Case: Cooper v. Noble

3:78-cv-00207 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi

Filed Date: May 12, 1978

Closed Date: March 14, 1996

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In 1978, a group of Madison County inmates filed a section 1983 class action suit against Madison County officials in the District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. The inmates challenged nearly every aspect of jail conditions. In 1980 or 1981, the district court accepted an interim consent agreement reached by the parties and entered an interim judgment. The consent agreement concerned issues such as nutrition, visitation, disciplinary rules, medical attention, and access to a…

In 1978, a group of Madison County inmates filed a section 1983 class action suit against Madison County officials in the District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. The inmates challenged nearly every aspect of jail conditions. In 1980 or 1981, the district court accepted an interim consent agreement reached by the parties and entered an interim judgment. The consent agreement concerned issues such as nutrition, visitation, disciplinary rules, medical attention, and access to attorneys.

One year later, the district court referred the case to a United States Magistrate Judge for entry of judgment. The Magistrate Judge entered a final judgment.

In 1989, the Madison County officials filed a motion for relief from the original consent agreement because the County had built a new jail, altering the conditions and procedures of the jail. In response, the plaintiffs not only opposed the motion, but also moved to hold the officials in contempt of court for violating the decree. The Magistrate Judge held that the Madison County officials were in contempt of court and denied their motion for relief from judgment. The officials appealed.

In 1994, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the Magistrate Judge's decision. Cooper v. Noble, 33 F.3d 540 (5th Cir. 1994). Two months after the decision, the Fifth Circuit supplemented its earlier decision, holding that the Violent Crime Control Act of 1994 does not apply to Defendants' appeal. Cooper v. Noble, 41 F.3d 212 (5th Cir. 1994).

Plaintiffs' counsel then sought attorney's fees. The court determined the proper amount of attorney's fees and the attorneys appealed the decision. Cooper v. Hopkins, 945 F. Supp. 940 (S.D. Miss. 1995). The Fifth Circuit heard the appeal and affirmed the decision of the District Court. Cooper v. Pentecost, 77 F.3d 829 (5th Cir. 1996).

Summary Authors

Lauren Cutson (5/19/2005)

People


Judge(s)

Duhe, John Malcolm Jr. (Louisiana)

Garza, Emilio M. (Texas)

Higginbotham, Aloyisus Leon Jr. (Pennsylvania)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Hinds, Lennox S. (Mississippi)

Attorney for Defendant

Cowan, Rebecca Barge (Mississippi)

Judge(s)

Duhe, John Malcolm Jr. (Louisiana)

Garza, Emilio M. (Texas)

Higginbotham, Aloyisus Leon Jr. (Pennsylvania)

Wingate, Henry Travillion (Mississippi)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

93-07678

Reported Opinion

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Oct. 5, 1994

Oct. 5, 1994

Order/Opinion

33 F.3d 33

93-07678

Reported Opinion

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Dec. 15, 1994

Dec. 15, 1994

Order/Opinion

41 F.3d 41

3:78-cv-00207

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Cooper v. Hopkins

March 3, 1995

March 3, 1995

Order/Opinion

945 F.Supp. 945

95-60260

Reported Opinion

Cooper v. Pentecost

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

March 14, 1996

March 14, 1996

Order/Opinion

77 F.3d 77

Docket

Last updated March 16, 2024, 3:06 a.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: Mississippi

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 12, 1978

Closing Date: March 14, 1996

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

inmates at the Madison County Jail in Mississippi

Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown

Filed Pro Se: Unknown

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Madison County Jai (Madison), County

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Equal Protection

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Order Duration: 1978 - 1996

Issues

General:

Access to lawyers or judicial system

Assault/abuse by staff

Classification / placement

Disciplinary procedures

Fire safety

Food service / nutrition / hydration

Mail

Personal injury

Phone

Recreation / Exercise

Sanitation / living conditions

Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)

Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:

Law library access

Library (non-law) access

Visiting

Crowding / caseload

Discrimination-basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)

Race discrimination

Sex discrimination

Type of Facility:

Government-run