Dowdy et al v. Caruso, et al

Filing 77

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ADOPTING 73 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING PLAINTIFFS 56 MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION. Signed by District Judge Avern Cohn. (SSro)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
ERIC DOWDY-EL, AVERIS X. WILSON,
AMIRA SALEM, TOM TRAINI, and
ROGER HUNT

Case Number: 06-11765
HON. AVERN COHN

Plaintiffs,
v.
PATRICIA L. CARUSO, MICHAEL
MARTIN, and DAVE BURNETT,
Defendants.
______________________________/

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 73)
AND
GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION (Doc. 56)
I. Introduction
Plaintiffs are Muslim1 inmates housed by the Michigan Department of Corrections
(“MDOC”) who challenge the defendant prison officials’ alleged failure to accommodate
their requests to observe three distinct Islamic religious practices: (1) attending Jum’ah
prayer services; (2) receiving a halal diet; and (3) participating in the Eid ul-Fitr and Eid
ul-Adha Feasts (the “Eid Feasts”). Plaintiffs challenge each alleged failure to
accommodate under: (1) the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of
the United States Constitution; (2) the Free Exercise Clause of
the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, (3) the Michigan Constitution’s
counterparts to the United States Constitution’s Equal Protection and Free Exercise

1

The magistrate judge has separately recommended that the sole non-Muslim
plaintiff’s claims be dismissed. (Doc. 70 at 2, fn. 1)

Clauses, Article 1 §§ 2 and 4, respectively; and (4) the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc et seq, “RLUIPA”). The
matter has been referred to a magistrate judge, before whom plaintiffs filed a motion for
class certification.2
The magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation (“MJRR”),
recommending that the motion be granted. Neither party has filed objections to the
MJRR and the time for filing objections has passed. Accordingly, the MJRR will be
adopted and plaintiffs’ motion for class certification will be granted.
II. The MJRR and Class Certification
The magistrate judge recommends that a class be certified under Fed. R. Civ. P.
23(a) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2). With respect to the attendance at Jum’ah services,
plaintiffs seek to certify a class comprised of “all current and future Michigan Muslim
inmates who desire but have been denied …the ability to participate in Jum’ah because
of a conflicting work, school or similar detail. With respect to the provision of a halal
diet, plaintiffs seek to certify a class comprised of “all current and future Michigan
Muslim inmates who desire but have been denied …a halal diet that is free of
contamination by foods considered haram,” i.e., non-halal meats and/or vegetarian
foods that have been “contaminated” by

2

The parties also filed cross motions for summary judgment. The magistrate
judge issued a report and recommendation that the motions be granted in part and
denied in part. (Doc. 70). The parties have objected. (Docs. 71, 72) The cross
motions for summary judgment and objections to the report and recommendation will be
the subject of a separate order.
2

coming into contact with such meats.3
III. Legal Standard
The failure to file objections to the MJRR waives any further right to appeal.
Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987).
Likewise, the failure to object to the MJRR releases the Court from its duty to
independently review the motions. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
However, the Court has reviewed the MJRR and agrees with the magistrate judge.
IV. Conclusion
Accordingly, the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are ADOPTED
as the findings and conclusions of the Court. Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification is
GRANTED. The class is certified as indicated above under Rule 23(a) and Rule 23
(b)(2), as further explained in the MJRR.
SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 20, 2012

S/Avern Cohn
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to the attorneys of
record on this date, December 20, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
S/Sakne Chami
Case Manager, [phone]

3

The magistrate judge did not address participation in the Eid feasts, noting that
he recommended the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment be granted on this issue.
The magistrate judge then correctly noted that should the Court adopt this
recommendation, the class certification issue becomes moot. Conversely, as the
magistrate judge noted, should the Court reject this recommendation, defendants will
have prevailed, also rendering the class certification issue moot.
3