Dunn et al v. Thomas et al

Filing 1353

PHASE 2A INVOLUNTARY MEDICATION SETTLEMENT FINAL APPROVAL ORDER: it is ORDERED as follows: (1) The objections to the settlement agreement (doc. nos. 1310 , 1316 , & 1322 -2) are overruled. (2) The settlement agreement (doc. no. 1248 -1) is app roved. (3) The settlement agreement (doc. no. 1248 -1) is entered as a consent decree. (4) United States Magistrate Judge John E. Ott is appointed to serve as mediator pursuant to § 16 of the consent decree entered today. (5) Plaintiffs' m otion for attorneys' fees (doc. no. 1346 ), which defendants do not oppose, is granted. (6) Pursuant to the provision in the settlement agreement (doc. no. 1248 -1) for the dismissal with prejudice of any and all claims asserted by plaintiff Q uang Bui regarding the involuntary-medication policies and/or practices, these claims are dismissed with prejudice. (7) By no later than September 20, 2017, the parties are to meet and confer and submit to the court a plan for providing notice to cla ss members of the entry of this consent decree and for ensuring that they have access to the decree during its pendency. The notice of settlement should describe in layperson's terms the involuntary-medication policy and procedure, as well as ho w a prisoner may go about challenging an involuntary-medication order or a violation of the policy requiring an involuntary-medication order before using force or coercion to administer medication to a prisoner. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 9/6/2017. (kh, )

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION EDWARD BRAGGS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. JEFFERSON S. DUNN, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14cv601-MHT (WO) PHASE 2A INVOLUNTARY MEDICATION SETTLEMENT FINAL APPROVAL ORDER Based upon the representations of counsel at a fairness hearing held in open court on August 24, 2017, on the proposed settlement concerning plaintiffs’ claims of involuntary medication without due process; upon consideration of the proposed settlement, the joint motion for approval of the proposed settlement, the objections to the proposed settlement, and other related filings; and with the understanding that an opinion will follow explaining the court’s reasoning, it is ORDERED as follows: (1) The objections to the settlement agreement (doc. nos. 1310, 1316, & 1322-2) are overruled. (2) The settlement agreement (doc. no. 1248-1) is approved. (3) The settlement agreement (doc. no. 1248-1) is entered as a consent decree. (4) United States Magistrate Judge John E. Ott is appointed to serve as mediator pursuant to § 16 of the consent decree entered today. (5) Plaintiffs’ motion for attorneys’ fees (doc. no. 1346), which defendants do not oppose, is granted. (6) Pursuant agreement (doc. to no. the provision 1248-1) for in the the settlement dismissal with prejudice of any and all claims asserted by plaintiff Quang Bui regarding the involuntary-medication policies and/or practices, these claims prejudice. 2 are dismissed with (7) By no later than September 20, 2017, the parties are to meet and confer and submit to the court a plan for providing notice to class members of the entry of this consent decree and for ensuring that they have access to the decree during its pendency. notice of settlement should describe in The layperson's terms the involuntary-medication policy and procedure, as well as how a prisoner may go about challenging an involuntary-medication order or a violation of the policy requiring an involuntary-medication order before using force or coercion to administer medication to a prisoner. DONE, this the 6th day of September, 2017. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?