University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name W.C. v. DeBruyn JI-IN-0003
Docket / Court 90-40 ( S.D. Ind. )
State/Territory Indiana
Case Type(s) Juvenile Institution
Case Summary
On January 16, 1990, juveniles at the Indiana Boys School, a correctional facility in Plainfield, Indiana, filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all present and future students against the superintendent of the school and commissioner of the Indiana Department of Corrections under 42 U.S.C. § 1 ... read more >
On January 16, 1990, juveniles at the Indiana Boys School, a correctional facility in Plainfield, Indiana, filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all present and future students against the superintendent of the school and commissioner of the Indiana Department of Corrections under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. The plaintiffs, who were represented by Legal Services of Indiana, asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming that the school's confinement conditions violated the juveniles' constitutional rights. They sought to reduce overcrowding and to increase the school's staff. They also sought changes in the school's medical, psychiatric and special education services.

On September 26, 1991, the parties entered into a Consent Decree. The Decree called for the defendants to lower the population of the school and to amend the school's disciplinary policies in accordance with the American Correctional Association standards. They also agreed to rehabilitate the medical unit and to provide more comprehensive services; to offer appropriate education, including individualized educational programs for students with disabilities; and to provide psychiatric treatment. Finally, the Decree required the defendants to pay for the plaintiffs' attorneys fees, and the plaintiffs to notify the class members of the proposed settlement terms. The Consent Decree provided for continued monitoring of the school's conditions for three years. On December 20, 1991, the court (Judge Sarah Evans Barker) entered a judgment approving the terms of the Consent Decree.

In May 1993, the plaintiffs sought to hold the defendants in contempt for violating the Decree. Subsequently the parties engaged in negotiations, and in what appears to be December 1993, the parties entered stipulations to amend the Decree.

On July 7, 1994, the court (Judge Barker) entered an order modifying the terms of the Consent Decree. The court ordered the school's population to be capped at 490, and to work to reduce the population to 400.

On February 22, 1995, the court (Judge Barker) entered an order in response to the parties' dispute over the amount of attorneys fees the defendants owed the plaintiffs. The court ordered the defendants to pay $4,135.00. W.C. v. DeBruyn, 833 F. Supp. 354 (S.D. Ind. 1995).

Thereafter, the parties continued to dispute the timeline for reducing the school's population and for adhering to other conditions of the Consent Decree.

On August 31, 2005, the District Court (Judge Barker) granted the defendants' unopposed motion to terminate the prospective relief in the case, under the provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The Court terminated the Consent Decree, as amended, and the case was closed.

Laura Uberti - 05/20/2006


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Male
Crowding
Pre-PLRA Population Cap
General
Disciplinary procedures
Disciplinary segregation
Education
Food service / nutrition / hydration
Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)
Totality of conditions
Visiting
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) Indiana Boys School
Indiana Department of Corrections and Indiana Boys School
Plaintiff Description All present and future students at the Indiana Boys School.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 1991 - 2005
Case Closing Year 2005
Case Ongoing No
Docket(s)
90-40 (S.D. Ind.) 08/31/2005
JI-IN-0003-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint / Class Action 01/16/1990
JI-IN-0003-0001.pdf | Detail
Stipulation to Enter Consent Decree Following Notice to the Class 09/25/1991
JI-IN-0003-0002.pdf | Detail
Parties' Stipulation to Withdraw Contempt Pleading and Stipulation to Amend Settlement 12/27/1993
JI-IN-0003-0003.pdf | Detail
Order 07/06/1994 (S.D. Ind.)
JI-IN-0003-0004.pdf | Detail
Entry 02/22/1995 (883 F.Supp. 354) (S.D. Ind.)
JI-IN-0003-0006.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Order Terminating Prospective Relief 09/01/2005 (S.D. Ind.)
JI-IN-0003-0005.pdf | Detail
Judges Barker, Sarah Evans (S.D. Ind.)
JI-IN-0003-0004 | JI-IN-0003-0005 | JI-IN-0003-0006 | JI-IN-0003-9000
Monitors/Masters Godich, John Paul (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Bennett, Julie E. (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-0004 | JI-IN-0003-0006
Falk, Kenneth J. (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-0001 | JI-IN-0003-0002 | JI-IN-0003-0003 | JI-IN-0003-0004 | JI-IN-0003-0006 | JI-IN-0003-9000
Hayes, Lisa R. (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-0001 | JI-IN-0003-0002
Jubinsky, Grace (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-0001
Pappas, Tracy T. (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-0003
Defendant's Lawyers Arthur, David A. (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-0002
Carter, Pamela (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-0004
Lahn, Seth M. (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-0003 | JI-IN-0003-0004 | JI-IN-0003-0006
Uhl, Wayne Elliott (Indiana)
JI-IN-0003-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -