Share This Page

State settles lawsuit by former inmate alleging guard assaulted him

| Monday, Aug. 4, 2014, 6:19 p.m.

The state paid $10,000 to settle a former inmate's lawsuit claiming that two Woods Run prison guards physically assaulted him in 2010, one of his attorneys said Monday.

James Turner, age and address unavailable, claimed that former guards Tory Kelly, 42, of Aliquippa and Harry Nicoletti, 62, of Coraopolis committed the assaults. He sued them, the Department of Corrections and six current and former agency officials.

Both guards were convicted of assaulting inmates and sentenced to probation, but Kelly said in his motion to dismiss the lawsuit that he was not convicted of assaulting Turner. Nicoletti never filed a response to Turner's lawsuit.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan in December 2013 dismissed the lawsuit against everyone but Kelly and Nicoletti.

The Department of Corrections and Turner reached a settlement while he was appealing that decision to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, said one of his attorneys, Alexandra Morgan-Kurtz of the Pennsylvania Institutional Law Project. After settling with the state, Turner dropped his claims against the two guards, she said.

Both sides filed a joint motion Monday to dismiss the lawsuit.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.