MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 1 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

Jeanne LoCicero (024052000)
Tess Borden (260892018)
Alexander Shalom (021162004)
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
OF NEW JERSEY FOUNDATION
P.O. Box 32159
Newark, NJ 07102
(973) 854-1715
jlocicero@aclu-nj.org
Robyn B. Gigl (013581977)
GLUCK WALRATH LLP
428 River View Plaza
Trenton, NJ 08611
(609) 278-3900
rgigl@glucklaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiff
SONIA DOE, a pseudonym,
Plaintiff,
v.
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, MARCUS HICKS, in
his
official
capacity
as
Acting
Commissioner of the New Jersey
Department of Corrections, PATRICK
NOGAN, in his official capacity as
Administrator of Northern State Prison;
LESLIE RUSSELL, in her official
capacity as Disciplinary Hearing Officer
at the New Jersey Department of
Corrections; LT. N.R., in her official
capacity as Lieutenant at Northern State
Prison, OFC. S.R., in his official capacity
as Corrections Officer at Northern State
Prison, and OFC. J.L., in his official
capacity as Corrections Officer at
Northern State Prison.
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
MERCER COUNTY
LAW DIVISION
Docket No.
CIVIL ACTION
VERIFIED COMPLAINT, JURY
DEMAND AND DESIGNATION OF
TRIAL COUNSEL

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 2 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

Plaintiff, through her undersigned attorneys, states her Complaint as follows:
NATURE OF ACTION
1.

This is a civil rights action for preliminary injunctive relief, permanent injunctive

relief, declaratory relief, and damages for violations of the Law Against Discrimination and the
State Constitution’s promise of equal protection, due process, free expression, and prohibition on
cruel and unusual punishment. This action is brought by a woman who has been imprisoned for
the past seventeen months in men’s prisons and who Defendants treat differently than other women
solely because she is transgender. As a result of her confinement in men’s prisons, Plaintiff has
been subject to discrimination, verbal and sexual harassment, and physical assault at the hands of
and/or with specific knowledge by Defendants.
2.

Plaintiff brings this action to enjoin Defendants from discriminating against her on

the basis of her gender identity or expression and on the basis of her sex including, but not limited
to: by housing her solely in men’s prisons despite her stated and well-documented gender identity
and exceptional vulnerability as a woman, referring to her as male, using male pronouns to address
her, and sometimes even explicitly telling her she is a man; by otherwise verbally and sexually
harassing her; and by failing to protect her from violence and indeed directly causing her physical
assault. Plaintiff also seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the more than seventeen
months that Defendants have caused her to suffer in men’s prisons, where she has been subject to
verbal and sexual harassment, physical assault, and continuous discrimination, including in
conditions of prolonged solitary confinement.

2

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 3 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

VENUE
3.

Venue is proper in Mercer County pursuant to R. 4:3-2(a). Although Plaintiff has

been subject to discrimination in men’s prisons across the state (in Trenton, Newark, and
Bridgeton), the ultimate decision to treat her differently than other women because she is
transgender was and continues to be made by the New Jersey Department of Corrections, which
resides in Mercer County.
PARTIES
4.

Plaintiff Sonia Doe is a woman who is being improperly confined in a men’s prison

solely because she is transgender. At all relevant times to this suit, Defendants knew or should
have known that Ms. Doe is a woman.
5.

Defendant New Jersey Department of Corrections (NJDOC) has its administrative

headquarters on Whittlesey Road in Trenton, New Jersey. NJDOC is a public entity amenable to
suit under New Jersey law.
6.

Defendant Marcus Hicks is Acting Commissioner of the NJDOC. He was appointed

to this position in May 2018 and previously held other positions throughout the NJDOC since
2007. He is sued in his official capacity.
7.

Defendant Patrick Nogan is Administrator of Northern State Prison (NSP), which

is one of thirteen main correctional facilities operated by the NJDOC, and one of the twelve of
which are exclusively for men. Like other NJDOC facilities, NSP is a place of public
accommodation under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. Administrator Nogan is sued
in his official capacity.
8.

Defendant Leslie Russell is a Disciplinary Hearing Officer at the Central Office of

the NJDOC. She is sued in her official capacity.

3

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 4 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

9.

Defendant Lt. N.R. is a Lieutenant at NSP and an employee of the NJDOC. She is

sued using initials pursuant to R. 4:26-6 or, in the alternative, as a public officer in her official
capacity pursuant to R. 4:26-7.
10.

Defendant Ofc. S.R. is a Corrections Officer at NSP and an employee of the

NJDOC. He is sued using initials pursuant to R. 4:26-6 or, in the alternative, as a public officer in
his official capacity pursuant to R. 4:26-7.
11.

Defendant Ofc. J.L. is a Corrections Officer at NSP and an employee of the

NJDOC. He is sued using initials pursuant to R. 4:26-6 or, in the alternative, as a public officer in
his official capacity pursuant to R. 4:26-7.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
Ms. Doe’s Background and Medical Diagnosis
12.

Sonia Doe is a woman.

13.

Ms. Doe was born in 1979. She was assigned the sex of male at birth but has

identified as female since she was a child. Since approximately 2003, she has used her current,
typically feminine name and has publicly lived as a woman in all aspects of her life.
14.

In approximately 2005, Ms. Doe was diagnosed with gender identity disorder.

Gender identity disorder, subsequently updated in the American Psychiatric Association’s
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) to gender dysphoria, is the medical
diagnosis given to individuals whose gender identity – a person’s innate sense of belonging to a
particular gender – differs from the sex they were assigned at birth, causing clinically significant
distress. Gender dysphoria is included in the most recent DSM (Fifth ed., 2013) (DSM-V) and is
recognized by the other major medical and mental health professional groups, including the

4

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 5 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association. Ms. Doe’s current
medical records reflect a diagnosis of gender dysphoria in line with DSM-V.
15.

Since her diagnosis in 2005 and until her entry into NJDOC custody in March 2018,

Ms. Doe received consistent treatment for gender dysphoria, including hormone therapy which
was prescribed by a medical provider. Hormone therapy altered Ms. Doe’s physical appearance
and secondary sex characteristics including by causing breast tissue to develop in a typically
feminine manner, redistributing fat and muscle in a typically feminine manner, and softening Ms.
Doe’s skin.
16.

In 2006, Ms. Doe legally changed her name in court in Center County,

Pennsylvania. Her Pennsylvania driver’s license recognizes her typically feminine legal name. The
following year she moved to Atlantic County, New Jersey and obtained a New Jersey driver’s
license. Her New Jersey license reflects her female gender and legal name.
17.

Ms. Doe has served her community as an emergency medical technician (EMT),

search and rescue technician, grief and suicide counselor, and as a board member of several nonprofit organizations. She has a number of educational degrees, including a master’s degree in
business management. For four years, she served as a licensed and bonded officer of the court as
a bail agent and fugitive recovery officer with arrest powers in the State of New Jersey.
18.

Following extensive surgeries related to vehicular accidents and injuries, Ms. Doe

became addicted to prescription painkillers and entered NJDOC custody in March 2018 for
offenses stemming from her addiction.
19.

When Ms. Doe entered NJDOC custody, her county jail records indicated that she

is transgender and/or has a gender dysphoria diagnosis and that she received hormone therapy,
namely estrogen and testosterone blocking medications twice a day. She also informed the medical

5

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 6 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

department and other NJDOC staff about this during her intake process at Central Reception and
Assignment Facility (CRAF). Like all other NJDOC facilities at which Ms. Doe has been confined,
CRAF is exclusively for men. People who NJDOC classifies as women are processed for intake at
the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women (EMCFW).
20.

When Ms. Doe entered prison, she was five foot six and 135 pounds. She looked,

identified as, and indeed was a woman.
21.

Ms. Doe’s NJDOC medical records since March 2018 reflect that she is

transgender, has a gender dysphoria diagnosis, receives hormone therapy in prison, and is marked
for monitoring pursuant to the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA), 42 U.S.C. § 15601.
Ms. Doe’s Confinement in Men’s Prisons
22.

From NJDOC’s own records, Ms. Doe’s self-reporting, and Ms. Doe’s appearance,

NJDOC and its staff knew or should have known that Ms. Doe is a woman. Nevertheless, since
her entry into NJDOC custody, Ms. Doe has been treated differently than other women in NJDOC
custody solely because she is transgender. Defendants have consistently and continually treated
Ms. Doe like a man because she was assigned the sex of male at birth.
23.

Whereas non-transgender women are confined at an NJDOC facility designated for

women (EMCFW), Ms. Doe has been confined exclusively in men’s prisons, with male cellmates
or in isolation, at CRAF, New Jersey State Prison (NJSP), Northern State Prison (NSP), and South
Woods State Prison (SWSP).
24.

Ms. Doe has been consistently misgendered. Most obvious, Defendants have

continuously confined her in men’s prisons, despite her stated and well-documented female
gender. In addition, Defendants and other NJDOC and NSP staff consistently refer to Ms. Doe
using male pronouns. NJDOC records list her as male and almost exclusively refer to her with

6

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 7 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

male pronouns. Her Electronic Medical Record (EMR) while in NJDOC custody also consistently
misgenders her. Indeed, she is referred to as male on the very same pages that she is identified as
transgender and subject to PREA monitoring. At times, Defendants and/or those under their
supervision and control have explicitly told Ms. Doe she does not have breasts and is in fact a man.
On a number of occasions, they have responded to her requests or complaints by telling her that
she is in a men’s prison.
25.

Ms. Doe has been denied female commissary items, such as tweezers, which she

believes to be available at the women’s prison, and has had difficulty obtaining and retaining
gender-affirming undergarments, which are available to non-transgender women incarcerated at
EMCFW. On January 4, 2019, the medical department at NSP provided temporary permission for
Ms. Doe to wear a bra that might trigger the metal detector. The underwire had been removed but
the clips on the band were permitted by nurse’s order. Nevertheless, on February 7, 2019, her bra
was confiscated as contraband. The sergeant who completed the Contraband Seizure form listed
the item seized as “bra” and the reason for seizure, “not authorized for retention/receipt.” While at
NSP, between January 24, 2019 and March 17, 2019, Ms. Doe filed 13 grievances or inmate
inquiries to NJDOC and individual facility staff, including administration, concerning issues
related to female undergarments.
26.

When Ms. Doe entered NJDOC custody, the doctor at CRAF decreased her

testosterone blocking dosage by fifty percent, and her prescription was consistently renewed at
that level until June 2019. At various facilities, including but not limited to during her time in
isolation at NSP, Ms. Doe had difficulty obtaining her hormone therapy regularly and on time, for
example when she was told the medication was back-ordered or out of stock. While at NSP,
between February 17, 2019 and March 29, 2019, Ms. Doe filed four grievances or inmate inquiries

7

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 8 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

to NJDOC and individual facility staff, including administration, concerning issues in her hormone
therapy. As a result of her inability to obtain appropriate hormone therapy, combined with her lack
of access to female commissary items, Ms. Doe developed extensive facial hair growth which
required her to shave and exacerbated her gender dysphoria, causing her emotional distress,
anguish, and humiliation, and making her feel uncomfortable in her body and unlike herself.
27.

While at NSP, between January 17, 2019 and May 21, 2019, Ms. Doe submitted

nine grievances or inmate inquiries to NJDOC and individual facility staff, including
administration, concerning other issues related to her identity as a woman who is transgender. In
them, she reported that she had been misgendered, subject to sexual harassment, and experienced
fear of violence due to her identity. In the first of those grievances, she explicitly asked to be
referred to using female pronouns.
28.

Ms. Doe’s EMR categorizes her PREA Status as “Victim.” It notes Ms. Doe has

reported symptoms that may indicate sexual victimization either currently or in the past, that she
has reported a history of prior institutional violence or sexual abuse, and that she has reported
being particularly vulnerable to victimization while incarcerated. Yet upon information and belief,
despite the notation of her risk in her EMR and her purported designation for PREA monitoring,
Defendant NJDOC and its officers never performed an individualized assessment of Ms. Doe’s
risk of assault, and her views of her own safety were not taken into account and/or were repeatedly
ignored.
29.

At CRAF and NJSP, after Ms. Doe was strip searched, which occurred frequently,

she was forced to finish dressing topless, with her breasts exposed, in front of male prisoners and
corrections officers.

8

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 9 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

30.

At SWSP, in March 2018, corrections officers harassed Ms. Doe and shouted that

they could not wait to strip search her and “see some titties.” After she filed a PREA complaint
through a counselor, she was ridiculed by officers, who said filing a PREA complaint was
“pathetic.”
31.

Ms. Doe was threatened by her assigned cell mate when she first entered SWSP,

who refused to let her into the cell. When she could not force her way into the cell, both because
he was physically blocking the door and because she was afraid, she received a disciplinary charge
for refusing a housing assignment. She also received a charge that she believes was in retaliation
for filing a PREA complaint. In the latter charge, the officer claimed she attempted to throw bodily
fluids at him because she allegedly cleared her throat and turned her head towards him. Ms. Doe
was adjudicated guilty of both disciplinary offenses and sanctioned with nine months in
administrative segregation, which she served in conditions of near-total isolation, or solitary
confinement, at NJSP, a facility used almost exclusively for maximum security prisoners.
32.

At NJSP, NSP, and SWSP, Ms. Doe has been sexually harassed by other prisoners.

At all three prisons, male prisoners have visibly masturbated while staring at her, sometimes
exposing their penises to her. At NJSP and NSP, she has received sexually harassing handwritten
notes from male prisoners that described sexual acts they wished to perform with her and referred
lewdly to genitalia. And at all the prisons in which she has been confined (CRAF, NJSP, NSP and
SWSP), male prisoners and/or corrections officers have made lewd remarks to her about her
appearance.
33.

As with everything else about her placement in men’s prisons, these incidents make

Ms. Doe fear for her safety.

9

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 10 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

The Extreme Vulnerability of Transgender Women in Men’s Prisons
34.

It is well documented that transgender prisoners, in particular women who are

transgender, face exceptional hardship in prison in general. Women who are transgender and
incarcerated in men’s facilities are especially vulnerable to physical and sexual assault, self-harm,
and lasting psychological trauma and emotional distress.
35.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, nearly 40 percent of transgender

prisoners in state and federal prisons experience sexual victimization, a rate ten times higher than
that for prisoners in general. 1
36.

The National Commission on Correctional Health Care (NCCHC) has warned that

“[t]ransgender people face an array of risks to their health and well-being during incarceration,
and are often targets of physical assault and emotional abuse.” 2 The NCCHC recognizes that
transgender prisoners are “commonly placed in correctional facilities according to their genitals
and/or sex assigned at birth, regardless of their gender presentation” and that the “health risks of
overlooking the particular needs of transgender inmates [are] severe[.]” 3
37.

When confined incongruously with their gender identity, transgender prisoners are

often “singled out” as targets of harassment and abuse. In a national survey, 21 percent of

1

BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, U.S. DEP’T OF JUSTICE, SEXUAL VICTIMIZATION IN PRISONS AND
JAILS REPORTED BY INMATES, 2011–12: SUPPLEMENTAL TABLES: PREVALENCE OF SEXUAL
VICTIMIZATION AMONG TRANSGENDER ADULT INMATES (2014). Sexual victimization is defined as
non-consensual sexual activity of various kinds, abusive sexual contact, and both willing and
unwilling sexual activity with correctional staff. BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, U.S. DEP’T OF
JUSTICE, SEXUAL VICTIMIZATION IN PRISONS AND JAILS REPORTED BY INMATES, 2011–12, at 9
(2014).
2
National Commission on Correctional Health Care, Policy Statement: Transgender Health Care
in Correctional Settings (Oct. 18, 2009), http://www.ncchc.org/transgender-health-care-incorrectional-settings.
3
Id.

10

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 11 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

transgender women confined in men’s facilities reported suffering physical abuse while in prison,
and 20 percent reported sexual violence. 4
38.

In 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice’s final regulation implementing PREA

recognized the extreme vulnerability of transgender prisoners and detainees. The regulations
require individualized assessments when determining whether to house transgender prisoners in
men’s or women’s facilities, prevent cross-gender searches, incorporate the unique vulnerabilities
of transgender prisoners into training and screening protocols; ensure transgender prisoners can
shower, change clothing, and use the bathroom without improper viewing by prisoners and staff
of the opposite gender; and restrict the use of protective custody in conditions of solitary
confinement for vulnerable prisoners. 5
NJDOC’s Policies and Practices Regarding Transgender Prisoners
39.

Pursuant to PREA, the NJDOC implemented a policy on Transgender/Intersex

Inmates, PCS.001.006, effective September 1, 2016 and revised December 15, 2018. Policy
PCS.001.006 was approved and issued by Defendant Commissioner Hicks on January 15, 2019.
Section III of the Policy reads: “It is the policy of the NJDOC to address the needs of transgender
and intersex inmates in a manner that is consistent with PREA standards and in accordance with
departmental regulations, policies and procedures.”
40.

The seven-page policy includes, inter alia, definitions of “gender dysphoria,”

“gender identity,” and “transgender” as well as procedures regarding identification of transgender

4

Testimony of Organizations Supporting LGBT Equality, Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the
Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights, Lambda Legal (June 9, 2012),
https://www.lambdalegal.org/sites/default/files/ltr_sjsccrhr_20120619_solitary-confinement.pdf.
5
See U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, Justice Department Releases Final Rule to
Prevent,
Detect
and
Respond
to
Prison
Rape
(May
17,
2012),
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-releases-final-rule-prevent-detect-andrespondprison-rape. For the full rule text, see https://ojp.gov/programs/pdfs/prea_final_rule.pdf.
11

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 12 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

prisoners, classification reviews, gender identity based housing, respect and confidentiality
responsibilities, medical treatment, privacy, prisoner safety, clothing issue, and personal property
for transgender prisoners.
41.

PCS.001.006(VI)(D) provides that “[t]he gender identity of transgender/intersex

inmates will be respected by addressing transgender intersex inmates in gender neutral terms both
in person and in written reports. . . . Staff shall conduct searches of inmates, including transgender
or intersex inmates, in a professional and respectful manner, and in the least intrusive manner
possible, consistent with security needs.”
42.

PCS.001.006(VI)(H)-(I) allows transgender prisoners to “be issued, purchase, and

retain undergarments associated with the identified gender” and to “request to retain personal
property associated with the identified gender[,]” which request “will be processed by the PREA
Institutional Compliance Manager.” PCS.001.006(VI)(A)(3) specifies that “PREA Institutional
Compliance Managers “receive a weekly list of inmates identified as transgender/intersex via
OIT’s PREA Management e-mails.”
43.

Presumably pursuant to this policy, Ms. Doe’s EMR indicates that she is subject to

PREA monitoring and notes in a yes/no fashion her vulnerability to victimization. Upon
information and belief, those notations are not regularly reevaluated or updated through
meaningful, individualized assessments of transgender prisoners’ vulnerability to assault or other
violence. The policy contains no provisions related to any such individualized assessment of
vulnerability or risk. Instead, the entire section entitled “Inmate Safety,” PCS.001.006(VI)(G),
reads as follows: “As with all inmates committed to the custody of the NJDOC, if concerns
regarding a transgender/intersex inmate’s safety are reported, all effective policies that govern
inmate safety are to be implemented.”

12

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 13 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

44.

PCS.001.006(VI)(C) provides a process by which “an inmate [can] request[]

correctional facility housing based on a gender identity that differs from the inmate’s sex[.]” In
such cases, the “facility refer[s] the request to the NJDOC PREA Agency Coordinator to be
scheduled for review by the Central Office level Sexual Assault Advisor Council.” The policy lays
out various factors for consideration of housing assignments for transgender prisoners, which
relevantly include current gender expression but also include irrelevant or inappropriate factors
such as inter alia custody level and sentencing information, criminal history, institutional
disciplinary history, medical and mental health needs/information/status, and likelihood of
perpetrating sexual abuse.
45.

Based on these factors, the Council makes a recommendation regarding gender

identity-based housing, which is forwarded to the correctional facility Institutional Classification
Committee “for consideration when determining the inmate’s housing assignment.” The policy
does not set out timelines, review, or appeal procedures, nor does it specify how the process applies
when the prisoner has already been improperly classified and confined at a facility not matching
her gender identity.
46.

Despite its formal policy, upon information and belief, the NJDOC’s practice has

been and continues to be to house prisoners according to their genitalia only. Upon information
and belief, all women who have penises are assigned to men’s prisons solely on that basis.
47.

Upon information and belief, a significant number of women who are transgender

are currently in NJDOC custody but the NJDOC continues to treat those women as “male” and to
house them in men’s prisons based exclusively on their genital characteristics, even when those
women have explicitly requested a transfer to the women’s prison and/or genital surgery, which it
has been the NJDOC’s general policy and practice not to provide.

13

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 14 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

48.

Upon information and belief, the NJDOC houses only two women who are

transgender at Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women (EMCFW) because they have
undergone genital surgery. 6
49.

The NJDOC’s practice of restricting housing at EMCFW to only those transgender

women who have undergone genital surgery is inconsistent with PREA, the NJDOC’s own policy,
and state and federal law. The practice also violates clear treatment protocols for the treatment of
gender dysphoria and is counter to recommendations of the NCCHC.
50.

By forcing women who are transgender into men’s prisons based solely on their

genital characteristics, NJDOC is subjecting a subset of women to a heightened risk of sexual
violence and ultimately increasingly the likelihood that individuals will engage in self-harm or
otherwise experience the deterioration of their health and well-being.
Ms. Doe’s Request for Transfer to the Women’s Prison
51.

Ms. Doe entered NJDOC custody in March 2018 and was immediately identifiable

as a woman who is transgender on the basis of her records and self-reporting. Nevertheless, she
was processed through the men’s facility at CRAF and never provided with the NJDOC’s formal
policy on Transgender/Intersex Inmates. Ms. Doe only learned about the policy in April 2019,
through undersigned counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey (ACLU-NJ).
52.

Through counsel, on April 29, 2019, pursuant to PCS.001.006, Ms. Doe submitted

to Defendant NJDOC, Defendant Commissioner Hicks, and appropriate staff members a formal
request that she be moved to the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women, in line with her

6

Genital surgery for transgender women includes “surgery to remove [the] testicles (orchiectomy),
create a vagina using penile or colon tissue (vaginoplasty), create a vulva (vulvoplasty), create a
clitoris (clitoroplasty), and create labia (labiaplasty).” Mayo Clinic, Feminizing Surgery (Sept. 26,
2017), https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/feminizing-surgery/about/pac-20385102.
14

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 15 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

gender identity. She stated that, despite her transgender identity, she had been confined solely in
men’s facilities for the past year, with male cellmates, and cited the urgent, ongoing, and
irreparable harms caused by her inappropriate placement at NSP. She asked that the NJDOC render
a final decision on her transfer request pursuant to the policy and take steps to initiate her transfer
to EMCFW no later than May 28, 2019 and asked that her counsel be provided written
confirmation by that date. 7
53.

On May 2, the NJDOC PREA Coordinator responded by email as follows: “NJDOC

is in receipt of your correspondence and will review same.”
54.

No confirmation was provided by May 28, 2019 that the NJDOC had rendered a

final decision pursuant to the policy or that a housing transfer to EMCFW would occur.
Officers’ Retaliatory Assault of Ms. Doe
55.

On May 24, 2019, Ms. Doe was called from her cell at NSP to the “ED Sergeant’s

Office,” into a room she had never before been. NJDOC records reflect that the office did not
contain security or surveillance cameras, which are typically visible to prisoners in other locations
in the prison, including even in attorney visit rooms. Defendants Lt. N.R., Ofc. S.R., and Ofc. J.L.
were in or near the office entrance.
56.

Inside the office, Defendant Lt. N.R. immediately misgendered Ms. Doe, telling

Defendant Ofc. S.R. to “search him.” Ms. Doe responded to Defendant Lt. N.R.’s incorrect use of
pronouns by saying “her.” She then took the position that would allow officers to search her and
Defendant Ofc. S.R. reached his hands around her breasts, which are C-cup size. He began fondling

7

In submitting this request, Ms. Doe has at no point conceded that she considers the factors
enumerated in PCS.001.006 to be appropriate, or non-discriminatory, for decisions about housing
assignments.
15

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 16 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

and massaging her breasts in what Ms. Doe experienced to be a sexual manner and unlike what
she had experienced to constitute an appropriate pat down search for security.
57.

Ms. Doe immediately took a step backward and exclaimed to Defendant Lt. N.R.

that she was being groped. Instead of addressing Defendant Ofc. S.R.’s behavior, Defendant Lt.
N.R. reprimanded Ms. Doe, telling her that she could not move one inch while being searched.
Ms. Doe responded that Defendant Ofc. S.R. was fondling her, not searching her.
58.

As Ms. Doe recalls, Defendant Lt. N.R. said: “Put your hands on the door, search

him again. Him. Notice I said him? You’re a man. You don’t have breasts. This is a male prison.
You’re a he. That’s how we do searches. This is Northern State Prison and that’s how we do it
here.”
59.

Defendant Ofc. S.R. then completed the pat down search of Ms. Doe and she took

a seat in the office. Calmly, she said she would be filing a complaint through the grievance system
about this incident.
60.

As Ms. Doe recalls, in response, Defendant Lt. N.R. said: “You know what else we

do at Northern State Prison?” Then, addressing Defendants Ofc. S.R. and Ofc. J.L., she said, “Go
ahead and show him.” Defendants Lt. N.R., Ofc. S.R., and Ofc. J.L. proceeded to beat Ms. Doe.
61.

Ofc. S.R. punched Ms. Doe in the face. She recalls curling into a fetal position on

the floor and being punched and repeatedly kicked. She was also sprayed in the face with a
chemical agent and struck with an asp baton on the knuckles, right knee, right elbow, and back.
62.

Ms. Doe’s injuries were extensive. Her clothes were spotted with blood and there

was a small pool of blood on the floor. Ms. Doe was eventually handcuffed and removed from the
office into a common area outside of it. She was told to bleed into a trashcan, which she hung her
head over as blood dripped from her nose. Afterward, the medical department staff used seven to

16

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 17 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

eight butterfly stitches to close up a laceration on her elbow. Later, when medical staff visited her
in her cell, Ms. Doe, trained as an EMT, recalls the doctor’s diagnosis as follows: probable broken
nose, fractured jaw, and possible damage to the spine and nerves in the hand.
63.

After she was removed from the common area, Ms. Doe’s movements were all

recorded by handheld camera. Ms. Doe requested that her counsel be notified.
64.

Counsel was not notified by Defendants but did meet with Ms. Doe four days later.

Her knee was still so bruised she could not cross her legs. She had a bruise on her forearm and a
bruise around her elbow that extended about a foot long. Her entire right eye socket, up to her
eyebrow and down to her upper cheekbone, was dark black and purple and the bridge of her nose
was raised and greenish in color.
65.

Ms. Doe was not allowed a shower until May 30, six days after she had been

assaulted. The chemical agent remained on her skin and in her hair for almost a week.
66.

Ms. Doe continues to have nightmares in which she relives the assault, often waking

her up in the middle of the night.
Ms. Doe’s Pretextual Disciplinary Charge and Adjudication
67.

While at NSP, Ms. Doe never saw a use of force report or received any information

that Defendants Lt. N.R., Ofc. S.R., and Ofc. J.L. were held to account for assaulting her when she
corrected Defendant Lt. N.R.’s misgendering of her with male pronouns, complained about
Defendant Ofc. S.R. groping her breasts, and said she would be filing a grievance.
68.

Instead, immediately following the assault, Ms. Doe was charged with disciplinary

offenses under N.J.A.C. 10A:4-4.1: Prohibited Act *.002, assault on any person, and Prohibited
Act 306, conduct which disrupts or interferes with the security or orderly running of the
correctional facility. In the disciplinary charging documents, Defendant Ofc. S.R. reported that,

17

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 18 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

“After completing a pat frisk of i/m Doe he became combative and struck me in the face with a
close fist.” Ms. Doe was placed in prehearing detention in conditions of isolation.
69.

While in isolation, Ms. Doe repeatedly asked to speak with her attorney but was

repeatedly denied. She had difficulty receiving her hormone medications. Any time she left the
unit, she was strip searched by male officers.
70.

From that date, May 24, until July 29, Ms. Doe was confined in conditions of

isolation, or solitary confinement, where most days she spent fewer than 30 minutes outside of her
cell.
71.

On the morning of May 29, counsel for Ms. Doe wrote by email to NJDOC staff,

including Defendant Commissioner Hicks, asking for an update on Ms. Doe’s housing transfer
request and, to the extent a decision had been made, for documentation of the review and decision.
72.

By separate email to the same staff members, including Defendant Commissioner

Hicks, counsel for Ms. Doe wrote the following:
As you know, the ACLU of New Jersey represents [Sonia Doe],
SBI# [ ]. This is the second of three emails I am sending you this
morning.
[Assistant Superintendent], I spoke with you by phone on multiple
occasions yesterday and in person at 3pm before my attorney visit
with Ms. [Doe]. When Ms. [Doe] finally arrived in the visit area at
or around 3:50pm, I asked the sergeant please to contact you.
Unfortunately, I was told neither you nor another person from NSP
administration was still available to speak with me. I also tried
calling you this morning shortly after 10am but was told you were
unavailable.
As I stated in person, on behalf of my client I hereby request that I
be permitted to appear as counsel for Ms. [Doe] in her Courtline
adjudication. While I recognize that prisoners are typically limited
to counsel substitute, this disciplinary charge is inextricably
intertwined with the ACLU of New Jersey’s representation of Ms.
[Doe] and her identity as a transgender woman. Given that context
and the related legal claims, counsel substitute is wholly insufficient

18

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 19 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

to ensure Ms. [Doe]’s due process and other rights. I therefore
request that you allow me to continue to serve as Ms. [Doe]’s
counsel when she appears before the disciplinary hearing officer.
I understand that Ms. [Doe] may have her hearing as soon as today.
Ms. [Doe] hereby waives any objection to a short delay of that
hearing should Northern State Prison or NJDOC need additional
time to consider her request for counsel. However, counsel requires
no delay and can be prepared to appear before Courtline on short
notice.
73.

On the afternoon of May 29, the Assistant Superintendent replied to the group,

including Defendant Commissioner Hicks, as follows: “I am sorry for the late response, I was at a
classification meeting. Your request to be present during the disciplinary hearing is denied.”
74.

On May 31, the Director of the NJDOC Office of Legal and Regulatory Affairs

replied to counsel’s other email, with copies to the same group of recipients, including Defendant
Commissioner Hicks, as follows: “Please be advised that no decision has been made at this time.
I will note that the recent allegation of assault on staff by Inmate [Doe] has delayed the process. In
any event, upon adjudication of the attendant disciplinary charges, the matter will be considered
by the Advisory Council and notification will be provided in accordance with PCS.001.006.”
75.

During the first week of June, Defendant Russell spoke to Ms. Doe a number of

times through her cell door to request a statement. Ms. Doe said she wished to and was attempting
to discuss with her counsel. On June 6 or 7, Defendant Russell told her that if she did not submit
a statement, her case would be decided based only on the evidence against her.
76.

While Defendant NJDOC did not permit Ms. Doe access to her attorney, it provided

counsel substitute. Counsel substitutes are other prisoners with some knowledge of the disciplinary
process, but no professional training as a lawyer, who can assist prisoners in the disciplinary
adjudication process upon request. Ms. Doe, through counsel substitute, submitted a four-page
handwritten statement describing how she had been assaulted by Defendants Lt. N.R., Ofc. S.R.

19

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 20 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

and Ofc. J.L. on May 24. At the start, she explained that her request to have her attorney at the
ACLU-NJ present for the hearing had been denied.
77.

On June 13, Ms. Doe handwrote a statement of mitigation, which her counsel

substitute said he was submitting to Defendant Russell, in which she made the following plea:
Ms. Russell and Courtline personnel,
As you and the D.O.C. know I am transgender. I have successfully
and passably lived as a woman for over 15 years, and been on female
hormones just as long. Also, the diagnosis of Gender Identity
Disorder or Gender Dysphoria has been recorded in my EMR
[electronic medical record] for an equal length of time. In addition,
my drivers license also says (f) female.
Today I ask for leniency in all it[s] forms. I am also asking that if I
am found guilty of some kind of admin charge that the punishment
imposed not be Ad-Seg (AKA solitary confinement)
Both science and recent statistics have proven that trans persons are
much more vulnerable to the negative and harmfu[l] effects of AdSeg than the general prison population. In fact at this moment there
is legislation in progress to prohibit trans persons from being
subjected to any form of ad-seg or solitary confinement. Again I
would like to request the services of my attorney given the context
of these proceedings.
Please take this statement under serious consideration.
Thank you
– [Sonia Doe]
78.

On June 14, Ms. Doe was afforded a limited ability to confront the witnesses against

her, Defendants Lt. N.R., Ofc. S.R. and Ofc. J.L. She was placed in a cage approximately four feet
by four feet on each side and six feet high. She was handcuffed and the cuffs were attached to a
belly chain so tightly that they were plastered to her stomach. She was not allowed to take notes.
79.

Under the terms of the disciplinary process, Ms. Doe’s counsel substitute was

permitted to submit questions to Defendant Russell to ask during confrontation, in Defendant

20

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 21 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

Russell’s discretion. Neither Ms. Doe nor her counsel substitute were permitted to ask questions
or follow-up questions of the witnesses directly.
80.

Ms. Doe had asked her counsel substitute to submit a number of questions related

to her identity as a woman who is transgender, including questions asking explicitly about
misgendering and groping by Defendants Lt. N.R. and Ofc. S.R., respectively. However, counsel
substitute submitted just two questions related to her identity. First, was the person aware that she
identified as female and was transgender? Second, prior to the assault, was the person aware of an
NJDOC policy on searching transgender prisoners?
81.

For each of Defendants Lt. N.R., Ofc. S.R. and Ofc. J.L.’s questioning, Defendant

Russell refused to ask the two questions related to transgender identity. Defendant Russell deemed
those “irrelevant” despite the fact that she knew or should have known Ms. Doe’s transgender
identity was key to both her defense and her request for mitigation: Ms. Doe had submitted
statements to Defendant Russell clarifying the assault occurred when she asserted her rights and
status as a transgender woman and seeking mitigation because of the risks to transgender people
of being placed in conditions of isolation in administrative segregation.
82.

In the disciplinary charging documents, Defendant Ofc. S.R. had stated that Ms.

Doe “struck me in the face with a close fist.” During the confrontation, Ms. Doe recalls that the
only injuries Defendant Ofc. S.R. claimed he suffered were a “right hand contusion.” 8 In Ms.
Doe’s statement to Defendant Russell, she had explained that, in fact, Defendant Ofc. S.R. had
punched her in the face.

8

Counsel substitute’s June 17 statement of the case, submitted to Defendant Russell before her
final adjudication, also notes that Defendant Ofc. S.R. responded that the only injury he suffered
was a right hand contusion.
21

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 22 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

83.

On June 20, Defendant Russell found Ms. Doe guilty of the assault and disruption

charges and imposed aggregate disciplinary sanctions of 270 days, or nine months, in
administrative segregation, with nine months loss of commutation and 60 days loss of recreation
privileges.
84.

On June 24, Ms. Doe’s counsel substitute filed an administrative appeal. On June

28, Defendant Nogan, by and through his designee, denied the appeal and upheld Defendant
Russell’s guilt adjudication and sanctions in full, constituting a final agency decision. 9
85.

Under NJDOC’s regulations, N.J.A.C. 10A:4-11.4, Defendant Nogan had “the

option to request a total or partial reinvestigation of the charge or proceedings of the hearing.”
Upon information and belief, no such request was made and no further investigation conducted.
86.

In deciding the appeal, Defendant Nogan, by and through his designee, either did

or should have reviewed the entire record of the adjudication, which did or should have included
Ms. Doe’s statement of the May 24 incident itself and her statement of mitigation in light of her
transgender identity. Nevertheless, the Disposition of Disciplinary Appeal Form stated: “There
was compliance with the New Jersey Administrative Code 10A which prescribes procedural
guards on inmate disicpline. The sanction of the hearing officer is appropriate, therfore no leniency
will be granted.”
Ms. Doe’s Placement in Solitary Confinement
87.

From May 24, when she was placed in disciplinary detention, through July 29, Ms.

Doe was subject to prolonged solitary confinement. She was isolated to a cell for almost 24 hours
a day on average, and well more than 20 hours a day, in retaliation for her asserting her rights as a

9

The appeal form is signed and dated June 26 and marked delivered to Ms. Doe on June 28.
22

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 23 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

woman to be free from misgendering and groping. The New Jersey Legislature recently defined
isolated confinement as more than 20 hours a day in a prison cell.
88.

Data show that transgender prisoners are especially vulnerable to the harms of

solitary confinement, including because they are more likely to be denied medical care, are at
greater risk of assault and harassment by correctional staff, and are at greater risk of suicidal
ideation and suicide attempts. 10
89.

Even for the general prison population, it is well documented that solitary

confinement, even for relatively short periods, causes extreme psychological, physiological and
emotional damage. 11 An article in the American Journal of Public Health noted: “Nearly every
scientific inquiry into the effects of solitary confinement over the past 150 years has concluded
that subjecting an individual to more than 10 days of involuntary segregation results in a distinct
set of emotional, cognitive, social, and physical pathologies.” 12 A report by the Vera Institute of
Justice described the “litany of negative impacts, including: hypersensitivity to stimuli, distortions
and hallucinations, increased anxiety and nervousness, diminished impulse control, severe and
chronic depression, appetite loss and weight loss, heart palpitations, talking to oneself, problems
sleeping, nightmares, self-mutilation, difficulties with thinking, concentration, and memory, and
lower levels of brain function, including a decline in EEG activity after only seven days in

10

See “Testimony of Organizations Supporting LGBT Equality,” Senate Judiciary Subcommittee
on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights (June 19, 2012),
https://www.lambdalegal.org/blog/dangers-solitary-confinement-transgender-prisonersdetainees.
11
See, e.g., Stuart Grassian, Psychiatric Effects of Solitary Confinement, 22 WASH. U. J.L. & POL’Y
325 (2006); Craig Haney, Mental Health issues in Long-Term Solitary and “Supermax”
Confinement, 49 CRIME & DELINQ. 124, 130, 134 (2003).
12
David H. Cloud, Ernest Drucker, Angela Browne, and Jim Parsons, “Public Health and Solitary
Confinement in the United States,” American Journal of Public Health, 105, no.1 (2015): 18-26.

23

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 24 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

segregation.” 13 Indeed, survivors of solitary confinement in NJDOC facilities recently testified
before the New Jersey Senate and Assembly and called their experiences “torture.” 14
90.

In 2011, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture warned that prolonged

solitary confinement can amount to torture. Prolonged solitary confinement is defined as 22 hours
or more per day in a cell, for more than 15 consecutive days. In 2015, the United Nations General
Assembly adopted the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, also known as the
Nelson Mandela Rules, which uses the same definition. Rule 43 reads: “In no circumstances may
restrictions or disciplinary sanctions amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment. The following practices, in particular, shall be prohibited: . . . prolonged
solitary confinement.”
91.

On June 20, the same day that Ms. Doe, a transgender woman, was sanctioned with

270 days of administrative segregation, the New Jersey Senate and Assembly passed a bill that
would make such a sanction illegal, so long as administrative segregation continued to be in
conditions of isolation as Ms. Doe experienced.
92.

With narrow exceptions that do not apply to Ms. Doe’s case, the Isolated

Confinement Restriction Act (A314/S3261) prohibits prolonged isolation in state prisons and
county jails and ensures members of vulnerable groups are never placed in isolated confinement

13

Alison Shames et al. Solitary Confinement: Common Misconceptions and Emerging Safe
Alternatives. New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice, 2015.
14
See Joe Hernandez, “New Jersey considers restricting the use of solitary confinement” WHYY
(June 6, 2018), https://whyy.org/articles/n-j-lawmakers-consider-clamping-down-on-solitaryconfinement-in-prisons-and-jails/; see also Star Ledger Staff, “Torture does happen in N.J.'s
prison, former inmates say. It's called solitary confinement.” Star Ledger (April 14, 2019),
https://expo.nj.com/opinion/g66l-2019/04/02ee5d48a2717/torture-does-happen-in-njs-prisonformer-inmates-say-its-called-solitary-confinement.html.
24

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 25 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

for any period of time. The bill defines isolated confinement in an NJDOC facility as isolation for
more than 20 hours a day and includes transgender people in the definition of vulnerable groups.
93.

On July 11, Governor Murphy signed the bill into law, restricting Defendant

NJDOC’s and New Jersey counties’ ability to use of isolated confinement, effective as of August
1, 2020. Meanwhile, Defendant NJDOC kept a transgender woman in isolation in a men’s prison
for approximately 67 days, as disciplinary punishment for claiming her identity and right to live
and be recognized as a woman.
94.

While in isolation, Ms. Doe was often forced to miss or take incomplete dosages of

her hormone therapy, as well as other medications, which did exacerbate or risk exacerbating her
gender dysphoria. She became anxious, depressed, and even more fearful for her safety.
95.

Ms. Doe’s experience of isolation – separately and together with the fact that she

was still recovering from bodily injury sustained during the assault and knew she was charged as
pretext and retaliation – caused her pain, suffering, emotional distress, fear, anguish, and
humiliation.
Ms. Doe’s Release to General Population Following Court Order
96.

On July 25, 2019, through undersigned counsel, Ms. Doe appealed the NJDOC’s

final agency decision to the Superior Court, Appellate Division. On the same day, she sought a
stay of the decision from the NJDOC itself pursuant to R. 2:9-7, directed to Defendant Nogan’s
designee who had denied her pro se disciplinary appeal. The stay request was based on the fact
that Ms. Doe had and would continue to suffer irreparable physiological, psychological, and
emotional harm in administrative segregation, harms to which she is particularly vulnerable as a
transgender woman.

25

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 26 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

97.

On July 26, Defendant Nogan, by and through his designee, denied Ms. Doe’s

request for a stay.
98.

On July 29, Ms. Doe, though counsel, applied for permission to seek emergent relief

from the Appellate Division and request a stay of the NJDOC’s decision. The same day, the
Appellate Division granted her permission and also ordered a temporary stay of the NJDOC’s
decision.
99.

Pursuant to the Appellate Division’s Order, Ms. Doe was released from isolation in

administrative segregation on the evening of July 29. She was transported from NSP in Newark
and to SWSP in Bridgeton, where she was eventually placed in general population.
100.

On August 5, the Appellate Division granted Ms. Doe’s relief, staying the decision

during the pendency of the appeal, and subsequently set an accelerated schedule for the appeal.
Accordingly, Ms. Doe currently remains in general population at SWSP, where she has been
assigned a male cellmate.
Ms. Doe’s Ongoing Experience of Discrimination
101.

Since her arrival at SWSP on the night of July 29, Ms. Doe has been subject to

verbal and sexual harassment by male prisoners and/or male corrections officers every day. The
majority of the comments made by prisoners or officers relate to her breasts, although she is also
called slurs such as “f*ggot.” On one occasion when she was walking down the hallway, she
overheard three officers talking about her, saying: “That’s the one they call [Sonia].” “Yeah, did
you see her titties?” “No, his titties.”
102.

On July 31, as Ms. Doe was walking to get her hormone therapy, male prisoners in

the unit taunted her and said “look at them titties.”

26

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 27 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

103.

On August 1, Ms. Doe spoke with a psychologist. Ms. Doe identified herself as

transgender, asked to be referred to using female pronouns, and inquired whether the psychologist
was aware of the NJDOC policy on transgender prisoners. The psychologist said she was aware
such a policy existed but said the unofficial policy at SWSP, as she understood it, was that male
pronouns would be used if a prisoner was “anatomically male.” The psychologist said that
prisoners had asked to be referred to by female pronouns in the past but that those requests had
been denied because it was a men’s prison.
104.

The same day, across the hall from her cell, a male prisoner pushed himself up

against the small window of his cell. He waved at Ms. Doe to get her attention. When he saw her
watching, he pulled out his penis and began masturbating while staring at her.
105.

Ms. Doe’s male cellmate and other male prisoners on the tier saw and/or were told

about this incident and understood it was directed at Ms. Doe. On August 8, the man again publicly
masturbated while staring at her.
106.

On August 2, while Ms. Doe was waiting on the dinner line, a male prisoner

commented repeatedly on her body and said “booty booty booty, nice booty” and “hey baby.”
Meanwhile, officers laughed at the comments and made purring noises.
107.

On August 3, on her way back from the lunch line, a male prisoner pointed to Ms.

Doe and said, “What the fuck is that?” Another called her “fried green tomatoes,” which Ms. Doe
took to mean she was considered “fresh meat” and vulnerable to, and even potentially being
threatened with, attack. A third male prisoner approached her and said, “Mmm, mmm. I’d fuck the
shit out of that.”
108.

As with everything else about her placement in men’s prisons, these incidents at

SWSP cause her anxiety, depression, humiliation, self-loathing and, at times, even feelings of self-

27

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 28 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

harm. These daily reminders that the NJDOC considers and treats Ms. Doe like a man make her
fear for her safety, exacerbate her gender dysphoria, and reinforce her urgent need to be transferred
to the women’s prison, in line with her female identity.
109.

Defendants NJDOC and Commissioner Hicks have not provided a final decision or

interim update since May 31 as to Ms. Doe’s request for a transfer to Edna Mahan Correctional
Facility for Women. Defendants have provided no assurance that they are considering the urgent
nature of the request or the ongoing and irreparable harm they are causing this woman by confining
her in prisons for and with men.
110.

Plaintiff Sonia Doe brings the claims in her Complaint accordingly.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF THE LAW AGAINST DISCRIMINATION
(discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression)
(against all Defendants)

111.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

112.

The New Jersey Law Against Discrimination provides:

herein.

All persons shall have the opportunity to obtain employment, and to
obtain all the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges
of any place of public accommodation, publicly assisted housing
accommodation, and other real property without discrimination
because of race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry, age, marital
status, affectional or sexual orientation, familial status, disability,
nationality, sex, gender identity or expression or source of lawful
income used for rental or mortgage payments, subject only to
conditions and limitations applicable alike to all persons. This
opportunity is recognized as and declared to be a civil right.
113.

The Law Against Discrimination mandates that when the use of a public

accommodation “is in its nature reasonably restricted exclusively to individuals of one sex, . . .
individuals shall be admitted based on their gender identity or expression.”

28

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 29 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

114.

NJDOC facilities, including but not limited to the Central Reception and

Assignment Facility, New Jersey State Prison, Northern State Prison, and South Woods State
Prison, constitute a place of public accommodation within the meaning of the Law Against
Discrimination.
115.

Defendants participated in, condoned, ratified, perpetuated, aided and abetted direct

actions that discriminated against Ms. Doe on the basis of her gender identity or expression in
places of public accommodation in violation of the Law Against Discrimination, including without
limitation by consistently misgendering her by referring to her as male and using male pronouns,
by denying her female undergarments and female commissary items, by verbally harassing her on
the basis of her gender identity and expression, and by otherwise failing to respect her gender
identity and expression. This discrimination and harassment have been so severe and pervasive
that it constitutes a hostile and abusive environment in violation of the Law Against
Discrimination.
116.

Additionally, by classifying NJDOC facilities as men’s and women’s facilities but

refusing entry to the women’s facility to people including Ms. Doe whose gender identity or
expression is female, Defendants have violated the Law Against Discrimination.
117.

Ms. Doe is under the care, custody, and control of Defendants such that the impact

of their discriminatory conduct was magnified.
118.

Defendants’ acts or omissions were motivated by actual malice or accompanied by

a wanton and willful disregard of individuals who foreseeably might be harmed by those acts or
omissions.

29

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 30 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

119.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ actions, Ms. Doe has already

suffered extensive injury and is entitled to compensatory damages. She is also entitled to punitive
damages based on Defendants’ egregious conduct.
120.

Unless the Court enjoins Defendants from continuing to discriminate against Ms.

Doe on the basis of her gender identity and expression, she will suffer irreparable harm.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF THE LAW AGAINST DISCRIMINATION
(discrimination on the basis of sex)
(against all Defendants)
121.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

herein.
122.

The New Jersey Law Against Discrimination which provides:
All persons shall have the opportunity to obtain employment, and to
obtain all the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges
of any place of public accommodation, publicly assisted housing
accommodation, and other real property without discrimination
because of race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry, age, marital
status, affectional or sexual orientation, familial status, disability,
nationality, sex, gender identity or expression or source of lawful
income used for rental or mortgage payments, subject only to
conditions and limitations applicable alike to all persons. This
opportunity is recognized as and declared to be a civil right.

123.

NJDOC facilities, including but not limited to the Central Reception and

Assignment Facility, New Jersey State Prison, Northern State Prison, and South Woods State
Prison, constitute a place of public accommodation within the meaning of the Law Against
Discrimination.
124.

Defendants participated in, condoned, ratified, perpetuated, aided and abetted direct

actions that discriminated against Ms. Doe on the basis of her sex in places of public

30

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 31 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

accommodation in violation of the Law Against Discrimination, including without limitation by
refusing to house her at the women’s prison because of her sex assigned at birth, because she has
not undergone genital surgery, and because she is transgender, and by otherwise treating her
differently than other women in NJDOC custody solely because she is transgender. Defendants
engaged in sex stereotyping in their treatment of Ms. Doe, including but not limited to by denying
her female undergarments and female commissary items and by explicitly telling her she did not
have breasts and that she was a man.
125.

Defendants created an environment for Ms. Doe in men’s prisons that is

discriminatory based on sex, and the harassment and discrimination has been so severe and
pervasive that it constitutes a hostile and abusive environment in violation of the Law Against
Discrimination.
126.

Ms. Doe is under the care, custody, and control of Defendants such that the impact

of their discriminatory conduct was magnified.
127.

Defendants’ acts or omissions were motivated by actual malice or accompanied by

a wanton and willful disregard of individuals who foreseeably might be harmed by those acts or
omissions.
128.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ actions, Ms. Doe has already

suffered extensive injury and is entitled to compensatory damages. She is also entitled to punitive
damages based on Defendants’ egregious conduct.
129.

Unless the Court enjoins Defendants from continuing to discriminate against Ms.

Doe on the basis of her sex, she will suffer irreparable harm.

31

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 32 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I, PARAGRAPH 1 OF
THE NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION
(Equal Protection)
(against all Defendants)
(brought directly under the New Jersey Constitution
and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c))
130.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

herein.
131.

The actions of Defendants described herein violated the right to equal protection of

the law, in violation of Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution.
132.

By treating Ms. Doe differently than other women in NJDOC custody, inter alia by

consistently misgendering her, by refusing to house her at the women’s prison, by denying her
access to female undergarments and commissary items, and by otherwise discriminating against
Ms. Doe because she is transgender, Defendants deprived her of equal protection of the law.
133.

Ms. Doe is under the care, custody, and control of Defendants such that the impact

of their discriminatory conduct was magnified.
134.

Defendants’ acts or omissions were motivated by actual malice or accompanied by

a wanton and willful disregard of individuals who foreseeably might be harmed by those acts or
omissions.
135.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ actions, Ms. Doe has already

suffered extensive injury and is entitled to compensatory damages. She is also entitled to punitive
damages based on Defendants’ egregious conduct.
136.

Unless the Court enjoins Defendants from continuing to treat Ms. Doe differently

from other women because she is transgender, she will suffer irreparable harm.

32

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 33 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I, PARAGRAPH 1 OF
THE NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION
(Right to Live Freely and to Free Expression as a Woman)
(against all Defendants)
(brought directly under the New Jersey Constitution
and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c))
137.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

herein.
138.

Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution provides, “All persons are by

nature free and independent, and have certain natural and unalienable rights, among which are
those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property,
and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.”
139.

Under Article I, Paragraph 1, Ms. Doe has a constitutional right to live in line with

her gender identity and expression and therefore to live and express herself freely as a woman.
140.

By continuously misgendering her, inter alia by housing her solely in men’s

prisons, referring to her as male, using male pronouns to address her, and sometimes even
explicitly telling her she is a man, Defendants are forcing Ms. Doe to live as a man and violating
her right to live and express herself freely as a woman.
141.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ actions, Ms. Doe has already

suffered extensive injury and is entitled to compensatory damages. She is also entitled to punitive
damages based on Defendants’ egregious conduct.
142.

Unless the Court enjoins Defendants from continuing to force her to live as a man,

she will suffer irreparable harm.

33

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 34 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I, PARAGRAPH 12 OF
THE NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION
(Failure to Protect)
(against all Defendants)
(brought directly under the New Jersey Constitution
and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c))
143.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

herein.
144.

Article I, Paragraph 12 of the New Jersey Constitution provides that “cruel and

unusual punishments shall not be inflicted.” Under Article I, Paragraph 12, prisoners have a
constitutional right to safe and humane conditions of confinement.
145.

Defendant NJDOC and NJDOC officials and staff, including without limitation

Defendants Commissioner Hicks and Administrator Nogan, had a constitutional obligation to
protect Ms. Doe from being assaulted or otherwise subject to violence in prison, and Ms. Doe had
a constitutional right to be protected from assaults and other violence in prison. Upon the direction
of and/or with knowledge by Defendants NJDOC, Commissioner Hicks, and Administrator
Nogan, Ms. Doe was confined in conditions posing a substantial risk of harm, including but not
limited to being confined in men’s prisons, being assigned male cellmates, being denied female
undergarments and commissary items, being subject to repeated, prolonged, and/or extreme sexual
harassment, and being consistently and intentionally misgendered by these Defendants and by
correctional staff under their supervision and control.
146.

Despite being on notice that Ms. Doe is a woman, these Defendants failed to

perform a sufficient or meaningful individualized assessment of Ms. Doe’s risk of assault, her
views of her own safety were not taken into account and/or were repeatedly ignored, and, despite
the notation of her risk in her Electronic Medical Record and her purported designation for PREA

34

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 35 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

monitoring, sufficient or meaningful precautions were not taken to prevent her from harassment
and assault, despite the obviousness of the risk.
147.

Additionally, Defendant NJDOC and NJDOC officials and staff, including without

limitation Defendants Commissioner Hicks and Administrator Nogan, knew and/or should have
known that housing Ms. Doe with male prisoners placed her at a substantial risk of harm, including
because Ms. Doe requested a transfer to Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women pursuant
to NJDOC Policy, citing the risk of irreparable harm. Despite this knowledge, these Defendants
failed to transfer Ms. Doe to the women’s prison.
148.

As a direct result of the refusal to transfer Ms. Doe to the women’s prison, Ms. Doe

was subjected to physical assault by Defendants Lt. N.R., Ofc. S.R., and Ofc. J.L., resulting in
extensive physical injury.
149.

By failing properly to investigate Ms. Doe’s assault by guards and/or by instead

adjudicating her guilty of disciplinary offenses, Defendants Administrator Nogan and Disciplinary
Hearing Officer Russell ratified the conduct of Defendants Lt. N.R., Ofc. S.R., and Ofc. J.L.; sent
a signal to these Defendants, other correctional staff, and other prisoners that assault, other
violence, and harassment of Ms. Doe on account of her gender identity or expression would be
met with impunity; and subjected Ms. Doe to additional risk of serious harm.
150.

Defendants’ acts or omissions were motivated by actual malice or accompanied by

a wanton and willful disregard of individuals who foreseeably might be harmed by those acts or
omissions.
151.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ actions, Ms. Doe has already

suffered extensive injury and is entitled to compensatory damages. She is also entitled to punitive
damages based on Defendants’ egregious conduct.

35

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 36 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

152.

Unless the Court enjoins Defendants from continuing to subject Ms. Doe to or

otherwise allow these conditions of confinement, she will suffer irreparable harm.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I, PARAGRAPH 12 OF
THE NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION
(No Cruel and Unusual Punishment)
(against all Defendants)
(brought directly under the New Jersey Constitution
and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c))
153.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

herein.
154.

Article I, Paragraph 12 of the New Jersey Constitution provides that “cruel and

unusual punishments shall not be inflicted.” Under Article I, Paragraph 12, prisoners have a
constitutional right to safe and humane conditions of confinement.
155.

Defendants participated in, condoned, ratified, perpetuated, aided and abetted direct

actions that resulted in the use of unreasonable and excessive force by Defendants Lt. N.R., Ofc.
S.R., and Ofc. J.L., without legal cause, in violation of Ms. Doe’s rights under Article I, Paragraph
12. This force was objectively unreasonable and was undertaken intentionally, with malice and
knowing disregard for or deliberate indifference to Ms. Doe’s clearly established rights. This force
was undertaken because she asserted her rights and identity as a woman and not for any legitimate
penological purpose.
156.

Defendants participated in, condoned, ratified, perpetuated, aided and abetted direct

actions that caused Ms. Doe to be placed in administrative segregation in conditions of prolonged
isolation, wherein she was confined to her cell for more than 20 hours per day, because she asserted
her rights and identity as a woman.

36

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 37 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

157.

Defendants also participated in, condoned, ratified, perpetuated, aided and abetted

direct actions that caused Ms. Doe to be subject to conditions of confinement that included
repeated, prolonged, and/or extreme sexual harassment, including without limitation male
prisoners exposing their penises to her and/or masturbating for her to see.
158.

Defendants’ acts or omissions were motivated by actual malice or accompanied by

a wanton and willful disregard of individuals who foreseeably might be harmed by those acts or
omissions.
159.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ actions, Ms. Doe has already

suffered extensive injury, including bodily injury, pain, suffering, emotional distress, fear, anguish,
and humiliation, and is entitled to compensatory damages. She is also entitled to punitive damages
based on Defendants’ egregious conduct.
160.

Unless the Court enjoins Defendants from repeating their use of unreasonable and

excessive force against Ms. Doe or, should she be again subject to administrative segregation, from
subjecting her to conditions of isolation, or otherwise allowing these conditions of confinement,
she will suffer irreparable harm.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I, PARAGRAPHS 1, 6 AND, 18 OF
THE NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION
(Retaliation)
(against all Defendants)
(brought directly under the New Jersey Constitution
and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c))
161.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

herein.

37

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 38 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

162.

Article I, Paragraph 6 of the New Jersey Constitution provides, “Every person may

freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects. . .” and “[n]o law shall be passed to
restrain or abridge the liberty of speech. . . .”
163.

Article I, Paragraph 18 of the New Jersey Constitution provides the right “to

petition for redress of grievances.”
164.

Under Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution, Ms. Doe has a

constitutional right to live in line with her gender identity and expression and therefore to live
freely as a woman.
165.

Ms. Doe also has a constitutional right to speak freely about her gender identity

and expression and to petition Defendants, formally or informally, to treat her like a woman,
including but not limited to requesting that she be transferred to the women’s prison, correcting
NJDOC officials and staff when they use incorrect pronouns for her, objecting to being improperly
searched by male guards, and stating her intention to file a grievance about misconduct related to
her treatment as a woman who is transgender.
166.

Defendants have a constitutional duty not to retaliate against Ms. Doe for the

exercise of her rights under Article I, Paragraphs 1, 6 or 18.
167.

Because Ms. Doe sought to live in line with her gender identity and expression,

spoke freely about her gender identity and expression, and petitioned Defendants to treat her as a
woman, she suffered numerous adverse actions, including but not limited to physical assault,
disciplinary charges, conditions of prolonged solitary confinement, and loss of commutation time
and other privileges. Ms. Doe’s constitutionally protected conduct was a substantial or motivating
factor in Defendants’ decision to take these adverse actions.

38

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 39 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

168.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ retaliation, Ms. Doe has already

suffered extensive injury and is entitled to compensatory damages. She is also entitled to punitive
damages based on Defendants’ egregious conduct.
169.

Unless the Court enjoins Defendants from continuing to retaliate against Ms. Doe

for being a woman and demanding she be treated like a woman, she will suffer irreparable harm.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I, PARAGRAPH 1 OF
THE NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION
(Due Process Related to Housing)
(against Defendants NJDOC, Commissioner Hicks, and Administrator Nogan)
(brought directly under the New Jersey Constitution
and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c))
170.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

herein.
171.

The actions of Defendants NJDOC, Commissioner Hicks, and Administrator

Nogan described herein deprived Ms. Doe of procedural due process, in violation of Article I,
paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution.
172.

Defendants knew or should have known that Ms. Doe is transgender and therefore

subject to PCS.001.006, Policy on Transgender/Intersex Inmates, but never provided her with the
Policy or told her that she had any rights available pursuant to it to seek review of her placement
in men’s prisons. She did not discover such a policy existed until over a year after her entry into
NJDOC custody, when her counsel provided her with it.
173.

Despite Ms. Doe’s request, through counsel, that she be transferred to the women’s

prison pursuant PCS.001.006, and her statement that the harms caused by her inappropriate
placement in a men’s prison were urgent, ongoing, and irreparable, Defendants failed to transfer
Ms. Doe to the women’s prison and failed to apprise her or her counsel of their decision-making

39

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 40 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

or any process by which to appeal the delay or final decision, to the extent such decision had been
made.
174.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ failure to inform Ms. Doe of the

policy, failure to transfer Ms. Doe, and failure to apprise her or her counsel of any recourse
available to her, Ms. Doe has already suffered extensive injury and is entitled to compensatory
damages.
175.

Unless the Court orders Defendants to transfer Ms. Doe to the women’s prison, she

will continue to suffer irreparable harm.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I, PARAGRAPH 1 OF
THE NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION
(Due Process Related to Disciplinary Charge and Adjudication)
(against all Defendants)
(brought directly under the New Jersey Constitution
and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c))
176.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

herein.
177.

Defendants participated in, condoned, ratified, perpetuated, aided and abetted direct

actions that caused Ms. Doe to be charged with assault on a corrections officer and adjudicated
guilty, when in fact Ms. Doe herself was assaulted because of her female and transgender identity,
which deprived Ms. Doe of procedural due process under Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey
Constitution.
178.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ charging and adjudication, Ms. Doe

was confined in conditions of isolation, or solitary confinement, for 67 days and is entitled to
compensatory damages, including inter alia for physical pain, suffering, and emotional distress.

40

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 41 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I, PARAGRAPH 1 OF
THE NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION
(Due Process Related to Right to Counsel)
(against Defendants NJDOC, Commissioner Hicks, Administrator Nogan,
and Disciplinary Hearing Officer Russell)
(brought directly under the New Jersey Constitution
and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c))
179.

The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are incorporated as if fully set forth

herein.
180.

By forcing Ms. Doe’s to proceed without counsel in her disciplinary adjudication,

Defendants NJDOC, Commissioner Hicks, Administrator Nogan and Disciplinary Hearing Officer
Russell deprived Ms. Doe of procedural due process under Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey
Constitution.
181.

These Defendants participated in, condoned, ratified, perpetuated, aided and

abetted the denial of Ms. Doe’s request for the assistance of undersigned counsel in her disciplinary
proceedings. They denied Ms. Doe counsel despite being informed by her, through counsel, that
the disciplinary charge was inextricably intertwined with counsel’s representation of Ms. Doe and
her identity as a transgender woman and despite her advisement that, in light of that context and
related legal claims, counsel substitute was wholly insufficient to ensure Ms. Doe’s due process
and other rights.
182.

The denial of counsel deprived Ms. Doe of a fair hearing in her disciplinary

adjudication and unconstitutionally limited the scope of her attorney-client communications.
183.

As a direct and proximal result of these Defendants’ denial of counsel, and/or their

ratification thereof, Ms. Doe was forced to proceed pro se, only with another prisoner as counsel
substitute, which delayed the adjudication, during which time she was held in conditions of
isolation, or solitary confinement, in prehearing detention.

41

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 42 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

184.

As a direct and proximal result of Defendants’ denial of counsel, Ms. Doe was

unable to fully vindicate her rights, confront the evidence against her, and present a defense and
was therefore adjudicated guilty on June 20, 2019, resulting in sanctions of 270 days of
administrative segregation, in addition to loss of commutation time and other privileges.
185.

Ms. Doe is therefore entitled to compensatory damages, including inter alia for

physical pain, suffering, and emotional distress.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants as follows:
(a)

Immediate, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, ordering Defendants not to
discriminate against Ms. Doe on the basis of her gender identity and expression and her
sex, including but not limited to ordering them to:
1) Treat Ms. Doe the same as other women held by the NJDOC;
2) Transfer Ms. Doe to Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women;
3) Use only female pronouns when speaking to or about Ms. Doe;
4) Provide Ms. Doe access to female undergarments and female commissary
items;
5) Except in exigent circumstances, only allow strip searches of Ms. Doe to be
conducted by female correctional officers, never male correctional officers;
6) Train all NJDOC staff on how to appropriately accommodate, treat and
communicate with transgender prisoners and/or prisoners with gender
dysphoria;
7) Discipline all NJDOC staff who fail to appropriately accommodate, treat and
communicate with transgender prisoners and/or prisoners with gender
dysphoria;
8) Ensure Ms. Doe is provided meaningful opportunity for out-of-cell time of at
least four hours or more per day, given her status as a member of a vulnerable
population who should not be subject to isolated confinement; and

42

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 43 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

9) Any further injunctive relief necessary to ensure Ms. Doe’s rights are not
violated.
(b)

Declaratory relief including, but not limited to, a declaration that Defendants have
violated:
1) the Law Against Discrimination by discriminating against Ms. Doe on the basis of
her gender identity and expression;
2) the Law Against Discrimination by discriminating against Ms. Doe on the basis of
her sex;
3) the New Jersey Constitution by treating Ms. Doe differently than all other woman
in NJDOC custody;
4) the New Jersey Constitution by failing to provide procedural due process to Ms.
Doe;
5) the New Jersey Constitution by punishing Ms. Doe cruelly and/or unusually, by
subjecting her to unreasonable and excessive force, and by failing to protect her;
6) the New Jersey Constitution by retaliating against Ms. Doe; and
7) the New Jersey Constitution by failing to respect Ms. Doe’s right to live and express
herself freely as a woman.

(c)

Compensatory damages in an amount and form to be determined at trial, including but
not limited to compensation for:
1) the period(s) during which Ms. Doe was confined in prehearing detention and
administrative segregation in conditions of isolation;
2) Ms. Doe’s pain, suffering, emotional distress, anguish, and humiliation from being
subject to cross-gender strip searches, being denied female undergarments and
commissary items, being consistently verbally and sexually harassed and
misgendered, and otherwise being treated differently than other women in NJDOC
custody; and
3) Ms. Doe’s bodily injury, pain, suffering, emotional distress, fear, anguish, and
humiliation from the May 24, 2019 assault.

(d)

Punitive damages on all claims allowed by law, in an amount to be determined at trial;

(e)

For prejudgment interest at the maximum rate, pursuant to applicable law;

43

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 44 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

(f)

Attorneys’ fees and costs associated with this action, pursuant to the New Jersey Civil
Rights Act, N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(f), and the Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-27.1,
and other relevant authority; and

(g)

Any further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Dated: August 14, 2019
Jeanne LoCicero (024052000)
Tess Borden (260892018)
Alexander Shalom (021162004)
ACLU-NJ Foundation
P.O. Box 32159
89 Market Street, 7th Floor
Newark, NJ 07102
(973) 854-1715
jlocicero@aclu-nj.org
Robyn B. Gigl (013581977)
GLUCK WALRATH LLP
428 River View Plaza
Trenton, NJ 08611
(609) 278-3900
rgigl@glucklaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiff

44

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 45 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff demands trial by jury in this action.
DESIGNATION OF TRIAL COUNSEL
Plaintiff designates Jeanne LoCicero as trial counsel.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO R. 4:5-1
Plaintiff, via counsel, hereby certifies that Ms. Doe’s disciplinary adjudication for the May
24, 2019 assault is the subject of a current appeal before the Superior Court, Appellate Division,
Docket No. A-5101-18 (appeal of final agency decision). The docket is currently under seal,
pending appellant Ms. Doe’s motion to proceed under pseudonym. In the sealed filings, Ms. Doe
is identified by her legal name and is the sole appellant. The New Jersey Department of Corrections
is the sole respondent, as the agency whose final decision is being appealed.
Other than that appeal, plaintiff, via counsel, certifies that there are no other proceedings
or pending related cases arising from the same factual dispute described herein and that the matter
in controversy is not the subject of any other action pending in any other court or a pending
arbitration proceeding, and no other action or arbitration proceeding is contemplated.
Other than the parties set forth in this complaint, the undersigned knows of no other parties
that should be made a part of this lawsuit. In addition, the undersigned recognizes the continuing
obligation to file and serve on all parties and the court an amended certification if there is a change
in the facts stated in this original certification.

Dated: August 14, 2019
Jeanne LoCicero

45

 MER-L-001586-19 08/14/2019 3:11:11 PM Pg 46 of 46 Trans ID: LCV20191434199

VERIFICATION

I, SoniaDoe, herebyaffirm underthepenaltyofperiurythat the factualstatementscontained
inthe

foregoing

Verified

Complaint

are, to the best ofmyrecollection

and belief,

tnue and accurate.

Sonia Doe, a psffidonynn*
*If
verification

the motion
containing

to proceed
my tie

under pseudonym

natne.

46

is denied,

I will

promptly

refilc

and sign a