University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Moore v. Final Reviewing Auth. PC-IN-0008
Docket / Court 87-420 ( N.D. Ind. )
State/Territory Indiana
Case Type(s) Prison Conditions
Case Summary
In July 1987, an inmate in the Indiana State Prison filed suit, pro se, in the District Court for the Northern District of Indiana against prison officials. The complaint alleged violations of the inmate's Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights in regards to a disciplinary hearing about ... read more >
In July 1987, an inmate in the Indiana State Prison filed suit, pro se, in the District Court for the Northern District of Indiana against prison officials. The complaint alleged violations of the inmate's Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights in regards to a disciplinary hearing about the inmate's attempted escape. In December 1987, the District Court (Judge Allen Sharp) dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, but permitted plaintiff to amend the due process claims.

Plaintiff's amended complaint alleged violations of his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process in three respects. Plaintiff alleged that the disciplinary board did not follow statutory procedures when conducting the hearing. Plaintiff also alleged that prison officials conspired to deny him of his due process rights. Finally, plaintiff alleged officials violated his rights by denying him visitation, recreation, mail, and access to the courts. Plaintiff later filed a supplemental complaint in which he claimed that his rights were violated by being classified as a ""Special Offender"" on the basis of his escape attempt. The District Court dismissed the supplemental complain for failure to state a claim and referred to its December 1987 order when dismissing the other allegations.

Plaintiff appealed the decision to the Seventh Circuit (Judges Richard Poser, Michael Kanne, and Joel Flaim) in 1991 and the District Court decision was affirmed except for the claim of conspiracy to deny plaintiff a fair hearing. Moore v. Final Reviewing Auth., 1991 WL 37787 (7th Cir.(Ind.)). This claim was remanded to the District Court and the parties reached a settlement. The terms of the 1992 settlement stipulated that plaintiff's earlier guilty verdict by the disciplinary board would not affect his future classification and would be kept in a classified portion of his file.

In 1997, plaintiff learned that his offense had not been kept confidential and asked officials directly to correct the situation. When they refused, plaintiff moved, still acting pro se, but with assistance from the Valparaiso University Law Clinic, for defendants to be held in contempt and asked for monetary damages. Prison officials then acted without order and moved plaintiff's earlier record into a confidential folder. The District Court (Judge Sharp) declined to find the prison officials in contempt and refused to award damages. On appeal to the Seventh Circuit (Judges William Bauer, Frank Easterbrook, and Kenneth Ripple), the District Court's decision was affirmed, but the order for plaintiff to pay costs was reversed. Moore v. Final Reviewing Auth., 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 3702 (7th Cir, March 7, 2000).

Apparently, during the pendency of the appeal, defendants put the disputed material back in the plaintiff's file; on the Court of Appeals' suggestion, he renewed his contempt motion but it was denied. There the docket ends.

John Maksymonko - 08/12/2005


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
General
Classification / placement
Disciplinary procedures
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Defendant(s) None on record
Plaintiff Description Inmate at the Indiana State Prison alleging that the defendants violated his sixth, eighth, and fourteenth amendment rights in the course of conducting a disciplinary hearing before the conduct adjustment board
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
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 1992 - n/a
Case Closing Year n/a
Case Ongoing Unknown
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 ]

Docket(s)
87-420 (N.D. Ind.) 10/06/2000
PC-IN-0008-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Order 03/20/1991 (928 F.2d 407)
PC-IN-0008-0001 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Order 03/07/2000 (210 F.3d 375)
PC-IN-0008-0002 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Judges Bauer, William Joseph (N.D. Ill., Seventh Circuit)
PC-IN-0008-0002
Easterbrook, Frank Hoover (Seventh Circuit)
PC-IN-0008-0002
Flaum, Joel Martin (N.D. Ill., Seventh Circuit)
PC-IN-0008-0001
Kanne, Michael Stephen (N.D. Ind., Seventh Circuit)
PC-IN-0008-0001
Posner, Richard Allen (Seventh Circuit)
PC-IN-0008-0001
Ripple, Kenneth Francis (Seventh Circuit)
PC-IN-0008-0002
Sharp, Allen (N.D. Ind.)
PC-IN-0008-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Vandercoy, David E. (Indiana)
PC-IN-0008-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Steiner, David L. (Indiana)
PC-IN-0008-9000
Uhl, Wayne Elliott (Indiana)
PC-IN-0008-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -