Parole Board Litigation Update:
David Hall et al. v. Harry Hageman et al.
(the Ohio Parole Board)

Decision from Franklin County Common Pleas Court

On January 27, 2009, Franklin County Common Pleas Court Judge John A. Connor ordered the Parole Board to grant meaningful consideration for parole to class members who have not had a parole hearing since June 2005.

• Decision and entry, issued Jan. 27, 2009

• Judgment entry, issued Feb. 9, 2009

Hall et al. v. Hageman et al. is a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of Ohio inmates seeking enforcement of their right to meaningful consideration for parole.  The case is currently pending in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, with Judge John Connor presiding.  The Hall case follows in the footsteps of Ankrom et al. v. Hageman et al., Case No. 01CVH02-1563, a prior class action lawsuit filed against the Ohio Parole Board. Attorney Charles Clovis and attorneys from the Office of the Ohio Public Defender are the lawyers for the Ohio inmate plaintiffs in both cases.

The trial court trial court certified the case as a “class action” under Ohio Civil Rule 26(B)(3) on September 1, 2006. As a part of the class certification in Hall, the trial court defined the class as including “all parole-eligible Ohio prison inmates whose conviction(s) were obtained by a trial.” Thus, any result from the Hall litigation will only effect those Ohio prison inmates who fit the class definition (i.e., they went to trial).  In Ankrom, the plaintiff class includes all parole-eligible Ohio prison inmates who were convicted after pleading guilty or no contest to lesser or fewer charges than for which they were indicted.

On April 9, 2007, attorneys for the plaintiff prison inmates filed the Motion of Plaintiffs Hall Et Al. for Summary Judgment. Defendants Hageman, et al. also filed a motion for summary judgment on April 9, 2007. Responses and reply memoranda were filed by both parties. Copies of the summary judgment motions, as well as of the parties’ responses and replies, are available on the Ohio Public Defender’s website, at www.opd.ohio.gov.

The court has not yet issued a decision on the parties’ summary judgment motions, but attorneys for the plaintiffs anticipate a decision before the end of 2008. 

See below for documents filed in Hall and check this site periodically for updates on the case.

• Hall - amended complaint

• Hall - answer to amended complaint

• Hall - decision class cert

• Hall - case scheduling order

• Motion of Plaintiffs Hall Et Al. for Summary Judgment 

• Defendants' Memorandum Contra to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment Filed April 9, 2007 

• Plaintiffs David Hall Et Al.'s Reply to Defendants Harry Hageman Et Al.'s Memorandum Contra Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment 

• Defendants' Second Motion for Summary Judgment

  • Exhibit A

  • Exhibit A1

  • Exhibit B

  • Exhibit C

  • Exhibit D

  • Exhibit E

• Plaintiff David Hall Et Al.'s Memorandum Contra Defendants Harry Hageman Et Al.'s Second Motion for Summary Judgment 

Press Releases

• Class certified in lawsuit against Adult Parole Authority

For questions, please call or write to:

Amy Borror
Public Information Officer
Office of the Ohio Public Defender
250 East Broad Street - Suite 1400
Columbus, Ohio  43215
(614)  466-5394
1-800-686-1573

"Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population."

Albert Einstein