Filed Date: Jan. 29, 2009
Closed Date: Oct. 6, 2009
Clearinghouse coding complete
This is a case about whether a Protection and Advocacy (P&A) agency can use its access authority in an unlicensed group home. On January 29, 2009, Disability Rights Washington, Washington’s P&A, filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. Disability Rights Washington filed this lawsuit against Penrith Farms (Penrith), an unlicensed group home provider, under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act (DD Act) and Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness Act (PAIMI Act). Represented by itself, Disability Rights Washington sought injunctive relief that required Penrith allow them to access the group home and investigate pursuant to the DD and PAIMI Acts. Judge Justin Lowe Quackenbush presided over this matter.
Disability Rights Washington began its investigation upon receiving a complaint from a Penrith resident who claimed Penrith took his personal belongings, told him he could not leave the home, and forced him to do manual labor without compensation. Subsequently, Disability Rights Washington requested records and interviews with residents, but Penrith refused. Penrith asserted that Disability Rights Washington could not access their facility or records because as an unlicensed group home, they were not a covered facility under the PAIMI and DD Acts, and that no Penrith residents had disabilities. Disability Rights Washington filed a Motion for Summary Judgment that Penrith was a facility under both Acts that served individuals with disabilities. On October 6, 2009, the court granted summary Judgment for Disability Rights Washington. The court reasoned that Penrith residents identified as individuals with disabilities and mental illness, that Penrith staff said residents had disabilities, and Penrith’s own website asserted that the group home provides services for individuals with disabilities. The court maintained that the PAIMI and DD Acts cover facilities for individuals with disabilities regardless of their licensure types. On October 6, 2009, the court closed the case.
Summary Authors
NDRN (12/16/2022)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5427978/parties/disability-rights-washington-v-penrith-farms/
Quackenbush, Justin Lowe (Washington)
Burr, Zachary Hamilton (Washington)
Carlson, David R (Washington)
Howard, Christopher Holm (Washington)
Krashan, Allison Kathleen (Washington)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5427978/disability-rights-washington-v-penrith-farms/
Last updated Dec. 16, 2024, 3:50 p.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: Washington
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Jan. 29, 2009
Closing Date: Oct. 6, 2009
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
P&A as plaintiff
Plaintiff Type(s):
Non-profit NON-religious organization
Attorney Organizations:
NDRN/Protection & Advocacy Organizations
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Penrith Farms, Non-profit or advocacy
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness (PAIMI) Act, 42 U.S.C. § 10801
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Content of Injunction:
Preliminary relief request withdrawn/mooted
Issues
General/Misc.:
Disability and Disability Rights: