Copeland v. Wabash Cnty.

JERRY COPELAND, JOHN WHITT, and JAMES DUTTON,on behalf of themselves and a class of those similarly situated Plaintiffs, v. WABASH COUNTY, INDIANA; and theWABASH COUNTY SHERIFF, in his official capacity, Defendants.

Case No. 3:20-CV-154-JD-MGG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION

September 16, 2020

OPINION AND ORDER

On February 19, 2020, the Plaintiffs filed a class action complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking to enjoin the practices of Wabash County Jail and the Wabash County Jail Sheriff in his official capacity. [DE 1]. The Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, have sued Wabash County and the Wabash County Sheriff ("Defendants"), alleging that the conditions of confinement resulting from the overcrowded and understaffed Wabash County Jail violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs also filed a Motion for Class Certification pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. [DE 3]. The Defendants oppose certification of the Plaintiffs' proposed class. For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification is denied.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Wabash County Jail is located in Wabash, Indiana and was constructed in 1979, with some renovations completed in 2006. [DE 1 at 3]. The Plaintiffs allege that the jail is "old, overcrowded, and understaffed, and as a result it is a place where violence between prisoners is common and dangerous conditions prevail." Id. at 1. The jail contains 72 permanent, operational beds. Id. at 3. County jails are periodically inspected by the Indiana Department of Correction jail inspector. Id. During the most recent inspection, the jail inspector noted that the jail exceeded its rated capacity and that there were not enough beds for all the prisoners being held in the jail. Id. at 4. The Plaintiffs allege that at the time of the inspection, Wabash County Jail housed 108 inmates, and an additional 64 inmates were being temporarily housed out of county. Id. Plaintiffs also allege that the jail is above its rated capacity 100% of the time and has been above capacity since 2016. Id. As a result of the allegedly overcrowded conditions, adequate classification of the inmates, which the Plaintiffs argue is essential to protecting the safety of both prisoners and staff, is impossible since there is no room to keep inmates with mental and physical disabilities separate from inmates without disabilities. Id. at 4. The Plaintiffs allege that there are not enough seats or tables for the inmates to sit at during mealtimes, so many inmates sit on the floor to eat their food. Id. at 4-5. There is no outdoor recreational area at the jail, only an indoor recreation room which is regularly used to house inmates. Id. at 5. Since there is no bathroom in the recreation room, inmates are "given cups in which to urinate and then dump down a drain in the floor of the room," which is unsanitary, and inmates complain of the smell. Id. As a result of the overcrowded conditions, the Plaintiffs also allege that assaults between prisoners are frequent and inmates with medical or mental health conditions are housed in the general population. Id. Finally, the Plaintiffs allege that there is insufficient staff at the jail to adequately monitor all of the inmates. Id.

Plaintiff Jerry Copeland has been incarcerated in the jail since July of 2019. Id. at 6. He alleges that when he first arrived, there were no permanent beds in his assigned cell. He, along with three other inmates, had to sleep on mats on the floor. Id. at 6-7. Mr. Copeland has witnessedprisoner fighting because of tensions on the jail block and claims that he is only occasionally offered recreation opportunities. Id. at 7. He has also witnessed inmates with mental health conditions being preyed upon by other inmates due to the lack of effective prisoner classification in the jail. Id. Plaintiff John Whitt has been incarcerated in the jail since October of 2019. Id. at 8. Mr. Whitt claims that when he was transferred back to the Wabash County Jail, he slept on one of the triple-bunked beds in the day room, where he remains. Id. He has also witnessed prisoner fighting due to increased tension among the inmates and is only offered occasional recreation opportunities. Id. He similarly alleges that he has witnessed inmates with mental health conditions being preyed upon by other inmates, because of the lack of effective classification in jail. Id. Finally, Plaintiff James Dutton was incarcerated in the jail from October 2019 to February 2020. [DE 14 at 6]. Two days after this class action complaint was filed, Mr. Dutton was transferred out of the jail. Id. Mr. Dutton claims that when he first arrived at the jail, he was housed in the recreation room, where he and three other inmates slept on mats on the floor. Id. at 8-9. Mr. Dutton witnessed prisoner fighting due to high tension among the inmates and was not offered regular recreation opportunities. Id. Each of the plaintiffs claim they have fully exhausted the jail's grievance system. [DE 1 at 7-9].¹

Collectively, the Plaintiffs claim that the overcrowding of the jail produces dangerous conditions, which results in the denial of basic human needs and minimal civilized measures of life's necessities amounting to punishment. Id. at 9. Disputes and violence commonly arise among prisoners due to the lack of secure areas for inmates housed in the day room to store their property,due to disputes over use of the single cell-block shower, and general tensions due to the large number of people being held in a very small space. Id. at 5. The Plaintiffs also alleged that, due to overcrowding, inmates have decreased access to the indoor recreation room, which is the only recreational space in the facility. Id. Lack of recreation, in turn, exacerbates tensions in the jail and assaults between prisoners are frequent. Id. at 6. The Plaintiffs further claim that there is insufficient staff at the jail to adequately monitor the prisoners, and inmates with medical and mental health conditions are not seen in a timely manner. Id.

On February 19, 2020, the Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Class Certification and define the class as "all persons currently confined, or who will in the future be confined, in the Wabash County Jail." [DE 3 at 1]. The Plaintiffs ask, on behalf of themselves and the proposed class, this Court to enter an injunction requiring the Defendants to take all steps necessary to ensure the conditions of confinement at the Wabash County Jail comply with the United States Constitution [DE 1]. County Defendants in their response opposed Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification. [DE 14]. In particular, the Defendants argue that the commonality and typicality requirements set forth in Rule 23(a) are not satisfied. The Defendants also argue that Plaintiff Dutton is not within the proposed class he seeks to represent and also challenge his standing to seek injunctive relief.

II. ANALYSIS

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs the certification of class actions in federal court. Rule 23(a) also ensures that the named plaintiffs are appropriate representatives of the class whose claims they wish to litigate. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 349-50 (2011). A party seeking class certification must first satisfy each of the requirements of Rule 23(a), showing that:

(1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable;

(2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class;(3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class; and

(4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a). If each of these prerequisites are met, a court must also find that at least one of the subsections of Rule 23(b) is satisfied. In this case, the Plaintiffs seek class certification under sub-section (b)(2), which applies when "the party opposing the class has acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a whole." Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2). The Plaintiffs, as the party seeking class certification, assume the burden of demonstrating that certification is appropriate. Trotter v. Klincar, 748 F.2d 1177, 1184 (7th Cir. 1984). And "[f]ailure to meet any of the Rule's requirements precludes class certification." Arreola v. Godinez, 546 F.3d 788, 794 (7th Cir. 2008). Finally, "Rule 23 does not set forth a mere pleading standard. A party seeking class certification must affirmatively demonstrate his compliance with the Rule . . . ." Orr v. Shicker, 953 F.3d 490, 500 (7th Cir. 2020) (quoting Wal-Mart, 564 U.S. at 350).

The Defendants set forth three arguments opposing class certification: (1) Plaintiff Dutton is not within the class he purports to represent; (2) Plaintiff Dutton lacks standing to seek injunctive relief; and (3) there is no proof of commonality or typicality of the jail conditions. [DE 14]. The Court addresses each argument in turn.

A. Plaintiff Dutton

The Defendants argue that Plaintiff Dutton lacks standing to seek injunctive relief. They also argue that Plaintiff Dutton is not a member of the proposed class, which is currently defined as "all persons currently confined or who will be in the future confined in the Wabash County Jail" because he is no longer being held in the jail. Thus the issue is whether Plaintiff Dutton, who filed the Complaint in this case while he was an inmate of the jail, but whose individualclaims for relief are now moot due to his release from the jail, has standing to pursue the motion for class certification and may adequately represent the proposed class. The Court addresses the standing argument...