Legal Opinion

Gentry v. Floyd County

District Court, S.D. Indiana

Decided February 16, 2016No. 4:14-cv-00054-RLY-TABPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ENTRY ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS

RICHARD L. YOUNG, CHIEF JUDGE

Plaintiffs, Tabitha Gentry, Vincent Minton, Michael Herron, Adam Walker, Brian Burgess, Anna Chastain, and Janelle South, are a group of detainees who were housed in padded isolation cells of the Floyd County Jail in conditions they claim were unconstitutional. Before the court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. For the reasons that follow, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification is GRANTED.

I. Background

In 2010, the Floyd County Sheriffs Department issued a policy statement entitled “Combative Subjects…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  4. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  5. Herbert L. Board v. Karl Farnham, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. WEBSTER v. CITY OF NOBLESVILLEDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2020
  2. XIRUM v. U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE)District Court, S.D. Indiana · 2024

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API