University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Rosario v. Goord PC-NY-0051
Docket / Court 7:03-cv-00859-CLB ( S.D.N.Y. )
State/Territory New York
Case Type(s) Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Prison Conditions
Case Summary
Plaintiffs, disabled inmates of the New York State Department of Correctional Services (''DOCS''), brought an action via an amended complaint in April 2003, against defendants (DOCS administrators and health care facility supervisors) alleging violations of Title II of the Americans with ... read more >
Plaintiffs, disabled inmates of the New York State Department of Correctional Services (''DOCS''), brought an action via an amended complaint in April 2003, against defendants (DOCS administrators and health care facility supervisors) alleging violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (''ADA''), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., and the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794, after an original complaint filed on February 6, 2003. The plaintiffs were represented by attorneys from The Prisoners' Rights Project of The Legal Aid Society in New York City. The case asked the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for declaratory and injunctive relief, together with attorneys' fees. The plaintiffs sought to redress the defendants' failure to provide access to prison programs, services and activities to prisoners with disabilities who are in DOCS custody and housed in its Regional Medical Units (RMUs). Plaintiffs sought to represent a class of individuals with disabilities housed in the RMUs, who are not provided access to prison programs available to non-disabled prisoners, such as educational, vocational, work and substance abuse programs, including those that would qualify them for an earlier release from prison.

The district court (District Judge Charles L. Brieant), in an unpublished memorandum and order dated September 24, 2003, dismissed the action. Judge Brieant found that plaintiffs had failed to exhaust their administrative remedies prior to filing suit as required by part of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), because, though they had arguably exhausted internal prison grievance procedures, they had not lodged a complaint with the Department of Justice (''DOJ''). DOJ regulations at 28 C.F.R. 35.170-178 provide a complaint procedure for persons who believe they have been subjected to discrimination on the basis of disability by a public entity and this procedure, too, according to the district court, must be exhausted prior to filing suit. The judge ruled this was so, even if the DOJ process is largely advisory and lacks the means of providing the relief the plaintiffs seek.

After the dismissal, plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Before the appeal process concluded, the defendants moved to have the appellate court vacate the district court's order and remand the case for further proceedings. The basis of the motion was the defendants' announced decision to abandon reliance on the DOJ administrative exhaustion defense, now and in the future. The plaintiffs consented to the motion and, in a brief ruling on March 2, 2005, the Second Circuit vacated the district court's order of dismissal and remanded the case. Rosario v. Goord, 400 F.3d 108 (2d Cir. 2005) (per curiam).

Having returned to the district court, the parties there disputed whether the case should be accorded class action status. In an unpublished order, Judge Brieant ruled in the plaintiffs' favor on that issue on September 15, 2005. A second amended complaint, filed by the plaintiffs of March 1, 2006, was answered by the defendants on March 23d. By July 21, 2006, the parties' settlement negotiations produced a voluntary stipulation of dismissal, subject to their settlement agreement and a notice of the impending dismissal and settlement was sent to the plaintiff class. On September 29, 2006, the court approved the voluntary dismissal and settlement agreement in the case. We do not have details about the settlement's terms.

We have no further information on the case.

Mike Fagan - 04/30/2008

compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Affected Gender
Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)
Recreation / Exercise
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Causes of Action Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.
Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701
Defendant(s) New York Department of Correctional Services
Plaintiff Description All prisoners with physical disabilities, as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 705(20) and 42 U.S.C. § 12102, who are now, or will in the future be, under the custody of DOCS and housed in the Fishkill, Walsh or Wende RMU.
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status outcome Granted
Filed Pro Se No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Attorneys fees
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Private Settlement Agreement
Voluntary Dismissal
Order Duration 2006 - 2009
Filed 02/06/2003
Case Closing Year 2009
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
  See this case at (May provide additional documents and, for active cases, real-time alerts)
Court Docket(s)
PC-NY-0051-9000.pdf | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Amended Complaint [ECF# 5]
PC-NY-0051-0001.pdf | Detail
Memorandum and Order [ECF# 29] (2003 WL 22429271)
PC-NY-0051-0003.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
U.S. Court of Appeals
Per Curiam [USCA Order] (400 F.3d 108)
PC-NY-0051-0002.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Voluntary Stipulation of Dismissal Subject to Conditions and Order [ECF# 78]
PC-NY-0051-0004.pdf | Detail
Source: Plaintiffs' counsel
show all people docs
Judges Brieant, Charles L. Jr. (S.D.N.Y.) show/hide docs
PC-NY-0051-0003 | PC-NY-0051-0004 | PC-NY-0051-9000
Cabranes, José Alberto (FISCR, D. Conn., Second Circuit) show/hide docs
Katzmann, Robert A. (Second Circuit) show/hide docs
Leval, Pierre Nelson (S.D.N.Y., Second Circuit) show/hide docs
Plaintiff's Lawyers Banks, Steven (New York) show/hide docs
Beck, John A. (New York) show/hide docs
Boston, John (New York) show/hide docs
PC-NY-0051-0001 | PC-NY-0051-0002 | PC-NY-0051-0004
Ginsberg, Betsy R. (New York) show/hide docs
PC-NY-0051-0001 | PC-NY-0051-0002 | PC-NY-0051-0004 | PC-NY-0051-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Brown, Bruce A. (New York) show/hide docs
Hotvet, Martin A. (New York) show/hide docs
Schwartz, John Michael (New York) show/hide docs
Smirlock, Daniel (New York) show/hide docs
Spitzer, Eliot (New York) show/hide docs

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -