Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 05-03-2023

Case Style:

Rachel Bohnenkamp and Crhistopher Bohenkamp v. James Whisterbarth, et al.

Case Number: 1:19-CV-115

Judge: Richard A. Lanzillo

Court: United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (Erie County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best Erie Civil Rights Lawyer Directory

Defendant's Attorney: Joseph Dominic Pometto and Sean T. Logue

Description: Erie, Pennsylvania civil rights lawyers represented Plaintiffs who sued Defendants on prisoner civil rights violation theories under 42 U.S.C. 1983 theories.

"Prisoner civil rights law is a complex and ever-evolving area of law. It is important to note that prisoners do not have the same rights as those who are not incarcerated. However, they do have certain fundamental rights, including the right to:

Be free from cruel and unusual punishment. This means that prisoners cannot be subjected to physical or mental pain or suffering.
Be free from discrimination. Prisoners cannot be discriminated against on the basis of race, religion, sex, or national origin.
Have access to the courts. Prisoners have the right to file lawsuits against prison officials for violations of their rights.
Practice their religion. Prisoners have the right to practice their religion, as long as it does not interfere with the security of the prison or the rights of others.
Receive adequate medical care. Prisoners have the right to receive adequate medical care, as long as it is not a financial burden on the state.
Be free from sexual assault. Prisoners have the right to be free from sexual assault, both by other prisoners and by prison officials.
Be protected from harm. Prisoners have the right to be protected from harm, both by other prisoners and by prison officials.

These are just some of the rights that prisoners have under the law. If you believe that your rights have been violated, you should contact an attorney who specializes in prisoner civil rights law."

Google Bard

Outcome: At a status conference convened in this matter this morning, Counsel for the Plaintiff, John F. Mizner, Esq., notified the Court that a settlement has been reached in this case. In light of this agreement, the Clerk of this Court is directed to mark this case ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED on the Court's docket as of today's date. Any and all deadlines previously imposed are hereby suspended. Nothing contained in this Order shall be considered a dismissal or disposition of this case. See Freeman v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC, 709 F.3d. 240, 246 (3d Cir. 2013) (Federal Courts have long distinguished dismissals from administrative closings.). The Court expressly retains jurisdiction in this matter to consider any issue that may arise during the period when the settlement is being finalized, including but not limited to enforcing the settlement. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (1994); Orbital Engineering, Inc., v. Buchko, 2022 WL 1062304, at *1 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 8, 2022). Counsel for the Plaintiff is hereby ordered to file a Stipulation of Dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) on or before December 31, 2023. Should said Stipulation not be filed by that date, Counsel for the Plaintiff is directed to file a written status report updating the Court on the progress made toward effectuating the settlement agreement. In the event an issue or problem arises in connection with the effectuation of the settlement, either Party may file a written status report updating the Court and/or request a status conference. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lanzillo on May 3, 2023. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jbh) (Entered: 05/03/2023)

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:


Find a Lawyer


Find a Case