Jones v. Wittenberg, Civ. No. C 70-388.

• Decision Date: 29 July 1977
• Docket Number: Civ. No. C 70-388.
• Citation: 440 F. Supp. 60
• Parties: Charles JONES et al., Plaintiffs, v. Sol WITTENBERG et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Ohio

440 F. Supp. 60

Charles JONES et al., Plaintiffs, v. Sol WITTENBERG et al., Defendants.

Civ. No. C 70-388.

United States District Court, N. D. Ohio, W. D.

July 29, 1977.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Dale Wilker, Advocates for Basic Legal Equality, Toledo, Ohio, Stanley A. Bass, New York City, Frank S. Merritt, College of Law, University of Toledo, Gerald B. Lackey, Toledo, Ohio, for plaintiffs.

John F. Hayward, Anthony G. Pizza, Lucas County Prosecutor, Toledo, Ohio, for defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DON J. YOUNG, District Judge.

This cause came to be heard upon the First Report of the Special Master evaluating the compliance of the defendants with this Court's order of July 30, 1971, as modified throughout the course of this litigation. The report was filed pursuant to the Court's Order of December 17, 1976. No objections having been filed by any of the parties, the Court being fully advised in the premises, it is ORDERED that the report is in all respects confirmed. Said report is attached hereto as an Appendix, incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof as fully for all intents and purposes as if set forth at length herein.

To the extent the First Report of the Special Master deals with ¶ 11 concerning the interpretation of the Court's order of July 6, 1973, with regard to finding of a pre-trial bail release program, the Court adds the following clarification.

In order to effect compliance with the prior orders of the Court with regard to funding of the aforesaid program, the Defendant County Commissioners must provide such funds as are necessary to support a viable program to meet the goals recognized in ¶ 11.

In the July 6, 1973 Order, the Court recognized that funding of at least $14,000 per year is required to meet this end. This figure was not set, however, as a limitation on the obligation of said defendants to provide such funds as are necessary for the program. The Court therefore adopts the finding of the Special Master that the defendants are not in compliance with the provisions of ¶ 11. In confirming the First Report of the Special Master, the Court adopts the findings with respect to the state of compliance in all other aspects of the case as well.

THEREFORE, FOR GOOD CAUSE APPEARING,

it is

FURTHER ORDERED that all of the named defendants, as well as their subordinates, proceed at once to effectuate full compliance with the July 30, 1971, Order of this Court, as modified by subsequent orders of the Court; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that all steps taken by the defendants and their subordinates to effectuate full compliance with that order, as modified, be supervised, coordinated, and approved by the Special Master, acting for the Court.

In this connection, the Special Master shall have the authority to state to the defendants, their subordinates, and all persons acting in concert with them, or any of them, the actions required to be taken by them, or any of them, to effectuate full compliance, and to seek orders from the Court requiring any or all of said defendants, their subordinates, and persons acting in concert with them, or any of them, to show cause why they should not be punished as for contempt for failure to carry out such actions required;

and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, because of the disclosures of noncompliance contained in the First Report of the Special Master, that the Special Master shall continue to investigate the defendants' state of compliance with the July 30, 1971, order of this Court, as modified, and shall make supplemental reports to the Court in the event that further or continuing instances of noncompliance are discovered.

For this purpose, the Special Master shall have all of the authority granted to him by the December 17, 1976, order of this Court;

and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the prior order of the Court filed on July 30, 1971, is modified in the following respects:

(1) The words "awaiting trial" in line 3 of the introductory statement to ¶ 6 are deleted.

(2) ¶ 7 is deleted.

(3) The words "and provisions for limitation or removal of visiting privileges for disciplinary purposes, or for abuse of visiting privileges" are deleted from subparagraph 17(h);

and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT the defendants, their employees, agents, successors, assigns, and all those in concert therewith are ENJOINED FROM:

(1) Incarcerating more than one prisoner in any cell originally designed for single occupancy and from incarcerating more than a total of 226 prisoners in the housing modules containing cells on the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth floors of the Lucas County Correction Center.

These limits shall not be exceeded unless there shall exist an extreme emergency where the protection of the public demands immediate confinement of a large number of persons and then the limits may be exceeded for not more than twenty-four (24) hours;

(2) Employing the attorney/client booths in the Lucas County Correction Center for use in attorney/client visits until the booths are modified as ordered herein unless the visiting attorney requests in writing a non-contact visit;

and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the defendants, their employees, agents, successors, assigns, and all those in concert therewith are ENJOINED TO:

(1) Remove the dividing wall in each of the attorney/client booths as well as to provide soundproof doors, adequate ventilation in the booths, and such furnishings as are necessary for attorney/client visits.

(2) Employ the multipurpose rooms for use in attorney/client visits until the aforesaid modifications in the attorney/client booths are completed.

(3) Provide adequate attorney/client visiting facilities on the second floor of the correction center.

(4) Either install toilets and sinks in the two cells on the first floor of the correction center which do not contain toilet facilities (these cells are numbered 1074 and 1078 and are designated on architectural drawings as "psychiatric cells") or remove the doors to the cells to render them unusable for occupancy by prisoners.

The defendants shall notify the Court in writing within ten (10) days of the filing of this order which alternative they elect to follow.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

APPENDIX

                                          FIRST REPORT OF THE SPECIAL MASTER
                                                  ON THE DEFENDANTS'
                                                 STATE OF COMPLIANCE
                                           Submitted by Vincent M. Nathan*
                                                  TABLE OF CONTENTS
                Introduction ______________________________________________________________  66
                Paragraph 1 — Overcrowding ________________________________________________  71
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________  73
                Paragraph 2 — Use of Space in Jail ________________________________________  74
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________  75
                Paragraph 3 — Lighting System of Jail _____________________________________  75
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________  77
                Paragraph 4 — Food Service ________________________________________________  77
                   Minimum Nutritional Standards __________________________________________  77
                   Temperature, Freshness, and Variety of Food ____________________________  79
                   Sanitary Conditions ____________________________________________________  81
                   Food Service Personnel _________________________________________________  83
                   Inspection by Public Health Authorities ________________________________  84
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________  85
                Paragraph 5 — Medical Facilities __________________________________________  86
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________  88
                Paragraph 6 — Communication Rights of Pre-Trial Prisoners _________________  89
                   Outgoing Mail __________________________________________________________  89
                   Incoming Parcels and Letters ___________________________________________  90
                   Availability of Writing Materials and Postage __________________________  91
                   Telephone Privileges ___________________________________________________  91
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________  92
                Paragraph 7 — Communication Rights of Sentenced Inmates ___________________  93
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________  95
                Paragraph 8 — Attorney/Client Visiting Facilities _________________________  95
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________  97
                Paragraph 9 — Physical Alterations and Repairs ____________________________  98
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________ 100
                Paragraph 10 — Library Services and Censorship ____________________________ 100
                   Library Services _______________________________________________________ 100
                   Censorship _____________________________________________________________ 102
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________ 103
                Paragraph 11 — Pre-Trial Release Program __________________________________ 103
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________ 106
                Paragraph 12 — Purchase of Jail Food ______________________________________ 107
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________ 108
                Paragraph 13 — Medical Services ___________________________________________ 108
                   Findings Relating to Compliance ________________________________________ 113
                Paragraph 14 — Guard Surveillance _________________________________________ 113
                   The Old Jail ___________________________________________________________ 114
                   The Lucas County Correction Center _____________________________________ 116
                   The R.P.U. Reevaluation ________________________________________________ 119
                   The Staffing Consultants

...