Interviewed by Abby McCormick-Foley
Sona De is a trial lawyer and litigation partner in Sidley Austin’s New York office.
De was part of the Sidley Austin trial team that, in September 2024, prevailed in a NDNY civil rights case, Williams v. O’Gorman et al., NDNY, 9:20-CV-01417 (BKS), in which a federal jury in Syracuse found that several New York State corrections officials violated an inmate’s Eighth Amendment rights by keeping him in solitary confinement for about nine years. The jury awarded compensatory and punitive damages at the end of a five-day trial. Before a punitive damages hearing took place, the parties reached a settlement by which New York State agreed to pay $100,000 to the plaintiff, Wonder Williams.
1. Why was this trial win important?
This is a landmark case. Our client was kept in solitary confinement for nearly nine years in New York State prisons. The jury unanimously found certain high-ranking prison officials violated his Eighth Amendment Constitutional rights, and awarded punitive damages. This is the first jury verdict we have seen on solitary confinement in New York state in a quarter century, and the first time that solitary confinement in New York state prisons was found cruel and unusual under the Eighth Amendment.
Having a jury unanimously find that high-level state prison officials violated the Eighth Amendment, and award punitive damages on top of that, speaks volumes.
2. Was the trial team concerned about jurors reacting negatively to your client’s criminal record and, if so, what did the team do to address that concern?
We accounted for that possibility. The way we addressed it was by telling the jury about those crimes right out of the gate. The first thing we did after introducing our client was explain why he was sent to prison, the plea deal he took, and the sentence he received. That may seem like a counterintuitive starting point, but we wanted to be upfront with the jury. At the same time, we helped them put that into perspective. We explained that this case was not about his past crimes, but about what happened to our client while he was serving his time.
3. Do you think that New York State will change its solitary confinement practices as a result of this case?
New York State should pay attention to this case. The jury’s punitive damages award is supposed to deter others from doing this again in the future.
Separate from our case, the use of prolonged solitary confinement has been part of the current social conversation and action across the nation. Many states have recently passed new laws to limit the time that an inmate may be isolated. New York’s version of that law is known as the HALT Act, which took effect in 2022.
4. Did you use any experts who discussed the psychological impact on solitary confinement?
Dr. Stuart Grassian testified in our case. He is a board-certified psychiatrist with extensive experience in the effects of solitary confinement on mental health. He has done ground-breaking research in this area. Dr. Grassian explained to the jury how years without adequate mental stimulation or social interaction affects inmates in solitary confinement, and can have lasting mental health effects years after their release.
5. What drew Sidley Austin to this case?
The initial decision to take on this case was made before I joined the team, and is a testament to Sidley’s commitment to pro bono work. I was brought in after discovery closed to lead the trial.
Great trial work takes great effort, but trials are also incredibly rewarding. This trial was our chance to tell a story. It was also an opportunity to give younger attorneys valuable courtroom time and experience. Although trials can make for some long hours and late nights, everyone on the Sidley team rose to the occasion to bring home this win.
6. Many inmate plaintiffs bring their cases pro se and are then represented at trial by a single attorney assigned by the Court. What advice do you have for such an attorney who wants to do a good job but who does not have the resources of Sidley Austin?
The most important resource any trial lawyer brings to a case is their experience. Invest the time to focus and prioritize your points for trial and devise a trial plan.
Then, find lower-cost ways to get those points across with limited resources. Make one or two slides on your computer that you can use for opening as well as closing. A simple picture, diagram, or timeline can go a long way with the jury.
Ask for help. Your colleagues and professional network can offer insights from other trials, or time to help you with a part of the case. Run your themes by a friend or family member outside the law. Listen to their feedback on what you said, and pay equal attention to their questions. If they are wondering about something left unsaid, chances are your jury will be, too.