A New Jersey court has upheld a class action settlement involving allegations of unlawful strip searches at the Salem County Correctional Facility. This decision, issued on June 24, 2026, affects former inmates who claimed their civil rights were violated while housed in an 'at-risk' unit. The ruling is significant as it clarifies the standards for class action settlements and the rights of class members.
The case, Dana Clark Stevenson v. the County of Salem, arose when former inmates alleged that officials at the facility improperly classified them as 'at-risk' and subjected them to strip searches without reasonable suspicion. The plaintiffs included Stevenson, who passed away during the litigation, and other former inmates, who claimed their rights were violated under state law. The dispute reached the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division after a settlement was reached but later challenged by some class representatives.
The plaintiffs initially filed their lawsuit against Salem County and the facility's warden, John Cuzzupe, claiming that their treatment violated their civil rights. After extensive discovery, the court certified four classes of plaintiffs based on different types of strip search claims. However, during the mediation process, the parties reached a settlement that included monetary compensation for some class members but also led to the decertification of two of the original classes.
On June 24, 2026, the court ruled that the settlement was fair and reasonable. The opinion, delivered by Judges Currier, Berdote Byrne, and Jablonski, stated, 'We are satisfied the court did not abuse its discretion in approving this class action settlement in accordance with Rule 4:32-2(e).' The ruling affirmed the lower court's decision to dismiss the claims of the decertified classes, which had been deemed to lack sufficient evidence.
The court's decision to uphold the settlement means that the remaining class members will receive compensation as outlined in the agreement. Class members from the first class will receive $75 each, while those from the third class will receive $300. Additionally, the court approved a $375,000 attorney fee for class counsel, which has raised concerns among some objectors who argued it was disproportionately high compared to the total class payouts.
This ruling has implications for how class action settlements are handled in New Jersey. It reinforces the principle that courts have broad discretion in approving settlements and that the adequacy of class counsel can be evaluated based on the circumstances of each case. The court emphasized the importance of ensuring that settlements are fair and reasonable, particularly in cases involving vulnerable populations like inmates.
Moving forward, the ruling may influence how future class actions are structured and settled, especially regarding the rights of class members and the responsibilities of class counsel. The court's decision also highlights the need for transparency in the settlement process, particularly when it comes to notifying class members about their rights and the implications of any agreements.
The plaintiffs have the option to appeal this ruling, but details about any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. As of now, the settlement remains in effect, and the decertification of the two classes stands, allowing the plaintiffs to pursue individual claims if they choose.