Terry D. v. Rader & Oklahoma

JI-OK-001-001

ft

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OL' OKLAHOMA

(f

FILED

TERRY D. , ROMONDO P., DAVID I.., ROGER V., BYRON C , JEFFERY H., LAURA C. , REBECCA G. by their attorneys and next friend?;, Steven A. Novick and Richard L. Weldon, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,

J'AA
HEK3ERT T. HOPE CLEKK. LJ. -j. DISTRICT COURT.
fiV-78-00 04T

vs.
L. E. RADER, individually and as Director of Public Welfare; CHASE GORDON, individually and as Coordinator of Bureau of Institutions and Community Services to Children and Youth; JOHN LEITKA, JR., individually and as Supervisor of Institutional Services; HAROLD WILSON, individually and as Superintendent of Oklahoma Children's Center-South Campus; BILL CAMPBELL, individually and as Superintendent of Oklahoma Children's Center-tlorth Campus; R. L. DOYLE, individually and as Superintendent of: Boley State School for Boys; BJLL HARPER, individually and as Superintendent of Girl's Town; DAVID McCUNE, individually and as Superintendent of Helena State School for Boys; GARY HUNT, individually and as Superintendent of Whitaker State Children's Home; REGIMALD BARNES, WILBUR CAVE, W. E. FARHA, LEON GILBERT, JAtJE HARTLEY, R. M. GREER, DEAN JAMES, SR., JOE VOTO and CARL WARD, individually and as Commissioners of Public Welfare,

MO. COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
P -~ '
U'i

Defendants.

I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1. This is a class action for declaratory, injunctive and other equitable relief. The named plaintiffs and the c];\ss they represent are persons who have been or may be committee1, to the custody of the Department of Institutions, Social find Rohabilitat.ivp Services (also known as Department of Public: Welfare and hereinafter "DISKS") as deprived children,

children in need of supervision or delinquent children, and institutionalized in DISRS facilities. All of the named plaintiffs are either confined at a DISRS institution, or on parole and subject to return to a DISRS institution.
2. Plaintiffs challenge the imposition of disciplinary measures, including solitary confinement and the suspension from school, without procedures comporting with due process of law as violative of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs challenge the use and conditions of solitary confinement as a punitive, control device violative of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs also challenge the practices of interfering with their attorneyclient privilege and of limiting their access to counsel as violative of the First and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs further challenge the inability and failure of defendants to provide them with appropriate habilitative and rehabilitative treatment in the least restrictive environment as violative of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and state lav;.
II. JURISDICTION 3. This Court has jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. §§1343(3) and (4) and 28 U.S.C. §§2201 and 2202. Plaintiffs' action for equitable relief is authorized by 42 U.S.C. §1983, which provides for redress of deprivations under color of state law of rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States. This Court also has pendent jurisdiction of claims under state law.
III. PI.AIMTIFFS 4. The named juvenile plaintiffs bring this action on their own behalf and on behalf of all other juveniles
-2-

similarly situated in the: State of Oklahoma. All of the named plaintiffs are under eighteen years of age, and are citizens of the United States and the State of Oklahoma.
IV. DEFENDANTS 5. Pursuant to Title 10, Okla. Stats. §§1401 et seq. (Supp. 1977) (hereinafter cited in the form, eg^ 10 O.S. S1401), DISKS has the "supervision, management, operation and control" of the public institutions for children in the State of Oklahoma. The institutions affected by this action are Oklahoma Children's Center, North and South Campus, at Taft, Oklahoma (hereinafter "Taft-North Campus" and "Taft-South Campus"); Boley State School for Boys at Boley, Oklahoma (hereinafter "Boley"); Girl's Town at Tecumseh, Oklahoma; Helena State School for Boys at Helena, Oklahoma (hereinafter "Helena"); and Whitaker State Children's Home at Pryor, Oklahoma (hereinafter "Whitaker"). Unless otherwise specified, all allegations hereinafter set forth relate to all of the aforesaid institutions. 6. Defendant L. E. Rader is the Director of Public Welfare. By virtue of 56 O.S. §lG2(a), 10 O.S. §§454 and 1403, and Okla. Const., Art. XXV, §4, said defendant is charged with the administrative and executive operation of DISRS, including responsibility for the supervision, management, operation and control of the named children's institutions. 7. Defendant Chase Gordon is an administrative assistant to L. E. Rader. Said Defendant is in charge of the Bureau of Institutions and Community Services to Children and Youth, and assists the Director of Public Welfare in the formulation of policy and regulations pertaining to the institutional care of children and juvenile parole services. The exact duties and responsibilities of said defendant are not known to plaintiffs. 8. Defendant John Leitka, Jr. is an immediate subordinate
-3-

of Chase Cordon. Said defendant is the Supervisor of Institutional Services to Children, and generally oversees the operation and maintenance of the children's institutions, and is responsible for carrying out DISRS policies relating to said institutions. The exact duties and responsibilities of said defendant are not known to plaintiffs.
9. Defendants Harold Wilson, Bill Campbell, R. L. Doyle, Bill Harper, David McCune and Gary Hunt are the institutional superintendents at Taft-South Campus, Taft-Morth Campus, Boley, Girl's Town, Helena and Whitaker, respectively. Each of said defendants is charged with the lawful day-to-day administration of the institutions, and the promulgation and execution of rules and regulations necessary for the fulfillment of that responsibility. Pursuant to 10 O.S. §1403(c), each of said defendants is the legal guardian of the person of each child in his institution.
10. Defendants Reginald Barnes, Wilbur Cave, W. E. Farha, Leon Gilbert, Jane Hartley, R. M. Greer, Dean James, Sr., Joe Voto and Carl Ward are the Commissioners of Public Welfare. Pursuant to 56 O.S. §162 and 10 O.S. §1403(a) the Commission has the responsibility for the formulation of policies and rules for the effective administration of DISRS, including the operation of the named children's institutions.
11. All defendants are sued individually and in their official capacities. Each defendant was and is acting under color of state law and by virtue of the authority vested in each of them by the laws of the State of Oklahoma in the capacities stated above.
VI. CLASS ACTION 12. The named plaintiffs bring this action on their own behalf and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated in the State of Oklahoma, pursuant to Rules 23(a) and (b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter "F.R.Civ.P-"). The class consists of all children
-4-

who have been or may be adjuuicatod deprived, in need of supervision or delinquent, placed in the custody of DISKS and confined to one of named institutions operated by defendants. The class may be divided into six sub-classes according to the institutional placements of the children. The class, consisting of approximately 650 children, is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. The following questions of law and fact are common to plaintiffs' class and predominate over any questions affecting only individuals: (1) whether defendants' summary imposition of disciplinary measures upon plaintiffs violates their rights under the United States Constitution; (2) whether defendants' use of solitary confinement and the conditions existing therein violates plaintiffs' constitutional rights; (3) whether defendants' practices and policies restricting plaintiffs' access to counsel is inconsistent with the United States Constitution; and (4) whether defendants, by failure to provide plaintiffs with appropriate habilitative and rehabilitative treatment, in the least restrictive environment, violates plaintiffs' rights under the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of Oklahoma. Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys associated with the Oklahoma County Public Defender Program, Legal Aid of Western Oklahoma and the National Juvenile Law Center, the latter two being projects funded and authorized pursuant to the Legal Services Corporation Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §§2996 et seq. (Supp. 1977), "to provide equal access of the system of justice in our Nation for individuals who seek redress of grievances . . Plaintiffs' counsel are experienced in litigating matters raising significant issues of statutory and Constitutional law; thus, the interests of the class will be adequately represented by the named plaintiffs and their counsel. By their conduct regarding the alleged practices and policies herein, defendants have acted and refused to act on grounds
-5-

generally applicable to the named plaintiffs and their class, thereby making appropriate preliminary and final injunctive and declaratory relief as to the class as a whole.
V. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS SOLITARY CONFINEMENT 13. Pursuant to 10 O.S. §1402, Girl's Town is operated and maintained primarily for females who have been adjudicated delinquent. Helena and 3oley are primarily for males who have been adjudicated delinquent. Taft-North Campus, Taft-South Campus and Whitaker are operated primarily for children who have been adjudicated in need of supervision or deprived. Girl's Town is for females between the ages of eleven and eighteen. Boley holds males eleven through fifteen inclusive, and Helena holds sixteen and seventeen year old males. Taft-North Campus generally houses children nine to fifteen; South Campus, children sixteen to eighteen. Whitaker houses children up to age eighteen. Of the six institutions, Taft, North and South Campus and Whitaker accomodate both males and females. 14. All of the six institutions have rooms and/or cells that are used for solitary confinement, which is variously designated "detention", "isolation", "segregation", "separation", or "time-out". Each of the plaintiffs has been subjected to illegal solitary confinement at the named institutions. 15. Although institutional guidelines provide that a child charged with misconduct shall be given an opportunity to ask questions and state his views to the Disciplinary Committee, it is the established pattern and practice of the defendants, their agents and employees, to place children, including plaintiffs, in solitary confinement for several days prior to any appearance before the Disciplinary Committee. Some children charged with misconduct and placed in solitary confinement never even appear before the Disciplinary
-6-

Committee regarding such allequc! misconduct. 16. Even when a child is brought before the Discipli-
nary Committee for alleged misconduct, there is no meaningful hearing or proceeding to determine whether or not there was, in fact, a rule violation, whether or not the child charged committed the violation and whether or not solitary confinement, or other disciplinary measures, is necessary or appropriate. Children are not permitted to confront witnesses against them. Children are given no opportunity to question their accusors. Neither counsel nor counsel substitute is present to represent children before the Disciplinary Committee. Children have no right to call witnesses or present evidence in their behalf. Mo written or oral notice of the charges is given. No written findings of fact or reasons sufficient to permit review are made. No appeal or review by the institutional superintendent is allowed.
17. Houseparents, school personnel and security personnel at all of the named institutions have in the past and continue in the present to summarily place children, including plaintiffs, in solitary confinement. It is often days before that summary decision is reviewed by the Disciplinary Committee.
18. At each institution there are written guidelines which purport to notify children of conduct which may result in solitary confinement or other punitive restrictions. Each list of written guidelines contains vague, ambiguous and overbroad terminology. The effect of such provisions is to permit the imposition of solitary confinement at the unbridled discretion of institutional personnel. Plaintiffs have been subjected to the arbitrary and capricious imposition of solitary confinement for alleged violations of such provisions. Additionally, there is conduct not specified in the written guidelines that can and has resulted in solitary confinement and other punitive restrictions. No special
- 7 -

e£fort is made to insure that each child in the institution, especially illiterate children, fully understands v/hat conduct is prohibited.
19. Pursuant to written institutional guidelines, the following conduct is punishable by solitary confinement: missing school classes (considered AWOL at state training schools) and school suspension; not cooperating with a houseparent; cursing or name-calling; tattooing or ear-piercing; selling, trading or wearing another student's clothing; disrespect of a teacher; disruption of the institutional programs.
20. Children at the named institutions are placed in solitary confinement for periods ranging from several hours to several weeks. Children are placed in or continued in solitary confinement solely for the purpose of punishment and control at times when they do not constitute a danger to themselves or others.
21. At Taft-South Campus there are solitary confinement rooms in the boy's dormitory, the girl's dormitory and the limited privilege dormitory (hereinafter "LPD"). At Taft-North Campus there are solitary confinement rooms in each of the dormitories. The conditions existing within the solitary confinement rooms at Taft are as follows:
(a) The rooms have windows which are heavily screenmeshed or boarded up. Some rooms have no outside view and the windows cannot be opened.
(b) The rooms contain no toilets or other washroom facilities.
(c) Some of the rooms are filthy, unsanitary and smell of human waste.
(d) The rooms contain no furnishings whatsoever and are completely stripped. The floors are bare linoleum, tile or concrete. During the day, the only item allowed in the rooms is a blanket. At night only a bare mattress is provided.

(e) The rooms are not properly or safely heated, ventilated or cooled.
(f) Children in the rooms are deprived of their regular clothing and forced to wear only their underwear or pajamas, without shoes.
(g) Children in the rooms are not allowed daily exercise or recreation.
(h) Children in the rooms are not allowed to participate in the educational or rehabilitative treatment programs of the institution. No substitute programs are provided for children in solitary confinement.
(i) No books, magazines, newspapers or other reading materials are allowed for the children in solitary confinement.
(j) Handcuffs and leather restraints are sometimes used on children in solitary confinement.
(k) Children in the rooms are not allowed to sleep during the day.
(1) Daily showers are not provided. 22. In addition to the solitary confinement rooms described above, there is a small broom closet in the LPD of Taft-South Campus known as "the hole". It has no windows, no toilet, no lighting and is approximately three feet by six feet in size. This room has been and is being used for institutional runaways and at times when the other solitary confinement rooms are full. 23. At Taft-South Campus when there are a large number of children to be locked up, many children are placed in the same solitary confinement room. During such large scale lock-ups, children have been physically and sexually attacked by other children. No effort is made by institutional personnel to prevent or break-up such assaults. 24. At Girl's Town there is one area used for solitary confinement. It is located in the basement of the
~ 9 —

reception building, and consists of fourteen barred cells and one padded room. The conditions existing within the solitary confinement cells at Girl's Town are as follows:
(a) The cells are barred and are approximately five feet by eight feet in size. Each cell is separated from its neighbor by a concrete wall.
(b) The cells are filthy, unsanitary and vermininfested.
(c) The cells contain only a metal palette attached to the wall, which serves as a bed, and a primitive toilet with no privacy. At night only a mattress is provided.
(d) Girls in the cells are deprived of their regular clothing and forced to wear a "detention uniform", consisting of pajama-like garments.
(e) The cells have no windows to the outside, and are not properly or safely heated, ventilated or cooled.
(f) Girls in the cells are not allowed daily exercise or recreation.
(g) Girls in the cells are not allowed to participate in the educational or rehabilitative treatment programs of the institution. No substitute programs are provided for girls in solitary confinement.
(h) A few books and magazines are available for the girls in the cells, but there is no right to have these reading materials. They are provided at the discretion of the houseparent on duty.
(i) Girls in the cells do not have access to staff psychologists.
(j) Girls in the cells are not allowed to sleep during the day.
(k) Daily showers are not provided. (1) Girls in the cells receive less food at mealtime than girls in the general institutional population. The food is often cold when served.
-10-

25. At Helena there are solitary confinement rooms in an area called Dodge House. The conditions existing within the solitary confinement rooms at Helena are as follows:
(a) The rooms are approximately five feet by eight foot in size.
(b) The windows in the rooms are heavily screen-meshed and opaque, permitting no view to the outside. None of the windows can be opened.
(c) The rooms are wholly stripped of furnishings. At night only a mattress is provided.
(d) The rooms are not properly or safely heated, ventilated or cooled.
(e) Boys in the rooms are not allowed daily exercise or recreation.
(f) Boys in the rooms are not allowed to participate in the educational or rehabilitative treatment programs of the institution. No substitute programs are provided for boys in solitary confinement.
(g) A few books and magazines are available for the boys in the rooms, but there is no right to have these reading materials. They are provided at the discretion of the houseparent on duty.
(h) Handcuffs, leather" restraints and belly chains are used on boys in solitary confinement.
(i) Boys in solitary confinement are often hit, beaten and whipped by institutional personnel.
(j) Daily showers are not provided. 26. At Boley there are twenty-four solitary confinement rooms in one wing of the dormitory known as Grant Cottage. The conditions existing within the solitary confinement rooms at Boley arc as follows:
(a) The rooms arc approximately six feet by six feet in size. The floor is concrete.
(b) The rooms have screen-meshed windows with outside
-11-

louvres, permitting no view to the outside and very little sunlight.
(c) The rooms are stripped, containing only a blanket and a mattress at night.
(d) Twenty of the twenty-four rooms contain no toilets or other washroom facilities.
(e) The rooms are not properly or safely heated, ventilated or cooled.
(f) Boys in the rooms are deprived of their regular clothing and forced to wear pajama-like detention garments, without shoes.
(g) Boys in the rooms are not allowed daily exercise or recreation.
(h) Boys in the rooms are not allowed to participate in the educational or rehabilitative treatment programs of the institution. Ho substitute programs are provided for the boys in solitary confinement.
(i) A few books and magazines are available for the boys in the rooms, but there is no right to have these reading materials. They are provided at the discretion of the houseparent on duty.
(j) Daily showers are not provided. LIMITED PRIVILEGE PROGRAM
27. At each institution there is an area designated as the limited privilege dormitory (LPD). LPD is basically a behavior modification program where a child is totally stripped of his or her institutional privileges and must earn his or her way back into the standard institutional program.
28. LPD is used primarily for children who have gone AWOL, children who have allegedly committed serious institutional rule infractions and children who have allegedly repeatedly violated institutional rules. The LPD program begins v/ith placement in solitary confinement for an

-12-

•"-•.'•.£:>£"'•;.-'..•.':•-./--.••:

i ncloteri'.iina to period of ti.r.ic-. 29. Following the period of time in solitary confine-
ment, the child is removed to a restricted area for a oeriod of six weeks. Generally, during the first two to three weeks in LPD, the child is wholly restricted to the LPD area without access to the educational and rehabilitative treatment programs of the institution. Thereafter, the child is allowed to return to school, and certain privileges are gradually restored, dependent upon appropriate behavior. Finally, after six weeks, the child may be returned to the general institutional population with full restoration of privileges, provided the child has not been a "behavior problem" and demonstrates a "good attitude" in LPD. At Taft-South Campus, children in LPD are forced to wear pajamas twenty-four hours a day and are deprived of their shoes.
30. LPD can last indefinitely depending upon the child's behavior and attitude as determined by houseparents on duty and security personnel. VJhile in LPD the child can be summarily placed in solitary confinement without any prior hearing. Transfer from the general population to LPD is accomplished without any meaningful hearing to determine •..-"nether or not there was a rule violation, whether or not the child charged committed the violation and whether or not placement in LPD is necessary or appropriate. The procedural deficiencies alleged in paragraph sixteen (16) of this complaint are re-alleged and expressly adopted and incorporated herein by reference.
ACCESS TO COUNSEL 31. On or about the 4th day of November, 1977, plaintiff Laura C. made a written request to speak with an attorney. This request was given by said plaintiff to her parole officer, who passed that request to plaintiff's counsel. All subsequent attempts by plaintiffs' counsel to contact said plaintiff were prevented by defendant Bill Harper and other
-13-

i n :J t i tut i ona 1 ['"rioniid at Girl's Town until such time as said plaintiff requested by name to speak with plaintiffs' counsel.
32. On or about the 4th day of May, 1977, plaintiffs' counsel attempted to have a private conference with a client at Girl's Town. Plaintiffs' counsel was refused a private conference with his client by defendant Bill Harper, who insisted upon being personally present throughout the conference.
33. During the first two weeks of October, 1977 a client of plaintiffs' counsel who is not presently in the custody of DISKS was not allowed to contact plaintiffs' counsel by telephone (collect call) on three separate occasions. No explanation was given for these actions.
34. Children in solitary confinement are not permitted to contact their attorneys.
35. Upon information and belief, plaintiffs allege that the defendants are arbitrarily enforcing an unwritten policy of discouraging and preventing contact between children and attorneys who have in the past or may in the future represent said children. Defendants have further refused to allow private conferences between male attorneys and female children.
SCHOOL SUSPENSIONS 36. Children in the named institutions may be suspended from school for varying periods of time for school rule infractions or other misconduct. The school rules by which a student must abide are vague and overbroad, permitting suspension of students at the unbridled discretion of school officials. 37. Neither prior to nor following a school suspension is there any kind of fact-finding proceeding conducted by defendants to determine whether or not there was a rule infraction, whether or not the student charged committed
-14-

the violation, and whet.her or not school, suspension is necessary or appropriate.
38. School suspension may result in severe disciplinary action, including solitary confinement. In addition, school suspension automatically results in the imposition of a 30-day campus restriction. Neither prior to nor follov.-inc a school suspension is there any kind of a fact-finding proceeding conducted by defendants to determine whether or not disciplinary measures should be imposed, and if so, to what extent.
INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAMS, PERSONNEL AND CONDITIONS 39. DISRS Manual Section 1750 provides, "It is basic that an individual plan of care be devised and maintained for each child in the institution. Such plan should be designed to contribute to the rehabilitation of the individual." In practice, however, no meaningful, individual- treatment plan is developed for each child in DISRS institutions. The basic plan for children, including plaintiffs, at all of the institutions is custodial maintenance. The smooth and efficient operation of the institution, and not the needs of the individual child, is of primary importance. Control of the general institutional population is the first duty of all personnel. All forms of outward expression by the children, such as anger, fear and excitement, are suppressed by the institutional personnel. "Disruption of the institutional programs" is an offense punishable by solitary confinement. 40. DISRS Manual Section 1753.1 provides in part, "Each child needs to be evaluated and his educational needs assessed. A program to assure the provision of 'these needs should be developed and maintained." In practice, however, the child's individual educational needs are rarely met. Many of the institutionalized children have educational deficiencies that rancje from illiteracy to severe learning disabilities. Some children are mentally retarded. Given the range and severity of those educational deficiencies,
-15-

the oducalional programs exlst.inq at the i nst i tu t ions are wholly inadequate to meet the special needs of each child. Teaching personnel at the institutions are not sufficiently qualified or trained to provide the; special education and traininq needed by the children, including plaintiffs. All of the educational programs are understaffed.
41. Vocational training is for the most part limited to institutional maintenance work. The individual needs, preferences and aptitudes of each child are not considered in planning for vocational training. Each of the institutions impose their own very limited vocational training programs, rather than developing the assets and capabilities of each child.
42. Girl's Town, Boley and Helena are not co-edu-.ational institutions. The sexual isolation of children at these institutions severely impairs normal sexual and social development and behavior. All of the named institutions have a high rate of both consensual and non-consensual homosexuality. All hetero- and homosexual conduct is punished by solitary confinement.
43. All of the named institutions are located in remote rural areas of the State of Oklahoma. A majority of the children, including plaintiffs, are from urban areas of the State, and from financially poor families. The locations of these institutions effectively deprive many children, including plaintiffs, of meaningful contact v/ith their families,and communities. These children are further deprived of family counseling opportunities.
44. The location of the named institutions contribute to the inability and failure of defendants to attract adequately qualified and trained personnel in sufficient numbers to staff the institutions. These locations also contribute to the severe lack of adequate educational and vocational opportunities for the institutionalized children.
-16-

<1 5. Defendant;; have faiJocl Lo osLablisli, develop, and provide foster homes, group homes and other community-based alternatives to the largo, rural .institutions. Many of the children in the named institutions, including plaintiffs, would benefit more from placement in a small residential facility in their own community than from placement in the named institutions. DISKS is authorized, pursuant to 10 O.S. §§601 e_t seq. , to purchase space in private residential facilities, but rarely, if ever, exercises this option, especially with respect to children adjudicated delinquent. Although Whitaker, Taft-North Campus and Taft-South Campus are designated as "children's homes" primarily for children adjudicated in need of supervision and deprived, the lock-up facilities and the control-oriented atmosphere at these institutions make them secure, prison-like facilities.
46. Defendants have failed to provide institutional personnel at all levels who are adequately qualified, trained and supervised to effectively provide children, including plaintiffs, with appropriate care and rehabilitative treatment. All of the named institutions are understaffed.
47. The buildings that house children at Taft-North Campus are run-down, decrepit and dilapidated, and contain numerous safety and health hazards. Bay Kail, a dormitory for fourteen and fifteen year-old boys, is totally unfit for human habitation.
VI. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
FIRST CLAIM 48. Defendants' imposition of disciplinary measures upon plaintiffs, including placement in solitary confinement and LPD, without procedures comporting with dun process of lav; violates rights and liberties secured by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
—17 —

CL..MH 49. The conditions existing in defendants' LPD programs and solitary confinement rooms and cells are so inhumane and deplorable as applied to children that they violate the right of plaintiffs to be free from cruel and unusual punishment'. guaranteed by the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
THIRD CLAIM 50. Defendants' practice of placing plaintiffs and their class in solitary confinement when they do not constitute a danger to themselves or others is punitive and antitherapeutic, and violates the rights of plaintiffs to be free from cruel and unusual punishment and to rehabilitative treatment in the least restrictive environment as guaranteed by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and state law.
FOURTH CLAIM 51. Defendants' practice of arbitrarily limiting plaintiffs' access to counsel and of arbitrarily interfering with the female plaintiffs' attorney-client privilege violates plaintiffs' rights to free speech and to counsel guaranteed by the First and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
FIFTH CLAIM 52. The failure of defendants to provide plaintiffs with adequate, meaningful, effective and individualized educational, vocational and therapeutic programs and resources in the least restrictive environment violates the right of plaintiffs to rehabilitative treatment and due process of law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and state lav;.
SIXTH CLAIM 53. Defendants' practice of operating sexually segregated institutions violates the right of plaintiffs to
-18-

rehabilitative; treatment as guaranteed by the- Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and state lav;.
SEVENTH CLAIM 54. The failure of defendants to provide personnel who arc adequately staffed, qualified, trained and screened to deliver effective care and rchabilit£itivo treatment to the plaintiffs violates the right of plaintiffs to rehabilitative treatment as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and state law.
EIGHTH CLAIM 55. The conditions existing in the children's dormitories at Taft-North Campus are so inhumane and deplorable as applied to children that they violate the right of plaintiffs at Taft-North Campus to be free from cruel and unusual punishment guaranteed by the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
NINTH CLAIM 56. The suspension of plaintiffs and their class from school and the imposition of disciplinary measures thereon by defendants without procedures comporting with due process of lav; violates rights and liberties guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
VII. RELIEF REQUESTED WHEREFORE, plaintiffs, on their own behalf and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, pray that this Court: A. Assume jurisdiction of this cause and certify the same to proceed as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(c) (1), F.R.Civ.P. B. Issue a judgment pursuant to 23 U.S.C. §52201 and 2202 and Rule 57, F.R.Civ.P., declaring that the defendants' practices of limiting plaintiffs' access to counsel and of interfering with the female plaintiffs' attorney-client privilege
-19-

are violativc of the right to free speech and the right to counsel guaranteed by the First and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
C. Issue a judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §52201 and 2202 and Rule 57, F.R.Civ.P., declaring that defendants' practice of imposing disciplinary sanctions upon plaintiffs, including placement in solitary confinement and LPO, without meaningful procedures comporting with due process of law is violative of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
D. Issue a judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. g§2201 and 2202 and Rule 57, F.R.Civ.P., declaring that defendants' practice of imposing disciplinary sanctions upon plaintiffs, including placement in solitary confinement and LPD without maintaining specific rules and regulations defining conduct which may result in such disciplinary sanctions is violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
E. Issue a judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§2201 and 2202 and Rule 57, F.R.Civ.P., declaring that the conditions existing within the solitary confinement rooms and cells at Taft-South Campus, Taft-North Campus, Girl's Town, Boley and Helena are violative of plaintiffs right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment guaranteed by the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
F. Issue a judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§2201and 2202 and Rule 57, F.R.Civ.P., declaring that the practice of placing children, including plaintiffs, in solitary confinement is violative of the rights to be free from cruel and unusual punishment and to rehabilitative treatment in the least restrictive environment guaranteed by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and state law.
G. Issue a judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§2201 and
-20-

2202 and Rule 5 7 , F . ?(. C iv . V . , di'r la i." if.'j th.-it the- f-; i 1 u ::..- of defendants to provide children in thoir institutions with adequate, meaningful and effective educational, vocational and therapeutic programs and resources is violative of the plaintiffs' right to rehabilitative treatment as cmaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and state law.
K. Issue a judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§2201 and 2202 and Rule 57, F.R.Civ.P., declaring that the failure of defendants to provide children in their custody, including plaintiffs, with adequate foster homes, group homes and other community-based alternatives is violative of the plaintiffs' right to rehabilitative treatment in the least restrictive environment as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and state law.
I. Issue a judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§2201 and 2202 and Rule 57, F.R.Civ.P., declaring that defendants' practice of operating sexually segregated juvenile institutions is violative of plaintiffs' right to rehabilitative treatment as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and state law.
J. Issue a judgment pursuant to 23 U.S.C. §§2201 and 2202 and Rule 57, F.R.Civ.P., declaring that the failure of defendants to provide plaintiffs with adequately staffed, qualified, trained and screened personnel at the named institutions is violative of plaintiffs' right to rehabilitative treatment as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and state law.
K. Grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining, restraining and prohibiting defendants, their agents, employees, successors in office and other persons acting in concert with them from refusing to allow private conferences between the female plaintiffs and their counsel.
L. Grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief
-21-

enjoining, restraining and prohib i I; inq do^ond'in t;;, their agents, employees, successors in office and other persons acting in concert with them from limiting or restricting in any manner whatsoever access to counsel for plaintiffs and the class members.
M. Grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining, restraining and prohibiting defendants, their agents, employees, successors in office and other persons acting in concert with them from imposing solitary confinement upon plaintiffs or any member of the class.
N. As an alternative to the relief requested in part M, grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining, restraining and prohibiting defendants, their agents, employees, successors in office and other persons acting in concert with them from imposing solitary confinement upon plaintiffs or any member of the class, unless it is immediately necessary to prevent injury to the child or other persons, but not to exceed three (3) hours, and not without:
(a) providing clean, comfortable and reasonably spacious facilities with adequate heating, ventilation and sunlight;
(b) providing an operative toilet and wash basin; (c) an administrative review of the decision to place in solitary confinement by the Superintendent (or his designate in his absence) as soon as is practicable, but in no event more than one (1) hour after placement in solitary confinement; (d) full time monitoring and supervision by a social worker or psychologist who is adequately trained to deal appropriately with violent or aggressive behavior in children; and, (e) providing reading materials suitable to each child, considerina the child's cultural and educational
-22-

background. 0. As an alternative to the relief requested in part
N, grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining, restraining and prohibiting defendants, their agents, employees, successors in office and other persons acting in concert with them from imposing solitary confinement upon plaintiffs or any member of the class without:
(a) providing a meaningful disciplinary hearing with written notice of charges, confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses, right to call witnesses and present evidence in defense, right to counsel or counsel substitute, written findings of fact and reasons for action taken and right to administrative review by the superintendent;
(b) providing clean, comfortable and reasonably spacious facilities with adequate heating, ventilation and sunlight;
(c) providing an operative toilet and wash basin; (d) providing daily indoor and outdoor exercise and recreation; (e) providing educational, vocational and treatment facilities and services; (f) providing adequate clothing appropriate to the season and weather; (g) providing reading materials suitable to each child, considering each child's cultural and educational background; and (h) providing daily showers for each child. P. Grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining, restraining and prohibiting defendants, their agents, employees, successors in office and other persons acting in concert with them from housing children in Bay Hall at Taft-North Campus. Q. Grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining, restraining and prohibiting defendants, their
-23-

aqent.s, employees, successors in office; and other persons acting in concert with them from interfering with, restricting or prohibiting plaintiffs' counsel, or any designated representatives of such counsel, or any expert witness potentially available in this case, from having access to plaintiffs and the class members, and from inspecting and photographing any areas of Taft-South Campus and Taft-North Campus, Whitaker, Girl's Town, Boley and Helena.
R. Grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining, restraining and prohibiting defendants, their agents, employees, successors in office and other persons acting in concert with them from questioning or discussing with plaintiffs or any class member any matter pertaining to this action, without the prior approval of the child and plaintiffs' counsel.
S. Institute appropriate safeguards necessary to prevent threats, punishment, harassment or other retaliation upon plaintiffs and members of the class for investigating, initiating and prosecuting this action.
T. Grant permanent injunctive relief enjoining, restraining and prohibiting defendants, their agents, employees, successors in office and other persons acting in concert with them from continuing to operate the state training schools for boys at Helena and Boley, the state training school for girls at Tecumseh (Girl's Town) and the state children's home at Taft, both North and South Campus.
U. Require defendants to submit to the Court within thirty (30) days after judgment is entered herein a plan outlining the steps to be taken by defendants to comply with said judgment.
V. Appoint a master and an advisory group to oversee and monitor ongoing implementation of the terms and conditions of any order entered herein, and to report to the Court conccrnino defendants' compliance with such terms
-24-

and conditions. W. Retain jurisdiction of this action. X. Award plaintiffs their costs and disbursements
herein, including attorneys fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 51988 (Suuu. 1977).
Y. Grant plaintiffs such other additional and alternative relief as may appear just and equitable to the Court.
LEGAL AID OF WESTFRM OKLAHOMA, INC.
Bv: STEVEN A. NOVICK Attorney at Lav; 600 Colcord Building 15 North Robinson Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102 Telephone: (405) 272-9461
STAN L. FOSTER Attorney at Law NATIONAL JUVENILE LAW CENTER
By: DAVID C. HOWARD Attorney at Lav? 3701 Lindell Boulevard St. Louis, Missouri 63108 Telephone: (314) 533-8868
HARRY F. SWANGER Attorney at Law JOHN T. ELLIOTT PUBLIC DEFENDER OF OKLAHOMA COUNTY
Bv: RICHARD L. WELDOM Assistant Public Defender Oklahoma County Courthouse 321 Park Avenue Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102 Telephone: (405) 236-2727
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

 
 Ik

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT.: FOR; THE

! ¯ ì ; - 1 / '•; •`,

•: •·¯¯· · ` '•-•

WESTERN DISTRICT QF¯>£teLA

TERRY D · , ROMONDO P., DAVID

L., ROGER V., BYRON C ,

JEFFERY H., LAURA C ,

REBECCA G., by their

-

attorneys and next friends

Steven A. Novick and Richard

L. Weldon, individually and on

behalf of all other persons

similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

L. E. RADER, et al.,

Defendants,

STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ex rel DEPARTMENT OF INSTITUTIONS, SOCIAL AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES,

Intervenor-Defendant.

)
) NO. CIV-78-0004-T ) ) )

CONSENT DECREE

All parties to this action, by and through counsel,

submit this Consent. Decree to the Court for approval and entry

in resolution of the merits of this action.

Plaintiffs filed this class action pursuant to 42

U.S.C. §1983 on January 4, 1978 challenging conditions and child care practices at state childrens1 institutions. The

plaintiff class was certified by order of the Court on November

3, 1978, and is composed of all children who are now or may be

in the future confined to one of the institutions named in this

action.

Initially, these institutions were Helena State

Terry D. v. Rader & Oklahoma

JI-OK-0001-0004

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. ' Nothing in this Decree shall be construed to abrogate any substantive rights or procedural protections a child may now heve or hereafter acquire under state law.
Based upon the discovery herein, including the investigations and reports prepared by expert consultants; and
Based upon the acknowledged constitutional and statutory rights of the plaintiffs embodied in the First, Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and the Oklahoma Juvenile Code; and
Based upon significant changes in policy effected by the Department of Human Services since the commencement of this action; and
Based upon the parties' interest in maintaining continued progress in the provision of a safe, humane, caring environment for children through the utilization of the least restrictive setting and individualized care and treatment; and
Based upon the concensus of the plaintiffs and defendants that the interests of all parties to this action can best be served by entering into this Decree, which is consistent with the constitutional and statutory rights of the plaintiffs; and
Based upon all the pleadings and other papers filed in this action,
The parties hereby agree to the entry of this Consent Decree as a final judgment of the Court with respect to the merits of this action. The terms of this Decree have been ne-
-3-

gotiated without regard to any claim for costs and attorneys' fees. These issues will be resolved informally or upon appli-
y¯
cation to the Court. I. TERMS AND DEFINITIONS A. Child Any person defined as a child by 10 O.S. 1982 §1101. B. Non-Offender Any person defined under 10 O.S. 1982 §1101 as a child in need of supervision, a deprived child, or a child adjudicated solely in need of treatment. C. Child in Need of Treatment Any person defined under 10 O.S. 1982 §1101 as a child in need of treatment. D. Division The Division of Children and Youth Services of the Oklahoma Department of Human Services, and any successor division. E. Department The Oklahoma Department of Human Services. F. Director The Director of Public Welfare of the State of Oklahoma. G. Commission The Oklahoma Public Welfare Commission, also known as The Oklahoma Commission for Human Services. H. Institution Any residential facility operated by the Department for children housing more than twelve (12)
-4-

children, except emergency shelters and rehabilita-

tive facilities as defined by 10 O.S. 1982

§§

H O l ( S ) and H 3 7 ( B ) .

I. Facility

Any place, institution, building or set of build-

ings utilized for the placement of children out-

side of their homes, other than a foster home.

J. Community-Based Program

Any foster home, halfway house, group home, home

placement or similar alternative as defined in 10

O.S. 1982 §IIOI(L).

K. Solitary Confinement

Involuntary removal of a child from contact with

other children by confinement in a room, including

the child's own room or cubicle, when locked or

when the- child is otherwise restrained from leav-

ing, except during normal sleeping hours.

L. Training School

An institution maintained by the State exclu-

sively for the care, education, training, treat-

ment and rehabilitation of delinquent children.

M. Treatment Center

A facility maintained by the State exclusively

for the care, education, training, treatment and

rehabilitation of children in need of treatment.

N. Separation Facility

A building designed- and operated for the short-

term separation of resident children from the

-5-

general population, where ingress and egress are controlled exclusively by staff. 0. Placement As used in this Decree,1 placement shall refer to the entire placement process, including pre-adjudicatory intake recommendations, post-adjudicatory dispositional recommendations, and post-commitment placement decisions. II. DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION A. General Principles
1. The parties recognize and acknowledge the right of children to receive individualized care and treatment in the least restrictive setting consistent with the treatment needs of the children, and additionally in the case of delinquent children, with the protection of the public, under Title 10, Oklahoma Statutes and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
¯ 2. The Department shall not confine in any institution a child who is capable of surviving safely, without serious danger to himself or others, in a community-based program by himself or with the responsible assistence of others, including the Department.
B. Non-Offenders The Department shall not place any non-offender in a Department institution, except that a child
-6-

placed in the Department's custody as a child in need of treatment may be placed in a Department treatment center. C. Children in Need of Treatment The Department shall not place any child in a Department treatment center or other psychiatric facility, other than en an emergency basis, unless the child has been adjudicated in need of treatment and placed in the Department's custody pursuant to the criteria set forth in 10 O.S. 1982 §lll6(A)(5)(b). D. Implementation
1. Least Restrictive Alternative All recommendations and decisions concerning the .placement of children shall be governed by the principle of the least restrictive alternative. In determining the appropriate placement of children, the presumption shall be that the child's best interests are se:rved by remaining in his' home community with necessary services to be provided there. If, after all community-based alternatives have been considered or attempted, it is determined that placement of a child in an institution is necessary, such placement shall be in the least restrictive institution.
-7-

2. Community-Based Programs The Department shall take all necessary steps to develop and implement sufficient community-based programs to carry out the terms of this Decree, including' but not necessarily limited to, group homes, family support services, foster care homes, halfway houses, shelter care facilities, and day treatment programs .
III. STANDARDS A. American Correctional Association Standards The Department shall comply with the American Correctional Association (ACA) Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, Juvenile Community Residential Services and Juvenile Probation and Aftercare Services (1983), except where such standards are inconsistent with the terms of this Decree, in which case this Decree shall be controlling. The Department shall actively seek accreditation of the applicable facilities and programs from the Commission on Accreditation for Corrections. B. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals, Consolidated Standards for Child, Adolescent and Adult Psychiatric Facilities The Department shall comply with the JCAH Consolidated Standards (1981) at its treatment centers, except where such standards are inconsistent with
-8-

the terms of this Decree, in which case this Decree shall be controlling. The Department shall actively seek accreditation of the applicable facilities from the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals. IV. SEPARATION PROGRAMS AND SOLITARY CONFINEMENT A. Separation from General Population Short-term separation from the general population may be necessary for counseling or other services to resolve problems and conflicts experienced by children. Separation need not involve confinement, however, Department institutions may maintain a separation facility to ccr.fine children where the child's problems c>ppear incapable of resolution without temporary conf ineme·nt. Confinement in a separation facility shall not be used for punishment at any Department institution. During any period of such confinement, the child shall receive appropriate psychological, educational, medical and recreational services. B. Confinement in Separation Facility A child may be confined in a separation facility when less restrictive methods of control have failed, only upon the prior approval of the Superintendent, Administrator on Duty or a licenced physician, and only under the following circumstances:
-9-

1. where:- there are reasonable grounds to believe, based upon overt acts, that the child is a serious and continuing escape risk; or
2. where the child is out of control, and is a serious and immediate physical danger to himself or others; or
3. upon the child's request. C. Limitations on Confinement in Separation Facility
1. No child shall be confined in a separation facility in excess of 24- hours, and the child shall be released as soon as he is no longer, an escape risk or physical danger, except as specifically provided herein. Children admitted to the separation facility on their own request shall be released upon request. The use of consecutive periods of confinement in separation to evade the spirit and purpose of this section is prohibited.
2. It is ccntemplated that confinement in a separation facility in excess of 24 hours shall be exceptional . Such confinement sbcill require the approval of the Superintendent, the Administrator on Duty or a licensed physician, and shall be limited to the following,situatioris :
(a) when a child in a Department institution continues to •engage in violent physical assaults against other persons, the child
-10-

must be placed in the least restrictive setting to protect others from harm, which may include confinement in a separation facility for a period not to exceed 72 hours. (b) when the Department has been ordered by a court to detain a child pending court proceedings, such child shall be placed in any appropriate Department facility in the least restrictive setting necessary for the protection of the public and to assure the child's appearance in court, which may include confinement in a separation facility; provided that solitary confinement may only be imposed according to the terms of this Decree. (e) A child may be required to remain in a separation facility in excess of 24. hours, but not to exceed 72 hours, when there is documented concern that release of the child to his regular living area presents an ongoing risk of physical danger to others; provided that during any such period of confinement, the child shall be permitted to participate in the regular programs and services of the institution, except for a program in which participation poses a physical danger to others.
-11-

D.Solitary Confinement

Solitary confinement is a serious and extreme mea-

sure and may be imposed only in emergency sit-

uations as described herein. Solitary confinement

shall not be used for punishment at any Department

institution.

A child in a Department institution

may be confined in solitary confinement, only in

cases where such child is out of control and is a

serious and immediate physical danger to himself or

others, and only after less restrictive methods of

restraint have failed. Solitary confinement may be

imposed only with the prior approval of the

Superintendent, Administrator on Duty, or a licens-

ed physician.

Children in solitary confinement shall receive ap-

propriate psychological and medical services. No-

thing herein shall be construed to limit the autho-

rity of direct child care staff to impose room or

cubicle restriction pursuant to Standard 2-9293 of

the ACA

Standards for Juvenile Training • Schools

and Services.

E. Limitations on Solitary Confinement

No child shall remain in solitary confinement in

excess of three hours. As soon as a child is

sufficiently under control so as to no longer

pose a serious and immediate danger to himself or

others, he shall be released from solitary confine-

ment immediately. In the event that a child is

-12-

not sufficiently under control to be returned to the general population following a period of solitary confinement, he may be held in the separation facility as provided herein. The use of consecutive periods of solitary confinement to evade the spirit and purpose of this section is prohibited. F. Reporting Requirements The reporting requirements of the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, Standards 2-9302 and 2-9313, shall apply to both solitary confinement and separation.. G. Conditions and Services • of Solitary Confinement and Separation
1. All solitary confinement rooms shall contain at least eighty (80) square feet of floor space, and shall have adequate lighting, heat and ventilation for the comfort of the child.
2. Staff shall provide monitoring and supervision to children in solitary confinement as provided in ACA Standard 2-9302. Children in solitary confinement shall have immediate access to staff at all times, including psychological and medical services.
3. As soon as a child is confined in solitary confinement or separation, the goal shall be the removal of the child from confinement as soon as possible. For every child confined in separation, staff shall immediately attempt
-13-

to identify the crisis and shall develop an action plan for the removal of the child from confinement. 4. The separation facility shall approximate, as nearly as possible, the regular cottage living units in the facility, including but not limited to, living space, furnishings, lighting, heat and ventilation. The child shall be permitted to have items necessary for his health and comfort, including but not limited to, regular clothing, a bed, mattress, pillow, linens and blanket, toilet, and wash basin and shower with hot and cold' running water. The Superintendent, Administrator on Duty, or a licensed physician may approve the removal of belts, bed linens, or other means of inflicting self-injury based upon a documented concern for the safety of the child. Reading and writing materials, a television, arts and crafts, games and toys shall be made availcble to a child in separation as long as the child is not destructive of such items. V. RESTRAINTS A. Mechanical Restraint Prohibited The use of mechanical restraints for any purpose is prohibited, except upon a child's hands as specifically provided herein. The practice of attaching hands and feet, as in hog-tying, is
-14-

presumptively punitive and is specifically prohibited. B. Exceptions Mechanical restraints may be employed only upon the prior approval of the Superintendent, Administrator on Duty, or a licensed physician, and only in the following situations:
1. In transporting a child to or from any Department facility when there are reasonable grounds to believe, based upon overt acts, that the child is a serious escape risk or a threat to public safety.
2. Within¯ Department institutions, to transport a violently out of control child to a place of confinement, but only after less restrictive methods of control have failed. When restraints are employed in this situation, they shall be removed as soon as the child regains control or is confined, whichever occurs first.
C. Reporting Requirements Every incident of mechanical restraint shall be reported on a standardized form which shall include the child's name, the date, the amount of time in restraints, a statement of the circumstances leading to the use of restraints, including attempts at less restrictive methods of control,
-15-

any injuries incurred, and the signature of the

person authorizing restraints.

D. Type of Mechanical Restraints Permitted

In order to minimize the risk of physical injury,

all mechanical restraints employed by the Depart-

ment shall be padded or cushioned with appropriate

material.

VI . STAFF

In addition to the staffing requirements of the ACA Stan-

dards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, the

Department shall, at a minimum, employ the following

personnel

-

`

A. One qualified licensed psychologist at every insti-

tution. The Department may employ a qualified

applicant for licensure under 59 O.S. 1971

§l362(a), provided that such applicant must be

licensed within one (1) year of the date of employ-

ment ; ¯ ¯

B. One qualified licensed consulting psychiatrist for

every institution;

C. One qualified licensed consulting physician for

every institution;

D. One registered nurse or 'physician's assistant with

training in pediatrics on duty from 7:00 a.m. to

11:00 p.m. at every institution.

E. One qualified full-time director of educational

services assigned solely to the Division.

-16-

F. One qualified licensed physician to serve as a director of medical services for the Division.
G. Sufficient qualified institutional staff to staff each cottage at a staff-resident ratio of 1:8 at all times that children are regularly in the cottage, except during normal sleeping hours.
H. Sufficient social workers qualified by a degree in the behavioral sciences from an accredited college, to achieve a minimum social worker-child ratio of 1:20 at every institution. Consistent with Standard 2-9075 of the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, the Department may retain as social workers present social work staff who are sufficiently qualified by experience.
VII. ADMINISTRATION OF MEDICATION Medications such as stimulants, tranquilizers or psychotropics , may be administered only as a part of a program of medically approved therapy. The administration of such drugs shall be periodically monitored by a licensed psychiatrist according to accepted medical standards. The use of medication for punishment, control or program management is prohibited.
VIII. AE'MINISTRATIVE TRANSFERS A. Procedures Prior to the transfer of a child from a less restrictive to a more restrictive setting, the child shall be entitled to an administrative hearing to determine the necessity for the transfer.
-17-

At such hearings, the child shall be entitled to the following elements of procedural due process:
1. the right to at least 24 hours written notice of the alleged reasons for the transfer;
2. the right to present evidence in mitigation, explanation or denial of the allegations, including compulsory attendance of witnesses;
3. the right to be represented by counsel or counsel substitute;
4. No waiver of administrative hearing shall be effective without the child first having consultedTwith counsel or counsel substitute;
5. No waiver of administrative hearing by a child shall relieve the Department fron conducting institutional screening processes embodied in its policies.
B. Classifications of Restriction For the purpose of this section,, the following levels of restriction shall apply: 1. Community-based programs - lowest level of restriction. 2. Training Schools (Taft and Rader Center) second level of restriction. 3. Maximum Security Training School (ITC) - highest level of restriction.
-18-

A change in institutional function shall result in a reclassification of its level of restriction according to the scheme set forth above. C. Limitations on Transfers
1. A child in Department custody may not be transferred to a treatment center or other psychiatric facility, other than on an emergency basis,' except upon a judicial finding pursuant to 10 O.S. 1982 §III6(A)(5)(b).
2. A child in need of treatment initially placed in any treatment center or other psychiatric facility, who has been discharged from such facility as no longer requiring residential treatment, may not be transferred to a Department training school.
IX. ACCESS TO THE COURTS Children at all Department residential facilities covered by this Decree shall have the right of access to the courts, attorneys and counsel substitutes; and the Department shall promulgate written policies and procedures to ensure and facilitate this right. Indigent resident children shall be entitled to receive legal assistance free of charge from persons with legal training, provided that in any matter wherein the Department may be a party with adverse interests to the child, such legal assistance shall be provided by a person or agency independent from the Department.
-19-

X. CLASSIFICATION The Department shall comply with the provisions of the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services and the JCAH Consolidated Standards relating to classification, except as modified herein. A. Evaluation Every child placed in a Department facility shall receive diagnostic services to include at a minimum the following, unless the age or circumstances of the child renders inappropriate or unnecessary any such ciagnostic service: complete medical examination, corrplete dental examination, family and social summary, educational and vocatior.õl evaluation, psychological evaluation, neurological appraisal and a complete. evaluation where medically indicated, speech and hearing evaluation and audiometric evaluation. Following a determination by the Division Placement Team that placement of a child in an institution is necessary, each such child shall receive all of the above diagnostic services, to the extent not already recently conpleted. B. Individual Treatment Plan The evaluation of every child placed in a Deµ`·artrrent facility shall be fully documented, and an individual treatment plan shall be developed identifying the treatment needs of each child and specifying the methods and programs best suited to meet those needs.
-20-

C. Additional Evaluation

'

Any child in a Department facility who appears to

be a child in need of treatment shall receive a

complete psychological evaluation performed by a

Eoard eligible psychiatrist or licensed psycholo-

gist.

D. Classification Policies and Procedures

Classification policies and procedures shall pro-

vide for identification of the least restrictive

placement, including community-based programs, con-

sistent with the treatment needs of each child,'

and additionally in the case of delinquents, with

the protection of the public. Any decision by

the Division Placement Team not to implement the

recommended placement shall be based upon sub-

stantial evidence that such placement is

inappropriate, and shall be fully documented.

XI. PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

A. Safe, Humane, Caring Environment

The primary goal of the Department's residential

programs shall be to achieve a safe, humane, car-

ing environment with access to needed services

that will provide for normal growth and develop-

ment and allow youth to lead lives as close to

normal as possible. Consistent with the neces-

sary limitations imposed by an institutional set-

ting, children in institutions shall have access

-21-

to all services which would be available to them in the community. The Department shall provide the programs and services necessary to implement each child's individual treatment plan. B· Discipline
1. All forms of corporal punishment and physical abuse of children in Department facilities are prohibited.
2. Children in Department facilities shall not be subjected to unreasonable silence rules, group punishment for individual acts, profanity, verbal abuse or threats of unnecessary physical force by staff, or "make work"; provided that nothing herein shall prevent the institutional authorities from requiring children to perform routine housekeeping tasks, or from permitting children to perform maintenance work directly related to a vocational program.
C. Denial of Privileges Any child in a Department facility may be disciplined on an individual basis by the removal of privileges, provided that no child may be denied the following essential services: (1) appropriate opportunities for daily outdoor physical exercise; (2) appropriate educational services that comply with state educational requirements.
-22-

(3) writing material and mail. (4) items and facilities to maintain cleanliness
and personal hygiene. (5) family visits-, unless otherwise ordered by a
court of competent jurisdiction. (6) regularly scheduled meals. (7) access to necessary medical, dental and
counseling services. (8) access to legal services. (9) the right to practice the religion of his
choice.
D. Limitations on Size of Institutions 1. Consistent with the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, the total bed capacity of any training school shall not exceed 100 beds. For the purposes of this section,- the Rader Center and ITC shall be treated as separate facilities. This shall not be construed as prohibiting the administrative consolidation of these two facilities. 2. COJTC shall not exceed a total of 90 beds. 3. ITC shall not exceed a total of 56 beds.
-23-

E. Coeducational Institutions It is the preferred practice that all Department institutions be coeducational, and such facilities shall be coeducational whenever feasible. The Department shall have, the authority, however, to cease coeducational operations when the number of female institutional residents declines to the point that coeducational operations become impractical.
F. Fire Safety, Health and Sanitation 1. All institutions shall fully comply with the 1981 Life Safety Code of the National Fire Protection Association and the applicable accreditation standards pertaining to fire safety, and any successor codes or standards. 2. All institutions shall fully comply with all applicable federal, state and local health and sanitation codes and the applicable accreditation standards pertaining to food service, sanitation, safety and hygiene.
XII. MONITORING AND REPORTING A. Office of Juvenile System Oversight The Office of Juvenile System Oversight (OJSO) of the Oklahoma Commission for Children and Youth is hereby designated to monitor and oversee the implementation of the terms of this Decree; provided that the reasonable costs of any monitoring
-24-

services which exceed the statutory duties of OJSO shall be borne by the Department, and the provision of any such monitoring services will be • subject to the execution- of a contract between the Department and the Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth. B. Duties and Powers of OJSO In addition to the duties and powers set forth in 10 O.S. 1982 §601.6, which are incorporated herein, the OJSO shall have the authority to retain qualified expert consultants to assist it in monitoring compliance with this Decree, the reasonable' costs of which shall be borne by the Department. C. Reporting Requirements It shall be the duty of OJSO to prepare and submit to the Court periodic written reports regarding progress and compliance with the terms of this Decree. Copies of such reports shall be provided to the Attorney General and designated counsel for the parties. D. Access of Plaintiffs Plaintiff's counsel and their authorized representatives, including expert consultants, shall have full access, upon reasonable notice, to all Department child care facilities, all Department child care staff, all class members and all files and records pertaining to any class member, whereever located.
-25-

,
XIII. CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS •A. Compliance by Private Providers The Department shall require, as a condition to funding, that all private group homes and private child care institutions providing placements for children in the Department's custody agree to abide by the terms of this Decree relating to solitary confinement, separation programs, mechanical restraints, administration of medication, discipline, and fire safety, health and sanitation. B. Corporal Punishment Prohibited The Department shall enter no contract for educational services., unless corporal punishment is prohibited by the terms of the contract.
XIV. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Within sixty (60) days of the entry of this Decree, the Department shall submit to the Court and the plaintiffs a comprehensive implementation plan, detailing the steps to be taken to achieve and maintain compliance with the terms of this Decree, including an estimated timetable for completion. Plaintiffs shall, within thirty (30) days of the submission of the plan, provide the Court and the defendants with any written comments, objections or proposals in regard to defendants' implementation plan.
XV. DISPOSITION OF ACTION A. Dismissal The parties agree that the Court may terminate its supervision herein, and dismiss this action when :
-26-

 
 Terry D. v. Rader & Oklahoma

JI-OK-001-002 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

TERRY D . , ROMONDO P . , DAVID

)

L . , ROGER V . , BYRON C , JEFFERY )

FILED

H., LAURA C . , REBECCA G., by

)

t h e i r attorneys and next f r i e n d s , )

Steven A. Novick and Richard L. )

JAN 1 1 1982

Weldon, i n d i v i d u a l l y and on

)

behalf of a l l other persons
similarly situated,

)

HERBERT T MOPE

)

CLERK-u-s BY

O'STR1CI_C_°--"I__

)

-DEPUTY

Plaintiffs,

)

)

vs.

) NO. CIV-78-0004-T

)

L.E. RADER, et al.,

)

)

Defendants,

)

)

STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ex rel

)

DEPARTMENT OF INSTITUTIONS,

)

SOCIAL AND REHABILITATIVE

)

SERVICES,

)

)

Intervenor-Defendant.

)

STIPULATED AGREEMENT

The parties, by and through counsel, submit this Stipulated Agreement and Proposed Order to the Court in resolution of the merits of this action.
Plaintiffs filed this class action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 on January 4, 1978. Certified on November 3, 1978, the class is composed of all children who are now or may be in the future confined to one of the institutions named in this action. Initially, these institutions were Helena State School for Boys (Helena), Boley State School for Boys (Boley), Girls' Town, Oklahoma Childrens' Center - North and South Campuses, and Whitaker State Childrens' Hone (Whitaker).
Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment contesting plaintiffs' right to rehabilitative treatment in the least restrictive alternative was denied by Order dated September 25, 1979. Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed March 10, 1981 and Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed August 12, 1980 were taken under advisement by the Court to be consolidated with a trial on merits.
Due to the transfer and construction of facilities during the pendency of this action, the parties agree that the institutions now in operation are Helena, Boley, Whitaker, Taft-North

PAGE 2 TERRY D.. ez al vs. L.E. RADER. et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
Campus (Taft), Central Oklahoma Juvenile Treatment Center (formerly Girls' Town) (COJTC) and the L.E. Rader Diagnostic, Evaluation and Intensive Treatment Center (D & E and ITC, respectively). The parties agree that this Agreement shall be binding upon the institutions now in operation and any future institutions covered by the terras and Qefinitions contained in this Agreement. The parties further agree that nothing contained in this Stipulated Agreement shall be construed to abrogate any substantive rights or procedural protections a child may now or hereafter have under State law.
The parties agree that the Court has jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. Si 1331 and 1343(3), and that declaratory and injunctive relief is authorized pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Is 2201 and 2202 and Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Based upon the discovery herein, including the investigations and reports prepared by expert consultants; and
Based upon the constitutional and statutory rights of plaintiffs enumerated herein; and
Based upon significant changes in policy and procedure effected by the Department of Human Services since the commencement of this litigation; and
Based upon the parties' interest in maintaining continued progress in the provision of a safe, humane, caring environment for children through the utilization of the least restrictive alternatives and individualized treatment; and
Based upon the agreement of plaintiffs and defendants that the interests of all the parties to this action can best be served by entering into this Agreement, which is consistent with the constitutional and statutory rights of the plaintiffs; and
Based upon all the pleadings and other papers filed in this action,
The parties hereby agree to the etitxy of this Stipulated Agreement and Proposed Order as a judgment of Che Court with respect to the merits of this action. The terms of this Stipulated Agreement have been negotiated without regard to any claim for

PAGE 3 TERRY D.. et al vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
costs and attoi-neys1 fees. Following execution of this Agreement, the issues of costs and attorneys' fees will be resolved informally -between the parties or upon application to the Court.
I. TERMS AND DEFINITIONS A. Child Any person defined as a child by 10 O.S. Supp. 1980 IllOKa) or §1104.2.
r
B. Non-Offender Any child defined under 10 O.S. Supp. 1980 IsLlOl as a child in need of supervision or deprived child.
C. Division The Division of Children and Youth Services and the Division of Child Welfare of the Oklahoma Department of Human Services.
D. Department The Oklahoma Department of Human Services.
E. Director The Director of Public Welfare of the State of Oklahoma .
F. Commission The Oklahoma Public Welfare Commission.
G. Dangerous Child Any child who can be expected within the near future to^ inflict serious physical injury on himself or others intentionally or unintentionally, and has engaged in one or more recent overt acts or made significant recent threats which substantially support that expectation.
H. Institution Any residential facility operated by the Department for children housing more thaxv twelve (12) children, except emergency shelters.
I. Non-Institutional Community Alternatives Any foster home, halfway house, group home, mini-group home, home placement or similar alternative in or

PAGE 4 TERRY D.. et al vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
near the child's home community. J. Seclusion
Involuntary removal of a child from contact with other children by confinement in a room, including the child's own room or cubicle, when locked or when the child is otherwise restrained from leaving, except during normal sleeping hoursK. Child Requiring Treatment "Child requiring treatment" means either: 1. A child who has a demonstrable mental illness
and who as a result of that mental illness can be expected within the near future to intentionally or unintentionally seriously and physically injure himself or another person and who has engaged in one or more recent overt acts or made significant recent threats which substantially support that expectation; or 2. A child who has a demonstrable mental illness and who as a result of that mental illness is unable to attend to those of his basic physical or psychiatric needs that must be attended to in order for him to avoid serious harm in the near future and who has demonstrated such inability by failing to attend to those basic physical xor psychiatric needs in the recent past. "Deraonstrable mental illness" means any disease or condition, other than mental retardation, defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association, 3rd edition. L. Training School A facility maintained by the State exclusively for the care, education, training, treatment and rehabilitation of delinquent children.

PAGE 5 TERRY D.. et a.1 vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT

M. Treatment Center

A facility maintained by the State for the care, educa-

tion, training, treatment and rehabilitation of child-

ren requiring treatment.

N. Segregation Cottage

A building designed and operated for the separation

of resident children from the general instutional

population, where ingress and egress are controlled

exclusively by staff.

0. Limited Privilege Program

Any program designed for a child in a Department

facility which involves less privileges or is more

restrictive than the programs provided to the general

population in that facility.

P. Placement

As used in this Agreement, placement shall include

pre-adjudicatory intake recommendations and

post-

adjudicatory dispositional recommendations made by

the Division of Court Related and Community Services,

and post-commitment placement decisions made by the

Division Placement Team or its designees.

II. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY RIGHTS OF PLAINTIFFS The plaintiffs shall have the following constitutional and statutory rights: A. The right to receive individualized treatment in the least restrictive setting, guaranteed by the Oklahoma Juvenile Code (10 O.S. Supp. 1980 i 1101 et se%.) and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. B. The right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, guaranteed by the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

.". u _ t
rE7. ?.'".' D. . e" al vs. "_ . E. KADER . et al.
C. The right to have adequate, meaningful and effective access to the courts and legal assistance, guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
D. The right to exercise free speech and association, and to petition the government for redress of grievances, guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
III. DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION A. Operation of Facilities 1. The Department shall cease all child care operations at Helena on or before June 1, 1982. 2. The Special Master shall conduct a comprehensive study of the programs and continued need for child care services at Boley. B. General Principles The Department shall not confine in any institution a non-dangerous child who is capable of surviving safely in a non—institutional community alternative by himself or with the responsible assistance of ethers, including the Department. C. Kon-Offenders The Department shall not place any non-offender in a Department institution, except that a child found by the committing court to be a child requiring treatcent may be placed in a Department treatment center. D- Children Requiring Treatment The Department shaU. not place any child in a Depart— cent treatment center or other psychiatric facility, other than on an emergency basis in conformance with 43A O.S. Supp. 1980 g'54.4(B), unless after a hearing the comrni ttiTig court has found the child to be a child requiring treatment based upon the testimony of a qualified psychiatrist. No child requiring treatment shall be placed in a Department training school. A finding that a child is a child requiring treatcent shall not operate to deprive such child of

PAGE 7 TERRY D., et al vs. L.E. RADER, et al STIPULATED AGREEMENT
E. Implementation 1. Least Restrictive Alternative All recommendations and decisions concerning the placement of children shall be governed by the principle of the least restrictive alternative. In determining the appropriate placement of children, the presumption shall be that the child's best interests are served by remaining in his home community with necessary services to be provided there. If, after all non-institutional alternatives have been considered or attempted, it is determined that placement of the child in an institution is necessary, such placement shall be in the least restrictive institution. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the Department's authority to place a child in a wilderness experience program or other innovative non-institutional program, not necessarily located in the child's home community. 2. Non-Institutional Community Alternatives The Department shall take all necessary steps to develop and implement sufficient non-institutional community alternatives in order to carry out the terms of this Agreement.
IV. STANDARDS A. America" Correctional Association Standards The Department shall comply with the American Correctional Association (ACA) Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, Juvenile Community Residential Services and Juvenile Probation and Aftercare Services (1979?, except where such standards are inconsistent with the terms of this Agreement. The Department shall actively seek accreditation of the applicable facilities and programs from the Commission on Accreditation for Corrections.

PAGE 8 TERRY D.. et al vs. L.E. RADER. et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
B. Joint Comaission on Accreditation of Hospitals, Consolidated Standards tor Child, Adolescent and Adult Psychiatric Facilities The Department shall comply with the JCAH Consolidated Standards (1981) at its treatment centers, except where such standards are inconsistent with the terms of this Agreement. The Department shall actively seek accreditation of the applicable facilities from the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals.
V. SECLUSION AND SEGREATION A. Seclusion Seclusion is a serious and extreme measure and may be imposed only in emergency situations as described herein. Seclusion shall not be used for punishment at any Department institution. A child in a Department institution may be confined in seclusion, either in his own room or cubicle, or in a designated seclusion room, in cases where such child is out of control and is a serious and immediate physical danger to himself or others, and only after less restrictive methods of restraint have failed- Seclusion may be imposed only with the prior approval of the Superintendent or Administrator on Duty. Children in seclusion shall receive appropriate psychological and medical services. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the authority of direct child care staff to impose room or cubicle restriction as a "cooling off" period pursuant to Standard 9360 of the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and ServicesB. Segregation Segregation is the removal of a child from the general population to a segregation cottage. Segregation shall not be used for punishment at any Department institution. During any period of segregation, the child shall receive appropriate psychological, medical

PAGE 9 TERRY D., et al vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
and educational services. A child in a Department institution may be placed in the segregation cottage only upon the prior approval of the Superintendent or Adininistrator on Duty and only under the following circumstances: 1. where there are reasonable grounds to believe,
based upon overt acts, that the child is a serious and continuing escape risk; or 2. where the child is out of control and is a serious and immediate physical danger to himself or others; OT 3. upon the child's request. C. Limitations on Seclusion No child shall remain in seclusion in excess of three hours. As soon as a child is sufficiently under control so as to no longer pose a serious and immediate danger to himself or others, he shall be released from seclusion immediately. In the event that a child is not sufficiently under control to be returned to the general population following a period of seclusion, he may be held in the segregation cottage for a period not to exceed 24 hours, including the period of seclusion. The use of consecutive periods of seclusion to evade the spirit and purpose of this section is ^prohibited. D- Limitations on Segregation As soon as a child is no longer deemed to be an escape risk or a physical danger as defined above, he shall be released immediately from segregation. No child shall remain in segregation in excess of 24 hours, except as specifically provided herein. Children admitted to segregation voluntarily shall be released upon request. The use of consecutive periods of segregation to evade the spirit and purpose of this section is prohibited.

PAGE 10 TERRY D., et al vs. L.E. RADER. et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
Exceptions to Limitations on Segregation 1. Assaultive Behavior
Segregation for periods exceeding 24 hours under this subsection shall be limited to the situation where a child demonstrates continuing overt violent assaultive behavior against other persons. When a child in a Department institution has committed an overt act of violent assault and battery against another person, the child must be placed in the least restrictive setting necessary to protect others from harm, which may include confinement in the segregation cottage for a period not to exceed 72 hours, provided that seclusion may only be imposed according to the terms outlined above. It is contemplated that segregation in excess of 24 hours shall be exceptional. 2. Court Ordered Pretrial Detention When the Department has been ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction to detain a child pending court proceedings, such child shall be placed in any appropriate Department facility in the least restrictive setting necessary for the protection of the public and to guarantee the child's appearance in court, provided that seclusion may only be imposed according to the terms outlined above. Reporting Requirements The reporting requirements of the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, Standards 9371 and 9375, shall apply to both seclusion and segregation. Conditions of Seclusion and Segregation 1. Seclusion rooms shall be fully padded and shall contain at least 80 square feet of floor space.

PAGE 11 TERRY D.. et al vs. L. E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
Seclusion rooms shall have adequate lighting, heat and ventilation for the comfort of the child. 2. The segregation cottage shall approximate, as nearly as possible, the regular cottage living units in the facility, including but not limited to, living space, furnishings, lighting, heat and ventilation. The child shall be permitted to have items necessary for his health and comfort, including but not limited to, regular clothing, a bed, mattress, pillow, linens and blanket, toilet, and wash basin and shower with hot and cold running water. The Superintendent or Administrator on Duty may approve the removal of belts, bed linens, or other means of inflicting selfinjury based upon a documented concern for the safety of the child. Reading and writing materials, a television, arts and crafts, games and toys shall be made available to children in segregation.
VI. RESTRAINTS The use of mechanical restraints is an extreme measure and may be employed only in seclusion rooms in emergency situations where a child is totally out of control and is a serious and immediate physical danger to himself, and only after less restrictive methods of restraint have failed. The approval of a physician shall be required prior to the application of mechanical restraints. The use of mechanical restraints as a form of punishment is strictly prohibited. A. Type of Mechanical Restraints Permitted The only type of mechanical restraints permitted shall be padded leather wristlets- When deemed necessary, a leather waistband may be employed.

PAGE 12 TERRY D., et al vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
B. Manner of Restraint Permitted The practices of restraining feet, attaching hands and feet, as in hog-tying, and attachment to objects or fixtures are specifically prohibited.
C. Exceptions .Mechanical restraints may be employed in transporting a child to or from an institution only when: 1. there are reasonable grounds to believe, based upon overt acts, that the child is a serious escape risk; or 2. there are reasonable grounds to believe, based upon overt acts, that the child is a threat to public safety. In all cases where restraint is deemed necessary to move a child from one location to another within an institution, staff shall employ only authorized personnel management procedures (such as the Mandt techniques). The use of mechanical restraints to move a child within an institution is prohibited.
VII. STAFF In addition to the staffing requirements of the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, the Department shall, at a minimum, employ the following personnel: A. one qualified licensed psychologist at every institution. The Department may employ a qualified applicant for state licensure under 59 O.S. 1971 §1362(a), provided that such applicant must be licensed within one (1) year of the date of employmentB. one qualified licensed consulting psychiatrist for every institution; C. one qualified licensed consulting physician for every institution; D. one qualified registered nurse or physician's assistant on duty during waking hours at every institution and on call at other times; E. one qualified full-time director of educational services assigned solely to the Division;

PAGE 13 TERRY D., et al. vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
F. one qualified licensed physician to serve as a full time director of medical services for the Division;
G. sufficient qualified youth guidance specialists (YGS) to achieve a YGS staff-child ratio on each cottage of 1:10 during the evening shift and non-school days. During the night shift there shall be no less than one full-time YGS on duty in each cottage and one full-time roving YGS for every two cottages;
H. sufficient social workers qualified by a degree in the behavioral sciences from an accredited college, to achieve a minimum social worker-child ratio of 1:20 at every institution. Consistent with Standard 9093 of the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, the Department may retain as social workers present social work staff who are sufficiently qualified by experience as determined by the Special Master.
VIII. ADMINISTRATION OF MIND-ALTERING DRUGS Mind-altering drugs, such as stimulants, tranquilizers or psychotropics, may be administered only as a part of a program of therapy. The administration of such drugs shall be periodically monitored and reviewed by a qualified licensed psychiatrist according to accepted medical standard^. The use of mind-altering drugs for punishment, ccmtTol or program management is prohibited.
IX. STUDENT GRIEVANCE PROGRAM The Department shall continue to maintain its student defender/representative program according to currently existing policy, with the following exceptions: A. The Advocate General shall be an attorney licensed ira the State of Oklahoma arwi employed by the Director. The Advocate General shall report to the Director, who shall transmit unedited copies of such reports to the Commission. The Advocate General may be dismissed only for cause, after a hearing.

PAGE 14 TERRY D.. et al. vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
B. Communications between children and the student defender/representative and Advocate General shall be privileged and confidential.
X. ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSFERS A. Procedures Prior to the transfer of a child from a less restrictive to a more restrictive setting, the Department shall conduct an administrative hearing to determine the necessity for the transfer. At such administrative hearings the child shall be entitled to the following elements of procedural due process: 1. the right to at least 24 hours written notice of the alleged reasons for the transfer; 2. the right to present evidence in mitigation, explanation or denial of the allegations; and 3. the right to be represented by counsel substitute, which shall be provided free of cost to indigent children. Nothing in this section shall be construed to abrogate any rights a child may have under State law. B- Classifications of Restriction For the purposes of this section the following levels of restriction shall apply: 1. non-institutional community placement - lowest level of restriction; 2. Taft and Whitaker (designated by the Department as open campuses) - second level of restriction; 3. Helena, Boley and Central Oklahoma Juvenile Treatment Center (designated by the Department as closed campuses) - third level of restriction; 4. L.E. Rader Intensive Treatment Center (maximum security} - highest level of restriction. Movement into and initial placement out of the L.E. Rader Diagnostic and Evaluation Center shall not be considered an administrative transfer within the meaning of this section. If applicable, any future

PAGE 15 TERRY D., et al. vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
change in function of an institution shall result in a reclassification of its level of restriction according to the above scheme. C. Limitation on Transfers to Training Schools A child requiring treatment initially placed in any psychiatric facility who has been discharged from such facility as no longer requiring in-patient treatment and services may not be transferred to a Department training school. DC. ACCESS TO THE COURTS Children at all Department residential facilities covered by this Agreement shall have the right of access to the courts, attorneys and counsel substitutes to present any issue under law; and the Department shall promulgate written policies and procedures to ensure and facilitate this right. Indigent resident children shall be entitled to receive legal assistance free of charge from persons with legal training, provided that in any matter wherein the Department may be a party with adverse interests to the child, such legal assistance shall be provided by a person or agency independent from the Department-
XII. CLASSIFICATION The Department shall comply with the provisions of the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services and the JCAH Consolidated Standards relating to classification, except as modified herein. A. Evaluation Following a determination by the Division Placement Team that placement of a child in an institution is necessary, each such child shall be evaluated at the L.E. Rader Diagnostic and Evaluation Center, or receive equivalent diagnostic services to include at a minimum the following: complete medical examination, complete dental examination, family and social summary, educational and. vocational evaluation, psychological evaluation, neurological appraisal and

PAGE 16 TERRY D., et al. vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
a complete evaluation where indicated, speech and hearing evaluation and audiometric evaluation. B. Individual Treatment Plan The evaluation of each child shall be fully documented, and an individual treatment plan shall be developed identifying the treatment needs of each child and specifying the treatment methods or programs best suited to meet those needs. C Additional Evaluation Children identified as possibly suffering from a disease or condition, except mental retardation, defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association, 3rd edition, shall receive a complete psychiatric evaluation performed by a Board eligible psychiatrist, preferably a child or adolescent psychiatrist. D. Classification Policies and Procedures Classification policies and procedures shall provide for identification of the least restrictive placement, including non-institutional community alternatives, consistent with the treatment needs of each child, which shall be reduced to a written recommendation. Any decision by the Division placement team not to implement the recommended placement shall be based upon substantial evidence that such placement is inappropriate, and shall be fully documented. XIII. PROGRAMS AND SERVICES A. Safe, Humane, Caring Environment The primary goal of the Department's Institutional programs shall be to achieve a safe, humane, caring environment with access to needed services that will provide for normal growth arid development and allow
youth to lead lives as close to normal as possible.
Consistent with the necessary limitations imposed by an institutional setting, children shall be entitled to receive all services which would be available to them in the community. All forms of corporal

PAGE 17 TERRY D., et al. vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
punishment of children in the Department's custody are prohibited. The Division shall have an affirmative obligation to ensure that all programs provide, and in no way inhibit, this safe, humane, caring environment, which includes the provision of opportunities for children to:
1- enhance individuality and self-respect; 2. enjoy privacy; 3- develop intellectual and vocational abilities; A. retain family and other personal ties; 5. express cultural identity; 6. relate and socialize with peers of both sexes; 7. practice religious beliefs of their preference; 8. explore political, social and philosophical ideas; 9. enjoy an adequate,nutritious and varied diet; 10. receive necessary medical and dental care; 11. receive necessary psychological and psychiatric
services; 12. receive educational services appropriate to their
needs; 13. have a choice of a full range of recreational
activities; 14. be safe from physical and psychological harm; 15. live in a home-like environment which is designed
to maximize their personal security, privacy and dignity; 16. communicate with persons in the community; and 17. exercise reasonable freedom of choice as to personal matters such as hair length and selection of friends. B. Provision of Services The Division shall ensure that children in Department facilities have access to all services that are required for their individual needs in compliance with standards adopted in Section IV of this Agreement.

PAGE 18 TERRY D., et al. vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
C. Limited Privilege Programs 1. Due Process Requirements When it is determined that a child in any Department institution may be an appropriate candidate for a limited privilege progranij an administrative hearing pursuant to Section X.A. of this Agreement shall be conducted to determine the need for such a program. 2. Individualized Program If it is determined that a limited privilege progran is necessary, a multi—disciplinary professional staffing shall be conducted to develop an individualized program for the child. The individualized program shall be the least restrictive alternative consistent with the child's treatment needs. 3. Limitations Limited privilege-type programs that separate children from the general population are prohibited.
D. Limitation on Size of Facilities Consistent with the ACA Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, the total bed capacity of any training school shall not exceed 100 beds, except that; Boley and COJTC shall not exceed a total of 90 beds each, and 7TC shall not exceed a total of 56 beds.
E. Coeducational Institutions All Department institutions shall be coeducational, with the exception of Boley.
XIV. MONITORING AND REPORTING A. Special Master The parties agree to the entry of an Order of Reference appointing a Special Master pursuant to Rule 53 of the Federal Rules, of Civil Procedure and the inherent powers of the Court.

P'AGE 19 TERRY D., et al. vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
B. Appointment of Special Master Plaintiffs and defendants shall exchange lists of three names each containing their respective suggestions for the person to be appointed as Special Master. From these lists the parties shall agree upon the person to be appointed, subject to the approval of the Court. The parties shall have the right to veto the nomination of any person suggested.
C Duties and Powers of Special Master The Special Master shall be responsible for monitoring compliance with this Stipulated Agreement, and in connection therewith, shall have the following duties and powers: 1. The Special Master shall have the authority to retain qualified expert consultants to assist the Special Master in monitoring compliance with the Stipulated Agreement, subject to the approval of the Court. 2. The Special Master and/or his or her designee shall conduct an on-site visit at every remaining Department institution no less than quarterly, beginning the first fiscal quarter following the effective date of this Agreement; and further shall have authority to conduct on-site visits * at all public and private residential facilities in which the Department places children. 3. The Special MasteT and his or her designees shall nave full access to all buildings, programs, files, records and data located at the institutions or state offices, and shall be permitted private or small group interviews with children, institutional staff and Division staff. Such access shall be permitted without notice to institutional personnel.

PAGE 20 TERRY D., et al. vs. L.E. RADER, et al. STIPULATED AGREEMENT
D. Reporting Requirements Following the quarterly on-site visits, the Special Master and/or his or her designees shall prepare a written report regarding progress and compliance to be filed with the Court and the parties, pursuant to Rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
E. Access of Parties 1. Every party to this action shall have the right to freely communicate with the Special Master and his or her designees. 2. Plaintiffs' counsel and their authorized representatives shall have full access to any class member and any files or records pertaining to class members kept at the institutions or the state offices.
F. Cornpensation of Special Master Fees and expenses of the Special Master and his or her designees shall be paid by the defendants. The amount of compensation shall be fixed by the Court. The defendants shall periodically deposit a sum to be determined by the Court with the Clerk of the Court, to be disbursed upon claim being presented to the Court by the Special Master and his or her designees.
XV. CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS A. Compliance by Private Providers The Division shall require, as a condition to funding, that all providers of placements for children in the Department's custody agree to abide by the terms of this Agreement concerning applicable standards (including current standards of the Child Welfare League of America^ where appropriate), seclusion and segregation, restraints, corporal punishment, programs and services and any other applicable area regulated by this Agreement.

~ ? . ? V Z.. e t £ l . v s . L . I . L A D E ? . , e : a l . •T:?-JLATID AGREEMENT
B. Access to Private Provider Programs by Special Master The Division shall require, as a condition of funding, Chat all private providers of placements for children in the Department's custody permit the Special Master and his or her designees to conduct on-site visits at residential facilities operated by such private providers. The Division shall also contractually require that such private providers allow the Special Master and his or her designees full access to all buildings, programs, files, records and data pertaining to children in the Department's custody.
C Corporal Punishment Prohibited The Department shall enter no contract for educational services unless corporal punishment is prohibited by the terms of the contract.
XVI. TIMETABLES The parties shall agree to reasonable timetables for the iizplenentation of this Stipulated Agreement-
XVII. LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION The parties agree that the terms and provisions of this Stipulated Agreement and Order should be liberally construed to promote the goals of removing non-dangerous and nonoffender children from institutional care, and providing appropriate, individualized treatment and services in the least restrictive setting and manner for all children. The parties further agree to conduct good faith negotiations concerning any dispute arising under this Stipulated Agreement prior to the initiation of enforcement or compliance proceedings in the United States District Court. Any conflict between the terms of this Agreement regarding continued child care operations -at Helena and futxrre legislative enactments may be submitted to the United States District Court for resolution.

 
 ,r

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT CDURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

TERRY D . , ROMDNDO P . , DAVID L . ,

ROGER V , , BYRON C . r JEFFERY H . ,

LAURA C , RRRECCA G . , fcy t h e i r

a t t o r n e y s and next f r i e n d s ,

, Steven A. Novick and Richard L.

Keldon, individually and on behalf

)

situated,

)

)

Plaintiffs, )

vs.
L. E. RADER, e t a l . , )
Defendants, ) )
STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ex rel. DEPARTMENT OF INSTITUTIONS, SOCIAL AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES,

Intervenor - Defendant.

INTERIM ORDER

No. CIV-78-0004-T
FILED
NOV

On this <^> d a y of

, 1982, this cause cones before the

Court upon plaintiffs' notions for preliminary injunctive relief, said

matters having been remanded to the District Court by the United States

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in an order dated October 15, 1982.

This Court entered an order on October 20, 1982 setting plaintiffs' motions

for hearing on November 2, 1982.

On March 10, 1981, plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary

Injunction to halt the use of all metallic restraint devices and to prohibit

the restraint practice known as hogtying, viiere hands and feet are

restrained together behind a child's back.

On March 4, 1982, plaintiffs sought a temporary restraining order and •

preliminary injunction to prohibit the confinement of children in facilities

where fire, health and safety violations were in existence.

On August 16, 1982, plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary

Injunction seeking to enjoin the use of solitary confinement cells at the

Boley State School for Boys and the L. E. Rader Intensive Treatment Center

(ITC), and to prohibit the imposition of solitary confinement at any

institution in excess of three hours or for punishment.

These notions are before the Court for disposition pursuant to the

partial remand order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth

Circuit.

Terry D. v. Rader & Oklahoma

m m • • V B • • • •••*
J-OK-001-003

-2-
The defendants neither admit nor deny the allegations contained in p l a i n t i f f s ' notions for preliminary r e l i e f . Prior to the scheduled hearing on said notions, p l a i n t i f f s and defendants have agreed t h a t in lieu of said hearing, the following interim order should be entered. The State Attorney General does not agree to the entry of t h i s order.
Upon consideration of the agreement of the p a r t i e s and being fully advised in the premises, the Court finds that i t has jurisdiction to enter the agreed order and that the following interim order should be entered as t o defendants, Oklahoma Public Welfare Commission, L. E. Rader, t h e i r agents, employees, successors in office and a l l persons acting in concert with them. For the purpose of t h i s order, the p a r t i e s have agreed, and the Court finds that the i n s t i t u t i o n s affected by t h i s order include Boley State School for Boys, Oklahoma Children's Center (Taf t ) , Wiitaker State Children's tone, Central Oklahoma Juvenile Treatment Center (COJTC), the L. E. Rader Intensive Treatment Center and the L. E. Rader Diagnostic and Evaluation Center.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND DECREED THAT: 1 . For the purpose of t h i s Order, s o l i t a r y confinement i s the involuntary removal of a child from contact with other children by confinement in a roorr. including the child own's roan or cubicle, when locked or vr.en the child i s otherwise restrained from leaving, except during normal sleeping hours. 2 . Solitary confinement shall be prohibited in excess of three hours or for the purpose of punishment. In the event t h a t a child i s not s u f f i c i e n t l y under control to be returned to the general population following a period of s o l i t a r y confinement, he may be held in the segregation cottage for a period not to exceed 24 hours, including the period of s o l i t a r y confinement. The use of consecutive periods of s o l i t a r y confinement to evade the s p i r i t and purpose of t h i s order i s prohibited. 3 . Solitary confinement may be imposed only upon the prior approval of the i n s t i t u t i o n a l superintendent or the administrator on duty, and only in emergency s i t u a t i o n s where a child i s out of control and poses a serious and immediate physical danger to himself or others a f t e r l e s s r e s t r i c t i v e methods of control have failed; provided t h a t , t h i s order shall not limit the authority of d i r e c t child care staff to impose room or cubicle

-3-

restriction as a "cooling off" period pursuant to Standard 9360 of the

American Correctional Association Standards for Juvenile Training School and

Services.

4. A child in solitary confinement shall be immediately released as

soon as he is sufficiently under control so as to no longer pose a serious

and immediate physical danger to himself or others.

5. Children in solitary confinement shall receive all necessary and

appropriate psychological and medical services. The provision of these

services shall not be solely dependent upon the child's request for such services.

'

6. Roans and other enclosures used for solitary confinement shall be

fully padded with fire resistant material, shall contain at least 80 square feet of floor space, and shall provide adequate lighting, heat and

ventilation for the health, safety and ccmfort of the child.

7. All incidents of solitary confinement shall be entered in a

master log containing the information required by Standards 9371 and 9375 of

the A-nerican Correctional Association Standards for Juvenile Training

Schools and Services.

8. The use and conditions of solitary confinement shall comply fully

with the American Correctional Association Standards for Juvenile Training

Schools arc: Services, to the extent that such Standards are not inconsistent

with this Order.

9. The use of the solitary confinement cells that do not mset the

standards set forth in this order is prohibited.

10. The use of mechanical restraints or shackles of any kind is

prohibited for the purpose of punishment. The use of metallic restraints or

shackles is prohibited. The restraint practices of binding feet, attaching

hands and feet, as in hog-tying, and attachment to objects or fixtures are

prohibited.

.11. Padded leather wristlets and a leather waistband may be employed

only in the following circumstances:

a. In solitary confinement roams in extreme emergency

situations where a child is totally out of control

and is a serious and immediate physical danger to

-4-
himself but only upon the prior approval of a physician and after less restrictive methods of restraint have failed. b. In transporting a child to or from an institution when there are reasonable grounds to believe, based upon overt acts, that the child is a serious escape risk or a threat to the public safety. The use of mechanical restraints to move a child within an institution is prohibited. 12. All incidents of mechanical restraint shall be entered in a master log containing the child's name, the date and time of restraint, a detailed statement of why restraints were applied, the time the child was released fran restraints and the name of the authorizing physician. 13. The use of mechanical restraints at all institutions except aXJTC shall fully canply with the American Correctional Association Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services, to the extent that such Standards are not inconsistent with this Order. 14. The use of mechanical restraints at CQJTC shall fully comply with the Joint Conmission on Accreditation of Hospitals, Consolidated Standards for Child, Adolescent and Adult Psychiatric Facilities, 1981, to the extent that such Standards are not inconsistent with this Order. 15. All institutions shall fully comply with the 1981 Life Safety Code of the National Fire Protection Association and the American Correctional Association Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services pertaining to fire safety. The defendant shall request and submit to unannouced fire safety inspections performed monthly by the State Fire Marshal's Office until full compliance with these standards is achieved. 16. All institutions shall fully canply with all federal, state and local health and sanitation codes and with the American Correctional Association Standards for Juvenile Training Schools and Services pertaining to food service, sanitation, safety and hygiene. The defendants shall request and submit to unannounced health and sanitation inspections performed monthly by the State Health Department until full compliance with these codes and standards is achieved.

r

r

-5-

17. in order to monitor compliance with this Order, p l a i n t i f f s '

counsel and t h e i r authorized representatives, including expert consultants,

s h a l l have reasonable access to any i n s t i t u t i o n , a l l class members, a l l

i n s t i t u t i o n a l and s t a t e office staff, and any f i l e s and records pertaining

t o c l a s s msmbers, a l l in accordance with the September 4, 1980 Order of t h i s

Court.

Dated t h i s < A day of

' , 1982 a t Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

APPROVED:

Ralph G. Thompson U.S. District Judge

STEVEN A. NOVICK BARBARA J. DEW CLAUDIA WRIGHT Attorneys for Plaintiffs

n. TUCKER Attorney for Department of Human Services and Employee Defendants

R. BORKETT Attorney for Oklahoma Public Welfare Commission

J."HARRY Attorney for O^ahoma Public Vfelfare Commission
GENE STIPE' MITCHELL LEE Attorneys for L. E. Rader

 
 CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 1 of 28

CLOSED, _ME
U.S. District Court Western District of Oklahoma[LIVE] (Oklahoma City)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:78-cv-00004

D, et al v. Rader, et al Assigned to: Honorable Ralph G. Thompson Demand: $0 Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury

Date Filed: 01/04/1978 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
Terry D by attorney and next friends, Steven A Novick and Richard L Weldon, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated

represented by Gary A Taylor Legal Aid of Oklahoma City 2901 N Classen Blvd Suite 112 Oklahoma City, OK 73106 405-521-1302 TERMINATED: 07/16/1996 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul DeMuro Frederic Dorwart PC 124 E 4th St Suite 100 Tulsa, OK 74103 918-583-9922 Fax: 918-583-8251 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Romondo P by attorney and next friends, Steven A. Novick and Richard L. Weldon, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated

Steven A Novick 1717 S Cheyenne Ave Tulsa, OK 74119 918-582-4441 Fax: 918-582-7830 Email: snovicklaw@aol.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gary A Taylor (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/16/1996 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 2 of 28

Plaintiff David L by attorney and next friends, Steven A Novick and Richard L Weldon, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated
Plaintiff Roger V by attorney and next friends Steven A. Novick and Richard L. Weldon, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated
Plaintiff Byron C by attorney and next friends Steven A. Novick and Richard L. Weldon, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated

Paul DeMuro (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven A Novick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gary A Taylor (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/16/1996 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul DeMuro (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven A Novick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gary A Taylor (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/16/1996 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul DeMuro (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven A Novick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gary A Taylor (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/16/1996 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 3 of 28

Plaintiff Jeffery H by attorney and next friends, Steven A. Novick and Richard L. Weldon, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated
Plaintiff Laura C by attorney and next friends STeven A. Novick and Richard L Weldon, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated
Plaintiff Rebecca G by attorney and next friends, Steven A. Novick and Richard L. Weldon individually and on behalf of all other

Paul DeMuro (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven A Novick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gary A Taylor (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/16/1996 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul DeMuro (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven A Novick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gary A Taylor (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/16/1996 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul DeMuro (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven A Novick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gary A Taylor (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/16/1996 LEAD ATTORNEY

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 4 of 28

persons similarly situated
V. Defendant L E Rader individually and as Director of Public Welfare

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul DeMuro (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven A Novick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters US Dept of Human Services-53025OKC Office of General Counsel P O Box 53025 Oklahoma City, OK 73152-3025 405-521-3638 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown US Dept of Human Services-53025OKC Office of General Counsel P O Box 53025 Oklahoma City, OK 73152-3025 405-521-3638 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown Ofc of Juvenile Affairs-OKC P O Box 268812 Oklahoma City, OK 73126 405-530-2800 Fax: 405-530-2891 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson Attorney General's Ofc-CAPITALOKC Capital Office 2300 N Lincoln Blvd Suite 112

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 5 of 28

Oklahoma City, OK 73105-3498 405-521-3921 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst Attorney General's Ofc-LINCOLNOKC General Counsel-Litigation Division 4545 N Lincoln Blvd Suite 260 Oklahoma City, OK 73105-3498 405-521-4274 Fax: 405-528-1867 Email: guy_hurst@oag.state.ok.us LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley Mitchell Foley & Jencks 205 NW 63rd St Suite 330 Oklahoma City, OK 73116 405-767-0404 Fax: 405-767-0909 Email: jfoley@southwestdocs.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey US Dept of Human Services-53025OKC Office of General Counsel P O Box 53025 Oklahoma City, OK 73152-3025 405-521-3638 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy US Dept of Human Services-53025OKC Office of General Counsel P O Box 53025 Oklahoma City, OK 73152-3025 405-521-3638 Fax: 405-521-6816 Email: Joseph.Strealy@okdhs.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 6 of 28

Defendant
Gordon Chase Coordinator of Bureau of Institutions and Community Services to Children and Youth

Ken Lackey Ofc of Juvenile Affairs-OKC P O Box 268812 Oklahoma City, OK 73126 405-530-2800 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 7 of 28

Defendant
John Leitka, Jr Supervisor for Institutional Services

Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 8 of 28

Defendant Harold Wilson Superintendent of Oklahoma Children's Center-South Campus
Defendant Bill Campbell Superintendent of Oklahoma Children's

represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address)

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 9 of 28

Center North Campus
Defendant R L Doyle Superintendent of Boley State School for Boys

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 10 of 28

Defendant
Bill Harper Superintendent of Girl's Town

(See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 11 of 28

Defendant David McCune

Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 12 of 28

Defendant Gary Hunt

Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 13 of 28

Defendant Reginald D Barnes

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address)

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 14 of 28

Defendant Wilbur Cave

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 15 of 28

Defendant W E Farha

(See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 16 of 28

Defendant Leon Gilbert

Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 17 of 28

Defendant Jane Hartley

Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 18 of 28

Defendant R M Greer

Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 19 of 28

Defendant Dean James, Sr
Defendant Joe Voto

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 20 of 28

Defendant
Carl Ward Commissioner of Public Works

(See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles L Waters (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 21 of 28

Date Filed 01/04/1978 05/31/1984
01/09/1996

David A Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dorothy Brown (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Drew Edmondson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Guy L Hurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonna S Geitgey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joseph W Strealy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ken Lackey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

#

Docket Text

COMPLAINT (kh) (Entered: 03/08/1996)

13 CONSENT JUDGMENT by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson dismissing case (cc: all counsel) (kh) (Entered: 03/08/1996)

188 ACCEPTANCE/NOTICE of Offer of jgm; pla acknowledges service and rcpt of an offer of jgm made by dfts allowing pla to take jgm for atty fees and costs in the amt of $33,716.25 agnst the Dept of Human Serv and

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 22 of 28

01/09/1996 01/09/1996 01/09/1996 01/17/1996
01/22/1996 01/22/1996
02/12/1996 02/12/1996 02/12/1996 02/12/1996 02/22/1996 02/22/1996 02/29/1996 02/29/1996

$35,000 agnst the Office of Juvenile Affairs. Pla hereby accepts the ref offer in full satisfaction of pla cnsl pending claims for atty fees and costs agnst dft pursuant to the terms of the offer (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
189 RULE 68 OFFER OF JGM / NOTICE (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
190 MOTION for order to approve amd implementation plan for the Office of Juvenile Affairs (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
191 PLA AND DFT MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF approval of amd implementation plan for the office of juvenile affairs/ STATEMENT by plaintiff, defendant (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
192 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson; Fifteenth monitoring rpt to court re the efforts of the Dept of Human Serv to implement the court approved plan for the Terry D. Consent Decree has been rec'd and is being reviewed. As before, for convenience the rpt is being maintained in this office. A copy of this ltr is directed to be filed by the Court Clerk in the records of the case so that public access to the rpt is assured. (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
193 AMENDED COURT PLAN OF IMPLEMENTATION OFFICE OF JUV AFFAIRS/ NOTICE (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
194 JUDGMENT: by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson ; IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that jgm be entered agnst dft Ok Dept of Human Serv and in favor of pla in the sum of $33,716.25 and agnst dft Ok Office of Juvenile Affairs and in favor of pla in the sum of $35,000.00 and that the same shall be paid topla's cnsl, Steven Novick and Gary A Taylor all reflecting the settlement of pla's cnsl's pending claim for fees and costs; and that the Clerk of this court enter this jgm in its civil dkt (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
195 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendants by Dorothy Brown (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
196 MOTION by defendant to quash (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
197 BRIEF IN SUPPORT FILED by defendant regarding motion to quash [196-1] (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
198 APPENDIX filed by defendant re brief [197-1] (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
199 MEMORANDUM by plaintiff in opposition to motion to quash [196-1] (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
200 APPENDIX filed by plaintiff re memorandum [199-1] (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
201 MOTION for order to set fairness hrg and approve class notice (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)
202 MEMORANDUM in support of motion for order to set fairness hrg and approve class notice [201-1] (cjs) (Entered: 03/05/1996)

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 23 of 28

03/05/1996
03/21/1996 03/21/1996
03/21/1996 03/21/1996 03/29/1996 03/29/1996 03/29/1996
04/02/1996
04/03/1996 04/03/1996
04/04/1996 04/04/1996 04/05/1996

203 MINUTE ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson re mtn to q or in the alternative for Protection of the dft, Office of Juvenile Affairs, filed 2/12/96, is temp stayed pending rcpt of the report of the court monitor [201-1] (cc: all counsel)(cjs) Modified on 03/08/1996 (Entered: 03/05/1996)
204 JOINT MOTION by plaintiff, defendant for order for temporary sealing of report (cjs) (Entered: 03/22/1996)
205 ORDER by Honorable David L. Russell for Honorable Ralph G. Thompson granting motion for order for temporary sealing of report [204-1] It is therefore ordered that the Compliance Report of Paul DeMuro, along with attachments filed on 3/21/96, be temporarily sealed (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 03/22/1996)
218 TERRY D. MONITORING REPORT/NOTICE (seal) (Entered: 04/10/1996)
219 ATTACHMENTS TO COURT MONITOR'S REPORT/EXHIBITS by plaintiff Terry D (seal) (Entered: 04/10/1996)
206 JOINT MOTION by plaintiff, defendant for order to release compliance report w/out attachments (cjs) (Entered: 04/01/1996)
207 RESPONSE by plaintiff (cjs) (Entered: 04/01/1996)
208 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson re Ord dtd 3/21/96 [205-1] The compliance report of Paul DeMuro ordered sealed by court order dtd 3/21/96 is hereby ord unsealed. The attach shall remain sealed until further order of the court (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 04/01/1996)
209 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson striking jnt pty motion for order to release compliance report w/out attachments [206-1] the mtn to release compliance rpt w/out attachments is stricken as moot, the court having heretofore released such rpt from seal sua sponte (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 04/02/1996)
210 APPLICATION/MOTION by Office of Juvenile Affairs for leave to file a reply to pla's suppl response to dfts mtn to quash (cjs) (Entered: 04/04/1996)
211 ENTER ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson; several written responses to the notice of hrg have been rec'd by the court. Cnsl for all ptys may review such responses at the chambers of Judge Thompson (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 04/04/1996)
212 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson granting Office of Juvenile Affairs' motion for leave to file a reply to pla's suppl response to dfts mtn to quash [210-1] (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 04/04/1996)
213 REPLY of the Office of Juvenile Affairs to pla's suppl respons to dft's mtn to quash re [207-1] (cjs) (Entered: 04/04/1996)
214 ORDER OF DISMISSAL by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson dismissing

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 24 of 28

04/05/1996
04/09/1996 04/10/1996 07/15/1996 07/16/1996
08/02/1996
09/10/1996 09/10/1996

case IT IS THEREFORE ORD by the court that this action, as it pertains to the OJA dfts be and is hereby dism upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Order w/out prejudice to the right of the pla to move the court for enforcement of such terms and conditions as provided herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for the purpose of adjudicating any outstanding claims for costs and atty fees (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 04/05/1996)
216 COURTROOM MINUTES:; hrg on compromise and dism of class action. Cause comes on for hrg. Ptys appear; Statements heard; Court finds the notice was proper and in order; Court also finds that the settlement is fair; Therefore Court approves order of dism and orders case dismissed (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 04/10/1996)
215 APPLICATION/MOTION by dft Office of Juvenile Affairs for order to strike atty appearance of Roger Creecy (cjs) (Entered: 04/09/1996)
217 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson granting Office of Juvenile Affairs' motion for order to strike atty appearance of Roger Creecy [2151] (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 04/10/1996)
220 MOTION by plaintiff Terry D, plaintiff Romondo P, plaintiff David L, plaintiff Roger V, plaintiff Byron C, plaintiff Jeffery H, plaintiff Laura C, plaintiff Rebecca G to withdraw attorney Gary A Taylor (cjs) (Entered: 07/15/1996)
221 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson granting motion to withdraw attorney Gary A Taylor [220-1] attorney Gary A Taylor for Rebecca G, attorney Gary A Taylor for Laura C, attorney Gary A Taylor for Jeffery H, attorney Gary A Taylor for Byron C, attorney Gary A Taylor for Roger V withdrawing attorney attorney Gary A Taylor for David L, attorney Gary A Taylor for Romondo P, attorney Gary A Taylor for Terry D (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 07/17/1996)
222 LETTER to Paul DeMuro from Honorable Ralph G. Thompson; the sixteenth monitoring rpt to court re the efforts of the Dept of Human Services to implement court approved plan for the Terry D Consent Degree has been rec'd and is being reviewed. Rpt is being maintained in this office. (cjs) (Entered: 08/05/1996)
223 RULE 68 OFFER OF JUDGMENT/STATEMENT by defendant (cjs) (Entered: 09/10/1996)
224 ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER OF JUDGMENT/STATEMENT by plaintiff Terry D, plaintiff Romondo P, plaintiff David L, plaintiff Roger V, plaintiff Byron C, plaintiff Jeffery H, plaintiff Laura C, plaintiff Rebecca G, defendant L E Rader in support of statement [223-1] Plas' accept offer of jgm made by Dept of Human Serv allowing plas to take jgm for atty fees and costs in the amt of $9,495.00 against the DHS. Plas hereby accept the ref offer in full satisfaction of plas pending claims for atty fees and costs agnst DHS thru 8/7/96 pursuant to the terms of the offer (cjs) (Entered: 09/10/1996)

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 25 of 28

09/12/1996 09/18/1996 11/06/1996 11/19/1996 11/20/1996
01/24/1997

225 JUDGMENT: by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson; IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that jgm be ent aganst Dept of Human Serv and in favor of pla in the sum of $9,495.00 and that the same shall be paid to pla's cnsl, Steven A. Novick P.C. and Legal Aid of Western Oklahoma all reflecting the settlement of pla's pending claim for atty fees and costs agnst the dft Dept of Human Serv thru 8/7/96 and that the Clerk of this court shall enter this jgm in its civil dkt (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 09/12/1996)
226 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson finding the dft's motion to quash [196-1] moot. As a result of the Dismissal, the court finds that the pending mtn to quash is moot. Therefore, the mtn to quash is dism w/out prejudice to its refiling subject to the terms and conditions of the Order of Dismissal (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 09/18/1996)
227 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson ; monitoring rpt to the court re the efforts of the DHS to implement the court approved plan for Terry D. Consent Degree has been rcd. Rpt is being maintained in this office. Copy of this ltr is directed to be filed by the Court Clerk in records of case so that public access to the rpt is assured. (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 11/07/1996)
228 MOTION by defendant L E Rader, defendant Gordon Chase, defendant John Leitka Jr, defendant Harold Wilson, defendant Bill Campbell, defendant R L Doyle, defendant Bill Harper, defendant David McCune, defendant Gary Hunt, defendant Reginald D Barnes, defendant Wilbur Cave, defendant W E Farha, defendant Leon Gilbert, defendant Jane Hartley, defendant R M Greer, defendant Dean James Sr, defendant Joe Voto, defendant Carl Ward for order confirming finding of court monitor and for dissolving the consent decree and the amd plan (cjs) (Entered: 11/20/1996)
229 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson granting motion for order confirming finding of court monitor and for dissolving the consent decree and the amd plan [228-1] IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED by the Court that the terms, injunctions, and provisions of the 1984 Consent Decree to the extent it applies to OJA and the 1996 OJA Amended Plan be and are hereby dissoved. All monitoring activities directed toward OJA under the Consent Decree and Amended Plan shall cease with the entry of this order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the terms and conditions set forth in this Court's 4/15/96 Ord of Dismissal shall remain in full force and effect. The Court shall retain ancillary jurisdiction to enforce such terms and conditions. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the 1984 Consent Decree and the 1995 Revised Court Plan of Implementation for DHS shall remain in full force and effect to the extent that they apply to DHS. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action for the purpose of adjudicating any outstanding claims for costs and atty fees (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 11/21/1996)
230 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson; the 17th monitoring rpt to the court re the efforts of the DHS to implement the court approved plan for the Terry D. consent Decree has been rcd and is being reviewed. The

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 26 of 28

02/11/1997 02/11/1997
02/12/1997 05/13/1997 05/13/1997 05/22/1997
05/27/1997

rpt is being maintained in this office. Copy of this ltr is directed to be filed by court clerk in the records of the case so that public access to the rpt is assured. (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 01/24/1997)
231 ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER OF JUDGMENT/NOTICE by plaintiff Terry D, plaintiff Romondo P, plaintiff David L, plaintiff Roger V, plaintiff Byron C, plaintiff Jeffery H, plaintiff Laura C, plaintiff Rebecca G (cjs) (Entered: 02/12/1997)
232 RULE 68 OFFER OF JUDGMENT/NOTICE by defendant L E Rader, defendant Gordon Chase, defendant John Leitka Jr, defendant Harold Wilson, defendant Bill Campbell, defendant R L Doyle, defendant Bill Harper, defendant David McCune, defendant Gary Hunt, defendant Reginald D Barnes, defendant Wilbur Cave, defendant W E Farha, defendant Leon Gilbert, defendant Jane Hartley, defendant R M Greer, defendant Dean James Sr, defendant Joe Voto, defendant Carl Ward (cjs) (Entered: 02/12/1997)
233 JUDGMENT: by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson re [232-1]; IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that jgm be entered agnst dft Ok Office of Juvenile Affairs in favor of pla in the sum of $27,737.50 and that same shall be paid to pla's cnsl, Steven A Novick and Gary A Taylor all reflecting the settlement of pla' s cnsl pending claim for fees and costs and that the clerk of this court enter this jgm in its civil dkt (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 02/12/1997)
234 NOTICE/RULE 68 OFFER OF JUDGMENT by Dft Dept. of Human Services (cjs) (Entered: 05/14/1997)
235 NOTICE/ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER OF JUDGMENT by plaintiff Terry D, plaintiff Romondo P, plaintiff David L, plaintiff Roger V, plaintiff Byron C, plaintiff Jeffery H, plaintiff Laura C, plaintiff Rebecca G; pla acknowledge service and rcpt of an offer of jgm made by Dept of Human Services on 5/6/97 allowing pla's to take jgm for atty fees and costs in the amt of $8,550.00 agnst dft DHS (cjs) (Entered: 05/14/1997)
236 JUDGMENT: by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson dismissing case IT IS THEREFORE ordered that jgm be entered agnst dft Dept Human Services and in favor of the plas' in the sum of $8,550.00, and that the same shal be pd to pla's cnsl Steven A. Novick, all reflecting the settlement of pla's pending claim for atty fees and costs agnst dft Dept Human Services from August 1996 thru 4/26/97 and that the Clerk of the Court shall enter this jgm in its civil dkt (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 05/22/1997)
237 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson ; the eighteenth monitoring rpt to the court re the efforts of the Dept of Human Services to implement the court approved plan for the Terry D. consent Decree has been rec'd and is being reviewed. The rpt is being maintained in this office. A copy of this ltr is directed to be filed by the Court Clerk in the records of the case so that public access to the rpt is assured. (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 05/27/1997)

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 27 of 28

10/28/1997 01/20/1998 01/26/1998
01/26/1998 01/26/1998
01/26/1998
02/05/1998 02/11/1998

238 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson; The nineteenth monitoring rpt to the Court re the efforts of the Dept. of Human Services to implement the court approved plan for the Terry D. Consent Decree has been rec'd and reviewed. More Fully set out (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 10/29/1997)
239 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson; the 20th monitoring rpt to the court re the efforts of the Dept of Human Services to implement the court approved plan for Terry D. Consent Decree has been rec'd and being reviewed. Rpt is being maintained in this office. (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 01/20/1998)
240 ORDER OF DISMISSAL by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson dismissing DHS dfts IT IS THEREFORE ORD by the Court that this action, as it pertains to the DHS dfts, be and is hereby dism upon the terms and conditions set forth in this order w/out prej to the right of the plas to move the court for enforcement of such terms and conditions as the settlement agreement of the ptys as provided herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for the purpose of adjudicating any outstanding claims for costs and atty fees and shall retain ancillary jurisdiction of this action for the purpose of enforcing the terms and conditions of this order as the settlement agreement of the ptys (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 01/26/1998)
241 COURTROOM MINUTES: re Ord of dismissal entered this date [240-1] ORDER OF DISMISSAL ENTERED (cjs) (Entered: 01/26/1998)
242 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant L E Rader, defendant Gordon Chase, defendant John Leitka Jr, defendant Harold Wilson, defendant Bill Campbell, defendant R L Doyle, defendant Bill Harper, defendant David McCune, defendant Gary Hunt, defendant Reginald D Barnes, defendant Wilbur Cave, defendant W E Farha, defendant Leon Gilbert, defendant Jane Hartley, defendant R M Greer, defendant Dean James Sr, defendant Joe Voto, defendant Carl Ward by Joseph W Strealy (cjs) (Entered: 01/26/1998)
243 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant L E Rader, defendant Gordon Chase, defendant John Leitka Jr, defendant Harold Wilson, defendant Bill Campbell, defendant R L Doyle, defendant Bill Harper, defendant David McCune, defendant Gary Hunt, defendant Reginald D Barnes, defendant Wilbur Cave, defendant W E Farha, defendant Leon Gilbert, defendant Jane Hartley, defendant R M Greer, defendant Dean James Sr, defendant Joe Voto, defendant Carl Ward by Jonna S Geitgey (cjs) (Entered: 01/26/1998)
TRANSCRIPT of hrg to approve settlement held on 1/26/98 by CSR Larry E. Marks (cjs) (Entered: 02/06/1998)
244 REQUEST/MOTION by defendant DHS for order for return of class correspondence and request that it be placed under seal (cjs) (Entered: 02/12/1998)

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:okwd - Docket Report

Page 28 of 28

02/12/1998
02/12/1998 02/13/1998
02/13/1998 02/16/1999

245 ACCEPTANCE by plaintiff Terry D, plaintiff Romondo P, plaintiff David L, plaintiff Roger V, plaintiff Byron C, plaintiff Jeffery H, plaintiff Laura C, plaintiff Rebecca G of offer of re judgment [236-2] Pla's acknowledge service and rcpt of offer of jgm made by dft DHS allowing pla's to take jgm agnst dft for costs and atty fees in the amt of 18,637.50 (cjs) (Entered: 02/12/1998)
246 OFFER OF JUDGMENT / NOTICE by defendant DHS (cjs) (Entered: 02/12/1998)
247 JUDGMENT: by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson IT IS ORDERED that jgm be entered agnst dft DHS and in favor of the plfs in the sum of $18,637.50 and that the same shall be pd to plfs; cnsl, Steven A Novick, all reflecting the settlement of plfs' pending claim for costs and attorney's fees in this action from 5/2/97 through 1/27/98; the Clk of this Court is directed to enter this jgm in the civil docket (cc: all counsel) (ch) (Entered: 02/13/1998)
248 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson granting motion for order for return of class correspondence and request that it be placed under seal [244-1] (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 02/18/1998)
249 ORDER by Honorable Ralph G. Thompson; final monitoring rpt to court re the efforts of the DHS to implement the court approved plan for the Terry D. Consent Decree has been rec'd and is being reviewed. The rpt is maintained in this office. Copy of letter is to be filed by court clerk in records of the case so that public access to the rpt is assured. (cc: all counsel) (cjs) (Entered: 02/16/1999)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

PACER Login:

hs0328

Description:

Docket Report

Billable Pages:

17

10/17/2005 17:19:21

Client Code:

Search

5:78-cv-00004 Start date:

Criteria: 1/1/1970 End date: 10/17/2005

Cost:

1.36

https://ecf.okwd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?881825859623937-L_923_0-1

10/17/2005

 
 Terry D. v. Rader, 93 F.R.D. 576 (1982)
93 F.R.D. 576 United States District Court, W. D. Oklahoma.
TERRY D., Romondo P., David L., Roger V., Byron C., Jeffery H., Laura C., Rebecca G., by their
attorneys and next friends, Steven A. Novick and Richard L. Weldon, individually and on behalf of
all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v.
L. E. RADER, et al., Defendants, State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Department of Institutions, Social and Rehabilitative Services,
Intervenor-Defendant.
No. CIV-78-0004-T. | Feb. 26, 1982.
Attorneys and Law Firms
*576 Steven A. Novick, Legal Aid of Western Oklahoma, Inc., Oklahoma City, Okl., David Lee Lambert, David C. Howard, St. Louis, Mo., Edward I. Koren, Alvin J. Bronstein, The National Prison Project of the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs.
Thomas H. Tucker, Oklahoma City, Okl., William R. Burkett, Linn, Helms, Kirk & Burkett, Oklahoma City, Okl., Gene Stipe, Mitchell A. Lee, Stipe, Gossett, Stipe, Harper & Estes, Oklahoma City, Okl., Jan Eric Cartwright, Atty. Gen., Floyd W. Taylor, Robert A. Nance, Asst. Attys. Gen., Oklahoma City, Okl., for defendants.
Opinion
ORDER
RALPH G. THOMPSON, District Judge.
Principally at issue is whether or not a proposed Stipulated Agreement, entered into by all parties and their counsel of record prior to the entry of appearance of the Attorney General of Oklahoma, should be approved.
This is a class action in which the plaintiffs allege that the operation of the juvenile *577 treatment centers of the State of Oklahoma is violative of certain of their constitutional rights. The proposed settlement was entered into by all parties, submitted to the Court and distributed to the several institutions, with notices to the class, inviting their objections or comments, all as required by rule.

[1] [2] Rule 23(e), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, provides:
“(e) Dismissal or Compromise. A class action shall not be dismissed or compromised without the approval of the Court, and notice of the proposed dismissal or compromise shall be given to all members of the class in such manner as the Court directs.”
The purpose of Rule 23(e) is to protect absent class members from unjust or unfair settlements by requiring approval of the Court in order to dismiss or compromise a class action. The standard of evaluation of a compromise is fairness and reasonableness with respect to the best interests of all affected. Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d 1326 (5th Cir. 1977). The Court cannot accept a settlement that the proponents have not shown to be fair, reasonable and adequate. Grunin v. International House of Pancakes, 513 F.2d 114 (8th Cir. 1975) cert. denied, 423 U.S. 864, 96 S.Ct. 124, 46 L.Ed.2d 93 (1975).
[3] [4] Many of the provisions of the proposed settlement may have merit and, were it not for the antagonism to them and the effort to withdraw from the settlement by the Attorney General, speaking for the Oklahoma House of Representatives, it might have been a settlement the Court could have approved. In order for a settlement to be fair, reasonable and adequate, however, it must at least offer the strong likelihood that it will eventually end the litigation and controversy. Where a settlement is the subject of disagreement, and predictably will be the source of continuing controversy and litigation, it cannot be deemed to be reasonable, fair or adequate.
[5] The proposal before the Court must be considered inadequate because it cannot reasonably be expected to settle the controversy by being successfully implemented. At least one body of the legislative branch of state government opposes the settlement which was entered into by a department of the executive branch. No such plan can be expected to succeed without the cooperation of both. Under such circumstances, to approve the proposed settlement would pit one branch of state government against the other, with the federal court, unwillingly but necessarily, superimposed on both. This would generate an inevitable and impossible tangle of jurisdictional, prerogative and constitutional disputes.
By approving the proposed settlement, the Court would be adopting it as its own order, and be obliged to enforce it, notwithstanding that the order was not based on competent evidence heard and evaluated by the Court, but based only on the agreement of the parties. Such proposal
1

Terry D. v. Rader, 93 F.R.D. 576 (1982)
might have been workable if the state government had spoken as one voice in agreeing to it. As a practical matter, had the parties to the proposed settlement consulted the legislative branch, at least to the extent of being reasonably assured that the settlement would not be opposed and resisted, the case might well have been successfully terminated. But here, where antagonism over its provisions exist between departments of state government, the potential for conflict would seem to be without end. No stable, predictable, manageable program could be possible and the state’s juvenile treatment program, state-federal relationships and the public’s confidence in its institutions all would suffer. To approve the proposed settlement under such circumstances would not be practical or sensible or in the best interest of the class or anyone else.
A state government which cannot even agree on who represents its institutions can hardly be expected to successfully implement the proposed changes in its juvenile treatment program.
This case has the potential of becoming an example of what is widely recognized as one of the most important disputes in the history of the American judiciary: What role should the federal judiciary play in *578 overseeing, correcting, setting standards for, and directly administering the social services of the states? Protection of constitutional rights is clearly and undisputably the role of the Court. The Court is, and always shall be, available and unhesitating in that role. Beyond that, the administration of social policy is properly for the state itself. A state’s decisions affecting social policy, with the attendant philosophical considerations and budgetary consequences should be as free from federal judicial intervention as protection of constitutional entitlements will permit. Forfeiture of a state’s decision-making power should occur only by such a dereliction of duty as to clearly require judicial intervention.
Many of the policies and procedures contained in the proposed settlement were just that-policy and proceduresand not matters of constitutional right. It is well within the prerogative of the state to adopt such policies and procedures if it chooses, but such matters are not the business of the Court. To the extent that courts assume the determination of such policy and procedures, the power and discretion of the states are reduced and their responsibilities are usurped. Again, the role of the Court is to protect constitutional rights, not to restructure state governmental programs except as necessary to protect those rights.
Whatever the perceived disagreements presently existing

between the parties, it is entirely possible that a revised agreement can be reached, which has the support of both the executive and legislative branches to insure successful implementation. No other solution could be as sensible and practical and beneficial to all concerned.
Many examples exist where state officials, by their inaction, have left no recourse but for the courts to assume the responsibility for any number of social programs. There is no reason why this case must inevitably join such indistinguished company. To the contrary, this case offers a long overdue opportunity to demonstrate a successful combination of (1) judicial restraint, based on a respect for the proper roles and relationships of government, together with (2) conscientious action by the state to insure constitutional entitlements and (3) reasonableness on the part of all parties to resolve, rather than litigate, the issues. The result should satisfy both the goals of the class and preserve the prerogatives of the state.
To provide a new opportunity for such a resolution to be realized, the following Order and schedule is announced:
1. By reason of its inadequacy, as heretofore discussed, the proposed Stipulated Agreement is not approved.
2. A trial date for this case will not be determined for a period of 60 days, during which time the parties, including the Attorney General of Oklahoma, are directed to confer, with full participation of legislative leaders, with a view to reaching an agreeable settlement.
3. In the meantime, this Court continues to be available for consideration of any requested preliminary or emergency relief, responsibly claimed to be necessary, from immediate or threatened deprivations of constitutional rights affecting the safety or welfare of any members of the class.
4. Having declined to approve the proposed Stipulated Agreement the issue and motions regarding the Attorney General’s purported withdrawal from it and its alleged invalidity are moot.
5. Plaintiffs’ Alternative Motion to Dismiss State of Oklahoma as a Party is denied.
6. The Entry of Appearance and participation of the Attorney General is found to be pursuant to statutory authority, 74 O.S. s 18b(b) and (c), and will be permitted.
	  

2