×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Alabama Prisoners Must Be Afforded Access To The Courts
The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals ruled a lower court abused its discretion when it dismissed a prisoner's civil action for failure to prosecute, despite pending motions moving for three alternatives for the prisoner to access the court.
Alabama state prisoner James McConico, Jr., was involved in a fight in the Holman Correctional Facility law library. McConico filed suit in state court claiming several causes of action including failure to prosecute the other prisoner, covering up the incident, retaliation for helping prisoners with legal work, and conspiracy to deprive McConico of his constitutional and civil rights. After a trial date was set, McConico filed to move the trial to the prison if he was not transported to the courthouse or to testify by deposition if the motion to move the trial was denied. The trial court denied motions and dismissed the action for failure to prosecute.
On appeal, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals found the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing the case when Ala.R.Civ.P. 30(a) and 31(a) provide for an incarcerated person?s deposition upon oral or written questions. Noting that a prisoner has no right to be present in court to prosecute civil claims, the Court concluded that a prison is denied equal access to the courts when a case is dismissed solely on a failure to be present, especially when a prisoner has filed to proceed with the litigation in alternative manners as in this case. See: McConico v. Culliver, 872 So.2d 872 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003) on appeal after remand 980 So.2d 299 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006).
Alabama state prisoner James McConico, Jr., was involved in a fight in the Holman Correctional Facility law library. McConico filed suit in state court claiming several causes of action including failure to prosecute the other prisoner, covering up the incident, retaliation for helping prisoners with legal work, and conspiracy to deprive McConico of his constitutional and civil rights. After a trial date was set, McConico filed to move the trial to the prison if he was not transported to the courthouse or to testify by deposition if the motion to move the trial was denied. The trial court denied motions and dismissed the action for failure to prosecute.
On appeal, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals found the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing the case when Ala.R.Civ.P. 30(a) and 31(a) provide for an incarcerated person?s deposition upon oral or written questions. Noting that a prisoner has no right to be present in court to prosecute civil claims, the Court concluded that a prison is denied equal access to the courts when a case is dismissed solely on a failure to be present, especially when a prisoner has filed to proceed with the litigation in alternative manners as in this case. See: McConico v. Culliver, 872 So.2d 872 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003) on appeal after remand 980 So.2d 299 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal cases
McConico v. Culliver
| Year | 2006 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 980 So.2d 299 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |
McConico v. Culliver
| Year | 2003 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 872 So.2d 872 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003) |
| Level | State Court of Appeals |
| Injunction Status | N/A |