(215) 557-0099

$2.5 Million Settlement Reached in Wrongful Death Lawsuit Against Clearfield County Jail

by | Aug 10, 2023 | Civil Rights Law

Williams Cedar and the estate of Kristen E. Corson, a Coalport woman who tragically died of pneumonia while in the Clearfield County Jail, has reached a settlement in the federal civil rights lawsuit filed against the county, probation officers, the warden, and corrections officers. Philadelphia attorney Dylan Hastings, representing the estate, can confirm that the case has been settled for $2.5 million.

Kristen E. Corson, a 36-year-old mother of two, was found dead in a “holding tank” within the Clearfield County Jail, where she had been admitted on October 10, 2019. Two probation officers believed she was under the influence of drugs and uncooperative during an investigation into her situation. However, Kristen repeatedly informed the officers and prison officials that she was not under the influence but rather seriously ill. She even left a voicemail for a probation officer the day before her arrest, stating she was vomiting and believed she had the flu. Despite her obvious need for emergency medical attention upon arriving at the jail, Kristen’s pleas for help went unanswered. She informed corrections officers multiple times about her illness, but who ignored her requests for medical care. The tragic situation escalated when, in the early hours of October 11, 2019, she was captured on surveillance cameras crawling towards the restroom area of her holding cell. Tragically, Kristen succumbed to pneumonia, as the autopsy report later revealed, with no illegal drugs found in her system.

After months of legal proceedings and unsuccessful mediation efforts, the parties finally reached a settlement on June 22, 2023. The proposed settlement of $2.5 million includes $1.5 million to be placed in trust for Kristen’s children and $1 million in attorney fees. The settlement is pending approval from federal District Judge Stephanie L. Haines in Johnstown.  The $2.5 million settlement aims to provide financial support to Kristen Corson’s children and seeks to bring some closure to her grieving family. The settlement agreement not only addresses the financial aspect of the tragedy but also marks a step towards accountability and justice.

The settlement in this wrongful death lawsuit of Kristen E. Corson against the Clearfield County Jail, probation officers, warden, and corrections officers for $2.5 million serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of upholding the rights and well-being of incarcerated individuals. This tragic case underscores the need for adequate medical attention and care within correctional facilities and calls for a closer examination of the treatment of inmates across the country. As the legal process moves forward, the hope is that this settlement will provide some solace to Kristen’s family, while also serving as a catalyst for positive changes in the criminal justice system to prevent similar incidents in the future.

About Williams Cedar

Williams Cedar has a proven track record of protecting the personal, civil, and consumer rights of clients throughout the country, and New Jersey and Pennsylvania in particular. From personal injury cases and civil rights cases to individual and class action environmental toxic tort cases, our diverse and experienced legal team has an extensive understanding of the law and what it takes to secure maximum cash settlements for our clients.

 

 

Attorney Permitted to Seek Civil Rights Claim in Federal Court

by | Jun 9, 2023 | Civil Rights Law

An attorney who was allegedly fired from her job as an adjunct professor at a New Jersey public university will be allowed to pursue her civil rights claims in federal court, despite a case related to the same circumstances ongoing before the New Jersey Civil Service Commission. This ruling, passed down by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, says that the Younger abstention doctrine did not apply in the case, which can prevent someone from pursuing a claim in both state and federal court at the same time. However, due to the circumstances of the case, the Third Circuit ruled that Younger did not apply, allowing her to continue pursuing her claims in federal court.

(more…)

Six Types of Police Misconduct to Watch Out For

by | May 3, 2023 | Civil Rights Law

Police officers are supposed to be responsible for maintaining public safety, investigating crimes, and apprehending criminals, all while respecting the rights of citizens. However, police officers will sometimes act in a manner unbecoming of their profession, resulting in unnecessary and avoidable harm. Here are six types of police misconduct you should watch out for if you ever have an interaction with law enforcement:

  1. Use of excessive force
    • One of the most common forms of police misconduct comes from the use of excessive force. This is when an officer uses violent force to detain or restrain a suspect far beyond what is actually necessary, resulting in undue harm to the suspect. This can result in severe injuries, or in some cases, may even result in a suspect’s death, before they have even been formally charged with a crime.
  2. Racial profiling
    • Another shockingly common form of police misconduct is the use of racial profiling. This is when a police officer specifically targets someone based on their apparent race or ethnicity, subjecting them to interrogation, search, seizure, or arrest. This can result in significant violations of someone’s civil and constitutional rights, and even put them in danger of prosecution for no reason.
  3. Witness tampering
    • When people think of witness tampering, they may imagine corrupt lawyers or shady criminals trying to intimidate witnesses into silence. However, some police officers will exert their influence on witnesses as well, convincing them to testify in a certain way that is beneficial to them. This type of police misconduct can be used to further a legally shaky prosecution, or to prevent witnesses from reporting other types of misconduct.
  4. Unlawful search and seizure
    • Police are prohibited from performing an unreasonable search and seizure without probable cause, according to the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. However, police will sometimes conduct a search of a person’s belongings or residence without a valid reason, or even seize property without it actually being evidence of a crime. Even if you are not prosecuted, you can still have your privacy violated and your property taken by police.
  5. Coerced confessions
    • When people are arrested and interrogated by the police, they can face extraordinary pressure to confess to a crime, regardless of whether they actually did anything wrong. When interrogators cannot get a confession through conventional means, they may resort to illegal methods, like denying access to food or water, or preventing someone from using the bathroom. This type of police misconduct is incredibly effective at coercing confessions, and may lead to a false prosecution.
  6. Malicious prosecution
    • This type of police misconduct comes about when a police officer or prosecutor chooses to bring a criminal case despite a lack of evidence of a crime. Even if a case is ultimately thrown out, it can lead to substantial civil rights violations, lost income, and reputational damage. When a malicious prosecution results in a conviction or plea deal, the damage can potentially last a lifetime.

Williams Cedar is a law firm dedicated to helping clients with personal injury, environmental law, and civil rights cases. We specialize in assisting clients who have been injured due to exposure to environmental toxins, including veterans and their loved ones. If you need legal assistance due to toxic exposure or other related matters, please give us a call at our New Jersey and Pennsylvania offices at (215) 557-0099, or visit our contact page.

New Law Ends Mandatory Arbitration for Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Claims

by | Mar 26, 2022 | Civil Rights Law

Christopher Markos - Social w logo

PHILADELPHIA, PA, March 23, 2022 – Facebook and Google may have stopped requiring arbitration for workplace sexual assault and harassment claims but forced arbitration clauses have been the standard for a majority of employment claims.  The Economic Policy Institute reports that approximately 56 percent of non-union private-sector employees are subject to mandatory individual arbitration procedures; this translates into approximately 60 million American workers. 

Forced arbitration clauses often result in an employee being required to go through a private proceeding with his or her employer after bringing an accusation of workplace sexual assault or harassment. Even though arbitration clauses do not prevent employees from going to the police in the case of a serious crime, companies often make signing an arbitration clause a condition of keeping or getting a job.  It is not unusual to see confidentiality clauses along with forced arbitration clauses, all of which can discourage the employee from reporting the misconduct. 

On March 3, 2022 a landmark bill was signed into law by President Biden that will make it easier for individuals to pursue workplace sexual abuse and harassment claims by striking a blow to the pre-dispute arbitration agreements. The law amends the Federal Arbitration Act to prohibit enforcement of contract provisions that mandate pre-dispute arbitration or waive the right to bring a joint, class or collective action in cases that involve workplace sexual assault and harassment disputes.

The new law, H.R. 4445, “Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act”, applies to any such disputes that arise after March 4, 2022.  The law broadly defines a pre-dispute arbitration agreement as “any agreement to arbitrate a dispute that had not yet arisen at the time of the making of the agreement”.  A “sexual assault dispute” is defined as a dispute involving a nonconsensual sexual act or sexual contact, including when a victim lacks capacity to consent. A “sexual harassment dispute” is a dispute relating to conduct that is alleged to constitute sexual harassment under applicable federal, tribal or state law. Sexual harassment disputes include unwelcome sexual advances; unwanted physical contact that is sexual in nature, including assault; unwanted sexual attention, including unwanted sexual comments and propositions for sexual activity; conditioning professional, educational, consumer, health care, or long-term care benefits on sexual activity and retaliation for rejecting unwanted sexual attention. Notably, if the parties disagree as to whether the law covers a particular dispute, the determination is one for a federal court and not an arbitrator.

By eliminating mandatory arbitration clauses this law is one additional step towards enabling victims to publicly hold their abusers accountable in court if they choose.

Williams Cedar represents employees in workplace sexual harassment and assault cases. You can request a free consultation by contacting us.