In 1986, black and Hispanic inmates at the Elmira Correctional Facility in New York brought a class action suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the prison administrators for widespread discrimination in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by ...
read more >
In 1986, black and Hispanic inmates at the Elmira Correctional Facility in New York brought a class action suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the prison administrators for widespread discrimination in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Plaintiffs, represented by the Prisoners' Rights Project of the Legal Aid Society, alleged that prison guards and administrators gave better jobs, preferable housing, and administered less discipline to white inmates. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief and requested the court to fashion the appropriate remedy. The District Court of the Western District of New York (Judge David Larimer) found that plaintiffs had established a pattern of unconstitutional racial discrimination with respect to housing, jobs, and discipline. Santiago v. Miles, 774 F.Supp. 775 (W.D. N.Y. 1991). The Court ruled that injunctive relief was warranted but decided that it was the parties themselves who should decide what the form of that relief should be. Accordingly, the Court directed the parties to meet together within thirty days to discuss (1) the practices and procedures that need to be implemented to rectify the violations found and (2) the terms of the injunction, and to report back to the Court with a progress report within 40 days of the decision.
According to the PACER docket, it was not until February 1993 that the Court actually issued its injunction, after receiving a proposed plan from defendants and comments on that plan by plaintiffs. Defendants appealed but subsequently withdrew that appeal on some kind of stipulation. Shortly thereafter, the District Court vacated its prior judgment and entered a new judgment on October 1, 1993, about which the docket reveals nothing.
The parties stipulated to unspecified attorneys' fees, and a ""revised proposed plan"" was filed by defendants on April 6, 1995. No substantive additional pleadings were filed. The docket ends in January 2000.
No further information is available on Westlaw or PACER.Rebecca Bloch - 02/15/2006