Cases

Rights Behind Bars has won more than 100 cases in the Federal Circuit Courts. Our briefs are linked on their respective case pages. If they are helpful to you as an attorney or pro se litigator, please feel welcome to use them.

Montanez v. Price, et al.
Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Montanez v. Price, et al.

Mr. Montanez collapsed in his cell and lost all sensation from the chest down. Rather than sending him to a hospital, prison staff laughed off his request for emergency care, left him to drag his paralyzed body across his cell floor, and abandoned him for three days before he received an MRI revealing spinal cord stenosis and edema requiring surgery.

Read More
Durham v. G. Kelley, et al
Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Durham v. G. Kelley, et al

After a diagnosis with lumbar stenosis Mr. Durham has been limited in his ability to ambulate and was prescribed a cane to allow him to walk without extreme pain. Despite this diagnosis and prescription, officials in the Trenton facility ordered Mr. Durham to abandon his cane in his cell when he was transferred to a quarantine unit. They then continued to deny him access to his cane for approximately ten days. They did this despite numerous different requests from Mr. Durham for his cane to nurses, doctors, and correctional officers, and despite his reports of excruciating pain when he was forced to walk without his cane.

Read More
Voices of the Experienced (VOTE) et al. v. James LeBlanc et al.
Affirmative Litigation Phoebe Mesard Affirmative Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Voices of the Experienced (VOTE) et al. v. James LeBlanc et al.

This lawsuit challenges the harsh and unconstitutional conditions of forced agricultural labor at Angola. It is brought Voice of the Experienced (VOTE) and four incarcerated men currently at Angola, who represent all those compelled to work on the so-called “Farm Line.” Angola, once a plantation site, now spans 18,000 acres and forces incarcerated people, primarily Black men, into agricultural labor under oppressive conditions. These individuals toil in extreme heat and humidity, often lacking basic safety gear. This labor serves no legitimate purpose, with men forced to perform grueling tasks like digging and refilling holes or manually picking blades of grass.

Read More
Brown v. Meisner, et al.
Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Brown v. Meisner, et al.

After injuring his knee in a fall at one Wisconsin prison, Lee Brown was transferred to another facility where his previously granted accommodations—a lower bunk, a wheelchair, and crutches—were not continued. He fell again while climbing to a top bunk, and was told he needed surgery that the prison would not provide.

Read More
Hall v. Higgins
Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Hall v. Higgins

Mr. Hall has been paralyzed from the waist down since 2012 and requires a wheelchair for mobility. Jail staff repeatedly refused to assist him in accessing his bed, the toilet, and medical appointments, citing "protocol."

Read More
Shaw v. Kemper et. al.
Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Shaw v. Kemper et. al.

Mr. Shaw, a wheelchair user, was unable to access the prison’s only handicapped-accessible toilet on multiple occasions because it was in use. Mr. Shaw’s lawsuit was dismissed by the district court at screening. The court characterized his inability to access a handicapped toilet as a mere "inconvenience" of prison life.

Read More
Richardson v. Clarke et al.
Affirmative Litigation Phoebe Mesard Affirmative Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Richardson v. Clarke et al.

Richardson v. Clarke is an appeal brought by Rights Behind Bars in the Fourth Circuit on behalf of a man in the Virginia Department of Corrections (VDOC) system who argues VDOC violated his right to freely exercise his religion and failed to provide him accommodations as a person with a disability.

Read More
Ingram v. Kubik
Amicus Brief Phoebe Mesard Amicus Brief Phoebe Mesard

Ingram v. Kubik

Rights Behind Bars is amicus counsel on behalf of disability rights groups supporting plaintiff who, in midst of a mental health crisis, was body-slammed by a police officer because the officer found him annoying.

Read More
Crane v. Utah D.O.C.
Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Crane v. Utah D.O.C.

Rights Behind Bars represents the grandmother of Brock Tucker on her claims under the 8th Amendment, Utah Constitution, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Brock entered the Utah Department of Corrections when he was seventeen years old.

Read More
Woodcock v. Correct Care Solutions, LLC
Amicus Brief Phoebe Mesard Amicus Brief Phoebe Mesard

Woodcock v. Correct Care Solutions, LLC

In collaboration with Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton, and Garrison LLP and the Center for Health Law & Policy Innovation at Harvard Law School, Rights Behind Bars filed an amicus brief on behalf of a group of medical organizations and doctors who specialized in correctional or kidney health.

Read More
Munoz v. CDCR
Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Munoz v. CDCR

Rights Behind Bars represents Rick Munoz in his appeal of the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) on his claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Read More
Mann v. Ohio DRC
Amicus Brief Phoebe Mesard Amicus Brief Phoebe Mesard

Mann v. Ohio DRC

In collaboration with Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton, and Garrison LLP and the Center for Health Law & Policy Innovation at Harvard Law School, Rights Behind Bars filed an amicus brief on behalf of a group of medical organizations and doctors who specialized in correctional or kidney health.

Read More
Taylor v. Riojas
Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard Appellate Litigation Phoebe Mesard

Taylor v. Riojas

Rights Behind Bars filed a petition for rehearing en banc to the Fifth Circuit on behalf of Trent Taylor. The court granted Texas state prison officials qualified immunity notwithstanding Mr. Taylor's claim that forcing him to live naked in prison cells covered in human sewage for nearly a week was an unconstitutional condition of confinement. The Supreme Court summarily reversed the Fifth Circuit decision granting qualified immunity to prison officials.

Read More