You are here

Prisoner Litigation

Displaying 1 - 10 of 13
Format: 2019
Greater than or equal to
May 14, 2019
Robert Timothy Reagan, Margaret S. Williams, Marie Leary, Catherine R. Borden, Jessica L. Snowden, Patricia D. Breen, Jason A. Cantone

Fair Elections Ohio v. Husted (Susan J. Dlott and S. Arthur Spiegel, 1:12-cv-797) and Mays v. Husted (Michael H. Watson, 2:18-cv-1376) (S.D. Ohio)

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Case Study 4 pages
May 23, 2018

This dramatic reenactment provides an example and insights of how mediation between a prison inmate and relevant state officials unfolds.  Guided by an experienced mediator, both sides present and discuss their cases, with the goal to achieve a mutually agreed upon resolution. 

December 12, 2017

Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure calls for “the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.” Section 1983 inmate civil rights cases can thwart that expectation, and such cases represent about 11% of civil cases filed nationwide. In an effort to reduce the amount of time these cases consume and their costs, the District of Nevada developed an inmate early mediation program that has enjoyed marked success. Court to Court visited the district court in Reno to learn why the program has been so successful. 

August 27, 2012
Robert Timothy Reagan, Margaret S. Williams, Marie Leary, Catherine R. Borden, Jessica L. Snowden, Patricia D. Breen, Jason A. Cantone

Hamilton v. Ashland County Board of Education (Donald C. Nugent, N.D. Ohio 1:08-cv-2546)
Adult inmates of a juvenile correctional facility sued to enjoin cancelation of their voter registrations for not being permanent residents. The district court denied the plaintiffs relief. The court of appeals vacated the portion of the district court decision pertaining to state law as a matter for state courts to decide.
Topics: Prisoner voters; registration challenges; matters for state courts.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Case Study 2 pages
January 1, 2011
Donna J. Stienstra, Jared J. Bataillon, Jason A. Cantone

This report is based on a study conducted by the Federal Judicial Center for the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management. The study sought information from district court clerks of court about programs, services, and materials their courts have developed to assist pro se litigants and to assist staff in handling pro se cases. The study also sought information from district court chief judges about the impact of pro se litigants on judges and chambers staff and what measures the judges have taken to meet the demands of these cases.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 76 pages
June 1, 1996
Rya Weickert Zobel, David E. Rauma, William W Schwarzer, Marie Leary, Genevra Kay Loveland, Charles P. Sutelan

Articles in this issue of FJC Directions describe federal courts' experiences with pro se actions. Included are an analysis of data from a Center study of nearly 60,000 pro se cases filed in ten district courts, a report on the District of Nevada's use of early case-evaluation telephonic hearings for prisoner pro se civil rights complaints, and discussions of developments in videoconferencing and other types of telecommunications for pretrial proceedings and trials. In this issue of FJC Directions:

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 43 pages
January 1, 1996

A resource for federal judges, pro se law clerks, and others in the courts who manage prisoner pro se litigation. The guide builds on an earlier Center report, Recommended Procedures for Handling Prisoner Civil Rights Cases in the Federal Courts (rev. 1980), while reflecting statutory changes and federal court experience in the sixteen years since that report was published. The guide describes provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, enacted in April 1996, and how they are likely to affect widespread practices.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 172 pages
January 1, 1996

Beginning in June 1996, the Center published thirteen issues of this newsletter. It summarizes relevant appellate and district court decisions under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996 and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. It was published in an effort to help judges during the intense early period of judicial interpretation of those acts, which were complex and spawned a great deal of litigation. It ceased publication with issue 13, September 1998.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 100 pages
January 1, 1984
Thomas E. Willging

A description of the procedures used in several district courts to adjust the filing fee to the amount of income available to a prisoner. The report details the operation of the program in the Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, and assesses the impact of the procedure on the court and litigants.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 45 pages
January 1, 1981
Ila Jeanne Sensenich

A supplement to augment and update the original volume on the law of prisoner litigation (see the following entry). It reports decisions and developments subsequent to the publication of the earlier report. The materials are presented in outline form, keyed to the sections and subsections of the first document. An annotated table of contents permits the user to find materials in both the compendium and the supplement.


Subscribe to Prisoner Litigation