§ 1983 (Due Process) Tanya Mitchell PSI corporate defendants & Giles County Equitable Relief 3 9 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Due Process) Lucinda Brandon & Tanya Mitchell PSI corporate defendants & Giles County Damages 8 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Due Process) Indya Hilfort CPS corporate defendants & Giles County Equitable Relief 7 42 U.S.C. The claims are summarized below: Count Claim Plaintiffs Defendants Relief 1 RICO Karen McNeil & Lesley Johnson CPS corporate defendants & Patricia McNair Damages 2 RICO Tanya Mitchell PSI corporate defendants & Markeyta Bledsoe Damages 3 RICO Lucinda Brandon PSI corporate defendants & Harriet Thompson Damages 4 RICO Tanya Mitchell PSI corporate defendants & Markeyta Bledsoe Equitable Relief 5 42 U.S.C § 1983 (Due Process) Karen McNeil, Lesley Johnson, & Indya Hilfort CPS corporate defendants & Giles County Damages 6 42 U.S.C. The named Plaintiffs seek to represent a class to obtain damages and injunctive relief on their claims.

Plaintiffs assert constitutional and state law claims against Giles County and Sheriff Kyle Helton. 3 2 and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), and state law claims against the CPS Defendants and the PSI Defendants.

Mitchell’s death on this litigation, as that issue has not been addressed by the parties. The Court’s resolution of the claims herein does not address the effect of Ms. Plaintiffs assert constitutional claims, claims brought under the Racketeer Influenced During the pendency of this litigation, Plaintiff Tanya Mitchell passed away, and Plaintiffs have filed a pending motion to substitute her estate as a party. Plaintiffs Mitchell and Brandon allege they have been supervised by “the PSI Defendants” or “PSI” (Progressive Sentencing, Inc., PSI-Probation II, LLC, PSI-Probation, L.L.C., Tennessee Correctional Services, LLC, Timothy Cook, Markeyta Bledsoe, and Harriet Thompson). Plaintiffs McNeil, Johnson, and Hilfort allege they have been supervised by the “CPS Defendants” or “CPS” (Community Probation Services, LLC, Community Probation Services, L.L.C., Community Probation Services, and Patricia McNair). FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiffs Karen McNeil, Lesley Johnson, Tanya Mitchell, 3 Indya Hilfort, and Lucinda Brandon allege they are indigent individuals who have been placed on probation for misdemeanor offenses by the Giles County courts, and that their probation is supervised by one of the two named private probation companies. 411) is DENIED, as moot, given the Court’s resolution of their pending motion herein. The PSI Defendants’ Motion to Ascertain Status of Case (Doc. 395) is DENIED, as the Court finds oral argument unnecessary, given the thoroughness of the written legal and factual material filed by the parties to support their arguments. The Joint Motion to Set Oral Argument (Doc. The other claims against the PSI Defendants – Counts 7 and 8 (the due process claims) Counts 17 and 18 (the unjust enrichment claims) Count 21 (an abuse of process claim, as to the remaining defendants) Count 22 (an abuse of process claim) and Count 23 (a civil conspiracy claim) – remain for trial. Consequently, the Court does not address the validity of the claims against these defendants herein. Giles County and Kyle Helton have not moved for summary judgment either. 2 The CPS Defendants have not joined in the Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment.

The Court grants summary judgment to the PSI Defendants on the following claims: Counts 2, 3, and 4 (the RICO claims) Counts 11 and 12 (the equal protection claims) and Count 21 (an abuse of process claim, as to Defendants Bledsoe and 1 Through the Renewed Motion, the PSI Defendants incorporate by reference the additional briefs and pleadings filed as Docket Nos. 363) is GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part. 2 For the reasons set forth below, the PSI Defendants’ Renewed Motion (Doc. 363) 1 Plaintiffs’ Amended Response (Doc. INTRODUCTION Pending before the Court are the PSI Defendants’ (Progressive Sentencing, Inc., PSIProbation II, LLC, PSI-Probation, L.L.C., Tennessee Correctional Services, LLC, Timothy Cook, Markeyta Bledsoe, and Harriet Thompson) Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 1:18-cv-00033 JUDGE CAMPBELL MAGISTRATE JUDGE FRENSLEY MEMORANDUM I. COMMUNITY PROBATION SERVICES, LLC, et al., Defendants. 416 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE COLUMBIA DIVISION KAREN MCNEIL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Community Probation Services, LLC et al Doc.

Psi probation charlotte tennessee