Document: 502 U.S. 367 112 S.Ct. 748 116 L.Ed.2d 867 Robert C. RUFO, Sheriff of Suffolk County, et al., Petitioners,v.INMATES OF the SUFFOLK COUNTY JAIL al. Thomas RAPONE, Commissioner Correction Massachusetts, Petitioner, v. INMATES Nos. 90-954, 90-1004. Argued Oct. 9, 1991. Decided Jan. 15, 1992. Syllabus Years after District Court held that conditions at jail were constitutionally deficient, petitioner officials and respondent inmates entered into a consent decree providing for construction new that, among other things, would provide single occupancy cells pretrial detainees. Work on was delayed and, in interim, inmate population outpaced projections. While still underway, sheriff moved to modify allow double bunking certain number cells, thereby raising jail's capacity. Relying Federal Rule Civil Procedure 60(b)—which provides, inter alia, "upon such terms as are just, court may relieve party . from judgment following reasons: (5) it is no longer equitable should have prospective operation"—the argued modification required by change law, this Court's postdecree decision Bell Wolfish, 441 520, 99 1861, 60 447, fact, increase The denied relief, holding 60(b)(5) codified standard United States Swift & Co., 286 106, 119, 52 460, 464, 76 L.Ed. 999—"Nothing less than clear showing grievous wrong evoked unforeseen lead [a] [in] what decreed years litigation with all concerned"—and case under had not been made. also rejected argument decree; found increased detainee "neither nor unforeseen"; declared relief be inappropriate even more flexible because separate detainees "perhaps most important" element sought; if sheriff's celling proposal met constitutional standards, allowing basis undermine discourage settlement institutional cases. Appeals affirmed. Held: 1. "grievous wrong" does apply requests decrees stemming reform litigation. That formulated context facts demonstrating genuine changes occurred requiring question, see id., 115-116, S.Ct., 462-463, recognized involving supervision changing conduct or revised necessary adapt future events, 114-115, 462-463. Moreover, subsequent decisions emphasized need flexibility circumstances, whether law changed ones arisen. Thus, cannot concluded misread intended modifications cases governed standard. A stringent made important recent upsurge litigation, where extended life increases likelihood significant will occur. Furthermore, experience federal courts implementing modifying demonstrates approach often essential achieving goals particularly public's interest sound efficient operations its institutions. contention any rule deter parties negotiating settlements hence destroy utility unpersuasive. Obviously respect government officials. plaintiffs wish settle cases, since, they litigate conclusion win, resulting give them hoped for, whereas avoid further perhaps obtain ordered without local government's consent, eliminate possibility losing; since effect obtained open deemed 60(b). Pp. 378-383. 2. Under adopted today, seeking an bears burden establishing warrants revision proposed suitably tailored circumstances. 383-393. (a) Modification warranted when factual make compliance substantially onerous, proves unworkable obstacles, enforcement detrimental public interest. Where relies upon events actually anticipated time decree, granted only satisfies heavy convincing agreed good faith, reasonable effort comply, relieved undertaking Accordingly, remand consider foreseen petitioners. Despite court's statement was, itself aspects record indicate unanticipated. To petitioners promise based necessarily violate decree's basic purpose remedy found—based variety factors, including celling—to unconstitutional old jail. one defeats purpose, then but impossible. erred Swift's, cell requirement forbidden. 383-387. (b) must modified obligations placed later becomes impermissible statutory decisional has legal designed prevent. holding, which unconstitutional, not, itself, issue. Since did cast doubt legality celling, issued viewed having immaterial signed i.e., preferred event agree called hold clarification automatically opens door relitigation merits every affected finality agreements could serve disincentive Nevertheless, merely clarifies constitute supporting their agreement misunderstanding governing law. issue declares "sets forth program both adequate " (emphasis added), can establish believed mandated, form modification. 387-390. (c) Once moving established fact warranting district determine perpetuate create violation. respondents correct factually distinguishable detainees' rights, granted. Because final reopened extent equity requires, strive rewrite so conforms floor, resolve problems created change. Within these constraints, considerations comity require defer administrators intricacies Although financial constraints used justify violations, legitimate concern defendants therefore appropriately considered tailoring 390-393. 915 F.2d 1557 (CA 1 1990), vacated remanded. WHITE, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, JJ., joined. O'CONNOR, filed concurring judgment. STEVENS, dissenting opinion, BLACKMUN, THOMAS, took part consideration Chester A. Janiak, Boston, Mass., No. 90-954. John T. Montgomery, Max D. Stern, respondents. Justice WHITE Court. In motion County Jail. before us below applied denying motion. We proceedings. 2 * This began 1971 sued Sheriff, State Mayor nine city councilors, claiming yet convicted crimes charged against being facility, known Charles Street Jail, constructed 1848 large tiers barred cells. numerous deficiencies jail, treated state described "malignant neglect," Attorney General 394 Mass. 624, 625, 477 N.E.2d 361, 362 (1985), documented See Inmates Jail Eisenstadt, 360 F.Supp. 676, 679-684 (Mass.1973). deficient: 3 "As facility detention presumptively innocent citizens, unnecessarily unreasonably infringes liberties, rights freedom motion, personal cleanliness, privacy. finds rules quality incarceration 'punishment' nature degree justified state's trial; violates due process clause Fourteenth Amendment." Id., 686.1 4 permanently enjoined defendants: "(a) housing November 30, 1973 another inmate, who awaiting trial June 1976 trial." 691. appeal.2 5 1977, unresolved, defendants, Boston City Council, take steps expend funds reasonably renovate existing substitute center. Kearney, Civ. Action 71-162-G (Mass., 1977), App. 22. immediate action required: 6 "It now just short five issued. For plaintiff class confined repugnant constitution. aware fact. 7 8 "Given present unconscionable delay already endured securing we alternative affirm order prohibit St. Jail." 573 98, 99-100 (CA1 1978). 9 closed October 2, 1978, unless plan presented County. 10 Four days deadline, formed submitted plans complete, observed "the critical features confinement, 80 sq. ft. inmates, fixed safety, security, medical, recreational, kitchen, laundry, educational, religious visiting provisions, included. There unequivocal commitments confinement meet standards." 1978), 51, 55. allowed continue 11 Seven months later, formal expressed "desire provide, maintain operate applicable suitable detainees." May 7, 1979), Pet. Cert. 15a. specifically incorporated provisions Detention Center, Facility, Architectural Program, which—in words required." 16a. 12 include total 309 "[s]ingle rooms" 70 square feet, 73, 76,3 arranged modular units included kitchenette recreation area, laundry room, education units, indoor outdoor exercise areas. See, e.g., 249. size projected decline population, 245 male prisoners 1979 226 present. 69. 13 Program completed 1983, ibid., work started 1984. During intervening years, Litigation ensued, build larger 361 (1985). Thereupon, prisoners, support sheriff, 435 Citing unanticipated completing jail," permit capacity amount, provided that: 14 single-cell maintained design facility; 15 "(b) standards specifications modified, relative proportion space services remain same Program; 16 "(c) architectural plans; 17 "(d) act carry out Consent Decree according authorized schedule." April 11, 1985), 110, 111. 18 453. Construction 1987. 19 July 1989, while construction, 197 610 asserted 447 (1979), handed down week approved 20 refused grant requested modification, failed 999 (1932): "Nothing concerned." 21 "did directly overrule interpretation based, circumstances invoke decree." 734 561, 564 (Mass.1990). finding problem unforeseen." Ibid. 22 briefly stated Courts Appeals,4 entitled "[a] each always sought litigation—perhaps element." 565. Finally, complied reasoning "would efforts cases." never decided permissible. 23 opened shortly thereafter. 24 affirmed, stating "[w]e well-reasoned reason elaborate further." (CA1, judgt. reported 1557, 2a.5 certiorari. 498 ----, 111 950, 1039 (1991). II 25 relied 60(b), relevant provides: 26 "On party's representative judgment, order, proceeding satisfied, released, discharged, prior reversed otherwise vacated, application; (6) justifying operation ." 27 suggestion subject embodies thus some respects contractual nature. But desire expect reflected enforceable judicial generally judgments decrees. Railway Employes Wright, 364 642, 650-651, 81 368, 372-373, 349 (1961). much supra, made, resort 60(b)(6) unavailing. 60(b) error. 28 product prolonged antitrust battle between Government meat-packing industry. 1920, manipulating industry banned engaging manufacture, sale, transportation foodstuffs. U.S., 111, 461. 1930, several meat-packers petitioned arguing grocery industries changed. 113, claim, positioned manipulate costs fix prices 1920. It Cardozo, set much-quoted standard, "[n]othing conditions" predicate meat-packers' decree. 464. 29 Read context, language suggests "hardening" traditional New York Assn. Retarded Children, Inc. Carey, 706 956, 968 (CA2), cert. denied, 464 915, 104 277, 78 257 (1983). follow read context. Shoe Machinery Corp., 391 244, 248, 88 1496, 1499, 562 (1968). pointedly distinguished 30 "The distinction restraints protection fully accrued nearly permanent impervious change, those involve provisional tentative. directed toward were. abandonment right exact future, become adaptation be." 462. 31 Our reinforce talismanic quality, warding off virtually administering decrees, stating: "There dispute discretion call injunctive obtaining issuance changed, arisen." 647-648, 371-372. 32 theme repeated our last term Board Education Oklahoma Public Schools Dowell, 630, 715 (1991), rigid use barrier dissolve desegregation 33 little concluding Swift. Rule, judgement application, permits stringent, 34 Brown Education, 347 483, 74 686, 98 873 (1954), ability response important. place periods time, occurring during increased. Philadelphia Welfare Rights Organization Shapp, 602 1114, 1119-1121 (CA3 444 1026, 100 689, 62 660 (1980), light beyond defendants' control contemplated entered. 35 circuit demonstrated supra.6 applying "reach involved suit impact institutions." Heath De Courcy, 888 1105, 1109 (CA6 1989). Accord, 969. 36 urge factors They assert improve detainees, housed transferred facilities, farther family members counsel. transfer celled desirable exist contend implicated here crowding necessitated release others halfway houses, many escape. 37 points insufficient "authority [was] limited requirements F.Supp., 566. noted above, suggested proper followed Circuits. None primary purposes [which] reasons appearing relief. well, recognize rigidity neither appropriate 38 urged insofar concerned. As know for. Whether bargain might get trial, worse position At least negotiate consent. And, course, litigate, lose. III 39 considering provides "it application," convenient live If meets circumstance.7 40 initial either 41 onerous. Such 1985 became apparent sufficient space. Apr. 110.8 F.2d, 969 (modification find facilities patients); 1120-1121 clients targets); interest, Duran Elrod, 760 756, 759-761 (CA7 1985) accused violent felons). 42 Respondents "unforeseen unforeseeable." Brief 35. exacting test; adopt it. Litigants anticipate exigency conceivably arise 43 Ordinarily, however, Twelve Does Columbia, 274 U.S.App.D.C. 62, 65-66, 861 295, 298-299 (1988); Ruiz Lynaugh, 811 856, 862-863 (CA5 1987). performance onerous nevertheless satisfy convince comply 44 touched April, 1990, when, course overcrowding faced unforeseen. ongoing entry 564. However, projections decrease years.9 Significantly, 1985, "modifications jail." 110 added). Petitioners July, 1988, began, exceeded 400 Petitioner p. 9. 45 strikes somewhat strange, rapidly increasing contemplated, settled house detainees.10 original 110.11 apparent, nowhere expressly orders reflects accommodate however be. Petitioners' appear bound specified second doubtful violated 46 Even construed found, obviously rule. error version required, 47 if, turns out, 48 railroad unions violating Labor Act, U.S.C. § 151 seq., discrimination nonunion employees, prohibited discrimination. Later, Act amended union shops, amendment purposely permitted correctly illegal "court free objectives th[e] amended." Employes, 650, 651, 372, 373. Firefighters Stotts, 467 576, n. 583, 17, 2576, 2586, 2590, 483 (1984). 49 Rapone urges more, disagree. announced: unconstitutional. surely undoubtedly pending judged ruled constitutional, built. 50 Neither Constitution forbade conduct. governments, over objection, undertake curing violation adjudicated. Milliken Bradley (Milliken II), 433 267, 281, 97 2749, 2757, 53 745 (1977). "save themselves expense, inevitable risk litigation," Armour 402 673, 681, 91 1752, 1757, 256 (1971), violations do requires (almost affirmative directive obey that), absent settlement. abuse entering agreed-upon clearly related offend Constitution. I), 418 717, 738, 94 3112, 3124, 1069 (1974). ----. Cf. Cleveland, 478 501, 525, 106 3063, 3076, 92 405 (1986).12 51 negotiation imply legally obligation assumed ultimately minimal prison standards. Substantively, violence obvious intention decretal meeting requirements. Procedurally, necessary, illustrates, enforce action." Plyler Evatt, 924 1321, 1327 (CA4 1991). instance, Pasadena Spangler, 427 424, 437-438, 96 2697, 2705-2706, 599 (1976), interpreted ambiguous manner contrary ultimate And Nelson Collins, 659 420, 428-429 1981) (en banc), Fourth Circuit assumption per se mandated Constitution, connection, note again, 375, recited (Emphasis B 54 circumstance. evaluating three matters clear. 55 Of Bell. counter detainees.13 case—the decide issue, 565-566—modification 56 floor. determined warrant focus requires. "turn aside inquire [the decree] joint opposed success offered opposition." Swift, 116-117, 463. 57 "[c]onsiderations allocation powers within system," 632, administrators, "primary responsibility elucidating, assessing, solving" reform, 294, 299, 75 753 755-756, 1083 (1955). Missouri Jenkins, 495 33, 1651, 109 (1990); II, 2757.14 officers charge minimally keep mind ruling request making abide refuse bind State, regardless view necessity matter litigated conclusion. seemed fiscal marginally case. Financial creation perpetuation IV 58 conclude, vacate proceedings consistent opinion. 59 ordered. THOMAS 61 I remanded reconsider write separately emphasize review; clarify why, despite review, returned Court; explain my concerns portions 63 embodied application." Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 60(b)(5). Determining "equitable" task entails substantial discretion, like one, complex sensitive balancing host factors. result, appellate examine primarily method exercises substantive outcome reaches. takes account (all likely suggest result), accommodates way, reached first instance. Lemon Kurtzman, 411 192, 200, 93 1463, 1469, (1973) ("In shaping vested broad discretionary power; review correspondingly narrow"). 64 deference heightened where, effectively overseeing institution long period time. Judge Keeton supervising implementation 1979; he developed understanding difficulties constructing managing court, best possible briefing, hope match. reviewing accordingly owe judge's hand." Hutto Finney, 437 678, 688, 2565, 2572, 522 (1978). 65 devotes attention elaborating "standard" lower kind. Ante, 378-384. am effort—"A law," ante, 384—makes clearer equally general think offer guidance here, burdened simply specify shortcomings 66 view, too narrow own discretion. reasoning, flawed different errors excised portion range options available court. believe sum erroneously self-imposed limits constituted 67 First, (1932), "new prerequisite 563 foreseen, 564, barring explains 379-380, respect. dispositive factor decision. rise foreseen; danger community example, outweigh petitioners' failure population. 68 Second, lacked authority budget determining equitable. held: supportable chosen resources Here authority. governments responsible wide services. difficult constraints; dollar spent something else. lack excuse requirements, continued "equitable," significantly expensive anyone anticipated. 69 Third, although purported "flexible standard" petitioners, "[t]he type overall Taken literally, deprives meaning; definition, alter meant but, taking word, instance respects, felt exist. full measure 71 doing so, fault well justified, refusing free, exercising reach result remand. satisfactory outcome. small. Someone suffer, underestimating delaying Instead, celling; counties supervision, County; public, victims committed county forced extraordinarily make. inclined second-guess deciding bear burden. 72 today removes barriers path. 379-380 (distinguishing ); 386-387 (explaining impossibly strict standard"); 392-393 (permitting constraints). hand, replaces other. Portions are, misplaced fettered 73 Most significantly, observes 'the element' 382 (quoting 566). decides "this modification." 382. unsupported offers reasoning: "If rule." 387. sweeping me logically erroneous. defeat 396. hardly follows especially element" If, consented (and decade relief) guarantee conclude inequitable. Similarly, small exceed inequitable otherwise, unwarranted ill-advised fashion. true "defer 764. sure, resolving day-to-day prison; fall expertise Thornburgh Abbott, 490 401, 407-408, 1874, 1878-1879, 459 (1989). disagree notion how These questions details management, bottom determination Deference lawsuit usually surest path equity; particular model previous case, unlikely result. claim equities. views sides account, side whom BLACKMUN joins, dissenting. 77 Today endorses articulated Friendly Association 956 endorsement, findings affirmance decree.1 When determines, contested guilty serious persistent typically fashions intrusive simple directing cease desist Swann Charlotte-Mecklenburg 1, 1267, 554 (1971). duty command effective, enjoys fulfill obligation. 15-16, 1275-1276; 300, 753, (1955); (1990). 79 injunction went "beyond proscription precise previously pursued." National Society Professional Engineers States, 679, 698, 1355, 1368, 637 discontinue (1) practice 1973, (2) 1976. 691 appeal injunction. double-celling prohibition, asked postpone requirement. 494 1196 (CA1), 419 977, 95 239, 189 injunction, postponed closing firm date compliance. pending, negotiations produced After affirmed 101 constructed. completed, required. 1984, permitting denied. negotiated agreement, modify, 1985. "necessary originally contemplated." 110. nothing prevent petitioners: 82 "from satisfied: 83 84 Program. 110-111. 85 order. Indeed, Council objected appears 86 suit, 87 reaffirmed seek modify. background propositions settled. existence almost injunction—which unquestionably valid waived challenge—the 99. prevailed, willing postponement submitted, approved, facility. plan, site design, mandated. discharge stern sanctions noncompliance outstanding entirely propose bare minimum "minimum" "floor" helpful constrained violation, sense "floor." Beyond constraint, remedy's attempt expression underlying value lend quantitative evaluation. complexity institutions affording effective remedial contain many, highly detailed commands. specific independent absence render ineffective. formulate fewest various interests fashion believes best.2 parties' remedy, approval, enjoy formulating 525-526, 3076-3078, (1986). 89 From respondents' point though won prepared surrender entitled—such enforcing deadline Jail—in exchange benefits benefit library, worship individual feature termination two overriding informed interim prohibition accepted, 1979, purposes. 90 program. recital refers "both required."3 recital, thought detail settlement—or, indeed, provisions—was "constitutionally An satisfied adequate. assuming provision required.4 led certiorari 1989. proponents 1989 acquiesced heard argue pre-1985 developments facts—provide defined construct reliance constituting plainly misplaced. 1979. permission 1984 well-known qualify circumstance.5 average is, 1985.6 steady progression foreseeable growth continue. unforeseen," (Mass.1990), amply supported record. continuing foreseeable. Mere foreseeability "could arise" 385, disqualify development notice prudent litigants contemplate Given realities today's society, surprising contemplation. Other counsel history added insisting honor commitments. current claims limitation new. pleas reflect continuation reluctance constraint requests.7 strong protecting counsels modifications. Teague Lane, 489 288, 308-310, 1060, 1073-1075, 103 334 (1989) (plurality opinion); Mackey 401 667, 682-683, 1160, 1174-1175, 404 (1971) (Harlan, part). reinforced policy favoring protracted solemn commitments, motivation compromised, reliability entire suffer. central his (CA2 1983), analyzed "of transferring Willowbrook, whose squalid living recited, human dimension quickly possible." 967. purpose. action, able measures "transfers prisons, bail reviews Superior controlled program" respond problem. affords easiest responding justification compromising regard, misses observation "[i]f impossible." certainly impossible thwart immutable, rather assures frustrate expectations core return benefits, single-celling commitment. Appeals. dealing Due Process Clause Amendment Cruel Unusual Punishments Eighth Amendment, vulnerable Amendment. 688. months, advised ending commissioner institutions, appealed, power him transfers. First "major responsibilities" jails lawsuit. 1196, reduced September plan. rooms sized devised setting agencies. Massachusetts Department Correction's Code Human Services Regulations, Chapter IX—Standards Correctional Facilities, Standard 972.3 calls feet design. Manual Standards Adult Local 5103, sponsored American floor exceeds hours day." 77-78. 63-66 (listing national consulted preparation Program). (CA2) (Friendly, J.), (1983); 1114 (1980); 846 208 (CA4), 488 897, 241, 102 230 1105 1989); Newman Graddick, 740 1513 (CA11 1984). female He subsequently 928 empty school mentally retarded 6,000 people conditions. residents placements fewer beds. 959. Defendants revising placement residences expedite higher care. Friendly, writing Second Circuit, modification: "Here, defendants. derogation objective namely, mammoth .; indeed evidence again contrast attaining goal early date. run occupants bearing resemblance normal home, perforce aspect ruling, long-established, broad, flexible." applies seeks arguably relates vindication right. implement minor extraneous (e.g., paint color building's facade) unrelated remedying changes. refuses request, binding authorities. Hence, technically exempting furnished insignificant avoided overly opposition projections: Year Populatin Priojections 254 1980 243 1981 241 1982 239 1983 238 236 1985-1989 232 1990-1994 1995-1999 216 daily data Transcript Hearing Motion Modify (Mar. 1990). none showed alarm fluctuations undermines dissent's "reasonably foreseeable." post, 406. foreseeable" differs today. By invoking focusing exclusively 405, dissent jumps numbers potentially infinitely. record, impose anticipating sole One "single-cell facility." App., contends disappeared recur" "no [is] alleged" "so there power." 90-1004, pp. 31, 36-37. His taken. issues, granted, question vacated. introduced report consultant claimed Division Capital Planning Operations leaving inadequate cell, dayroom, 146-179. Bell, 544, 27, 1876, ("while recommendations groups instructive minima"). concurrence mischaracterizes accord administrators. stated, 383, No threshold inquiry. once warranted, principles federalism common weight "flexible" advanced Carey. 565 difficulty prospectively justifies relationship characteristics structural explained passage standard: 'The judge search "best" incorporate open-ended effectiveness fairness, threat occasions intervention great precision, defended certitude. revisions, traditionally choice causing hardship. working burdensome.' 970 1983) Fiss, Supreme Court—1978 Term Foreword: Forms Justice, Harv.L.Rev. (1979)). "too much," better achieve goals. reads full: "And attached paragraph below, sets Consider example decree: headed 'A.1.a. Lobby/reception' page visitor lockers one-hundred (100) tenth sentence read: 'Lobby telephones, drinking fountain, vending machines bulletin boards.' "(j) shall 37: 'Inmate located access staff supervision. Room resolved phase. Each room high washing clothes drying equipment, sink, sorting table, storage ironing board.' 17a, 18a. agrees Wolfish 388, define kind merit particular, occasion draw System Federation (1961), effected deserves mention. brought alleging discriminated seq. promising refrain Congress shops situation contended preference favor celling. amicus curiae: "Bell challenge constitutionality double-celling, represent endorsing housing. contrast, amending weighed labor policies endorsed shops. conflicted clauses. propriety agreed." Amicus Curiae 20, figures cited 386, drawn projection (The published dated January 61, 69.) 1982, underestimated Record, 642-648. knew detained 320 instead 236. 642-650. "keep mind" 392. powers, properly "public." noted, unpopular; additional expenditures unpopular unpopularity Brown, "Courts go saying vitality yield disagreement them."

Category: 3