Case: Hickey v. Forkner

4:10-cv-02696 | U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina

Filed Date: Oct. 19, 2010

Closed Date: Dec. 21, 2011

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The plaintiff, an individual with a number of disabilities who requires at-home personal care services in order to remain in the community, filed this lawsuit after South Carolina reduced the number of personal care nursing hours available to her. The Plaintiff had been receiving 50 hours of at-home care through a Medicaid waiver program, but in late 2009, the state opted to cap the total number of available personal care hours at 28 for non-institutionalized persons. The Plaintiff claimed th…

The plaintiff, an individual with a number of disabilities who requires at-home personal care services in order to remain in the community, filed this lawsuit after South Carolina reduced the number of personal care nursing hours available to her. The Plaintiff had been receiving 50 hours of at-home care through a Medicaid waiver program, but in late 2009, the state opted to cap the total number of available personal care hours at 28 for non-institutionalized persons. The Plaintiff claimed that this reduction put her at risk of unnecessary institutionalization in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

After filing a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina on October 19, 2010, the Court (Judge Terry L. Wooten) granted the Plaintiff's motion to prevent the state from reducing her service hours during the course of the litigation on May 5, 2011. At the same time, the Plaintiff pursued an administrative appeal of her service reduction. The Plaintiff ultimately won her administrative appeal and was able to maintain her 50 hours of home care services. As a result, the parties agreed to dismiss the litigation as moot on November 29, 2011.

Summary Authors

Beth Kurtz (2/22/2013)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4990312/parties/hickey-v-forkner/


Judge(s)

Wooten, Terry L. (South Carolina)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Davidson, William Henry II (South Carolina)

Jackson, Emily E. (South Carolina)

Miller, Emily Jackson (South Carolina)

Unumb, Daniel (South Carolina)

Woodington, Kenneth P. (South Carolina)

Judge(s)

Wooten, Terry L. (South Carolina)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Davidson, William Henry II (South Carolina)

Jackson, Emily E. (South Carolina)

Miller, Emily Jackson (South Carolina)

Unumb, Daniel (South Carolina)

Woodington, Kenneth P. (South Carolina)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket

Hickney v. Forkner

Dec. 21, 2011 Docket
1

Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief

Oct. 19, 2010 Complaint
24

Joint Motion for Consent Order to Maintain Services Pendente Lite

May 3, 2011 Pleading / Motion / Brief
25

Order

May 5, 2011 Order/Opinion
32

Consent Motion to Dismiss Based on Mootness

Nov. 29, 2011 Pleading / Motion / Brief

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4990312/hickey-v-forkner/

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

ECF Number Description Date Link
25

ORDER granting 24 Consent Motion to Maintain Medicaid Services Pendente Lite. Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on 05/05/2011.(dsto, )

May 5, 2011 RECAP
34

ORDER DISMISSING CASE as stipulated by the parties, that the instant action is hereby dismissed, without prejudice, on grounds of mootness. Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on 12/20/2011. (dsto, )

Dec. 21, 2011 RECAP

State / Territory: South Carolina

Case Type(s):

Public Benefits/Government Services

Special Collection(s):

Olmstead Cases

Key Dates

Filing Date: Oct. 19, 2010

Closing Date: Dec. 21, 2011

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Plaintiff is an elderly individual with multiple severe disabilities. She requires at-home nursing care in order to live in the community and not in a nursing facility.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

Legal Services/Legal Aid

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, State

South Carolina Department of Disabilities and Special Needs, State

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Hospital/Health Department

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

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Order Duration: 2011 - None

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief granted

Issues

General:

Deinstitutionalization/decarceration

Habilitation (training/treatment)

Public benefits (includes, e.g., in-state tuition, govt. jobs)

Discrimination-basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)

Disability:

disability, unspecified

Hearing impairment

Integrated setting

Mental impairment

Benefit Source:

Medicaid