University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Hines v. Anderson PC-MN-0002
Docket / Court 73-387 ( D. Minn. )
State/Territory Minnesota
Case Type(s) Prison Conditions
Case Summary
In August 1973, inmates at the Minnesota State Prison, represented by private counsel, filed a Section 1983 class action suit in the District of Minnesota against officials of the Minnesota State Prison system. Plaintiffs claimed that the medical care and facilities at the Minnesota State Prison ... read more >
In August 1973, inmates at the Minnesota State Prison, represented by private counsel, filed a Section 1983 class action suit in the District of Minnesota against officials of the Minnesota State Prison system. Plaintiffs claimed that the medical care and facilities at the Minnesota State Prison were inadequate in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.

In May 1977, the district court accepted a consent agreement reached by the parties and entered a consent decree. Hines v. Anderson, 439 F. Supp. 12 (D. Minn. 1977). The decree was limited to the ""the primary maximum security prison for men in Minnesota, no matter where located or how designed."" The consent decree required that ""to the fullest extent possible"" the ""Patients Bill of Rights"" should apply to inmates requiring medical treatment. The decree also required that no inmate be deprived of medical care, medication, or prosthetic devices due to indigency. Finally, the decree required that the medical staff have a full-time physician and medical staff on daily, weekend and ""on-call"" duty. The court maintained jurisdiction for oversight of the implementation of the consent decree.

The paper docket is not in the file and the PACER docket picks up in 1996. From 1996 until 2002, several individual inmates made repeated motions for contempt, which were all denied by the District Court (Judge Michael J. Davis.) In August 2002, the Minnesota Department of Corrections moved to terminate the consent decree under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Citing lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the district court denied the MDOC's motion without prejudice. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded finding that a case or controversy existed. Hines v. Anderson, 83 Fed. Appx. 148 (8th Cir. 2003).

On March 30, 2007, the District Court (Judge Patrick J. Schiltz) terminated the consent decree.

Kristen Sagar - 08/02/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
General
Counseling
Food service / nutrition / hydration
Medical/Mental Health
Medical care, general
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Defendant(s) Minnesota State Prison
Plaintiff Description inmates at the Minnesota State Prison
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 Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 1977 - 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 ]

Docket(s)
73-387 (D. Minn.) 05/10/2007
PC-MN-0002-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Order and Consent Decree 05/27/1977 (439 F.Supp. 12) (D. Minn.)
PC-MN-0002-0003.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Opinion 12/15/2003 (83 Fed.Appx. 148)
PC-MN-0002-0004.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Report and Recommendation on Motion to Terminate Consent Decree 01/29/2007 (D. Minn.)
PC-MN-0002-0001.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Terminating Consent Decree 03/30/2007 (D. Minn.)
PC-MN-0002-0002.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Arnold, Richard Sheppard (Eighth Circuit, E.D. Ark., W.D. Ark.)
PC-MN-0002-0004
Boylan, Arthur J. (D. Minn.) [Magistrate]
PC-MN-0002-0001 | PC-MN-0002-9000
Davis, Michael James (FISC, D. Minn.)
PC-MN-0002-9000
Fagg, George Gardner (Eighth Circuit)
PC-MN-0002-0004
Larson, Earl Richard (D. Minn.)
PC-MN-0002-0003
Schiltz, Patrick Joseph (D. Minn.)
PC-MN-0002-0002
Wollman, Roger Leland (Eighth Circuit)
PC-MN-0002-0004
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Cullen, James P. (Minnesota)
PC-MN-0002-0003 | PC-MN-0002-9000
Vasaly, Mary Ruth (Minnesota)
PC-MN-0002-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Jensen, Thomas H. (Minnesota)
PC-MN-0002-0003
Lockhart, Greer E. (Minnesota)
PC-MN-0002-0003
Service, Jennifer A. (Minnesota)
PC-MN-0002-0004 | PC-MN-0002-9000
Other Lawyers Nearing, Carolin J. (Minnesota)
PC-MN-0002-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -