COVID-19 Summary: This class-action injunctive and habeas case against the State of Connecticut sought release and improved conditions at two inpatient psychiatric facilities. The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction for improved conditions on June 8, 2020, and the defendants moved to dismiss the case on June 11. The plaintiffs withdrew their motion for preliminary injunction on July 16. After the Court dismissed the habeas portion of the lawsuit in January 2021, the parties agreed to withdraw the action.
On April 30, 2020, five individuals hospitalized at the Connecticut Valley Hospital (CVH) and the Whiting Forensic Hospital (WFH) filed this class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut against the State of Connecticut, seeking improved conditions and release because of the threat posed by the COVID pandemic. Represented by the Connecticut Legal Rights Project, the plaintiffs brought this lawsuit as a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, and as an injunctive and declaratory action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. They asserted claims on behalf of all patients admitted or to be admitted by the CVH and WFH during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged failure to timely isolate patients and staff, which resulted in or substantially contributed to infections and outbreaks; they complaint alleged that conditions violated their rights under the Due Process Clause and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The plaintiffs sought immediate temporary and conditional release of all patients who could be safely discharged. The plaintiffs also requested implementation of COVID-19 testing and social distancing measures, and appointment of an independent court monitor to enforce court orders. The case was assigned to Judge Janet C. Hall.
On May 7, the complaint was amended, dismissing several defendants.
The plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction on June 8. They sought COVID-19 testing protocols in line with CDC standards, improved hygiene and protective equipment, maximum social distancing possible, and clinical review that would allow accelerated discharges. The defendants moved to dismiss the case on June 11, claiming that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust state court remedies.
The defendants opposed the preliminary injunction on July 9, pointing to the low number of positive cases and deaths at the facilities. According to the defendants, as of July 9, the date that a patient at CVH last tested positive for COVID-19 was on May 16, 2020, while the date that a patient at Whiting last tested positive was on April 21, 2020.
The plaintiffs sought continued hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction and a discovery period of 60 days on July 15. A hearing was held on July 16 and the plaintiffs withdrew their motion for preliminary injunction the same day.
On August 19, 2020, the case was referred to Judge Robert A. Richardson for pretrial case management. Discovery was ongoing through January 2021.
On December 18, 2020, the court granted in part and denied in part defendant's motion to dismiss. The motion to dismiss was denied in part as to the defendants' arguments concerning primary jurisdiction doctrine. The court agreed to continue to hear this case rather than referring it to state court. The motion was granted in part as to the defendants' arguments concerning habeas corpus, and the portion of the Amended Complaint petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus was dismissed.
On January 14, 2021, the court granted a stipulation of all parties to dismiss all claims without prejudice.
Averyn Lee - 09/21/2020
Tessa McEvoy - 05/20/2021
compress summary
