Case: Sanchez v. Johnson

4:00-cv-01593 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: May 4, 2000

Closed Date: 2004

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 4, 2000, a group of individuals with developmental disabilities (each through a parent as next friend), together with several interested advocacy organizations and service providers, filed this suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the state of California. The plaintiffs, represented by the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, sought class certification, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief under: (1) Title XIX of the Soci…

On May 4, 2000, a group of individuals with developmental disabilities (each through a parent as next friend), together with several interested advocacy organizations and service providers, filed this suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the state of California. The plaintiffs, represented by the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, sought class certification, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief under: (1) Title XIX of the Social Security Act (the Medicaid Act), 42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq.; (2) Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12134; and, (3) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794(a) together with its regulations. Enforcement of the Medicaid Act claims was premised on 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Chiefly, the plaintiffs sought injunctive relief requiring the state to provide wages and benefits for community-based service providers at substantially the same rates as those paid to state institutions. They alleged that the lower wages paid community-based facilities violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by causing some individuals with disabilities to unnecessarily become or remain institutionalized.

Some background on the Medicaid Act is helpful. Through the Medicaid Act, the federal government provides funds to participating states to help them provide health care services to qualifying low-income or otherwise needful individuals. States that accept these funds must ensure that their state Medicaid program complies with certain requirements, as laid out in 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(1)-(65). In 1981, Congress enacted the Home and Community Based Services ("HCBS") waiver program. This program provides Medicaid reimbursement to states for the provision of community based services to individuals who would otherwise require institutional care. To qualify for a waiver, the state must show that the cost of care for that individual through the waiver program will be less than or equal to the cost of care in an institution. See 42 U.S.C. § 1396n(c). See generally Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581, 600-03 (1999) (tracing the origins and discussing the application of HCBS).

The plaintiffs claimed that because California pays community based service providers participating in the HCBS waiver program lower wages than it pays employees in state institutions, the State was violating the provision of the Medicaid Act that requires state plans to "provide such methods and procedures relating to the utilization of, and the payment for, care and services available under the plan . . . as may be necessary to . . . assure that payments are consistent with efficiency, economy, and quality of care and are sufficient to enlist enough providers so that care and services are available under the plan at least to the extent that such care and services are available to the general population in the geographic area[.]" 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(30)(A). Plaintiffs further claimed that the lower wage rate in community based programs has caused some persons with developmental disabilities to remain institutionalized unnecessarily. Plaintiffs argued that this constituted discrimination against them in violation of the ADA and § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. To remedy this, the plaintiffs sought injunctive relief requiring state officials to increase wages and benefits for community based services to match those provided to employees of in-state institutions. Thus, the plaintiffs advanced three causes of action, namely: (1) the § 30(A) claim (42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(30)(A)); (2) the ADA claim; and, (3) the § 504 claim.

After initially denying the plaintiffs' motion for class certification, the District Court (Judge Claudia Wilken) granted the plaintiffs' renewed motion for class certification on August 2, 2001. See Docket at 17, 19. During this time the parties also had several discovery disputes. These revolved around the plaintiffs' requests for production of documents to the defendants regarding budgetary and fiscal information related to community service providers. This culminated in a motion to compel, which the District Court (Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero) granted in part and denied in part on November 19, 2001. Sanchez v. Johnson, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25233 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 2001).

On August 10, 2001, the defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings with respect to the § 30(A) claim, on the ground that § 30(A) does not provide a private right of action enforceable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 24, 2001, Judge Wilken denied the defendants' motion for partial judgment on the pleadings. In response, the defendants moved the court for certification to take an interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit. On February 28, 2002, Judge Wilken also denied this motion. Both the court's September 24, 2001, and February 28, 2002, orders and opinions involved the court holding, inter alia, that the plaintiffs were entitled to enforce rights granted to them under § 30(A) of the Medicaid Act by means of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

During March, April and early May of 2002, both sides filed cross-motions for summary judgment with respect to various aspects of the case. The defendants moved for summary judgment as to the ADA and § 504 claims on the grounds that the plaintiffs had failed to establish sufficient facts establish a prima facie case of discrimination. By an opinion and order dated August 6, 2002, Judge Wilkin denied all of the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Specifically, the court granted summary judgment as to the plaintiffs' ADA and § 504 claims of discrimination. As explained by the Ninth Circuit on appeal, the district court found that the plaintiffs had failed to establish any material factual dispute with respect to three key issues:

"First, the court held that 'even if unjustified institutionalization is occurring, [the plaintiffs] have failed to show that an increase in wages and benefits for community based direct care workers would remedy the alleged violation.' Second, the court held that the relief proposed by [the plaintiffs] is not a 'reasonable modification' of California's current policies and practices because the $1.4 billion of extra expenditure they request would represent a forty percent increase in the State's budget for developmentally disabled services. Third, the court held that California already has in place an acceptable plan for deinstitutionalization, the disruption of which would involve a fundamental alteration of the State's current policies and practices in contravention of the Supreme Court's instructions in Olmstead."

However, Judge Wilkin's denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment as to the § 30(A) claim and allowed the case to go forward exclusively on this issue. The parties engaged in discovery over the course of the following year.

On August 6, 2003, the defendants filed a motion for reconsideration of the district court's denial of their 2001 motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the § 30(A) claim. The defendants claimed that the Supreme Court's subsequent decision in Gonzaga University v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002), undermined the authorities relied on by the court when it denied judgment on the pleadings, and that reconsideration was thus warranted. Gonzaga University clarified the standard for evaluating whether a statute creates a private right of action.

On January 5, 2004, Judge Wilkin granted the defendants' motion for reconsideration, reversing her earlier decision and granting the defendants judgment on the pleadings as to the § 30(A) claim. Sanchez, 301 F. Supp. 2d at 1064-65. Judge Wilkin held that there was no indication that Congress intended to create a private right of action with § 30(A), and that, accordingly, none of the plaintiffs could bring suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In holding so, Judge Wilkin noted that there had been "no post-Gonzaga case in which a court, considering the guidelines articulated in Gonzaga, has found that § 30(A) gives Medicaid recipients a private right enforceable under § 1983." Since the § 30(A) claim was the sole remaining claim, this decision terminated the case in its entirety.

The plaintiffs appealed the district court's decisions with respect to both their § 30(A) claim as well as their ADA and § 504 claims. The plaintiffs argued § 30(A) does indeed create a private right that is enforceable under § 1983, and that the district court misinterpreted the import of Gonzaga in rejecting their claim. Regarding the ADA and § 504 claims the plaintiffs argued that in granting summary judgment to the defendants, the court had improperly resolved four factual disputes, namely: (1) that the plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate entitlement to class-wide relief because of a failure to show more than "isolated" and "sporadic" instances of developmentally disabled individuals who were ready for community based services but were still institutionalized; (2) that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a causal link between low wages and benefits for direct care workers in community service programs for the developmentally disabled and the low rate of deinstitutionalization; (3) that California has a "comprehensive plan" for deinstitutionalization which met the requirements of showing reasonable progress; and (4) that the cost of the relief sought by Plaintiffs constituted a "fundamental alteration" of California's Developmental Disabilities Program.

On August 2, 2005, a three-member panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain writing for the court) unanimously rejected the plaintiffs' claims and affirmed the district court decisions. The Ninth Circuit held that that Congress "did not unambiguously create an individually enforceable right in § 30(A) that would be remediable under § 1983 either by recipients or providers of Medicaid services." Sanchez, 416 F.3d at 1067. The court further explained that the relief requested by the plaintiffs under their ADA and § 504 claims "would require the 'fundamental alteration' of a comprehensive, working plan for deinstitutionalization in contravention of Olmstead."

Summary Authors

Greg in den Berken (7/7/2014)

Related Cases

Clayworth v. Bonta, Eastern District of California (2003)

People


Judge(s)

Bea, Carlos T. (California)

Cowen, Robert E. (New Jersey)

Larson, James L. (California)

O'Scannlain, Diarmuid Fionntain (Oregon)

Spero, Joseph C. (California)

Wilken, Claudia Ann (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Churchill, Michael (Pennsylvania)

Cummings, Larisa M. (California)

Eisenman, James Jr. (Pennsylvania)

Gilhool, Thomas K. (Pennsylvania)

Judge(s)

Bea, Carlos T. (California)

Cowen, Robert E. (New Jersey)

Larson, James L. (California)

O'Scannlain, Diarmuid Fionntain (Oregon)

Spero, Joseph C. (California)

Wilken, Claudia Ann (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Churchill, Michael (Pennsylvania)

Cummings, Larisa M. (California)

Eisenman, James Jr. (Pennsylvania)

Gilhool, Thomas K. (Pennsylvania)

Gran, Judith A. (Pennsylvania)

Lapertosa, Max (Pennsylvania)

Lipton, Diane (California)

Mayerson, Arlene Brynne (California)

Vanaman, Valerie (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Boley, Todd Alexander (California)

Canady, Clarissa R. (California)

Carson, Susan (California)

Edwards, Elizabeth (California)

Hewitt, Henry S. (California)

Lockyer, Bill (California)

Stinson, Teresa (California)

Wald, Stephanie (California)

Other Attorney(s)

Petersen, Mark D. (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Dec. 21, 2005 Docket
147

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Without Prejudice Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel

2001 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 25233

Nov. 19, 2001 Order/Opinion
507

Order Granting Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration of Right of Action under Section 1983 [Granting Judgment on the Pleadings]

301 F.Supp.2d 1060, 2004 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 6956

Jan. 5, 2004 Order/Opinion

Appellants' Opening Brief

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

2004 WL 1621383

May 24, 2004 Pleading / Motion / Brief

Appellees' Opening Brief

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

2004 WL 1935964

July 19, 2004 Pleading / Motion / Brief

Appellants' Reply Brief

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

2004 WL 2357809

Aug. 16, 2004 Pleading / Motion / Brief

Opinion [Affirming District Court]

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

416 F.3d 1051

Aug. 2, 2005 Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated May 11, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT No process Fee status pd entered on 5/4/00 in the amount of $ 150.00 ( Receipt No. 3310515) [3:00−cv−01593] (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/08/2000)

May 4, 2000
2

ORDER RE COURT PROCEDURE and SCHEDULE (ADR Multi−Option) by Magistrate Judge James Larson : Proof of service to be filed by 6/19/00 ; counsels' case management statement to be filed by 8/28/00 ; initial case management conference will be held 10:30 9/6/00 . (cc: all counsel) [3:00−cv−01593] (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/08/2000)

May 4, 2000
3

MOTION before Magistrate Judge James Larson by Plaintiff for attorney Thomas K. Gilhool to appear pro hac vice . Fee status pd. [3:00−cv−01593] (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/08/2000)

May 4, 2000
4

MOTION before Magistrate Judge James Larson by Plaintiff for attorney Max Lapertosa to appear pro hac vice . Fee status pd. [3:00−cv−01593] (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/08/2000)

May 4, 2000

SUMMONS issued [3:00−cv−01593] (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/19/2000)

May 11, 2000
6

RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Clifford Allenby, defendant Grantland Johnson, defendant Diane M. Bonta, defendant B. Timothy Gage on 5/11/00, 5/12/00 [3:00−cv−01593] (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/14/2000)

June 7, 2000
8

Request for reassignment to a U.S. District Judge for trial and disposition by defendant (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/29/2000)

June 22, 2000
9

ANSWER by defendant to complaint [1−1]; jury demand [3:00−cv−01593] (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/29/2000)

June 22, 2000
7

CLERK'S NOTICE of impending reassignment to a United States District Judge [3:00−cv−01593] (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/28/2000)

June 23, 2000
10

ORDER by Assignment Committee Case reassigned to Judge Claudia Wilken referred to Judge Claudia Wilken the motion for attorney Judith Gran to appear pro hac vice . Fee status pd. [5−1], referred to Judge Claudia Wilken the motion for attorney Max Lapertosa to appear pro hac vice . Fee status pd. [4−1], referred to Judge Claudia Wilken the motion for attorney Thomas K. Gilhool to appear pro hac vice . Fee status pd. [3−1] ( Date Entered: 6/30/00) (cc: all counsel) [3:00−cv−01593] (ab, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/30/2000)

June 29, 2000
11

CLERK'S NOTICE setting case management schedule; meet and confer by 8/2/00; initial disclosures by 8/14/00; case management statement is due 8/28/00 ; case management conference set for 1:30pm on 9/8/00 [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/10/2000)

July 6, 2000
12

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken granting motion for attorney Judith Gran to appear pro hac vice . Fee status pd. [5−1] ( Date Entered: 7/11/00) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/11/2000)

July 7, 2000
13

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken granting motion for attorney Max Lapertosa to appear pro hac vice . Fee status pd. [4−1] ( Date Entered: 7/11/00) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/11/2000)

July 7, 2000
14

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken granting motion for attorney Thomas K. Gilhool to appear pro hac vice . Fee status pd. [3−1] ( Date Entered: 7/11/00) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/11/2000)

July 7, 2000
15

ORDER by Judge D. L. Jensen for Judge Claudia Wilken that C−00−1593−CW &C−00−2532−SBA are NOT related ( Date Entered: 8/9/00) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/09/2000)

Aug. 9, 2000
16

CERTIFICATION of discussion of ADR options by Plaintiffs. [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/30/2000)

Aug. 28, 2000
17

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT and PROPOSED ORDER filed. [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/30/2000)

Aug. 29, 2000
18

SUPPLEMENT by Plaintiff re ADR certification [16−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/30/2000)

Aug. 29, 2000
19

CERTIFICATION of discussion of ADR options by Plaintiff Kathy Tobiason . [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/11/2000)

Sept. 8, 2000
20

MINUTES: before Judge Claudia Wilken ( C/R Carol Karen) ( Hearing Date: 9/8/00); case management conference held; case referred to a Magistrate Judge for early settlement conference to be held ASAP; motion for change of venue to be filed and notice for hearing on 10/27/00 at 10:00am; motion to intervene (if any) should also be noticed for 10/27/00 [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/12/2000)

Sept. 11, 2000

REFERRAL: referring case for settlement to Mag. Judge Maria−Elena James [4:00−cv−01593] (wh, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/12/2000)

Sept. 12, 2000
22

CERTIFICATION of discussion of ADR options by Plaintiff Kory Nigian . [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/22/2000)

Sept. 21, 2000
23

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION before Judge Claudia Wilken by Proposed Intervenors Colleen Cross, et al to intervene with Notice set for 10/27/00 at 10:00am [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/02/2000)

Sept. 29, 2000
24

MEMORANDUM by Intervenors Colleen Cross, et al in support of motion to intervene [23−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/02/2000)

Sept. 29, 2000
25

DECLARATION by Marion Lieberman on behalf of Intervenors Colleen Cross, et al re motion to intervene [23−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/02/2000)

Sept. 29, 2000
26

DECLARATION by Robert Cross on behalf of Intervenors Colleen Cross, et al re motion to intervene [23−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/02/2000)

Sept. 29, 2000
27

DECLARATION by Patricia C. O'Prey on behalf of Intervenors Colleen Cross, et al re motion to intervene [23−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/02/2000)

Sept. 29, 2000
28

NOTICE of hearing by Intervenors Colleen Cross, et al setting motion to intervene [23−1] ; hearing set for 10:00 11/3/00 [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/03/2000)

Oct. 2, 2000
29

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION before Judge Claudia Wilken by defendants to transfer action to a proper venue with Notice set for 11/14/00 at 2:00pm [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
30

MEMORANDUM by defendant in support of motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
31

DECLARATION by Paul Carleton on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
32

DECLARATION by Cliff Allenby on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
33

DECLARATION by Granland Johnson on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
34

DECLARATION by Mervin Tamai on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
35

DECLARATION by Patricia Lof on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
36

DECLARATION by Alena Dron on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
37

DECLARATION by Diana M. Bonta on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
38

DECLARATION by B. Timothy Gage on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
40

DECLARATION by Barbara Wilson on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
41

DECLARATION by Louis Sarrao on behalf of defendant re motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/11/2000)

Oct. 10, 2000
42

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken : for extension of time on briefing and oral argument dates for defendants' motion for transfer venue and the putative intervenors' motion for and complaint in intervention (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/13/2000)

Oct. 12, 2000
43

ORDER by Mag. Judge Maria−Elena James Settlement conf. (Mag) at 10:00 11/8/00 ; ( Date Entered: 10/18/00) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/18/2000)

Oct. 13, 2000
44

OPPOSITION by Plaintiffs to motion to intervene [23−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/18/2000)

Oct. 17, 2000
45

PROOF OF SERVICE by Plaintiff of order [42−2] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/20/2000)

Oct. 19, 2000
46

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT; Date of proceedings: 9/8/00 ( C/R: Carol Karen) minutes [20−2] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/23/2000)

Oct. 20, 2000
47

OPPOSITION by Plaintiffs to motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/24/2000)

Oct. 24, 2000
48

DECLARATION by Dwight W. Hansen on behalf of Plaintiff re opposition [47−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/24/2000)

Oct. 24, 2000
49

DECLARATION by Ron Cohen, Ph.D. on behalf of Plaintiff re opposition [47−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/24/2000)

Oct. 24, 2000
50

DECLARATION by Theodore Eckberg, M.D. on behalf of Plaintiff re opposition [47−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/24/2000)

Oct. 24, 2000
51

DECLARATION by Max Lapertosa on behalf of Plaintiff re opposition [47−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/24/2000)

Oct. 24, 2000
52

OPPOSITION by defendants to motion to intervene [23−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/25/2000)

Oct. 24, 2000
53

REPLY by Intervenors to opposition to motion to intervene [23−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/02/2000)

Oct. 31, 2000
54

REPLY by defendants to opposition to motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/02/2000)

Oct. 31, 2000
55

MOTION before Judge Claudia Wilken by Plaintiff for leave to file surreply to reply of CASH/PCR, et al in support of motion to intervene with Notice set for 11/14/00 at 2:00pm [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/06/2000)

Nov. 3, 2000
56

MOTION before Judge Claudia Wilken by Intervenors for leave to file reply to plaintiffs' surreply with Notice set for 11/14/00 at 2:00pm [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/09/2000)

Nov. 8, 2000
61

STIPULATION and ORDER by Mag. Judge Maria−Elena James : rescheduling settlement conf. (Mag) at 10:00 3/9/01 ; (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/20/2000)

Nov. 9, 2000
57

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken denying Intervenors Colleen Cross, et al's motion for leave to file reply to plaintiffs' surreply [56−1] ( Date Entered: 11/16/00) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/16/2000)

Nov. 13, 2000
60

SURREPLY by Intervenors re motion to intervene [23−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/20/2000)

Nov. 13, 2000
58

MINUTES: before Judge Claudia Wilken ( C/R Candace Yount) ( Hearing Date: 11/14/00) denying without prejudice proposed intervenors' motion to intervene [23−1]; denying defendants' motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1]; further case management conference set for 1:30pm on 1/26/01 ; [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/16/2000)

Nov. 14, 2000
62

NOTICE by Intervenors of entry of [57−1] order [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/21/2000)

Nov. 20, 2000
63

PROOF OF SERVICE by Plaintiff of order [59−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/27/2000)

Nov. 27, 2000
64

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken denying defendants' motion to transfer action to a proper venue [29−1] ( Date Entered: 12/5/00) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 12/05/2000)

Dec. 4, 2000
65

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken denying Proposed Intervenors' motion to intervene [23−1] as to Organizational Proposed Intervernos, and DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Individual Proposed Intervenors, with leave to refile for the limited purpose of contesting certification of plaintiffs' proposed class ( Date Entered: 12/5/00) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 12/05/2000)

Dec. 4, 2000
66

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT; Date of proceedings: 11/14/00 ( C/R: Candace L. Yount) minutes [58−2] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 12/07/2000)

Dec. 6, 2000
67

MINUTES: before Judge Claudia Wilken ( C/R Carol Karen) ( Hearing Date: 1/26/01) Case Management Conference held; cross−motions to be filed, and will be held on 2/15/02 at 10:00am, along with case management conference; [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/05/2001)

Jan. 29, 2001
68

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION before Judge Claudia Wilken by Plaintiff for class certification with Notice set for 3/16/01 at 10:00am [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/06/2001)

Feb. 5, 2001
69

MEMORANDUM by Plaintiffs in support of motion for class certification [68−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/06/2001)

Feb. 5, 2001
70

DECLARATION by Max Lapertosa on behalf of Plaintiffs re motion for class certification [68−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/06/2001)

Feb. 5, 2001
71

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT; Date of proceedings: 1/26/01 ( C/R: Carol A. Karen) minutes [67−2] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/23/2001)

Feb. 21, 2001
72

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken re: confidential information, and that the parties comply with Local Rule 79−5: (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/26/2001)

Feb. 22, 2001
73

NOTICE by Plaintiff [72−1] order [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/02/2001)

March 1, 2001
74

OPPOSITION by defendants to motion for class certification [68−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/07/2001)

March 2, 2001
75

STIPULATION and ORDER by Mag. Judge Maria−Elena James : Settlement conf. (Mag) continued to 3/14/01 at 2:00pm; (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/09/2001)

March 2, 2001
77

ORDER by Mag. Judge Maria−Elena James granting defendants' motion to be excused from personal attendance at the settlement conference [76−1] ( Date Entered: 3/9/01) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/09/2001)

March 6, 2001
79

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION before Mag. Judge Maria−Elena James by Plaintiffs to excuse plaintiffs from attendance at settlement conference with Notice set for 3/14/01 at 2:00pm [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/13/2001)

March 8, 2001
80

ORDER by Mag. Judge Maria−Elena James granting motion to excuse plaintiffs from attendance at settlement conference [79−1] ( Date Entered: 3/13/01) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/13/2001)

March 8, 2001
78

REPLY by Plaintiffs to opposition to motion for class certification [68−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/12/2001)

March 9, 2001
82

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE MINUTES: ( C/R not reported) ( Hearing Date: 3/14/01) Settlement conference held , further settlement conf. (Mag) on 5/24/01 and 6/18/01 at 2:00pm; [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/20/2001)

March 15, 2001
81

MINUTES: before Judge Claudia Wilken ( C/R Candace Yount) ( Hearing Date: 3/16/01) denying without prejudice plaintiff's motion for class certification [68−1]; plaintiff to file renewed motion within 3 weeks [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/19/2001)

March 16, 2001
83

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken DENYING motion for class certification [68−1] without prejudice to refiling according to instructions given by the Court at the hearing on 3/16/01; (Date Entered: 3/23/01) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (kc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/23/2001)

March 22, 2001
84

NOTICE OF RENEWED MOTION AND RENEWED MOTION before Judge Claudia Wilken by Plaintiff Stephen Sanchez, Plaintiff Kory Nigian, Plaintiff Kathy Tobiason, Plaintiff Scott De Santo, Plaintiff Grace Ewalt, Plaintiff Scott Crose, Plaintiff Edward Compton for class determination [4:00−cv−01593] (kc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 04/06/2001)

April 6, 2001
85

MEMORANDUM by Plaintiffs in support of motion for class determination [84−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (kc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 04/06/2001)

April 6, 2001
86

DECLARATION by Max Lapertosa on behalf of Plaintiffs in support of renewed motion for class determination [84−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (kc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 04/06/2001)

April 6, 2001
87

EXHIBITS in support of plaintiffs' motion for class determination [84−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (kc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 04/06/2001)

April 6, 2001
88

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT; Date of proceedings: 3/16/01 ( C/R: Candace L. Yount) minutes [81−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 04/18/2001)

April 17, 2001
89

MOTION before Judge Claudia Wilken by Plaintiffs to seal documents in support of plaintiffs' renewed motion for class determination [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 04/19/2001)

April 18, 2001
90

OPPOSITION by defendants to motion for class determination [84−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 04/25/2001)

April 20, 2001
92

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken : granting motion to seal documents in support of plaintiffs' renewed motion for class determination [89−1] (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/02/2001)

April 24, 2001
93

EXCERPTS from the clients records of plaintiffs Stephen Sanchez, Edwin Compton, Kory Nigian, Scott Desanto and Kathryn Tobiason in support of motion for class determination [84−1] ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/02/2001)

April 24, 2001
91

REPLY by Plaintiffs to opposition to motion for class determination [84−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/01/2001)

April 27, 2001
94

MOTION before Judge Claudia Wilken by defendant State of CA to seal individual plaintiffs' records in support of opposition to plaintiffs' renewed motion for class determination [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/02/2001)

April 30, 2001
95

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken : sealing exhibits in support of defendants' opposition to plaintiffs' renewed motion for class determination (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) Modified on 05/17/2001 (Entered: 05/15/2001)

May 11, 2001
96

EXHIBITS in support of opposition [90−1] ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/15/2001)

May 11, 2001

Docket Modification (Administrative) to order [95−2] granting motion to seal individual plaintiffs' records in support of opposition to plaintiffs' renewed motion for class determination [94−1] [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/03/2001)

May 11, 2001
97

DECLARATION OF SERVICE by defendants of stipulation and order [95−2] [4:00−cv−01593] (kc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/16/2001)

May 16, 2001
98

ORDER by Mag. Judge Maria−Elena James excusing defendants, and plaintiff's counsel Thomas K. Gilhool from personal attendance at the 5/24/01 settlement conference ( Date Entered: 5/24/01) (cc: all counsel) [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/24/2001)

May 21, 2001
99

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE MINUTES: ( C/R not reported) ( Hearing Date: 5/24/01) Settlement conference held ; further settlement conference will be held 2:00pm on 6/18/01 ; [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/01/2001)

May 24, 2001
100

NOTICE by Plaintiffs of entry of [92−1] order [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/18/2001)

June 15, 2001
101

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE MINUTES: before Mag. Judge James ( C/R not reported) ( Hearing Date: 6/18/01) Settlement conference NOT held; parties informed court that they are unable to settle [4:00−cv−01593] (cp, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/25/2001)

June 18, 2001

RECEIVED motion for leave to file two page supplemental authority in support of plaintiffs' renewed motion ofr class determination submitted by Plaintiffs [4:00−cv−01593] (kc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/10/2001)

July 9, 2001

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Public Benefits/Government Services

Special Collection(s):

Olmstead Cases

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 4, 2000

Closing Date: 2004

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

A class of disabled individuals and community care providers.

Attorney Organizations:

NDRN/Protection & Advocacy Organizations

Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund (DREDF)

Public Interest Law Center (PILCOP)

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

California Department of Health and Human Services (Sacramento, Sacramento), State

California Department of Developmental Services (Sacramento, Sacramento), State

California Department of Finance (Sacramento), State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.

Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701

Medicaid, 42 U.S.C §1396 (Title XIX of the Social Security Act)

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

Benefit Source:

Medicaid