DOJ Olmstead Technical Assistance
DOJ Olmstead Enforcement by Circuit Court
DOJ Olmstead Enforcement by Case or Matter
DOJ Olmstead Enforcement by Issue
Olmstead: Community Integration for Everyone
Olmstead Enforcement
The Department is working with State and local government officials, disability rights groups and attorneys around the country, and with representatives of the Department of Health and Human Services to fashion an effective, nationwide program to enforce the integration mandate of the Department's regulation implementing title II of the ADA.
First Circuit: Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island
U.S. v. Rhode Island – 1:14-cv-00175 – (D.R.I. 2014)
On April 8, 2014, the United States entered into the nation’s first statewide settlement agreement vindicating the civil rights of individuals with disabilities who are unnecessarily segregated in sheltered workshops and facility-based day programs. The settlement agreement with the State of Rhode Island resolves the Civil Rights Division’s January 6, 2014 findings, as part of an ADA Olmstead investigation, that the State’s day activity service system over-relies on segregated settings, including sheltered workshops and facility-based day programs, to the exclusion of integrated alternatives, such as supported employment and integrated day services. Read more
U.S. v. Rhode Island and City of Providence – 1:13-cv-00442 – (D.R.I. 2013)
On June 13, 2013, the United States entered a court-enforceable interim settlement agreement with the State of Rhode Island and the City of Providence which resolved the Civil Rights Division's findings, as part of an ADA Olmstead investigation, that the State and City have unnecessarily segregated individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) in a sheltered workshop and segregated day activity service program, and have placed public school students with I/DD at risk of unnecessary segregation in that same program. The first-of-its-kind agreement will provide relief to approximately 200 Rhode Islanders with I/DD who have received services from the segregated sheltered workshop and day activity service provider Training Thru Placement, Inc. (TTP), and the Harold A. Birch Vocational Program (Birch), a special education program which has run a segregated sheltered workshop inside a Providence high school. Read More
Amanda D., et al. v. Hassan, et al.; United States v. New Hampshire – 1:12-CV-53 (SM)
The Justice Department intervened in Amanda D. v. Wood Hassan, a lawsuit alleging that the state of New Hampshire fails to provide mental health services to people with disabilities in community settings in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. On December 19, 2013, the Department, along with a coalition of private plaintiff organizations, entered into a comprehensive Settlement Agreement with the State of New Hampshire that will significantly expand and enhance mental health service capacity in integrated community settings over the next six years. Read more
U.S. v. Puerto Rico, No. 99-1435 (GAG)
This ADA case involves all persons with developmental disabilities (“DD”) served in the Commonwealth’s system. Over the years, through a series of consent decrees, along with regular court oversight and involvement, the Division has been able to prompt the Commonwealth to close all six of its residential institutions and to create, from nothing, a community service system to meet the needs of hundreds of persons with DD in integrated community settings. In 2011, the Court entered as a Court order, a Joint Compliance Action plan that summarized prior Court orders and imposed additional requirements on the Commonwealth. On October 31, 2016, the Court issued an order that clarified that the group covered by existing orders in this case included all persons with DD in the system and was not limited to just those who at one time resided in a Commonwealth institution. Read More
Second Circuit: Connecticut, New York, Vermont
M.G. v. Cuomo — 7:19-cv-630
On February 12, 2021, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in the case of M.G. v. Cuomo. In M.G., a class of individuals with serious mental illness allege that they are placed at serious risk of unnecessary institutionalization upon their release from prison because the State of New York administers its mental health system in a discriminatory manner that fails to provide necessary community-based metal health housing and supportive services. The Statement of Interest explains that: (1) individuals who allege serious risk of institutionalization have standing to bring a Title II claim; and (2) allegations that a public entity administers its services in a discriminatory manner state a claim under Title II.
U.S. v. New York – 13-cv- 4165 —(E.D.N.Y. 2013)
On July 23, 2013, the United States, individual plaintiffs, and the State of New
York filed a settlement agreement in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of New York. The agreement is subject to the court's
approval. The agreement remedies discrimination by the State in the
administration of its mental health service system and ensures that individuals
with mental illness who reside in 23 large adult homes in New York City receive
services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs consistent
with the ADA and Olmstead. Under the agreement, such individuals will
have the opportunity to live and receive services in the community such that they are able to live, work, and participate fully in community life. Read More
Connecticut Office of Protection and Advocacy v. State of Connecticut – 3:06-CV-179 — (D. Conn. 2006)
The Plaintiffs in this lawsuit challenge the State of Connecticut's reliance on privately-run, segregated nursing facilities to serve the needs of individuals with mental illness who would be more appropriately served in community-based settings. Read more
Third Circuit: Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania
Smith v. Department of Public Welfare of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania – 2:13-cv-05670
On June 12, 2014, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in the case of Smith v. Department of Public Welfare of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In Smith, the Plaintiffs alleged that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania put them at serious risk of institutionalization by reducing funding for Act 150, a state-funded program providing attendant care services in the community. Read More
Carey et. al. v. Christie-1:12-cv-02522-RMB-AMD-(D.N.J. 2012).
On March 14, 2013, the United States filed a Notice of Interest in Carey v. Christie, a case brought by
plaintiffs living in a state-operated institution for people with developmental disabilities, who claimed
that the Americans with Disabilities Act should prevent the State from shutting this institution over their
objections. Read more
Sciarrillo ex rel. St. Amand v. Christie – 2:13-cv-03478-SRC-CLW – (D.N.J. 2013)
OOn September 13, 2013, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in Sciarrillo v. Christie, a case in which private plaintiffs oppose the state's deinstitutionalization plan for its facilities housing people with developmental disabilities. . Read more
U.S. v. Delaware – 11-CV-591 – (D. Del. 2010) On July 6, 2011 the Division filed in District Court a Complaint and a simultaneous Settlement Agreement resolving its ADA Olmstead investigation into whether persons with mental illness in Delaware are being served in the most integrated settings appropriate to their needs and its CRIPA investigation into conditions of confinement at Delaware Psychiatric Center. Read more
Disability Rights New Jersey, Inc. v. Velez — 05-CV-4723 — (D.N.J. 2005) - Hundreds of persons with developmental disabilities residing in several large State-owned-and—operated institutions in New Jersey brought this suit, alleging that the State fails to provide themwith services and supports in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs. Read more
Benjamin et al. v. Pennsylvania Dept. of Public Welfare — 09-CV-1182 — (M.D. Pa. 2010) - In July 2010, the United States filed an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief in this class action. We supported the arguments made by a class of individuals with developmental disabilities who sought to end their unjustified segregation in Pennsylvania’s large, publicly-run congregate care institutions. Read more
Fourth Circuit: Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia
West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources | (PDF) – On June 1, 2015, the United States sent its findings to the state stating it violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and Olmstead v. L.C. by failing to deliver mental health services to children who rely on publicly funded care in the most integrated settings appropriate. Children in West Virginia experience high levels of institutionalization per capita and are unable to access mental health services in their homes and communities.
U.S. v. North Carolina – No. 5:12-cv-557 – (E.D.N.C. 2012)
On August 23, 2012, the United States entered a comprehensive, eight-year settlement agreement with the State of North Carolina resolving the Civil Rights Division's ADA Olmstead investigation of the State's mental health service system, which currently serves thousands of individuals with mental illness in large adult care homes. The Agreement will expand access to community-based supported housing — integrated housing that promotes inclusion and independence and enables individuals with mental illness to participate fully in community life. Read more
U.S. v. Virginia –3:12cv059 – (E.D. Va. 2012) - On January 26, 2012, the Division filed in District Court a Complaint and a simultaneous Settlement Agreement resolving its ADA Olmstead investigation into whether persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Virginia are being served in the most integrated settings appropriate to their needs.
After taking public comment and holding a fairness hearing, the Court approved the settlement agreement subject to certain modifications, which were agreed to by the Commonwealth and the United States. The Court entered the settlement agreement as a final order on August 23, 2012.
Read more
ARC of Virginia, Inc. v. Kaine — 09-CV-686 — (E.D. Va. 2009) - The United States filed an Amicus Curiae Brief supporting the ARC of Virginia's challenge to the State of Virginia's plan to build a costly, institutional facility for individuals with intellectual disabilities, a plan that Plaintiff alleged would result in seventy-five individuals being moved to unnecessarily segregated facilities. Read more
Marlo M. v. Cansler — 09-CV-535 — (E.D.N.C. 2009) - In a case brought by two individuals with mental illness and developmental disabilities who faced institutionalization because of the State's decision to reduce their community-based services, the United States filed an Amicus Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction in December 2009, requesting that the Court stop the State from reducing the services. Read more
Clinton L., et al. v. Cansler, et al. — 10-CV-00123 — (M.D.N.C. 2010) - Individuals with developmental disabilities and mental illness challenged the State's proposed reductions in reimbursement rates for in-home services that will have the effect of eliminating providers that offer medically necessary services that enable individuals to successfully reside in the community and will place them at risk of institutionalization. Read more
Fifth Circuit: Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas
DOJ Findings Letter to Louisiana (PDF)
On December 21, 2016, the United States sent its findings to the state notifying it of violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which stem from its failure to deliver services to people with serious mental illness in the most integrated settings appropriate. People with serious mental illness in Louisiana often must enter nursing facilities to receive the day-to-day assistance they need when they rely on the state to provide those services.
U.S. v. Mississippi (S.D. Miss 2016)
The United States issued a findings letter in December 2011 concluding that Mississippi is violating the ADA's integration mandate in its provision of services to people with developmental disabilities and mental illness. Following an investigation, the Department found that the State of Mississippi has failed to meet its obligations under the ADA by unnecessarily institutionalizing persons with mental illness or developmental disabilities and failing to ensure that they are offered a meaningful opportunity to live in integrated community settings appropriate to their needs. Read More
Disability Rights Mississippi v. Mississippi Children's Home Services – 3:13-CV-547-HTW-LRA – (S.D. Miss. 2013)
On February 5, 2014 the United States filed a Statement of Interest in Disability Rights Mississippi v. Mississippi Children's Home Services, a case in which the defendants have denied monitoring access to the local protection and advocacy organization. Read More
Troupe v. Barbour — 10-CV-00153 — (S.D. Miss. 2010) - The United States filed a Statement of Interest opposing Mississippi officials' motion to dismiss the complaint of Medicaid-eligible children with significant behavioral disorders who allege that the State of Mississippi fails to ensure that medically necessary services are provided to Medicaid-eligible children in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs in violation of the ADA and the EPSDT provisions of the Medicaid Act.
The motion to dismiss was heard by a magistrate judge who ruled in favor of the State and recommended dismissal of the Medicaid EPSDT claim. Read more
Steward et al. v. Abbott et al. — 5:10-CV-1025 – (W.D. Tex. 2010) - On September 20, 2012, the Court granted the United States' request to intervene in a pending lawsuit against the State of Texas. The suit claims that Texas unnecessarily segregates individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities in nursing facilities, and that this violates the law under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Read more
Pitts v. Greenstein — 10-CV-635 — (M.D. La. 2010) - In September 2010, a group of four individuals with disabilities who receive and depend on Medicaid Personal Care Services (PCS) in order to remain in the community and to prevent hospitalization and institutionalization filed suit to prevent the State of Louisiana from reducing the maximum number of PCS hours available each week. Read more
Sixth Circuit: Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee
Ball v. Kasich - 2:16-cv-282
On August 22, 2016, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in the case of Ball. v. Kasich. In Ball, individuals on a wait list for home- and community-based services allege that Ohio’s ongoing denial of services has placed them at serious risk of institutionalization. Read More
John B. v. Emkes – 3-98-0168 – (M.D. Tenn. 1998) (Formerly John B. v. Goetz) - Following a remand from the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in support of a Consent Decree remedying alleged failures by Tennessee officials to provide adequate health services and treatment to thousands of Medicaid-eligible children in violation of the early and periodic screening, diagnostic and treatment (EPSDT) provisions of the Medicaid Act. Read more
Seventh Circuit: Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin
Maertz v. Minott - 1:13-cv-957-JMS-MJD (S.D. In. 2015) | (PDF) - On March 27, 2015, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in opposition to the State of Indiana’s argument that serious risk of institutionalization or segregation is not a viable claim under the ADA. In Maertz, Plaintiffs with developmental disabilities provided evidence that the State of Indiana harmed their health by drastically reducing their home and community-based Medicaid services, placing them at serious risk of institutionalization.
ILADD v. DHS — 13-CV-01300 — (E.D. Ill. 2013) - On April 15, 2013, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in ILADD v. Quinn. Plaintiffs seek a preliminary injunction to stop the planned closure of two state-run centers for people with developmental disabilities. Read more
Ligas v. Maram — 05-CV-04331 — (N.D. Ill. 2005) - In January 2010, the United States filed a Statement of Interest urging the Court to grant preliminary approval of the Plaintiffs' and Defendants' jointly submitted Consent Decree in a case regarding large, private facilities for individuals with developmental disabilities. Intervenors, primarily family members of residents, strongly opposed the agreement. Read more
Williams v. Quinn — 05-CV-4673 — (N.D. Ill. 2005) — On May 24, 2010, the Department filed comments in Williams v. Quinn, supporting a Settlement Agreement that would provide hundreds of individuals with mental illness the opportunity to move from institutions to community-based settings. Read more
Hampe v. Hamos — 10-CV-3121 — (N.D. Ill. 2010) - In July 2010, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, urging the Court to permit young adults to collectively challenge a State policy that places medically fragile individuals with disabilities at risk of institutionalization after turning 21. Read more
Eighth Circuit: Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota
SJ v. Tidball - 20-cv-004036
In Tidball, nine children with medically complex conditions and an association of parents of medically complex children allege that Missouri's methods of administering its Medicaid program put medically complex children enrolled in the program at serious risk of institutionalization. The Statement of Interest clarifies that: (1) a plaintiff need not allege disparate treatment or animus to state a claim under Title II's integration mandate; (2) a serious risk of unnecessary segregation may give rise to a Title II claim; and (3) serious risk of unnecessary segregation may constitute a threat of irreparable harm for the purposes of granting injunctive relief.
DOJ Findings Letter to South Dakota (Word) | PDF
On May 2, 2016, the United States sent its findings to the state notifying it of violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Olmstead v. L.C. due to its failure to deliver services to people with disabilities in the most integrated settings appropriate. People with disabilities in South Dakota, including those with chronic illnesses, physical disabilities, disabilities resulting from the aging process, and cognitive disabilities, often must enter nursing facilities to receive the day-to-day assistance they need when they rely on the state to provide those services.
United States v. Marion County Nursing Home District - (E.D. Mo. 2013)
On March 14, 2013, the parties in United States v. Marion County Nursing Home District d/b/a Maple Lawn Nursing Home filed a Settlement Agreement. Read more
U.S. v. Arkansas — 10-CV-327 — (E.D. Ark. 2010) -- The United States filed suit against the State of Arkansas and Arkansas officials on May 6, 2010, alleging that the defendants were violating the ADA by failing to provide services to individuals with developmental disabilities in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs and by failing to provide community service options for the 1400 people on waiting lists at risk of institutionalization. Read more
U.S. v. Arkansas — 4:09-CV-00033 — (E.D. Ark. 2009) - The United States filed a complaint on January 16, 2009, against the State of Arkansas and Arkansas officials alleging violations of the ADA, the U.S. Constitution, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act at the State's Conway Human Development Center for failing to provide services to facility residents in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs; subjecting them to unconstitutional conditions; and depriving them of a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment. Read more
Hiltibran v. Levy — 10-CV-4185 — (W.D. Mo. 2010) - In a suit brought by individuals who need incontinence supplies to live in the community, the United States filed a Statement of Interest in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, requesting that the Court order the State to provide the Medicaid-funded incontinence supplies to individuals who need those supplies to prevent their placing in nursing facilities. Read more
U.S. v. Nebraska – 8:08CV271 – (D. Neb. 2008)
On March 7, 2008, the Division issued a CRIPA/ADA findings letter to the State of Nebraska that detailed systemic conditions that violated the constitutional and statutory rights of the residents of the Beatrice State Developmental Center ("BSDC"), the State's largest facility for persons with developmental disabilities. At the time, BSDC housed close to 350 residents. The parties then swiftly concluded negotiations on a judicially enforceable remedial agreement. On July 2, 2008, the Hon. Richard G. Kopf, United States District Court Judge for the District of Nebraska (Lincoln), signed the parties' proposed consent decree as an order of the court. The agreement provides for oversight by a court monitor. Read More
Ninth Circuit: Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington
Lane v. Brown (formerly Lane v. Kitzhaber) — 12-CV-00138 — (D. Or. 2012)
On September 8, 2015, the United States entered into a proposed settlement agreement with the State of Oregon to vindicate the civil rights of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) who are unnecessarily segregated in sheltered workshops, or at risk of such unnecessary segregation. Read More
Katie A. v. Douglas — CV-02-05662 AHM (SHX) — (C.D. Cal. 2011) (Formerly Katie A. v. Bonta) - On November 18, 2011, Comments of the United States in Support of Final Approval of the Proposed Settlement Agreement were filed in support of the parties' agreement to the manner in which the State will provide an array of intensive, community-based mental health services to Medi-Cal eligible foster children or children at-risk of entry into the foster-care system. Read more
Darling v. Douglas — 09-CV-3798 — (N.D. Cal. 2009) (Formerly Cota v. Maxwell-Jolly) - The United States filed a Statement of Interest on July 12, 2011 and October 31, 2011 in support of Plaintiffs' challenge to the manner in which the State plans to eliminate the Adult Day Health Care (ADHC) service, which enables elderly individuals and individuals with physical and mental disabilities to live in the community and avoid hospitalization and institutionalization. Read more
Oster, et al. v. Lightbourne — 09-CV-4668 — (9th Cir. 2009) (Formerly Oster v. Wagner) - The United States filed a Statement of Interest on January 9, 2012 regarding Plaintiffs' challenge to a twenty percent reduction in personal care services provided through the State's In-Home Support Services (IHSS) program. IHSS is designed to enable elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities to avoid hospitalization and institutionalization. Read more
Napper v. County of Sacramento — 10-CV-01119 — (E.D. Cal. 2010) - Individuals with mental illness brought suit against the County of Sacramento for failing to provide adequate community-based services, which placed them at risk of institutionalization. Read more
M.R. v. Drefyus — 10-CV-2052 — (W.D. Wash. 2011) - On December 16, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the judgment of the district court and granted injunctive relief with respect to the named plaintiffs, finding that plaintiffs had demonstrated that the State's cuts placed them at serious risk of institutionalization in violation of the ADA. The court relied, in part, upon DOJ's previously filed Statement of Interest. Read more
Laguna Honda Hospital and Rehabilitation Center (LHH)
In mid-June 2008, the Division executed a comprehensive Settlement Agreement with the City of San Francisco to address outstanding deficiencies at the LHH nursing home. LHH is owned and operated by the City through the San Francisco Department of Public Health, and is licensed as both a skilled nursing facility and an acute care hospital. At the time of our settlement, LHH was the largest publicly-operated, single-site nursing home in the United States with a capacity of over 1,200 skilled nursing beds. The Division issued CRIPA/ADA findings letters on May 6, 1998, April 1, 2003, and August 3, 2004, that collectively concluded, in part, that the City engages in a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct with respect to placement of qualified LHH residents in the most integrated setting pursuant to the ADA. Read More
Tenth Circuit: Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Wyoming
Eleventh Circuit: Alabama, Florida, Georgia
Alvey v. Gualtieri (M.D. Fla. 2016)
This Statement of Interest was filed to clarify a county-run homeless shelter’s obligations under Title II, including the obligation to provide safe and appropriate facilities for individuals with disabilities, and the obligation to consider reasonable modifications that would allow individuals with disabilities to meet the shelter’s eligibility criteria. Read More
Georgia Network for Educational and Therapeutic Support / U.S. v. Georgia (N.D. Ga. 2016)
On August 23, 2016, the United States filed a lawsuit against the State of Georgia in federal district court to remedy violations of the ADA pertaining to the State’s failure to provide thousands of public school students with behavior-related disabilities with appropriate mental health and therapeutic educational services and supports in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs. Read More
Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program v. SafetyNet Youthcare, Inc. – 2:13-cv-00519 – (S.D. Ala. 2014)
On October 14, 2014 the United States filed a Statement of Interest in Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program v. SafetyNet Youthcare, Inc., a case in which the defendant denied access to the local protection and advocacy organization. The Statement of Interest expresses the United States' view that facilities must permit access under the Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness Act to all residents regardless of whether the facility characterizes some residents as having a less serious mental health disorder than others.
U.S. v. Florida –1:13-cv-61576 – (S.D. Fla. 2013)
On July 22, 2013, the United States filed a lawsuit against the State of Florida in federal district court to remedy ADA violations involving the State's failure to provide services and supports to children with disabilities in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs. The lawsuit alleges that, as a result of the manner in which Florida administers its service system for children with significant medical needs, children with disabilities are unnecessarily segregated in nursing facilities when they could be served in their family homes or other community-based settings. The lawsuit further alleges that the State's policies and practices place other children with significant medical needs in the community at serious risk of institutionalization in nursing facilities. Read More
Hunter v. Cook – 1:08-cv-02930-TWT – (N.D. Ga. 2013)
The United States filed a Statement of Interest in Hunter v. Cook, in opposition to the state of Georgia's argument that serious risk of institutionalization is not a viable claim under Title II of the ADA. Read More
Georgia Advocacy Office v. Shelp – 1:09-cv-2880-CAP – The United States filed a Statement of Interest on June 25, 2010 to address the issue of access to institutions and records granted to Protection and Advocacy systems pursuant to the P&A acts. Read more
Haddad v. Arnold — 10-CV-414 — (M.D. Fla. 2010) - Michelle Haddad successfully sought a preliminary injunction enjoining the State of Florida from denying her the home and community-based services available under its Traumatic Brain Injury/Spinal Cord Injury Medicaid Waiver. Read more
Jones v. Arnold — 09-CV-1170 — (M.D. Fla. 2010) - Plaintiffs challenge the State's failure to fund appropriate Medicaid community services for individuals with spinal cord injury, which places plaintiffs at risk of institutionalization in violation of Olmstead. Read more
Cruz v. Dudek — 1:10-CV-23048 — (S.D. Fla. 2010) - Luis Cruz and Nigel de la Torre successfully sought a preliminary injunction enjoining the State of Florida from denying them the home and community-based services available under its Traumatic Brain Injury/Spinal Cord Injury Medicaid Waiver. Read more
Knipp v. Perdue — 10-CV-2850 — (N.D. Ga. 2010) - In October 2010, the United States filed a brief in support of Plaintiffs' challenge to the State's plan to eliminate services for individuals with mental illness without offering sufficient alternative support services that are necessary to prevent Plaintiffs' hospitalization and institutionalization. Read more
Boyd v. Mullins -- 2:10-CV-688 — (M.D. Ala. 2010) - Jonathon Paul Boyd, a 34-year-old with quadriplegia who is currently living in a nursing home but desires and is able to receive services in a more integrated setting, alleges that the State of Alabama violates Title II of the ADA by administering its Medicaid program in a manner that causes Mr. Boyd to be unnecessarily institutionalized in a nursing facility. Read more
U.S. v. Georgia — 10-CV-249 — (N.D. Ga. 2010) - On October 19, 2010, the DOJ entered into a comprehensive Settlement Agreement with the State of Georgia and Georgia officials, resolving the United States' complaint alleging that individuals with mental illness and developmental disabilities confined in State hospitals were unnecessarily institutionalized and subjected to unconstitutional harm to their lives, health, and safety in violation of the ADA and the U.S. Constitution. Read more
Long v. Benson — 08-16261 — (11th Cir. 2009) (related to Lee v. Dudek) - Clayton Griffin€”a member of the class in Lee v. Dudek and who is partially paralyzed€”successfully sought a preliminary injunction requiring the State of Florida to provide him with community-based services through the State's Medicaid program, instead of requiring him to remain in a nursing home in order to receive needed services. Read more
Lee v. Dudek — 08-CV-26 — (N.D. Fla. 2008) - This class of plaintiffs€”consisting of all Medicaid-eligible adults with disabilities who currently, or at any time during the litigation, are unnecessarily confined to a nursing facility and desire to and are capable of residing in the community€”claims that the State of Florida's refusal to provide services in the community to these individuals violates the ADA's integration mandate. Read more
D.C. Circuit: Washington, DC
Thorpe et al. v. District of Columbia – 1:10-cv-02250-ESH – (D.D.C. 2010) (Formerly Day et al. v. District of Columbia) - The United States filed a Statement of Interest on June 26, 2013, supporting the Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for Class Certification. The United States previously filed a Statement of Interest on October 3, 2011, opposing the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment. The pending lawsuit alleges that the District of Columbia violates the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by unnecessarily segregating individuals with physical disabilities in nursing facilities. Read more