University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Rosen v. City of Philadelphia PN-PA-0012
Docket / Court 00-0764 ( E.D. Pa. )
State/Territory Pennsylvania
Case Type(s) Policing
Case Summary
On February 11, 2000, plaintiffs, a group of individuals with diabetes who were allegedly denied proper medical care and diet while in police custody, filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the City of Philadelphia under 42 U.S.C. §1 ... read more >
On February 11, 2000, plaintiffs, a group of individuals with diabetes who were allegedly denied proper medical care and diet while in police custody, filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the City of Philadelphia under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, sought injunctive relief, damages, and attorneys' fees. Plaintiffs alleged the City of Philadelphia failed to ensure that individuals with diabetes who were detained or arrested by police received adequate treatment.

On March 6, 2001, the District Court (Judge Petrese B. Tucker) certified both an injunctive class, including all those who are or will be in the custody of the Philadelphia Police Department, and a damages class, consisting of all those with diabetes who were denied timely and adequate medical care and diet while in the custody of the Philadelphia Police Department.

On March 13, 2003, the parties reached a settlement agreement providing for: (1) centralized processing and medical services for all adult detainees with diabetes, (2) a "source of sugar" available in all police districts and units, (3) monitoring of compliance by plaintiffs' counsel and the American Diabetes Association for 18 months following approval of the settlement agreement, (4) training videos on the needs of people with diabetes in custody incorporated into police training and diabetes posters placed in each area where prisoners are detained, (5) compensation for the damages class, and (6) attorneys' fees. The settlement agreement was approved by the District Court (Judge Petrese B. Tucker) on October 16, 2003.

Following the final monitoring report, on July 2, 2007, the District Court (Judge Petrese B. Tucker) dismissed the case.

Kristen Sagar - 04/12/2009
Brendan Brown - 10/15/2014


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Content of Injunction
Monitoring
Reporting
Defendant-type
Jurisdiction-wide
Law-enforcement
Disability
disability, unspecified
Discrimination-basis
Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)
General
Conditions of confinement
Failure to train
Personal injury
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) City of Philadelphia
Plaintiff Description Diabetics detained by the Philadelphia Police Department
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 Attorneys fees
Damages
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Private Settlement Agreement
Order Duration 2003 - 2008
Case Closing Year 2008
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Federal Enforcement of Police Reform
By: Stephen Rushin (University of Illinois College of Law, University of California, Berkeley - Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program )
Citation: 82 Fordham Law Review 3189 (2014)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Panopticism for Police: Structural Reform Bargaining and Police Regulation by Data-Driven Surveillance
By: Mary D. Fan (University of Washington)
Citation: Forthcoming, 87 Washington L. Rev. __ (2012).
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  What Happens When Police Are Forced to Reform?
Written: Nov. 13, 2015
By: Kimbriell Kelly, Sarah Childress and Steven Rich (Frontline/Post)
Citation: Washington Post (Nov. 13, 2015)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
2:00−cv−00764 (E.D. Pa.) 07/19/2012
PN-PA-0012-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Memorandum and Order [Certifying Class] 03/06/2001 (2001 WL 484114) (E.D. Pa.)
PN-PA-0012-0004.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Press Release 03/13/2003
PN-PA-0012-0001.pdf | External Link | Detail
Order and Final Judgment 09/25/2003 (E.D. Pa.)
PN-PA-0012-0002.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Approving Settlement and Order for Distribution 06/15/2004 (E.D. Pa.)
PN-PA-0012-0003.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [Dismissing Case] 06/21/2005 (E.D. Pa.)
PN-PA-0012-0005.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [Dismissing All Claims for Injunctive Relief] 07/02/2008 (E.D. Pa.)
PN-PA-0012-0006.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Tucker, Petrese B. (E.D. Pa.)
PN-PA-0012-0002 | PN-PA-0012-0003 | PN-PA-0012-0004 | PN-PA-0012-0006 | PN-PA-0012-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Dever, Joseph P. Jr. (Pennsylvania)
PN-PA-0012-9000
Edwards, Mark (Pennsylvania)
PN-PA-0012-9000
Fay, Joseph B.G. (Pennsylvania)
PN-PA-0012-9000
Kulak, Kenneth M. (Pennsylvania)
PN-PA-0012-9000
Rudovsky, David (Pennsylvania)
PN-PA-0012-9000
Scott, Jeffrey M. (Pennsylvania)
PN-PA-0012-9000 | PN-PA-0012-9000
Yatvin, Alan L. (Pennsylvania)
PN-PA-0012-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Smith, Shelley R. (Pennsylvania)
PN-PA-0012-9000
Wolf, Denise S. (Pennsylvania)
PN-PA-0012-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -