Ortiz v. Jordan

Case Date: 11/01/2010
Docket No: none

Facts of the Case 

Michelle Ortiz, a former inmate, filed suit against several state and prison officials in an Ohio federal district court for violating her civil rights. While Ms. Ortiz served her sentence, she was sexually abused by a corrections officer on two consecutive nights. Prior to the second incident, Ms. Ortiz complained to prison officials, but was told "that the man was leaving," "this was his nature," and he "is just an old dirty man." The corrections officer assaulted her on the following night. At trial, the jury found in favor of Ms. Ortiz against two of the prison officials – Paula Jordan and Rebecca Bright.

On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed, holding that the prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity and dismissed the case. The court noted that while courts do not normally review the denial of summary judgment after a trial on the merits, a denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity is an exception to the general rule. The court reasoned that Ms. Jordan's conduct did not violate Ms. Ortiz's Eight Amendment right to humane conditions because Ms. Jordan was not "deliberately indifferent" to Ms. Ortiz's plight.

Read the Briefs for this Case
  • Brief of Respondents
  • Brief for Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming,
  • Question 

    May a party appeal an order denying summary judgment after a full trial on the merits if the party chose not to appeal the order before trial?

    Argument Ortiz v. Jordan - Oral ArgumentFull Transcript Text  Download MP3Ortiz v. Jordan - Opinion AnnouncementFull Transcript Text  Download MP3 Conclusion  Decision: 9 votes for Ortiz, 0 vote(s) against Legal provision: summary judgment

    No. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded the lower court order in a unanimous opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, which held that a party may not appeal a denial of summary judgment after a district court has conducted a full trial on the merits. Justice Clarence Thomas filed a special concurrence, joined by Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy.