Case: Hinkle v. Kent

3:18-cv-06430 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: Oct. 22, 2018

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On October 22, 2018, Disability Rights and co-counsel Disability Rights Advocates and Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund filed a federal class action lawsuit on behalf of the California Council of the Blind and three blind individuals, claiming that blind individuals do not receive accessible notices about Medicaid options and services, in violation of: the ADA Title II, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, California Government Code Section …

On October 22, 2018, Disability Rights and co-counsel Disability Rights Advocates and Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund filed a federal class action lawsuit on behalf of the California Council of the Blind and three blind individuals, claiming that blind individuals do not receive accessible notices about Medicaid options and services, in violation of: the ADA Title II, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, California Government Code Section 11135, The California Disabled Persons Act, and The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in the Northern District of California and assigned to Judge Maxine M. Chesney,  alleged that when blind individuals requested accessible versions of Medicaid notices, the state Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) and California counties of, Contra Costa, Alameda, and San Diego, either failed to provide accessible versions or failed to do so in a timely manner. These delays caused blind individuals, eligible for Medicaid, to lose their benefits. 

Providing information to blind individuals in alternative formats such as Braille or large print is required by federal and California anti-discrimination laws. To solve this problem, the plaintiffs requested that the defendants be required to  (1) identify people who need communication in Braille or other accessible formats, and (2) respond appropriately to requests for accessible formats.

Before a trial was scheduled, Judge Maxine M. Chesney ordered both parties try to resolve the case through formal mediation. Several mediation sessions were conducted but ended in March 2021 without resolving the issues. In the Summer of 2021, both parties began formal settlement negotiations that are still in progress as of Fall 2022.

Summary Authors

NDRN (11/7/2022)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/14687643/parties/hinkle-v-kent/


Judge(s)
Attorney for Plaintiff

Bichell, Rosa Lee (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Antonen, Charles J. (California)

Barca, Dane Christian (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
1

3:18-cv-06430

Class Action Complaint

Oct. 22, 2018

Oct. 22, 2018

Complaint

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/14687643/hinkle-v-kent/

Last updated Dec. 18, 2024, 7:16 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Disability Rights

Healthcare Access and Reproductive Issues

Key Dates

Filing Date: Oct. 22, 2018

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

individual plaintiffs seeking class status

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

NDRN/Protection & Advocacy Organizations

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Pending

Defendants

California Department of Health Care Services, State

Defendant Type(s):

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

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

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

Disability and Disability Rights:

Disability, unspecified