On May 17, 1993, juveniles detained in North Carolina detention centers filed a class action lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina against the Secretary of Human Resources and the various regional detention centers. The class ...
read more >
On May 17, 1993, juveniles detained in North Carolina detention centers filed a class action lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina against the Secretary of Human Resources and the various regional detention centers. The class consisted of all juveniles who were confined in the detention centers. Private counsel represented the class. The plaintiffs sought injunctive relief and damages, alleging that the conditions at the juvenile detention centers violated the constitutional guarantees of due process and freedom from unreasonable seizure, punishment, and to cruel and unusual punishment.
According to the complaint, the detention centers were overcrowded and inadequately staffed. The overcrowding and understaffing increased the risk of inmate-on-inmate violence. The health care, classification system, recreation, and educational programs were all inadequate.
On September 30, 1994, the case was consolidated with Simpson v. Britt (Docket No. 94-00581).
After discovery and negotiation, the parties reached a settlement agreement. On February 22, 1995, the District Court (Magistrate Judge Denson) approved a settlement agreement. The agreement provided for a reduction in the number of juveniles confined in the detention center, a good faith effort to provide additional staff, the development and implementation of a medical care plan, a mental health care plan, and the development and implementation of an educational plan. Additionally, a behavior management system was specifically outlined. The defendant was required to standardize intake procedures, develop and implement a classification system, provide recreation and programming, and develop and implement a policy regarding visitation, telephone use, and mail.
The case was dismissed with prejudice on January 20, 1998.
Kaitlin Corkran - 06/04/2006
compress summary