University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Martino v. Carey JC-OR-0001
Docket / Court 81-751 ( D. Or. )
State/Territory Oregon
Case Type(s) Jail Conditions
Case Summary
On August 17, 1981, prisoners brought a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, against the Umatilla County Sheriff and County Commissioner, under 42 U.S.C § 1983. The plaintiffs claimed that the conditions of confinement violated their First, Eighth, and Fourteenth ... read more >
On August 17, 1981, prisoners brought a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, against the Umatilla County Sheriff and County Commissioner, under 42 U.S.C § 1983. The plaintiffs claimed that the conditions of confinement violated their First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. On November 5, 1981, the District Court certified the class and visited the jail. On July 2, 1982, the District Court (Judge James Redden) granted the plaintiff's motion for interim relief pending trial, and ordered that the defendants provide adequate staffing so that security of the inmates could be maintained 24 hours per day, ventilation of the cells during the summer, a shower temperature that would not scald the inmates, and an hour of exercise five days a week. On September 2, 1982, the court made a second inspection of the jail to confirm that defendants were complying with the interim relief order. Though a new facility was under construction, and would have alleviated many of the conditions in the suit, the defendants refused to settle, and therefore on February 1, 1983, the District Court for the District of Oregon, (Judge Redden) announced the ruling concerning the conditions at the jail when the suit was originally filed. The court found that the security, medical care, and living conditions all violated the inmates' Eighth Amendment rights. Martino v. Carey, 563 F.Supp. 984 (D. Oregon 1983). The court also found that the inmates Due Process rights were violated by the disciplinary policy, and that the inmates were denied access to the courts. Finally, the court found that the inmates' First Amendment rights were violated by the jail's censorship and regulation of the mail. The court ordered the defendants to pose a plan to the court, within 30 days, to alleviate the violations that still existed at the jail and to advise the court of the progress on the new facility. If the defendants failed to respond, the court would fashion its own remedy. The docket on PACER is sparse, but it indicates a judgment for the three named plaintiffs on July 11, 1984.

As of February 22, 2016, there has been no new action on the docket for several years.

Jaclyn Adams - 02/24/2006
Rachel June-Graber - 02/22/2016


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Crowding
Crowding / caseload
General
Bathing and hygiene
Mail
Personal injury
Recreation / Exercise
Totality of conditions
Medical/Mental Health
Medical care, general
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) Umatilla County Jail
Plaintiff Description Inmates at the Umatilla County Jail
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 Litigation
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration 1983 - n/a
Case Closing Year n/a
Case Ongoing Unknown
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies After Decision: Implementation of Judicial Decrees in Correctional Settings
Written: Oct. 01, 1977
By: M. Kay Harris & Dudley P. Spiller (Temple University)
Citation: (1977)
[ Detail ] [ PDF ]

Docket(s)
81-751 (D. Or.) 08/27/1993
JC-OR-0001-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Opinion 02/01/1983 (563 F.Supp. 984) (D. Or.)
JC-OR-0001-0001.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Judges Redden, James Anthony (D. Or.)
JC-OR-0001-0001 | JC-OR-0001-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Haber, Roy S. (Oregon)
JC-OR-0001-0001 | JC-OR-0001-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Fabre, Harold A. (Oregon)
JC-OR-0001-0001
Gallaher, David D. (Oregon)
JC-OR-0001-9000
Nash, Douglas R. (Oregon)
JC-OR-0001-0001
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -