Wayne County Jail Inmates v. Wayne County Chief Executive Officer

• Decision Date: 30 August 1989
• Docket Number: Docket No. 115672
• Parties: WAYNE COUNTY JAIL INMATES, Michael Harris, James Johnson, Lawrence Robert Plamondon, Norman Richardson, Carolyn Traylor, and Nora Ware, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. WAYNE COUNTY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, Edward McNamara; Arthur Carter, Chairperson, Wayne County Board of Commissioners; and Jimmie L. Byrd, Administrator of the Wayne County Jail, Defendants-Appellees, and Robert A. Ficano, Sheriff of Wayne County, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US

Page 549

444 N.W.2d 549

178 Mich.App. 634

WAYNE COUNTY JAIL INMATES, Michael Harris, James Johnson Lawrence Robert Plamondon, Norman Richardson Carolyn Traylor, and Nora Ware Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. WAYNE COUNTY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, Edward McNamara Arthur Carter, Chairperson, Wayne County Board of Commissioners; and Jimmie L. Byrd, Administrator of the Wayne County Jail, Defendants-Appellees, and Robert A. Ficano, Sheriff of Wayne County, Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 115672.

Court of Appeals of Michigan.

Submitted May 10, 1989.

Decided July 26, 1989.

Released for Publication Aug. 30, 1989.

Michigan Legal Services by Kathleen A. Gmeiner and Alan S. Ells, Glotta, Rawlings & Skutt, P.C. by Richard M. Skutt, and Goodman, Eden, Millender & Bedrosian by William H. Goodman and Deborah Choly, Detroit, for plaintiffs-appellees.

Bodman, Longley & Dahling by Joseph A. Sullivan and Charles N. Raimi, Detroit, for Wayne County Sheriff.

Saul A. Green, Wayne County Corp. Counsel, Glen H. Downs and Ellen E. Mason, Detroit, for Chairperson of the Wayne County Bd. of Com'rs.

Michael E. Duggan, Detroit, for Wayne County Chief Executive Officer.

Michigan Sheriffs' Ass'n by Paul A. Rosenbaum, Lansing, amicus curiae.

Before CYNAR, P.J., and WAHLS and MARILYN J. KELLY, JJ.

MARILYN J. KELLY, Judge.

This class action was filed by the Wayne County Jail inmates in 1971. It sought equitable relief from "depraved, inhuman and barbaric" conditions at the jail. A three-judge panel issued its opinion on May 18, 1971. The panel members were then-Wayne Circuit Judges Victor J. Baum, Richard M. Maher and John D. O'Hair. They found conditions in the jail deplorable and in violation of the inmates' rights as claimed. Violations included:

--serious overcrowding;

--violations of plumbing, ventilation, heating, electrical, fire and sanitation laws;

--... "[a]n investigated assault rate of almost 100 in eleven months ... too high by any reasonable standard";

--an unreasonable risk of suicide;

--the exacerbation of mental illness by "the stark physical environment and harsh regimen of the jail," compounded by enforced idleness, lack of recreation and lack of staff;

--the existence of a "health program [which] fails to provide reasonable care for existing illness and fails to provide reasonable safeguards against future preventable illness";

--poor sanitation;

--inadequate nutrition, lack of warm meals;

--interference with mail;

-- lack of standards for assignment to maximum security.

In light of these conditions, the Wayne Circuit Court issued orders designed to improve the jail. It included among them the appointment of a monitor to investigate and report on the status of defendants' compliance with court orders. The orders for relief and appointment of a monitor were appealed and affirmed in Wayne Co. Jail Inmates v. Wayne Co. Sheriff, 391 Mich. 359, 216 N.W.2d 910 (1974) (Inmates I ). In that opinion, the Supreme Court concluded, at p. 369, 216 N.W.2d 910:

The trial court retained jurisdiction to assure compliance with its order.

As noted above the defendant commissioners challenged only the power of the court to enter its order and did not dispute the specific provisions of it.

In light of the fact that full compliance comprehends the expenditure of large sums of public money the defendant commissioners are directed within 30 days to introduce before the trial court any evidence they may have which puts in question the propriety of the specific provisions of the order. Such 30-day period shall not be extended by reason of any further application or proceedings in this or any other court. Upon consideration thereof the trial court is directed to issue a current order as may be appropriate.

We retain jurisdiction for the purpose of reviewing without delay any objections to such updated order with the end of bringing to a conclusion this controversy which is already too long protracted, and to securing for the plaintiffs relief to which they are entitled.

Remanded.

Thirteen years went by with numerous dispositional orders being entered. Ultimately on April 9, 1987, all the parties except the inmates consented to a judgment (final judgment). It was corrected by order of April 30, 1987, and amended by order of December 4, 1987. The Chairperson of the Wayne County Commission (commission) appealed by right to this Court. The Wayne County Executive and the inmates cross appealed (Docket No. 110295). On May 12, 1988, both the appeal and cross appeal were dismissed for no progress. It appeared from this Court's file that the parties had amicably settled their differences over the final judgment.

The circuit court appointed a new jail monitor, Vincent M. Nathan, in May of 1987. It named a comonitor, Paul Belazis, several months later. A remedial order, generated by a monitor's report of July 10, 1987, resulted in a further order governing recreation at the jail to which the parties stipulated.

By February of 1988, the monitor issued a preliminary report regarding compliance with the final judgment. It was followed by a March 11, 1988, "Comprehensive Report of the Court Monitor on the Defendants' State of Compliance" (monitor's report).

The monitor's report is 122 pages long and has several hundred pages of appendices. It describes jail conditions the monitors observed from March through November, 1987, and carries this proviso: "Although the facts set forth below demonstrate noncompliance with certain provisions of the final judgment, no specific recommendations for supplemental relief are made in this report."

The categories addressed are:

A. Visitation;

B. Inmate recreation;

C. Mail;

D. Clothing and linen;

E. Physical plant maintenance and sanitation;

F. Disciplinary and grievance process;

G. Maximum security;

H. Health care (adopted experts' report, a copy of which was Appendix V);

I. Food service (adopted experts' report, a copy of which was Appendix W);

J. Training;

K. Law library;

L. Classification;

M. Staffing;

N. Population limits and overcrowding.

While the monitor's report notes improvements in some areas, it identifies, describes and documents substantial noncompliance in every category covered in the final judgment.

The sheriff responded to the monitor's report by requesting a hearing. The parties were given the opportunity to discuss their concerns with one another and with the trial judge and negotiated a stipulation on May 13, 1988. In it the sheriff withdrew his request for a hearing. Each of the parties confirmed the observations of the trial court's medical experts which had been adopted by the monitor. The sole exception was an objection by the sheriff to observations on individual patient care. ¹ The parties concurred in the monitor's fundamental observations concerning deficiencies at the jail. The Wayne Circuit Court adopted the monitor's report as its findings of fact in conformity with the stipulation of all the parties in its order of May 13, 1988.

Following entry of the order, activities commenced on three distinct fronts. First, the sheriff undertook compliance activities. He began development of policies and procedures manuals, a listing of which can be found in an October 17, 1988, report of corrective action. According to this report, numerous procedures already were in process. Others were implemented, while still others could not be accomplished because of the Wayne County Executive's lack of cooperation.

The second front focused on a millage in Wayne County to supply twenty million dollars annually for jail facilities and operations. Revenue was projected to commence in December of 1988 and to continue for ten years.

The third front involved placing the jail under central county administration by petition of the Wayne County Executive filed August 16, 1988. The County Executive asked to be appointed temporary administrator of the jail.

In this regard, a settlement conference was held at which Judge Kaufman suggested a compromise: both the sheriff and the Wayne County Executive would voluntarily relinquish power to Vincent Nathan as temporary receiver. No agreement was reached.

Then a motion was made for appointment of a receiver, this time by the inmates. The Wayne County Executive withdrew his petition. Argument was had before Judge Kaufman during which it was urged variously that the receiver named be Vincent Nathan, the Wayne County Executive, or someone else. The sheriff strenuously objected to both the substance of the motion and the procedures used to decide it. The parties were given a fairly tight time frame in which to file further documentary evidence including affidavits and depositions. No evidentiary hearings were allowed, and final briefs were submitted to Judge Kaufman by December 16, 1988.

Next, the sheriff moved for the disqualification of Judge Kaufman and of the entire Wayne Circuit Court bench. The judge denied both motions on September 16, 1988. The sheriff sought leave to appeal to this Court in Docket No. 111714. A panel consisting of William R. Beasley, Walter P. Cynar and Michael J. Kelly denied leave to appeal on September 26, 1988. The State Court Administrator referred the unsuccessful motion to disqualify to Oakland Circuit Judge Robert C. Anderson. He denied the motion on October 18, 1988. That decision was appealed to this Court in Docket No. 112798. The same panel denied relief by order of December 13, 1988. The Supreme Court denied leave to appeal on February 1, 1989, and denied the motion for reconsideration on March 31, 1989. 432 Mich. 857 (1989).

Judge Kaufman then granted the motion for receivership. His opinion and order are dated February 16, 1989, and will be referred to as the "receivership order." He summarized the decision as follows:

For eighteen years seven judges of this Court including four Chief Judges, have struggled to bring the Wayne County Jail into compliance with the law. Without doubt limited...