BENTON – Seven St. Clair County jail inmates stated meritorious claims that Sheriff Rick Watson failed to protect them from coronavirus, Senior U.S. District Judge Phil Gilbert ruled on April 5.
Gilbert ordered service of their suits on Watson, medical director David Marcowitz, and commissary operator Trinity Service Group.
Plaintiffs claim three inmates have died and 300 tested positive.
They filed a single suit in February, with Cortez Brown as lead plaintiff.
Gilbert severed it into individual suits, finding it likely that different legal standards would control each claim.
He notified plaintiffs that he would make a decision on the merits in 60 days, and delivered a decision in their favor a week ahead of his deadline.
Gilbert wrote that to state a claim, a plaintiff must set forth allegations demonstrating each defendant’s personal involvement.
He found plaintiffs satisfied this requirement in connection with each claim by suggesting each defendant acted unreasonably or indifferently.
He found plaintiffs alleged that Watson allows detainees to purchase and smoke electronic cigarettes despite a general prohibition against smoking.
He found they blamed second-hand vapor for transmission of the virus and blamed poor ventilation and crowding for the spread of the virus.
He found they alleged they slept on the floor with insects and black mold.
He found they alleged Watson and Marcowitz took inadequate steps to prevent, diagnose, and contain the virus.
He found they alleged Watson and Marcowitz provided masks and gloves for staff but not for inmates.
Gilbert divided the suits into four counts, starting with a count against all three defendants for allowing e-cigarettes.
The second count alleges Watson subjected plaintiffs to unconstitutional conditions of confinement.
The third count alleges Watson and Marcowitz exposed plaintiffs to substantial risk of serious harm.
The fourth count alleges Marcowitz denied adequate care.
Gilbert wrote that the exact legal status of each plaintiff and the legal standard for each claim could be sorted out as the case proceeds.
He denied recruitment of counsel, finding plaintiffs appeared competent to represent themselves.
He wrote that they could renew the request as the case progresses.
He wrote that it would likely take 60 days to receive answers from defendants and entirely possible that it would take 90 days or more.
He wrote that they didn’t need to submit any evidence unless directed to do so.