Inmate Vs State Unemployment
Inmate Vs State Unemployment
Inmate Vs State Unemployment
INTRODUCTION
1. Plaintiff Marc Sparks was, until recently, employed as a grill cook at the Applebee’s
hours a week, typically on Friday through Tuesday from roughly 4pm until midnight. When he
started his job, he made $13 an hour, but he was recently given a raise to $14 an hour. He enjoyed
his job, and his manager greatly appreciated his work ethic and dedication.
2. The COVID-19 pandemic brought Mr. Sparks’s employment, along with the employment
of thousands of individuals in the state of Maine and across the country, to a halt. Like many
Americans, Mr. Sparks is eager to begin working again. He stays in regular contact with his
manager, who intends to hire Mr. Sparks back as soon as pandemic restrictions lift.
3. The only difference between Mr. Sparks and his co-workers at Applebee’s is that Mr.
Sparks is incarcerated at the Bolduc Correctional Facility (“BCF”) in Warren, Maine. While Mr.
1
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 2 of 19 PageID #: 2
Sparks’s co-workers went home at the end of their shifts, Mr. Sparks and his fellow incarcerated
4. Mr. Sparks’s employment at Applebee’s was facilitated by BCF’s Work Release Program.
The Work Release Program allows incarcerated individuals classified as “community custody”—
the lowest security classification—to work at and receive wages from employers in the local
community. Participants in BCF’s Work Release Program work at a range of businesses, such as
restaurants, landscaping companies, plowing companies, lobster wharves, and sawmills. These
employers typically value the work of their incarcerated employees greatly. For instance,
Applebee’s plans to hire Mr. Sparks permanently once he is released from prison. Almost all of
the participants in the Work Release Program work full-time, and many work overtime.
5. The Maine Department of Corrections withholds roughly ten percent of the income earned
by incarcerated people through the Work Release Program to cover the costs of their room, board,
and transportation. It also withdraws funds to cover child support and fines owed by individuals
in the program—typically up to fifty percent for child support and twenty-five percent for fines.
Federal and state income taxes are also deducted from participants’ paychecks. After these
mandatory withdrawals, Work Release Program participants often have only a small amount of
money left to send home to family or to purchase basic goods at the BCF commissary.
6. On March 16, 2020, as the COVID-19 crisis became seriously recognized, the Work
Release Program was brought to a halt in an effort to reduce non-essential contact between
incarcerated individuals and the outside world and to reduce the possibility of COVID-19
spreading through Maine’s prisons. Mr. Sparks and the other Work Release Program participants
were gathered and told that, effective immediately, they no longer would be allowed to work in
the community.
2
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 3 of 19 PageID #: 3
7. In response to the COVID-19 crisis and its devastating impact on the economy, the Maine
State Legislature passed emergency legislation easing the requirements for unemployment
benefits. See P.L. 2020, Ch. 617, Part B-1, codified at 26 M.R.S. § 1199(2)(A).
8. Within a week of the Work Release Program ending, prison officials at BCF encouraged
Mr. Sparks and other individuals who found themselves out of work due to the indefinite
suspension of the Work Release Program to apply for these benefits. Mae Worcester, BCF’s
Community Programs Coordinator, met with the program participants individually to help them
file their unemployment applications. Mr. Sparks and the other program participants supplied their
benefits, including the standard state benefit and the federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance
(“PUA”) payment, which is currently set to pay $600 per week through the end of July. In total,
$3,750 per person. Like the wages earned by the Work Release Program participants prior to the
COVID-19 pandemic, large portions of these unemployment benefits were deducted by BCF to
cover room and board, child support, and fines. Mr. Sparks, like many of the Work Release
Program participants, received the minimum unemployment benefit amount available to Maine
residents: $172 per week from the state plus the $600 PUA payment, for a total of $772 per week.
10. On April 29, 2020, the Maine Office of the Attorney General prepared a memorandum
directed to Maine Department of Labor Commissioner Laura Fortman explaining why the
individuals who had previously performed work under the Work Release Program were eligible
for unemployment benefits. The memorandum noted that “Maine’s unemployment law, the
Employment Security Act, provides unemployment compensation benefits to all workers who
3
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 4 of 19 PageID #: 4
provide services unless there is an exception set forth in the law.” Letter from Nancy Macirowski,
went on to conclude that “[e]mployment of inmates by private employers to perform work outside
the prison is not exempted from unemployment coverage.” Id. at 2. Finally, it noted that under
emergency legislation passed in response to the COVID-19 crisis, the incarcerated individuals are
eligible for unemployment benefits because they “became unemployed for COVID-related
reasons.” Id. at 2, citing P.L. 2020, Ch. 617, Part B-1, codified at 26 M.R.S. § 1199(2)(A) (“An
individual is deemed to have met the eligibility requirements . . . as long as the individual remains
able and available to work for, and maintains contact with, the relevant employer, and the
individual is . . . [u]nder a temporary medical quarantine or isolation restriction to ensure that the
individual has not been affected by the subject condition of the state of emergency and is expected
to return to work.”).
11. On May 15, 2020, Governor Janet Mills issued a letter to Department of Corrections
1. Provide to the Maine Department of Labor (DOL) a list of all inmates who have
participated in work release and who remain incarcerated but are prevented
from engaging in work release due to the COVID-19 crisis, to include their
DOB’s and SSN’s; and
2. Place any and all UI benefits received by such inmates in a separate trust
account designated solely for this purpose and not distribute those funds further.
Letter from Janet Mills, Governor, to Maine Department of Corrections Commissioner Randall
Liberty (May 15, 2020) (“Governor Mills Letter”) at 1, attached hereto as Exhibit B. Governor
Mills further noted that she was “likewise directing Maine DOL to withhold distribution of further
4
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 5 of 19 PageID #: 5
12. In her letter, Governor Mills noted that “the Attorney General’s Office has determined . . .
that this circumstance [of the incarcerated individuals receiving unemployment benefits] is legal
under the emergency law passed unanimously by the legislature.” Id. at 1. Governor Mills made
no attempt to refute the Work Release Program Participants’ eligibility for unemployment benefits.
Rather, she noted only that she found the distribution of unemployment benefits “appalling and to
be bad public policy,” and that she did “not believe that it was the intent of the Legislature or
Congress to allow inmates to receive state or federal benefits, including the $600 weekly PUA
payment.” Id.
13. Governor Mills wrote that unemployment funds should be reserved for Mainers “struggling
to pay for basic necessities.” Id. It is worth noting that this is exactly how Mr. Sparks and the other
Work Release Program participants used their benefits. Contrary to what Governor Mills appears
to believe, basic necessities also cost money for incarcerated individuals and their struggling
Maine families. Mr. Sparks used his benefits primarily to support his children, pay for room and
board, and to purchase soap, shampoo, toiletries, clothes, and other personal supplies at the BCF
commissary.
14. Pursuant to Governor Mills’s directive, Commissioner Fortman and the Department of
Labor have halted the distribution of further unemployment benefits to the Work Release Program
participants—despite the Attorney General’s legal determination that the participants are entitled
to those benefits. Additionally, Commissioner Liberty and the Department of Corrections have
seized funds from the bank and phone accounts of Work Release Program participants in an effort
to recoup the unemployment benefits those individuals received. The unemployment benefits
seized from the Work Release Program participants have been placed in a designated trust account.
5
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 6 of 19 PageID #: 6
15. The seizure of funds mandated by Governor Mills has dramatically impacted those
incarcerated at BCF who received unemployment benefits. For instance, because Mr. Sparks spent
approximately $350 of the money that he received in unemployment benefits, his phone account
is now levied each time his girlfriend pays money to the account so that she can speak to Mr.
Sparks on the phone. Until the $350 is recouped, Mr. Sparks cannot communicate with the outside
world other than through a collect call. Other prisoners face the same issues. For many, the seizure
of their funds has deprived them of the simple human acts of talking to their children and loved
ones on the phone and purchasing personal care items at the commissary.
16. The cessation of unemployment benefits for the Work Release Program participants and
the seizure of benefits already paid occurred without any semblance of procedural due process.
Governor Mills acted unilaterally and outside the scope of her executive authority to deprive
qualified individuals of the funds to which they are legally entitled. In doing so, she usurped the
authority of both the legislature that drafted the emergency unemployment legislation and the
17. In Governor Mills’s letter, she noted that the Work Release Program “is a privilege—not a
right.” Governor Mills’s Letter at 1. This may be true. However, under the United States
Constitution, procedural due process is a right. Fifty-three total individuals, including Mr. Sparks,
remain legitimately entitled to the unemployment benefits they have received in the past and to
the continued receipt of those benefits under Maine law. When Governor Mills unilaterally
demanded the cessation of those benefits and the seizure of the funds previously paid to these
individuals, she deprived them of their legitimate property interests without any form of procedural
due process. Accordingly, Mr. Sparks brings this action on behalf of himself and the additional
6
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 7 of 19 PageID #: 7
fifty-two Work Release Program participants, who are all similarly situated, to challenge the denial
18. Mr. Sparks brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to vindicate his right to procedural
due process under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Mr. Sparks seeks:
(1) a declaration that Governor Mills’s directives to the Department of Corrections to place all
unemployment benefits received by the Plaintiffs into a trust account and to the Department of
Labor to cease further distribution of unemployment benefits violated the constitutional guarantee
to procedural due process; (2) an injunction mandating Commissioner Liberty and the Department
of Corrections to return the unemployment benefits currently held in a designated trust account to
the accounts of the appropriate individuals; and (3) an injunction enjoining Commissioner Fortman
and the Department of Labor from denying unemployment benefits to individuals who are entitled
JURISDICTION
19. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question
jurisdiction).
VENUE
20. Venue in the District of Maine is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial
part of the events or omissions giving rise to the Plaintiffs’ claim occurred in this District.
PARTIES
21. Plaintiff Marc Sparks is a resident of Hancock County, Maine currently incarcerated in
7
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 8 of 19 PageID #: 8
22. Defendant Janet Mills is the Governor of Maine. She is sued in her official capacity as a
23. Defendant Randall Liberty is the Commissioner of the Maine Department of Corrections.
He is sued in his official capacity as a state actor for declaratory and injunctive relief only.
24. Defendant Laura Fortman is the Commissioner of the Maine Department of Labor. She is
sued in her official capacity as a state actor for declaratory and injunctive relief only.
FACTS
A. The Plaintiffs are entitled to unemployment benefits under Maine state law.
25. Mr. Sparks and fifty-two others were employed by employers in the local community
through BCF’s Work Release Program, and they received wages from those community employers
until BCF was forced to end the Work Release Program in mid-March of 2020 due to the COVID-
19 pandemic.
26. Mr. Sparks and the other Work Release Program participants applied for and received
unemployment benefits, including the standard state benefit and the federal PUA payment. In total,
27. The Maine Office of the Attorney General acknowledges that Mr. Sparks and the other
Work Release Program participants were and remain legally entitled to receive unemployment
benefits. In its April 29, 2020 Memorandum, the Office of the Attorney General explained:
8
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 9 of 19 PageID #: 9
26 M.R.S. § 1043(11)(F)(17)(g).
The sections of the Federal Unemployment Tax Act that are references, 26 U.S.C.
§ 3306(c)(7) and (8), apply to unemployment by the state and political subdivisions and
employment by religious and other organizations organized under 501c3 of the Tax Code.
Thus, the exception applies only to inmates who perform services for the state and political
subdivisions (including prisons) or for certain nonprofit organizations. Employment of
inmates by private employers to perform work outside the prison is not exempted from
unemployment coverage. In the absence of an applicable exemption, prisoners are workers
eligible for unemployment benefits.
28. On May 15, 2020, Governor Mills sent Department of Corrections Commissioner Randall
1. Provide to the Maine Department of Labor (DOL) a list of all inmates who have
participated in work release and who remain incarcerated but are prevented from
engaging in work release due to the COVID-19 crisis, to include their DOB’s and
SSN’s; and
9
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 10 of 19 PageID #: 10
2. Place any and all UI benefits received by such inmates in a separate trust account
designated solely for this purpose and not distribute those funds further.
29. Governor Mills also noted that she had “direct[ed] Maine DOL to withhold
30. Governor Mills did not provide any legal response to the determination by her own
Attorney General that Mr. Sparks and the other Work Release Program participants were entitled
to unemployment benefits. Rather, she simply noted that she found the legislation to be “appalling
and to be bad public policy.” Id. at 1. She went on to interpret the intent of the federal and state
legislatures, arguing that they could not have intended to allow incarcerated individuals to receive
unemployment benefits. Id. Finally, she opined that “[w]hile work release offers inmates a
valuable opportunity to learn life skills, support local employers, and earn a salary that can be used
to pay restitution to victims, it is a privilege—not a right—and any inmate who loses that privilege
for whatever reason should not have access to our limited public benefit system.” Id.
31. Pursuant to Governor Mills’s directive, Laura Fortman, Commissioner of the Department
of Labor, halted the distribution of further unemployment benefits to Mr. Sparks and the other
32. Also pursuant to Governor Mills’s directive, Randall Liberty, the Commissioner of the
Department of Corrections, seized funds in the bank accounts of Mr. Sparks and the other Work
Release Program Participants and placed them in a designated trust. In an effort to recoup the
unemployment benefits paid to Mr. Sparks and the other Work Release Program participants, funds
placed into phone and bank accounts by the participants’ families were also seized and placed in
the trust. As families place more money into these accounts, those funds continue to be seized.
10
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 11 of 19 PageID #: 11
33. Governor Mills’s directive was not based on any legal authority. The Constitution of the
State of Maine grants the Governor, as the chief executive, the right to enforce the laws of the
state. ME. CONST. art. V, § 12. However, only the judicial branch can interpret the law and only
the legislative branch can amend it. This separation of powers is the bedrock of American
democracy.
34. Because Governor Mills’s directive is entirely outside the scope of due process, Mr. Sparks
and the other Work Release Program participants had no administrative recourse by which they
could challenge or appeal the cessation of their benefits and the seizure of benefits already paid.
Mr. Sparks and the other Work Release Program Participants were provided no opportunity for a
hearing to determine their eligibility for unemployment benefits. They were provided no actual
notice that their unemployment benefits were to be terminated and their bank and phone accounts
levied. There was no change in the law or to any rules that would have even given Mr. Sparks and
the other Work Release Program participants constructive notice that they had been deemed
ineligible for unemployment benefits. The benefits were simply halted, and the benefits already
paid clawed back, at the direction of a state governor who—motivated by personal conviction or
political considerations—felt that fifty-three of Maine’s most destitute and powerless residents
should not receive unemployment benefits when a pandemic forced them from their jobs.
CLASS ALLEGATIONS
35. Mr. Sparks seeks class certification pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b)(2)-(3). This
Class is defined as: “All currently and formerly incarcerated individuals in the State of Maine who
were deemed eligible for state and federal unemployment benefits after the loss of their Work
Release Program employment and whose benefits ceased pursuant to Governor Mills’s May 15,
11
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 12 of 19 PageID #: 12
36. A class action is the only practicable means by which Mr. Sparks and the Class can
challenge the constitutionality of Governor Mills’s May 15, 2020 directive and the subsequent
37. As set forth below, this action satisfies the numerosity, commonality, typicality, and
adequacy requirements of Rule 23(a). It also meets Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2)-(3).
38. Numerosity: Based on reports to the media, it appears that fifty-three currently and
formerly incarcerated individuals received unemployment benefits after the loss of their Work
Release Program employment which cease following Governor Mills’s May 15, 2020 directive.
See Nick Sambides Jr., Inmates got nearly $200K in coronavirus unemployment benefits, BANGOR
paid nearly $200,000 in unemployment benefits, PORTLAND PRESS HERALD (May 20, 2020),
https://www.pressherald.com/2020/05/20/state-prison-inmates-were-paid-nearly-200000-in-
unemployment-benefits/.
39. Some of these individuals remain incarcerated, while roughly twenty have since been
released into the community. Accordingly, a portion of the Class is likely spread throughout the
state and beyond, making them difficult to track down and contact.
40. Even the portion of the Class that remains incarcerated is impracticably difficult to contact
in its entirety. Communication with incarcerated individuals has always been difficult, and this is
even more true now that COVID-19 has made attorney visits difficult or impossible. As of this
filing, BCF is in lockdown due to COVID-19. Phone and email communication with incarcerated
individuals remains challenging, particularly when many of the individuals in the Class have had
12
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 13 of 19 PageID #: 13
their phone accounts levied to pay back their unemployment benefits. Representation of each
41. Members of the Class are typically low-income individuals who lack the financial
resources to bring an independent action or to be joined in this action. By the Class’s very nature,
individuals would be unable to afford counsel to bring their own separate action against the
Defendants. Moreover, with an average unemployment claim of $3,750 per person, even if an
individual member of the Class could afford private counsel, he would be unlikely to do so when
the cost would be many times the amount of his individual claims.
42. Commonality: All individuals in the Class were equally subject to the loss of their
unemployment benefits and the seizure of the previously received funds from their accounts as a
result of Governor Mills’s May 15, 2020 directive. Accordingly, Mr. Sparks raises his claim based
on questions of law and fact that are common to, and typical of, the Class he seeks to represent.
a. Whether the Class is entitled to unemployment benefits under Maine Law; and
Liberty and the Department of Corrections seized funds in the bank and phone
13
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 14 of 19 PageID #: 14
a. Whether Governor Mills’s May 15, 2020 directive and the subsequent actions by
b. Whether injunctive and declaratory relief is appropriate and, if so, what the terms
44. The relief sought for the Class is common among all members of the Class. Mr. Sparks
seeks relief declaring Governor Mills’s directive and the subsequent actions by Commissioners
Commissioner Liberty to return the unemployment benefits currently held in a designated trust
account to the accounts of the appropriate individuals; as well as an injunction enjoining the
Commissioner Fortman from denying unemployment benefits to individuals who are entitled to
45. Typicality: The claims of Mr. Sparks are typical of the claims of the Class as a whole. Mr.
Sparks and the rest of the Class have suffered the same loss of their legitimate property interest in
their unemployment benefits, and they will continue to suffer that loss until Governor Mills’s
directive and the subsequent actions by Commissioners Liberty and Fortman are declared
held in a designated trust account to the accounts of the appropriate individuals, and Commissioner
Fortman is enjoined from denying unemployment benefits to individuals who are entitled to those
46. Because Mr. Sparks and the Class all challenge the same unlawful actions, Governor Mills
and Commissioners Liberty and Fortman will likely assert similar defenses against Mr. Sparks and
14
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 15 of 19 PageID #: 15
the rest of the Class. Moreover, the answer to whether the statute is unconstitutional will determine
the success of the claims of Mr. Sparks as well as ever other member of the Class. If Mr. Sparks
is successful in his claim that the actions of Governor Mills and Commissioners Liberty and
Fortman violated his constitutional rights, that ruling will benefit every other member of the Class.
47. Adequacy: Mr. Sparks will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the Class he
seeks to represent.
48. Mr. Sparks has no interest seperate from, or in conflict with, those of the Class he seeks to
represent, and he seeks no relief other than the declaratory and injunctive relief sought on behalf
49. Rule 23(b)(2): Class action status under Rule 23(b)(2) is appropriate because Governor
Mills and Commissioners Liberty and Fortman have acted or failed and/or refused to act on
grounds that generally apply to this proposed Class, such that final injunctive and declaratory relief
is appropriate and necessary with respect to each member of the Class. Specifically, the Governor
Mills’s directive and the actions of Commissioners Liberty and Fortman deprived all members of
the Class of their legitimate property interest in their unemployment benefits in violation of the
50. Accordingly, a declaration that Governor Mills’s directive and the subsequent actions of
Commissioner Liberty return the unemployment benefits currently held in a designated trust
account to the accounts of the appropriate individuals, and an injunction and enjoining
Commissioner Fortman from denying unemployment benefits to individuals who are entitled to
those benefits under Maine law is the only appropriate means of vindicating the rights of each
15
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 16 of 19 PageID #: 16
51. Rule 23(b)(3): Furthermore, class action status under Rule 23(b)(3) is appropriate because
questions of law and fact predominate over questions effecting individuals and are superior to
52. Specifically, the constitutionality of Governor Mills’s directive and the subsequent actions
of Commissioners Liberty and Fortman is the predominating issue in this matter. The
circumstances of the individual Class members’ receipt and denial of benefits are not relevant to
this overarching questions. The individual class members have nothing to gain from pursing this
claim individually; on the contrary, concentration of this litigation in one forum will only benefit
the incarcerated and under-privileged members of this class who likely cannot afford individual
counsel. No individuals in the Class have begun any litigation concerning this matter. There will
likely be minimal difficulties in managing this class action; on the contrary, this matter is likely to
be far more efficient as a class action than it would be as fifty-three individual cases.
53. Rule 23(g): Mr. Sparks respectfully requests that the undersigned be appointed as Class
Counsel. Undersigned counsel, who is the senior partner at Camden Law, LLP, has been in full-
time practice since 1996 and has extensive experience in complex civil and criminal litigation.
Approximately half of this class of inmates has, individually and through third parties, requested
that undersigned counsel represent their interests in this action. In addition to already having the
trust of these inmates, undersigned counsel has experience defending the rights of inmates and
criminal defendants through his work as a criminal defense attorney in state court and in federal
court as a CJA panel attorney. Undersigned counsel has sufficient resources to prosecute these
claims on behalf of the Class, including other experienced litigation attorneys and several
16
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 17 of 19 PageID #: 17
COUNT ONE
Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution
(Violation of Procedural Due Process)
54. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained in the
55. Mr. Sparks asserts this claim on behalf of himself and the proposed Class he seeks to
represent.
56. The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits the State of Maine
from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
57. The cornerstone of due process when a property interest is at stake is notice and a
58. Notice must be reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested
parties of the pendency of the action; to accurately describe legal rights and options available to
59. Mr. Sparks and the proposed Class have a property interest in the unemployment benefits
60. Governor Mills’s May 15, 2020 directive and the subsequent actions of Commissioners
Liberty and Frontman deprived Mr. Sparks and the Class of the unemployment benefits to which
61. Mr. Sparks and the Class were afforded no meaningful opportunity to be heard regarding
the deprivation of the unemployment benefits in which they have a legitimate property interest.
62. Mr. Sparks and the Class received no notice apprising them of the pendency of the
deprivation of their unemployment; describing their legal rights and options; or affording them an
17
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 18 of 19 PageID #: 18
63. The exists no lawful reason for depriving Mr. Sparks and the Class of the unemployment
64. Governor Mills acted outside her authority to unilaterally impose her own belief that it was
“appalling” that certain individuals who worked in the community lawfully received
unemployment benefits when their work was curtailed due to a global pandemic.
65. The state and federal governments included no such value judgments in the laws mandating
unemployment and COVID-19 relief. There is therefore no legitimate governmental interest that
justifies the deprivation of unemployment benefits from Mr. Sparks and the Class.
66. Governor Mills’s May 15, 2020 directive and the subsequent actions of Commissioners
Liberty and Fortman violate the Procedural Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of
b. Certify a Class under Rules 23(a) and (b)(2)—(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil
received by the Plaintiffs into a trust account and to cease further distribution of
18
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 19 of 19 PageID #: 19
f. Award prevailing party costs, including attorney fees per 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b);
and
g. Grant such other relief as the Court deems just and appropriate.
19