Dunn et al v. Thomas et al

Filing 2076

PHASE 2A OPINION REGARDING MONITORING ISSUE SCHEDULE. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 9/26/2018. (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)

PHASE 2A OPINION REGARDING MONITORING ISSUE SCHEDULE
Previously

this

court

granted

the

plaintiffs’

motion for an order to show cause why the defendants
should not be held in contempt for failing to comply
with mental-health staffing deadlines set by the court,
see

Phase

2A

Understaffing

Remedial

Order

(doc

no.

1657), and set an evidentiary hearing, see Phase 2A
Opinion and Order Regarding Motion for Order to Show
Cause (doc. no. 2030).
On

September

19,

2018,

the

second

day

of

the

contempt hearing, the court entered an order continuing

the

proceedings

“pending

acceleration

of

the

consideration and resolution of the remedial issue of
monitoring.”

Phase

2A

Order

Proceedings (doc. no. 2058).

Continuing

Contempt

As that order expressly

states, the court continued the contempt proceedings
based on an understanding that the monitoring remedial
process

would

be

accelerated.

Furthermore,

as

discussed on the record the second day of the hearing,
the expediting of resolution of the monitoring issue
also required the postponement of two other remedial
issues set for consideration in October 2018: hospitallevel care and disciplinary sanctions.

See Phase 2A

Revised Remedy Scheduling Order (doc. no. 2060).
In

short,

the

acceleration

of

the

monitoring

remedial process was at the heart of both the cessation
of

the

September

contempt

proceedings

and

the

rescheduling of the October consideration of two other
remedial

matters.

The

principal

reason

behind

the

acceleration of the monitoring remedial process was the
court’s

ever-growing

concern,

2

from

the

evidence

presented

in

the

remedial

matters

so

far,

that

the

monitoring issue needed to be addressed and resolved
immediately.

The court was concerned that resolution

of the issue was not just ripe but overdue.
will

therefore,

by

separate

order,

The court

expedite

the

evidentiary hearing on the monitoring issue from early
December to early November 2018--that is, accelerate
the

hearing

otherwise
allow

the

by

about

intervening
parties

to

a

month--with

remedial
focus

the

matters

more

of

two

other

postponed
their

time

preparing for the monitoring issue hearing.
DONE, this the 26th day of September, 2018.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3

to
on