Miami Attorney Reps Florida Prisoners in Class Action Over Impounded Music
Florida Justice Institute Executive Director Dante Trevisani is one of the attorneys leading litigation against the Florida Department of Corrections over the state prison system's seizure of digital songs and book purchased by inmates. He is joined by lawyers from the Tampa Bay and Kansas City-based Social Justice Law Collective firm.
February 20, 2019 at 03:31 PM
4 minute read
A federal lawsuit is accusing the Florida Department of Corrections of unlawfully separating Florida inmates from their rightful property, namely, digital media they'd purchased in prison.
The class action filed in the Northern District of Florida on Tuesday charges the FDOC and its newly appointed secretary, Mark Inch, with violating Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment assurances of compensation and due process by confiscating music and books that Florida prisoners had bought.
FDOC Press Secretary Patrick Manderfield said “the department has not been served this lawsuit,” but would “thoroughly review it upon receipt.”
Dante Trevisani, the executive director of Miami public interest law firm the Florida Justice Institute, said the new policy is a result of the FDOC's partnership with a new vendor, Miramar-based JPay, for the state prison system's digital music player program.
“If the music could transfer, it would negate the new vendor's ability to make money. This was the explicit reason it was done,” Trevisani said.
The complaint claims advertisements touting the digital media players promised inmates: “Once music is purchased, you'll always own it!” Now, prisoners are being compelled to hand in their old devices in exchange for new Jpay-branded ones without any of the media they'd purchased. What's more, the suit claims the FDOC has declined to offer compensation for the seizure of materials prisoners had thought they owned outright. Now, if they want access to the music or books they'd previously enjoyed, they'll have to buy them a second time.
Joshua Glickman, a former attorney with the Florida Justice Institute and founding member of the Social Justice Law Collective, is one of the lawyers representing the class outlined in the suit. He referred to the FDOC's actions as “completely unacceptable.”
“For a lot of these prisoners this music program was a huge thing for them,” Glickman said. “These were not just songs, this was a way for these prisoners who had life sentences or 25 years or more … to have a little slice of normalcy. And to just have it ripped away from them is completely unacceptable.”
Read the lawsuit:
Glickman said both he and Trevisani's firms “started receiving a deluge of letters from inmates and their family members complaining about the loss of their property.”
“Once we started looking into it … we were somewhat surprised at not only that they were confiscating these inmate's lawfully purchased properties, but the reasoning that they were giving these inmates,” Glickman said, calling the FDOC's justification for the policy “callous” and “indifferent.”
Trevisani said the FDOC ignored prisoner's grievances before developing a standard response which said the ability for inmates to keep their media would “negate the vendor's ability to make money.” He summarized the prison system's sentiment as “We're sorry you feel this way, but we hope you'll come to acknowledge the value of this program.”
The named plaintiff in the case, William Demler, is an inmate at the South Florida Reception Center in Doral. He had purchased more than 300 songs on his old media player and expressed his concerns about the new policy with both the prison as well as the attorneys. Trevisani said the legal team hopes “to get a class certified of everyone who lost out on” media they'd owned prior to the new policy's implementation.
“The class as we defined it is all FDOC prisoners whose music was taken pursuant to this transition from the old media players to the new tablets,” he said. Through litigation, Trevisani and his co-counsel are hoping to get Demler and class members “access to the old music by transferring it to the new player or some other means.”
“For some people, this is all they have,” Trevisani added. “There was advertising to induce them to buy the music. It said you'd own it forever, and people believed that.”
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250