University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Duvall v. Glendening PC-MD-0006
Docket / Court 1:94-cv-02541-JFM ( D. Md. )
State/Territory Maryland
Case Type(s) Prison Conditions
Special Collection Post-PLRA enforceable consent decrees
Attorney Organization ACLU National (all projects)
ACLU National Prison Project
Case Summary
This case was brought in 1976 in the federal district court for the District of Maryland under Section 1983 by inmates at the Baltimore City Jail against both state and city officials of the Baltimore, Maryland prison system. The plaintiffs complained of overcrowding and conditions of confinement ... read more >
This case was brought in 1976 in the federal district court for the District of Maryland under Section 1983 by inmates at the Baltimore City Jail against both state and city officials of the Baltimore, Maryland prison system. The plaintiffs complained of overcrowding and conditions of confinement at the Baltimore City Jail, which resulted in a consent agreement setting capacity limitations, eliminating double-celling and providing other services.

In April 1981, the case was consolidated with Collins v. Schoonfield, another case involving the same jail that had earlier resulted in an interim decree setting standards of confinement. The decree was revised in 1984, 1986 and 1988. In 1991, the State assumed control of the Baltimore City Jail requiring further modifications to the decree. These modifications were agreed upon in the 1993 Revised Consolidation Decree. The 1993 decree established requirements for housing, inmate services, communications, access to courts, grievances and discipline. The decree also required the designation of a Director of Court Compliance to monitor the implementation of the decree. In 1994, the case was reassigned to Judge J. Frederick Motz under the new docket number 94-cv-02541. At some point prior to 1994, the National Prison Project of the ACLU agreed to represent plaintiffs.

In 2002, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order to address the excessive heat at the Women's Detention Center of the Baltimore City Detention Center. On August 16, 2002, Judge Andre M. Davis granted a temporary restraining order addressing the issue. On August 22, 2002, Judge Motz issued a consent order that required the defendants to implement a "comprehensive protocol for intake screening to identify detainees who are susceptible to heat-related injury."

In late 2003, the plaintiffs asked the court to restore the case to the active docket. Thereafter, on April 23, 2004, the defendants filed a renewed motion to terminate the revised consolidated decree. On August 31, 2004, Judge Motz restored the case to the active docket. Subsequently, the parties began conducting discovery and preparing for a hearing with regard to the defendants' motion. The parties acknowledged that the defendants had made improvements, such as the air conditioning at the Women's Detention Center, and that the parties desired and expected further improvements.

In 2009, the parties reached a partial settlement agreement (PSA), and Judge Motz approved the agreement on November 10, 2009. The agreement covered all areas of dispute, except for how to protect detainees with high security or high-medium security classifications from heat injury. The parties agreed to let the court resolve that issue. On April 6, 2010, Judge Motz approved the final partial settlement agreement (PSA).

In 2011, the case was reassigned to Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander, who approved an amendment to the partial settlement on May 8, 2012, settling all of the substantive matters and conditionally dismissing the case. On April 7, 2014, Judge Hollander denied the plaintiff's motion that the defendants were liable for the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees. Duvall v. O'Malley, 2014 WL 1379787 (D. Md. Apr. 7, 2014).

The PSA provided that, if the defendants failed to achieve compliance with its substantive agreements, Plaintiffs could file a motion to reopen the case within two years of the time of court approval. The PSA allows the defendants to oppose a reopening of the case, but only on the ground that the defendants had achieved compliance with its contested provisions. Under the amended PSA, the time for the plaintiffs to file a motion to reopen was June 30, 2013. But later, the parties stipulated to extensions of the PSA to June 3, 2015; the court approved those extensions on April 10, 2014, and March 24, 2015.

On October 23, 2014, the plaintiffs filed a notice of noncompliance, formally informing the defendants of their contention that the jail remained noncompliant with the agreement, and entering into settlement discussions. No settlement was forthcoming, and on June 2, 2015, the day before the expiration of their right to reopen, the plaintiffs filed a motion to reopen the case, restore it to the active docket, and grant a preliminary injunction compelling improvements in several areas posing acute dangers to prisoner safety. The plaintiffs alleged a litany of noncompliant incidents, and argued that the failures not only violated the PSA but also the Eighth Amendment.

The parties entered in settlement talks and asked the court to stay the proceedings in the case. On October 26, 2015, the court (Judge Ellen L. Hollander) granted the parties' motion to stay.

On December 23, 2015, the parties reached a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval. Under the settlement, Maryland agreed to overhaul the jail’s health care system and make major improvements to the facilities, including accommodations for people with disabilities. To ensure compliance with the settlement, the parties agreed that the jail’s progress would be assessed by independent monitors. The Court would dismiss the case when all the requirements have been met, or in four years unless the Court finds that jail conditions still violate federal law. The defendants also agreed to pay $450,000 in attorney's fees and costs to the plaintiffs.

On January 4, 2016, the court preliminarily approved the settlement, and on June 28, 2016, the court approved the final settlement and attorneys' fees and costs. The court closed the case, subject to reopening as provided in the settlement agreement.

Eoghan Keenan - 05/25/2005
Jessica Kincaid - 04/01/2016
Abigail DeHart - 10/22/2016


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Constitutional Clause
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Due Process
Content of Injunction
Monitor/Master
Monitoring
Preliminary relief granted
Reporting
Crowding
Crowding / caseload
Defendant-type
Corrections
Disability
disability, unspecified
Discrimination-basis
Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)
Race discrimination
Sex discrimination
General
Administrative segregation
Classification / placement
Conditions of confinement
Fire safety
Food service / nutrition / hydration
Law library access
Library (non-law) access
Mail
Phone
Recreation / Exercise
Religious programs / policies
Sanitation / living conditions
Suicide prevention
Visiting
Medical/Mental Health
HIV/AIDS
Medical care, general
Medication, administration of
Mental health care, general
Suicide prevention
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) City of Baltimore
State of Maryland
Plaintiff Description Detainee in the Baltimore City Detention Center arguing that the conditions of the prison violate his constitutional rights
Indexed Lawyer Organizations ACLU National (all projects)
ACLU National Prison Project
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Attorneys fees
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Conditional Dismissal
Order Duration 1981 - n/a
Case Closing Year n/a
Case Ongoing Yes
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)
1:94-cv-02541-ELH (D. Md.) 06/28/2016
PC-MD-0006-9002.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
1998 Revised Consolidated Decree 08/30/1988 (1988 WL 225861 / 1988 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 18298) (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0005.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
1993 Revised Consolidated Decree 07/09/1993 (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0001.pdf | Detail
Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration 07/19/2001 (2001 WL 34647163) (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0006.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Reported Opinion 12/19/2001 (22 Fed.Appx. 292)
PC-MD-0006-0004.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Temporary Restraining Order 08/16/2002 (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0002.pdf | Detail
Consent Order 08/22/2002 (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0003.pdf | Detail
Partial Settlement Agreement 08/18/2009
PC-MD-0006-0007.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [Approving Settlement Agreement] 10/10/2009 (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0008.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Report and Reccomendation 04/18/2012
PC-MD-0006-0009.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Approval of [First] Amendment to Partial Settlement Agreement 05/08/2012 (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0010.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Memorandum Opinion [Concerning Attorneys' Fees] 04/07/2014 (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0011.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Notice of Service [Notice of Significant Noncompliance] 10/22/2014
PC-MD-0006-0013.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Reopening This Case, Restoring it to the Active Docket, and Temporary Relief 06/02/2015
PC-MD-0006-0012.pdf | Detail
Document Source: Plaintiffs' counsel
Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs' Consent Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement and Proposed Notice to the Class; [Proposed] Settlement Agreement; Declaration in Support 12/23/2015
PC-MD-0006-0014.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
First Amendment to Settlement Agreement 06/27/2016
PC-MD-0006-0016.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Approving Settlement Agreement 06/28/2016 (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0015.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Gregory, Roger L. (Fourth Circuit)
PC-MD-0006-0004
Grimm, Paul William (D. Md.) [Magistrate]
PC-MD-0006-0009
Hollander, Ellen Lipton (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0010 | PC-MD-0006-0011 | PC-MD-0006-0015 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Kaufman, Frank Albert (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0001 | PC-MD-0006-0005
Messitte, Peter Jo (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0006
Motz, J. Frederick (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0006-0003 | PC-MD-0006-0004 | PC-MD-0006-0008
Traxler, William Byrd Jr. (Fourth Circuit, D.S.C.)
PC-MD-0006-0004
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Alexander, Elizabeth R. (District of Columbia)
PC-MD-0006-0003 | PC-MD-0006-0007 | PC-MD-0006-0012 | PC-MD-0006-0013 | PC-MD-0006-0014 | PC-MD-0006-0016 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Burt, Marianna I. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Dunbaugh, Frank M. III (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0001 | PC-MD-0006-0003 | PC-MD-0006-0005 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Eber, Gabriel B. (District of Columbia)
PC-MD-0006-0016 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Fathi, David Cyrus (District of Columbia)
PC-MD-0006-0012 | PC-MD-0006-0013 | PC-MD-0006-0014 | PC-MD-0006-0016 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Fisher, Sally Dworak (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Gardner, Debra (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0012 | PC-MD-0006-0013 | PC-MD-0006-0014 | PC-MD-0006-0016 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Hess, Wendy Noel (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0007 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Jeon, Deborah A. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0003
Wyda, James (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Young, Joseph H. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0003
Defendant's Lawyers Brockman, William F. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Curran, John Joseph Jr. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0003 | PC-MD-0006-0004 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Dove, Maureen Mullen (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0003 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Fader, Matthew J. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Gordon, Joan I. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Hoffman, Donald E. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0007
Howard, John Burnside Jr. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Kastendieck, Richard H. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0001 | PC-MD-0006-0005
Kennedy, David P. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Marrow, Glenn Todd (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0003 | PC-MD-0006-0004 | PC-MD-0006-9002
Mullally, Laura (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Nathan, Stuart M. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0007 | PC-MD-0006-0014 | PC-MD-0006-0016
Ruckle, James S. Jr. (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-0005
Weber, Stephanie Judith Lane (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002
Other Lawyers Andrew, Julia Melville (Maryland)
PC-MD-0006-9002

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -