On May 6, 2010, the United States Department of Justice ("DOJ") filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas under Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") against the State of Arkansas. The Department of Justice asked the court to issue ...
read more >
On May 6, 2010, the United States Department of Justice ("DOJ") filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas under Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") against the State of Arkansas. The Department of Justice asked the court to issue an injunction, claiming that the State discriminates against people with developmental disabilities by not providing programs that are the most appropriate for their needs. Specifically, the DOJ claimed that in administering developmental disability services, the State of Arkansas unnecessarily segregates and isolates persons with disabilities from the community.
Previously, the DOJ had filed suit against the State of Arkansas (ID-AR-002) and the Conway Human Development Center ("CHDC") alleging that the manner in which the State provides services to persons with disabilities residing in the CHDC violated the Fourteenth Amendment, the ADA, and the Disabilities Education Act. The DOJ moved to dismiss Count II of the CHDC complaint in order to pursue the statewide action.
The State moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the DOJ did not fulfill the procedural requirements to bring suit under Title II of the ADA, as stated in the Code of Federal Regulations. The regulations set forth an administrative process, that prior to filing a lawsuit, that requires a complaint by an individual of discrimination to an agency with jurisdiction over the subject matter, an attempt at an informal resolution, issuance of a formal letter of compliance or noncompliance, and a referral by the federal agency to the Attorney General for enforcement. On January 24, 2011, the District Court (Judge J. Leon Holmes) dismissed the case without prejudice because the court found that the DOJ had not followed the administrative process set forth in the regulations.
Ashley Grolig - 09/21/2014
compress summary