California: CDCR Agrees to Pay $7,500 to Settle Pro Se Prisoner's § 1983 Retaliation Lawsuit
California: CDCR Agrees to Pay $7,500 to Settle Pro Se Prisoner's § 1983 Retaliation Lawsuit
In June 2012, after five years of litigation, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) entered into an agreement with prisoner Lorenzo Fosselman to settle the federal lawsuit he had filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging retaliation and other causes of action stemming from his refusal to participate in an interview process ostensibly designed to gather intelligence and evidence following an incident in which two guards (19 months earlier) had been stabbed. Without admitting liability, CDCR agreed to pay Fosselman $7,500 in exchange for a stipulated dismissal of his complaint.
In July 2005, two guards were stabbed in a maximum security housing unit at Salinas Valley State Prison (SVSP). This led to a lockdown, which was followed by a "modified program," participation in which required prisoners to submit to an interview.
When Fosselman refused to participate in the interview process, he was moved to a Behavior Modification Unit (BMU), where he was denied all privileges (including yard, phone calls, visits, and packages).
After SVSP was returned to normal program, Fosselman grieved his continued placement in the BMU. Less than a week later, in December 2006, he was issued a Rules Violation Report (RVR) alleging that his continued refusal to be interviewed regarding the July 2005 stabbing incident indicated that he was "participating [in] and promoting ... organized criminal gang/disruptive group activity."
Fosselman was found guilty of this RVR and disciplined with continued loss of privileges. In the end, he was denied access to fresh air and outdoor exercise for over 57 weeks.
Proceeding pro se, Fosselman filed an amended complaint in August 2007, alleging 14 causes of action, including retaliation for filing grievances and for refusing to interview (in violation of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights); violation of his Fifth Amendment rights by requiring him to incriminate himself and punishing him for refusing to speak; deliberate indifference to the risks to his safety entailed in forcing him to interview; and denial of outdoor exercise for many weeks.
Defendants filed two motions to dismiss, both of which Fosselman defeated. The case was twice referred for mediation before a magistrate judge. It finally settled on June 12, 2012. Sources: Fosselman v. Evans, U.S. District Court (N.D. Cal.), Case No. 4:2007-cv-02606-PJH.
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Fosselman v. Evans
| Year | 2012 |
|---|---|
| Cite | U.S. District Court (N.D. Cal.), Case No. 4:2007-cv-02606-PJH. |
| Level | District Court |
| Conclusion | Settlement |
| Damages | 7,500.00 |