Case: Homeward Bound v. Hissom Memorial Center

4:85-cv-00437 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma

Filed Date: May 2, 1985

Closed Date: 2007

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 2, 1985, Homeward Bound, Inc. filed a class-action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma against the Hissom Memorial Center and various state agencies. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of 600 individuals with intellectual disabilities, most of whom were children, who were incarcerated in Hissom Memorial in Sand Springs, Oklahoma. Homeward Bound was represented by private attorneys and attorneys from the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelp…

On May 2, 1985, Homeward Bound, Inc. filed a class-action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma against the Hissom Memorial Center and various state agencies. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of 600 individuals with intellectual disabilities, most of whom were children, who were incarcerated in Hissom Memorial in Sand Springs, Oklahoma. Homeward Bound was represented by private attorneys and attorneys from the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia and the University of Oklahoma School of Law. The complaint alleged that that the plaintiffs were subject to abuse, neglect, injury, and unnecessary physical and chemical restraints and were denied adequate medical care, clothing, food, and habilitation services. It alleged violations of the Rehabilitation Act, the Social Security Act, the Education of Handicapped Children Act, Due Process, Equal Protection, and the constitutional rights of expression, association, privacy, and family integrity. The complaint alleged that the residents would be better served in community-based placements.

On July 24, 1987, after consultation with experts, the District Court (Judge James Ellison) entered Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and a Court Plan and Order of Deinstitutionalization. Homeward Bound, Inc. v. Hissom Memorial Center, Inc., 1987 WL 27104 (N.D. Okla.). The order gave defendants four years to move plaintiffs to community-based alternative placements and provided guidelines for accomplishing that goal.

Litigation continued regarding attorneys' fees and costs. After being awarded attorneys' fees, the plaintiffs requested an enhancement and the district court denied that request. On May 8, 1992, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (Judge Bobby Ray Baldock) affirmed. Homeward Bound, Inc. v. Hissom Memorial Center, Inc., 963 F.2d 1352 (10th Cir. 1992).

In 1989, the parties entered into a Consent Decree which was approved by the court. The Decree outlined a procedure for moving plaintiffs into the community and would terminate upon substantial compliance. The PACER docket does not provide any information about proceedings between 1987 and 1998. Progress reports were provided to the court. On February 1, 2005, Judge Ellison entered an Amended Permanent Injunction, terminating the case and finding that the Consent Decree imposed a permanent obligation on the defendants to provide individual community services and support to the plaintiffs. On January 24, 2007, the parties entered into a Final Stipulation closing the case and resolving issues of attorneys' fees. A Second Amended Permanent Injunction dated February 6, 2007 and signed by Judge Terence Kern ordered defendants to continue utilizing community based treatment under the previous orders and to seek waivers for those individuals with intellectual disabilities who required institutional-based treatment.

The PACER docket indicates that on February 6, 2007, the case was reassigned to Judge Gregory K. Frizzell. At the time of the writing of this summary, there has been no further activity.

Summary Authors

Angela Heverling (5/23/2007)

People


Judge(s)

Baldock, Bobby Ray (New Mexico)

Ellison, James O. (Oklahoma)

Joyner, Sam A. (Oklahoma)

Kern, Terence C. (Oklahoma)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Blakemore, Robert Murray (Oklahoma)

Bullock, Louis Werner (Oklahoma)

Cook, Timothy M. (Pennsylvania)

Gilhool, Thomas K. (Pennsylvania)

Gran, Judith A. (Pennsylvania)

Laski, Frank J. (Pennsylvania)

Judge(s)

Baldock, Bobby Ray (New Mexico)

Ellison, James O. (Oklahoma)

Joyner, Sam A. (Oklahoma)

Kern, Terence C. (Oklahoma)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Blakemore, Robert Murray (Oklahoma)

Bullock, Louis Werner (Oklahoma)

Cook, Timothy M. (Pennsylvania)

Gilhool, Thomas K. (Pennsylvania)

Gran, Judith A. (Pennsylvania)

Laski, Frank J. (Pennsylvania)

Lissau, Michael Joseph (Oklahoma)

Mitchell, Allen (Oklahoma)

Yasser, Raymond (Oklahoma)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Andrew, Stephen Lawrence (Oklahoma)

Casus, Mary Ann (Oklahoma)

Cotter, David A. (Oklahoma)

Curnutte, Mark W. (Oklahoma)

Freeman, Richard Weldon Jr. (Oklahoma)

Hardwick, Pamela Thedford (Oklahoma)

Harness, Gordon (Oklahoma)

Holland, Robert John (Oklahoma)

Holmes, Richard K. (Oklahoma)

Hurst, Guy Lee (Oklahoma)

Ikenberry, Kevin (Oklahoma)

Jones, Mark Lawton (Oklahoma)

Langley, A. (Oklahoma)

Lowry, Dick (Oklahoma)

McCormick, Joseph Arthur (Oklahoma)

Miller, Charles A. (District of Columbia)

Moak, Grant E. (Oklahoma)

Nance, Robert A. (Oklahoma)

Pallotta, Howard J. (Oklahoma)

Rambo-Jones, Lynn Susan (Oklahoma)

Russo, Carol J. (Oklahoma)

Sagona, William (Oklahoma)

Sidak, J. Gregory (District of Columbia)

Snider, Jerry (Oklahoma)

Stuart, Roger (Oklahoma)

Tucker, Thomas H. (Oklahoma)

Turpen, Michael C. (Oklahoma)

Waters, Charles Lee (Oklahoma)

Watson, Chuck (Oklahoma)

Wear, Pat (Kentucky)

Other Attorney(s)

Atencio, Delores S. (Colorado)

Barringer, Marilyn D. (Oklahoma)

Bradshaw, Scott W. (Oklahoma)

Coyle, John W. III (Oklahoma)

Feiger, Lynn D. (Colorado)

Roman, Gilbert M. (Colorado)

Salem, Micheal (Oklahoma)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket (PACER)

Feb. 7, 2007 Docket
1

Class Action Complaint

May 2, 1985 Complaint

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

1987 WL 27104, 1987 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 16866

July 24, 1987 Order/Opinion

Court Plan and Order of Deinstitutionalization

July 24, 1987 Order/Opinion

Consent Decree

Jan. 1, 1989 Order/Opinion

Opinion

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

963 F.2d 1352

May 8, 1992 Order/Opinion
1466

Amended Permanent Injunction

Feb. 1, 2005 Order/Opinion
1496

Agreed Order and Judgment

Homeward Bound v. Hissom Memorial Center

June 5, 2006 Order/Opinion
1506

Final Stipulation

Homeward Bound v. Hissom Memorial Center

Jan. 24, 2007 Pleading / Motion / Brief
1507

Second Amended Permanent Injunction

Feb. 6, 2007 Order/Opinion

Resources

Title Description External URL

Settlement Ends Four-Year Fight To Close Hissom

Ed Godfrey

This article provides insight on what caused this lengthy case to finally end. Dec. 5, 1989 http://newsok.com/article/2296867

Docket

Last updated May 13, 2022

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.