News Articles

This site contains over 2,000 news articles, legal briefs and publications related to for-profit companies that provide correctional services. Most of the content under the "Articles" tab below is from our Prison Legal News site. PLN, a monthly print publication, has been reporting on criminal justice-related issues, including prison privatization, since 1990. If you are seeking pleadings or court rulings in lawsuits and other legal proceedings involving private prison companies, search under the "Legal Briefs" tab. For reports, audits and other publications related to the private prison industry, search using the "Publications" tab.

For any type of search, click on the magnifying glass icon to enter one or more keywords, and you can refine your search criteria using "More search options." Note that searches for "CCA" and "Corrections Corporation of America" will return different results.

OK Prisoners' Argument, Raised for First Time on Appeal, Not Considered

Loaded on Dec. 15, 2007

Filed under: Corrections Corporation of America/CoreCivic, Medical, Diabetes, Food, Appeals, Contractor Liability, Sovereign Immunity. Location: Oklahoma.

On November 15, 2001, Leticia Smedley was arrested by police in Tulsa, Oklahoma on suspicion of being intoxicated. She was jailed at the David L. Moss Criminal Justice Center, a facility operated by Corrections Corporation of America (CCA). Medical staff discovered that Smedley was having a hypoglycemic reaction due to low blood sugar. Even so, jail officials gave her no food to bring her blood sugar up, and physically and verbally assaulted her. Through her lawyer, Joseph Clark, Jr. of Tulsa, she sued CCA in federal district court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court found that CCA could not be held liable for its employees' behavior unless the same was the result of CCA's inadequate training, supervision or employee policies. Finding no such assertion, the district court dismissed. Smedley appealed.

On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit found that a statement by Smedley's lawyer to the district court that CCA's supervision of its employees was "pretty poor" was insufficient to state an inadequate supervision or policy claim. It therefore refused to consider that claim and affirmed the district court's ruling. See: Smedley v. Corrections Corp. of America, 175 Fed.Appx. 943 (10th Cir. 2005) (unpublished).

Related legal case

Smedley v. Corrections Corp. of America

Year	2005
Cite	175 Fed.Appx. 943 (10th Cir. 2005)
Level	Court of Appeals
Injunction Status	N/A