Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Braggs v. Dunn

United States District Court, M.D. Alabama

March 15, 2019

EDWARD BRAGGS, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
JEFFERSON S. DUNN, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections, et al., Defendants. OLD DATES NEW DATES

          PHASE 2A REVISED REMEDY SCHEDULING ORDER ON THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT CLAIM

          MYRON H. THOMPSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Based on the representations made on the record on March 14, 2019, it is ORDERED that the remaining deadlines and dates for the Phase 2A remedy scheduling order for the Eighth Amendment claim are revised as follows:

OLD DATES
NEW DATES

SEGREGATION

Parties to develop schemes to verify that defendants are now accurately and timely identifying SMI inmates with regard to segregation

Continued generally pending mediation and resolution of the monitoring issue

In-person oral argument on how to proceed on remedies for violations found in supplemental liability opinion. (doc. nos. 2353, 2397, & 2398).

To be reset.

5/14/19 at 10:00 a.m.

HOSPITAL-LEVEL CARE

Parties to file initial briefs for upcoming oral argument.

5/1/19 at noon

Parties to file reply briefs for upcoming oral argument.

5/8/19 at noon

In-person oral argument to discuss “what the substantive law is” and “how” to proceed in light of defendants' statement as to whether revised stipulations meet the PLRA's

‘need-narrowness-intrusiveness' requirements. (doc. nos. 2383 & 2382). Counsel for plaintiffs have already said that they do.

To be reset.

5/14/19 at 10:00 a.m.

SUICIDE PREVENTION

Oral argument and hearing on parties' joint proposals on ‘methods' defendants can use to verify that segregation rounds are being properly conducted in segregation and segregation-like settings. (doc. nos. 2345, 2380, 2410, & 2414.).

3/27/19 at 9:00 a.m.

Oral argument and hearing parties' submission of list of the agreed-upon segregation-like settings, as well as the settings

about which they may not be able to reach an agreement. (doc. nos. 2345 & 2364).

3/27/19 at 9:00 a.m.

Oral argument and hearing on defendants' development of a ‘review process' that collects and consolidates information on at least a weekly basis for each prisoner in ADOC with SMI who is housed in segregation; that is, a “tracking process.” (doc. Nos. 2345, 2377, & 2406-07).

3/27/19 at 9:00 a.m.

Oral argument and hearing on parties' submission of joint report to the court as to other prisons that do not place (or significantly limit the placement of) SMI prisoners in segregation. (doc. nos. 2345 & 2379).

3/27/19 at 9:00 a.m.

Oral argument on how to proceed on defendants' initial submission of the results for “tracking process' of SMIs in segregation. (doc. nos. 2345, 2357, & 2408).

3/27/19 at 9:00 a.m.

Pretrial briefs on all remaining issues, including but not limited to further addressing whether plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunctions (doc. no. 2276) has been properly characterized as preliminary, rather than simply post-liability finding, relief and the legal and factual implications that should follow.

3/22/19 at noon

Pretrial hearing on all remaining issues.

3/25/19 at 10:00 a.m., with the courtroom deputy to arrange for the hearing to be conducted by telephone

Evidentiary hearing on plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunctions. (doc. no. 2276)

3/27/19 through 4/10/19 at 9:00 a.m. each day

Evidentiary hearing on all remaining issues.

3/27/19 through 4/10/19 at 9:00 a.m. each day

DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS

Parties to file initial briefs for upcoming oral argument.

5/1/19 at noon

Parties to file reply briefs for upcoming oral argument.

5/8/19 at noon

In-person oral argument to discuss “what the substantive law is” and “how” to proceed in light of defendants' statement as to whether revised stipulations meet the PLRA's

‘need-narrowness-intrusiveness' requirements. (doc. nos. 2384 & 2382). Counsel for plaintiffs have already said that they do.

To be reset.

5/14/19 at 10:00 a.m.

Parties to resubmit stipulations to address training issue. (doc. no. 2374).

3/21/19

MONITORING

Parties to file initial briefs for upcoming oral argument.

5/1/19 at noon

Parties to file reply briefs for upcoming oral argument.

5/8/19 at noon

In-person oral argument to discuss “what the substantive law is” and “how” to proceed as to the monitoring remedial issue in light of defendants' statement as to whether all remedial stipulations previously approved and adopted by the court meet the PLRA's

‘need-narrowness-intrusiveness' requirements.

5/14/19 at 10:00 a.m.

MISCELLANEOUS

Parties to file initial briefs for upcoming oral argument.

5/1/19 at noon

Parties to file reply briefs for upcoming oral argument.

5/8/19 at noon

In-person oral argument to discuss “what the substantive law is” and “how” to proceed in light of defendants' statement as to whether all remedial stipulations previously approved and adopted by the court meet the PLRA's ‘need-narrowness-intrusiveness' requirements. (doc. no. 2382). Counsel for plaintiffs have already said that they do.

To be reset.

5/14/19 at 10:00 a.m.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.