University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Bartlett v. Atencio PC-ID-0010
Docket / Court 1:17-cv-00191-CWD ( D. Idaho )
State/Territory Idaho
Case Type(s) Prison Conditions
Attorney Organization ACLU Chapters (any)
Case Summary
On May 3, 2017, Jewish prisoners at the Idaho Department of Corrections (IDOC) filed a putative class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. The plaintiffs sued the Director of the Idaho Department of Corrections and several agents of the IDOC under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, ... read more >
On May 3, 2017, Jewish prisoners at the Idaho Department of Corrections (IDOC) filed a putative class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. The plaintiffs sued the Director of the Idaho Department of Corrections and several agents of the IDOC under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), and state law, namely, the Free Exercise of Religion Protected Act. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU, sought declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. The case was assigned to Judge Candy W. Dale.

The plaintiffs alleged that, in refusing to offer Kosher meals to prisoners, the defendants had imposed a substantial burden on the plaintiffs’ religious practice. Specifically, they alleged that the defendants had violated RLUIPA, the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth amendment and the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.

On May 4, 2017, the plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction, seeking to require the defendants to provide a kosher diet option without charge for prisoners at all Idaho Department of Correction facilities.

On July 11, 2017, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, or, alternatively, for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiffs’ state law claims were barred by the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution and that their state law claims for monetary relief were barred for the failure to file a notice of tort claim.

After reaching a partial settlement, the parties jointly filed a motion for entry of an order dismissing all of the plaintiffs’ class action claims. The parties also posed a joint stipulation of their settlement agreement to create a new kosher diet system. Entitled the Common Fare No Touch menu, this diet system consisted of a majority of meals that were pre-packaged or double-sealed frozen meals that were kosher certified. The parties also agreed that the plaintiffs’ counsel would monitor compliance for at least six months.

On August 17, 2017, Judge Dale entered an order adopting the stipulation, dismissing the claims and deeming as moot the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. The court would retain jurisdiction to enforce the agreement.

In October 2017, the plaintiffs agreed to allow judgment to be taken against them in exchange for the sum of $93,000, including all accrued costs and attorney’s fees. The court entered such judgment.

On December 26, 2017, the defendants agreed that the monitoring period of the new diet system would end on June 1, 2018. As of June 7, 2018, there are no new entries on the docket that would suggest noncompliance. The case is presumably closed.

Jake Parker - 06/07/2018


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Equal Protection
Free Exercise Clause
Content of Injunction
Discrimination Prohibition
Monitoring
Recordkeeping
Defendant-type
Corrections
Discrimination-basis
Religion discrimination
General
Food service / nutrition / hydration
Religious programs / policies
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Religious Freedom Rest. Act/Religious Land Use and Inst. Persons Act (RFRA/RLUIPA)
Defendant(s) Idaho Department of Corrections
Plaintiff Description Jewish prisoners under the Idaho Department of Corrections who were denied a kosher diet while incarcerated.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations ACLU Chapters (any)
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted No
Filed Pro Se No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Attorneys fees
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 2017 - 2018
Filing Year 2017
Case Closing Year 2018
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
  Civil Rights Injunctions Over Time: A Case Study of Jail and Prison Court Orders
N.Y.U. Law Review
Date: May 2006
By: Margo Schlanger (Washington University Faculty)
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
Book
Date: Jan. 1, 1998
By: Malcolm M. Feeley & Edward Rubin (UC Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law & Vanderbilt School of Law Faculty Faculty)
Citation: (1998)
[ Detail ]

Docket(s)
1:17-cv-00191 (D. Idaho)
PC-ID-0010-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 01/03/2018
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Verified Class Action Civil Rights Complaint [ECF# 1]
PC-ID-0010-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 05/03/2017
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order for Partial Dismissal with Retained Jurisdiction [ECF# 33] (D. Idaho)
PC-ID-0010-0003.pdf | Detail
Date: 08/17/2017
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judgment [ECF# 41] (D. Idaho)
PC-ID-0010-0002.pdf | Detail
Date: 10/04/2017
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Dale, Candy W. (D. Idaho)
PC-ID-0010-0002 | PC-ID-0010-0003 | PC-ID-0010-9000
Williams, Mikel H. (D. Idaho)
PC-ID-0010-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Durham, Craig (Idaho)
PC-ID-0010-0001 | PC-ID-0010-9000
Eppink, Richard Allen (Idaho)
PC-ID-0010-0001 | PC-ID-0010-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Hayes, Leslie Marie (Idaho)
PC-ID-0010-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -