Georgia
$10M settlement announced in heat death of student
ATLANTA (AP) — The parents of a Georgia high school basketball player who collapsed while practicing outdoors in sweltering heat and later died announced Tuesday that they have agreed to a $10 million settlement with the school district.
As part of the settlement, the Clayton County school system agreed to rename the gymnasium at Elite Scholars Academy for Imani Bell, who was a 16-year-old junior at the school when she died. A ceremony was set to be held Tuesday afternoon to commemorate that renaming, the family’s lawyers said.
Imani’s father, Eric Bell, called the renaming of the gym a “great honor,” but said the settlement is “bittersweet.”
“We’d trade everything to have her back here with us,” he said in a phone interview.
Imani collapsed on Aug. 13, 2019, after running up the football stadium steps during required conditioning drills for the girls’ basketball team, her family said in the wrongful death lawsuit filed against administrators at the school. The temperature was in the high 90s Fahrenheit (more than 35 degrees Celsius) at the time and the area was under a heat advisory.
Imani died later that day from heat-related cardiac arrest and kidney failure, the lawsuit said. An autopsy done by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation found that she had no preexisting conditions and her death was due solely to heatstroke caused by strenuous physical exertion in extreme temperatures, the family’s lawyers said.
Two coaches, Larosa Walker-Asekere and Dwight Palmer, were indicted in July 2021 on charges including murder and child cruelty in Imani’s death. That criminal case is ongoing.
Imani’s parents filed a wrongful death lawsuit in February 2021. Online court records show that suit was settled last month. An attorney for the family, L. Chris Stewart, said the significant settlement amount sends a message to other school districts.
“It sends a nationwide message to every school district and every athletic program ... that the lives of our children matter over athletics, and every district needs to realize that no child should die from heat exhaustion,” he said. “We salute Clayton County for sending that message nationwide.”
The family has started the Keep Imani Foundation, which their lawyers said will be funded in part by funds from the settlement. Eric Bell said it will offer scholarships for students and will help schools get cold tubs to help prevent heat stroke deaths.
Bell said he wants to send a message to school officials: “Keep educating coaches, keep educating students about the dangers of heat and humidity, and try to be prepared for a situation like this.”
Massachusetts
Ex-mayor, elected at age 23, loses corruption appeal
BOSTON (AP) — A federal appeals court has upheld the extortion and fraud convictions of a once-celebrated young Massachusetts mayor who was found guilty of extorting hundreds of thousands of dollars from marijuana businesses.
In a ruling published on Monday, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a series of challenges to former Fall River Mayor Jasiel Corriea’s 2021 trial, concluding that the 30-year-old was “fairly tried and lawfully convicted by an impartial jury.”
Correia, once a rising Democratic star after being elected at just 23 years old, was found guilty by jurors in Boston federal court of defrauding investors in his smartphone app and soliciting bribes from marijuana vendors who wanted to operate in the struggling mill city.
The judge later tossed several wire fraud and false tax returns convictions that he said prosecutors failed to prove. Corriea remains convicted of multiple counts of fraud, extortion conspiracy and extortion. He reported to prison in April to begin serving his six-year prison sentence.
Lawyers for Correia declined to comment on Tuesday. In their appeal, they accused prosecutors of carrying out an “unfair smear campaign in the courtroom” and called the evidence against their client “remarkably shallow.” The former mayor maintains he is innocent.
Correia’s trial shone a light on his meteoric rise to become mayor as a recent college graduate. Correia portrayed himself to voters as a successful entrepreneur who could breathe new life into the town.
Prosecutors told jurors that in reality Corriea funded his lavish lifestyle with money he stole from investors who pumped cash into his startup, “SnoOwl,” an app designed to help businesses connect with consumers.
After becoming mayor in 2016, prosecutors said Correia started a pay-to-play scheme involving bribes from marijuana vendors in exchange for letters of approval from the city they needed in order to get a license.
Correia’s lawyers challenged, among other things, prosecutors’ use of a video clip from a 2015 mayor’s race debate in which Correia promised taxpayers that he would take their money and and “spend it wisely” — as he said he had done in his business.
Judge Bruce Selya wrote in the three-judge panel’s opinion that “even though the challenged comments may have suggested that the voters of Fall River had been duped, nothing in the record suggests that invoking the plight of those voters would have clouded the jury’s ability to weigh the evidence fairly.”
Delaware
Appeals panel rules in favor of former inmate
DOVER, Del. (AP) — A federal appeals court panel has ruled in favor of a former Delaware prison inmate who claimed he was deprived of his constitutional rights by being placed into solitary confinement for a long period despite his mental illness.
A three-judge panel ruled Monday that a federal district court judge wrongly dismissed a claim filed by Angelo Lee Clark challenging the conditions of his confinement. Clark died earlier this year at age 66 and is being represented in the appeal by a family member.
The federal district court judge in 2019 granted qualified immunity to Department of Correction officials and dismissed Clark’s claim alleging that his lengthy placement in solitary confinement violated his constitutional rights. The judge concluded that housing a mentally ill inmate in solitary confinement for long periods of time does not in itself violate a clearly established Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
The appeals panel concluded, however, that Clark had alleged that prison officials knew that the confinement conditions they imposed on him carried a risk of substantial harm and caused him to suffer debilitating pain that served no legitimate prison purpose.
“Because these allegations trigger established Eighth Amendment protection, we will reverse the grant of qualified immunity and remand for further proceedings,” Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo wrote for the panel.
According to court records, Clark, who was diagnosed with manic depression and paranoid schizophrenia, was housed in solitary confinement for fifteen days in 2015 and for seven months in 2016 before being moved to a psychiatric facility. The appeal involved only the time spent in solitary confinement in 2016.
Attorneys for Clark alleged that his placement in solitary confinement was in retaliation for his mental illness, loud voice, and minor rule infractions, and that his extended time in isolation worsened his mental illness. They argued among other things that holding a severely mentally ill inmate in solitary confinement when the harmful effects of such punishment are well known amounts to cruel and unusual punishment.
Clark’s attorneys alleged that prison officials kept Clark in isolation even though they knew of an American Correctional Association study on the effects of solitary confinement on seriously mentally ill inmates. That ACA study singled out the former warden at Delaware’s maximum-security prison, saying he was not open to change regarding the housing of mentally ill inmates.
“By alleging prison officials imposed solitary confinement for months, knowing the isolation carried a substantial risk of exacerbating his mental illnesses but keeping him there until he suffered serious harm, Clark alleged conduct that no reasonable corrections officer could conclude was constitutionally permissible,” the appeals panel said.
While declaring that the district judge’s grant of qualified immunity to prison officials was “premature,” the panel noted that the allegations in Clark’s complaint might be disproved in further proceedings and the conduct of prison officials found appropriate.
Wisconsin
Judge orders Enbridge, tribe to form emergency pipeline plan
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A federal judge has ordered energy company Enbridge Inc. and an American Indian tribe to come up with an emergency plan to prevent potential spills from an aging oil pipeline running across the tribe’s reservation.
The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa sued Enbridge in federal court in 2019 to force the company to remove a section of the Line 5 pipeline that runs across the tribe’s reservation in northern Wisconsin, arguing the nearly 70-year-old line poses an unreasonable risk to health and safety. The company agreed and plans to build a $450 million pipeline that would run 41 miles (66 kilometers) around the reservation.
Wisconsin Public Radio reported that U.S. District Judge William Conley said in an order issued Monday that risk of a significant rupture exists and the resulting spill could cause “catastrophic” impacts to the Bad River watershed. He allowed the pipeline to continue operating but ordered the tribe and the company to develop a plan to prevent possible spills.
He told the company and tribe to meet and talk about installing emergency shutoff valves and developing a protocol for shutting down and purging the line by Dec. 17. They must submit proposals by Dec. 24.
Enbridge spokesperson Juli Kellner said in a statement that the company looks forward to meeting with the tribe. Bad River tribal Chairman Mike Wiggins Jr. didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday.
Sierra Club Wisconsin Director Elizabeth Ward said she’s glad that Conley recognized the tribe’s concerns about a potential spill but she’s disappointed the judge didn’t shut down the line.
Conley has said a shutdown would have significant effects on regional economies. Line 5 carries up to 23 million gallons (about 87 million liters) of oil and natural gas liquids daily and stretches 645 miles (about 1,040 kilometers) from Superior through northern Wisconsin and Michigan to Sarnia, Ontario.
Washington
High court opening its doors to public on non-argument days
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is making a fuller reopening to the public following more than two and a half years of closures related to the coronavirus pandemic.
Beginning Dec. 1, the high court will be open to the public from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., according to the Supreme Court’s website. The high court closed to the public in March 2020 because of the coronavirus pandemic.
In October, the high court began allowing the public to attend arguments in the courtroom again on the approximately six days a month the court hears arguments, but the court building remained closed to visitors at other times.
The high court initially postponed arguments because of the pandemic, then started hearing arguments by phone. The justices began hearing arguments in the courtroom again in October 2021 but without the public present.
