Duane Morris Class Action Review - 2023 - Report - Page 102
with the plaintiffs' aims or beliefs “does not defeat the adequacy-of-representation
requirement.” Id. at *16-17. The court concluded that class certification under Rule
23(b)(2) was appropriate because the plaintiffs did not seek individualized relief for any
class member, but rather sought injunction or declaratory relief for the class as a whole.
For these reasons, the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification.
C.
Class Certification In Prisoners’ Rights Litigation
Prisoner litigation over civil right issues is ubiquitous, and 2022 was no exception.
One of the successful class certification rulings in prisoner litigation in 2022 is Ross, et
al. v. Gossett, 33 F. 4th 433 (7th Cir. 2022), where the Seventh Circuit affirmed the
decision of the district court to grant class certification on claims brought by inmates at
various state correctional centers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of the
Eighth Amendment arising from shakedowns to sanitize cells and discover contraband.
The shakedowns were coordinated and executed according to a systematic plan down
to the sequence of events and uniforms worn by officers; both the plaintiffs and the
defendants agreed “that the shakedowns…were executed according to a uniform plan.”
Id. at 436. In framing the question for resolution as the constitutionality of the actions
pursuant to a common policy that was implemented in the same or similar fashion in
each of the four correctional centers at issue, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the holding of
the district court that commonality was satisfied under the standards established by
Wal-Mart. Id. at 437. In doing so, the Seventh Circuit rejected the argument that the
plaintiffs needed to provide “significant proof” of the plan and its unconstitutionality at
the class certification stage. Id. Instead, it held that unlike Wal-Mart where it was
disputed that the discriminatory actions were undertaken as part of a uniform policy, it
was undisputed here that the alleged discriminatory actions were part of a uniform plan,
and proof regarding the content of that plan was an issue for examination on the merits.
Id. at 438-39.
In the case of In Re Conditions At Lake County Jail, Case No. 22-CV-127 (D. Mont. Oct.
11, 2022), the court also granted the plaintiffs’ class certification motion, but refined the
proposed class definitions. The plaintiffs were inmates at the defendant’s jail who
sought certification of two classes, including one on behalf of the “conditions class”
against the jail, and one for a sub-class of inmates alleging claims including that they
were deprived of their Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, and of cost-free
medical care. Id. at p. 2. The court rejected the defendants’ arguments that failure to
exhaust administrative remedies and standing undermined the numerosity requirement
under Rule 23 (for the plaintiffs failed to grieve all claims). It adopted the “vicarious
exhaustion” principle recognized in other federal circuits that deems exhaustion
complete if one class member has exhausted administrative remedies with respect to
each claim raised by the class. Id. at 8-11. Procedurally, the court noted that while the
burden on failure to exhaust lies with the defendants, once a defendant has
demonstrated a failure to exhaust, the plaintiff must bring forth some explanation of the
failure that can be addressed at the initial pleadings stage, which was demonstrated as
to the conditions class on behalf of grievances filed by one class member. Id. at 12.
Numerosity was therefore satisfied based on the allegations concerning the scope of
101
© Duane Morris LLP 2023
Duane Morris Class Action Review – 2023
