Case: Human Rights Defense Center v. Management & Training Corporation

3:17-cv-01082 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio

Filed Date: May 23, 2017

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 23, 2017, the Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC) filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The case was assigned to Judge Jeffrey Helmick. The plaintiff sued the Management and Training Corporation (MTC), doing business as North Central Correctional Complex, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. MTC’s mail policy prohibited prisoners from receiving books through the mail if the books had not been pre-approved by MTC or if the sender was not on a pre-approved vend…

On May 23, 2017, the Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC) filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The case was assigned to Judge Jeffrey Helmick. The plaintiff sued the Management and Training Corporation (MTC), doing business as North Central Correctional Complex, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. MTC’s mail policy prohibited prisoners from receiving books through the mail if the books had not been pre-approved by MTC or if the sender was not on a pre-approved vendor list. HRDC alleged that MTC censored HRDC’s publications in violation of HRDC’s free speech rights under the First Amendment, as well as HRDC’s rights to due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiff sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief, damages, and attorneys’ fees.

On the same day that it filed the complaint, the plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction prohibiting the MTC from enforcing its pre-approval mail policy. The case settled, however, before the court could rule on this motion.

On July 24, 2017, the parties reached a nationwide settlement agreement that resolved the issues both in this case and in Prison Legal News v. Management & Training Corporation (Case No. 2:16-cv-01174) in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. MTC agreed to modify its mail policy to allow the delivery of publications to prisoners without using an approved vendors list and discontinue bans on publications on the basis of sender. MTC also agreed to pay HRDC $150,000 in damages and attorneys’ costs. The settlement terms applied to all of MTC’s facilities throughout the country.

The case was dismissed with prejudice on August 17, 2017. In the event of a breach of the settlement agreement, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. The settlement agreement does not state a time period for which the terms of the agreement will be in effect.

Summary Authors

Rebecca Strauss (6/25/2018)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60923858/parties/human-rights-defense-center-v-management-training-corporation/


Judge(s)

Helmick, Jeffrey James (Ohio)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Gerhardstein, Alphonse A. (Ohio)

Marshall, Daniel (Florida)

Mutamba, Masimba (Florida)

Neelakanta, Sabarish (Florida)

Attorney for Defendant

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

3:17-cv-01082

Docket [PACER]

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

Docket
1

3:17-cv-01082

Complaint

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

Complaint

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60923858/human-rights-defense-center-v-management-training-corporation/

Last updated Feb. 20, 2024, 3:03 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

Complaint

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

PACER
1

Complaint

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

PACER
1

Complaint

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

PACER
1

Complaint

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

PACER
2

Preliminary Injunction

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

PACER
2

Preliminary Injunction

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

PACER
2

Preliminary Injunction

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

PACER
2

Preliminary Injunction

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

PACER
3

Magistrate Consent Form issued. No summons provided, no summons issued. (R,Ke) (Entered: 05/23/2017)

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

Notice re Prompt Service. Counsel for Plaintiff is responsible for promptly serving the Complaint on Defendant(s) upon receiving the issued summons from the Clerk and, after service has been perfected, electronically filing a Return of Service or an executed Waiver of Service for each Defendant. Service is to be accomplished pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, which includes provisions for personal service and waiver of service, and Local Rule 4.2. If you wish the Clerk to serve the Complaint on Defendant(s) (a seldom used alternative because it does not save time or money), you must provide the Clerk's office with copies of the Complaint along with other necessary documents, in the manner set forth in Local Rule 4.2(a). (R,Ke) (Entered: 05/23/2017)

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

4

Supplement to 1 Complaint filed by Human Rights Defense Center. Related document(s) 1 . (Gerhardstein, Alphonse) (Entered: 05/23/2017)

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

Notice to Attorney Sabarish P. Neelakanta. The Court finds no record of your being admitted to practice in the Northern District of Ohio. Pursuant to LR 83.5, an Application for Admission to Practice or a Motion to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice in this case must be filed within 10 business days. The local rules and the attorney admission application are available on the court's web site at: www.ohnd.uscourts.gov. If you are not the attorney of record in this case, a Motion to Withdraw as Attorney pursuant to LR 83.9 must be filed within 10 business days. Related document(s) 1 . (G,CA) (Entered: 05/24/2017)

May 24, 2017

May 24, 2017

Notice to Attorney Masimba M. Mutamba. The Court finds no record of your being admitted to practice in the Northern District of Ohio. Pursuant to LR 83.5, an Application for Admission to Practice or a Motion to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice in this case must be filed within 10 business days. The local rules and the attorney admission application are available on the court's web site at: www.ohnd.uscourts.gov. If you are not the attorney of record in this case, a Motion to Withdraw as Attorney pursuant to LR 83.9 must be filed within 10 business days. Related document(s) 1 . (G,CA) (Entered: 05/24/2017)

May 24, 2017

May 24, 2017

Notice to Attorney Daniel L. Marshall. The Court finds no record of your being admitted to practice in the Northern District of Ohio. Pursuant to LR 83.5, an Application for Admission to Practice or a Motion to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice in this case must be filed within 10 business days. The local rules and the attorney admission application are available on the court's web site at: www.ohnd.uscourts.gov. If you are not the attorney of record in this case, a Motion to Withdraw as Attorney pursuant to LR 83.9 must be filed within 10 business days. Related document(s) 1 . (G,CA) (Entered: 05/24/2017)

May 24, 2017

May 24, 2017

5

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 30, 2017

May 30, 2017

PACER
5

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 30, 2017

May 30, 2017

PACER
5

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 30, 2017

May 30, 2017

PACER
5

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 30, 2017

May 30, 2017

PACER
6

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
6

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
6

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
6

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
7

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
7

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
7

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
7

Appear Pro Hac Vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
8

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
8

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
8

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
8

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
9

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
9

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
9

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
9

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
10

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
10

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
10

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
10

Order on Motion to appear pro hac vice

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
11

Attorney Appearance by Michael P. Quinlan filed by on behalf of Management & Training Corporation, Neil Turner. (Quinlan, Michael) (Entered: 06/02/2017)

June 2, 2017

June 2, 2017

12

Waiver of Service Returned Executed by Human Rights Defense Center. Management & Training Corporation waiver sent on 5/24/2017, answer due 7/24/2017; Neil Turner waiver sent on 5/24/2017, answer due 7/24/2017. filed on behalf of Human Rights Defense Center (Gerhardstein, Alphonse) (Entered: 06/07/2017)

June 7, 2017

June 7, 2017

13

Case Management Conference Scheduling Order

Aug. 11, 2017

Aug. 11, 2017

PACER
13

Case Management Conference Scheduling Order

Aug. 11, 2017

Aug. 11, 2017

PACER
13

Case Management Conference Scheduling Order

Aug. 11, 2017

Aug. 11, 2017

PACER
13

Case Management Conference Scheduling Order

Aug. 11, 2017

Aug. 11, 2017

PACER
14

Order Dismissing Case

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER
14

Order Dismissing Case

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER
14

Order Dismissing Case

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER
14

Order Dismissing Case

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: Ohio

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Special Collection(s):

Prison Legal News

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 23, 2017

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Human Rights Defense Center, the parent organization and publisher of Prison Legal News

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Management & Training Corporation (Marion), Private Entity/Person

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Freedom of speech/association

Equal Protection

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Attorneys fees

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Private Settlement Agreement

Conditional Dismissal

Amount Defendant Pays: $150,000.00

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Develop anti-discrimination policy

Recordkeeping

Training

Preliminary relief request withdrawn/mooted

Issues

General:

Conditions of confinement

Loss or damage to property

Mail

Type of Facility:

Non-government for-profit