Civil Rights Lawyers Sue Alabama Sheriffs Over Jail Food
The Southern Center for Human Rights and Alabama Appleseed Center for Law and Justice filed a lawsuit challenging the refusal of 49 Alabama sheriffs to produce public records showing whether, and if so by how much, they have personally profited from funds allocated for feeding people in their jails.
January 09, 2018 at 11:10 AM
4 minute read
Neither the Alabama Sheriffs Association nor the state attorney general's office offered any response Monday to allegations from civil rights lawyers about abuse of funds meant to feed those locked up in county jails.
The Southern Center for Human Rights and Alabama Appleseed Center for Law and Justice filed a lawsuit challenging the refusal of 49 Alabama sheriffs to produce public records showing whether, and if so by how much, they have personally profited from funds allocated for feeding people in their jails.
The lawyers said in a news release Monday that many Alabama sheriffs exploit a state law authorizing them to personally “keep and retain” taxpayer dollars provided for feeding people in their jails, taking the position it permits them to take any amounts they do not spend on food as personal income.
“This archaic system is based on a dubious interpretation of state law that has been rejected by two different attorneys general of Alabama, who concluded that the law merely allows sheriffs to manage the money and use it for official purposes, not to line their own pockets,” Aaron Littman, a staff attorney at the Southern Center for Human Rights, said in the news release. “It also raises grave ethical concerns, invites public corruption, and creates a perverse incentive to spend as little as possible on feeding people who are in jail.”
The lawyers said they sent letters requesting copies of financial records showing how much each sheriff has kept for personal use in an effort to learn which sheriffs across the state have taken taxpayers' money from jail food funds, and by how much they have profited.
“Although certain sheriffs have responded in compliance with Alabama's open records law, 49 sheriffs have refused for nearly half a year to comply with their clear obligations to produce the records, claiming instead that these documents are personal,” the lawyers said.
“The public has a right to know whether sheriffs are meeting the basic human needs of incarcerated people in their care, or are instead filling their personal coffers,” Frank Knaack, executive director of Alabama Appleseed, said in the news release. “The Alabama Public Records Law exists so that we can hold our government accountable. Unfortunately, a number of sheriffs have decided that our public records law does not apply to them.”
The Southern Center for Human Rights has received reports from people in Alabama jails that they are being provided inadequate or unhealthy meals or food that is spoiled or contaminated, the lawyers said.
A former sheriff was held in contempt and jailed by a federal judge after he purchased half of an 18-wheeler load of corn dogs for $500 and fed them to inmates at every meal, the civil rights groups said. They alleged some sheriffs have pocketed substantial amounts of money, although they acknowledged the amounts are unknown because the sheriffs are not required to report the income on state financial disclosure forms.
“One sheriff who did make such a report took more than $250,000 in 'compensation' from 'food provisions' in both 2016 and 2015, the lawyers said. “Another sheriff was held in contempt of a federal court in 2017 after removing $160,000 from the jail food account and investing it in a used car dealership.”
The lawsuit was filed in Hale County Circuit Court. The organizations, represented by attorneys at the Southern Center for Human Rights and Jake Watson and Rebekah Keith McKinney of Huntsville, seek an order from the court that the records they have requested are public and that the defendant sheriffs must produce them. They have requested that their suit be consolidated with a related case filed by Sheriff Kenneth Ellis which is currently pending before the same court and involves the same question of public access to information about how sheriffs profit from jail food funds.
A spokesman for Attorney General Steve Marshall said by email Monday, “In response to your inquiry today concerning a contact for Alabama sheriffs, the Alabama Attorney General's Office does not speak for the state's sheriffs. I would instead refer you to the Alabama Sheriff's Association.”
A staff member at the association said Executive Director Bobby Timmons would be the person to respond. But Timmons could not be reached.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllStuckey's Leader Using Skills as Georgia Lawyer to Help Revive Iconic Brand
6 minute readGa. Election Workers Settle Defamation Lawsuit Against Conservative Website
4 minute readTo Woo Law Firms, Legal Training Platforms Are Combining Hands-On and Online Learning
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250