On December 3, 2010, the United States of America filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana against Lake County, Indiana, pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C § 1997. The plaintiffs, represented by the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, sought permanent injunctive relief, alleging that the County's actions and omissions in maintaining the Lake County Jail exhibited deliberate indifference to the health and safety of detainees at the Jail. The case was assigned to Judge Theresa Springmann.
Specifically, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant failed to appropriately screen for suicide risk, failed to provide sufficient and adequate staffing, failed to provide intake and referral process for persons with serious psychiatric needs, failed to provide sufficient medical staffing and adequate access to medical care for persons with serious medical needs, failed to provide adequate fire safety, and maintained a physical environment at the Jail that caused harm and posed an unreasonable risk to health and safety.
On September 12, 2008, the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice notified the County of its intention to investigate conditions of confinement at the Jail. On December 15-18, 2008, DOJ consultants in the fields of correctional suicide prevention, mental health care, medical care, fire safety and environmental health toured the Jail. On December 7, 2009, the plaintiff issued a "Findings Letter", where it concluded that certain conditions at the Jail violated the constitutional rights of the detainees.
The parties entered into a settlement agreement on August 18, 2010. On December 3, 2010, the plaintiffs and the defendants filed a joint motion to enter the settlement. On December 20, 2010, Judge Springmann issued an order approving the settlement agreement in its entirety. The Court retained jurisdiction over the case to ensure timely and proper implementation of the settlement agreement.
The settlement agreement provided that the County did not admit any fault or liability. Under the agreement, the County had to use its best efforts to establish a suicide prevention program, to develop and implement a comprehensive fire safety program and ensure compliance with it, to revise and implement written housekeeping and sanitation plans for proper cleaning of housing, shower and medical areas, and to implement comprehensive and contemporary policies and procedures related to the use of force.
Under the agreement, the Jail had to submit bi-annual compliance reports to the U.S. Department of Justice. The plaintiff agreed to have a Liaison whose duty is to supervise the implementation of the agreement and file the reports with the Court.
The agreement was set to terminate when the Jail achieved substantial compliance with the provisions of the agreement and maintained such compliance for one year. If the plaintiff believed that the County had failed to substantially comply with any of the obligations under the agreement, it would, prior to seeking judicial enforcement of the agreement, give written notice of failure to the County, and the parties were to attempt good-faith resolution of the dispute. In the event of the failure of mutual resolution, the parties could submit the dispute to mediation or invoke the jurisdiction of the Court.
On January 18, 2012, a compliance report was filed with the Court. The report indicated non-compliance and partial compliance with the provisions of the agreement. Status and compliance reports continued to be provided over the next two years. On September 17, 2015, the parties jointly moved to terminate Subsection D (Fire Safety) of the settlement agreement, noting that the defendants had reached and maintained compliance with Subsection D for one year. The Court granted this motion on October 6, 2015.
Then, by the same reasoning, the parties moved to terminate Subsection A (Medical Care) and Subsection C (Suicide Prevention) on August 10, 2017. The Court granted this motion on August 31, 2017.
The parties continued to provide status reports through December 8, 2019, when they submitted their eighteenth and final report. On December 17, 2019, the parties jointly moved to terminate the settlement agreement and for final dismissal. Judge Springmann granted the motion the following day, December 18, 2019. This case is now closed.
Zhandos Kuderin - 03/27/2014
Jake Parker - 06/25/2018
Alex Moody - 04/10/2020
compress summary
