Seeking Justice for Sarah Collins Rudolph

On September 15, 1963, Sarah Collins Rudolph became the victim of a horrific church bombing in Birmingham, Alabama. Carried out by the Ku Klux Klan, the explosion at the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church killed Ms. Collins Rudolph’s older sister, 14-year-old Addie Mae, as well as Denise McNair, 11, Carole Robertson, 14, and Cynthia Wesley, 14.

Known as the “fifth little girl,” Ms. Collins Rudolph survived the attack, losing her right eye as a result of the explosion.

On September 14, Partners Ishan Bhabha and Alison Stein and Associate Caroline Cease sent a letter to Alabama Governor Kay Ivey on behalf of Ms. Collins Rudolph, calling for an official apology from the State of Alabama and seeking compensation for the decades of physical and emotional pain she has endured.

“While social justice is always a worthy cause, given recent events, now is the time for Ms. Collins Rudolph to receive long overdue justice,” the letter states.

On September 30, Gov. Ivey responded. “Moreover, there should be no question that Ms. Collins Rudolph and the families of those who perished – including Ms. Collins Rudolph’s sister, Addie Mae, as well as Cynthia Wesley, Carole Robertson, and Carole Denise McNair – suffered an egregious injustice that has yielded untold pain and suffering over the ensuing decades. For that, they most certainly deserve a sincere, heartfelt apology – an apology that I extend today without hesitation or reservation,” reads the response letter.

In the letter, the governor also suggests opening a dialogue with the firm team regarding the sought-after compensation.

“We are gratified by Governor Ivey’s unequivocal acknowledgment of the egregious injustice that Ms. Collins Rudolph suffered, and by the Governor’s apology for the State’s racist and segregationist rhetoric and policies that led to Ms. Collins Rudolph’s injuries. We look forward to engaging in discussions in the near future about compensation, which Ms. Collins Rudolph justly deserves after the loss of her beloved sister and for the pain, suffering and lifetime of missed opportunities resulting from the bombing,” said Ishan, Alison, and Caroline in a recent statement.

Ms. Collins Rudolph’s story was chronicled in a Washington Post feature, “Birmingham’s Fifth Girl” and was also reported in The New York Times. Ms. Collins Rudolph also wrote an opinion letter for The Daily Beast and co-authored a book, “The 5th Little Girl: Soul Survivor of the 16th Street Baptist Church Bombing.” 

Defending 8th Amendment Rights Against Deliberate Indifference, Negligence

On September 28, US District Judge Sue Myerscough issued a 55-page order affirming a jury verdict in excess of $8 million for firm pro bono client William Kent Dean against Wexford HealthSources, Inc. The order, which denied the defendants’ motion for judgment as a matter of law and motion for a new trial, includes approximately $700,000 in attorney’s fees and costs. 

In her ruling, Judge Myerscough noted, “This case was about a kind of deliberate indifference that is more subtle and insidious than the kind of deliberate indifference that screams out with obvious, easy-to-find evidence. The skill, resources, and tenacity of Plaintiff’s attorneys are the reason Plaintiff was able to uncover and prove deliberate indifference.”

“We are pleased with Judge Myerscough’s order, which sends a strong message about the systemic deficiencies in medical care involved in this case. Most importantly, we are hopeful that Mr. Dean and his family will now promptly receive the resources necessary to support his care,” said Jenner & Block Partner Joel Pelz, who led the matter for the firm.

In December 2019, a unanimous jury in Springfield, IL returned a more than $11 million verdict for Mr. Dean, who was incarcerated at the time. The jury found that Wexford and several of its employees violated Mr. Dean’s federal civil rights (8th Amendment, deliberate indifference) and committed both institutional negligence and medical malpractice under Illinois law.  The result concluded a seven-day trial before US District Judge Sue Myerscough in the Central District of Illinois.  Mr. Dean secured early release from prison in January.

Mr. Dean has stage-4 metastatic kidney cancer, which is terminal.  While imprisoned in the Taylorville Correctional Center in central Illinois, he began showing obvious signs of serious illness, including gross hematuria, or visible blood in his urine, in late 2015.  Despite his alarming symptoms, Mr. Dean did not receive proper diagnostic testing for four months and did not receive surgery for seven months.  Jenner & Block was appointed as his pro bono counsel in 2017.

In her decision to set punitive damages at $7 million, Judge Myerscough wrote: “This amount recognizes the reprehensibility of Wexford’s conduct and the harm Plaintiff suffered, should be sufficient to deter future similar conduct, and also stays within the bounds of due process, in the court’s judgment.”

Paralegal Kevin Garcia assisted Joel in the matter.

Judge Will Consider Reducing Sentence of Tortured Guantánamo Detainee     

For more than a decade, we have represented Majid Khan, a detainee at Guantánamo Bay.

Guantánamo’s sole high-value cooperator, Mr. Khan pled guilty in 2012 and agreed to delay his sentencing so he could continue to cooperate with the government in its prosecution of alleged terrorists.

On June 4, Co-Managing Partner Katya Jestin and former senior associate Natalie Orpett scored a major victory in Mr. Khan’s case before the Guantánamo Military Commission, when the military judge ruled that he will consider reducing Mr. Khan’s sentence as a remedy for his years of torture at the hands of the US government. This will be the first time a detainee will have the opportunity to present evidence and argument about his torture for the purpose of seeking any type of remedy.

Filed more than a year ago, the ruling related to our motion asking the military judge to grant administrative credit of at least half the amount of Mr. Khan’s approved sentence as a remedy for his unlawful “pretrial punishment.”

In the court’s martial system, pretrial punishment refers to illegal treatment while the defendant is in detention awaiting trial, ranging from denial of access to counsel to torture. Our motion included a lengthy proffer describing his brutal torture and other mistreatment. 

The prosecution took the position that the military judge lacked the authority to grant pretrial punishment credit, including because Mr. Khan was in law of war detention at the time of the alleged treatment and because he had no right to Constitutional due process.

The military judge unequivocally rejected the prosecution’s argument, finding that he has the “inherent authority” to award sentencing credit to remedy not only torture, but all other forms of illegal pretrial punishment as well.

Crucially, the judge held that if taken as true, Mr. Khan’s mistreatment “rises to the level of torture” in violation of the “universal right to be free of torture under US and international law.”

Although he deferred his decision on whether to grant credit until after he hears argument on the merits, he noted that “military judges have broad discretion to fashion remedies in order to ensure that relief is effective and meaningful, and sufficient to deter future violations.”

No government official has ever been prosecuted for committing torture against the men held at Guantánamo. As the Military Commissions chief defense counsel said, commenting on the importance of this decision, “It is about time that we see a means to hold the government accountable for the reprehensible torture of Mr. Khan and other commissions’ defendants in a court of law.” 

This precedent-setting case was also covered by The New York Times.

Two Section 1983 Cases Settled in Northern District of Illinois

In early 2020, a firm team settled two Section 1983 cases for client Kendrick Butler, who alleged unconstitutional conditions of confinement and that correctional officers failed to protect him from a brutal beating at Stateville Correctional Center. 

Both of the matters proceeded through motion practice and written discovery before negotiating a very favorable double settlement for Mr. Butler. In the unconstitutional conditions of confinement matter, the team prevailed on summary judgment on the argument that the client had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.

In the summary judgment brief, the team requested that the court deny the State’s motion for summary judgment without a Pavey hearing, which are typically held to resolve disputed factual questions that bear on exhaustion. However, the court granted this motion, which may have effectively set a precedent in the Northern District of Illinois in which an incarcerated individual has prevailed at summary judgment on the issue of administrative exhaustion without a Pavey hearing.

Associate E.K. McWilliams led the team, which included Associates Jing Xun Quek, Deepthika Appuhamy, and Philip Sailer, with support from Legal Assistant Susan Galler. Partner and Co-Chair of the firm’s Litigation Department Reid Schar supervised the matter.