University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Harris v. Cardwell PC-AZ-0005
Docket / Court 75-185 ( D. Ariz. )
State/Territory Arizona
Case Type(s) Prison Conditions
Case Summary
This is a Section 1983 action brought by the class of all present and future inmates of the Arizona State Penitentiary at Florence charging unconstitutional conditions relating to crowding and medical care. Plaintiffs were represented by private counsel. This class action commenced in the ... read more >
This is a Section 1983 action brought by the class of all present and future inmates of the Arizona State Penitentiary at Florence charging unconstitutional conditions relating to crowding and medical care. Plaintiffs were represented by private counsel. This class action commenced in the District of Arizona some time in 1975. The file is not very complete; the docket available from PACER dates back only to May 18, 1989 and the file contains only that partial docket and a few court orders. The earliest available court order was filed on September 2, 1977. The court found that due to overcrowding and substandard facilities the plaintiffs' eighth amendment rights were being violated and Judge Carl A. Muecke therefore issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting defendants from allowing the male inmate population at the Arizona State Prison at Florence from exceeding 2,125 until October 3, 1977.

On December 13, 1978, the court ordered the adoption of defendants' proposed plan to improve inmate classification and health care services. As part of this order the court required written reports from defendants regarding implementation of the plan. On May 23, 1979, the court reviewed the implementation of defendants' plan and found it deficient due to lack of quality physician care. The court ordered defendants to address this deficiency and further lower the amount of overcrowding, specifically of maximum-security inmates.

On October 14, 1980, in response to a settlement agreement between the parties, the court expanded the scope of the injunction to require defendants to further decrease overcrowding and improve: classification procedures; health care facilities; work opportunities; and educational facilities for the inmates. As part of the agreement, defendants planned to refrain from: housing more than one inmate per cell; housing in dormitories those inmates classified as maximum custody status; double bunking inmates in dormitories and from providing less than 60 square feet of floor space per inmate in dormitories. The agreement also required defendants to maintain a classification system that ensures all new inmates would be carefully screened and evaluated for proper custodial assignment and program placement. Finally, the court maintained jurisdiction over the matter subject to a hearing to determine defendants' progress in implementing the agreement.

The 1980 judgment was amended on May 26, 1982 to eliminate the requirement that defendants maintain a classification system to regulate the surveillance of inmates. This final amendment also transferred monitoring responsibility from the court to an internal grievance system.

The paper docket is not in the file, and the PACER docket picks up in 1989 with motions by two individual inmates (no counsel) to enforce the judgment; these were dismissed, as were some similar filings in 2003. There are many docket entries between 1989 and 2003 that are not included in the PACER docket. Included among these were Defendants' Motion to Terminate Consent Decree Order [Doc. No. 868] and Plaintiffs' Motion to Re-Open and For Enforcement of Consent Decree and Permanent Injunction [Doc. No. 869], both filed in 1996, neither of which was ruled upon. In an order dated October 26, 2005, prompted by some of the individual inmate filings, Judge McNamee denied those two long-pending motions without prejudice.

On November 23, 2005, the case was reassigned to Judge Susan R. Bolton. She issued an order (dated December 6, 2006) calling for a status report by the parties. In response, the state filed a new motion to terminate, dated January 22, 2007. This motion explained the prior background of the case, and argued that the facts and law had changed significantly since 1982. In particular, the defendants argued that the enactment of the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996 (PLRA), 18 U.S.C. § 3626 justified the termination of relief in the Amended Judgment. The plaintiffs opposed the motion, arguing that the Amended Judgment contained preliminary findings of constitutional violations and the court was required to determine whether constitutional violations were ongoing before granting termination of the relief.

On August 31, 2007, the District Court (Judge Bolton) issued an order granting defendants' motion to terminate the relief on the grounds that the Amended Judgments contained no constitutional violations and thus the PLRA "immediate termination" provisions applied. The court held that prospective relief, in the absence of a prior finding of the violation of a federal right, must be terminated immediately.

Eoghan Keenan - 04/17/2005
David Cho - 11/10/2014


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Content of Injunction
Monitoring
Crowding
Crowding / caseload
Pre-PLRA Population Cap
Defendant-type
Corrections
General
Administrative segregation
Classification / placement
Disciplinary segregation
Education
Food service / nutrition / hydration
Library (non-law) access
Personal injury
Recreation / Exercise
Sanitation / living conditions
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) Arizona State Penitentiary
Plaintiff Description all present and future inmates of the Arizona State Penitentiary at Florence
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
Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 1978 - 2007
Case Closing Year 2007
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Civil Rights Injunctions Over Time: A Case Study of Jail and Prison Court Orders
N.Y.U. Law Review
By: Margo Schlanger (Washington University)
Citation: 81 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 550 (2006)
[ Detail ] [ PDF ] [ External Link ]

  Judicial Policy Making and the Modern State: How the Courts Reformed America's Prisons
By: Malcolm M. Feeley & Edward Rubin (UC Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law & Vanderbilt School of Law Faculty)
Citation: (1998)
[ Detail ]

  Sunbelt Justice: Arizona and the Transformation of American Punishment
By: Mona Lynch (UC Irvine)
Citation: (2010)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
75-185 (D. Ariz.) 08/31/2007
PC-AZ-0005-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Order 09/02/1977 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0001.pdf | Detail
Order 10/07/1977 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0002.pdf | Detail
Order on Population Limits 04/01/1979 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0003.pdf | Detail
Order 05/23/1979 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0004.pdf | Detail
Stipulation and Order Re Amendment of State's Plan on Medical Care 09/26/1979 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0005.pdf | Detail
Order 12/13/1979 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0006.pdf | Detail
Judgment 10/14/1980 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0007.pdf | Detail
Amended Judgment 05/26/1982 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0008.pdf | Detail
Order 10/26/2005 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0011.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendant's Motion [to terminate prospective relief] 01/22/2007
PC-AZ-0005-0012.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Motion to Terminate Prospective Relief 08/30/2007 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0010.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Bolton, Susan Ritchie (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0010 | PC-AZ-0005-9000
McNamee, Stephen M. (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0011 | PC-AZ-0005-9000 | PC-AZ-0005-9000
Muecke, Charles Andrew (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0005-0001 | PC-AZ-0005-0002 | PC-AZ-0005-0003 | PC-AZ-0005-0004 | PC-AZ-0005-0005 | PC-AZ-0005-0006 | PC-AZ-0005-0007 | PC-AZ-0005-0008
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Bendheim, Alice L. (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-9000
Hawkins, Michael Daly (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-0006
Hentoff, Nicholas Simon (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-9000
Lewis, Frank (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-0001 | PC-AZ-0005-0003 | PC-AZ-0005-0006 | PC-AZ-0005-0007 | PC-AZ-0005-0008 | PC-AZ-0005-9000
Pochoda, Daniel Joseph (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Brodsky, Michael L. (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-9000
Corbin, Robert K. (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-0005 | PC-AZ-0005-0007 | PC-AZ-0005-0008
DeLange, Darrin J. (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-0012 | PC-AZ-0005-9000
Goddard, Terry (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-0012
Morrow, James Russel (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-9000
Prose, Thomas (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-0003 | PC-AZ-0005-0005 | PC-AZ-0005-0006 | PC-AZ-0005-0007 | PC-AZ-0005-0008 | PC-AZ-0005-9000
Teply, R. Elizabeth (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-9000
Other Lawyers Johns, Michael A. (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-9000
Loss, James (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-9000
McNamee, Stephen M. (Arizona)
PC-AZ-0005-0011 | PC-AZ-0005-9000 | PC-AZ-0005-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -