Ford v. Bender
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 18298
| 1st Cir. | 2014Background
- Ford was a pretrial detainee housed in the DDU, a maximum-security unit, for offenses committed during confinement in a prior sentence.
- In 2003 Ford received a ten-year DDU sanction after a disciplinary hearing for dangerous conduct, signaling punitive purpose.
- After completing his original sentence in 2007, Ford remained in DOC custody as a pretrial detainee and was kept in the DDU without a new hearing.
- Superintendent St. Amand and Deputy Commissioner Bender attributed Ford’s continued DDU confinement to punitive discipline for a past incident, with conditions markedly harsher than the general population.
- Ford’s health deteriorated in the DDU due to diabetes management deficiencies, including insufficient insulin administration and related complications.
- Ford pled guilty in 2008 to assault with intent to murder and mailing heroin; the DOC later released him and ceased the DDU sanction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qualified immunity for pretrial DDU confinement | Ford argues the DDU confinement as punishment violated rights. | Bender/St. Amand contend no clearly established violation; Karnes reliance supports immunity. | Defendants entitled to qualified immunity. |
| Procedural due process for hearing after status change | 2003 hearing sufficed; no new hearing needed after status change. | A fresh Wolff hearing was required for the pretrial detainee. | Bender entitled to qualified immunity; 2003 hearing adequate. |
| Mootness of equitable relief | Equitable relief remained live post-release due to ongoing rights. | Release moots equitable relief; declaratory relief advisory. | Equitable relief mooted; vacatur appropriate. |
| Attorneys' fees on appeal when claims are moot | Prevailing party status persists for some relief; fees should follow. | Damages and most equitable relief moot; limited prevailing status. | Remand to determine fees for two surviving forms of relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (U.S. 1979) (pretrial detainee punishment and due process balance)
- Collazo-Leon v. United States Bureau of Prisons, 51 F.3d 315 (1st Cir. 1995) (disciplinary sanctions may be punishment or discipline in pretrial context)
- Surprenant v. Rivas, 424 F.3d 5 (1st Cir. 2005) (pretrial detainee disciplinary process; limits on punishment)
- Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (U.S. 1974) (due process in disciplinary hearings for prison inmates)
- Pletka v. Nix, 957 F.2d 1480 (8th Cir. 1992) (civil disciplinary sanctions; independence from criminal process)
- Diffenderfer v. Gomez-Colon, 587 F.3d 445 (1st Cir. 2009) (mootness and prevailing party analysis on appeal)