Clarkson v. Coughlin

Background

Reynaldo Perez, appearing without a lawyer, filed a motion asking the court to hold the superintendent and deputy superintendent of Five Points Correctional Facility in contempt. He alleged that the facility violated the consent decree governing accommodations for deaf and hard-of-hearing prisoners by failing to provide reasonable accommodations for his hearing impairment.

The opinion states that medical professionals classified Perez as HL20, meaning hard of hearing. He had been approved for accommodations including a telephone amplifier, closed-caption television, sound amplification, hearing aids, and headphones. Perez said he had submitted multiple requests after arriving at Five Points and had not received accommodations as of December 15, 2021.

Counsel for the named defendants in the underlying case told the court that the Five Points officials had not been formally served or joined as parties. Counsel also reported that Five Points had granted Perez’s accommodation requests in full on December 21, 2021, and that Perez accepted that grant in writing on December 28, 2021. The court had directed Perez to respond, but the opinion states that he did not do so.

Ruling

The court denied Perez’s motion for contempt as moot. The court explained that, because Perez had acknowledged in writing that he received the accommodations, there was no reason to direct him to serve and formally join the Five Points officials. The Clerk was directed to close the motion at Docket Number 190.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court resolved the contempt motion as moot rather than deciding whether the officials had violated the consent decree. The opinion is signed by Judge Colleen McMahon.