University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Hawker v. Consovoy CJ-NJ-0001
Docket / Court 1:00-cv-02106-JAP ( D.N.J. )
State/Territory New Jersey
Case Type(s) Criminal Justice (Other)
Case Summary
On May 2, 2000, three inmates at the Riverfront State Prison in New Jersey filed a class action lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against the New Jersey State Parole Board. The complaint alleged that the Parole Board knowingly ... read more >
On May 2, 2000, three inmates at the Riverfront State Prison in New Jersey filed a class action lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against the New Jersey State Parole Board. The complaint alleged that the Parole Board knowingly and consistently failed to meet the deadlines for the preparation of pre-parole reports and the conduction of parole hearings, as required by the New Jersey Parole Act of 1979 ("Act"), N.J.S.A. 30:4-123.45 to 30:4-123.69, in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. As a result of the Parole Board's alleged inaction, the plaintiffs and thousands of other inmates remained incarcerated past their respective parole eligibility dates. At the peak of the problem, hearings were behind schedule for approximately 5,800 prisoners. The complaint demanded declaratory and injunctive relief and nominal damages.

Soon after the case was filed, the parties pursued settlement negotiations. Ultimately, a settlement was reached and the parties filed a joint motion for approval of the Settlement Agreement. The District Court (Judge Pisano) certified the case as a class action and approved the settlement as being fair and reasonable. Hawker v. Consovoy, 198 F.R.D. 619 (D.N.J. 2001). Under the terms of the Agreement, the Parole Board stipulated that it would conduct more timely hearings, and that no such backlog would be allowed to build up again.

Dan Dalton - 11/20/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
General
Parole grant/revocation
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) New Jersey State Parole Board
Plaintiff Description New Jersey state inmates that are eligible for parole (or who will become eligible) but who had not received timely parole hearings.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year 2001
Case Ongoing No
Docket(s)
1:00-cv-02106-JAP (D.N.J.) 04/24/2001
CJ-NJ-0001-9000 PDF | Detail
General Documents
Class Action Complaint 05/02/2000
CJ-NJ-0001-0001 PDF | Detail
Settlement Agreement 11/10/2000
CJ-NJ-0001-0002 PDF | Detail
Opinion 01/22/2001 (198 F.R.D. 619) (D.N.J.)
CJ-NJ-0001-0003 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Judges Pisano, Joel A. (D.N.J.) [Magistrate]
CJ-NJ-0001-0002 | CJ-NJ-0001-0003 | CJ-NJ-0001-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Fuoco, Philip Stephen (New Jersey)
CJ-NJ-0001-0001 | CJ-NJ-0001-0002 | CJ-NJ-0001-0003
Osefchen, Joseph A. (New Jersey)
CJ-NJ-0001-0001 | CJ-NJ-0001-0003 | CJ-NJ-0001-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Farmer, John J. Jr. (New Jersey)
CJ-NJ-0001-0002 | CJ-NJ-0001-0003
Harris, James D. (New Jersey)
CJ-NJ-0001-0002 | CJ-NJ-0001-0003
Moratti, Dianne M. (New Jersey)
CJ-NJ-0001-0002 | CJ-NJ-0001-0003 | CJ-NJ-0001-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -