COVID-19 Summary: This is an ongoing case to secure sanitary water in a psychiatric hospital in which the plaintiffs filed additional motions for temporary restraining orders in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, requesting release and mitigation measures including: adequate mental health care, social distancing, and hygiene products. The court granted a temporary restraining order on April 25 and a preliminary injunction on May 24, ordering the defendants to isolate patients exposed to the virus and to conduct testing throughout the facility to determine the spread of COVID-19 among staff and patients. The defendants appealed the preliminary injunction on June 22 and filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, a motion for summary judgment on July 10. The parties later filed a motion to vacate the preliminary injunction and requested that the court stay the case while the parties discussed a possible resolution.
On October 23, 2019, four individuals at Saint Elizabeths Hospital, a psychiatric hospital in D.C., filed this action in the U.S. District Court for the District of D.C. on behalf of themselves and all other patients at the hospital. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of the D.C., Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights & Urban Affairs, and private counsel, the plaintiffs sued the District of Columbia and Saint Elizabeths Hospital. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 2201, alleging violations of their Fifth Amendment Due Process rights, and violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12131. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Saint Elizabeths had not had safe, running water since at least September 26, 2019, the date the water supply was completely turned off. This prohibited patients and staff from routinely flushing toilets, washing their hands, showering, drinking water from water fountains, and washing their clothing. The case was initially assigned to Judge Christopher R. Cooper, but randomly reassigned to Judge. Randolph D. Moss on October 30, 2019.
The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on December 16, 2019, arguing that the plaintiffs had failed to state a Due Process or ADA claim and that the hospital officials were entitled to qualified immunity.
On January 21, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a motion to certify the class, seeking to represent "all current and future Saint Elizabeths Hospital patients."
On April 16, the plaintiffs filed a motion to amend their complaint in light of COVID-19, adding a petition for writ of habeas corpus. They alleged that although the defendants had turned the water back on in October 2019, they continued to foster conditions that exacerbated the dangers to their patients by failing to take adequate steps to protect their patients from COVID-19. Plaintiffs also asserted that, as of April 15, four patients had died of COVID-19 and that "32 patients and 47 staff at the Hospital have tested positive for COVID-19." The motion was granted on April 22. 2020 WL 1935524.
The plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order on April 18, requesting the court order the defendants to reduce the population, both by halting admission to the hospital and releasing current patients, and to develop COVID-19 mitigation measures including testing, hygiene products, social distancing, educational programming, and daily reporting. The defendants filed a motion in opposition on April 21.
On April 25, Judge Moss granted in part the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order, ordering the defendants to isolate individuals exposed to COVID-19, conduct clinical evaluations prior to releasing individuals from isolation, and produce bi-weekly reports of compliance with the order. 456 F.Supp.3d 126 (Apr. 25, 2020). Following a status conference, this order was extended until May 11.
On May 11, Judge Moss again extended and expanded the temporary restraining order, additionally requiring defendants to complete and report the results of two baseline point prevalence surveys to determine the spread of COVID-19 among staff and residents at the facility, and to assign staff to only one unit per day. 2020 WL 2410502.
On May 14, the plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction, requesting the incorporation of the current restraining order into an injunction, a reduction of the number of patients in the facility, appropriate mental health care, the appointment of an independent monitor, and reporting. The defendants filed a motion in opposition on May 19.
The court granted the plaintiffs' motion in part on May 24, converting the temporary restraining order into a preliminary injunction which required the defendants to file a status report by June 8 detailing plans for further mitigation measures in the facility. The court denied the plaintiffs' motion in all other respects. 464 F.Supp.3d 132 (May 24, 2020).
On June 22, the defendants appealed the preliminary injunction to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. They also filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, a motion for summary judgment on July 10. The plaintiffs opposed the motion to dismiss on August 14 and the defendants continued continued to submit bi-monthly notices of compliance to the court.
On April 30, 2021 the parties filed an unopposed motion to vacate the Preliminary Injunction as it was moot, which the court granted on May 3. The parties then filed a motion to stay the litigation in the district court while they attempted to discuss possible resolution of the matter until November 9, 2021
The case is ongoing.
Caitlin Kierum - 06/04/2020
Tessa McEvoy - 03/19/2021
compress summary
