Dunn et al v. Thomas et al
Filing
1981
OPINION AND ORDER: As to the unresolved issue identified in the court's opinion and order of June 22, 2018 (doc. no. 1904 ), the court stated during an on-the- record status conference on September 4, 2018, that it believes, from the evidenc e presented, that the problems underlying this issue are threefold, as further set out. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the parties are to attempt jointly to develop a scheme by which the plaintiffs and the court can verify that the defendants can no w be trusted to accurately and timely identify SMI inmates (both categorical and non-categorical ones) who are considered for, or in, segregation. The parties will be given two weeks to develop, through mediation, this scheme. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 9/5/2018. (kh, )
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)
OPINION AND ORDER
As to the unresolved issue identified in the court's
opinion and order of June 22, 2018 (doc. no. 1904), the
court stated during an on-the-record status conference
on September 4, 2018, that it believes, from the evidence
presented, that the problems underlying this issue are
threefold:
the
defendants
have
grossly
failed
to
accurately identify SMI inmates (both categorical and
non-categorical
ones);
that
the
defendants
need
to
develop a reliable in-house "self-critical" scheme to
check behind themselves so as to assure that they are
accurately
and
timely
identifying
SMI
inmates
(both
categorical and non-categorical ones) in segregation; and
the court and the plaintiffs need the ability to verify
that
defendants
are
identifying
SMI
prisoners
in
segregation in a timely manner for the time being.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the parties are to
attempt
jointly
to
develop
a
scheme
by
which
the
plaintiffs and the court can verify that the defendants
can now be trusted to accurately and timely identify SMI
inmates (both categorical and non-categorical ones) who
are
considered
for,
or
in,
segregation.
The
court
encourages the parties to approach this task in a manner
that addresses all three above-mentioned problems at
once.
and
is
The court is not wedded to any particular approach
willing
to
consider
through the mediation process.
any
approaches
generated
The parties will be given
two weeks to develop, through mediation, this scheme.
DONE, this the 5th day of September, 2018.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?