Case: U.S. v. Illinois

1:92-cv-00694 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Filed Date: Jan. 28, 1992

Closed Date: 1996

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On January 28, 1992, the United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of residents at the W.A. Howe Developmental Center pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 1997 et seq. against the State of Illinois and W.A. Howe Developmental Center in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The DOJ alleged that the defendants deprived residents of the facility of their constitut…

On January 28, 1992, the United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of residents at the W.A. Howe Developmental Center pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 1997 et seq. against the State of Illinois and W.A. Howe Developmental Center in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The DOJ alleged that the defendants deprived residents of the facility of their constitutional rights, privileges, and immunities and it sought injunctive relief.

The DOJ specifically alleged that defendants subjected residents to unreasonable risks to their personal safety and undue bodily restraint by failing to provide appropriate individualized training and behavioral programs. It was also alleged that the defendants provided inadequate medical care, kept inadequate record review systems, subjected residents to undue bodily restraint by failing to ensure restraints were administered by qualified professionals according to professional judgment, failed to prescribe and administer psychotropic medication safely and pursuant to professional judgment, and failed to employ adequate staff.

On January 4, 1994, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Judge Paul E. Plunkett) issued a consent decree. The Court ordered that the defendants provide each resident a training program designed to reduce unreasonable risks to personal safety and unreasonable use of bodily restraints. Defendants were also required to ensure that bodily restraints and time out were administered only pursuant to professional judgment. Further, defendants were also required to provide adequate medical care and medical specialty services, ensure that prescription medications were appropriately prescribed and administered, establish and maintain adequate medical records for each resident, and employ adequate staff in ratios set forth in the consent decree.

The Court anticipated that defendants would fully implement the provisions of the consent decree within two years. The Court maintained jurisdiction over this action until all provision were fully implemented and appointed a panel of experts to monitor the defendants' compliance (the monitors appointed were psychology expert Johnny L. Matson, Ph.D., medical expert Robert B. Kugel, M.D., and physical management expert Karen M. Green-McGowan). The docket ends on February 14, 1996 with the Court (Judge Plunkett) entering a minute order granting the Agreed Motion to Terminate Consent Decree and Dismiss Case.

Summary Authors

Emilee Baker (7/25/2006)

People


Judge(s)

Plunkett, Paul Edward (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Barr, William P. (District of Columbia)

Chen, Pamela K. (District of Columbia)

Dunne, John R. (District of Columbia)

Fitzgerald, Patrick J. (Illinois)

Foreman, Fred (Illinois)

Peabody, Arthur E. Jr. (District of Columbia)

Perez, Thomas E. (District of Columbia)

Preston, Judith (Judy) C. (District of Columbia)

Reynolds, William Bradford (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Plunkett, Paul Edward (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Barr, William P. (District of Columbia)

Chen, Pamela K. (District of Columbia)

Dunne, John R. (District of Columbia)

Fitzgerald, Patrick J. (Illinois)

Foreman, Fred (Illinois)

Peabody, Arthur E. Jr. (District of Columbia)

Perez, Thomas E. (District of Columbia)

Preston, Judith (Judy) C. (District of Columbia)

Reynolds, William Bradford (District of Columbia)

Schoen, Benjamin P. (District of Columbia)

Stern, Robert H. (District of Columbia)

Stutman, Edward A. (Pennsylvania)

Turner, James P. (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Brummet, Delilah (Illinois)

Hartigan, Neil F. (Illinois)

Katten, Mitchell Bruce (Illinois)

Montana, James S. Jr. (Illinois)

Sullivan, Marita Clare (Illinois)

Valukas, Anton R. (Illinois)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

Feb. 14, 1996 Docket

Notice Letter re: CRIPA Continuing Investigation of Howe Developmental Center, Tinley Park

No Court

May 20, 1988 Notice Letter

Findings Letter re: the W.A. Howe Developmental Center, 42 U.S.C. Section 1997b (a) (1)

No Court

July 31, 1989 Findings Letter/Report

Complaint

Jan. 13, 1992 Complaint
91

Consent Decree

Jan. 4, 1994 Settlement Agreement
94

Agreed Motion to Terminate Consent Decree and Dismiss Case

Feb. 14, 1996 Pleading / Motion / Brief
95

Minute Order

Feb. 16, 1996 Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

State / Territory: Illinois

Case Type(s):

Intellectual Disability (Facility)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Jan. 28, 1992

Closing Date: 1996

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

United States Department of Justice

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Denied

Defendants

W.A. Howe Developmental Center (Tinley Park), State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 1997 et seq.

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Litigation

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Order Duration: 1994 - 1996

Issues

General:

Assault/abuse by staff

Incident/accident reporting & investigations

Individualized planning

Neglect by staff

Record-keeping

Restraints : physical

Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)

Medical/Mental Health:

Medical care, general

Medication, administration of

Type of Facility:

Government-run