Case: Picon v. Morris

2:84-cv-00103 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

Filed Date: Aug. 31, 1984

Closed Date: 1989

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 31, 1984, prisoners at the Missouri Training Center for Men filed a class action lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Missouri Department of Corrections in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The class action was the product of three cases that were immediately consolidated. (Capraro v. Morris and Harris v. Morris) The plaintiffs alleged that their constitutional rights had been violated by the use of emergency segregation cells at the prison. On Ja…

On August 31, 1984, prisoners at the Missouri Training Center for Men filed a class action lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Missouri Department of Corrections in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The class action was the product of three cases that were immediately consolidated. (Capraro v. Morris and Harris v. Morris) The plaintiffs alleged that their constitutional rights had been violated by the use of emergency segregation cells at the prison.

On January 24, 1986, the parties entered into a consent decree, in which the defendants agreed not to use emergency segregation cells. On March 8, 1989, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (Judge Robert Kingsland) found that the defendants had complied with the decree and dismissed the case.

Barry McBride was a prisoner at the Missouri Training Center for Men during the period of time governed by the consent decree, and in August 1987, the defendants housed him in an emergency segregation cell for twelve days. After his release from the prison in 1988, he filed a pro se lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his rights had been violated by the defendants' actions in violation of the consent decree. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (Judge Richard Webber) denied McBride's claim. He appealed.

On May 16, 1991, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit (Judge Clarence Arlen Beam, Judge Myron Bright, and Judge George Woods) reversed the district court's denial of McBride's claim and remanded the case, ordering the district court to reopen the case and enforce the consent decree. Picon v. Morris, 933 F.2d 660 (8th Cir. 1991).

On January 30, 1992, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (Judge Catherine Perry) denied McBride's motion for contempt, ruling that it was moot. The court further ordered that the order previously dismissing the case would be modified only to the extent that the court would retain jurisdiction solely for the purposes of enforcement of modification of the ongoing consent decree. We have no further information on the proceedings in this case.

Summary Authors

Kristen Sagar (4/4/2006)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/8866861/parties/picon-v-morris/


Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

2:84-cv-00098

Docket (PACER)

Harris v. Morris

Aug. 21, 1984

Aug. 21, 1984

Docket

2:84-cv-00150

Docket (PACER)

Capraro v. Morris

Jan. 3, 1995

Jan. 3, 1995

Docket

2:84-cv-00103

Docket

April 28, 1999

April 28, 1999

Docket

90-01765

Reported Opinion

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

May 16, 1991

May 16, 1991

Order/Opinion

933 F.2d 660

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/8866861/picon-v-morris/

Last updated March 20, 2026, 5:29 a.m.

ECF Number Date Description Link
1 Jan. 30, 1992

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: by Honorable Catherine D. Perry Ordered that the motion of Barry McBride for contempt is denied as moot. Further Ordered that the 3/8/89 Order of Magistrate Judge Robert D. Kingsland ordering that the cause be dism8issed with prejudice is MODIFIED only to the extent that the Court shall retain jurisdiction solely for the purposes of enforcement of modification of the ongoing consent decree. (cc: all counsel) (FCE) (Entered: 02/20/1996)

RECAP
2 Aug. 17, 1995

MOTION by petitioners for an order to show cause why defts should not be adjudged in contempt of court (FCE) (Entered: 02/20/1996)

RECAP
3 Sept. 8, 1995

RESPONSE by respondents to motion for an order to show cause why defts should not be adjudged in contempt of court [2-1] (FCE) (Entered: 02/20/1996)

RECAP
4 Sept. 14, 1995

REPLY by petitioners to response to motion for an order to show cause why defts should not be adjudged in contempt of court [2-1] (FCE) (Entered: 02/20/1996)

RECAP
Feb. 8, 1996

ORDER by Honorable Jean C. Hamilton Case reassigned to Honorable E. R. Webber (cc: all counsel) (LSD) Modified on 02/13/1996

5 Feb. 16, 1996

MAIL Returned [0-2] addressed to plaintiff Rodinald Lee Remington marked moved, left no address (FCE) (Entered: 02/20/1996)

RECAP
7 Feb. 20, 1996

LETTER from plaintiff Michael Capraro requesting copy of docket sheet. Copy of docket sheet forwarded. (FCE) (Entered: 02/26/1996)

RECAP
6 Feb. 23, 1996

MAIL Returned [0-2] addressed to plaintiff Frank A. Picon (FCE) (Entered: 02/26/1996)

RECAP
8 July 17, 1996

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: by Honorable E. R. Webber granting motion for an order to show cause why defts should not be adjudged in contempt of court [2-1] ; response to order show cause by 8/19/96 by defts why they should not be held in contempt of court for allegedly violating the consent decree. (cc: all counsel) (FCE) (Entered: 07/23/1996)

RECAP
9 July 19, 1996

MAIL Returned [8-2] addressed to plaintiff Rodinald Lee Remington (Contacted Fulton Reception and Diagnostic Center, pltf released from PAROLL in August of 1991, whereabouts unknown) (FCE) (Entered: 07/24/1996)

RECAP
10 July 23, 1996

LETTER from all defendants' attorney of record Deborah Neff indicating her withdrawl and substitution of David Johnston as counsel. (FCE) (Entered: 07/24/1996)

RECAP
11 Aug. 12, 1996

MOTION by defendants to extend time to reply to show cause for 30 days (FCE) (Entered: 08/21/1996)

RECAP
12 Aug. 22, 1996

RULED DOCUMENT by Honorable E. R. Webber granting motion to extend time to reply to show cause for 30 days GRANTED 8/22/96 [11-1] (cc: all counsel) (ARL) (Entered: 08/29/1996)

RECAP
13 Sept. 12, 1996

MAIL Returned [11-1] addressed to plaintiff Frank A. Picon; Inmate moved and left no forwarding address (FCE) (Entered: 09/17/1996)

RECAP
14 Sept. 16, 1996

MOTION w/incorporated suggestions in sppt. by defendant to extend time to & including 14 days to file reply to Motion for order to show cause (LSD) (Entered: 09/18/1996)

RECAP
15 Sept. 19, 1996

ORDER by Honorable E. R. Webber granting motion to extend time to & including 14 days to file reply to Motion for order to show cause [14-1] (cc: all counsel) (FCE) (Entered: 09/24/1996)

RECAP
16 Sept. 26, 1996

RESPONSE to order show cause by defendants' [8-2]. (attachments are in a separate accordian folder) (LGK) (Entered: 09/30/1996)

RECAP
17 Sept. 27, 1996

MOTION by plaintiff Frank A. Picon for order to produce exhibits, for extension of time (30 days) to file reply and request that this court send plaintiffs a copy of its order of July 17, 1996 (FCE) (Entered: 10/02/1996)

RECAP
18 Sept. 30, 1996

MAIL Returned [15-1] addressed to plaintiff Frank A. Picon marked return to sender, inmate moved left no address (FCE) (Entered: 10/03/1996)

RECAP
19 Oct. 1, 1996

RESPONSE by all defendants to motion for order to produce exhibits [17-1], to motion for extension of time (30 days) to file reply [17-2] (FCE) (Entered: 10/04/1996)

RECAP
20 Oct. 4, 1996

MAIL Returned [15-1] addressed to plaintiff Rodinald Lee Remington marked "addressee unknown" (FCE) (Entered: 10/11/1996)

RECAP
21 Oct. 8, 1996

EMERGENCY MOTION by plaintiff Frank A. Picon, plaintiff Rodinald Lee Remington, plaintiff Michael Capraro, plaintiff Barry McBride for protection, and or for restraining order (FCE) (Entered: 10/11/1996)

RECAP
22 Oct. 8, 1996

MOTION by plaintiff Frank A. Picon, plaintiff Rodinald Lee Remington, plaintiff Michael Capraro, plaintiff Barry McBride for sanctions (FCE) (Entered: 10/11/1996)

RECAP
23 Oct. 9, 1996

RESPONSE by defendant Terry D. Morris, defendant Jimmie M. Jones, defendant Larry Dittmer, defendant Dan Henry, defendant Tom Anderson, defendant Milton S. Rucker, defendant Andy Thomas, defendant Unknown Lyons, defendant Rocky Martin to motion for sanctions [22-1] (FCE) (Entered: 10/11/1996)

RECAP
24 Oct. 16, 1996

RESPONSE by defendants to motion for protection [21-1], to motion for restraining order [21-2] (FCE) (Entered: 10/18/1996)

RECAP
25 Nov. 25, 1996

REPLY by plaintiff Frank A. Picon re [16-1] LEAVE TO FILE IN EXCESS OF PAGE LIMITATION IS GRANTED ERW. (CLA) (Entered: 11/26/1996)

RECAP
26 Dec. 6, 1996

MAIL Returned [25-1] addressed to plaintiff Rodinald Lee Remington. (FCE) (Entered: 12/12/1996)

RECAP
27 Dec. 10, 1996

MAIL Returned [25-1] addressed to plaintiff Frank A. Picon, released from FCI Memphis on Feb. 1990. (FCE) (Entered: 12/12/1996)

RECAP
28 Dec. 27, 1996

AFFIDAVIT of Norman E. Douglas (FCE) (Entered: 12/31/1996)

RECAP
29 Aug. 12, 1997

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: by Honorable E. R. Webber denying motion for an order to show cause why defts should not be adjudged in contempt of court [2-1] denying motion for sanctions [22-1] denying as moot motion for order to produce exhibits [17-1], denying as moot motion for extension of time (30 days) to file reply [17-2] denying without prejudice motion for protection [21-1], denying without prejudice motion for restraining order [21-2]. A separate Judgment shall accompany this Memorandum and Order (cc: all counsel) (MCB) (Entered: 08/13/1997)

RECAP
30 Aug. 12, 1997

ORDER OF DISMISSAL by Honorable E. R. Webber IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff Gerald Bereuter's motion to fashion emergency relief and a restraining order against defendants is DISMISSED without prejudice. (cc: all counsel) (MCB) (Entered: 08/13/1997)

RECAP
31 Aug. 21, 1997

MAIL Returned [30-1], [29-1] addressed to plaintiff Rodinald Lee Remington (Contacted Fulton Reception & Diagnostic Center "Crystal", Deft completed sentence on 8/27/91 and is not currently on parole). (FCE) (Entered: 08/25/1997)

RECAP
32 Sept. 8, 1997

NOTICE OF APPEAL filed by plaintiff William Cooper re: the District Court decision ; [30-1], [29-1] fee: $ ifp case forwarded to pro se law clerks for IFP on Appeal review. (FCE) (Entered: 09/16/1997)

RECAP
33 Sept. 24, 1997

ORDER by Honorable E. R. Webber IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that w/in 30 days (by 10/24/97) from the date of this order, plf shall pay to this Court the full $105.00 filing and docketing fee for filing an appeal ; initial partial filing fee ddl set 10/24/97 (cc: all counsel) (FCE) (Entered: 09/25/1997)

RECAP
34 Sept. 29, 1997

MAIL Returned [33-2] addressed to plaintiff Rodinald Lee Remington (BAK) (Entered: 10/01/1997)

RECAP
Sept. 30, 1997

DELIVERED TO USCA - 1 Civil Appeal Cover Sheet, 2 Certified Copies of Notice of Appeal filed by William Cooper, 2 Certified Copies of Clerk's Docket entries, 2 copies of ORDER (ERW) filed 9/24/97 and 2 copies of ORDER/MEMO/ORDER (ERW) filed 8/12/97. Copy of NOA to Judge Webber. cc: NOA and Clerk's docket entries to parties. (FCE)

Sept. 30, 1997

ENTIRE FILE SENT TO (USCA) - # of Volumes: 4 (FCE)

35 Oct. 3, 1997

ORDER FROM USCA The appellant is directed to pay the $105.00 filing fees to the Clerk of the United States District Court by November 3, 1997. If the appellant fails to act by that date, the appeal will be dismissed for failure to prosecute. copy filed USCA number: 97-3578 (BAK) (Entered: 10/06/1997)

RECAP
36 Dec. 2, 1997

MANDATE W/OPINION ATTACHED from (USCA) dismissing the appeal for failure to prosecute [32-1] (cc: all counsel) (CMA) (Entered: 12/05/1997)

RECAP
37 Dec. 8, 1997

MAIL Returned [36-1] addressed to plaintiff Rodinald Lee Remington; attempt to locate addressee's new address was unsuccessful - has been released from prison - no forwarding address (BAK) (Entered: 12/11/1997)

RECAP
38 Jan. 8, 1998

ORDER FROM USCA copy filed USCA number: 97-3578. The suggestion for rehearing en banc is denied. The petition for rehearing by the panel is also denied. (BAK) Modified on 01/14/1998 (Entered: 01/12/1998)

RECAP
April 28, 1999

GENERIC SCHEDULING EVENT ; Response to Court ddl satisfied (FCE)

Case Details

State / Territory:

Missouri

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 31, 1984

Closing Date: 1989

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Prisoner challenging the use of emergency segregation cells

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: Yes

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

State

Missouri Department of Corrections

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Other Dockets:

Eastern District of Missouri 2:84-cv-00103

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit 90-01765

Eastern District of Missouri 2:84-cv-00150

Eastern District of Missouri 2:84-cv-00098

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed

Relief Granted:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Order Duration: 1986 - 1989

Issues

Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:

Administrative segregation

Crowding (General)

Disciplinary segregation

Recommended Citation