Case Citation
Legal Case Name

TWELVE JOHN DOES v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case Brief

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit1988
861 F.2d 295 Civil Procedure Federal Courts Remedies Constitutional Law

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: A court refused to modify a prison population consent decree under Rule 60(b), finding the defendant’s claimed “changed circumstances” were foreseeable and that it failed to make good faith compliance efforts, thus affirming a strict enforcement order.

Legal Significance: This case reinforces the high bar for modifying institutional reform consent decrees, holding that predictable changes, such as increased prison populations resulting from a party’s own policy choices, do not justify relief from a court-ordered judgment.

TWELVE JOHN DOES v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

In 1982, the District of Columbia entered into a consent decree to resolve a lawsuit over unconstitutional prison conditions at its Central Facility. A key provision capped the inmate population at 1,166. For years, the District persistently violated this cap, leading to a contempt order and fines. In 1988, with the facility severely overcrowded, the plaintiffs moved to enforce the decree, while the District moved to modify it under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5). The District argued that a dramatic and unforeseen increase in felony drug convictions constituted a changed circumstance making compliance impossible without endangering the public. The district court denied the motion to modify and issued an injunction ordering the District to cease new admissions and reduce the population by 150 inmates per month until compliance was achieved. The District appealed, arguing the court abused its discretion by refusing to modify the decree and by issuing the enforcement order.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a predictable increase in prison population, resulting in part from the defendant’s own legislative choices, constitute a changed circumstance sufficient to warrant modification of a consent decree under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5)?

No. The court affirmed the denial of the motion to modify the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in volupt

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a predictable increase in prison population, resulting in part from the defendant’s own legislative choices, constitute a changed circumstance sufficient to warrant modification of a consent decree under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5)?

Conclusion

This case demonstrates the judiciary's significant reluctance to modify consent decrees, treating Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco la

Legal Rule

A party seeking to modify a consent decree under Federal Rule of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui offic

Legal Analysis

The court rejected the District's motion for modification, finding it failed to Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididun

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A party seeking to modify a consent decree must show unforeseen
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

The young man knows the rules, but the old man knows the exceptions.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+