A Report by
Senator Michael F.Nozzolio
Chairman, Senate Committee on
Crime Victims, Crime and Correction
I:
Introduction by Chairman Michael F. Nozzollo
Overview by Senator Michael F. Nozzolio, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Crime victims, Crime and Corrections
II: New York's Mandated Requirements
The Constitutional right of access to the courts, and states' legal obligation to provide it
III: New York Compared to the Nation
A look at the many legal services New York's taxpayers are providing to inmates
IV. The Avalanche of Prisoner Lawsuits
New York's crushing burden of inmate Litigation
V: New York's Wide Array of Inmate Legal Services
A look at the many legal services New York's Taxpayers are providing to inmates
VI: Legal Double Dipping
The taxpayers are paying inmate legal services groups and their attorneys twice for the same job.
VII: Taxpayers Suing Themselves
Reforming New York's inmate legal services program
VIII: Summary of Recommendations
The taxpayers of New York State are currently subsidizing the most expensive legal services system for prison inmates in the entire United States. In fact, it can be accurately stated that an entire legal industry, dependent on inmate litigation, has been created and subsidized with New York's tax dollars.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that inmates must be provided with access to the courts by "either providing prisoners with adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from persons trained in the law" as set forth in Bounds v. Smith (430 U.S. 817, 828,1977). Disturbingly, New York State provides both these service and spends far more than any other state in the nation.
The results of this lavish spending have helped produce an avalanche of 50,000 inmate lawsuits since 1976. These lawsuits are mostly frivolous and range from melted ice cream and bad haircuts to inmates' personal domestic issues and general confinement cases. The heretofore untold story is the exorbitant cost of theselawsuits to the taxpayers. According to the New York Stae Department of Law, the awards from these 50000 lawsuits have cost taxpayers over 18 million dollars since 1983.
In addition to paying for the awards to the inmates, the taxpayers also pay for the inmates' attorneys. Since 1978, the taxpayers have spent an additional $53 million for Prisoners' Legal Services and the Lecial Aid Society to provide professional legal representation for Inmates.
In addition to that exorbitant expense, the taxpayers have also paid these same two agencies another $3 million dollars for court-awarded attorney's fees In cases decided in favor of the inmate.
The taxpayers of New York State can no longer afford this over-generous system of legal services to convicted criminals.
New York State Attorney General Dennis Vacco has stated that New York's courts currently backlogged with 15,000 cases brought by New York's convicted inmates. According to Attorney General Vacco, ten inmates alone have filed over 1,100 lawsuits. One of those inmates, convicted murderer Chaka Zulu, has himself filed over 347 lawsuits against the state.
New York State spends more than any other state in the nation to represent inmates in legal matters. Prisoners' Legal Services, receives nearly twice as much funding ($3.56 million), as a similar group In Texas ($2.0 million), yet Texas has 128,681 inmates, compared to New York, which about 68,000.
New York also provides its inmates with the most expensive inmate legal library system in the nation. According to the Department of Corrections, New York spends over $971,100 annually on law library resources for its correctional facilities. Additionally, the Department of Corrections spends over $2.4 million annually to employ professional law librarians and clerks to assist inmates with legal research.
Another substantial taxpayer cost which must be taken into consideration is the price to the taxpayers of defending these cases. In 1994, then-New York State Attorney General Oliver Koppell estimated that his office spent 20% of its total work hours defending the state against the seemingly endless stream of prisoners' lawsuits. Current Attorney General Dennis C. Vacco reports that his office is forced to pay about 15 million of the taxpayers' dollars per year to defend the State against lawsuits filed by prisoners.
This report, the most comprehensive study to date of New York State's spending on inmate legal services, will show that New York's inmate legal services system is the most generous and expansive in the . The current system of inmate legal services greatly exceeds what is necessary, and can no longer continue to be subsidized at such a generous level of funding.
As Chairman of the Senate Crime Victims Crime & Corrections Committee1 it is my firm belief that the services currently offered to New York's inmates are much too generous and must be scaled back. Indeed, the entire system of inmate litigation must be reformed.
The facts surrounding the expenditure of the public's tax dollars in support of inmate legal services are indisputable. The $3.56 million allocated annually to Prisoners' Legal Services (PLS) is just the tip of the iceberg in detailing the true cost of inmate legal services to the taxpayers of New York State. Consider that the Legal Aid Society of New York County, which also represents inmates, also receives state budget funding. A subsidiary organization within the Legal Aid Society, the Prisoners' Rights Project, represents prisoners in New York's correctional facilities.
We must also consider the total cost to the taxpayer of the Attorney General having to defend these cases, the costs associated with judgements awarded to inmates, the court-ordered attorney's fees paid to inmate's state-financed lawyers in cases found in inmates' favor and finally the costs associated with clogging the courts and holding trials.
The United States House of Representatives recently passed legislation that would require all inmates to pay for the filing costs of any legal action initiated in federal courts. Similarly, my legislation (S.4408), passed by the State Senate, would impose a filing fee on inmate litigation in New York State courts, offsetting the costs and discouraging inmates from filing frivolous and meritless lawsuits. This measure would also require inmates to exhaust all administrative remedies before seeking court action against the state of New York.
While inmates' right of access to the courts is important, New York has gone too far. ln this era of economic difficulty the taxpayers must be protected - New York State can no longer subsidize the high cost of legal services for prison inmates.
This report shows that New York greatly exceeds the judicially imposed requirements of providing prison inmates with access to the courts. It will also report on the organizations that represent inmates in actions against the State -- organizations which have evolved into autonomous legal fiefdoms funded with taxpayers dollars.
The report also sheds light on a hidden cost to the taxpayers from inmate lawsuits -Attorney's fees. Incredibly, when Prisoners' Legal Services represents an inmate against the state and the inmate is awarded a judgement by the Court, PLS is then allowed to receive Attorney's fees for doing a job for which they have already been paid. These Attorney's fees have cost taxpayers more than $3 million since 1990.
This amounts to legal double-dipping at taxpayers expense.
It is my belief that inmates must be given the basic access to the courts as required iy the United States Supreme Court. NO MORE AND NO LESS.
New York State can no longer afford to offer the most expensive inmate law library system in the nation and then spend millions of dollars for taxpayer-funded attorneys whose job it is to sue the taxpayers. It is our mission to explore new avenues to protect the inmates' rights while simultaneously protecting the taxpayers from excessive spending.
During the upcoming legislative session, I will be working with Attorney General Dennis Vacco and Governor George Pataki to determine if privatization or a competitive bidding system should be enacted for organizations interested in representing inmates. Whatever course we pursue, the bottom line must be to reduce the costs of inmate legal services to the taxpayers.
We will continue to focus on this issue in an effort to protect the taxpayers of New York State. It is my firm belief that the New York's taxpayers are being victimized by the most overly generous inmate legal services system in the nation -- a system which is excessive and costs far too much and is far from cost-effective.
In a 1977 decision, Bounds v. Smith 430 U.S. 817, the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling which defined the extent of states' obligation to facilitate inmates' Constitutionally-guaranteed right of access to the courts. In this decision, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall ruled that, consistent with every citizen's constitutionally-guaranteed access to the courts, prison inmates are also entitled to "adequate access to the courts," and that in order to facilitate this access, states are obliged to provide inmates with certain legal services.
In the Bounds decision, Justice Marshall held that "the fundamental constitutional right of access to courts requires prison authorities to assist inmates in preparation and filing of meaningful legal papers by providing prisoners with adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from persons trained in the law."
Justice Marshall's use of the word "or" clearly indicates that prison authorities may satisfy the criteria of "fundamental constitutional right of access" by either furnishing inmates with "adequate law libraries," or "adequate legal assistance from persons trained in the law." The Bounds decision clearly does not require that both law libraries and legal assistance be provided.
Individual states have elected to satisfy the requirements upheld in Bounds v. Smith differently, but as a general rule have fashioned inmate legal services systems which satisfy the Bounds requirement at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer. New York State provides, as this report will show, a level of legal services to inmates which far exceeds the requirements outlined in Bounds v. Smith, and as a result, presents an excessive cost to its taxpayers.
New York State currently supports the most expensive inmate legal services system in the nation, with an annual expenditure of over $7 million for fiscal year 1994-1995 more than double the amount spent by Texas, the second leading state. New York State operates 65 law libraries for inmates across the state, in addition to providing a signtficant level of state funding to two private not-for-profit organizations who supply legal representation to indigent prison inmates.
The law library system which the State of New York provides to its prison inmates cost the taxpayers about $3.5 million for the 1994-95 fiscal year. By contrast, the State Attorney General, whose office represents the legal interests of New York's law-abiding public, had only $500,000 to spend on library resources during the same time period. In this regard, New York is treating convicted criminals better than its law-abiding taxpayers.
Similarly, New York State spends just $945,500 a year on law library books and resources for all law students in the State University of New York system -- $2.5 milllon less per year than it spends on prisoners' libraries. At this level of funding, the law library system provided to prison inmates by the State of New York assuredly satisfies, and doubtless far exceeds the requirements of Bounds:
"Adequate law libraries in prisons are one constitutionally [sic] acceptable method to assure meaningful access to the courts..." (430 U.S. 817, 97 S.CT. 1491)
In an October 6,1995 letter to the Director of the Senate Committee on Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections, New York Department of Correctional Services Counsel and Deputy Commissioner Anthony J. Annucci reported that the Department had on more than one occasion, successfully defended against lawsuits challenging the adequacy of the Department's law libraries. According to the courts, therefore, the DOCS law libraries are in fact adequate, and accordingly, satisfy the Bounds requirements.
"It is the Department's position that the sufficiency of the collection maintained in the libraries, coupled with the trained inmate clerks who work in the libraries, fulfill without anything else the constitutionally mandated right of access to the courts for inmates."
Anothy J. Annuci
Deputy Commissioner,
NYS Department of Correctional Services
The cost of law libraries, however, represents less than half the expenditure on inmate legal services engaged in by the State of New York. The State of New York, in addition to putting a 65-branch fully-stocked, up-to-date law library system and a staff of 72 full-time law librarians and clerks at the disposal of its prison inmates, also spends millions of dollars per year supporting two not-for-profit private agencies to provide legal representation to inmates in nearly every type of litigation.
These organizations, Prisoners' Legal Services and the legal Aid Society provide prison inmates with a host of legal services that many could argue far exceed the Constitutionally-required services. In New York State, taxpayer-provided attorneys not only assist inmates in cases directly related to their incarceration, as required by Bounds, these groups also represent inmates in all kinds of cases, from divorce proceedings, to immigration issues, to other types of civil litigation. It is clear that the extensive level of representation provided to inmates by these state-funded private groups fully satisfies, and in fact exceeds the Constitutional "right of access" as defined by Bounds.
The law leaves New York and other states with a choice of two alternatives: to provide its prison inmates with either professional/para-professional legal assistance, or adequate law library services. New York, to the detriment of its law-abiding taxpayers, provides both, and as a result is spending far more than it has to on inmate legal services.
New York State can no longer afford to maintain both taxpayer-funded legal representation for inmates and a comprehensive law library system in its correctional facilities.
Comply with the Bounds requirements by providing inmates with
either law libraries or professional/para-professional assistance but protect the taxpayers
by not providing both. One of the programs should be dropped.
Only when New York State's inmate legal services system is compared with those of the other states in the nation does the extent of its taxpayer-financed excess become apparent. For one, New York State is one of only fifteen states in the nation thatprovide both professional inmate legal representation and a prison law library system. New York's inmate legal service budget currently accounts for 27% of all inmate legal services spending in the entire United States (See Figure Ill-i on following page).
PROFESSIONAL INMATE LEGAL SERVICES
New York State currently spends $3.56 million each year on professional
inmate legal services alone -- not including law libraries (See Figure 111-3
at section's end). This figure is well in excess of the amount spent by Texas
and Georgia combined -- the two next generous states. In fact,
New York State with a current state inmate population of 68,686 spends $156
million more than Texas, even though Texas has 188% more inmates.
(The current inmate population in the state of Texas is 128,681). New York
spends more than twice the amount spent by Georgia, the third most generous
state.
Furthermore, unlike the 21 states that currently provide professional legal services for inmates, New York State offers its inmates virtually unlimited access to the courts to sue the state. While Minnesota, Texas and South Dakota prohibit state funded legal allows its prisoners to bring inmate lawsuits against the state taxpayers. Inmates by themselves have sued for such matters as melted ice-cream and the absence of veal and oyster dinners. An inmate at Mohawk medium security facility in New York State sued the state for $1 million because a guard refused to refrigerate his ice-cream cone and it melted. Another inmate at New York's Great Meadow correctional facility sued the state because the razor ribbon used atop prison fences to prevent escapes violated his civil rights.
By comparison, the Minnesota budget appropriation for the Board of Public Defense specifically prohibits the appropriation from being "used to pay for lawsuits against public agencies or public officials to change social or public policy."
South Dakota uses state funds to contract with private attorneys to provide inmate legal services. The contract requires that the attorney agree "not to participate as Counsel, in person or by his law firm, in opposition to the interests of the State of South Dakota or any of its departments, bureaus, boards or commissions, without written consent of the Attorney General, the entity for which legal work is completed under this contract, and the entity against whom the action, adverse interest, contested case or other proceeding is brought or by whom it is defined; and further agrees to abide by all rules of ethics mgarding conflicts of interest."
The Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division (TDCJ-ID) defines in their inmate legal services statement that Inmate Legal Services (ILS) shall provide legal services to indigent inmates except in civil rights cases against TDCJ-ID and fee-generating cases. In fact the Ruiz v. Estelle litigation dated May 11, 1983, states the TDCJ shall continue to provide legal services to indigent inmates which includes access to courts, law libraries and attorney services, except for civil rights issues against TDCJ and for fee generating cases. For those types of cases, inmates need to contact either a private attorney for fee generating cases, or the Texas Center for Correctional Services for civil rights maflers against TDCJ-lD or other detaining agencies in Texas.
By prohibiting inmates from suing the state, the Texas inmate legal services program eliminates the problem of taxpayers supporting inmate-initiated lawsuits against themselves.
In fiscal year 1994-95, New York State taxpayers paid Prisoners' Legal Services $3.5 million to respond to 12,407 inmate requests for lawsuits. In cases that were decided that year in favor of the inmate, the taxpayers paid an additional $221,750 in judgements to prisoners. On top of this $3.5 million figure, and the $221,750 in judgements, the taxpayers also paid an additional $292,558 for Attorneys' fees in these cases. This amounted to a total of over $4 million of taxpayer money spent on professional inmate legal services alone.
PRISON LAW LIBRARIES
In addition to the $4 million spent on professional legal representation,
New York State also supports inmate law libraries in 65 DOCS facilities
across the state to the tune of $3.45 million each year. The New York State Department of Correctional Services Inmate Law Library Program (DOCS ILLP) currently spends
up to $31,000 per facility on resources alone to keep New York's prison law
libraries up to the standards esteblished by the American Association of Law
Libraries (MLL) (See Figures III-1, III-2). Spending for fiscal
year 1994-95 exceeded $971,000 to equip prison libraries with research and
reference materials alone.
| State | Inmate Legal Services | Prison Libraries | Total |
| New York | $3,560,000 | $3,456,464 | $7,016,464 |
| Texas | $2,000,000 | $617,290 | $2,617,290 |
| Georgia | $1,278,000 | $500,000 | $1,718,000 |
| California | $0 | $1,680,000 | $1,680,000 |
| North Carolina | $1,100,000 | $0 | $1,100,000 |
| Washington | $500,000 | $542,000 | $1,042,000 |
| Connecticut | $750,000 | $120,000 | $870,000 |
| Maryland | $650,000 | $200,000 | $850,000 |
| Illinois | $0 | $713,200 | $713,200 |
| Kansas | $438,011 | $233,000 | $671,011 |
| Arizona | $0 | $585,489 | $585,489 |
| Massachusetts | $400,000 | $177,931 | $577,931 |
| Hawaii | $0 | $550,699 | $550,699 |
| Delaware | $213,300 | $278,300 | $491,60 |
| Michigan | $426,000 | N/A | $425,000 |
| Colorado | $0 | $419,459 | $419,459 |
| Florida | $256,888 | $143,635 | $400,321 |
| Minnesota | $250,000 | $110,000 | $360,000 |
| Wisconsin | $200,000 | $134,910 | $334,910 |
| Rhode Island | $0 | $299,717 | $299,717 |
| Missouri | $0 | $250,000 | $250,000 |
| New Mexico | $0 | $250,000 | $250,000 |
| Vermont | $250,000 | $0 | $250,000 |
| New Jersey | $0$243, | 781 | $243,781 |
| Idaho | $0 | $231,416 | $231,416 |
| Pennsylvania | $0 | $205,000 | $205,000 |
| South Carolina | $0 | $175,000 | $175,000 |
| Mississippi | $50,000 | $120,000 | $170,000 |
| Oregon | $0 | $153,823 | $153,823 |
| Oklahoma | $0 | $150,000 | $150,000 |
| Utah | $150,000 | $0 | $150,000 |
| Virginia | $0 | $128,868 | $128,868 |
| Arkansas | $36,000 | $61,000 | $117,000 |
| Nevada | $0 | $116,500 | $116,500 |
| Alaska | $0 | $105,000 | $105,000 |
| Kentucky | $0 | $103,633 | $103,633 |
| Montana | $79,000 | $5,000 | $84,000 |
| District of Columbia | $0 | $77,488 | $77,488 |
| Louisiana | $0 | $66.000 | $66,000 |
| South Dakota | $46,000 | $20,000 | $66,000 |
| Nebraska | $0 | $57,532 | $57,532 |
| Iowa | $0 | $47,057 | $47,067 |
| Wyoming | $0 | $40,000 | $40,000 |
| New Hampshire | $0 | $26,448 | $26,448 |
| Maine | $25,000 | N/A | $25,000 |
| Tennessee | $0 | $24,800 | $24,800 |
| Alabama | $0 | $21,700 | $21,700 |
| North Dakota | $0 | $21,000 | $21,000 |
| West Virginia | $0 | $17,000 | $17,000 |
| Indiana | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Ohio | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| FACILITY APROPRIATION | LAW LIBRARY TOTAL NON-PERSONNEL SERVICE |
| ATTICA | 31,134.36 |
| AUBURN | 31,256.24 |
| CLINTON | 30,796.37 |
| WATERTOWN | 18,575.33 |
| GREAT MEADOW | 23,116.49 |
| FISFIKILL | 14,384.78 |
| WALLKILL | 13,934.01 |
| SING SING | 20,192.63 |
| GREEN HAVEN | 21,006.79 |
| ALBION | 12,921.98 |
| EASTERN | 20,951.92 |
| ELMIRA | 26,599.25 |
| BEDFORD HILLS | 33,572.66 |
| COXSAKIE | 16,961.90 |
| WOODBOURNE | 14,098.89 |
| ARTHURKILL | 14,885.01 |
| QUEENSBORO | 777.60 |
| C. PHARSALIA | 3,418.10 |
| MONTERY SHOCK | 1,637.72 |
| SUMMIT SHOCK | 1,772.93 |
| C. GEORGETOWN | 675.25 |
| C. GABRIELS | 1,166.60 |
| ADIRONDACK | 11,347.67 |
| DOWNSTATE | 25,725.88 |
| TACONIC | 12,489.00 |
| MT. MCGREGOR | 15,903.78 |
| HUDSON | 13,765.60 |
| MID-ORANGE | 13,359.71 |
| OTISVILLE | 11,917.71 |
| BAYVIEW | 15,458.59 |
| C. BEACON | 2,990.91 |
| OGDENSBURG | 14,768.05 |
| LINCOLN | 263.25 |
| FULTON | 0.00 |
| MOHAWK | 15,295.52 |
| WENDE | 19,732.00 |
| ONIEDA | 14,637.84 |
| GOWANDA | 3,460.76 |
| GROVELAND | 22,554.43 |
| COLLINS | 27,386.01 |
| MID-STATE | 12,582.52 |
| MARCY | 17,388.73 |
| MORIAH SHOCK | 1,618.71 |
| BUTLER | 3,292.57 |
| FRANKLIN | 12,760.96 |
| ALTONA | 14,675.39 |
| CAYUGA | 17,518.54 |
| BARE HILL | 14,978.70 |
| RIVERVIEW | 20,059.73 |
| CAPE VINCENT | 13,388.38 |
| LYON MOUNTAIN | 4,343.15 |
| LAKEVIEW SHOCK | 13,892.86 |
| ULSTER | 13,685.83 |
| SOUTHPORT | 52,020.67 |
| ORLEANS | 18,503.82 |
| WASHINGTON | 15,060.36 |
| WYOMING | 17,633.53 |
| GREENE | 15,397.87 |
| SHAWANGUNK | 22,110.95 |
| SULLIVAN | 16,284.12 |
| LIVINGSTON | 15,733.07 |
| GOVERNEUR | 13,857.45 |
| HALE CREEK ASACT | 5,968.71 |
| CHATEAUGAY | 3,349.46 |
| CENTRAL OFFICE | 20,869.40 |
| TOTAL ALL FACILITIES | 971,869.00 |
Additionally, New York State spends an additional $2.4 million on salaries of up to $55,000 for 72 library clerks and senior librarians for the 65 facilities, bringing the total amount spent on prison libraries by the State of New York to $3.45 million annually.
With librarian salaries, New York State spends more in inmate law library spending than any other state in the nation including California (California provides only law libraries for its inmates and does not provide state-funded inmate legal services).
In fiscal year 1995-96, New York State will spend 15 times more than the average amount spent on library services for all states responding to this survey (The average amount spent on library services for all states responding to this survey was $218,341). New York's annual library spending is even greater than the amount spent by Texas, Georgia, California and Washington combined.
To put this figure further into perspective, the New York State Department of Law (Attorney General) was allocated $528,500 for fiscal year 1995/96 for their law library budget. While New York's prison library system serves 68,000 inmates, the Attorney General represents approximately 18 million citizens, yet the Attorney General spends 6 times less on their library resources each year than DOCS. Further New York State spends $945,500 a year on law library books and resources for all law student in the State University of New York system -- $2.5 million less per year than it spends on prisoners' libraries.
TOTAL INMATE LEGAL SERVICE SPENDING
New York State annually spends a total of $7,016,464 on legal services for
inmates, more than 18 times the national average of other states
(The national average all states surveyed is $382,813). Overall, New York
spends more on inmate legal services than Texas, Georgia and California
combined.
In fact, New York State with a current state inmate population of 68,686 spends more than twice the amount spent by Texas which has 188% more inmates. (The current inmate population in the state of Texas is 128,681). While Texas spends $20.34 per inmate on legal services and libraries, New York spends $102..15, 5 times the amount spent by Texas.
NEW YORK STATE COMPARED WITH ITS NEIGHBORS
When New York State is compared with its neighboring states in the east,
these figures begin to illustrate the degree to which New York has inflated
its spending on inmate legal services. A comparison with the bordering states
of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Vermont, Massachusetts and Connecticut reveals
that New York spends times the average amount spent by Its five neighboring
states (The average amount spent on inmate legal services including libraries
by the aforementioned states is $430,586).
According to the New York Attorney General's office, New York's Court System is currently faced with a backlog of at least 15,000 inmate cases. The number will continue to grow with New York's inmates, taking full advantage of the generous, taxpayer-provided law libraries and legal representation will file several thousand new cases seeking millions of dollars in damages in the next year.
The excessive opportunities for litigation offered to New York's inmates has produced an avalanche of inmate lawsuits that are costing the taxpayers millions of dollars. According to the New York State Department of Law, since 1974 inmates have filed 50,649 lawsuits against New York State. These lawsuits have cost the taxpayers of New York State over $18 million in awards to convicted criminals.
In the coming legislative session I will begin working on legislation that would require that inmates' proceeds from lawsuits against the State be directed to settle all compensation owed to the State and victim in relation to the crime for which the inmate was incarcerated. This legislation, which will also require that the remainder of these funds be directed to the Crime Victims Assistance Fund, will be crafted to send a clear signal that these inmates are convicted criminals whose actions have inflicted permanent trauma upon their victims. By deducting a portion of any successful inmate award to the Crime Victims Assistance Fund we can also remind the convicted inmates that crime doesn't pay.
Inmate lawsuits are clogging our court system and requiring the State Attorney General's Office to expend an exorbitant amount of staff to defend the taxpayers against these mostly frivolous cases.
In 1994, working with Attorney General Dennis Vacco, I introduced legislation (S.4403) to require a modest, refundable filing fee for lawsuits filed by inmates. This filing fee is intended to provide a disincentive for inmates to file frivolous lawsuits against the state. This approach has worked on the federal level where impositlon of a similar filing fee in some federal courts has led to a nearly 50 percent reduction in inmate lawsuits filed.
Additionally, this measure would require all inmates to exhaust all administrative remedies within the Department of Corrections before filing a lawsuit and establishes penalties and privilege revocation for inmates who file lawsuits determined by the courts to be frivolous.
This measure passed overwhelmingly, with bipartisan support in the State Senate by a vote of 46-12. The measure was never acted upon in the State Assembly.
Attorney General Dennis Vacco deserves tremendous credit for highlighting the importance of this issue and working on both the State and federal levels to implement inmate litigation reforms. The Attornry General has taken his case to Washington and joined with other Attorney General's from around the nation in pushing for federal legislation to address this issue.
Although the dollars involved, over $7 million annually, may not sound exorbitant, the idea of convicted criminals, using taxpayer provided resources and taxpayer-funded attorneys to sue the taxpayers is so perverse that it demands intense scrutiny and immediate action. Consider that in 1976, there were only 25 prisoner lawsuits filed against New York State. Incredibly, the number of prisoner lawsuits against the state has skyrocketed in recent years reaching an all-time high of 7,285 prisoner lawsuits in 1992. The chart clearly shows the steady growth of prisoner lawsuits from 1976 to 1994.
INMATES V- TAXPAYERS:
PRISONER LAWSUITS
AGAINST STATE OF NEW YORK BY YEAR
| YEAR | # OF SUITS | INMATE AWARDS |
| 1976 | 25 | N/A |
| 1977 | 40 | N/A |
| 1978 | 63 | 0 |
| 1979 | 91 | 0 |
| 1980 | 224 | 0 |
| 1981 | 945 | 0 |
| 1982 | 2,457 | 0 |
| 1983 | 5,314 | $2,220,858 |
| 1984 | 5,924 | $182,222 |
| 1985 | 6,384 | $708,703 |
| 1986 | 6,887 | $2,032,245 |
| 1987 | 6,203 | $395,590 |
| 1988 | 5,611 | $316,004 |
| 1989 | 5,470 | $3,322,948 |
| 1990 | 6,308 | $3,320,477 |
| 1991 | 6,613 | $2,396,823 |
| 1992 | 7,285 | $2,169,322 |
| 1993 | 6,707 | $940,954 |
| 1994 | 6,808 | $652,685 |
| TOTAL | 50,649 | $18,658,831 |
The rapid growth of prisoner lawsuits can only be attributed to the excessive, taxpayer-subsidized opportunities provided to inmates to file lawsuits against the state and against the taxpayers.
Attorney General Vacco earlier this year released listing of New York's most frequent filers of lawsuits against the state (Figure IV-1) -- the results were shocking.
Consider that the top 10 jailhouse lawyers, individuals convicted of such crimes as murder, arson, rape and manslaughter contributed to filing over 1,100 lawsuits between them. The top two jailhouse lawyers are both convicted murderers and have filed a combined 563 lawsuits against the taxpayers of New York State, This kind of abuse clearly shows the excessive opportunities that are available for inmates to sue the taxpayers. The charts that follows(Figures IV-1 and IV-2) plainly illustrate this dilemma.
| Inmate | Convictions | Lawsuits Filed |
| 1. Chaka Zulu | Murder Weapons possession | 347 |
| 2. Douglas E. Lee | Murder Attempted arson | 216 |
| 3. Henry Latham | Sex abuse Attempted sodomy | 126 |
| 4. Kevin Alleyne | Robbery (2) | 106 |
| 5. Anthony G. Gill | Manslaughter Stolen property | 91 |
| 6. Jory Lowrence | Rape Sodomy | 74 |
| 7. Steven Lashway | Rape (2) | 37 |
| 8. Carl Fisher | Robbery | 33 |
| 9. Gregory Schoolfield | Drug sale Arson | 32 |
| 10. Jonathan Odom | Attempted murder attempted arson | 30 |
|
1. Crying in His Milk 2. The "Defective" Haircut 3. The Color or Money 4. The Seeds of Discontent 5. "Oops, Forgot My Stuff..." 6. Reach Out and Sue Someone 7. Sheets of Gold 8. We All Scream for Ice Cream! 9. The Naked Truth 10. Happiness is a Warm Blanket |
Compounding the problem is that the great percentage of these lawsuits are entirely frivolous and have no place in the court system. Lawsuits filed over confiscated coconuts and bad haircuts are symptomatic of the great majority of inmate lawsuits.
Regardless of the merits of the lawsuit, each case must be treated seriously and the Attorney General's office must prepare a defense against each one of them. This requires further expenditue of tax dollars that we have not as vet quantifled.
A recent United States Supreme Court decision Sandin v. Conner, No.93-1911, has substantially narrowed the scope of what the Court deems to be legitimate grounds for prisoners to bring Constitutional lawsuits challenging prison management. According
to Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, only actions by prison officials that impose
"atypical and significant hardship on the inmate" should be treated by Federal judges
as potential violations of an inmate's constitutional right to due process of law.
According to Rehnquist, prisoner complaints that fall short of that standard are
generally nothing more than complaints about the "ordinary incidents of prison life" and should not be accorded constitutional status by Federal judges. Instead judges should step aside and give prison officials the "flexibility" they need "in the fine-tuning of the ordinary incidents of prison life."
Taxpayers in New York State pay to provide a vast array of legal services for indigent inmates. The Aid to Defense portion of the New York State budget is comprised of funding allocations for both The Legal Aid Society and Prisoners' Legal Services. The total budget for these two entities is in excess of $14 million for fiscal year 1995-96.
The Legal Aid Society (LAS) of New York City was awarded $10.7 million in fiscal yea 1995-96 to pursue its stated goal of "the expedient and eftective processing of repeat and violent felony offenders through the criminal justice system." According to the State Grant Contract agreement, support is to be furnished through case processing and effective defense representation.
LAS represents incarcerated inmates with regard to their legal proceedings and maintains seven divisions dealing with differing matters:
Additionally, Legal Aid also represents former LAS clients who are incarcerated in state prisons on matters of advice, information or assistance.
Prisoners' Legal services was awarded $3.56 million in fiscal year 1995-96 to pursue its stated goal of ensuring "the right of prisoners to have access to the courts for the redress of their grievances through competent legal representation." According to the State Grant Contract agreement, PLS is to work to accomplish this goal by providing legal counsel to indigent prisoners in the State correctional facilities where counsel would not otherwise be available, including post-conviction matters, institutional problems and a broad range of civil legal problems.
PLS does not represent prisoners on direct criminal appeals, or in criminals trials, but does handle cases involving:
New York spends over $3.5 million dollars a year to support Prisoners' Legal Services whose attorneys frequently pursue cases against the very state which pays their salaries. In effect, the taxpayers of New York are paying to sue themselves. Between 1990 and 1995, a period during which Prisoners' Legal Services received a total of over $10.4 million from the State of New York, PLS-handled cases resulted in monetary damages judgements which cost New York taxpayers an additional $481,000.
Texas, which has nearly twice the number of inmates New York has, yet spends less than half of what New York spends on inmate legal services, also funds a private organization to provide legal representation to inmates. However, Texas forbids their publicly-funded inmate legal organization from seeking any monetary awards from the state, thereby protecting the taxpayers from paying to sue themselves.
Though attorneys employed by PLS are paid a salary out of their multi-million-dollar annual appropriation from the State, they often seek attorney's fees which are also paid by the taxpayers of New York State. This practice amounts to "double-dipping" into the pockets of New York's taxpayers -- getting paid twice for the same job.
Between 1990 and 1995, PLS attorneys received over $1.1 million in court-awarded attorney fees from the New York's taxpayers, or $2.30 for every dollar in damages won for a client (see Fiqure VI-1). Documents obtained from the New York State Department of Correctional Services indicate that PLS attorneys working on one case, Hurley V. Ward (77 ClV 3847 RLC), have filed affidavits requesting attorney fees totalling over $313,000 in compensation for time spent pursuing a single case against the state.
When discussing the injustices of double dipping into the taxpayers' trough, however it is the attorneys of the Legal Aid Society who dip the deepest.
Since they do not represent inmates exclusively, it isn't known exactly how much of the Legal Aid Society's annual state funding appropriaton ($10.7 million in fiscal 1995) is actually spent in support, of inmate litigation. However, the New York State Department of Law reports that since 1990, LAS lawyers involved in litigation on behalf of prison inmates received nearly $2 million in court-awarded attorney's fees. Legal Aid Attorneys charge the taxpayers of New York State, who they are in effect suing, as high as $230-an-hour to represent the claims of convicted criminals state correctional facilities.
For one 1992 case, Milburn V. Coughtin, the Legal Aid Society billed the New York State Department of Correctional Services for a whopping $737,500 In attorney fees, charging the taxpayers $210-an-hour to pay for a convicted criminal's representation. Legal counsel at $210-an-hour is well beyond the financial means of the average taxpaying citizen, yet these same citizens must pay to provide this costly service to prison inmates.
Why not-for-profit organizations who represent the legal interests of prison inmates receive millions of dollars per year in state funding is a weighty question in itself. Why the attorneys they employ are paid upwards of $100-an-hour, and sometimes as high as $230-an-hour by the taxpayers to represent prison inmates is an even greater, and more disturbing question.
LEGAL AID SOCIETY:
| YEAR | LEGAL FEES | STATE BUDGET |
| 1990 | $470,751 | $1,060,000 |
| 1991 | $0 | $1,060,000 |
| 1992 | $737,500 | $720,000 |
| 1993 | $0 | $720,000 |
| 1994 | $660,000 | $720,000 |
| 1995 | $107,000 | $720,000 |
| TOTAL | $1,975,151 | $2,408,336 |
PRISONERS' LEGAL SERVICES:
| YEAR | LEGAL FEES | STATE BUDGET |
| 1990 | $16,491 | $3,898,000 |
| 1991 | $147,373 | $0 |
| 1992 | $326,600 | $500,000 |
| 1993 | $194,500 | $3,000,000 |
| 1994 | $306,222 | $3,035,000 |
| 1995 | $122.041 | $3,560,000 |
| TOTAL | $1,113,967 | $13,993,000 |
Using State funds to pay attorneys fees to lawyers dedicated to suing the very state who pays them is bad business for the people of New York. Since their organization hold an implicit monopoly on incarcerated clients, and are not directly employed by State, the Attorneys of PLS and LAS have virtually no accountability to anyone. Thus, taxpayer-funded attorney's fees may offer incentive for these attorneys to drag cases out longer than necessary, or even persuade inmates to file cases against the State which they might otherwise not file.
The New York State Senate Committee on Crime Victims, Crime and Corrections, recently received a written complaint from an inmate at a state facility, reporting unsolicited contact from a PLS attorney, who, based on false reports, wished to pursue an excessive force case on behalf of the inmate. The PLS attorneyts solicitation was written on state-funded stationery, and sent via taxpayer-funded legal mail. In his complaint, the inmate wrote, "I would like them (PLS) to please leave me alone because I don't have any problem." It seems unlikely that this is a singular, isolated incident.
Such an egregious example of inmate solicitation illustrates why the opportunities for double dipping must be eliminated. We cannot offer attorneys incentive to create litigation against the state in order to receive a fee.
The taxpayers of New York State are paying the salaries of attorneys to represent the legal interests of inmates. These attorneys in turn, are suing the State on behalf of their inmate clients, often seeking additional compensation at exorbitant rates, and sometimes winning monetary wards which the state must also pay.
Prohibit attorneys paid salary by a state-funded organization from pursuing any cases on behalf of prison inmates which seek monetary damages from the State;
Enact the necessary federal legislation needed to preclude attorneys paid salary by a state-funded organization from collecting attorney's fees from the State to cases on behalf of inmates. If not, at very least
deduct the total amount in attorneys fees collected by Prisoners' Legal Service from their yearly budgetary appropriation.
When an average citizen files a lawsuit he or she must hire an attorney at their own expense. If the lawsuit is successful, the attorney's fees are deducted from the amount of the award. While this system is in place for law abiding citizens, convicted criminals have unlimited
legal services available - BUT THE BILL FOR INMATE LEGAL COSTS IS PAID BY THE TAXPAYERS.
This system is blatantly unfair to the taxpayers who since 1978 have paid nearly $46 million dollars for attorneys to represent the inmates, forced to pay over $18 million in awards to inmates and finally, forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a legal expenses incurred by the lawyers. This is a lose-lose-lose proposition for taxpayers of New York State which cannot continue.
Since 1983 New York taxpayers have paid a total of $18 million in awards to inmates. During that same period, taxpayers also spent $46 million to provide professional representation for inmates. Incredibly, since 1990, the taxpayers were also forced to pay over $3 million dollars in court awarded Attorney's fees to Prisoners' Legal Services and the Legal Aid Society for cases decided in favor of the inmate.
That brings the total costs of inmate lawsuits for the taxpayers to over $107 million dollars.
It is time New York State's approach to inmate legal services was dramatically reformed to reduce the cost to the taxpayers. Texas, Minnesota and South Dakota prohibit their state funded inmate legal organizations from representing inmates in cases against the state. If an inmate wants to file a lawsuit against the state, he or she must contract with a private law firm.
As the preceding chapters have documented, New York State's inmates have at their disposal perhaps the most advanced body of legal research in the country. In addition, New Yorks 68,000 inmates also have access to top-flight legal representation through any one of three state funded organizations.
Obviously, inmates pursuing lawsuits against the state would be interested in legal representation - however, it is unconscionable to require the taxpayers of New York not only pay for the attorney's, but then also pay for any judgement that is awarded
Clearly, it is appropriate that New York begin reforming the legal services offered to inmates in an effort to provide the most cost-effective protections for the taxpayers. The protections for the taxpayer implemented in Texas, South Dakota and Minnesota make sense and I will begin working to implement those protections here in New York.
Perhaps just as important would be to pursue a system where the contract for defending inmates is put out for competitive bidding. Why should Prisoners' Legal Services have an monopoly on receiving state funding to represent inmates? If the state contract to represent New York's inmates was competitively bid, the cost to the taxpayers might be considerably less.
Opening up the contract of defending New York's inmates for competitive bidding would serve to protect the taxpayers' interests and meet the needs of New York's inmates.
Another important issue to pursue would be to follow the model of Texas, which has nearly twice as many inmates as New York (128,000) and yet New York spends nearly three times as much as Texas in providing inmate legal services. Texas, along with South Dakota and Minnesota, prohibit their state-funded inmate legal organizations from entering into lawsuits against the state. If an inmate wants to file suit against the state a private attorney must be contacted to represent the inmate.
According to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice , their Inmate Legal Service organization program contract states that, "Texas Inmate Legal Services shall provide legal services to indigent inmates except in civil rights cases against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice." It further outlines the procedure for legal representation against the state of Texas, "for civil rights cases against Texas, inmates need to contact a private attorney for fee generating cases."
This is the model for which New York State must adhere to. The taxpayers cannot afford to continue suing themselves. Safeguards must be put in place to protect the taxpayer. In the upcoming legislative session I will work with the Attorney General's office in developing legislation that will protect the taxpayers from financing lawsuits against the state by inmates.
Calitornia, which has over 125,000 inmates, they do not fund a professional legal organization to represent state inmates. They in turn concentrate their resources on law libraries and require inmates to contract with private attorneys to represent them in legal matters.
If California, which has nearly 60,000 more inmates than New York, can provide
adequate legal services and access to the courts for only $1.6 million. New York's $7 million expenditures can onl be described as a boondoggle on the taxpayers.
The recommendations contained in this summary represent alternatives which will achieve relief from the inequities and high cost of New York State's inmate services system.
The overall goal of these recommendations is to drastically reduce the taxpayer burden of inmate legal services and litigation. It is my firm belief that only the victims of the crimes committed by these inmates and the taxpayers supporting their incarceration should benefit from any and all proceeds derived through inmate litigation
U>New York State can no longer afford to maintain both taxpayer-funded legal representation for inmates and a comprehensive law library system in its correctional facilities.
The taxpayers of New York State are paying the salaries of attorneys to represent the legal interests of inmates. These attorneys in turn, are suing the State taxpayers on behalf of their inmate clients, often seeking additional compensation at exorbitant rates, and sometimes winning monetay awards which the state taxpayers must also pay.
ICQ #2811842