approved by the United States. The technical assistance consultants shall prepare at least one report every six months identifying any remaining deficiencies at the Jail and corrective action recommendations. The United States shall have full access to the consultants and their work materials. This access shall include the right to communicate ex parte with the consultants. Because these consultants are technical assistance consultants, they shall be precluded, however, from testifying on compliance matters regarding this Order unless the United States consents. Also, their reports
27

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 30 of 33
may not be introduced in any compliance proceeding without the United States' consent 84. Compliance Reporting The Defendants, with the aid oftheir qualified professional consultants, shall submit quarterly compliance reports to the United States, the first of which shall be filed within 90 days ofthe date of this Order. Thereafter, the quarterly reports shall be filed 15 days after the termination of each four-month period thereafter until the Order is terminated. Each compliance report shall describe the actions the Defendants have taken during the reporting period to implement this Order and shall make specific reference to the Order provisions being implemented. 85. Documentation of Compliance The Defendants shall maintain sufficient records to document that the requirements of this Order are being properly implemented and shall make such records available at all reasonable times for inspection and copying by the United States. In addition, the Defendants shall maintain and submit upon request records or other documents to verify that they have taken such actions as described in their compliance reports (s:&, census summaries, policies, procedures, protocols, training materials, and incident reports) and will also provide all documents reasonably requested by the United States. C. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement 86. Compliance Monitoring DOJ representatives, with their experts, may conduct periodic, unannounced, on-site compliance monitoring tours. The Defendants shall provide DOJ representatives with reasonable access to inmates and staff,
28

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 31 of 33
documents, and information relating to implementation of this Order. DOJ shall have the right to conduct confidential interviews with inmates, and to conduct interviews with facility staff outside the presence of other staff or supervisors. The DOJ's right of access includes all documents regarding medical care, mental health care, suicide prevention, or protocols or analyses involving one of those subject areas. 87. Non-compliance If the Defendants fail to implement the requirements ofthis Order in a timely manner, the United States shall be entitled to appropriate relief from the Court. 88. Emergency Situations If the Defendants' non-compliance with any provision of this Order constitutes an emergency (i.e., an imminent threat to the health, safety, or life of an inmate or inmates), the United States may file for immediate injunctive relief to remedy the deficient condition or practice at the JaiL D. General Provisions 89. Dissemination of Order Within 30 days of the effective date of this Order, the Defendants shall distribute copies of the Order to all relevant staff, including all medical and security staff at the Jail and explain it as appropriate. 90. Successors This Order shall be applicable to and binding upon all parties, their officers, agents, employees, assigns, and their successors in office. 91. Costs All parties shall bear their own costs, including attorney fees. 92. Defense of Order The parties agree to defend the provisions of this Order. The parties shall notify each other of any court challenge to this Order. In the event
29

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 32 of 33
any provision of this Order is challenged in any local or state court, removal to a federal court shall be sought. 93. Enforcement Failure by either party to enforce this entire Order or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other provision herein shall not be construed as a waiver of its right to enforce deadlines or other provisions of this Order. 94. Unforeseen Delay If any unforeseen circumstance occurs which causes a failure to timely carry out any requirements of this Order, the Defendants shall notify DOJ in writing as soon as possible, but no later than 20 calendar days of the time that the Defendants become aware of the unforeseen circumstance and its impact on the Defendants' ability to perform under the Order. The notice shall describe the cause of the failure to perform and the measures taken to prevent or minimize the failure. The Defendants shall implement all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such failure. 95. Non-Retaliation The Defendants shall not retaliate against any person because that person. has filed or may file a complaint, provided information or assistance, or participated in any other manner in an investigation or proceeding relating to this Order. 96. Severability In the event any provision of this Order is declared invalid for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, said finding shall not affect the remaining provisions ofthis Order.
30

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82-2 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 33 of 33

97. =...:.== "Notice" under this Order shall be provided overnight delivery and shall

be provided to counsel for the Board of County Commissioners, counsel for the

Sheriff, and counsel of record for the United States.

98. Subheadings All subheadings in this Order are written for convenience of

locating individual provisions. If questions arise as to the meanings of individual

provisions, the parties shall follow the text of each provision.

XI. PRISON LITIGATION REFORM ACT, 18 U.S.C. § 3626, FINDINGS

99. The prospective relief in this Order is based upon and supported by this Court's

findings in its September 30, 2006 Order, which further incorporates by reference

the United States' Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of Motion

for Summary Judgment (Nov. 14, 2005). The prospective relief in this Order is

necessary to correct the violations of the federal rights of Jail inmates.

100. This Order is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct these

violations, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct these violations.

101. This Order will not have an adverse impact on public safety or the operation of a

criminal justice system.

102. This Order complies with the requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act,

18 U.S.C. § 3626 et ~·

1/)u,. AJ,;K SO ORDERED, this

day of

2007.

W. LOUIS SAND ,JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
31

 
 Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

:

:

Plaintiff

:

:

v.

:

:

TERRELL COUNTY, GEORGIA, et al., :

:

Defendants

:

___________________________________ :

1:04-CV-76 (WLS)

ORDER Presently before the Court are Plaintiff’s Brief on remedial issues (Doc. 67), Defendant Terrell County’s Brief on remedial issues (Doc. 69), and Defendant Bowens’s Brief on remedial issues(Doc. 73). The parties filed these briefs in pursuant to the Court’s February 26, 2007 Order (Doc. 65). Plaintiff submitted a detailed thirty-three (33) page proposed order to the Court as an attachment to their brief. (Doc. 67, attachment #1). Plaintiff contends that the plan outlined in their proposed order will satisfy the requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3626 (a), and remedy existing constitutional violations at Defendants’ jail, while allowing Defendants a fair amount of flexibility in implementing the same. Id. Defendant Terrell County requests time to discuss a Consent Order with all parties in the case. (Doc. 69). It appears, however, that Plaintiff’s thirty-three (33) page Proposed Order (Doc. 67, attachment #1), filed simultaneously with Defendant Terrell County’s brief, encompasses all of the concerns addressed by Defendant Terrell County’s brief. (See Doc. 71). Therefore, additional time to discuss a Consent Order is not necessary. Id. Defendant Bowens adopts Plaintiff’s Proposed Order with the exception of paragraphs eighty-three (83) and eighty-nine (89). Defendant Bowens argues that if the Court were to adopt paragraph eighty-three (83), Defendants would be denied the right to confront noncompliance allegations and generally due process. Additionally, Defendant Bowens rejects paragraph eighty-nine (89) because adoption of this paragraph “would create an inherent problem of individuals misinterpreting the Order and using it in a manner that would

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 2 of 3
unduly interrupt the normal flow of administration with the jail. On November 29, 2007, Plaintiff sent a letter to the Court, also filed, requesting a
telephone conference with the Court and all parties. (Doc. 81). The Court granted Plaintiff’s request and a telephone conference was held on December 13, 2007. At that time, the Court heard from Plaintiff, Defendant Terrell County, and Defendant Bowens concerning remedial issues in the case. The general consensus from all parties was that an order is needed from the Court so that each party is aware of its rights and responsibilities as Defendants work to comply with the Constitution. The Court fully considered the representations of each party via the aforementioned briefing and during the telephone conference.
Accordingly, the Court has this date separately executed and placed in force the Proposed Order of Plaintiff (Doc. 67, attachment #1), incorporated herein by reference. The Court rejects the proposed plan submitted by Defendant Terrell County, as Plaintiff’s Proposed Order adequately addresses all of Defendant Terrell County’s concerns. Also, the Court refuses to omit paragraph eighty-nine (89) as requested by Defendant Bowens. The Court’s orders must be available for all individuals to know what rights and responsibilities they have under the same.
The Court agrees with Defendant Bowens, however, that paragraph eighty-three (83) is susceptible to misuse. It is reasonable for the Court to expect and require Defendants to obtain the assistance of technical experts. Therefore, to that extent, paragraph eighty-three (83) remains unchanged. However, Plaintiff is ordered to concede or consent in good faith to any of Defendants’ proposed experts whom possess adequate technical certification, training and/or experience to conduct the relevant job. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Proposed Order (Doc. 67, attachment #1) is amended by reference to the extent that if any person objectively qualified by technical experience is rejected by Plaintiff, the Court reserves the right to hear argument regarding the same by all parties on the matter and approve or reject said proposed technical assistant.
The Court also reserves the right to amend this order as well as Plaintiff’s Proposed Order executed by the Court if the same is used by any party for the purpose of harassment or a provision proves to be ineffective or inefficient at achieving the goal of correcting the

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 82 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 3 of 3
constitutional deficiencies in Defendants’ jail previously found by the Court and aiding Defendants in complying with the United States Constitution. The Court requires and expects each party to act and cooperate with each other party in good faith in compliance with the Court’s orders.
SO ORDERED, this 21st day of December, 2007.
/s/W. Louis Sands THE HONORABLE W. LOUIS SANDS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 
 Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/07/04 Page 1 of 7

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

PLAINTIFF

)

)

v.

)

)

TERRELL COUNTY, GEORGIAi

)

WILBUR T. GAMBLE, JR., CHAIRMAN,

)

TERRELL COUNTY BOARD OF

)

COMMISSIONERSi

)

JOHN W. BOWENS, SHERIFFi

)

LARRY ATHERTON SR., LUCIUS

)

HOLLOWAY, BOB RAINEY, BLAKE VANN,

)

MEMBERS, TERRELL COUNTY BOARD OF

)

COMMISSIONERS

)

)

______~D=E=F~E=N=D=AN~~T~S~____________________ )

COMPLAINT

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA alleges: 1. The Attorney General files this complaint on behalf
of the United States of America pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. § 1997, to enjoin the named Defendants from depriving persons incarcerated at the Terrell County Jail, located in Dawson, Georgia, of rights, privileges, or immunities secured and protected by the Constitution of the United States.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1345.

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/07/04 Page 2 of 7
3. The United States is authorized to initiate this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997a.
4. The Attorney General has certified that all pre-filing requirements specified in 42 U.S.C. § 1997b have been met. The Certificate of the Attorney General is appended to this Complaint and is incorporated herein.
5. Venue in the Middle District of Georgia is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
DEFENDANTS 6. Defendant TERRELL COUNTY is a governmental subdivision created under the laws of the State of Georgia. The Terrell County Sheriff's Office is a division of the Terrell County government. The County owns and operates the Terrell County Jail ("TCJ"), located in Dawson, Georgia. 7. Defendant TERRELL COUNTY is the entity charged by the laws of the State of Georgia with authority to maintain the TCJ and 1S responsible for the conditions of confinement and health and safety of persons incarcerated at TCJ. 8. Defendant WILBUR T. GAMBLE, JR. is the Chairman of the TERRELL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS and serves as the chief administrator of the County government. Chairman GAMBLE is sued in his official capacity.
- 2-

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/07/04 Page 3 of 7
9. Defendant JOHN W. BOWENS is the Sheriff of the Terrell County Jail and is responsible for the day-to-day operations of TCJ. In his official capacity as Sheriff, he has the custody, control, and charge of the jail and inmates. Sheriff BOWENS is sued in his official capacity.
10. Defendants LARRY ATHERTON, LUCIUS HOLLOWAY SR., BOB RAINEY, and BLAKE VANN are members of the Terrell County BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS. As the County's governing authority, the Board has funding, claims resolution, and oversight powers over TCJ. The Defendant Board members ATHERTON, HOLLOWAY, RAINEY, and VANN are sued in their official capacities.
11. Defendants are legally responsible, in whole or in part, for the operation and conditions of TCJ, and for the health and safety of persons incarcerated in TCJ.
12. At all relevant times, the Defendants or their predecessors in office have acted or failed to act, as alleged herein, under color of state law.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 13. The Terrell County Jail is an institution within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1997(1). 14. Persons confined to the Terrell County Jail include both pre-trial detainees and sentenced inmates.
-3-

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/07/04 Page 4 of 7
15. Defendants have engaged in and continue to engage in a pattern or practice of failing to protect inmates at the Terrell County Jail from serious harm and undue risk of serious harm by, inter alia, failing to provide adequate safety, failing to provide adequate medical and mental health care, failing to provide adequate fire safety, and failing to provide sanitary living conditions.
16. The factual allegations set forth in paragraph 15 have been obvious and known to Defendants for a substantial period of time; yet Defendants have failed to address adequately the conditions described.
VIOLATIONS ALLEGED 17. Through the acts and omissions alleged in paragraphs 15 and 16, Defendants have exhibited deliberate indifference to the health and safety of Terrell County Jail inmates, in violation of the rights, privileges, or immunities of those inmates as secured or protected by the Constitution of the United States. U.S. Const. amend. VIII, XIV. 18. Unless restrained by this Court, Defendants will continue to engage in the acts and omissions set forth in paragraph 15 that deprive persons confined in the Terrell
- 4-

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/07/04 Page 5 of 7
county Jail of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution of the United States.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF 19. The Attorney General is authorized under 42 U.S.C. § 1997 to seek equitable and declaratory relief. WHEREFORE, the United States prays that this Court enter an order permanently enjoining Defendants, their officers, agents, employees, subordinates, successors in office, and all those acting in concert or participation with them from continuing the acts, omissions, and practices set forth in paragraph 15 above, and that this Court require Defendants to take such actions as will ensure lawful conditions of confinement are afforded to inmates at the Terrell County Jail. The United States further prays that this Court grant such other and further equitable relief as it may deem just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
•
States
- 5-

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/07/04 Page 6 of 7

United States Attorney Middle District of Georgia 433 Cherry St. Thomas Jefferson Building Macon, GA 31201

R.~
Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division

Chief Special Litigation Section
TAMMIr~AJA~'~ff=
Deputy Chief Special Litigation Section
CHRIST~N. CHENG DANIEL L. LOW Attorneys Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section U.S. Department of Justice 601 D Street, NW Room 5424 Washington, DC 20530 (202)514-8892

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 1 Filed 06/07/04 Page 7 of 7
®ffice of t4e j\ttornel! ®eneral
~a£'i4ington, ~J!L 20530

CERTIFICATE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

I, JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United States, certify that with regard to the foregoing Complaint, United States v. Terrell County, Georgia, I have complied with all subsections of 42 U.S.C. § 1997b(a) (1). I certify as well that I have complied with all subsections of 42 U.S.C. § 1997b(a) (2). I further certify, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997b(a) (3), my belief that this action by the United States is of general public importance and will materially further the vindication of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution of the United States.

In addition, I certify that I have the "reasonable cause to believe," set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 1997a(a), to initiate this action. Finally, I certify that all prerequisites to the initiation of this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1997, have been met.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997a(c), I have personally signed

the foregoing Complaint. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997b(b), I am

personally signing this Certificate.
-r Signed this ~ day ofY'h-:..

2004, at Washington,

D.C.

~'ASH~'- ~-
Attorney General of the United States

 
 Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 98 Filed 12/14/10 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

:

:

Plaintiff,

:

:

v.

:

:

TERRELL COUNTY, GEORGIA, et al., :

:

Defendants.

:

____________________________________:

CASE NO.: 1:04-CV-76 (WLS)

ORDER

Before the Court is th e United Sta tes’ Motion for an Order to Hold Def endants in Civil

Contempt for Violation of This Court’s Remedial Order and to Stay Termination of the Remedial

Order. (Doc. 97). At Paragraph 8 of the Mo tion, the United States requests that “[p]ending

resolution of this m otion, the United States m oves this Court to stay the term ination of the

Remedial Order.” ( Id. at 3 ¶ 8). Upon consideration of the United States’ request, the Court

finds it a ppropriate to stay term ination of the Rem edial Order pending resolution of the

substantive civil contempt motion.

Accordingly, the United States’ request for a stay found at P aragraph 8 of its Motion for

an Order to Hold Defendants in Civil Contem pt for Violation of This Court’s Remedial Order

and to Stay Term ination of the Reme dial Order (Doc. 97 at 3 ¶ 8) is GRANTED. It is hereby

ORDERED that termination of the Court’s Remedial Order of Decem ber 21, 2007 is STAYED

pending resolution of the substan tive civil contempt m otion found in the United States’ Motion

for an Order to Hold Defendants in Civil Contempt for Violation of This Court’s Remedial Order

and to Stay Term ination of the Remedial Order (D oc. 97). Pursuant to th e Local Rules of this

Court, Defendants shall file their Response to the United States’ civil contem pt m otion by

1

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 98 Filed 12/14/10 Page 2 of 2

Thursday, December 30, 2010 , unless extended by the Court or the Clerk of Court upon a timely request made according to the Local Rules.
SO ORDERED, this 14th day of December, 2010.

UNITE

/s/ W. Louis Sands_________________________ THE HONORABLE W. LOUIS SANDS,
D STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

 
 , Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 115 Filed 10/17/11 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff;
v.
TERRELL COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

No. I :04-cv-76 (WLS)

ORDER FOR ENTRY OF MODIFIED REMEDIAL ORDER Plaintiff United States and Defendants Terrell County, et al., have determined that the attached Modified Remedial Order ("Modified Order") resolves the United States' Motion for an Order To Hold Defendants in Civil Contempt, ECF No. 97, and that the relief contained in the Modified Order is based upon and suppot1ed by this Court's findings in its September 30, 2006, and Remedial Orders, ECF Nos. 63, 82, & 82-2. The Parties fU11her agree that the proposed relief is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the violations of federal rights of prisoners at the Terrell County Jail, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct those violations. The Modified Order removes substantive provisions of the Remedial Order that Defendants previously attained substantial compliance with, as well as provisions addressing conditions of confinement that have improved such that they are no longer a significant concern to the Parties. It retains provisions related to the three remaining areas of significant concern:

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 115 Filed 10/17/11 Page 2 of 2

(I) adequacy of staffing, (2) medical and mental health care, and (3) suicide prevention. The Modified Order also clarifies the Remedial Order's staffing provision by ensuring that the Jail is operated and managed by no fewer than four qualified staff members per shift stationed within the internal security perimeter of the Jail. The Modified Order also includes a revised termination provision.
Having considered the parties' Joint Motion for Entry of the Modified Remedial Order, it is hereby ORDERED that Judgment shall be entered in this matter pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Modified Order. This Court will retain jurisdiction over the case in accordance with the terms of the Modified Order.

1~.:It. d2~ SO ORDERED this

day of

,2011.

n&({.~

United States District Judge

2

 
 Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 118 Filed 07/15/14 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICrCOURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

PLAINTIFF

)

)

v.

)

)

TERRELL COUNTY, GEORGIA et al., )

DEFENDANTS

)

)

)

Civil Action No. I :04-CV-76-3(WLS)

DISMISSAL ORDER In accordance with ~ J of the October 17,2011 Modified Order ("Modified Order") by this Court (ECF No. 115), the United States of America, Terrell County, Georgia, and the Terrell County Sheriff (collectively, the "Parties") jointly moved to terminate the Modified Order and the December 24,2007 Remedial Order (ECF No. 82) governing conditions at the Terrel1 County Jail ("Jail"). The Parties also requested that the Court dismiss this action. The Parties agree that conditions at the Jail satisfy all requirements of the Modified Order, meaning the Defendants have achieved compliance with most, or all, components of each provision of the Modified Order, and have maintained such compliance for at least six months. Consistent with Paragraph J ofthe Modified Order. Therefore, it is appropriate to terminate the Modified Order and original Remedial Order.
SO ORDERED, this L~l1aay Of~20 14, the Modified Order and Remedial Order are
hereby TERMINATED and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 118 Filed 07/15/14 Page 2 of 2
Tlf~ON£~SANDS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Albany, GeOrgia~, 2014.

 
 Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 114 Filed 10/13/11 Page 1 of5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
 FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 

ALBANY DIVISION 


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff;
v.
TERRELL COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

No. 1:04-cv-76 (WLS)

JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF THE MODIFIED REMEDIAL ORDER Plaintiff United States and Defendants Terrell County, et al., having entered into an
agreement concerning the conditions of confmement at the Terrell County Jail, jointly move this Court to enter the Modified Remedial Order ("Modified Order"), attached as Exhibit A, as an Order of this Court. The Modified Order represents the Parties' joint proposed modification of the Remedial Order that this Court entered on December 21, 2007, and, if approved by this Court, resolves the United States' Motion for an Order To Hold Defendants in Civil Contempt, ECF No. 97.
The Modified Order removes substantive provisions ofthe Remedial Order that Defendants previously attained substantial compliance with, as well as provisions that have improved such that
they are no longer a significant ~oncern to the Parties. It retains provisions related to the three
remaining areas of significant concern: (1) adequacy of staffing, (2) medical and mental health care, and (3) suicide prevention. The Modified Order also clarifies the Remedial Order's staffing

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 114 Filed 10/13/11 Page 2 of 5
provision by ensuring that the Jail is operated and managed by no fewer than four qualified staff members per shift stationed within the internal security perimeter of the Jail. The Modified Order also includes a revised tennination provision.
The Parties agree that the relief contained in the Modified Order is based upon and supported by this Court's findings in its September 30, 2006, and Remedial Orders, ECF Nos. 63, 82, & 82-2, and is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the violations of federal rights of prisoners at the Terrell County Jail, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct those violations.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
THOMAS E. PEREZ Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
ROY AUSTIN Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
JONATHAN M. SMITH Section Chief Special Litigation Section
SHELLEY R. JACKSON Deputy Chief Special Litigation Section
slSamantha K Trepel
SAMANTHA K. TREPEL
DC Bar Number: 992377 TIFFANY C. AUSTIN OH Bar Number: 0083123
2 


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 114 Filed 10/13/11 Page 3 of 5
Attorneys for Plaintiff United States Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section U.S. Department of Justice 601 D. Street N.W. Washington D.C. 20004 Telephone: (202) 514-6255 Fax: (202) 514-4883 E-mail: samantha.trepel@usdoj.gov
s/ Edward Collier
EDWARD COLLIER Bar Number: 178064 Attorney for Defendant Terrell County Collier & Gamble, L.L.P. 177 South Main Street Dawson, GA 39842 Telephone: (229) 995-5657 Email: ed@colliergamble.com
s/ Leonard Danley, Sr.
LEONARD DANLEY SR. Bar Number: 204710 Attorney for Defendant Bowens Danley & Associates, P.C. 6519 Spring Street, Suite B Douglasville, GA 30134 Telephone: (770) 942-2053 Email: firm@danleylaw.net
3 


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 114 Filed 10/13/11 Page 4 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF JOINT CONSENT
I certifY that the originally executed document contains the signatures of all filers indicated herein and therefore represents consent to the filing of this document.
Respectfully submitted, s/ Samantha K Trepel Attorney for the United States
4 


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 114 Filed 10/13/11 Page 5 of 5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on October 13, 2011, I electronically filed the Joint Motion for Modification of the Remedial Order with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following: Edward Collier, Esq.
Collier & Gamble, L.L.P. 177 South Main Street Dawson, GA 39842 Attorney for Defendants Terrell County, Georgia; Wilbur T. Gamble, Jr., Chairman, Terrell County Board of Commissioners; and Larry Atherton, Sr., Lucius Holloway, Bob Rainey, Blake Varm, members, Terrell County Board of Commissioners Leonard Danley, Sr. Danley & Associates, P.C. 6519 Spring Street, Suite B Douglasville, GA 30134 Attorney for Defendant John W. Bowens
Respectfully submitted,
s/ Samantha K Trevel Attorney for the United States
5 


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 114-1 Filed 10/13/11 Page 1 of 4

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

ALBANY DIVISION 


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff;
v.
TERRELL COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

No. 1:04-cv-76 eWLS)

MODIFIED REMEDIAL ORDER 


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 114-1 Filed 10/13/11 Page 2 of 4
A. This Modified Remedial Order ("Modified Order" or "Order") is entered into between the United States and Terrell County, the members of the Terrell County Board of Commissioners in their official capacity, and the Terrell County Sheriff (collectively, "Defendants"). The Modified Order represents the parties' joint proposed modification ofthe Remedial Order that this Court entered on December 21, 2007.
B. On September 30, 2006, the Court granted the United States' motion for summary judgment finding that there was no genuine issue of material fact concerning whether the conditions at the Terrell County Jail violated the Constitution. On December 21, 2007, the Court issued a Remedial Order setting forth measures Defendants were required to undertake to ensure constitutional conditions of confinement at the Terrell County Jail.
C. Since the Court entered its Remedial Order, Defendants have made progress in remedying some of the conditions at the Terrell County Jail and, significantly, have built a new facility that meets minimum constitutional standards.
D. In recognition of Defendants' progress, and to facilitate the creation of constitutional conditions at the Terrell County Jail, the parties thus jointly move this Court to modify its Remedial Order as set forth in this proposed Order.
E. The Effective Date of this Order shall be the date that the UnitedStates District Court for the Middle District of Georgia enters an order adopting this Order as a modification to this Court's Remedial Order, dated December 21, 2007.
F. By sixth months from the Effective Date of the Modified Order, Defendants shall achieve substantial compliance with the following substantive provisions contained in the Remedial Order:
1. IILA.1 2. IILA.2 3. IV.A.16 4. IV.A.17 5. IV.A.18 6. IV.A.19 7. IV.B.21 8. IV.B.22 9. IV.B.23 10. IV.B.24 11.IV.B.25 12. IV.B.26 13. IV.B.27 14. IV.B.28 15. IV.C.29 16. IV.C.30 17. IV.C.31
2 


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 114-1 Filed 10/13/11 Page 3 of 4
18. IV.C.32 19. IV.D.33 20. IV.D.34 21. IV.D.35 22. IV.D.37 23. IV.E.39 24. IV.E.40 25. IV.E.41 26. IV.F.42 27. IV.F.43 28. IV.F.44 29. V.45 30. V.46 31. V.47 32. V.48 33. V.49 34. V.50 35. V.5l 36. V.52 37. V.53 38. VIII.70 39. VII1.71 40. VIII.72 41. VIII.73
G. The following text will replace the language contained in Paragraph III.A.l of the Remedial Order:
Defendants shall ensure that the facility is operated and managed by adequate qualified staff. Defendants assert that 18 full-time jailers, one part time jailer, and a Jail Administrator is sufficient to staff the Jail. The Jail will be operated and managed by no fewer than four qualified staff members per shift stationed within the internal security perimeter of the Jail.
H. The paragraphs listed in Sections F and/through G above shall collectively be referred to as the Retained Paragraphs.
I. All parties stipulate to the dismissal of the remaining provisions contained in Parts III through IX of the Remedial Order.
J. Consistent with the Prison Litigation Reform Act and federal law, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia shall have continuing jurisdiction over enforcement of this Modified Order and the Remedial Order as modified by this Order until Defendants maintain substantial compliance with each and every term ofthe Modified Order for a period of six months, at which time both the Modified Order and Remedial Order shall terminate, and the case will be dismissed. Defendants shall submit
3 


Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 114-1 Filed 10/13/11 Page 4 of 4
quarterly compliance reports to the United States, beginning January 1,2012. The quarterly reports shall be filed 15 days after the termination of each three-month period thereafter until this Order is terminated. Each compliance report shall describe the actions Defendants have taken during the reporting period to implement this Order, and the Remedial Order as modified by this Order, and shall make specific reference to the provisions being implemented. With each compliance report, Defendants shall provide all supporting documentation evidencing compliance and actions taken during the reporting period. Within 30 days of receiving Defendants' compliance report, the United States shall provide written evaluation of Defendants' compliance. If the United States needs additional information to determine compliance, it will notify Defendants within 30 days and take necessary steps to obtain the information. In the event of a disagreement about compliance that the parties cannot resolve, either party may request a hearing with the Court. This paragraph modifies Paragraphs X.A.79 and X.A.80 of the Remedial Order. K. The modified prospective relief in this Order is based upon and supported by this Court's findings in its September 30, 2006, and Remedial Orders, and is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the violations of federal rights of prisoners at the Terrell County Jail, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct those violations.
SO ORDERED this _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ _ _, 2011.
HONORABLE W. LOUIS SANDS United States District Judge
4 


 
 Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 1 of 10
U.S. District Court [LIVE AREA] Middle District of Georgia (Albany) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:04−cv−00076−WLS

United States v. Terrell County, GA, et al Assigned to: U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS Demand: $0 Cause: 28:1345 USA Plaintiff
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 06/07/2004 Date Terminated: 08/22/2008 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

represented by Christopher Cheng 601 D Street, NW − Room 5424 U.S. Department of Justice Washington, DC 20530 202−514−8892 Email: christopher.cheng@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Daniel H. Weiss U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section 601 D. Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 202−616−6594 Email: daniel.weiss@usdoj.gov TERMINATED: 01/04/2011 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Kerry Krentler Dean U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 202−514−1841 Fax: 202−514−4883 Email: kerry.k.dean@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sandhya L. Subramanian 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW U.S. Dept. of Justice, Civil Rights Division Washington, DC 20530 202−616−9017 Email: sandhya.subramanian@usdoj.gov TERMINATED: 11/15/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Todd J. Schneider U.S. Department of Justice Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 202−616−9958 Fax: FAX 202−514−6903 Email: todd.j.schneider@usdoj.gov

Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 2 of 10
TERMINATED: 04/05/2007 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
SHELLEY R JACKSON US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 601 D ST NW WASHINGTON, DC 20004 202−305−3373 Email: shelley.jackson@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Samantha Trepel 601 D ST NW RM 5516 WASHINGTON, DC 20005 202−305−3204 Fax: 202−514−0212 Email: samantha.trepel@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant TERRELL COUNTY GEORGIA
Defendant Wilbur T. Gamble, Jr. Chairman, Terrell County Board of Commissioners Defendant John W. Bowens
Defendant Larry Atherton, Sr.
Defendant Lucius Holloway
Defendant Bob Rainey

represented by Edward R. Collier P.O. Box 577 Dawson, GA 31742 229−995−5657 Email: ed@colliergamble.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Edward R. Collier (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Leonard Danley 6519 Spring St. Douglasville, GA 30134 770−942−2053 Email: firm@danleylaw.net LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Edward R. Collier (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Edward R. Collier (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Edward R. Collier (See above for address)

Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 3 of 10

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant Blake Vann

represented by Edward R. Collier (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 06/07/2004
06/14/2004 06/18/2004 06/18/2004 06/18/2004 06/18/2004 06/18/2004 06/18/2004 06/18/2004 07/22/2004 08/06/2004
08/09/2004 08/16/2004 08/16/2004 08/23/2004 08/23/2004
08/30/2004 09/17/2004

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT filed; Service of Complaint due by 10/5/04 for Blake Vann, for Bob Rainey, for Lucius Holloway, for Larry Atherton Sr., for John W. Bowens, for Wilbur T. Gamble Jr., for Terrell County, GA (kme) (Entered: 06/08/2004)
Case referred to ARBITRATION (trh) (Entered: 06/14/2004)
2 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed as to Terrell County, GA 6/8/04 . Answer due on 8/9/04 for Terrell County, GA (kme) (Entered: 06/22/2004)
3 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed as to Wilbur T. Gamble Jr. 6/8/04. Answer due on 8/9/04 for Wilbur T. Gamble Jr. (kme) (Entered: 06/22/2004)
4 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed as to John W. Bowens 6/8/04 . Answer due on 8/9/04 for John W. Bowens (kme) (Entered: 06/22/2004)
5 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed as to Larry Atherton Sr. 6/8/04. Answer due on 8/9/04 for Larry Atherton Sr. (kme) (Entered: 06/22/2004)
6 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed as to Lucius Holloway 6/8/04 . Answer due on 8/9/04 for Lucius Holloway (kme) (Entered: 06/22/2004)
7 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed as to Bob Rainey 6/8/04. Answer due on 8/9/04 for Bob Rainey (kme) (Entered: 06/22/2004)
8 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed as to Blake Vann 6/8/04. Answer due on 8/9/04 for Blake Vann (kme) (Entered: 06/22/2004)
9 NOTICE of attorney appearance for United States by Todd J. Schneider (kme) (Entered: 07/29/2004)
10 ANSWER to Complaint by Terrell County, GA, Wilbur T. Gamble Jr., Larry Atherton Sr., Lucius Holloway, Bob Rainey, Blake Vann (Attorney Edward R. Collier) (kme) (Entered: 08/06/2004)
11 ANSWER to Complaint by John W. Bowens (Attorney Leonard Danley) (kme) (Entered: 08/11/2004)
12 RULES 16 AND 26 ORDER; proposed scheduling/discovery order due on 9/24/04 . ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (kme) (Entered: 08/16/2004)
DEADLINE updated; Set Scheduling Conference for 3:30 on 10/5/04 in Albany (kme) (Entered: 08/16/2004)
13 ELECTION not to proceed before a Magistrate Judge by United States (kme) (Entered: 08/23/2004)
14 ELECTION not to proceed before a Magistrate Judge by Terrell County, GA, Wilbur T. Gamble Jr., Larry Atherton Sr., Lucius Holloway, Bob Rainey, Blake Vann (kme) (Entered: 08/23/2004)
ARBITRATION LETTER mailed. Parties to opt−out of arbitration by 9/27/04 (trh) (Entered: 08/30/2004)
Proposed Scheduling/Discovery Order Received (wks ) Modified on 2/22/2005 (wks, ). (This proposed order was docketed in wrong case when received due to document referencing incorrect case number). (Entered: 02/22/2005)

Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 4 of 10

09/24/2004 09/27/2004 10/19/2004 10/27/2004 11/01/2004
11/02/2004 11/05/2004 12/10/2004 01/11/2005
01/24/2005
01/24/2005
01/28/2005 02/04/2005 02/08/2005 02/14/2005 02/14/2005 03/04/2005
03/29/2005
04/04/2005
04/19/2005 05/09/2005
05/09/2005

15 ORDER to reschedule conference reset Scheduling Conference for 3:30 on 10/19/04 ( signed by Judge W. L. Sands ) (jbk) (Entered: 09/24/2004)
Case no longer referred to ARBITRATION. (trh) (Entered: 09/27/2004)
17 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge W. Louis Sands : Scheduling Conference held on 10/19/2004. (wks, ) (Entered: 11/01/2004)
16 NOTICE by United States of America (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 10/27/2004)
19 Scheduling/Discovery Order: Amended Pleadings due by 11/18/2004. Discovery to be complete by 4/5/2005. Dispositive Motions due by 5/5/2005.. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 10/29/04. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(wks, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 2/22/2005 (wks, ). (Entered: 11/04/2004)
18 Letter regarding alternative dispute resolution. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(wks, ) (Entered: 11/02/2004)
20 Letter stating that defendant Bowens would be willing to enter into ADR. (bjl) (Entered: 11/09/2004)
21 STIPULATION by United States of America. (Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 12/10/2004)
22 MOTION to Stay Application of 20−20−20 Rule by United States of America filed by Todd J. Schneider. Response to Motion due by 2/3/2005 Reply to Response to Motion due by 2/22/2005. (Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 01/11/2005)
23 ORDER granting 22 Motion to Stay Application of 20−20−20 Rule. Accordingly, the USA shall have until and including 1/31/05 to file motion to compel, if any. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 1/21/05. (wks, ) (Entered: 01/24/2005)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE − I certify that on this date I have mailed by United States Postal Service a copy of 23 Order on Motion to Stay including any attachments filed with this document to all non−CM/ECF participants as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. By Wanda K. Sanders, Deputy Clerk. (wks, ) (Entered: 01/24/2005)
24 NOTICE by United States of America (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 01/28/2005)
25 NOTICE by United States of America (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 02/04/2005)
26 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Chief Judge W. Louis Sands : Telephone Conference held on 2/7/2005 to discuss discovery issue. (gpg) (Entered: 02/08/2005)
27 NOTICE by United States of America (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 02/14/2005)
28 NOTICE by United States of America (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 02/14/2005)
29 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by United States of America filed by Christopher Cheng. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Order to Extend Time)(Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 03/04/2005)
30 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by United States of America filed by Christopher Cheng. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 03/29/2005)
31 ORDER granting 30 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery Discovery to be complete by 8/5/2005. Dispositive Motions due by 9/5/2005. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 4/4/2005. (wks, ) (Entered: 04/05/2005)
32 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Todd J. Schneider on behalf of United States of America (Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 04/19/2005)
33 ORDER granting 29 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery (For Additional Time to Produce Export Reports) Status Report for parties to advise the Court of the status of Defendant's document production due by 7/11/2005.. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 5/6/05. (wks, ) (Entered: 05/09/2005)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE − I certify that on this date I have mailed by United States Postal Service a copy of 33 Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery, including any attachments filed with this document to all non−CM/ECF

Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 5 of 10

05/12/2005 07/07/2005 07/07/2005 07/08/2005
08/16/2005 09/02/2005 09/07/2005 10/05/2005 10/28/2005 11/01/2005
11/07/2005 11/09/2005 11/14/2005

participants as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. By Wanda K. Sanders, Deputy Clerk. (wks, ) (Entered: 05/09/2005)
34 NOTICE by United States of America (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 05/12/2005)
35 NOTICE by United States of America (Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 07/07/2005)
36 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by United States of America filed by Todd J. Schneider. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 07/07/2005)
37 ORDER granting 36 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. Discovery to be complete by 10/5/2005. Dispositive Motions due by 11/5/2005. Tentative trial date is January or February 2006.. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 7/8/05. (wks, ) (Entered: 07/08/2005)
38 STIPULATION by United States of America. (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 08/16/2005)
39 MOTION to Amend/Correct by United States of America filed by Todd J. Schneider. Response to Motion due by 9/26/2005 Reply to Response to Motion due by 10/12/2005. (Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 09/02/2005)
40 ORDER granting 39 Motion to Amend/Correct Discovery & Scheduling Order. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 9/6/05. (wks ) (Entered: 09/07/2005)
41 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by United States of America filed by Todd J. Schneider. (Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 10/05/2005)
42 STIPULATION by United States of America. (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 10/28/2005)
43 ORDER granting 41 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. Discovery to be complete by 10/11/2005; Dispositive Motions due by 11/14/2005 and Jury Trial set tentatively for January 2006. The Clerk is not authorized to grant any extensions to the above schedule for filing dispositive motions. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 11/1/05. (Nunc pro tunc 10/5/05) (bjl ) (Entered: 11/02/2005)
44 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages for Motion for Summary Judgment by United States of America filed by Todd J. Schneider. (Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 11/07/2005)
45 ORDER granting 44 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages . Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 11/8/05. (bjl) (Entered: 11/09/2005)
46 MOTION for Summary Judgment by United States of America filed by Todd J. Schneider. Response to Motion due by 12/7/2005 Reply to Response to Motion due by 12/27/2005. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum of Law# 2 Statement of Undisputed Material Facts# 3 Exhibit Notice Regarding Exhibit Attachments)(Schneider, Todd) (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/11/2014: # 4 Exhibit List, # 5 Exhibit 1 − Declaration of William H. Kerbin, # 6 Exhibit 2 − Parties Stipulation, # 7 Exhibit A − Answer, # 8 Exhibit B − Answer, # 9 Exhibit C Part 1 − Deposition of Wilbur T. gamble, # 10 Exhibit C Part 2 − Deposition of Wilbur T. Gamble, # 11 Exhibit C Part 3 − Deposition of Wilbur T. Gamble, # 12 Exhibit C Part 4 − Deposition of Wilbur T. Gamble, # 13 Exhibit C Part 5 − Deposition of Wilbur T. Gamble, # 14 Exhibit C Part 6 − Deposition of Wilbur T. Gamble) (bcl). (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/11/2014: # 15 Exhibit D Part 1 − Deposition of Sheriff John Bowens, # 16 Exhibit D Part 2 − Deposition of Sheriff John Bowens, # 17 Exhibit D Part 3 − Deposition of Sheriff John Bowens, # 18 Exhibit D Part 4 − Deposition of Sheriff John Bowens, # 19 Exhibit D Part 5 − Deposition of Sheriff John Bowens, # 20 Cover Letter D Part 6 − Deposition of Sheriff John Bowens, # 21 Exhibit E − Amended Answers to REquests for Admissions, # 22 Exhibit F − Response to Plaintiff's Request for Admission, # 23 Exhibit G − Deposition of John Southern (Excerpts)) (bcl). (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/11/2014: # 24 Exhibit H Part 1 − Deposition of Willie Hood, # 25 Exhibit H Part 2 − Deposition of Willie Hood, # 26 Exhibit H Part 3 − Deposition of Willie Hood, # 27 Exhibit H Part 4 − Deposition of Willie Hood, # 28 Exhibit H Part 5 − Deposition of Willie Hood, # 29 Exhibit H Part 6 − Deposition of Willie Hood, # 30 Exhibit H Part 7 − Deposition of Willie Hood, # 31 Envelope H Part 8 − Deposition of

Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 6 of 10

11/14/2005 11/14/2005 11/22/2005 11/29/2005
12/06/2005
01/04/2006

Willie Hood) (bcl). (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/11/2014: # 32 Exhibit I Part 1 − Deposition of Alfred Dowdell, # 33 Exhibit I Part 2 − Deposition of Alfred Dowdell, # 34 Exhibit I Part 3 − Deposition of Alfred Dowdell, # 35 Exhibit J Part 1 − Deposition of Charlotte Law, # 36 Exhibit J Part 2 − Deposition of Charlotte Law, # 37 Exhibit J Part 3 − Deposition of Charlotte Law, # 38 Exhibit K Part 1 − Deposition of Sandra Walker, # 39 Exhibit K Part 2 − Deposition of Sandra Walker, # 40 Exhibit K Part 3 − Deposition of Sandra Walker) (bcl). (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/12/2014: # 41 Exhibit L Part 1 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger, # 42 Exhibit L Part 2 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger, # 43 Exhibit L Part 3 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger, # 44 Exhibit L Part 4 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger, # 45 Exhibit L Part 5 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger, # 46 Exhibit L Part 6 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger, # 47 Exhibit L Part 7 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger) (bcl). Modified on 8/12/2014 (bcl). (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/12/2014: # 48 Exhibit L Part 8 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger, # 49 Exhibit L Part 9 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger, # 50 Exhibit L Part 10 − Declaration of Dr. Robert Greifinger) (bcl). (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/12/2014: # 51 Exhibit M − Deposition of Jailer Calvin Buchanan (excerpts), # 52 Envelope N Part 1 − Declaration of Steve Martin, # 53 Exhibit N Part 2 − Declaration of Steve Martin, # 54 Exhibit N Part 3 − Declaration of Steve Martin, # 55 Exhibit N Part 4 − Declaration of Steve Martin, # 56 Exhibit O − Deposition of Jailer Sandra Mitchell (excerpts), # 57 Exhibit P − Deposition of EMS Director James Hamby, # 58 Exhibit Q − Deposition of Jailer Brenda Dale (excerpts), # 59 Exhibit R Part 1 − Declaration of Leonard Rice, # 60 Envelope R Part 2 −Declaration of Leonard Rice, # 61 Exhibit R Part 3 − Declaration of Leonard Rice, # 62 Exhibit R Part 4 − Declaration of Leonard Rice) (bcl). (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/13/2014: # 63 Exhibit S Part 1 − Declaration of Wayne Carson, # 64 Exhibit S Part 2 − Declaration of Wayne Carson, # 65 Exhibit S Part 3 − Declaration of Wayne Carson, # 66 Exhibit T − Deposition of Jailer Annie Ruth Laster (excerpts), # 67 Exhibit U − Deposition of Jailer Clifford Johnson (excerpts), # 68 Exhibit V − Deposition of Jailer Catherine Minter, # 69 Exhibit W − Deposition of Helen Price, # 70 Exhibit X − Deposition of ELizabeth Brimberry (excerpts), # 71 Exhibit Y − Deposition of Jailer Iri Pittman (excerpts), # 72 Exhibit Z − Deposition of Dr. Miles Ellis (excerpts)) (bcl). (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/13/2014: # 73 Exhibit AA − Deposition of Julie Oliver (excerpts), # 74 Exhibit BB − Deposition of Jailer Leila Murphy, # 75 Exhibit CC − Deposition of Jailer Lillian Tooley (excerpts), # 76 Exhibit DD Part 1 − United States' Correspondence and Expert Reports, # 77 Exhibit DD Part 2 − United States' Correspondence and Expert Reports, # 78 Exhibit DD Part 3 − United States' Correspondence and Expert Reports, # 79 Exhibit EE − List of Referenced Inmates, # 80 Exhibit FF − Official Certifications for all Deposition Transcripts) (bcl). (Entered: 11/14/2005)
47 MOTION to Seal by United States of America filed by Todd J. Schneider. Response to Motion due by 12/7/2005 Reply to Response to Motion due by 12/27/2005. (Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 11/14/2005)
48 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Christopher Cheng on behalf of United States of America (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 11/14/2005)
49 ORDER granting 47 Motion to Seal Exhibits. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 11/22/05. (wks ) (Entered: 11/23/2005)
50 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Defendant John Bowens and Terrell County Commissioners Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and Time for Plaintiff to Reply Thereto by John W. Bowens filed by Leonard Danley. (Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 11/29/2005)
51 ORDER granting re 50 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Defendant John Bowens and Terrell County Commissioners Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and Time for Plaintiff to Reply Thereto. Response to Motion due by 1/4/2006. Reply to Response to Motion due by 1/24/2006.Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 12/5/05. (wks ) (Entered: 12/07/2005)
52 RESPONSE filed by Terrell County, Georgia, Wilbur T. Gamble, Jr, Larry Atherton, Sr, Lucius Holloway, Bob Rainey, Blake Vann re 46 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Collier, Edward) (Entered: 01/04/2006)

Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 7 of 10

01/04/2006 01/09/2006 01/10/2006
01/23/2006 01/23/2006 01/25/2006 01/26/2006 02/03/2006
02/15/2006
07/12/2006 09/30/2006 02/20/2007 02/26/2007 02/26/2007 04/02/2007 04/02/2007 04/02/2007 04/05/2007 04/23/2007 08/02/2007

53 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 46 MOTION for Summary Judgment by John W. Bowens filed by Leonard Danley. (Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 01/04/2006)
54 RESPONSE filed by John W. Bowens re 46 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Attachments: # 1 # 2)(Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 01/09/2006)
55 ORDER granting 53 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 46 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Response to Motion due by 1/9/2006. Reply to Response to Motion due by 1/30/2006. Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 1/10/06 nunc pro tunc 1/9/06. (bjl ) (Entered: 01/10/2006)
56 REPLY to Response filed by United States of America re 46 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Attachments: # 1)(Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 01/23/2006)
57 REPLY to Response filed by United States of America re 46 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 01/23/2006)
58 AFFIDAVIT in Opposition filed by John W. Bowens re 46 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 01/25/2006)
59 Notice of Error in Filing (related document(s): 58 Affidavit in Opposition to Motion filed by John W. Bowens ). (wks ) (Entered: 01/26/2006)
60 MOTION for Leave to File Affidavit and Exhibit to Defendant John Bowens Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment by John W. Bowens filed by Leonard Danley. Response to Motion due by 2/27/2006. Reply to Response to Motion due by 3/15/2006. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Affidavit of John Wesley Bowens# 2 Exhibit December 12, 2005 Policy)(Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 02/03/2006)
61 RESPONSE filed by United States of America re 60 MOTION for Leave to File Affidavit and Exhibit to Defendant John Bowens Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit U.S. Request for Production of Documents# 2 Exhibit Sheriff Letter)(Schneider, Todd) (Entered: 02/15/2006)
62 ORDER denying 60 Motion for Leave to File . Signed by Judge W. Louis Sands on 7/12/06. (wks ) (Entered: 07/13/2006)
63 ORDER granting 46 Motion for Summary Judgment . Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 9/29/06. (bjl ) (Entered: 09/30/2006)
64 Letter regarding scheduling. (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 02/20/2007)
65 ORDER directing parties to file simultaneous briefs on all appropriate remedial issues by 4/2/07; reply briefs to be filed by 4/23/07. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 2/26/07. (jbk, ) (Entered: 02/26/2007)
66 Letter from Christopher N. Cheng dated 2/20/07 re scheduling in the case. (jbk, ) (Entered: 03/01/2007)
67 BRIEF filed by United States of America re 65 Order. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order # 2 Certificate of Service)(Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 04/02/2007)
68 NOTICE Withdrawal of Counsel Todd Schneider by United States of America (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 04/02/2007)
69 BRIEF Defendant Terrell County, Georgia's Brief Concerning Remedial Issues filed by Terrell County, Georgia re 65 Order. (Collier, Edward) (Entered: 04/02/2007)
70 ORDER approving 68 Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel of Todd Schneider filed by United States of America, . Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 4/5/07. (jbk, ) (Entered: 04/05/2007)
71 BRIEF in Reply to County Brief filed by United States of America re 69 Brief. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 04/23/2007)
72 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to the Court's February 26, 2007 Order. by John W. Bowens filed by Leonard Danley. (Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 08/02/2007)

Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 8 of 10

08/02/2007
08/06/2007
08/07/2007 08/07/2007
08/08/2007 08/08/2007
08/27/2007
11/26/2007 11/29/2007 12/21/2007 09/23/2008 04/16/2009 04/28/2009 05/01/2009 05/13/2009
06/17/2009
06/26/2009 07/15/2009 07/21/2009
08/13/2009 10/26/2009 11/24/2009

73 MEMORANDUM in Support filed by John W. Bowens re: 72 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to the Court's February 26, 2007 Order. (Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 08/02/2007)
74 ORDER granting 72 Motion to Allow Defendant Bowens to Respond to the Court's February 26, 2007 Order Out of Time; opposing counsel to file reply by 8/17/07. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 8/6/07. (jbk) (Entered: 08/06/2007)
75 Letter regarding Order of August 6, 2007 (Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 08/07/2007)
76 RESPONSE filed by United States of America re 72 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to the Court's February 26, 2007 Order. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 08/07/2007)
77 Notice of Error in Filing (related document(s): 76 Response to Motion filed by United States of America ). (wks) (Entered: 08/08/2007)
78 RESPONSE filed by United States of America re 72 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to the Court's February 26, 2007 Order. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service (corrected filing)# 2 Exhibit A)(Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 08/08/2007)
79 AMENDED ORDER that Defendant Bowen's Amended Motion for relief is granted; said relief as granted in the Court's previous order remains in full force and effect re 74 Order on Motion for Extension of Time (Misc), 75 Letter [Amended Motion]. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 8/27/07. (jbk) (Entered: 08/27/2007)
80 Letter regarding status conference (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 11/26/2007)
81 Letter from Attorney Cheng requesting telephone conference (wks) (Entered: 11/30/2007)
82 ORDER regarding remedial issues. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 12/21/07. (Attachments: # 1 (Proposed) Order)(wks) (Entered: 12/24/2007)
83 ORDER that the captioned case be administratively closed until further order of the court. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 9/23/08. (wks) (Entered: 09/24/2008)
84 MOTION to Amend/Correct 82 Order by Terrell County, Georgia filed by Edward R. Collier.(Collier, Edward) (Entered: 04/16/2009)
85 RESPONSE filed by United States of America re 84 MOTION to Amend/Correct 82 Order (Cheng, Christopher) (Entered: 04/28/2009)
86 RESPONSE filed by John W. Bowens re 84 MOTION to Amend/Correct 82 Order (Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 05/01/2009)
87 NOTICE of Hearing on Motion 84 MOTION to Amend/Correct 82 Order : Motion Hearing set for 6/17/2009 10:30 AM in Albany before Judge W. Louis Sands. (jbk) (Entered: 05/13/2009)
88 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge W. Louis Sands: Motion Hearing [via telephone] held on 6/17/2009 re 84 MOTION to Amend/Correct 82 Order filed by Terrell County, Georgia (jbk) (Entered: 06/17/2009)
89 ORDER granting−in−part 84 Motion to Amend/CorrectOrdered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 6/25/09 (wks) (Entered: 06/26/2009)
90 MOTION to Amend/Correct by Terrell County, Georgia filed by Edward R. Collier.(Collier, Edward) (Entered: 07/15/2009)
91 RESPONSE filed by United States of America re 90 MOTION to Amend/Correct (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A: 10−22−08 Compliance Letter, # 2 Exhibit B: 7−2−09 Compliance Letter)(Dean, Kerry) (Entered: 07/21/2009)
92 Letter regarding Schedule a phone conference (Collier, Edward) (Entered: 08/13/2009)
93 ORDER granting 90 Motion to Amend/Correct. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 10/26/09, nunc pro tunc 7/15/2009. (wks) (Entered: 10/26/2009)
94 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Samantha Trepel on behalf of United States of America (Trepel, Samantha) (Entered: 11/24/2009)

Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 9 of 10

04/06/2010 04/06/2010 12/09/2010
12/14/2010
12/28/2010 12/29/2010
12/29/2010 01/04/2011 01/04/2011 01/04/2011 01/06/2011 01/13/2011 01/27/2011
08/30/2011 09/02/2011 09/09/2011
09/29/2011 09/30/2011 10/03/2011

95 NOTICE of Leave of Absence by Attorney Leonard Danley, Sr. (bcl) (Entered: 04/06/2010)
96 Letter from Clerk's Office regarding Leave of Absence to Attorney Leonard Danley. (bcl) (Entered: 04/06/2010)
97 MOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 Order by United States of America filed by Samantha Trepel. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit Exhibit F, # 8 Exhibit Exhibit G, # 9 Exhibit Exhibit H, # 10 Exhibit Exhibit I)(Trepel, Samantha) (Entered: 12/09/2010)
98 ORDER staying the termination of the Court's Remedial Order of December 21, 2007 pending resolution of the substantive civil contempt motion found in 97 MOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 Order, filed by United States of America. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 12/14/2010. (bcl) (Entered: 12/14/2010)
99 MOTION for Extension of Time to File by Terrell County, Georgia filed by Edward R. Collier.(Collier, Edward) (Entered: 12/28/2010)
100 ORDER granting 99 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 97 MOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 OrderMOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 Order. Response due by 1/13/2011. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 12/28/2010 (bcl) (Entered: 12/29/2010)
101 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by United States of America filed by Samantha Trepel.(Trepel, Samantha) (Entered: 12/29/2010)
102 RESPONSE filed by John W. Bowens re 97 MOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 OrderMOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 Order (Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 01/04/2011)
103 MOTION for Leave to File Response to the Court's Order Out of Time by John W. Bowens filed by Leonard Danley.(Danley, Leonard) (Entered: 01/04/2011)
104 ORDER granting 101 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Daniel H. Weiss terminated. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 1/3/2011 (bcl) (Entered: 01/04/2011)
105 ORDER granting 103 Motion for Leave to File Response to the Court's Order Out of Time. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 1/6/2011 (bcl) (Entered: 01/06/2011)
106 RESPONSE filed by Terrell County, Georgia re 97 MOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 OrderMOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 Order (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit)(Collier, Edward) (Entered: 01/13/2011)
107 REPLY to Response filed by United States of America re 97 MOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 OrderMOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 Order (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Attachment 1, # 2 Exhibit Attachment 2)(Trepel, Samantha) (Entered: 01/27/2011)
108 NOTICE of Hearing on Motion 97 MOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 OrderMOTION Civil contempt and stay re 82 Order : Motion Hearing set for 9/9/2011 10:00 AM in Albany before Judge W. Louis Sands. (tmm) (Entered: 08/30/2011)
110 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge W. Louis Sands: In Chambers Conference held on 9/2/2011 (jbk) (Entered: 09/12/2011)
109 ORDER granting continuance requested via telephonic conference on 9/2/2011 re 108 Notice of Hearing on Motion. The evidentiary hearing re Doc. 97 will be continued to 10/21/2011 @ 10:00 am. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 9/9/2011. (bcl) (Entered: 09/09/2011)
111 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by SHELLEY R JACKSON on behalf of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (JACKSON, SHELLEY) (Entered: 09/29/2011)
112 Notice of Error in Filing (related document(s): 111 Notice of Attorney Appearance filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ). (bcl) (Entered: 09/30/2011)
113 CORRECTED NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by SHELLEY R JACKSON on behalf of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (JACKSON, SHELLEY) (Entered:

Case 1:04-cv-76 As of: 01/12/2018 11:46 AM EST 10 of 10

10/13/2011
10/17/2011 10/17/2011 01/30/2012 07/11/2014
07/15/2014

10/03/2011)
114 MOTION Entry of the Modified Remedial Order by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA filed by Samantha Trepel. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Trepel, Samantha) (Entered: 10/13/2011)
115 ORDER granting 114 Motion for Entry of Modified Remedial Order. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 10/14/2011 (bcl) (Entered: 10/17/2011)
NOTICE TO COUNSEL: re 109 Order − the hearing scheduled for 10/21/11 has been CANCELLED. (jbk) (Entered: 10/17/2011)
116 ORDER finding as moot 97 Motion.Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 1/30/2012 (bcl) (Entered: 01/30/2012)
117 MOTION to Dismiss Case and Terminate Remedial Orders −− Joint by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA filed by Kerry Krentler Dean. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Dean, Kerry) (Entered: 07/11/2014)
118 ORDER granting 117 Motion to Dismiss. The Modified Order and Remedial Order are hereby terminated and this case is dismissed with prejudice. Ordered by U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS on 7/15/2014. (bcl) (Entered: 07/15/2014)

 
 Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 117 Filed 07/11/14 Page 1 of 6

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

PLAINTIFF

)

)

v.

)

)

TERRELL COUNTY, GEORGIA et al., )

DEFENDANTS

)

)

________________________________ )

Civil Action No. 1:04-CV-76-3(WLS)

PARTIES’ JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE REMEDIAL ORDER AND MODIFIED ORDER AND FOR DISMISSAL
In accordance with ¶ J of the October 17, 2011 Modified Order (“Modified Order”) by this Court (ECF No. 115), the United States of America, Terrell County, Georgia, and the Terrell County Sheriff (collectively, the “Parties”) jointly move to terminate the Modified Order and the December 24, 2007 Remedial Order (ECF No. 82) governing conditions at the Terrell County Jail (“Jail”). The Parties also respectfully request that the Court dismiss this action. In support of their motion, the Parties state:
1. On October 3, 1994, the United States sent a letter to Terrell County, Georgia and the Terrell County Sheriff (“Defendants”) notifying them of its intention to investigate the Jail pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act. 42 U.S.C. § 1997 (“CRIPA”). On June 1, 1995, the United States issued its findings letter that identified conditions at Jail that deprived inmates of rights, privileges or immunities protected by the Constitution. As these conditions remained unremedied and the Parties were unable to reach a settlement, the United States filed suit pursuant to CRIPA on June 7, 2004, alleging unconstitutional conditions due to

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 117 Filed 07/11/14 Page 2 of 6
deficiencies in the areas of protection from harm, medical care, mental health care, environmental health and safety, and fire safety.
2. On November 14, 2005, the United States filed its Motion for Summary Judgment. On September 29, 2006, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the United States and found “no genuine issue of material fact concerning whether the conditions at the Terrell County Jail are unconstitutional” and a “violation of the inmates’ rights to be free from serious risks of harm while incarcerated at the Terrell County Jail.” United States v. Terrell County, 457 F.Supp.2d 1359 (M.D. Ga. 2006) (ECF No. 63). The Court found that federal law required relief on all claims alleged in the United States’ complaint. Id.at 1368-69.
3. On December 24, 2007, the Court entered a Remedial Order, which covered: (1) correctional issues, including adequate staffing to ensure proper supervision of inmates to provide reasonable safety at the facility; (2) medical and mental health care; (3) suicide prevention; (4) quality assurance; (5) policies and procedures; and (6) providing a constitutionally sound facility to house inmates. The Remedial Order required Defendants to implement most of the necessary reforms within 180 days after the December 24, 2007 effective date.
4. On December 9, 2010, the United States filed for contempt. The United States alleged that Defendants had failed to achieve substantial compliance with fifty-five of the Remedial Order’s seventy-three substantive provisions and could not reach full and sustained compliance with the Remedial Order before its bright line termination date of December 21, 2010. Accordingly, the United States asked the Court find Defendants in civil contempt and amend the Remedial Order to: (1) replace the brightline expiration date with a provision requiring substantial compliance with all provisions of the Remedial Order; (2) require specific

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 117 Filed 07/11/14 Page 3 of 6
performance of each provision of the Remedial Order within six months after entry of the amended order; and (3) require Defendants to operate the Jail with no fewer than twenty-two full-time, qualified Jailers to ensure adequate supervision and safety.
5. The Parties negotiated to resolve the United States’ motion for contempt and jointly proposed the Modified Order to the Court. On October 17, 2011, the Court entered the Modified Order.
6. The Modified Order: (1) removed those provisions of the Remedial Order with which the Defendants had achieved substantial compliance; (2) retained provisions related to adequate staffing, medical and mental health care, and suicide prevention; (3) included a requirement that the Jail be operated and managed by no fewer than four qualified staff members per shift, stationed within the internal security perimeter of the Jail; and (4) replaced the brightline termination with a substantial compliance requirement (¶ J).
7. Paragraph J of the Modified Order reads: Consistent with the Prison Litigation Reform Act and federal law, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia shall have continuing jurisdiction over enforcement of this Modified Order and the Remedial Order as modified by this Order until Defendants maintain substantial compliance with each and every term of the Modified Order for a period of six months, at which time both the Modified Order and Remedial Order shall terminate, and the case will be dismissed.
8. Following entry of the Modified Order, the Defendants made steady progress toward compliance. The United States received quarterly compliance reports from Defendants and monitored Defendants’ compliance through review of those reports, supporting documentation, and a March 2013 compliance tour of the Jail. Increased staffing and stable management enabled the Sheriff to ensure adequate supervision at the Jail. The County entered into and maintained a contract with a private, regional provider for correctional medical and mental health

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 117 Filed 07/11/14 Page 4 of 6
care. After consultation with the United States and its medical expert, the medical provider implemented appropriate policies, hired sufficient qualified staff, and began providing adequate and consistent care at the Jail.
9. The United States conducted its final compliance tour of the Jail in March of 2013, with an expert in correctional medical and mental health care. At that time, the United States found the Defendants in substantial compliance with all but a few select provisions related to medication administration and continuity. The United States continued to monitor compliance through document request and review.
10. On February 7, 2014, the United States sent a Response to Defendants’ Eighth Compliance Report under the Modified Order. Based on the United States’ review of the documents included with the Defendants’ Eighth Compliance Report, the United States concluded that conditions at the Jail satisfy all requirements of the Modified Order, meaning the Defendants have achieved compliance with most, or all, components of each provision of the Modified Order, and have maintained such compliance for at least six months. Consistent with Paragraph J of the Modified Order, dismissal of the Remedial and Modified Orders – and the litigation – is now appropriate. .
WHEREFORE the Parties respectfully move that the Court enter the attached proposed order to terminate the Modified Order and Remedial Order and dismiss this case, with prejudice.

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 117 Filed 07/11/14 Page 5 of 6

Respectfully Submitted,

FOR THE UNITED STATES:
MICHAEL J. MOORE United States Attorney Middle District of Georgia 433 Cherry Street Thomas Jefferson Building Macon, GA 31201

JOCELYN SAMUELS Acting Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
MARK KAPPELHOFF Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
s/ Kerry Krentler Dean JONATHAN M. SMITH, Chief SHELLEY R. JACKSON, Deputy Chief KERRY KRENTLER DEAN, Senior Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 (202) 514-6255 kerry.k.dean@usdoj.gov

FOR DEFENDANTS:
s/ Edward Collier Edward Collier, Esq. Attorney for Defendants Terrell County, Georgia Collier & Gamble, L.L.P. P.O. Box 577 Dawson, GA 31742 229-995-5657 ed@colliergamble.com
s/ Leonard Danley, Sr. Leonard Danley, Sr. Attorney for Defendant John W. Bowens Danley & Associates, P.C. 6519 Spring Street, Suite B Douglasville, GA 30134 firm@danleylaw.net

Case 1:04-cv-00076-WLS Document 117 Filed 07/11/14 Page 6 of 6
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on July 11, 2014, I electronically filed the attached Joint Motion using the Court’s CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to all registered litigants.
s/ Kerry Krentler Dean Senior Trial Attorney for the United States U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington D.C. 20530 Telephone: (202) 514-1841 Fax: (202) 514-4883 E-mail: kerry.k.dean@usdoj.gov

 
 Office of the Assistant Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division
Washington, D.C. 20035

Mr. Wilbur T. Gamble, J r . Chairman Terrell County Commission Route 3 P.O. Box 285 Dawson, GA 3174 2

j u n e i j 1995

Re: Notice of Findings from Investigation of Terrell County Jail

Dear Mr. Gamble:

On October 3, 1994, we notified you of our intent to investigate the Terrell County Jail ("TCJ") pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act ("CRIPA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1997 e_t sea. Consistent with the requirements of CRIPA, the purpose.' of this letter is to advise you of our findings from this investigation, the supporting facts, and to recommend necessary remedial measures.

Our investigation consisted of a tour of the facility with expert consultants, the examination of documents, and extensive interviews with prisoners and staff at the facility. We were accompa'hied on our tours by three consultants: a penologist., a medical expert, and a fire safety/environmental sanitarian, all with expertise in jail facilities. Throughout the course of this investigation, County officials and TCJ staff extended to us and our consultants their cooperation, for which we wish to convey to you our thanks.

In making our findings, we recognize that TCJ confines both pre-trial detainees and sentenced inmates. In general, inmates may not be subjected to conditions that are incompatible with evolving standards of decency or deprive them of their basic human needs while'incarcerated. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976) . With respect to the pre-trial detainees, the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits punishment of these persons and restrictive conditions or practices that are not reasonably related to the legitimate governmental objectives of safety, order and security. Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (1979) . For

CRIPA Investigation

JC-GA-002-001

- 2-
those convicted of a crime, the standard to be applied is the Eighth Amendment's proscription against cruel and unusual punishment. Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294 (1991); Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337 (1981). When convicted prisoners are not, as here, separated from pre-trial detainees, the Fourteenth Amendment standard applies to all inmates.
• TCJ was opened in 1940- and has a reported capacity of 44. On the day of our tour it housed 14 inmates. Based on our ' investigation, we believe that conditions at TCJ violate the constitutional rights of prisoners.
I. Deficient Correctional Practices.
A. Staffing and supervision are inadequate. TCJ failed to demonstrate that routine visual inspections are made. Numerous prisoners reported that they rely upon the inmate trustee for necessary attention. Additionally, TCJ fails to document incidents of violence.
B. Staff training is deficient. TCJ officers reportedly have received the required 80 hours of basic training. TCJ fails, however, to provide supplemental in-service training as generally accepted in the field. Supplemental training in small jail operations is needed to provide staff with the skills and knowledge necessary to effectively perform their duties and to hold staff accountable for their job performances. Without proper staff training in such matters as jail security, discipline of inmates, emergency response, medical screening, and use of CPR, unnecessary harm can occur.
C _- Policies and procedures are inadequate. TCJ does not have arfy written policies or procedures. Indeed, TCJ even fails to have an inmate handbook to inform prisoners of rules and' regulations of the Jail. Written policies and procedures are important as a training tool for staff and for providing guidance to staff in the performance of their duties. A lack of specific procedures to be followed by staff to govern, e.g., inmate classification, emergencies and evacuations, escapes, inmate disturbances, and mentally ill or suicidal inmates, is dangerous to inmates. For example, there should be procedures in place to separately house pre-trial felons from misdemeanantsT
The Jail does ngt have a written grievance system. The failure to have a written grievance system leads to increased inmate tension which may translate to increased acts of violence.
D. Out-of-cell/exercise time is inadequate. TCJ inmates are allowed out of their cells for only one hour per week for exercise and visitation. Reportedly, this hour is cancelled in the event of staff shortages. No exercise equipment is provided. While TCJ has a multi-purpose room which could serve as a

- 3-
visitation room, prisoners are required to stand in an enclosed fenced area while their visitors stand approximately three feet away on the sidewalk adjacent to a public street, separated by two chain link fences. This practice is not reasonably related to any legitimate penological interest. Moreover, it is degrading to prisoners. Opportunities for both exercise and visitation are inadequate.
E. Access to the courts and reading materials are insufficient. With exception of the Bible, TCJ inmates are not allowed any reading material. Reportedly, inmates are told that if "they wanted to read that they should not have come to jail." This blanket restriction encroaches upon the inmates' First Amendment rights and is not reasonably related to any legitimate penological interest. Further, such a restriction increases inmate idleness and inmate tension which may translate into heightened risks of violence.
F. Access -to religious services is deficient. TCJ fails to afford prisoners reasonable opportunities for the exercise of religion. Absent outside visits initiated by religious officials, no religious services occur at TCJ. Significantly, the last religious official's visit was sometime in the distant past.
II. Medical and Mental Health Care and Suicide Prevention.
A. Policies and procedures are grossly inadequate. The Jail does not have any written policies or procedures regarding medical services.
B.*> Receiving screening and routine examinations are deficient. TCJ does not routinely screen or examine prisoners. TCJ does not conduct any screening for tuberculosis, nor does it have policies or procedures regarding TB. Furthermore, TCJ staff were unaware of universal precautions. This is unacceptable and poses a serious danger to inmates.
C. Sick call is deficient. Inmates access medical care by submitting a sick call slip to a jailer who then reportedly calls the medical doctor. Significantly, there is no way to ensure the timeliness of care provided as relevant dates are not recorded, e.g., dates the sick call slips are submitted and received. Furthermore, sickcai\L slips are not readily available. Reportedly, TCJ does not call the medical doctor regarding requests for medical assistance referenced in sick call slips until a significant number of slips have been received. Furthermore, TCJ staff who determine when the medical doctor should be called have no medical training. This practice has resulted in significant delays in accessing medical care. Indeed, one prisoner who reports having a heart condition allegedly submitted a sick call request regarding chest pains

- 4-
three weeks prior to our inspection and had yet to receive any medical attention. This is grossly unacceptable.
D. Physician care is deficient. There is no health care professional who assumes responsibility for ensuring medical attention is provided to inmates. TCJ has only an informal agreement with a local doctor who reportedly provides services for the prisoners on an as needed basis. Our consultant was unable to speak to the medical doctor during our investigation as he was out of town for two weeks. Significantly, there was no arrangement for another doctor to provide care in his absence.
Additionally, according to both the doctor's secretary and jail personnel, no medical record is maintained regarding any of the prisoners who receive care from the doctor unless the patient is seen at the doctor's office. This is a grossly insufficient policy and contrary to generally accepted medical practice.
E. Examination room and equipment are inadequate. TCJ does not provide an examination area for the sick call visits. Sick call visits are conducted in the front area of the Jail which provides little, if any, privacy, and has no provisions for an adequate examination. Reportedly, the medical doctor can refer a patient to be seen in his office, if necessary. Additionally, no medical equipment is maintained on site. The only medical equipment available is that which the medical doctor brings with him in his medical bag.
F. Medication practices are deficient. Prescription medication is administrated by Jail staff, none of whom have appropriate training.
*-* G.-' Special diets is nonexistent. Special diets are not available as medically needed.
H. Dental care is nonexistent. Reportedly, dental services are available on an as needed basis by submitting a sick call slip. At least one inmate told our consultant that it was not possible to get dental services.
I. Mental health care and suicide prevention are inadequate. TCJ appears to provide some mental health'care. It fails, however, to have any written policies and procedures regarding the provision of mental health care. Such policies and procedures are essential to providing adequate, consistent care. Additionally, staff appear to need additional training in suicide prevention.
III. Environmental Health and Safety Deficiencies.
A. General sanitation is inadequate. The general sanitation of the Jail is. grossly inadequate. The Jail's current

- 5-
pest control system is totally inadequate as the entire housing area is infested with cockroaches and spiders. Throughout the facility, we observed numerous showers and lavatories with significant soil residue and mold growth. Reportedly, the Jail has a housekeeping plan, but was unable to produce supporting written documentation.
B. Fire safety is def-icient. TCJ fails to have a fire plan. Indeed, with the exception of reports from the Fire Marshal, TCJ does not have any documentation relating to fire safety. TCJ fails to conduct routine fire drills. Additionally, TCJ improperly stores gasoline in a non-fire rated container and gasoline operated lawnmowers in a hallway adjacent to one of the housing units.
C. Plumbing is deficient. TCJ failed to have vacuum breakers on several hosebibs. This practice is inadequate as it can result in back siphonage and contamination of the water supply.
D. Ventilation -is inadequate. The housing area is provided with an insufficient amount of fresh air. Our consultant found no circulation of air.
E. Overcrowding and personal hygiene. The Jail fails to provide-an adequate amount of unencumbered space per prisoner to ensure adequate hygiene and protect against contagious diseases. Significantly, the Jail houses the majority of the inmates in one area, leaving a complete section of the Jail empty. In one area, inmates have only nine square feet per person. In another area, 24 inmates share one shower.
Additionally, numerous inmates complained of the unavailability of personal hygiene items, such as deodorant-and shampoo. TCJ fails to provide such items, even to indigents.
F. Food services are deficient. The food is provided by the Terrell County Correctional Institution. Our consultant inspected the cooking area of this facility and discovered that two food freezers maintained improper temperatures. Our consultant also expressed concern regarding the large number of flies present in the cooking area as a result of remodeling done in the kitchen area.
The Jail only provides inmates two meals per day. The Jail was unable to produce documentation that these meals were nutritionally adequate. Significantly, nearly 16 hours expires between meals. This is unacceptable.
G. Lighting is inadequate. The Jail does not provide adequate lighting for inmates. Measurements revealed a level below 10 foot-candles. Lighting at this level is insufficient to

- 6-
protect against possible eye strain and inhibits adequate cleaning and maintenance of cells as well as personal hygiene.
IV. Recommendations Regarding Correctional Practices.
A. Staffing and supervision. Conduct and properly document routine visual inspections of the housing areas. Inmate trustees should not be the sole aid available to inmates. Incidents involving violence must be properly documented, both in the individual offender's records and in a master log for the Jail. Master logs regarding violent incidents must be evaluated at appropriate intervals to enable jail administrators to properly deploy security personnel.
B. Staff training. Ensure all jailers have attended the state's jailer training school and receive periodic, additional training.
C. Policies and procedures. Create and implement comprehensive TCJ policies and procedures which must include, but not be limited to, a classification system, incident reports, disciplinary procedures, and suicide prevention. Ensure staff understanding and compliance with policies and procedures. Draft and distribute to every inmate a comprehensive inmate handbook which includes, but is not limited to, an explanation of the Jail rules and regulations, and grievance and disciplinary procedures.
Create and implement a written grievance system.
D. Out-of-cell/exercise time. Inmates must be provided with exercise, outdoors when weather permits, one hour per day, five days per week. Reasonable exercise equipment should be provideti..
E. Visitation. Proper facilities for reasonable visitation must be provided.
F. Access to reading materials. Provide adequate access to law books, writing materials and other reading materials for inmates.
G. Access to religious services. Provide opportunities for the free exercise of religion. Facilitate access by inmates to local religious officials, as requested.
V. Recommendations Regarding Medical and Mental Health Care.
A. Medical services. Create and implement comprehensive policies and procedures regarding the provision of health care. Such policies must cover, but not be limited to, initial medical screenings, non-urgent sick call requests, communicable disease testing, physical examinations and staff training.

- 7-

B. Receiving screening and routine examinations.

Thoroughly screen and assess the medical history of every inmate

within 24 hours of an inmate's entry into the Jail. Ensure that

medical conditions are referred to a health care professional.

Ensure inmates are informed of the necessary procedures to access

medical services. Complete physical exams must be performed by '

qualified medical staff within 14 days of an inmate's entry into

the Jail.

:

Inmates housed in the Jail for more than seven days must be tested for tuberculosis and other communicable diseases, as appropriate.

C. Sick call. Ensure that sick call slips are dated and signed by the submitting inmate, receiving staff member, and attending health care professional. Ensure that inmates receive prompt medical and mental health care.

D. Physician care. Retain the services of a "responsible health authority" ("RHA"). The RHA may be a part-time registered nurse, but must be-under a doctor's supervision. The registered nurse must have regular hours and should conduct daily triage and "walkthroughs" of the housing areas.

E. Examination room and equipment. Provide an adequate area for sick call triaging. This area must afford proper privacy and permit professional and thorough examinations.

F. Medication. Ensure administration of all prescription medication by qualified personnel.

G.^ Special diets. Provide special diets. Provide a printed*menu detailing meals provided. Ensure that all meals are nutritionally adequate.

H. Dental care. Provide inmates with prompt dental care. Dental services may not be limited to extractions.

I. Mental health care and suicide prevention. Create and implement comprehensive policies and procedures for the provision of mental health care. Create and implement suicide precautions. Ensure all staff are trained in recognizing and promptly referring to a qualified professional, individuals exhibiting common symptoms of mental illness, mental retardation or suicidal behavior.

VI. Recommendations Regarding Environmental Health and Safety.

A. General sanitation. Thoroughly clean the entire Jail. Review and implement, with appropriate documentation of compliance, a Jail housekeeping plan. Ensure routine cleaning of

- 8-
all housing areas. Implement an effective pest control system throughout the Jail.
B. Fire safety. Create fire exit plans and post them conspicuously throughout the Jail. Develop, based upon consultation with an appropriate professional, written plans for an emergency/disaster, e.g., flood or fire. Maintain an emergency generator. Conduct and document routine fire drills. Ensure proper storage of gasoline and gasoline powered equipment.
C. Plumbing. Provide and maintain vacuum breakers on all hosebibs.
D. Ventilation. Provide adequate ventilation throughout Jail housing areas.
E. Overcrowding, bedding supplies and personal hygiene. Ensure each prisoner is provided adequate unencumbered space to protect against communicable diseases.
Ensure that inmates, including indigents, have adequate personal hygiene items.
F. Food services. Ensure the proper storage of food. Repair and replace freezers as necessary. Ensure the cleanliness of cooking areas at all times.
Ensure that inmates receive nutritionally adequate meals. Meals must be served at proper intervals.
G ^ Lighting. Provide lighting adequate for reading and sanitation in the housing areas.
Pursuant to CRIPA, the Attorney General may initiate a lawsuit to correct deficiencies at an institution 49 days after appropriate local officials are notified of them. 42 U.S.C. § 1997b(a)(1). We expect to hear from you as soon as possible, but no later than 49 days after receipt of this letter, with any response you may have to our findings and a description of the specific steps you have taken, or intend to take, to implement each of the minimum remedies set forth above. If you" do not respond within the stated time period, we will consider initiating an action/against your jurisdiction to remedy the unlawful conditions.
We look forward to working with you and other County officials to resolve this matter in a reasonable and expeditious manner. If you or any member of your staff have any questions,

- 9-
please feel free to contact the attorneys in the Special Litigation Section assigned to this matter, Shanetta Y. Brown, (202) 514-0195, David Deutsch, (202) 514-6270, and Christopher Cheng, (202) 514-8892.
Sincerely
Deval L. Patrick Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
cc: Edward Collier, Esquire County Attorney
Mr. John Bqwens Sheriff Terrell County Jail
James L. Wiggins, Esquire United States Attorney Middle District of Georgia