269 A.3d 741
R.I.2022Background
- Plaintiffs Cody‑Allen Zab and Jose R. Rivera are serving life sentences at the Adult Correctional Institutions; each sued the Department of Corrections (DOC) for negligence based on injuries suffered in prison (Zab also sued Global Tel*Link and asserted a § 1983 claim).
- Rhode Island Gen. Laws § 13‑6‑1 (the “civil death statute”) provides that persons imprisoned for life are “deemed to be dead in all respects” as to civil rights and relations; the Superior Court held that the statute barred the plaintiffs’ negligence claims and dismissed Zab’s § 1983 claim on other grounds.
- On consolidated appeal, the Rhode Island Supreme Court addressed whether the civil death statute violates article 1, § 5 of the Rhode Island Constitution (the state right of access to the courts) and whether Zab’s § 1983 claim was viable.
- The Court held the civil death statute unconstitutional in its entirety under article 1, § 5 because it completely denies life prisoners access to state courts to vindicate civil claims; it reversed the summary‑judgment dismissals of the negligence claims and vacated the judgments, remanding for further proceedings.
- The Court affirmed dismissal of Zab’s § 1983 claim against the DOC and the Director in her official capacity because a state and an official sued in her official capacity are not “persons” under § 1983.
- Justice Goldberg dissented, arguing the matter should be resolved on nonconstitutional grounds, that prior precedent supported limiting court access for lifers, and that repeal or modification of the statute is for the Legislature.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 13‑6‑1 (civil death statute) violates article 1, § 5 (state right of access to courts) by barring life prisoners from bringing civil claims | §13‑6‑1 totally deprives lifers of access to courts and thus violates the Rhode Island constitutional guarantee of a remedy for injuries | The statute is a permissible legislative limitation and operates as an additional punishment/deterrent for the worst criminals; it only limits pursuit of negligence damages | The statute is unconstitutional under article 1, § 5: it completely denies an expressly enumerated right of access to courts and fails strict scrutiny; reversed and remanded for negligence claims |
| Whether the civil death statute preempts or impermissibly interferes with federal § 1983 claims (Supremacy Clause) | Zab: the statute divests state courts of jurisdiction to adjudicate his federal § 1983 claim, violating Supremacy Clause | Defendants: state law limits lifers’ civil rights; state courts retain authority; also practical limitations exist | Court found the hearing justice dismissed the §1983 claim on the merits, not for lack of jurisdiction; Supremacy issue not controlling here |
| Whether Zab could maintain a § 1983 claim against the DOC and the DOC Director in her official capacity | Zab sought declaratory and injunctive relief under § 1983 | Defendants: a State and officials sued in official capacity are not "persons" under § 1983; thus no § 1983 monetary claim | Court affirmed dismissal: state and officials sued in official capacity are not "persons" under § 1983 (Will); § 1983 claims against DOC/official capacity barred |
Key Cases Cited
- Gallop v. Adult Correctional Institutions, 182 A.3d 1137 (R.I. 2018) (interpreted § 13‑6‑1 as deeming lifers civilly dead and barring many civil rights)
- Gallop v. Adult Correctional Institutions, 218 A.3d 543 (R.I. 2019) (declined to address constitutionality of the civil death statute)
- Haywood v. Drown, 556 U.S. 729 (U.S. 2009) (state courts have authority to adjudicate federal claims; limits on divesting state court jurisdiction)
- Will v. Michigan Department of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (U.S. 1989) (States and officials sued in official capacity are not "persons" under § 1983)
- Kennedy v. Cumberland Engineering Co., 471 A.2d 195 (R.I. 1984) (Legislature may place reasonable limits on bringing claims, but not total denial of access)
- Cok v. Read, 770 A.2d 441 (R.I. 2001) (categorical bans on court access are invalid absent specific findings and narrow tailoring)
- Cherenzia v. Lynch, 847 A.2d 818 (R.I. 2004) (statutes implicating an expressly enumerated constitutional right are subject to strict scrutiny)
- Bandoni v. State, 715 A.2d 580 (R.I. 1998) (constitutional provisions that are not self‑executing do not themselves create private causes of action)