Filed Date: March 18, 1983
Clearinghouse coding complete
On March 18, 1983, incarcerated persons filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Department of Corrections for the City of New York. The plaintiffs challenged violent and overcrowded conditions at the New York City Correctional Institution for Men. The plaintiffs were represented by the Legal Aid Society of New York City's Prisoners' Rights Project.
On July 13, 1988, following a lengthy trial, the district court (Judge Morris E. Lasker) found that violence at the facility by incarcerated persons and staff violated the Eighth Amendment. Fisher v. Koehler, 692 F.Supp. 1519 (S.D.N.Y. 1988). The court found that inadequate conditions in the facility, such as overcrowding, inadequate staff, problems with classification, and inadequate systems for reporting abuse, contributed to an environment where people suffered ongoing physical abuse. The court gave the defendants an opportunity to submit a plan to address the violations. Both parties submitted proposals and the court approved a decree on July 14, 1989. Fisher v. Koehler, 718 F.Supp. 1111 (S.D.N.Y. 1989). The decree included a new system of classification whereby violent or vulnerable persons were housed separately, addressed overcrowding, and created a new policy regarding the use of force by staff. The decree also increased supervision and provided for monitoring. Defendants sought approval for a new policy related to reporting uses of force. Judge Lasker approved the policy on November 8, 1989. Fisher v. Koehler, No. 83-2128, 1989 WL 135912 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 8, 1989).
On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (per curium) upheld the district court's finding that the conditions in the facility were unconstitutional and held that the district court's remedy was reasonable. Fisher v. Koehler, 902 F.2d 2 (2d Cir. 1990).
On April 12, 1991, the court revisited its previous decision to suspend the dormitory aspect of the previously ordered overcrowding relief. Finding that the defendants had not reduced violence to a constitutionally acceptable level, the court concluded that implementing that aspect of relief was necessary. As a result, the defendants submitted a plan, with which the plaintiffs agreed, that would ensure that all incarcerated persons (but not pre-trial detainees) would have at least 60 square feet of floor space.
Summary Authors
Angela Heverling (4/5/2006)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6364392/parties/fisher-v-ward/
Feinberg, Wilfred (New York)
Kaufman, Irving Robert (New York)
Boston, John (New York)
Brutten, Caren S. (New York)
Hsu, Hway-Ling (New York)
Feinberg, Wilfred (New York)
Kaufman, Irving Robert (New York)
Lasker, Morris Edward (Massachusetts)
Walker, John Mercer Jr. (New York)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6364392/fisher-v-ward/
Last updated March 31, 2024, 3:02 a.m.
State / Territory: New York
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: March 18, 1983
Case Ongoing: Perhaps, but long-dormant
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Incarcerated persons of the State of New York
Plaintiff Type(s):
Attorney Organizations:
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: Yes
Class Action Outcome: Granted
Defendants
Correctional Institutions for Men (East Elmhurst), State
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration: 1989 - None
Content of Injunction:
Goals (e.g., for hiring, admissions)
Issues
Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:
Assault/abuse by staff (facilities)
Assault/abuse by non-staff (facilities)
Type of Facility: