A federal appeals court has overturned a ruling that would have required New York State to offer relocation to more than 4,000 people with mental illnesses from group homes to the community.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said that the plaintiff, Disability Advocates, Inc., did not meet the legal qualifications to sue state agencies on behalf of its clients. The panel did not disagree with the lower court’s finding that keeping the clients in institutional homes violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
“We are not unsympathetic to the concern that our disposition will delay the resolution of this controversy and impose substantial burdens and transaction costs on the parties, their counsel and the courts,” the panel wrote in its decision.
“We hope New York State will negotiate a remedy to end the unnecessary institutionalization of adult home residents. We will work with New York to solve this problem, hopefully without the need for future litigation,” said Cliff Zucker, executive director of Disability Advocates.
The plaintiff is also represented by the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, MFY Legal Services, Inc., New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, the Urban Justice Center and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, LLP.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
The April 6th decision is the latest in a nine-year fight that began with a lawsuit against former Gov. George Pataki charging that institutionalization violates Title II of the ADA, which states that, “a public entity shall administer services, programs, and activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities.”
In March 2010, Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis of the Eastern District Court of New York ruled in favor of the plaintiff and ordered the state to begin moving 1,000 people out of institutions immediately. The state appealed the case and lost three months later when the Second Circuit Court upheld that ruling.
Disability Advocates is a nonprofit organization contracted by the state to provide protection and advocacy services to its clients. The panel had debated whether clients and their family members had an active role in the organization’s leadership decisions, including budget decisions and director elections – a standard established by a prior case that determines whether the plaintiff is eligible to sue on behalf of its clients. This was the issue in which the panel disagreed with prior rulings in favor of the plaintiff.
The case is now likely to go back to U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis for further action. “Should that situation arise, we are confident that the experienced and able district judge, as a consequence of his familiarity with prior proceedings, can devise ways to lessen those burdens and facilitate an appropriate, efficient resolution,” the panel wrote in its decision.
This article was published in the May 2012 issue of Able News.
Comments