Travis D. v. Eastmont Human Serv. Ctr.

MR-MT-001-001

1

Andree Larose

Alan Freed, Jr.

2

Allen Smith, Jr.

Mary Gallagher

3

MONTANA ADVOCACY PROGRAM 316 North Park, Room 211

4

P.O. Box 1680 Helena, MT 59624

Voice/TDD (406) 444-3889

5

Fax. (406) 444-0261

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

6

AUG 2 3 1936
LOU ALEKSiCH, JR., Clerk Depjiy Clerk

7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MONTANA

HELENA DIVISION

9

TRAVIS D., by his mother and next friend Leslie Barry:

)

ALLEN K., by his parents and guardians Michael and '

)

10

Earlene K.;

)

VIRGINIA L., by her sister and next friend Barbara Mercer; )

11

ISIDOR S., by his next friend Nancv Staigmiller;

KIMBERLY B., by her next friend Dawn~DeVor;

)

)

CIVIL ACTION

12

CORE B., by his sister and next friend Lillv Westby: TIFFANY M., by her next friend Johnelle Howanach;

)
) No. Cf-$(,-(>*>

LYLE H., by his parents and guardians Martha and Ervin H.; )

13

JUDY M., by her next friend Nancy Staigmiller;

)

ALVIN W., by his next friend Gay Moddrell.

)

14

Plaintiffs,

15

vs.

CLASS ACTION

16

EASTMONT HUMAN SERVICE CENTER and

COMPLAINT

MONTANA DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER:

17

PETER BLOUKE. Director, Montana Department of

Public Health and Human Services:

18

ROBERT ANDERSON, Administrative Services

Division. Department of Corrections;

)

19

JOE MATTHEWS, Director, Disability Services Division, )

Department of Public Health and Human Services;

)

20

DAN ANDERSON, Administrator, Mental and Addictive )

Disorders Division, Department of Public Health and

)

21

Human Services: JENNIFER PRYOR, Superintendent, Montana

) )

Developmental Center;

)

22

SYLVIA HAMMER, Superintendent, Eastmont Human

)

Service Center;

)

23

CARL KEENER, Medical Director, Montana State Hospital; )

RON BALAS, Superintendent, Montana Mental Health

)

24

Nursing Care Center; and STATE OF MONTANA.

) )

25

)

Defendants.

)

26

27

28

Complaint - page 1

1

I. INTRODUCTION

2

1. This is a civil rights action for declaratory judgment and to enjoin responsible officials of

3

Montana from continuing unnecessarily to segregate people with developmental disabilities in state

4

institutions, confining and isolating them there, and from failing to provide to them effective, family-sized

5

residential and other services in the community which will enable them to grow and learn and earn and

6

thrive and be productive.

7

2. This action is brought by ten individuals with developmental disabilities who are segregated

8

and confined in state institutions, who sue by their parents, family members and next friends, on behalf of

9

themselves and all others similarly situated, to redress violations of the laws and Constitution of the

10

United States.

11

3. Named plaintiffs and class members (hereinafter referred to collectively as "plaintiffs") have

12

been or are at risk of being involuntarily committed to the Montana Developmental Center (MDC or

13

Boulder) at Boulder, Montana; Eastmont Human Service Center (Eastmont) at Glendive, Montana; and a

14

few of them at two other state institutions, Montana State Hospital (MSH) at Warm Springs, Montana;

15

and Montana Mental Health Nursing Care Center (MMHNCC) at Lewistown, Montana. Approximately

16

175 persons with developmental disabilities are confined at these institutions currently.

17

4. Small, individualized, family-sized community residential programs and other community

18

support services are necessary to meet the developmental needs of plaintiffs, as well as to afford to them

19

the normal human experience of being part of the community. Montana has established a comprehensive

20

community-based service system which provides treatment, habilitation, vocational, residential and other

21

support services to people with developmental disabilities in community settings. However, plaintiffs are

22

denied these living arrangements and support services for reasons having nothing to do with their

23

individual needs.

24

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

25

5. This being an action for declaratory and injunctive relief arising under the Americans with

26

Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §12101 et. seq.; and under 42 U.S.C. §1983 to redress the deprivation under

27

color of state law of rights secured to plaintiffs by Title XIX of the Social Security Act, 28 U.S.C. §1396

28

et. seq., and by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, this Court has subject

Complaint - page 2

1

normal, integrated community setting.

2

Allen K.

3

10. Allen K. is a 25 year old man who has been involuntarily confined at MDC for seven years,

4

since 1989. He brings this action by his parents and guardians, Earlene and Michael K.

5

11. Allen K. has had a traumatic brain injury. A tumor was removed from his brain when he

6

was 11 yrs. old. The injury has affected Allen K.'s vision, personality, behavior and ability to control

7

emotions, and he has been diagnosed as mildly retarded. Allen K. has retained many skills which were

8

developed prior to his brain injury, including some reading, writing and math skills. He can converse in

9

German and uses sign language.

10

12. Allen K. is a social and very caring individual who thrives on companionship and who would

11

like to live near his family. His parents and three siblings all live in Great Falls. By segregating Alien

12

K. in a state institution over 100 miles from his home, defendants are preventing him from experiencing,

13

on a tangible, day to day basis, the loving support of his family and the opportunity to participate in

14

normal family and community activities. His parents want to be able to take him to church on Sundays

15

and have him over for Sunday dinner. So long as Allen K. is segregated and isolated at MDC, family

16

activities such as these are not possible. Visits to the distant institution do not provide family interactions

17

of the quality or quantity that Allen K. and his family want and need.

18

13. Defendants' own developmental disabilities professionals have determined that Allen can and

19

should be supported in the community. However, defendants have failed to make the necessary

20

community services available to him. His individual treatment planning team recognizes that appropriate

21

community services can meet Allen K.'s need for structure and close supervision and has referred him to

22

Montana's long waiting list for community services. Montana has long provided "intensive" community

23

services to individuals with needs similar to Allen K.'s. "Intensive" community services are characterized

24

by a high level of structure and supervision. Allen K. has applied for six separate intensive group home

25

openings last year, but each time, defendants denied him the services and provided them to others.

26

thereby continuing to relegate Allen K. to the confines of MDC.

27

Virginia L.

28

14. Virginia L. is a 49 year old woman who is profoundly retarded and has been involuntarily

Complaint - page 4

1

confined at one state institution or another for forty years, since she was 9. She was committed to

2

Montana State Hospital (MSH) at Warm Springs in 1956, MDC at Boulder in 1957, and since 1979,

3

Eastmont Human Service Center (Eastmont) at Glendive. She brings this action by her sister and next

4

friend, Barbara Mercer.

5

15. Virginia L. enjoys listening to music, going for walks and community outings and socializing.

6

She does not speak, but she does communicate through vocalizations, gestures and physical prompting.

7

Defendants have failed to provide Virginia L. with any of the now common assistive communication

8

devices available to enable non-verbal disabled people to communicate effectively.

9

16. Virginia L.'s brother and sister recall her as an affectionate person who became distant and

10

withdrawn after she was institutionalized. Because defendants have kept Virginia L. segregated at a state

11

institution, away from her home community, she has been deprived of the ongoing support and

12

involvement of her family. Virginia L.'s family would like her to live in Billings, where her father and

13

sister live and where other family members visit.

14

17. Defendants' own developmental disabilities professionals have detennined that Virginia L.

15

can and should be supported in the community. However defendants have failed to make the necessary

16

community services available to Virginia L. Her individual treatment planning team not only

17

recommends community placement, but believes she is at risk of losing more life skills, opportunities and

18

independence if she remains the institutional setting. The team believes that because of her institutional

19

confinement, Virginia L. is not realizing her potential and that, given the opportunity to live in a family

20

like community setting, she could learn and use many more skills.

21

Tsidor S.

22

18. Isidor S. is a 74 year old man who has been involuntarily confined in successive state

23

institutions since 1927 when he was 4 years old, a time when Montana law commanded the detention of

24

the "feeble-minded, idiot and epileptic" in isolated institutions "for life" to prevent them from being a

25

"menace to the state." Isidor S. was first confined at MSH, transferred to Galen in 1956, MDC in 1977,

26

and Eastmont in 1979. Isidor S. is profoundly retarded. Isidor S.'s parents are presumed deceased and

27

there is no record of contact by any sibling. He brings this action by his next friend Nancy Staigmiller.

28

19. Isidor S. is alert, active and aware of his environment He has a sense of humor; he will

Complaint - page 5

1

smile and chuckle if he feels he has "gotten" someone. He makes baskets, does jigsaw puzzles, runs

2

simple errands, crushes cans and stuffs envelopes. Isidor S. communicates his wishes and hopes, likes

3

and dislikes, by reaching for items, making facial expressions and pushing items away. Defendants have

4

not provided Isidor S. with any of the assistive communication devices now commonly available to enable

5

non-verbal people to communicate effectively.

6

20. Isidor S. is in the senior retirement program at Eastmont, which consists mostly of leisure

7

activities, but he chooses also to attend some vocational activities.

8

21. Defendants' own developmental disabilities professionals have determined that Isidor S. can

9

and should be supported in the community. However, defendants have failed to make the necessary

10

community services available to him. Isidor S.'s individual treatment planning team recommends a

11

senior group home and day program in a community setting. The team believes Isidor S. risks losing

12

more skills if he remains in the institutional setting. The team also believes he would benefit greatly from

13

increased opportunities to participate in community life and activities.

14

Kimherlv B.

15

22. Kimberly B. is a 28 year old woman who is profoundly retarded and has cerebral palsy and

16

epilepsy and who has been involuntarily confined at Eastmont for 13 years. She brings this action by her

17

next friend Dawn DeVor.

18

23. Kimberly B. has lived most of her life in the community, where she also attended public

19

school. At the age of four months following the administration of a diphtheria vaccination, Kimberly B.

20

began to experience developmental problems. She lived with her family in the family home in Nebraska

21

until she was about 2 Vi years old, when she was placed at the Beatrice State Home in Beatrice, Nebraska

22

where she resided for approximately two years. When Kimberiy B. was almost five years old, she was

23

provided a community group home and other community services. Kimberly B. lived in the community

24

group home for ten years, until she was 15 years old. In 1983. after her parents' relocation to Montana

25

and because of the unavailability of community resources, she was committed to Eastmont.

26

24. Kimberly B. uses a non-motorized wheelchair pan of the time, but prefers to walk with a gait

27

trainer (walker). She is aware of her environment and notices when a stranger enters the room. She

28

enjoys going off campus for van rides and other excursions. She especially enjoys swimming and

Complaint - page 6

1

bowling. For vocational activities, Kimberiy B. crushes cans and folds washcloths, however she could

2

and should be involved in a more challenging and productive vocational program.

3

25. Kimberiy B. communicates by smiling, making intermittent eye contact, intentionally

4

avoiding eye contact, laughing and other vocalizations. She also knows some sign language. Defendants

5

have failed to provide Kimberiy B. with any of the assistive communication devices now commonly

6

available to enable non-verbal people to communicate effectively.

7

26. Defendants' own developmental disabilities professionals have determined that Kimberiy B.

8

can and should be supported in the community. However, defendants have failed to make the necessary

9

community services available to her. Her individual treatment planning team strongly recommends

10

community placement and has referred Kimberiy B. to Montana's long waiting list for community

11

services. The team recognizes that, as a result of having lived in a community group home for ten years

12

of her life, Kimberiy B. has experienced daily home living activities, normalized settings, life styles and

13

other benefits which simply cannot be matched in the institutional setting. They believe Kimberiy B.

14

should be with other young adults and should be supponed in an integrated community setting.

15

Additionally, Kimberiy B. displays some disadvantageous behaviors which her team believes result from

16

boredom and lack of challenge and the lack of an appropriate peer group in the institutional setting.

17

Kimberiy B.'s treatment team notes that while in the community and public school setting in the past, she

18

did not engage in the disadvantageous behaviors observed in the institutional setting. Most importantly,

19

Kimberiy B. was happier in an integrated community environment.

20

Corie B.

21

27. Corie B. is a 31 year old man who is profoundly retarded and has been involuntarily

22

confined at MDC since 1985. He brings this action by his sister and next friend, Lilly Westby.

23

28. Corie B. was committed to Montana Developmental Center "temporarily" for management of

24

an eating disorder in which he rejects non-liquid foods. This has been managed by mixing liquid into his

25

food and giving him nutritional supplements, an approach any community service provider can utilize

26

successfully.

27

29. Corie B. is the youngest of eight children and is a member of the Confederated Salish and

28

Kootenai Tribes. He has two sisters and a brother who live in Poison, all of whom would like Corie B.

Complaint - page 7

1

to live on or near the Flathead reservation, where he would be close to his family and his native culture.

2

The Confederated Tribes actively follow Corie B,'s progress; a tribal social worker attends his annual

3

treatment planning meetings. Tribal representatives also desire Corie B.'s placement on or near the

4

reservation.

5

30. Corie B. uses a wheelchair for ambulation, but moves it with slowness and difficulty.

6

Defendants have not provided Corie B. with an electric wheelchair, despite the fact that an electric

7

wheelchair would enable him to move about more easily, readily and independently. At times, Corie B.

8

walks using a forearm walker or other external support. Corie B. does not speak, but he does interact

9

with others by shaking hands, making eye contact, smiling and laughing. Defendants have not provided

10

Corie B. with any of the assistive communication devices now commonly available to enable non-verbal

11

people to communicate effectively.

12

31. Defendants' own developmental disabilities professionals have determined that Corie B. can

13

and should be supported in the community. However, defendants have failed to make the necessary

14

community services available to him. Corie B.'s individual treatment team has recognized that an

15

appropriate community placement can meet his need for occupational therapy, physical therapy and

16

nutritional and health care needs and has referred him to Montana's long waiting list for community

17

services. The team also has recognized that an appropriate community placement can provide the 24 hour

18

supervision Corie B. needs due to his seizures, inability to respond to emergencies and inability to care

19

for himself.

20

32. In fact, defendants' own developmental disabilities professionals identified Corie B. as one of

21

twelve individuals who are the "highest priority" for community placement under an MDC population

22

reduction plan scheduled to have been implemented this summer but now abandoned. As part of that

23

plan, Corie B. would have been placed in a community group home in Ronan, near his family and native

24

culture. However, only three of the identified twelve MDC residents will actually be provided

25

community services.

26

Tiffany M.

27

33. Tiffany M. is a 21 year old young woman who is mildly retarded and has been involuntarily

28

confined at MDC since June 1995. She brings this action through her next friend Johnelle Howanach.

Complaint - page 8

1

LvleH.

2

39. Lyle H. is a 47 year old man who has cerebral palsy and is profoundly retarded. He has

3

been involuntarily confined at successive state institutions since 1969; now he is confined at Eastmont.

4

He brings this action by his parents and guardians, Ervin and Martha H.

5

40. Lyle H. was born in Montana and lived with his family in the family home until he was 20

6

years old. In 1969, he was committed to MDC. From 1974 to 1979, Lyle H. was transferred to various

7

nursing homes, then in 1979 was committed to Eastmont where he has been confined for the past 17

8

years.

9

41. Lyle H.'s family is seriously involved in his care and treatment planning and they visit as

10

often as possible. Last year, for example. Lyle H. had visits from his aunt, sister and two brothers.

11

although visits at the institution do not provide family interactions of a quality or quantity that Lyle H.'s

12

family desires. Lyle H.'s parents want him to live in a smaller, family-scale, community-based setting,

13

preferably in Billings, where his brother and other family members live and where his parents can visit

14

him more easily from their new home in Arizona. If Lyle H. lived in Billings, he could be included in

15

these family gatherings. Instead, by segregating Lyle H. in a state institution over 200 miles from

16

Billings, difficult and expensive to reach with public transportation, defendants are preventing him from

17

experiencing, on a tangible, regular basis, the loving support of his family and the opportunity to

18

participate in normal family and other community activities.

19

42. Lyle H. uses a non-motorized wheelchair to move around the living unit, visiting with staff

20

and peers. He is a social person who often tries to engage the attention of others. He enjoys being

21

outside and. on the few occasions allowed, going off the institution grounds. He does not like big

22

crowds. Although Lyle H. is non-verbal, he has not been provided any of the assistive technology

23

devices now commonly available to enable him to communicate effectively.

24

43. Defendants' own developmental disabilities professionals have determined that Lyle H. can

25

and should be supported in the community. However, defendants have failed to make the necessary

26

community services available to him. Lyle H.'s treatment planning team believes he has many abilities

27

which are not being, and cannot be, developed in his current institutional setting. The team believes that

28

keeping Lyle H. in the institutional setting puts him at risk of loss of skills and opportunities and

Complaint - page 10

1

independence. The team believes community placement would provide Lyle H. with the added challenge

2

he needs, as well as more choices and activities directed at working with his physical disabilities. The

3

team also believes Lyle H. would benefit from the increased staff attention and interaction in a smaller,

4

community-based setting. The team has referred Lyle H. to Montana's long waiting list for community

5

services.

6

Judy M.

7

44. Judy M. is a 46 year old woman who is profoundly retarded and has been confined at

8

successive state institutions since she was 5 or 6 years old: now she is confined at Eastmont. She brings

9

this action by her next friend Nancy Staigmiller.

10

45. Judy M. was one often children and an apparent victim of early infancy neglect and

11

malnutrition, according to institution records. After an initial placement in foster care, Judy M. was

12

committed to MSH in 1955, transferred to MDC in 1957 and to Eastmont in 1990. Judy M.'s parents are

13

deceased and she has no family contact.

14

46. Judy M. does not speak but she does communicate through such means as gestures and

15

physical prompting. Defendants have not provided her with any of the assistive communication devices

16

now commonly provided to enable non-verbal people to communicate effectively.

17

47. Defendants' own developmental disabilities professionals have determined that Judy M. can

18

and should be supported in the community. However, defendants have failed to make the necessary

19

community services available to her. Judy M.'s individual treatment planning team not only recommends

20

community placement, but believes that her institutional placement is causing a regression of skills, in that

21

it fosters "trainer dependency." The team believes Judy M. would benefit from the greater challenge and

22

independence of a community placement. The team also believes placing Judy in a smaller setting where

23

she could receive more individual attention would better meet her needs, reducing or eliminating some

24

"attention seeking" behaviors.

25

Alvin W

26

48. Plaintiff Alvin W. is a 40 year old man who is profoundly retarded and has been

27

involuntarily confined at MDC for 27 years, since he was 13. Alvin has no known family. He brings

28

this action by his next friend Gay Moddrell.

' - n a H f )}

1

49. Alvin W. uses a non-motorized wheelchair and sometimes walks with staff assistance. He

2

expresses himself through facial expressions, vocalizations and physically guiding staff, but has no

3

assistive communication device. He laughs, smiles and holds staffs hand when happy or content; he cries

4

when he is sick or in pain.

5

50. Alvin W. could be effectively supported in a community setting, but his individual treatmen:

6

planning team has not referred him for Montana's long waiting list for community services. The

7

treatment team recognizes that Alvin W. could live in the community if he were provided an intensive

8

group home with 24 hour awake supervision in a barrier free environment and other community services.

9

However, his team notes that they have not referred him for community placement because they do not

10

know of particular openings in community services which could meet his needs. Defendants have failed

11

to provide the necessary community services which will allow Alvin W. to live and thrive in the

12

community, although Montana has long provided the type of community services he needs to others with

13

similar developmental disabilities.

14

IV. DEFENDANTS

15

51. Eastmont Human Service Center (Eastmont) is a state owned and operated institution for

16

persons with developmental disabilities. It is operated by the Montana Department of Public Health and

17

Human Services (DPHHS) under MCA §53-1-602. Eastmont is an intermediate care facility for the

18

mentally retarded (ICF/MR) under Title XIX of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §1396d(d) with a

19

noted capacity of 55 beds. It is located in eastern Montana in the town of Glendive, some 200 miles

20

northeast of Billings and 35 miles from the North Dakota border. Forty-nine individuals with

21

developmental disabilities are committed there.

22

52. Montana Developmental Center (MDC or Boulder) is a state owned and operated institution

23

for persons with developmental disabilities. It is operated by DPHHS under MCA §53-1-602. MDC is

24

an intermediate care facility for the mentally retarded (ICF/MR) with a noted capacity of 110 beds. It is

25

located in the small town of Boulder, Montana, some 30 miles from Helena, where the nearest high

26

quality medical center is located, and some 35 miles from Butte, where most of MDC's vocational

27

program transactions take place. Most employees at MDC commute from Butte or Helena.

28

53. Defendant Peter Blouke is the Director of the Montana Department of Public Health and

Complaint - page 12

1

Human Services (DPHHS), an agency of the State of Montana created under An. XII, Section 3(3) of the

2

Montana Constitution and operating under MCA §2-15-2201. DPHHS is charged by Montana law to

3

provide services to Montanans with developmental disabilities and, in particular, "to do so whenever

4

possible in a community-based setting," [MCA §53-20-101], and to "make every attempt to move

5

residents from more to less structured living, larger to smaller facilities, . . . group to individual

6

residences, segregated from the community to integrated into the community living," (Section 53-20-

7

148(2)]. Defendant Blouke is charged with directing, organizing and executing the responsibilities of

8

DPHHS, which include: responsibility for care, treatment, habilitation, discharge planning and transition

9

services for individuals committed to MDC. Eastmont, MSH and MMHNCC; responsibility for the

10

creation and administration of community services in a comprehensive community developmental

11

disabilities service system, for the admission of persons to that system, and for the care, treatment and

12

habilitation of all individuals in the community service system, including tribal members; and,

13

responsibility for the administration of Title XIX services, which include both institutional and

14

community-based services. Defendant Blouke is responsible also for ensuring that individuals with

15

developmental disabilities receive the services to which they are entitled under the Constitution and laws

16

of the United States and Montana. He is sued in his official capacity.

17

54. Defendant Joe Matthews is the director of the Disability Services Division, a division of

18

DPHHS. Defendant Matthews is charged with directing, organizing and executing the responsibilities of

19

the Disabilities Services Division, which include: responsibility for care, treatment, habilitation,

20

discharge planning and transition services for individuals committed to the two state developmental

21

disabilities institutions, MDC and Eastmont; responsibility for the creation and administration of

22

community services in a comprehensive community developmental disabilities service system, for the

23

admission of persons to that system, and for the care, treatment and habilitation of all individuals in the

24

community service system, including tribal members; and, responsibility for the administration of Title

25

XIX services, which include both institutional and community-based services. Defendant Matthews is

26

responsible for ensuring that individuals with developmental disabilities receive the services to which they

27

are entitled under the Constitution and laws of the United States and Montana. He is sued in his official

28

capacity.

Complaint - page 13

1

55. Defendant Dan Anderson is the director of the Mental and Addictive Disorders Division, a

2

division of DPHHS. Defendant Dan Anderson is charged with directing, organizing and executing the

3

responsibilities of the Mental and Addictive Disorders Division, which include: responsibility for care,

4

treatment, habilitation, discharge planning and transition services for individuals committed to the two

5

state mental health institutions, MSH and MMHNCC. Although MSH and MMHNCC were designed to

6

serve persons with mental illness, not persons with developmental disabilities, many persons with

7

developmental disabilities are committed there. Defendant Dan Anderson is responsible for ensuring that

8

residents at those institutions receive the services to which they are entitled under the Constitution and

9

laws of the United States and Montana. He is sued in his official capacity.

10

56. Defendant Roben Anderson has had responsibility for the operation of Montana's

11

developmental disabilities and mental health institutions and for care, treatment and habilitation of

12

residents at those state institutions at relevant times in the recent past and continuing through the

13

transition of a reorganized state government. Currently, he has responsibility for facility management

14

within the Administrative Services Division of the newly formed Department of Corrections. Defendant

15

Robert Anderson was the administrator of the Special Services Division of the former Department of

16

Corrections and Human Services, which until 1995 had responsibility for all state institutions. Until July

17

1995, responsibility for providing services to people with disabilities in institutions was consigned to the

18

same state agency responsible for the incarceration of convicted criminals. Defendant Robert Anderson

19

is sued in his official capacity.

20

57. Defendant Jennifer Pryor is the Superintendent of the Montana Developmental Center in

21

Boulder. Defendant Pryor is responsible for care, treatment, habilitation and discharge planning for

22

residents at MDC. She supervises the professional staff who have recommended placement in integrated,

23

community settings for MDC residents. She is responsible for carrying out the laws Constitution of the

24

United States and Montana. Defendant Pryor is sued in her official capacity.

25

58. Defendant Sylvia Hammer is the Superintendent of Eastmont Human Service Center in

26

Glendive. Defendant Hammer is responsible for care, treatment, habilitation and discharge planning for

27

residents at Eastmont and supervises the professional staff who have recommended placement in

28

integrated, community settings for Eastmont residents. She is responsible for carrying out the laws

Comolaint - pace 14

1

Constitution of the United States and Montana. Defendant Hammer is sued in her official capacity.

2

59. Defendant Carl Keener is the Medical Director for the Montana State Hospital in Warm

3

Springs. Montana State Hospital (MSH) is a state owned and operated institution for persons with mental

4

illness. It is operated by DPHHS under MCA §Section 53-1-602. It is located in Warm Springs,

5

Montana on the same campus as Montana prison facilities. Although never a developmental disability

6

institution, approximately 10 individuals with developmental disabilities are involuntarily committed

7

there. Defendant Keener is responsible for care, treatment, habilitation and discharge planning for

8

residents at MSH. He is responsible for carrying out the laws Constitution of the United States and

9

Montana. He is sued in his official capacity.

10

60. Defendant Ron Balas is the Superintendent for the Montana Mental Health Nursing Care

11

Center in Lewistown. The Montana Mental Health Nursing Care Center (MMHNCC) is a state owned

12

and operated institution for persons with mental illness who have skilled nursing care needs. It is

13

operated by DPHHS under MCA §53-1-602. MMHNCC is located in Lewistown, Montana, at the

14

geographic center of the state. Although never a developmental disability institution, approximately 10

15

individuals with developmental disabilities are involuntarily committed there. Defendant Balas is

16

responsible for care, treatment, habilitation and discharge planning for residents at MMHNCC. He is

17

responsible for carrying out the laws Constitution of the United States and Montana. Defendant Balas is

18

sued in his official capacity.

19

61. The State of Montana is a political entity created and governed for and by the people of the

20

State.

21

V. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

22

62. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 (a) and (b)(2), individual named plaintiffs

23

bring this action on behalf of the following class: All persons with developmental disabilities who, on or

24

after the date of filing of this Complaint, are confined or will be confined at the Montana Developmental

25

Center, Eastmont Human Service Center, Montana State Hospital or Montana Mental Health Nursing

26

Care Center, have been transferred out of said institutions yet remain under defendants' custody and

27

control or otherwise remain defendant's responsibility, or who are at risk of being confined in said

28

institutions at some future date.

Corrrolaint - Daee 15

1

63. The plaintiff class is so numerous that joinder of all its members is impracticable. The class

2

is in excess of 175 persons. Approximately 106 people are confined at MDC. 50 at Eastmont, 10 at MSH

3

and 10 at MMHNCC. There are approximately 1300 people with developmental disabilities on the

4

community waiting list who are at risk of involuntary commitment to state institutions.

5

64. There are questions of law and fact common to the class. All members of the class are

6

persons with developmental disabilities who need habilitation and other support services, but who are

7

segregated and confined at state institutions involuntarily or who are at risk of such confinement. Each

8

class member is capable of living and thriving in an integrated, community setting with appropriate

9

support services. All members are, or are at risk of, being denied integrated community services and are

10

being discriminated against because of their disability.

11

65. The claims of the named plaintiffs are typical of those in the class. Named plaintiffs' claims

12

are typical because they arise from the same pattern or practice: defendants' unlawful segregation and

13

confinement of plaintiffs in state institutions and defendants' failure, despite requirements of the laws and

14

Constitution of the United States, to provide services in integrated community settings. The claims are

15

based on the same legal theories. Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable

16

to the class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive and declaratory relief with respect to the class as

17

a whole.

18

66. These named plaintiffs will fairly represent and adequately protect the interests of members

19

of the class as a whole. The named plaintiffs do not have interests antagonistic to those of other class

20

members. Plaintiffs' counsel are qualified, experienced and generally able to conduct the proposed

21

litigation.

22

VI. THE LAW

23

67. Plaintiffs bring this action to redress violations of the laws and the Constitution of the United

24

States, as follows.

25

1. The Americans with Disabilities Act

26

68. The Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C.§12101, et. seq. was enacted by Congress in

27

the exercise of its "power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment" and signed by President Bush in 1990.

28

The Act is based upon findings that:

Complaint - page 16

1

•

"individuals with disabilities . . . have been . . . subjected to a history of

purposeful unequal treatment, and relegated to a position of political

2

powerlessness in our society, based on characteristics that are beyond the control

of such individuals and resulting from stereotypic assumptions not truly indicative

of the individual ability of such individuals to participate in, and contribute to,

society." 42 U.S.C. §12101(a)(7).

4

that "despite some improvements." historically-imposed isolation and segregation

5

"continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem." 42 U.S.C. §12101(a)(2).

6

•

that "to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities'1 are "forms of

discrimination against [them]." Id.

7

69. The Act declares as its purpose to end "discrimination faced day-to-day by people with

8

disabilities." 42 U.S.C. §12101(b)(4).

9

70. The Act at Title II prohibits discrimination by any public entity against any qualified

10

individual with a disability and prohibits such an individual's exclusion from participation in or denial of

11

the benefits of public services, prosrams or activities. 42 U.S.C. §12131.

12

71. As set forth in authoritative and binding regulation, required to implement the Act, 42 U.S.C.

13

12134, and promulgated in 1991 by the Attorney General of the United States, the Americans with

14

Disabilities Act requires that:

15

A public entity shall administer services, programs and activities in the most integrate^

16

setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities. 28 C.F.R.

§35.130(d) (emphasis added).

17

72. The Act forbids affording to qualified individuals with disabilities or to any class of

18

individuals with disabilities any aid, benefit or service:

19

which is "not equal to that afforded others," 28 C.F.R. §35.130(b)(l)(ii),

20

•

which is not "not as effective . . . to reach the same level of achievement," 28 C.F.R.

21

•

which is different or sfijame, 28 C.F.R.§35.130(b)(l)(iv), or

which "otherwise limits [the individual] in the enjoyment of any right, privilege,

22

advantage or opportunity enjoyed by others receiving the aid, benefit or service." 28

C.F.R.§35.130(l)(vii). {emphasis added)

23

73. The Attorney General in his 1991 comments to the statutorily commissioned regulation wrote:

24

The public entity must administer services, programs and activities in the most integrated

25

setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities, i.e., in a setting

that enables individual? with disabilities to interact with non-disahled persons to the

26

fullest extent possible. 28 C.F.R. at page 461 (1995 ed.) (emphasis added).

27

See Helen L. v. DiDario. 46 F.3d 323 (3d Cir. 1995), cert, denied sub nom. Secretary of the Department

28

of Public Welfare of Pennsylvania v. Idell S., 116 S Ct 64 (1995).

Complaint - page 17

1

2

2. Title XIX of the Social Security Act

3

74. Title XIX of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §1396, et. seq., was enacted "for the purpose

4

of enabling each State to . . . furnish . . . rehabilitation and other services to help [disabled] individuals

5

attain or retain capability for independence or self-care." 42 U.S.C. §1396.

6

75. Title XIX authorizes Federal financial assistance for HICF/MR"s and for Home and

7

Community-Based Services for retarded and relatedly disabled persons, and sets the conditions for State

8

participation therein.

9

76. Montana has chosen to participate in Title XIX. The federal financial share of Montana

10

expenditures under Title XIX is 70.8%. The State financed share is 29.2%.

11

77. Title XIX requires that, for each person "whose needs could be met by alternative services

12

that are currently unavailable, the facility must . . . look for alternative services." 42 C.F.R. §456.371

13

(emphasis added).

14

78. Title XIX was enacted "for the purpose of enabling each State to . . . furnish . . .

15

rehabilitation and other services to help [disabled] individuals attain or retain capability for independence

16

or self-care," 42 U.S.C. at §1396. and requires for each retarded and relatedly disabled person in an

17

"institution":

18

•

"active treatment . . . aggressive, [and] consistent . . . . directed toward . . . as much self-

determination and independence as possible [and]the prevention . . . of regression or loss

19

of current optimal function status," Id. at §1396(d)(2); 45 C.F.R. §1483.440 (a) (1955)

("Conditions of Financial Participation").

20

•

periodic review — "by professional personnel who are not themselves directly responsible

21

for the care . . . and who do not have a significant financial interest in the institution and

are n o t . . . employed by the institution providing the care involved "whether it is feasible

22

to meet the persons needs through "alternative . . . noninstitutional services," . . . "to

safeguard against unnecessary utilization . . . and to assure that payments are consistent

23

with efficiency, economy and quality of care." 42 U.S.C. at §1396a(a)(30) & (31) and by

42 C.F.R. 4566.609(a) and(b).

24

a plan for discharge 42 C.F.R.§456.380 (b)(b),and

25

• - for each person "whose needs could he met by alternative services that are currently

26

unavailable, the facility must . . . look for alternative services." 42 C.F.R. at §456.371

{emphasis added).

27

28

Complaint - page 18

1

•

the other — pan of the legacy of state imposed segregation — at the self-same "school" in

Boulder, at Eastmont institution in Glendive and also at state mental hospitals, segregated,

2

isolated, congregate-care facilities where people with disabilities live a self-contained",

inactive, artificial life, seldom gain and often lose life skills and are deprived of the

3

learning, earning and associational opportunities present in the community.

4

89. More than 1300 individuals with developmental disabilities are supported in the community

5

residential service system, ranking Montana among the highest of the fifty states in the proportion of

6

people with retardation supported in small community integrated residences.

7

90. But at least 175 people with developmental disabilities — about 106 at MDC, 50 at

8

Eastmont, 10 at MSH and 10 at MMHNCC — are still confined in institutions, and have been confined

9

there, on average, for some 20 years. Many of these individuals were committed there as children, when

10

institutionalization was thought to be the only alternative.

11

91. Montana officials have said and written that those persons retained in institutions are those

12

who are severely disabled, itself an unlawful discrimination. In fact, among the more than 1300 people

13

with developmental disabilities receiving community residential services and living and thriving in the

14

Montana communities, including many who were once confined in institutions, are persons whose

15

disabilities are just as severe as those of people still in the institutions. These functional disability "twins"

16

in the community have disabilities and suppon needs which match the disabilities and needs of each of the

17

175 people still confined by defendants in the institutions. For example. Montana's community service

18

system already serves 135 adults with profound retardation. 106 people who use wheelchairs and 607

19

people who take anti-seizure medication.

20

92. Both the community service system and the institutional system are funded under Title XIX

21

of the Social Security Act. In both, federal dollars pay 70.8% of the cost with the State paying 29.2%

22

(FY 1995).

23

93. The annual combined federal and state expenditure for institutional placement averages

24

approximately SI 18.000 per person at MDC and S80.000 per person at Eastmont.

25

94. The annual average per person cost for people with similar developmental disabilities

26

currently being served in the Montana community-based service system is approximately $33,000. In

27

defendants' 1994 plan, defendants calculated the annual cost in FY96 and FY97 of necessary and

28

appropriate community services for 66 institutionalized individuals to be $30,000 per person and the

Complaint - page 21

1

annual cost in FY98 for another 7 institutionalized individuals to be S66.000 per person. In the recent

2

MDC reduction plan, defendants appropriated $57,000 per person for 12 institutionalized individuals.

3

95. Montana spends Federal Medicaid dollars on community-based services for people with

4

developmental disabilities under the authority of a Home and Community-Based Services Waiver.

5

pursuant to Title XIX of the Social Security Act and MCA §53-6-402. Title XIX allows, and indeed

6

requires, that Title XIX expenditures in institutions be moved te community services to support in the

7

community those individuals who do not require placement in an ICF/MR. Essentially, the HCBS waiver

8

allows Title XIX funds to be used to suppon a variety of home and community-based services for

9

discharged ICF/MR residents and for those at risk of ICF/MR placement.

10

96. Given the respective costs of institutional and community placement, for each person moved

11

from Boulder to the community, at least one and as many as three additional individuals with similar

12

disabilities can be appropriately served in the community; for each person discharged from Eastmont to

13

the community, possibly one and as many as two additional individuals with similar disabilities can be

14

appropriately served in the community.

15

97. Extensive experience in Montana as well as extensive experience nation-wide

16

shows that each person with a developmental disability, including especially those with the most severe

17

developmental disabilities, can be served — and served more effectively — and. in fact, are served — in

18

integrated settings in the community. Systematic professional studies nationwide of what happens to

19

institutional residents when they move to the community, including Montana studies and surveys

20

conducted by defendants and their agents, show strong improvements in skills and quality of life in

21

practically every area that is measurable. These studies show significant improvements in adaptive

22

behavior, in the skills of daily living, self-direction, productivity, integration (actual interaction with non-

23

disabled persons) and in satisfaction with their lives in the community.

24

98. Four states similar in demographics to Montana — Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and

25

Vermont — have now achieved a community service system which serves people with developmental

26

disabilities without needing or using an institution. Other states, including Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii,

27

New York, Michigan and Wyoming are moving toward replacing their state institutions for people with

28

developmental disabilities with complete community service systems.

Complaint - page 22

1

99. In Montana, defendants have admitted that the demand for institutional services has

2

significantly declined and will continue to decline. Defendants have closed institutional admissions to

3

children. Eastmont has had no admissions from the community for at least six years. Montana's

4

executive officials acknowledge there is no appropriate mission for Eastmont and that it should close.

5

Having experienced access to the public schools and other community services as well, Montanans say. in

6

surveys conducted by defendants, that they do not want institutional services for their children when they

7

become adults.

8

100. As long ago as 1981. responsible Montana officials announced their intention to replace

9

Montana's institutions for people with developmental disabilities with a comprehensive community service

10

system.

11

101. For some time and still, Montana has provided by statute as follows:

12

A. In the Montana Long Term Care Reform Act, Ch. 384, L-1995; MCA §53-6-602:

13

(1) The legislature finds that in keeping with the traditional concept of the inherent

dignity of the individual in a democratic society, . . . persons with disabilities should be

14

able to live as independently as possible.

15

(2) The legislature further finds that: (a) the ability to continue to live in a person's own

residence or in the least restrictive setting best serves the health and dignity of . . .

16

persons with disabilities. . . .

17

(3) The legislature declares that the policy of this state is to: (a) respect the dignity of

persons in the provision of state-sponsored and state-funded services for . . . persons with

18

disabilities by seeking to maintain the maximum level of independence possible for those

persons receiving services; (b) foster the development of community services that allow a

19

person to choose to remain in a person's own residence or in the least restrictive setting.

20

B. MCA §53-19-101: The legislature, in recognition of the needs of persons with severe

disabilities and of the desirability of meeting those needs on a community level to the

21

extent of available funding and in order to reduce the need for institutional care settings,

establishes by this pan a community program to assist persons with severe disabilities to

22

live and function independently. This program implements Title VII of the federal

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 796, et. seq.) as may be amended, for persons with

23

severe disabilities in Montana.

24

C. MCA §53-20-101: The state recognizes that its purpose is to "secure for each person

. . . with developmental disabilities such treatment and habilitation as will be suited to the

25

needs of the person and to assure that such treatment and habilitation are skillfully and

humanely administered with full respect for the person's dignity and personal integrity;"

26

and to "accomplish this goal whenever possible in a community-based setting."

27

D. MCA §53-20-148(2): Institutional facilities in Montana are required to "make every

attempt to move residents from more to less structured living, larger to smaller facilities, .

28

. . group to individual residences, segregated from the community to integrated into the

Complaint - page 23

1

Administration, which administers Title XIX of the Social Security Act states, with regard to Montana's

2

plan for mental health managed care for people with mental illness, that:

3

Under the ADA and regulations written at 28 C.F.R. 130(d), a State must not place or

keep in an institutional facility any. person who could be served more appropriately in a

4

community-based setting. The State is further obligated to create the community-based

services to serve these individuals. The court cases of Helen L. vs. DiDario (1995) and

5

Charles Q. vs. Houston (April 1996) have determined that a State's argument that no

community-based services currently exist is nci a permissible argument for keeping

6

individuals in institutional settings when they would more appropriately be treated in a

community setting, (emphasis added).

7

8

107. Montana's executive officials abandoned their plan to place some 66 to 73 institutionalized

9

individuals in community services by FY98, in pan, because they were unable to obtain the legislative

10

approval required by MCA §53-1-602. Under that plan, defendants would have transferred the funds

11

supporting one state institution, Eastmont, to create the community services so desperately needed to

12

implement the treatment decisions of defendants' own developmental disabilities professionals.

13

108. The provisions of two Montana statutes also have contributed to the aforementioned

14

derelictions; they burden and inhibit implementation of the federal laws and the United States

15

Constitution. One, MCA 53-20-132 (En. Sec. 1, Ch. 417. L. 1987; amd. Sec. 15. Ch. 381, L. 1991;

16

amd. Sec. 21, Ch. 255, L. 1995) is entitled, "Court-ordered placement in community-based services

17

prohibited," provides that:

18

Nothing in this pan may be construed as authorizing the placement and delivery of services to

persons with developmental disabilities in community-services by coun order. Placement of

19

persons in community-based services is governed by 53-20-209.

20

Montana limits state coun orders to institutional settings. MCA 53-20-125, even when the state court has

21

determined that the individual could and should be habilitated in a community setting. Section 53-20-

22

125(8) allows the court to "refer" persons found to need community services to the State Department of

23

Public Health and Human Services and. together with Section 53-20-132, confides entirely to the

24

unreviewable discretion of the executive branch whether or not the individual will get the needed

25

community services and singularly deprives persons with developmental disabilities of any resort to state

26

courts to secure needed community services as provided by law or to enforce professional judgments and

27

judicial determinations that such are needed. Montana's commitment laws offer no protection against

28

unnecessary institutionalization.

Complaint - page 25

they had previously achieved).

b. Plaintiffs are disengaged throughout their days and not engaged in meaningful activities. Much of their time is dead time. They spend long periods "waiting" to go from one activity to another, thumbing through magazines, milling around, dozing or simply doing nothing, or trying to ignore or escape the chaotic environment around them. 4 c. Plaintiffs have, and can secure, very little privacy.

d. As defendants' own employees have found year after year in their annual Title XIX surveys of

6

MDC and Eastmont; plaintiffs do not receive active treatment: for many there are no programs of

active treatment; for many there are only programs randomly begun and randomly ended and only

7

sporadically engaged; programs are not consistently monitored or changed when change is

indicated; and, programs are not implemented in a timely manner.

e. Counseling services by a qualified professional are not provided to plaintiffs with an identified

9

need for such services.

10

f. Psycho-active medications are over-used: integrated program plans and active treatment

programs to diminish the use of psycho-active medications are not provided; and. psychiatrists

11

prescribe the administration of medications from a distance, without personally meeting and

interacting with the individual.

12

g. Modern aids to mobility and communication are not provided.

13

h. Physical injuries — broken bones, muscle strains, cuts and large, vivid bruises — occur more

14

frequently in the institutional setting. Defendants' own records show a marked decrease in

physical injuries suffered by the same person after he or she moves to community-based services.

15

i. Routine, as well as critical, medical services are often uncertain and untimely because they are

16

thirty or more miles away and require a major excursion, to Butte. Helena or Billings where

comprehensive preventive and primary as well as acute and specialized medical care is available.

17

j . There are no employment opportunities outside the institution, even for those residents who

18

were gainfully employed in the community prior to commitment. Institution residents live and

work with the same people, day after day.

19

k. Because of the remote and isolated location of the state's institutions, plaintiffs are deprived of

20

necessary and appropriate support services. Services such as speech therapy, medical treatment,

psychological counseling and employment opportunities are more readily available in other

21

communities in die state.

22

1. Plaintiffs live a self-contained and narrow life, rarely interact with anyone other than a paid

staff member and other people with disabilities, with no opportunity to go for walks or for "rolls"

in a wheelchair in the neighborhood, to pet their neighbor's dog, to shop for weekly groceries, to

invite friends for dinner or even to prepare, and to choose, their own meals.

24

115. Individuals with severe disabilities — those with profound or severe retardation, with

26

multiple disabilities including communication and mobility deficits, with complex medical needs, and with

27

maladaptive behaviors which are often aggravated and increased at the institution — fare the least weil in

28

large congregate-care settings. They suffer most from the harms set forth in the preceding paragraphs and

Comniain? - Daee 28

1

have the most to gain from the individually-focused structure and consistency of smaller settings. For

2

example, systematic studies show that individuals with challenging behaviors have made the most

3

significant improvements in behavior when moved to smaller, supported living models.

4

116. Developmental disabilities professionals, including defendants' own professionals, now

5

generally believe the task of the service system is to support people in normal, integrated residential and

6

work settings, in or near their home communities, in homes they choose diemselves, where they can live

7

with people with whom they want to live and work where they want to work. This approach is called

8

"the support model." The supported living approach is based on the values of individual choice,

9

independence, productivity, integration and inclusion of citizens with disabilities. It also recognizes that

10

people with retardation, whose disability inhibits their ability to "transfer" skills learned in one setting to

11

another, should learn daily living skills in the real community where they will be using those skills.

12

117. Montana families recognize the harms suffered at institutions and support the provision of

13

services in integrated community settings. Defendants' own surveys show:

14

(a) Families of former institutional clients transferred to community settings within the preceding

four years, after experiencing both service settings, now prefer community services, in contrast to

15

their initial satisfaction widi institutional services and opposition to community placement prior to

the community placement. In fact, respondents expressed higher levels of satisfaction with

16

community based services than with institutional services on every item.

17

(b) Parents of children with developmental disabilities overwhelmingly prefer small, home-like

environments for their children when they reach adulthood. Parents responding to the survey

18

consider institutional housing the least favorable of all options; some respondents considered that

form of housing totally unacceptable.

19

118. Professional recommendations for community placement and discharge from the institution

20

are nor made and/or not acted upon because of the "unavailability" of community services, an

21

unavailability created by defendants' own actions in supporting costly. sesre2ated institutions instead.

22

Institutionalized individuals who are recommended for community placement by their individual treatment

23

planning teams are placed on the community waiting list and often languish there for years.

24

119. DPHHS's developmental disabilities professionals have limited their recommendations for

25

community placement to institutionalized individuals with less severe disabilities, unlawfully excluding

26

and discriminating against classes of institutionalized individuals based on the type and severity of their

27

disabilities. In conducting the 1994 assessments of institution residents to determine which individuals

28

Complaint - page 29

1

were a priority for community placement, defendants established criteria which excluded classes of

2

individuals with disabilities from consideration, including those with physical disabilities requiring the use

3

of a gastrostomy tubes or jejunostomy tubes, those with "total care needs," and those with medical or

4

behavioral needs which require a very intensive staffing level.

5

120. Plaintiffs have suffered and continue to suffer irreparable harm from defendants' actions and

6

inactions. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law to secure redress:of their rights; monetary damages

7

are inadequate. Accordingly, injunctive relief is necessary.

8

VIII. CAUSES OF ACTION

9

Count T: The AMERICANS WTTH DISABILITIES ACT

10

121. All plaintiffs are "qualified individuals" under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

11

122. Defendants, by their actions and inactions set forth above, have violated rights of the

12

plaintiffs secured by Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. Section 12131 et seq., and 28 C.F.R. Pan 35. by:

13

(a) failing to provide public services, programs, and activities to plaintiffs "in the most integrated

14

sening appropriate to the needs of the qualified individual with disabilities," including "in a setting that

15

enables individuals with disabilities to interact with non-disabled persons to the fullest extent possible," as

16

required by 42 U.S.C. §12132 and 28 C.F.R. §35.130(d);

17

(b) denying plaintiffs participation in integrated services and programs by failing to "make

18

reasonable modifications in policies, practices and procedures when the modifications are necessary to

19

avoid discrimination on the basis of disability," as required by 28 C.F.R. §35.130(b)(7) and by 28 C.F.R.

20

§35.105(a)and (b);

21

(c) failing to undertake a programmatic "self-evaluation" of its current services, policies and

22

practices for programmatic discrimination and failing to make the necessary modifications required as a

23

result of the self-evaluation, as required by 28 C.F.R. §35.105(a) and (b);

24

(d) denying plaintiffs the opportunity to participate in public services and programs that are as

25

effective and meaningful as those delivered to others, as prohibited by 28 C.F.R. §35.130(b)(l)(iii):

26

(e) denying plaintiffs the opportunity to participate in public services and programs that are not

27

separate or different, as required by 28 C.F.R. §35.130(b)(2);

28

(f) unnecessarily excluding certain individuals because of the severity and type of their disabilities

Complaint - page 30

1

from fully and equally using and enjoying integrated, community-based public services, programs and

2

activities, thereby providing different and separate benefits and services to a class of individuals with

3

disabilities than is provided to others, as prohibited by 28 C.F.R. §35.130(b)(l)(iv); and

4

(g) otherwise limiting plaintiffs "in the enjoyment of any right, privilege, advantage and

5

opportunity enjoyed by others receiving the aid, benefit or service," as prohibited by 28 C.F.R.

6 : §35.130(b)(l)(vii).

7

123. MCA §53-20-132, as applied by defendants, by singularly constraining the authority of

8

Montana courts and precluding them from ordering community residential and other services for people

9

with developmental disabilities when the facts show that is what they need and what federal and state law

10

otherwise requires, violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and thereby, the Supremacy Clause of

11

Article VI of the United States Constitution.

12

124. MCA §53-20-214, as applied by defendants, by singularly prohibiting without rational

13

basis, except upon budget amendment by the Montana state legislature, the transfer of appropriations,

14

employees and spending authority, authority which is otherwise available to the executive, only as to

15

institutionalized people with developmental disabilities who have been historically subjected by the State

16

to a tradition of disfavor; and by precluding people with developmental disabilities from benefiting as

17

others can from the ordinary conduct of government, violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and

18

thereby, the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the United States Constitution.

19

Count TT: Thp SOCIAL SECTTPTTV ACT

20

125. Defendants, by their actions and inactions described above, have violated Title XIX of the

21

Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1396, et seq., by:

22

(a) failing to conduct regular individual determinations to determine whether institutional

23

"services" are necessary and desirable for plaintiffs and whether it is feasible to meet habilitation needs

24

through "alternative...noninstitutional services" which are "consistent with efficiency, economy and

25

quality of care" and to implement them, as required by 42 U.S.C. §1396a(a)(30) and (31) and by 42

26

C.F.R. 4566.609(a) and (b); and

27

(b) failing to provide such alternative community services and a plan for discharge to the plaintiffs

28

as to whom they have found institutional services unnecessary and undesirable and community services to

Complaint - page 31

1

provide greater independence and self-determination, less risk of regression and loss of function, and

2

otherwise to meet their needs. Id.; 42 U.S.C. §1396(d)(2), and 42 C.F.R. §§456.371, 456.380.1483.440.

3

and 456.609(a)(b) and (c).

4

Count TTT: The EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE

5

126. Defendants have violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the

6

United States Constitution by excluding, separating and segregating persons with developmental

7

disabilities from the rest of society without any rational basis.

8

127. MCA §53-20-132, as applied by defendants, by singularly constraining the authority of

9

Montana courts and precluding them from ordering community residential and other services for people

10

with developmental disabilities when the facts show that is what they need and what federal and state law

11

otherwise requires, violates the Equal Protection Clause in that it perpetuates, without rational basis, the

12

tradition of disfavor toward institutionalized developmental^ disabled citizens and the historical link

13

between state court commitment and institutional confinement exclusively, a link which was originated

14

and established by state action in the first decades of this century based on stereotypic assumptions. See,

15

City of Clehume. Texas v. Clebume Living Center. 1055 S.Ct. 3249, especially at 3261 (1985) (opinion

16

of Justice Stevens and me Chief Justice).

17

128. MCA §53-20-214, as applied by defendants, by singularly prohibiting without rational

18

basis, except upon budget amendment by the Montana state legislature, the transfer of appropriations.

19

employees and spending authority, authority which is otherwise available to the executive, only as to

20

institutionalized people with developmental disabilities who have been historically subjected by the State

21

to a tradition of disfavor; and by precluding people with developmental disabilities from benefitting as

22

others can from the ordinary conduct of government, violates the Equal Protection Clause.

23

Count TV: Thp DUF. PROCESS CLAUSE

24

129. Defendants have violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by failing

25

to provide community services to institutionalized persons with developmental disabilities when sound

26

professional judgment would require it. See, Youngherg v. Romeo. 457 U.S. 307, 323 (1982)).

27

130. MCA §53-20-132, as applied by defendants, by singularly constraining the authority of

28

Montana courts and precluding them from ordering community residential and other services for people

Complaint - page 32

1

with developmental disabilities when the facts show that is what they need and what federal and state law

2

otherwise requires, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States

3

Constitution, in that it unconstitutionally strips the hearing tribunal of its authority to afford relief.

4

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

5

WHEREFORE, plaintiffs respectfully request that this honorable Court:

6

1. Exercise its subject matter jurisdiction of this case.

-

7

2. Determine that plaintiffs may maintain this action as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of

8

Civil Procedure 23.

9

3. Declare that the Americans with Disabilities Act requires:

10

(a) that each plaintiff and class member must be served in the most integrated setting appropriate

to the needs of each;

11

(b) that each plaintiff and class member must be served in a setting that enables each to interact

12

with non-disabled people to the fullest extent possible;

13

(c) that the State must not place or keep in an institutional facility any person with developmental

disabilities who could be served appropriately in a community-based setting; and

14

(d) that the State is obligated to make available to each plaintiff and class member the community-

15

based services necessary to appropriately serve each.

16
4. Declare that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits the unnecessary segregation of people with 17
developmental disabilities. 18
5. Declare that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States 19
Constitution prohibits the retention of people with developmental disabilities in state institutions when 20
such retention is a substantial departure from professional judgment. 21
6. Declare that defendants have unconstitutionally applied MCA §53-20-132 and MCA §53-2022
214 and. if necessary, enjoin them from continuing to do so. 23
7. Declare that plaintiffs are entitled under Title XIX of the Social Security Act to receive 24
"alternative...noninstitutional services" in the community which meet their individual needs. 25
8. Enjoin defendants to complete a self-evaluation of DPHHS policies and practices as required 26
by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and to modify its services, policies and practices as 27
necessary to meet the requirements of the ADA. 28

[| Complaint - page 33

1

9. Enjoin defendants to propose and, after court hearing and approval, to implement a plan to:

2

(a) promptly arrange and conduct independent evaluations, by qualified and independent

developmental disability professionals not employed by defendants, of the individual needs of all

individuals who are residents of MDC, Eastmont, MSH and MMHNCC on or after the date of

filing this Complaint, according to criteria agreed upon by the parties and which does not

4

discriminate on the basis of severity of disability, whether a community setting is the most

integrated setting appropriate to each individual's needs; and

(b) ensure that each plaintiff and class member for whom it is determined that the most integrated

6

setting appropriate to his or her needs is a community setting is promptly provided the necessary

community services in such setting.

7

9. Enjoin defendants to actually provide to each plaintiff and class member for whom it is

9

determined that the most integrated setting appropriate to his or her needs is a community setting

10

effective, person-centered, community-based residential, vocational and other support services appropriate

11

to the needs of each.

12

10. Enjoin defendants from admitting individuals with developmental disabilities who could be

13

served appropriately in community-based services to the Montana Developmental Center, Eastmont

14

Human Service Center, Montana State Hospital and Montana Mental Health Nursing Care Center.

15

11. Award plaintiffs their costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

16

Section 12205 and 42 U.S.C. Section 1988.

17

12. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

///

Complaint - page 34

1

Respectfully submitted this s y day of August, 1996.

2

3

4

5

Andree Larose

6

Alan Freed, Jr.

Allen Smith, Jr.

7

Mary Gallagher

Montana Advocacy Program

8

P.O. Box 1680

316 North Park, Room 211

9

Helena, MT 59624

(406) 444-3889

10

11

A

13

Thomas K. Gilhool

/ /

Judith A. Gran

14

Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia

125 S. 9th Street, Suite 700

15

Philadelphia, PA 19107

(215) 627-7100

16

Counsel for Plaintiffs

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Complaint - page 35

 
 MONTANA ADVOCACY PROGRAM, Inc.
Protection & Advocacy for Persons with DISABILITIES
Assistive Technology (AT) Client Assistance Program (CAP) Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with a Developmental Disability (PADD) Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with a Mental Illness (PAIMI) Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR)

To:
From: Date: Re:

Mary Hayden University of Minnesota
Andree Larose^
January 23, 1997
Class Action Litigation

316 N. Park, Room 211 P.O. Box 1680 Helena, Montana 59624
(406) 444-3889 (800) 245-4743 Voice/TDD (406) 444-0261 FAX

Enclosed is a copy of the Complaint filed in Montana to obtain community supports and integration for people with developmental disabilities in state institutions. Also enclosed is a fact sheet which gives a short overview of the suit, its history and its purpose: Please call if you have anyquestions.
We arein thebeginning stages of discovery and will be having a pre-trial conference with the judge February 14, 1997, at which time wewill seta discovery and trial schedule. Weanticipate going to trial sometime in thespring or summer of 1998.

Travis D. v. Eastmont Human Serv.Ctr. MR-MT-001-002

 
 MONTANA ADVOCACY PROGRAM, Inc.
Protection & Advocacy for Persons with DisABELITIES
Assistive Technology (AT) Client Assistance Program (CAP) Protection andAdvocacyfor Individuals with a Developmental Disability (PADD) Protection andAdvocacyfor Individuals with a Mental Illness (PAIMI) Protection andAdvocacy ofIndividual Rights (PAIR)

316 North Park Room 211 P.O. Box 1680 Helena. Montana 59624
(406) 444-3889 (800) 245-4743 Voice TDD (406) 444-0261 FAX

Travis D. v. Eastmont Fact Sheet
1. The purpose of this lawsuit is, in large part, simply an attempt to implement the treatment decisions made by Montana's own developmental disabilities professionals. The goal is to obtain effective community services for Montanans with developmental disabilities who are involuntarily confined in Montana state institutions and who can and should be supported in a community setting.
2. There are approximately 175 people with developmental disabilities who are confined in Montana's institutions. Almost half of them, by the State's own admission, would be better served in community based settings.
3. In 1994, the State's own professionals identified 73 developmental^ disabled people who were in immediate need for community services. Their treatment teams believe many of them are losing skills by continuing to live in institutions, yet those 73 individuals still remain in institutions today.
4. The State has developed several plans to down size and/or close some of its institutions, in order to move into community settings those people who are unnecessarily institutionalized. In 1995, the State proposed closing one state institution, the Eastmont Human Service Center in Glendive, and transferring those funds to create the community services so desperately needed by the institutionalized individuals and many others on the State's long community waiting list. However, the legislature refused to approve the plan and Eastmont continues to operate, at a cost which far exceeds the cost of community services. The Montana Developmental Center was scheduled to implement a population reduction plan this summer. The plan has been abandoned.
5. Many states have closed their institutions for people with developmental disabilities entirely and replaced them with a complete community service system while others are moving in that direction.
6. The average annual cost to institutionalize a person at the Montana Developmental Center is about $118,000 and at Eastmont about $80,000. The cost of community service programs ranges from $20,000 to $66,000 per person.
7. Many people confined in the institutions are no more severely disabled than individuals already being served, and served successfully, in Montana's community service system.
8. The suit is brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), as well as other federal laws and the U.S. Constitution. The ADA states that a state government which undertakes to provide services to people with disabilities must do so "in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities." An institution, by its nature, is an artificial, restrictive, segregated environment.
9. No one will be released into the community without a comprehensive treatment plan, supervision and support services. No one will be "kicked out into the streets."
10. MAP and its attorneys are NOT attempting to collect money damages from the State.

 
 U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 1 of 58

Docket as of July 26, 2004 11:28 am

Web PACER (v2.4)

U.S. District Court
U.S. District Court of Montana (Helena)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 96-CV-63
Travis D., et al v. Eastmont Human Svc, et al
Filed: 08/23/96 Assigned to: Judge Carolyn S. Ostby
Demand: $0,000 Nature of Suit: 440 Lead Docket: None Jurisdiction: Federal Question Dkt# in other court: None Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

TRAVIS D., by his mother and next friend Leslie Barry
plaintiff

Linda J. Deola [COR NTC ret] REYNOLDS MOTL AND SHERWOOD 401 N Last Chance Gulch Helena, MT 59601 406-442-3261 FTS 443-7294
Andree Larose [COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] [COR] Alan Freed, Jr. [COR LD NTC] MONTANA ADVOCACY PROGRAM PO Box 1681 Helena, MT 59624 406-449-2344 FTS 449-2418
Ira A. Burnim [COR LD NTC] JUDGE DAVID L. BAZELON CENTER 1101 - 15th Street, NW Suite 1212 Washington, DC 20005 202-467-5730
Thomas K. Gilhool

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

[COR LD NTC] Judith A. Gran [COR LD NTC] PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA 125 S Ninth Street Suite 700 Philadelphia, PA 19107

ALLEN K., by his parents and guardians Michael and Earlene K.
plaintiff
VIRGINIA L., by her sister and next friend Barbara Mercer
plaintiff

215-627-7100
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] (See above) [COR] Alan Freed, Jr. (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR LD NTC] Judith A. Gran (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] (See above) [COR] Alan Freed, Jr. (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR LD NTC]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 2 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

ISIDOR S., by his next friend Nancy Staigmiller
plaintiff
KIMBERLY B., by her next friend Dawn DeVor
plaintiff

Judith A. Gran (See above)
[COR LD NTC]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] (See above) [COR] Alan Freed, Jr. (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR LD NTC] Judith A. Gran (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] (See above) [COR] Alan Freed, Jr. (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR LD NTC] Judith A. Gran (See above)
[COR LD NTC]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 3 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

CORIE B., by his sister and next friend Lilly Westby
plaintiff
TIFFANY M., by her next friend Johnelle Howanach
plaintiff

Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] (See above) [COR] Alan Freed, Jr. (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR LD NTC] Judith A. Gran (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] (See above) [COR] Alan Freed, Jr. (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR LD NTC] Judith A. Gran (See above)

LYLE H., by his parents and guardians Martha and Ervin H.
plaintiff

[COR LD NTC]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above)

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 4 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

JUDY M., by her next friend Nancy Staigmiller
plaintiff
ALVIN W., by his next friend Gay Moddrell
plaintiff

[COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] (See above) [COR] Alan Freed, Jr. (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR LD NTC] Judith A. Gran (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] (See above) [COR] Alan Freed, Jr. (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR LD NTC] Judith A. Gran (See above)
[COR LD NTC]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC] Allen Smith, Jr.
[term 12/21/98] (See above) [COR] Alan Freed, Jr.

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 5 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

BRENDA S., by her mother and guardian Mary Ann Parrent
plaintiff [term 02/05/04]
FREEMAN B., by his father and next friend Bob B.
plaintiff [term 02/05/04]
ANDREA I., by her mother and next friend Lori I.
plaintiff [term 02/05/04]

(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR LD NTC] Judith A. Gran (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Linda J. Deola [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Ira A. Burnim [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Thomas K. Gilhool [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Linda J. Deola [term 02/05/04]
(See above)
[COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Ira A. Burnim [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Thomas K. Gilhool [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Linda J. Deola [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 6 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

TRAVIS C., by his mother and guardian Ann C.
plaintiff [term 02/05/04]

Andree Larose [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Ira A. Burnim [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Thomas K. Gilhool [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Linda J. Deola [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Ira A. Burnim [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]

MICHAEL H., by his step mother and next friend Helen H.
plaintiff
JAMES K., by his next friend Nancy Staigmiller
plaintiff

Thomas K. Gilhool [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above)

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 7 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

PATRICK D., by his parents and guardians Dayle and Monte D.
plaintiff

[COR LD NTC ret]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above)

LYNN D., by her next friend Nancy Maxson
plaintiff
PEOPLE FIRST OF MONTANA, on behalf of its members
plaintiff

[COR NTC ret]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Linda J. Deola (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Andree Larose (See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Ira A. Burnim (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Thomas K. Gilhool (See above) [COR NTC ret]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 8 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

v. EASTMONT HUMAN SERVICE CENTER
defendant [term 02/05/04]
MONTANA DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER defendant
PETER S. BLOUKE, Director, Montana Department of Public

Russell E. Cater [term 02/05/04]
[COR LD NTC] MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES Box 4210 Helena, MT 59604-4210 406-444-5622
Katherine J. Orr [term 02/05/04]
[COR LD NTC] OFFICE OF THE MONTANA ATTORNEY GENERAL
PO Box 201401 215 N Sanders, Justice Building Helena, MT 59620-1401 406-444-2026 FTS 444-3549
Cary B. Lund [term 02/05/04]
[COR LD NTC] MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES PO Box 4210 Helena, MT 59604-4210 406-444-5622
Kimberly A. Kradolfer [term 02/05/04]
[COR LD NTC] MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PO Box 201440 Helena, MT 59620-1440 406-444-2026 FTS 444-4303
Russell E. Cater (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Katherine J. Orr (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Cary B. Lund (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Russell E. Cater [term 11/02/01]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 9 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Health and Human Services defendant
[term 11/02/01]
GAIL GRAY, Director, Montana Department of Public Health & Human Services
defendant
ROBERT ANDERSON, Administrative Services Division, Department of Corrections
defendant [term 10/15/98]
JOE MATTHEWS, Director, Disability Services Division, Department of Public Health and Human Services

(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Katherine J. Orr [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Cary B. Lund [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Russell E. Cater (See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Katherine J. Orr (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Cary B. Lund (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Russell E. Cater [term 10/15/98]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Katherine J. Orr [term 10/15/98]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Cary B. Lund [term 10/15/98]
(See above) [COR NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer [term 10/15/98]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Russell E. Cater (See above) [COR LD NTC]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 10 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

defendant

Katherine J. Orr (See above) [COR LD NTC]

DAN ANDERSON, Administrator, Mental and Addictive Disorders Division, Department of Public Health and Human Services
defendant [term 02/05/04]
JENNIFER PRYOR, Superintendent, Montana Developmental Center
defendant [term 11/02/01]
JEFF STURM, Superintendent, Montana Developmental Center

Cary B. Lund (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Russell E. Cater [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Katherine J. Orr [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Cary B. Lund [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Russell E. Cater [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Katherine J. Orr [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Cary B. Lund [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Russell E. Cater (See above)

defendant

[COR LD NTC ret] Katherine J. Orr

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 11 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

SYLVIA HAMMER, Superintendent, Eastmont Human Service Center
defendant [term 02/05/04]
CARL KEENER, Dr., Medical Director, Montana State Hospital
defendant [term 11/02/01]

(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Cary B. Lund (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer (See above) [COR NTC ret]
Russell E. Cater [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Katherine J. Orr [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Cary B. Lund [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Russell E. Cater [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Katherine J. Orr [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Cary B. Lund [term 11/02/01]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer [term 11/02/01]
(See above)

ED AMBERG, Chief Executive Officer, Montana State Hospital
defendant [term 02/05/04]

[COR LD NTC]
Russell E. Cater [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC ret]
Katherine J. Orr [term 02/05/04]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

Page 12 of 58 10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

RON BALAS, Superintendent, Montana Mental Health Nursing Care Center
defendant [term 02/05/04]
STATE OF MONTANA defendant

(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Cary B. Lund [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR NTC ret]
Russell E. Cater [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Katherine J. Orr [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Cary B. Lund [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer [term 02/05/04]
(See above) [COR LD NTC]
Joseph Seifert [COR LD NTC] KELLER REYNOLDS DRAKE JOHNSON & GILLESPIE 50 S Last Chance Gulch 3rd Floor Helena, MT 59601 406-442-0230 FTS 449-2256
Russell E. Cater (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Katherine J. Orr (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Cary B. Lund (See above) [COR LD NTC]
Kimberly A. Kradolfer (See above) [COR LD NTC] Paul D. Johnson

Page 13 of 58

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report
[COR LD NTC -] MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PO Box 201440 Helena, MT 59620-1440 406-444-2026 FTS 444-4303

Page 14 of 58

DOCKET PROCEEDINGS

DATE #

DOCKET ENTRY

8/23/96 1 9/4/96 2 9/12/96 3 9/12/96 4 9/12/96 5 9/12/96 6 9/13/96 7
9/24/96 8 9/24/96 9 9/24/96 10

COMPLAINT - 9 Original Summons issued, hn'd to cnsl (gar) [Entry date 08/26/96]
RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED upon defendant Jennifer Pryor, Supt Mont Develop Center on 8/29/96 (dmz) [Entry date 09/09/96] [Edit date 11/08/96]
RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED upon defendant Joe Matthews on 8/26/96 (dmz) [Entry date 09/25/96]
RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED upon defendant Peter Blouke on 8/26/96 (dmz) [Entry date 09/25/96]
RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED upon defendant Robert - Anderson on 8/26/96 (dmz) [Entry date 09/25/96]
RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED upon defendant Dan Anderson on 8/26/96 (dmz) [Entry date 09/25/96]
MOTION by defendant Eastmont Human Svc, Mont Develop Center, Peter Blouke, Robert - Anderson, Joe Matthews, Dan Anderson, Jennifer Pryor, Sylvia Hammer, Carl Keener, Ron Balas, State of Montana to dismiss complaint (dmz) [Entry date 09/25/96]
RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED upon defendant State of Montana on 8/26/96 (dmz) [Entry date 09/25/96]
RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED upon defendant Sylvia Hammer, supt Eastmont Human Svc on 8/27/96 (dmz) [Entry date 09/25/96] [Edit date 11/08/96]
RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED upon defendant Ron Balas, director, Mt Mental Health Nursing Care Center on 9/3/96 (dmz) [Entry date 09/25/96] [Edit date 11/08/96]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 15 of 58

9/24/96 -9/25/96 11 10/1/96 12 10/2/96 13 10/4/96 14 10/25/96 --
10/25/96 15 11/8/96 16 11/8/96 --
11/8/96 17
11/13/96 18 11/15/96 19

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiff Travis D., Allen K., Virginia L., Isidor S., Kimberly B., Corie B., Tiffany M., Lyle H., Judy M., Alvin W. by Thomas K. Gilhool, Judith A. Gran (dmz) [Entry date 11/08/96]
RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to dismiss complaint [7-1] (dmz)
RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED upon defendant Carl Keener on 9/24/96 (dmz) [Entry date 10/07/96]
MOTION by defendant to extend time to file answer (dmz) [Entry date 10/07/96]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to file answer [13-1] defts to have until 10/25/96 (cc: Mt Advocacy, Orr, cCL) (dmz) [Entry date 10/07/96]
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant Eastmont Human Svc, Mont Develop Center, Peter Blouke, Robert - Anderson, Joe Matthews, Dan Anderson, Jennifer Pryor, Sylvia Hammer, Carl Keener, Ron Balas, State of Montana by Cary B. Lund, Russell E. Cater (dmz) [Entry date 11/08/96]
ANSWER by defendant Eastmont Human Svc, Mont Develop Center, Peter Blouke, Robert - Anderson, Joe Matthews, Dan Anderson, Jennifer Pryor, Sylvia Hammer, Carl Keener, Ron Balas, State of Montana to [1-1] (dmz) [Entry date 11/08/96]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell denying as moot defts' motion to dismiss complaint [7-1] (cc: Larose, Gilhool, Lund, Cater, Kradolfer, Orr, CCL, TC) (dmz)
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant Eastmont Human Svc, defendant Mont Develop Center, defendant Peter Blouke, defendant Robert - Anderson, defendant Joe Matthews, defendant Dan Anderson, defendant Jennifer Pryor, defendant Sylvia Hammer, defendant Carl Keener, defendant Ron Balas, defendant State of Montana by Kimberly A. Kradolfer (dmz)
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell ; pptc set for 9:30 12/4/96, Hlna - cnsl for parties to file a written ppt stmt by 11/27/96, written prediscovery disclosure stmt by 11/20/96 (cc: all same counsel as order #16 today, Tina, USM, Sec, CCL, TC) (dmz) [Edit date 11/08/96]
MOTION by plaintiffs to continue Preliminary Pre-Trial Conference w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 11/18/96]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to continue Preliminary Pre-Trial Conference [18-1] ; Pretrial conference set for 12/4/96 is vacated and now set for 11:00 2/14/97. Written preliminary pretrial disclosure statements shall be filed by 11/20/96 and written preliminary pretrial statements by 12/20/96. cc: CCL, Clk, Crt Rpr, USM, Lund, Gilhool, Cater, Orr, Larose (gar) [Entry date 11/18/96]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 16 of 58

11/20/96 20 11/20/96 21 11/21/96 22
11/22/96 23 11/22/96 24 11/22/96 25 11/22/96 26 11/22/96 27 11/22/96 28 11/22/96 29 11/22/96 30 11/22/96 31 11/25/96 32
11/25/96 33
11/25/96 34
11/25/96 36

MOTION by defendant to extend time to file prediscovery disclosure stmt (dmz) [Entry date 11/21/96]
PREDISCOVERY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT of facts by plaintiff (dmz) [Entry date 11/21/96]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to file prediscovery disclosure stmt [20-1] - defts to have until 11/25/96 to file prediscovery disc stmt, pltfs to file disclosure stmt pursuant to the original schedule or may file it simultaneously w/defts (cc: Cater, Gilhool, Larose, Kradolfer) (dmz) [Entry date 11/22/96]
MOTION by plaintiffs for attorney Ira A. Burnim to appear pro hac vice w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
CONSENT OF DESIGNATION AS LOCAL CNSL as to Mot PHV of Burnim (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
AFFIDAVIT of Ira A. Burnim re [23-1] w/ attachments (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
MOTION by plaintiffs for attorney Judith A. Gran to appear pro hac vice w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
CONSENT TO DESIGNATION OF LOCAL CNSL of Pltfs as to Mot PHV of Judity A. Gran (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
AFFIDAVIT of Judith A. Gran re [26-1] w/ attachments (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
MOTION by plaintiff for attorney Thomas K. Gilhool to appear pro hac vice w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
CONSENT TO DESIGNATION AS LOCAL CNSL of Pltfs as to Mot PHV of Gilhool (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
AFFIDAVIT of Thomas K. Gilhool re [29-1] w/ attachments (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting Pltfs' motion for attorney Ira A. Burnim to appear pro hac vice [23-1] (cc: Burnim, Larose, Gran, Gilhool, Kradolfer, Carter) (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting Pltfs' motion for attorney Judith A. Gran to appear pro hac vice [26-1] (cc: Gran, Gilhool, Burnim, Larose, Kradolfer, Cater) (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting Pltfs' motion for attorney Thomas K. Gilhool to appear pro hac vice [29-1] (cc: Gran, Gilhool, Burnim, Larose, Cater, Kradolfer) (gar) [Entry date 11/26/96]
MOTION by defendant to extend time to file prediscovery disclosure stmt (dmz) [Entry date 12/02/96]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 17 of 58

11/25/96 -11/26/96 37
11/26/96 38 12/4/96 -12/19/96 39 12/20/96 40 1/10/97 41 1/10/97 42 1/17/97 43 1/21/97 44 1/21/97 45 1/21/97 46
2/6/97 47 2/6/97 48 2/10/97 49

REMARK - Docket item #35 was deleted - item was docketed twice - thuse there is no item #35 (dmz) [Entry date 12/06/96]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to file prediscovery disclosure stmt [36-1] until 11/26/96 (cc: Kradolfer, Gilhhol, Larose) (dmz) [Entry date 12/02/96]
PREDISCOVERY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT of facts by defendant (dmz) [Entry date 12/02/96]
FINANCIAL ENTRY Rec'd ck #18507 from MT Advocacy Program in amt of $90.00 as pmt of Adm PHV of Ira Burnim, Judith Gran, and Thomas Gilhool (gar) [Entry date 12/05/96]
PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL STATEMENT of facts by defendant State of Montana (dmz) [Entry date 12/30/96]
PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL STATEMENT of facts by plaintiff (dmz) [Entry date 12/30/96]
MOTION by plaintiff for order for determination of class (dmz) [Entry date 01/13/97]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff in support of motion for order for determination of class [41-1] (dmz) [Entry date 01/13/97]
AMENDMENT by plaintiff to preliminary pretrial stmt [40-1] (dmz) [Entry date 01/21/97]
MOTION by defendant to extend time to file obj to pltfs' mtn to certify class (dmz)
ATTACHMENT NO 3 by plaintiff re motion for order for determination of class [41-1] (dmz)
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to file obj to pltfs' mtn to certify class [44-1] ; Dfts shall have to and including 2/7/97 to file objection to Pltfs' Motion to Certify Class (cc: Gilhool, LaRose, Kradolfer, Cater) (gar) [Entry date 01/22/97]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to extend time to file obj to Mot to Cert Class w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 02/07/97]
OBJECTION by plaintiff to motion to extend time to file obj to Mot to Cert Class [47-1] w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 02/07/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell ; in-court hearing set for 2:30 2/14/97 instead of 11:00 (cc: Mt Advocacy, Kradolfer, Cater, CCL, TC, USM, Tina) (dmz) [Entry date 02/11/97]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 18 of 58

2/11/97 50 2/12/97 51 2/13/97 52 2/13/97 53 2/14/97 54
2/14/97 55 2/14/97 56 2/14/97 57

ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to file obj to Mot to Cert Class [47-1] defts to have until 3/7/97 (cc: Kradolfer, Larose, Gilhool) (dmz)
RESPONSE by defendants to Request for Extension of Time w/c/s (gar)
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to extend time to serve response to 1st Request for Production Nos. 1-101 w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 02/14/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to serve response to 1st Request for Production Nos. 1-101 [52-1]. Dfts shall have to and including 3/17/97 in which to prepare and serve those responses. cc: Kradolfer, Larose, Gilhool (gar) [Entry date 02/14/97]
MINUTES: before Judge Charles C. Lovell C/R: Tina Brilz. PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL CONF. Pr for plf: Andre Larose, Tom K. Gilhool, Alan Freed. Pr for dft. Kim Kradolfer, Katherine Orr, Carry Lund. Crt will enter an order shortening the caption and asks cnsl to adhere to this caption once done. Crt gives proposed discovery schedule. Discovery cutoff-11/20/97; Motions ddline, to include motns in limine and for summary jgmt - 12/11/97; Written discovery, answers by 11/20/97; Status report by 9/18/97; Atty's conf-March, 1998; Pretrial Order to be lodged by 3/23/98; Settlement date 3/16/98. If deft's want to amend answer, to be done by end of February 1997, to be set in the scheduling order. Both sides agree on schedule given. Cnsl are meeting to try to stipulate to facts; if this goes well, may not need to amend answer. Crt urges settlement if possible. Court would consider settlmt conf if desired.
There is a settlmt proposal, hopefully to be acted on by end of month. A. Larose reports on status of discovery. May need a motion to compel on certain discovery. If hrg is nec, it could be set. K. Kradolfer responds. Crt won't set trial date or final pretrial conf. til the pretrial order is in. K. Kradolfer says they may ask crt to tour the facilities late in the discovery process. Crt would consider this. Adj. (baf)
STENO NOTES of proceedings before Judge Charles C. Lovell ( Court Reporter: Tina Brilz) Hearing date: 2/14/97 Prelim PT Conf status report minutes [54-1] (baf)
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell, it having come to the crt's attention that there is some d3viation in the manner the pties are captioning their crt documents, IT IS ORDERED that the pties shall, when using an abbreviated caption for this case, conform their pleadings to reflect that used herein. (cc: Larose, et al, Burnim, Gilhool, Kradolfer,/Orr; Lund/Cater, CCL)( (baf) [Entry date 02/18/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell that cnsl to adhere to the following discovery schedule: All discovery to be completed by 11/20/97; All motns, including motns in

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 19 of 58

2/17/97 58 3/7/97 59
3/21/97 60 4/7/97 61 4/7/97 62
4/21/97 63 4/22/97 64
4/22/97 65 4/23/97 66

limine and Motions for summ. jgmt, including partial summary jgmt to be filed by 12/11/97. Briefing in accordance with Local Rule 220-1. All written discovery be served w/i the time provided by appropriate rule or, where applicable, order of court, in order that the responses meet the respective ddlines. All Answers to such written discov to be made by 11/20/97. Cnsl for ea pty to file status rpt by 9/18/97. Plf expert witness disclosure purs to Rule 26, Fed., R.Civ.P. by 9/18/97. Dfts by 10/20/97. Plfs cnsl to convene attys conf during week of 3/9/98 to complete final pretrial order. Final pretrial order in the form prescribed by local rule, signed by cnsl for all pties, to be lodged by 3/23/98. No new pties may be joined or pleadings amended after this date except by lv of crt for good cause shown. This order must be lodged by this date regardless of whether pending motns remain undecided by the crt. A contin of any ddline does not a;utomatically extend any unspecified ddlines. Settlemt date is 3/16/98.
FURTHER ORDERED cnsl for dfts having stated their intention to amend their answer, that the amended answer must be filed by 2/28/97. (cc: Larose et al; Burnim, Gilhool; Kradolfer/Orr; Lund/Cater,CCL) (baf) [Entry date 02/18/97]
AMENDED ANSWER [15-1] by defendant State of Montana (dmz) [Entry date 03/03/97]
OBJECTIONS by defendant State of Montana to request for class certification [41-1] - with blue folder of Mont. Admin. R. 46.8.101 thru 46.8.2055 (dmz) [Entry date 03/10/97] [Edit date 03/10/97]
RESPONSE by plaintiff to [59-1] (dmz) [Entry date 03/25/97]
MOTION by plaintiffs to compel production of documents w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 05/02/97]
BRIEF by plaintiff in support of motion to compel production of documents [61-1] w/c/s, bound vol "Department of Public Health & Human Services Rules" and bound Exhibit "A" (vols placed in expand. folder) (gar) [Entry date 05/02/97]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to extend time to and including 5/21/97 to respond to Mot to Compel w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 05/02/97]
OBJECTION by plaintiff to motion to extend time to and including 5/21/97 to respond to Mot to Compel [63-1] w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 05/02/97]
MOTION by plaintiffs to file brief exceeding 20 pages w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 05/02/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to and including 5/21/97 to respond to Mot to Compel [63-1] ; Dfts shall have to and including 5/21/97 to prepare and serve those responses. cc: Lund Kradolfer, Larose, Gilhool, Burnim (gar) [Entry date 05/02/97]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 20 of 58

4/23/97 67 5/16/97 68 5/16/97 69
5/21/97 70 5/23/97 71 5/23/97 71 5/27/97 72
6/17/97 73 6/18/97 74 6/20/97 75 7/1/97 76 7/1/97 77
7/3/97 78

ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to file brief exceeding 20 pages [65-1]. Note: said brief filed 4/7/97, doc. #62. cc: Lund, Kradolfer, Larose, Gilhool, Burnim (gar) [Entry date 05/02/97]
MOTION by defendant to extend time to file responses to plaintiffs' second requests for production w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/20/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to file responses to plaintiffs' second requests for production [68-1]. Defendant's have to and including 6/13/97 to respond to second request for production. cc: Smith, Gilhool, Burnim, Cater and Kradolfer (tlh) [Entry date 05/20/97] [Edit date 05/20/97]
MOTION by defendants to extend time to prepare and serve their response to pltfs mot to compel w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/23/97]
RESPONSE (Objection) by plaintiff to motion to extend time to prepare and serve their response to pltfs mot to compel [70-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/28/97]
MOTION (Request) by plaintiff for conference with court w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/28/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting defts' motion to extend time to prepare and serve their response to pltfs to compel [70-1] ; ddl set for 6/20/97 (cc: Cater, Lund, Gilhool, Burnim, Larose, Kradolfer) (dmz) [Entry date 05/28/97]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana for leave to file oversized brief w/c/s (tlh)
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion for leave to file oversized brief [73-1] (cc: Cater, Lund, Gilhool, Burnim, Larose, Kradolfer) (dmz) [Entry date 06/24/97]
RESPONSE by defendant to motion to compel production of documents [61-1] - kept in expando folder (dmz) [Entry date 06/24/97]
MOTION by plaintiffs to extend time to submit reply brief w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 07/02/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to submit reply brief [76-1]. Pltfs shall have an extension of time until 7/3/97 in which to file reply to dft's resp to pltfs' mot to compel. cc: CCL, Laroe, Gilhool, Kradolfer, Cater (gar) [Entry date 07/02/97] [Edit date 07/02/97]
REPLY by plaintiff to response to motion to compel production of documents [61-1] (dmz) [Entry date 07/11/97]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 21 of 58

7/9/97 79 7/9/97 80 7/25/97 81 7/25/97 82 8/7/97 83 8/7/97 84
8/29/97 85 9/5/97 86 9/8/97 87
9/17/97 88 9/18/97 89 9/18/97 90
9/19/97 91 9/23/97 92

NOTICE by plaintiff of taking deposition of James Driggers on 6/27/97 at Hlna (dmz) [Entry date 07/11/97]
NOTICE by plaintiff of taking deposition of Mike Hanshew on 7/17/97 at Hlna (dmz) [Entry date 07/11/97]
SECOND MOTION by plaintiff to compel production of documents (dmz) [Entry date 07/30/97]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff in support of second motion to compel production of documents [81-1] (dmz) [Entry date 07/30/97]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana for extension of time to respond to Pltfs' Second Motion to Compel w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 08/08/97] [Edit date 08/18/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion for extension of time to 8/29/97 to respond to Pltfs' Second motion to Compel [83-1] (cc: Larose, Gilhool, Kradolfer, Burnim, Cater, GR) (tlh) [Entry date 08/13/97] [Edit date 08/18/97]
RESPONSE by defendant to pltfs' 2nd motion to compel production of documents [81-1] - kept in expando (dmz) [Entry date 09/19/97]
MOTION by plaintiff to extend time to submit reply brief in resp to defts' resp to pltfs' 2nd mtn to compen (dmz) [Entry date 09/19/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to submit reply brief in resp to defts' resp to pltfs' 2nd mtn to compel [86-1] ; case management ddl set for 9/23/97 (cc: Burnim, Larose, Cater, Gilhool, Kradolfer) dmz for tlh (dmz) [Entry date 09/19/97]
MOTION by plaintiff to extend time to disclose expert witnesses (dmz) [Entry date 09/19/97]
STATUS REPORT by plaintiff - pltf requests the crt designate this a complex litigation and consider whether it would be helpful to develop a case mgmt plan, prospects for settlement do not look promising (dmz) [Entry date 09/19/97]
STATUS REPORT by defendant - a class certification is pertinent to the disc disputes and a decision by the court will have direct and significant bearing on the scope of disc which is relevant and approp in this matter, a longer extension of the current disc schedule is warranted (dmz) [Entry date 09/19/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to disclose expert witnesses [88-1] (cc: Burnim, Larose, Cater, Gilhool, Kradolfer) (dmz)
REPLY by plaintiffs to Defts' response to Pltf's Second motion to compel production of documents [81-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 09/25/97]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 22 of 58

9/24/97 93
10/1/97 94
10/17/97 95 10/28/97 96 10/29/97 -11/20/97 97 11/20/97 98 11/26/97 99 11/26/97 100 12/9/97 101 12/16/97 102 12/22/97 103 12/23/97 104

AMENDMENT OF STATUS REPORT by plaintiff - Pltfs amend status report submitted 9/18/97. Parties agree to modify the limitation on the number of depos allowed to be taken under Rule 30, Fed. R. Civ. P. to allow more than ten depos to be taken by the pltfs or by the defts. The parties agree that the number of depos to be taken shall be reasonable and that either party may file an objection if the party believes the number of depos scheduled are unreasonable. The parties agree with the proposed alteration of the discovery schedule to allow expert witness disclosure by pltf by 11/20/97 by defts by 12/19/97 and close of discovery by 2/20/98. w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 09/25/97] [Edit date 10/08/97]
AMENDED STATUS REPORT by defendant State of Montana and response to Pltfs' status report. Defts do not anticipate major discovery conflicts and therefore to not see the need for development of special case management methods. Defts will continue to defend this action and will not cause delay in this matter. w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 10/03/97] [Edit date 10/08/97]
MOTION by defendant to vacate all or part of disc schedule (dmz) [Entry date 10/24/97]
RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to vacate all or part of disc schedule [95-1] (dmz) [Entry date 11/03/97]
REMARK - Vol. 4 begins here....................... (tlh) [Entry date 11/25/97]
MOTION by plaintiff to extend time for expert witness disclosure w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 11/25/97]
PRELIMINARY EXPERT WITNESS DISCLSOURE submitted by plaintiffs w/c/s, attchs (tlh) [Entry date 11/25/97]
MOTION by defendant for partial summary judgment (dmz)
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by defendant in support of motion for partial summary judgment [99-1] (dmz)
MOTION by plaintiffs for extension of time w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 12/10/97]
JOINT MOTION by parties to vacate existing sched orders and set briefing sched proposed in this motion and request for oral argument and sched conference w/c/s (gar) [Entry date 12/19/97] [Edit date 12/19/97]
PRELIMINARY EXPERT WITNESS DISCLOSURE submitted by defendant State of Montana w/c/s & attachments (gar) [Entry date 12/29/97]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to vacate existing sched orders and set briefing sched in this motion [102-1]. Previously set deadlines are vacated. ; mtion resp ddl is vacated reply brief ddl is vacated; Pretrial

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 23 of 58

2/5/98 105 2/6/98 106
2/25/98 107 2/26/98 108
3/11/98 109 3/12/98 110 3/13/98 111 3/13/98 112 3/30/98 113

order ddl is vacated ; Oral argument on Pltfs' Motion to Certify Class set for hearing at 10:30 on 4/16/98 ; The following briefing sched on motions which may be dispositive of some aspects of this case is set: 2/9/98, Pltf file response brf to Dfts' Mot for Partial Jdgmt on Pleadings. Any other legal motions currently contemplated by either party which may be dispositive of some aspect of the case must be filed on or before this date. This does not preclude either party from filing substantive legal motions after the date discovery closes in accordance with a new court-ordered sched. 3/27/98 - Reply brf in support of Motion for parties jdgmt on pleadings due. any response brfs to any orther dispositive motions shall be filed on or before this date. 4/24/98 - All reply brfs on any dispositve motion s must be filed on or before this date. Dfts shall identfy and provide abbreviated disclosure of those expert witnesses they currently intend to call at trial by 12/23/97. Near the end of the above briefing sched, the Court will entertain a request to set a timely sched in this matter. motion brief ddl satisfied (cc: Larose, Burnim, Gilhool, Cater, Kradolfer, Lund, CCL, Crt Rpr, Clk, BF, USM) (gar) [Entry date 12/29/97]
JOINT MOTION by defendant, plaintiff to modify schedule (dmz) [Entry date 02/10/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to modify schedule [105-1] - pltfs to file resp brief to defts' mtn for partial sj by 2/26/98 (cc: all cnsl) (dmz) [Entry date 02/10/98] [Edit date 02/10/98]

MOTION by defendants and plaintiffs for modification of schedule w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 03/02/98]

ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion for

modification of schedule [107-1]; Pltfs to file response

brief to defts' mtn for Partial judgment on pleadings by

3/13/98; Defts' reply brief in support of motion for

partial judgment on the pleadings due 4/22/98; all reply

briefs on any dispositive motions must be filed by 5/8/98.

(cc: Gilhool, Kradolfer, Burnim, Larose, Cater)

(cc:

all counsel) (tlh) [Entry date 03/02/98]

MOTION by plaintiffs to file brief exceeding twenty pages w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 03/18/98]

JOINT MOTION by defendants and plaintiffs for order to modify schedule w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 03/18/98]

ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to file brief exceeding twenty pages [109-1] (cc: Gilhool, Lund, Cater, Burnim, Gallagher, Kradolfer) (tlh) [Entry date 03/18/98]

RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion for partial summary judgment [99-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 03/18/98]

ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell hrg set for 4/14/98 on mtn to certify class is VACATED and reset ; for 10:30 4/23/98

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 24 of 58

3/30/98 114
4/14/98 115
4/16/98 116
4/16/98 -4/20/98 -4/20/98 -4/20/98 -4/23/98 117 4/24/98 118
4/24/98 119 4/24/98 120 4/24/98 121 4/24/98 122

Hlna (cc: all counsel) (dmz) [Entry date 03/31/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting parties' motion for order to modify schedule [110-1] ; 3/13/98 - pltfs to file resp to defts' mtn for partial jgmt, 4-24-98 - defts' rply brief in supp of mtn for sj, 5-15/98 - any resp briefs to any other dispositive mtns, 6/4/98 - all rply briefs on any dispositive mtns (cc: all counsel) (dmz) [Entry date 03/31/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell, A review of the file demonstrates that the parties are still briefing a motion for partial jdgmt on pldgs. Consequently, judicial economy dectates that the oral argument be rescheduled until after this motion is ripe for determination. Accordingly, ; The hearing sched for 4/23/98 is vacated to be rescheduled at a later date. (cc: Orr/Kradolfer, Lund/cater, Burnim, Gran/Gilhool, Larose, Crt Rpr, CCL, GR, USM) gr for dmz (gar) [Entry date 04/17/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell referring to Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson the motion to compel production of documents [81-1], [61-1] Case referred to Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson for ruling (cc: Kradolfer, Cater, Burnim, Gran, Gallagher, CCL, GR, LBE) (dmz) [Edit date 04/17/98]
FILE DELIVERED (4 volumes plus expando) to Msla for LBE (dmz)
RECEIVED file (4 volumes & expando) from Helena Clerk's office (kjh)
FILE DELIVERED to LBE for ruling on Motions to Compel [61-1] and [81-1] (kjh)
RECEIVED Exhibits for Depositions of Driggers and Hanshew (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to extend time to 6/4/98 to file reply brief (mgs) [Entry date 04/24/98] [Edit date 04/24/98]
ORDER by Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson setting hearing on motion to compel production of documents [81-1] and on motion to compel production of documents [61-1] 9:00 5/13/98 @ Missoula, USMJ Crtroom. (cc: all counsel, USM, CSO, RPR, KH) (mgs)
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to dismiss Robert Anderson (mcn) [Entry date 04/29/98] [Edit date 04/29/98]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by defendant State of Montana in support of motion to dismiss Robert Anderson [119-1] (mcn) [Entry date 04/29/98]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana for partial summary judgment (mcn) [Entry date 04/29/98]
MOTION by plaintiff Alvin W., plaintiff Judy M., plaintiff

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 25 of 58

4/24/98 --
4/27/98 123
4/29/98 124
4/29/98 -4/29/98 -4/30/98 -4/30/98 -4/30/98 -4/30/98 125 4/30/98 126 4/30/98 127 4/30/98 128 4/30/98 129 4/30/98 130

Lyle H., plaintiff Tiffany M., plaintiff Corie B., plaintiff Kimberly B., plaintiff Isidor S., plaintiff Virginia L., plaintiff Allen K., plaintiff Travis D. for partial summary judgment for failing to provide services in the most interated setting to class members unnecessarily placed in the institutions. (mcn) [Entry date 04/29/98]
PROPOSED Order submitted by plaintiff Alvin W., plaintiff Judy M., plaintiff Lyle H., plaintiff Tiffany M., plaintiff Corie B., plaintiff Kimberly B., plaintiff Isidor S., plaintiff Virginia L., plaintiff Allen K., plaintiff Travis D. [122-1]. (mcn) [Entry date 04/29/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to 6/4/98 to file reply brief [117-1] (cc: LaRose, Cater, Lund, Kradolfer, Gilhool, Burnim) (tlh) [Entry date 04/28/98] [Edit date 04/29/98]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to vacate oral argument scheduled for 5/13/98, and to reset for 6/15/98 and continue as needed to 6/16/98. Copy to LBE/chambers. (mcn) [Entry date 05/05/98] [Edit date 05/05/98]
PROPOSED Order submitted by defendant State of Montana, original to LBE/chambers. (mcn) [Entry date 05/05/98]
REMARK - END OF FILE FOLDER #4........................... (mgs) [Entry date 06/11/98]
RECEIVED Deposition of Michael Hanshew, Vols 1 & 2 (in expando) (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98]
RECEIVED Deposition of James Driggers (in expando) (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98]
RECEIVED Exhibits for Driggers and Hanshew Depositions (in black binder) (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98]
NOTICE by plaintiffs of receipt of deposition of James Driggers w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]
NOTICE by plaintiffs of receipt of deposition of Michael Hanshew w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]
MOTION by plaintiffs for leave to file brief exceeding twenty pages w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]
AFFIDAVIT of Barbara Mercer re sister Virginia LeDoux being kept at Eastmont Human Service Center against her will (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]
AFFIDAVIT of Charlene Lindberg re brother Lyle Huber being kept at Eastmont Human Services against his will (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]
Certificate OF SERVICE by plaintiffs of Afdt of Charlene

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 26 of 58

4/30/98 131 4/30/98 132 4/30/98 133 5/1/98 134 5/1/98 135 5/6/98 136
5/6/98 137
5/11/98 -5/14/98 138 5/15/98 139 5/18/98 140

Linderg dated 2/3/98 and Afdt of Barbara Mercer dated 1/29/98 (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]
STATEMENT of Uncontroverted facts by plaintiffs in support of pltfs' mtns for partial summary judgment w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]
APPENDIX filed by plaintiff for Statement of uncontroverted facts in support of pltfs' mtns for partial sj [132-1] (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]

REPLY by plaintiff re [122-1] pltfs' mtn for partial summary judgment for failing to provide services in the most integrated setting to class members unnecessarily placed in institutions w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]

MEMORANDUM of law by plaintiffs in support of motion for partial summary judgment for failing to provide services in the most interated setting to class members unnecessarily placed in the institutions. [122-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98]

MEMORANDUM by defendant State of Montana in support of motion for partial summary judgment [121-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98]

ORDER by Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson granting motion to vacate oral argument scheduled for 5/13/98 [124-1], granting motion to reset for 6/15/98 and continue as needed to 6/16/98. [124-2] resetting hearing on motions to compel [81-1], [61-1] for 1:30 6/13/98 (cc: all counsel) (kjh) [Entry date 05/08/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]

ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion for leave to file Pltfs' brief in Support of pltfs' mtn for partial sj for failing to provide services in the Most Integrated Setting to Class Members Unnecessarily Placed in Institutions exceeding twenty pages [128-1] (cc: Gallagher, Gran, Burnim, Lund, Cater, Kradolfer) (tlh) [Entry date 05/11/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]

REMARK - Documents 126-132 and 134-137 sent to Missoula to

be inserted into file. Bulky document 133 and rec'd

documents Depos of Driggers, Hanshew (vols 1 & 2) and

Exhibits for depos of Drigger and Hanshew kept in Helena

office.

(tlh)

Dft.'s MOTION to extend time to & includiong 07/31/98 to serve dft.'s resp. brf. (cad) [Entry date 05/27/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]

MOTION by plaintiff to exceed page limitation (dmz) [Entry date 05/21/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]

ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to exceed page limitation [138-1] (cc: all counsel) (dmz) [Entry date 05/21/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 27 of 58

5/18/98 141 5/19/98 142 5/20/98 143 6/3/98 144 6/3/98 145 6/5/98 -6/10/98 146 6/11/98 -6/12/98 147
6/12/98 148
6/15/98 149

RESPONSE by plaintiff to defts' motion for partial summary judgment [121-1] (dmz) [Entry date 05/21/98]
OBJECTIONS by plaintiff to defts' mtn for ext of time to file response briefs to pltfs' mtn for partial sj (dmz) [Entry date 05/21/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting defts' mtn for extension of time, defts to have until 6/19/98 to file resp to pltfs' mtn for partial sj (cc: all counsel) dmz for tlh (dmz) [Entry date 05/21/98] [Edit date 06/11/98]
MOTION by defendant to extend time to file rply brief in suppof defts' mtn for partial jgmt and defts' rply brief in supp of defts' mtn for partial sj (dmz) [Entry date 06/05/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting defts' motion to extend time to file rply brief in suppof defts' mtn for partial jgmt and defts' rply brief in supp of defts' mtn for partial sj [144-1] - defts to have until 6/19/98 (cc: all counsel) (dmz) [Entry date 06/05/98]
REMARK - docket items #144 and 145 sent to Msla for file (dmz)
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant State of Montana by Joseph Seifert (mgs) [Entry date 06/11/98]
FILES DELIVERED to LBE (mgs)
MOTION by defendant to extend time to Deft response brief in opposition to Plf Motion for Partial Summ. Jgmt for Failing to Provide Title XIX Services to Class members at Risk of Placement in the Institutions" and Plfs' motion for Partial summ. jgmt for failing to provide services in the Most Integrated setting to Class Members unnecessarily placed in institutions, which were filed 4/30/98 (baf)
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to and including 7/3/98to Deft response brief in opposition to Plf Motion for Partial Summ. Jgmt for Failing to Provide Title XIX Services to Class members at Risk of Placement in the Institutions" and Plfs' motion for Partial summ. jgmt for failing to provide services in the Most Integrated setting to Class Members unnecessarily placed in institutions, were filed 4/30/98 [147-1] (cc: all counsel) (baf)
MINUTES: Pltf cnsl Larose and Freed, and dft cnsl Seifert, Lund and Kradolfer present for hearing on the motion to compel production of documents [81-1], and the motion to compel production of documents [61-1], before Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson; argument presented; crt conducted review of documents in dispute and discussion; further hearing continued to Tuesday, 6/16/98 at 9:00 a.m. C/R: Daina Hodges (kjh) [Entry date 06/20/98]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 28 of 58

6/16/98 150
6/19/98 151 6/19/98 -6/19/98 152 6/20/98 153
6/24/98 -7/1/98 154
7/1/98 155 7/2/98 -7/2/98 -7/2/98 156 7/6/98 --

MINUTES: before Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson; pltf cnsl Larose and Freed, and dft chsl Seifert and Lund present for continuation of hearing on the motion to compel production of documents [81-1], and the motion to compel production of documents [61-1]; the crt continued its discussion and review of discovery documents in dispute and ruled in accordance with Order to be filed C/R: Daina Hodges (kjh) [Entry date 06/20/98]
REPLY by defendant State of Montana to response to motion for partial summary judgment [121-1] files 4 & 5 delivered to: LBE (mgs) [Entry date 06/23/98]
REMARK - END OF FILE FOLDER #5............................ (mgs) [Entry date 06/23/98]
REPLY by defendant State of Montana to response to motion for partial summary judgment [99-1] files 4, 5 & 6 delivered to: LBE (mgs) [Entry date 06/23/98]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to file Dfts' resp brfs in opposition to pltfs' mot for partial summary judgment for failing to provide Title XIX Svcx and pltfs' mot for partial sum jdgmt for failing to provide services in the most integrated setting to classmembers unnecessarily placed in institutions (gar) [Entry date 07/01/98]
REMARK - files returned to Clks' Ofc w/advice that this file was referred to LBE for the motion to compel only. (mgs)
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to file Dfts' resp brfs in opposition to pltfs' mot for partial summary judgment for failing to provide Title XIX Svcx and pltfs' mot for partial sum jdgmt for failing to provide services in the most integrated setting to classmembers unnecessarily placed in institutions [153-1]. July 17, 1998 - Dfts' shall file response brf to Pltfs' mots for partial summary jdgmt. August 27, 1998 - Pltfs' shall file their reply briefs in support of their motions for partial summary judgment. cc: LaRose, Burnim, Gilhool, Kradolfer, gar (gar)
ORDER by Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson granting motions to compel production of documents [81-1] and [61-1] as set out in copy of transcript attached; denying pltfs' claim for costs & atty fees in pursuing the mtn/compel. (cc: all counsel) (mgs) [Entry date 07/02/98]
MINUTES: terminating case referral to Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson for motions to compel (mgs)
FILES DELIVERED to Helena Div. Ofc (mgs)
TRANSCRIPT filed of hearing held 6-15/16-98 in Msla - kept in expando file (dmz) [Entry date 07/08/98] [Edit date 07/08/98]
REMARK - file received at Helena from Msla, copy of order

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 29 of 58

7/14/98 -7/17/98 157 7/17/98 158 7/28/98 -7/29/98 -8/27/98 159 8/27/98 160 8/28/98 161 8/28/98 162
9/2/98 163
9/2/98 -9/3/98 -9/4/98 --

#55 to CCL and LC (dmz) [Entry date 07/08/98]
REMARK - rec'd Attachment A to Janice Frisch's affidavit which was filed in support of Defendants' Reply Brief in Support of Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary judgment (Doc #152) and attached to affidavit (tlh)
RESPONSE by defendants to motion for partial summary judgment for failing to provide services in the most integrated setting to class members unnecessarily placed in the institutions. [122-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 07/21/98]
RESPONSE by defendant State of Montana to Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment for failing to provide Title XIX services to class members at risk of placement in the institutions. [122-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 07/29/98]
FILE DELIVERED (6 volumes) to Msla for LBE at request of KJH (dmz)
FILE RECEIVED from Helena (6 VOLUMES) and DELIVERED to LBE Chambers for Mary Ann Sutton (san)
MOTION by plaintiffs for leave of court to file brief exceeding twenty pages w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 08/31/98]
REPLY by plaintiff to response to motion for partial summary judgment for failing to provide title XIX services to class members at risk of placement in the institutions [122-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 08/31/98] [Edit date 09/01/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion for leave of court to file brief exceeding twenty pages [159-1] (cc: Kradolfer, Cater, Lund, Seifert, Burnim, Gran, Gallagher, Larose) (tlh) [Entry date 08/31/98]
REPLY by plaintiff to response to motion for partial summary judgment for failing to provide services in the most interated setting to class members unnecessarily placed in the institutions. [122-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 09/01/98]
ORDER by Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson regarding plaintiffs' Second Motion to Compel [81-1]; documents withheld from discovery by defendants under claims of attorney-client privilege and/or work product protection having been reviewed in camera, granted in part and denied in part (cc:
all counsel) (kjh)
REMARK - documents submitted for in camera review relating to Plaintiffs' Second Motion to Compel [81-1] retained under seal in Clerk's office (kjh) [Edit date 09/03/98]
FILE DELIVERED to Helena from Missoula by certified mail (Vols 1 thru 6, transcript of proceedings of 6/15/98 and 6/16/98, and envelope containing documents submitted for in camera inspection relative to motion to compel No. 81( (kjh)
REMARK - File (6 Vols., transcript of proceedings of

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 30 of 58

9/9/98 -9/16/98 164
9/18/98 -10/13/98 165 10/15/98 166 11/19/98 167
11/19/98 168 11/20/98 169 11/20/98 170 11/24/98 171 11/25/98 -12/2/98 172 12/3/98 173
12/8/98 174

6/15/98 and 6/16/98 and envelope containing documents submitted for in camera inspection relative to mtn to compel No. 81) rec'd from Msla (tlh) [Entry date 09/09/98]
FILE DELIVERED to law clerk (tlh)
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell; hearing on class certification and parties competing mtns for partial summary judgment set for 9:30 12/16/98 (cc: Kradolfer, Cater, Seifert, Burnim, Gran, Gallagher, Smith, USM, RPR, Sched Clerk, CCL) (tlh) [Entry date 09/17/98]
REMARK - per call from LBE lawclerk, mailed out copy of 9/2/98 order again to all cnsl. Faxed copy to Andre Larose and Kim Kradolfer per her instructions. (baf)
STIPULATION BY ALL for dismissal of Robert Anderson as a party deft (dmz) [Entry date 10/16/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell dismissing party Robert Anderson (cc: all cnsl, CCL, GR) (dmz) [Entry date 10/16/98]
NOTICE OF NONCOMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULES and MOTION by plaintiffs For Order Barring Dfts from Filing Statement of Genunie Issues and Supporting Evidence (gar) [Entry date 11/25/98]
MEMORANDUM by plaintiffs in support of motion For Order Barring Dfts from Filing Statement of Genunie Issues and Supporting Evidence [167-1] (gar) [Entry date 11/25/98]
STATEMENT of Genuine Issues by defendants (gar) [Entry date 11/25/98] [Edit date 11/25/98]
EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF DFTS' STATEMENT OF GENUNIE ISSUES Doc. #169 (BOUND VOLUME IN EXPAND. FOLDER) (gar) [Entry date 11/25/98] [Edit date 11/25/98]
RESPONSE by defendants to motion For Order Barring Dfts from Filing Statement of Genunie Issues and Supporting Evidence [167-1] (gar) [Entry date 11/25/98]
REMARK Folder #7 begins here............................... (gar)
AMENDED STATEMENT of genuine issues by defendants [169-1] w/c/s (tlh) [Entry date 12/03/98]
NOTICE by defendant State of Montana of Additional Authority and NOTICE of Pending Petition for Writ of Certiorari In Case Involving Relevant Issues w/ attachments.( Copy given to Lawclerk) (gar) [Entry date 12/07/98]
REPLY by plaintiff to response to motion For Order Barring Dfts from Filing Statement of Genunie Issues and Supporting Evidence [167-1] file delivered to: lawclerk (tlh) [Entry date 12/10/98]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 31 of 58

12/14/98 175 12/14/98 176 12/15/98 177 12/15/98 178 12/15/98 179 12/15/98 180 12/15/98 181
12/15/98 182
12/16/98 183

MOTION by defendants for leave to rebrief & notice that certiorari granted in 98-536, Olmstead v. L.C., et al, and motion to vacate December 16, 1998 hearing w/c/s/ (baf) [Entry date 12/16/98]
SUPPLEMENTal reply to defts respons to plfs motion for partial summary judgment for failing to provide services in the most integrated setting to class members unnecessarily placed in the institutions - by plaintiff (baf) [Entry date 12/16/98]
SUPPLEMENTal reply memo in suppt of motion for partial summary judgment for failing to provide Title XIX services to class members at risk of placement in the institutions by plaintiff (baf) [Entry date 12/16/98]
NOTICE of supplemental authority re plf motion for summary judgment by plaintiff (baf) [Entry date 12/16/98]
NOTICE by Montana Advocacy Program of Change of Address as follows: Andree Larose, Alan Freed, Mary Gallagher, Montana Advocacy Program, 316 N. Park, Rm 211P. O. Box 1681, Helena, MT 59624; Voice/Tdd (406) 444-3889; Fax. (406) 444-0261. (baf) [Entry date 12/16/98]
Opposition by plaintiff to motion for leave to rebrief [175-1]& to motion motion to vacate December 16, 1998 hearing [175-2]. (baf) [Entry date 12/16/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell denying motion motion to vacate December 16, 1998 hearing [175-2]. Crt to hear argumts at that hrg on the question of whether it should stay its rulings relating to plfs ADA claims pending the Supreme Court's ruling in Olmstead. Each side to have 1 hr to pr argumts on all pending motns at the hrg. Hrg to commence at 9:10. Crt has confnc call at 10:15, an so crt will recess at 10:10 and resume hrg at completion of conf. call. (cc: Seifert (picked up order); Kradolfer/Orr faxed. Cater, Burnim, Gran/Gilhool, Gallagher, Larose/Freed; CCL,CLK,RPR) (baf) [Entry date 12/21/98]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell that plfs motion for an order barring defendants from filing a stmt of Genuine Issues is Denied and granting motion for leave to rebrief in response to dfts motion for partial summary jgmt [175]. (cc: Seifert (picked up) Kradolfer/Orr - faxed. Cater, Burnim, Gran/Gilhool, Gallagher, Larose/Freed - cnsl called. CCL,CLK,RPR) Court is in receipt of these briefs. (cc: all counsel) (baf) [Entry date 12/21/98]
MINUTES, HEARING ON MOTIONS: before Judge Charles C. Lovell. Present for plf, Andree Larose, Judy Gran, Alan Freed. Also pr is Travis D. Pr for dfts: Kim Kradolfer, Cary Lund, Joe Seifert. Cnsl have agreed defdts will begin.
Kim Kradolfer for dft, and Andre Larose & Judy Gran, for pfs are hrd several times on several motions. Motions submitted and under advisement. C/R: Tina Brilz (baf) [Entry date 12/21/98] [Edit date 12/21/98]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 32 of 58

12/21/98 184
2/18/99 185 9/30/99 186
10/15/99 187 10/15/99 188
12/16/99 189 12/16/99 190 12/16/99 191 8/3/00 192 8/23/00 193 8/23/00 194 8/23/00 -8/30/00 195

ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell, All proceedings are STAYED pending the United States Supremem Court's ruling in Olmstead vs. L.C. Cause No. 98-536. When that ruling issues, the parties shall brief the question of its impact upon the claims and motions currently before this court. [184-2] (cc: Seifert, Cater, Kradolfer, Lund, Larose, Burnim, Gilhool, Gallagher) (tlh) [Entry date 12/22/98]
TRANSCRIPT filed of oral arguments of hearing held 12/16/98 (kept in expando) (dmz) [Entry date 02/23/99]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell - parties shall brief the question of the impact of the Olmstead decision upon the claims and mtns currently before this crt and shall file the same w/in 45 days of receipt of this order; case management ddl set for 11/15/99 (cc: Cater, Burnim, Gilhool, Gallagher, Orr, Larose, Seifert, CCL, GR) (dmz) [Entry date 10/01/99] [Edit date 10/01/99]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to extend time to prepare and serve brf on question of impact of Olmstead v. L.C. (gar) [Entry date 10/19/99]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to prepare and serve brf on question of impact of Olmstead v. L.C. [187-1] ; State of Montana shall have to and including 12/16/99 to file and serve brf on the question (cc: Lund, Burnim, LaRose, Gilhool, Kradolfer) (gar) [Entry date 10/19/99]
BRIEF FILED by plaintiff re impact of Supreme Court decision in Olmstead v Curtis and Wilson (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/99]
BRIEF FILED by defendant re Olmstead v LC (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/99]
NOTICE by defendant of additional authority (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/99]
ATTORNEY SUBSTITUTION: addition of co-counsel - attorney Linda J. Deola for pltfs (dmz) [Entry date 08/17/00]
MOTION by plaintiffs for protective order and certification of attempts to resolve dispute (gar) [Entry date 08/30/00]
BRIEF by plaintiffs in support of motion for protective order [193-1] (gar) [Entry date 08/30/00]
PROPOSED Protective Order submitted by plaintiff (gar) [Entry date 08/30/00]
ORDER by Judge Jack D. Shanstrom referring to Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson the motion for protective order [193-1] The clerk directed to notify parties and Mag. Judge Erickson of entry of this order and to forward case file to Mag. Judge Erickson. Case referred to Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson (cc: JDS, CCL, LBE, Judy A., Geola, Larose,

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 33 of 58

8/30/00 -8/31/00 -8/31/00 196 9/6/00 197 9/6/00 --
9/6/00 197 9/7/00 -9/8/00 198
9/11/00 -9/11/00 -9/18/00 199 9/18/00 -9/21/00 -9/22/00 200 10/10/00 --
10/23/00 -10/24/00 --
12/1/00 --

Gallagher, Gran, Burnim, Cater, Seifert, Kradolfer, Lund) (gar)
FILE CONSISTING OF 8 VOLUMES AND 3 EXPANDABLE FOLDERS DELIVERED to Clerk, Missoula for Mag. Judge Erickson (gar)
RECEIVED from Helena vol 1-8 plus 3 expando files. copy of motion, brief and proposed order to MAS fyi. (mcn)
MOTION (REQUEST) by plaintiffs for order setting scheduling conference. (lll) [Entry date 09/07/00]
RESPONSE by defendants to [193-1]. (lll) [Entry date 09/08/00] [Edit date 09/08/00]
PROPOSED Protective Order submitted by defendants. (lll) [Entry date 09/08/00]
CROSS-MOTION by defendants for entry of defendants' protective order. (lll) [Entry date 09/08/00]
REd FILE DELIVERED to MAS for review o # 193 & 194 (mcn)
ORDER by Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson regarding [197-1], regarding [193-1], parties are directed to use Defendants' Protective Order as a guide and that the parties are directed to attempt draft an order within one week (see Order for specifics) (cc: all counsel). (lll)
REMARK - faxed copy of document #197 and 198 to attorney Andree Larose per her request (san)
PROPOSED Interim Order submitted by defendant State of Montana. (lll) [Entry date 09/12/00]
STIPULATION BY ALL for entry of protective order. (lll) [Entry date 09/21/00]
PROPOSED Protective Order (Exhibit A) submitted by defendants, plaintiffs. (lll) [Entry date 09/21/00]
RED FILE DELIVERED to LBE for review of item #199 and proposed Protective Order. (lll)
PROTECTIVE ORDER by Mag Judge Leif B. Erickson : adopting [199-1] (cc: all counsel). (lll)
REMARK Case assigned to Hon. Charles C. Lovell pursuant to Standing Order #11 of Chief Judge Shanstrom (gar) [Entry date 12/01/00]
FILE DELIVERED to Helena (Vol. 8 only) for review of item #196. (lll)
RECEIVED file vol #8 from Clerk, Missoula and delivered to Law Clerk re request for sched conf and mot for protective order & cert cert of attempts to resolve dispute. (gar)
VOLUME 1-7 OF FILE DELIVERED W/ 3 BROWN EXPANDOS to Helena

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 34 of 58

12/5/00 -4/26/01 -4/27/01 201 4/27/01 202 5/1/01 203
5/1/01 204 5/22/01 205 5/23/01 206
6/4/01 207 6/4/01 -6/5/01 208
6/5/01 209 6/5/01 210 6/5/01 --

for review by Jay (san)
REMARK - rec'd 6 volumes and 2 expandos of file in Helena from Mssla. (baf)
PROPOSED suppl brief submitted by plaintiff (dmz) [Entry date 05/01/01]
MOTION by plaintiff for leave to file supplemental brief summarizing recent legal developments (dmz) [Entry date 05/01/01]
PROOF/NOTICE OF SERVICE by plaintiff of proposed order (dmz)
[Entry date 05/01/01]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion for leave to file supplemental brief summarizing recent legal developments [201-1] (cc: Orr/Kradolfer, Burnim, Gilhool/Gran, Deola, Larose, Seifert, Cater/Lund, CCL,GR) (dmz)
SUPPLEMENTAL MEMO OF LAW SUMMARIZING RECENT LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS RELEVANT TO PENDING MTNS by plaintiff (dmz)
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to extend time to prepare and serve supplemental brief (gar) [Entry date 05/23/01]
CLERK'S ORDER by order of Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to prepare and serve supplemental brief [205-1]. Dft State of Montana has to and including 6/8/01 to prepare, serve and file their supplemental brief in quest of impact of Olmstead decision. cc: Kradolfer, Gilhool, Burnim, Larose (gar)
MOTION by plaintiffs Travis D., et al to extend time to file a motion to amend the complaint and no objection by dfts' cnsl. (snyb) [Entry date 06/05/01]
PROPOSED order submitted by pltfs in re doc. #207, Mot. for ext. and delvd to CCl as the file is in chambers. (snyb) [Entry date 06/05/01]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time of three days to file a motion to amend the complaint [207-1] Briefing on the motion to amend complnt to be conducted in accordance w/Local Rule and resolution of the motion to be governed by F.R.Civ.P. 15(a). (cc: Lund, Orr, Kradolpher, Seifert, Coler, Deola, Burnim, Gran, Gilhool, Gallagher, Freed, Larose) (baf) [Entry date 06/06/01]
MOTION by plaintiff to amend complaint (dmz) [Entry date 06/12/01]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff in support of motion to amend complaint [209-1] (dmz) [Entry date 06/12/01]
PROPOSED 1st amended complaint submitted by plaintiff (dmz)

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 35 of 58

6/8/01 211 6/19/01 212 6/21/01 213 7/3/01 214 7/13/01 215 7/27/01 216 8/29/01 217
8/30/01 218 8/31/01 219 9/27/01 220
10/12/01 221 10/12/01 221 10/12/01 221 10/16/01 222

[Entry date 06/12/01]
SUPPLEMENTAL POST OLMSTEAD BRIEF by defendant (dmz) [Entry date 06/12/01]
OBJECTIONS by defendant to amendment of complaint [209-1] (dmz) [Entry date 07/17/01]
NOTICE (Eratta) by defendant of omittance to obj to amendment of complaint (dmz) [Entry date 07/17/01]
REPLY by plaintiff re defts' obj to amendment of complaint [212-1] (dmz) [Entry date 07/17/01]
OBJECTIONS by plaintiff to consideration of improperly raised defenses and notice of supplemental authority (dmz) [Entry date 07/17/01]
RESPONSE by defendant to obj to consideration of improperly raised defenses [215-1] (dmz) [Entry date 08/02/01]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to amend complaint [209-1]. Clerk is directed to File plf's first amended complaint that was lodged with the court 6/5/01. FURTHER ORDERED all other motions presently pending in this case are denied as moot. Pties to have 45 days frm entry of this order to file whatever dispositive or other motions they wish the crt to consider at this stage of the proceedings. Briefing of those motns to be in accord. w/local rule (cc: Lund; Orr/Kradolfer; Seifert; Cater; Deola; Burnim; Gran/Gilhool; Gallagher/Freed/Larose; CCL) (baf) [Entry date 08/30/01]
AMENDED COMPLAINT [1-1] by plaintiff (baf)
NOTICE by Andrea Larose, atty for plaintiff of change of address: Montana Advocacy Program, 400 North Park Avenue, PO Box 1681, Helena, MT 59624 (dmz) [Entry date 09/04/01]
MOTION by defendant State of MT for leave to file mtn to dismiss and brief pursuant to crt's scheduling order in lieu of now filing amended answer (dmz) [Entry date 10/02/01]
Unopposed MOTION for leave to file a second amended complaint (dmz) [Entry date 10/15/01]
JOINT MOTION by defendant, plaintiff to set schedule (dmz) [Entry date 10/15/01]
JOINT MOTION by defendant, plaintiff to exceed page limitation (dmz) [Entry date 10/15/01]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to set schedule [221-1] ; second amended complaint to be filed by 11/2/01; motion brief ddl set for 11/15/01; setting mtion resp ddl for 11/14/01; setting date for reply brief ddl set for 1/18/02 (cc: all counsel) (dmz) [Entry date 10/26/01] [Edit date 10/28/03]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 36 of 58

11/2/01 223 11/14/01 224 11/15/01 225 11/15/01 226 11/15/01 227 11/21/01 228 11/26/01 229
12/12/01 230 12/12/01 231 12/12/01 232 12/12/01 233 12/12/01 234 12/14/01 235 12/14/01 236

AMENDED COMPLAINT [218-1] by plaintiff; adding Brenda S., Freeman B., Andrea I., Travis C., Michael H., James K., Patrick D., Lynn D., People First of MT, Gail Gray, Jeff Sturm, Ed Amberg (dmz) [Entry date 11/05/01]
MOTION by plaintiff to extend time to submit mtn for sj (dmz) [Entry date 11/15/01]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting mtn to extend time to submit mtn for sj by 11/21/01 (cc: all cnsl) (dmz)
MOTION by plaintiff to certify class action (dmz) [Entry date 11/19/01]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff in support of motion to certify class action [226-1] (dmz) [Entry date 11/19/01]
MOTION by plaintiff to extend time to submit mtn for sj and brief and stmt of facts (dmz) [Entry date 11/26/01]
ORDER by Clerk by Order of Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to submit mtn for sj and brief and stmt of [228-1], 12/14/01-Dispositive motions briefs and any Statements of Uncontroverted Facts to be simultaneously filed by parties ; setting motion resp ddl set for 2/1/02 (including to plntfs' Motion for Class Cert filed 11/15/01 and any Statements of Genuine Issues to be filed simultaneously by parties ; setting date for reply brief ddl set for 3/1/02 to be simultaneously filed by parties. Parties are granted leave to file oversized briefs. cc: Deola, Burnim, Larose Gilhool, Kradolfer, Seifert, Lund, Law Clerk-MKB (gar) [Entry date 11/27/01] [Edit date 10/28/03]
MOTION by plaintiff for partial summary judgment (dmz) [Entry date 12/13/01]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff in support of motion for partial summary judgment [230-1] - kept in expando folder (dmz) [Entry date 12/13/01] [Edit date 12/13/01]
SUMMARY of uncontroverted facts by plaintiff in support of [230-1] (dmz) [Entry date 12/13/01] [Edit date 12/13/01]
STATEMENT of UNCONTROVERTED FACTS by plaintiff in support of [230-1] (dmz) [Entry date 12/13/01]
APPENDICES 1-117 CONTAINED IN 5 VOLUMES OF THREE RING BINDERS filed by plaintiff re [230-1] (dmz) [Entry date 12/13/01]
MOTION by defendant to dismiss equal protection and due process claims (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by defendant in support of motion to dismiss equal protection and due process claims [235-1] (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 37 of 58

12/14/01 237 12/14/01 238 12/14/01 239 12/14/01 240 12/14/01 241 12/14/01 242 12/14/01 243 12/14/01 244 12/14/01 245 1/23/02 246 3/12/02 247 3/13/02 248
4/18/02 249
4/19/02 250

SECOND MOTION by defendant to dismiss claims for relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by defendant in support of motion to dismiss claims for relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act [237-1] (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
THIRD MOTION by defendant to dismiss Section 504 claims (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by defendant in support of motion to dismiss Section 504 claims [239-1] (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
FOURTH MOTION by defendant to dismiss medicaid claims (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by defendant in support of motion to dismiss medicaid claims [241-1] (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
MOTION by defendant for summary judgment (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by defendant in support of motion for summary judgment [243-1] (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
STATEMENT of facts by defendant in support of [243-1] kept in expando folder (dmz) [Entry date 12/17/01]
JOINT MOTION by defendant, plaintiff to modify briefing schedule (dmz) [Entry date 01/24/02]
MOTION by defendants to modify briefing schedule (baf) [Entry date 03/14/02]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to modify briefing schedule [247-1] & Ordered Response briefs for all pending motions and stmts of genuine issues to be filed and served by 4/19/02; Rply brfs for pending motns to be filed and served by 5/16/02 (cc: Lund, Orr/Kradolpher, Seifert, Cater, Deola, Burnim, Gran, Gilhool, Gallagher, Freed, Larose) (baf) [Entry date 03/14/02] [Edit date 10/28/03]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to extend time to file resp brfs to pltfs'mot for sum jdgmt and brf requesting class cert (gar) [Entry date 04/22/02]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell granting motion to extend time to file resp brfs to pltfs'mot for sum jdgmt brf requesting class cert [249-1]. Dfts shall have to and including 4/26/02 to prepare, srv and file their reqponse brfs to Pltfs' Motion for Class Cert and Pltfs' Mot for Summary Jdgmt with supporting documents including Stmts of Genuine Issues. CCL, PED, LaRose, Gilhool, Burnim, Deola, Carter, Seifert, Kradolfer, Lund (gar) [Entry date 04/22/02]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 38 of 58

4/19/02 251 4/19/02 252
4/19/02 253 4/19/02 254 4/19/02 255 4/19/02 256 4/24/02 257
4/25/02 258

RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to dismiss equal protection and due process claims [235-1] (gar) [Entry date 04/22/02]
RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to dismiss claims for relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act [237-1] (Placed in expando folder) (gar) [Entry date 04/22/02] [Edit date 04/22/02]
RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to dismiss medicaid claims [241-1] (gar) [Entry date 04/22/02]
RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to dismiss Section 504 claims [239-1] (gar) [Entry date 04/22/02]
RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion for summary judgment [243-1] (Placed in expando folder) (gar) [Entry date 04/22/02] [Edit date 04/22/02]
STATEMENT of Genuine Issued by plaintiffs in opposition to dfts' Motion for Summary Jdgmt. (gar) [Entry date 04/22/02]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell ; status hearing set for 2:30 4/25/02 in chambers at Helena, MT (cc: all cnsl rec'd cpies, called Cater, Seifert, Kradolpher, Orr, Lund, Deola, Gallagher; cpies to Clk-Hlna, Sched Clk-Hlna, CCL) (baf)
MINUTES status conference before Judge Charles C. Lovell In chambers w/crt, MKB, Kim Kradolfer and Joe Seifert pr for dfts. Andre Larose, Alexandra Volkert pr for plfs. Crt indicates a need to move forward with the case and a need to set scheduling conference. There are pending motions for summ. jgmt, motns to dismiss and for class certification. Motns shall be ripe by 5/16/02. Crt will set hrg and trial dates and will order court supervised sttlmt confns. Cnsl could consider having summary jury trial. All sides would have to agree on this. Schedule given by court. Motions hrg on 5/30/02; hear class certification issue in May. Disclosure of plf expts 3/24/02; Disclose deft expts 6/24/02; Discovery ddline 6/5/02; Mtns ddline 8/2/02. Attys pretrl cnfns week of 8/19/02; FPTO and trl brfs due by 9/4/02; FPTC held 9/9/02; Trial date 9/16/02. Larose feels schedule is optimistic. Kradolfer has conflicting trial 9/9/02 in state court. Pties have agreed to mediation in July w/private mediator. Crt says that is fine but will require crt supervised sttlmt confns. Pties among themselves discussed a spring trial. Larose suggests that it may be good to have sttlmt confns before legislature. Kradolfer asks for argumt on motns and a hrg as the decision on that will shape and focus the case. Says they may need more time for discovery after motns are ruled on. Crt will set 6/4/2 as date to hear motns. At hrg there will primarily be argumt. On summ jgmt motns could be testimony by declaration of key expts and then have cross exam on those declarations. Crt will give the schedule as suggested above. Cnsl to attempt to agree on a schedule and may attempt to persuade the court

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 39 of 58

4/26/02 259
4/26/02 260 4/26/02 261 4/26/02 262 4/26/02 263 5/1/02 264 5/3/02 265 5/11/02 289 5/14/02 266

to continue that which will be given. Volkert asks to change the disclosure of experts til after the June hrg. Crt agrees to extend that to 6/11/02. Issues before court. Larose states, assuming class certification is granted and they get access to records, that records are all over the state. Suggest placing records in 1 location & having dfts provide those. Argumt is had re this matter. Once it was clarified that records are as to those listed in the case, Kradolfer had no obj to getting info in one location. All agree. Larose asks if it is nec to have out of state people pr for cross exam at 6/4/02 hrg. Crt says up to cnsl. Ea side to let other side know who witns are,, crt to be notified also. Kradolfer suggestts 4 wks for trial. Crt supervised sttlmt confns to be set at later time. Status rpts will be necc and if a summ. jury trial is held, it would be done in one day. Adj. 3:35 (baf) [Entry date 04/26/02]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell - Ordered an omnibus hrg for all currently pending motns is set for 10:00 Wed. 6/5/02 at Helena, MT. Absent an order granting any d ispositive motns, the following schedule to govern further procdgs: Disclosure of plfs Expts - 7/31/02; Disclosure of dft experts - 8/30/02; Discovery ddline - 9/13/02; Motions ddline - 9/23/02; Attorney conference to prepare pretrial order - wk of 10/7/02; Submit final pretrial order & trl brfs - 10/25/02 ; final pretrial conference set for 10/30/02 @ 10:00 a.m. Hlna; bench trial set for 9:30 11/4/02 At Helena, MT. Cnsl to adhere to paragraphs 9-21 to prepare for trial. Each month beginning 5/1/02, cnsl to file a joint status report. (cc: Lund; Orr'Kradolfer;Seifert, Cater, Deola, Burnim,Gran, Gilhool, Gallagher, Freed Larose, CCL, CLK-Hlna, Sched Clk-Hlna, PED) (baf) [Entry date 05/01/02] [Edit date 05/17/02]
OBJECTION by defendants to Class Certification (baf) [Entry date 05/01/02]
RESPONSE by defendants to plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment [230-1] (baf) [Entry date 05/01/02]
STATEMENT of Genuine Issues by Defendants (kept in very large black binder separately) (baf) [Entry date 05/01/02]
Errata to Deft Response to Plf Motn for Summ. Jgmt [261-1] by State of Montana (baf) [Entry date 05/01/02]
Joint STATUS REPORT ( copy to LC) (baf) [Entry date 05/02/02]
MOTION by defendant State of Montanafor court tours of Eastmont Human Services Center and Montana De velopmental Center. ( cpy to LC) (baf)
NOTICE by plaintiffs of Supplemental Authority (gar) [Entry date 06/12/02]
RESPONSE by plf to motion for court tours of Eastmont Human Services Center and Montana De velopmental Center.

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 40 of 58

5/16/02 267 5/16/02 268
5/16/02 269
5/16/02 270 5/16/02 271
5/16/02 272
5/16/02 273
5/16/02 274 5/16/02 275 5/16/02 276 5/16/02 277 5/16/02 278 5/16/02 279 5/16/02 280 5/21/02 281
5/28/02 282 5/28/02 283 6/3/02 284

[265-1] (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
NOTICE of supplemental authority by plf (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
REPLY by plaintiff to response to plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment [243-1] (copy to MKB)d to: (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
REPLY by plaintiff to defendant's objection to class certification. (cpy to MKB) (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
RESPONSE to motion to dismiss equal protection and due process claims [235-1] (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
REPLY by plaintiff to response to motion to dismiss claims for relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act [237-1] (cpy o MKB) (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
REPLY by plaintiff to response to motion to dismiss Section 504 claims [239-1] (copy to MKB) (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
REPLY by plaintiff to response to motion to dismiss medicaid claims [241-1] ( copy to MKB) (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
REPLY by plaintiff to defendant's motion for summary judgment [243-1] (copy to MKB) (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
AFFIDAVIT of Daphne Crosbie (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
AFFIDAVIT of Joyce Decunzo (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
AFFIDAVIT of Barbara Hoffmann (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
AFFIDAVIT of Joe Mathews (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
AFFIDAVIT of Mick Robinson (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
AFFIDAVIT of Scott Sim (baf) [Entry date 05/17/02]
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell denying motion for court tours of Eastmont Human Services Center and Montana De velopmental Center. [265-1] with lv to refile later if circumstances warrant.(cc: Lund, Orr/Kradolfer, Seifert, Cater, Deola, Burnim, Gran/Gilhool, Freed/Larose, CCL,PED) (baf) [Entry date 05/22/02]
OBJECTIONS to Hearsay evidence by Defts (copy to law clk) (baf) [Entry date 05/29/02] [Edit date 05/29/02]
NOTICE of additional authority by defendants (copy to law clk) (baf) [Entry date 05/29/02] [Edit date 05/29/02]
STATUS REPORT regarding discovery and regarding motions to dismiss and motion for summary jgmt, by defendants (copy to law clk) (baf) [Edit date 06/03/02]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 41 of 58

6/3/02 285 6/5/02 286
6/10/02 287

STATUS REPORT by plaintiff (baf) [Entry date 06/04/02]
MINUTES - motions hearing: Present for plaintiff is Andre Larose. Pr for deft is Kimberly Kradolfer and Cary B. Lund.
Two of the named plfs are present. Kim Kradolfer is hrd re motions to dismiss 1,2 & 3. Deft has packet of exhibits. No obj to admission. Marked A and admitted w/o obj. Andre Larose is hrd for plf. Cnsl Kradolfer is hrd in rebuttal. Crt asks if any named plfs are entitled to placemt in group home setting. Dft responds. The open slots regarding the Medicaid waiver are discussed. Motns to dismiss are submitted and under advisement.There are several volumes of treatment records. They are admitted w/o objection as Deft's B,C,D,E,F,G,H. The affidavits are discussed. Plf moves that all docs submitted be admitted. State moves to admit original deposition of Mike Hansoew and James Driggers. These are to be admitted also. All depositions admitted w/o obj, except that deft has objections to some testimony in the deposition of Mike Hanshew. These are to be received. Some of the affidavits are included in appendices to summ. jgmt motion and are found in appendices 13,15,116, 96 and 8. Cnsl have no live testimony today and have no cross exam of affidavit testimony. The affidavits were to be treated as live testimony and are received into the record. Crt questions re the Medicaid vacancies. Cnsl Larose is hrd on this and on summ. jgmt. Kim Kradolfer is hrd re summ. jgmt. Ms. Kradolfer has rec'd new info and informs crt that 18 individuals will now be moved into new facilities. She also discusses budget cuts to the State yr. She give updates on named defts and where they are on placement lists and why. Cnsl Larose is hrd re summ. jgmt. Kradolfer hrd on summ. jgmt. Adj @ 5:10 p.m. Done before Judge Charles C. Lovell C/R: Lisa Lesofski (baf) [Entry date 06/11/02] [Edit date 06/13/02]
MINUTES continuation of motions hearing before Judge Charles C. Lovell C/R: Lisa Lesofski. Andre Larose pr for plf. Kim Kradolfer and Cary Lund pr for dft. Cnsl Kradolfer is hrd re new group homes and placing some individuals into those. Kradolfer hrd re State's budget cuts. Kradolfer argues and moves crt to grant dft's summ. jgmt motn. Ms. Larose is hrd. Moves to admit a packet of exhibits. Exhibits are a part of other summary jgmt motions and are admitted w/o objection. Plf objects on the record that Eastmont and MDC is a community based facility and wants to present evidence on this at trial. Deft objects to Plf exhibit 7. Plf to be filing this testimony under seal and will provide a copy to deft. Admitted over obj. Crt cites that both MDC and Eastmont are running @ 1/2 capacity, could one be closed and others moved to the remaining facility? Cnsl both hrd re t his. Crt asked for testimony re state budget. Mr. Simms is out of state. Gail BreezyZimmer S/T for Deft on this matter. Cnsl Larose argues motion for class certification. Kradolfer argues re class certification. Dft opposes court certifying class til other motions are ruled on. There is discussion by crt and cnsl retarding definition of class. Hrg to be continued til 2:30 on 6/11/02. Adj. 12:20 p.m. (baf) [Entry date 06/11/02]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 42 of 58

6/11/02 288
6/11/02 290 6/14/02 291 6/17/02 -7/1/02 292 7/23/02 293 7/29/02 294 8/1/02 295 8/2/02 296 8/7/02 297
8/9/02 298

[Edit date 06/13/02]
MINUTES: 2:30 pm, continuation of Motions Hearing before Judge Charles C. Lovell C/R: Laurie Crutcher. Andree Larose pr for Pltfs; Cary Lund and Karen Powell pr for Dfts. Court hrd, all motions set for hearing have been submitted and under advisement with exception of Motion to Cert as Class. Court hrd on matter of cert as class, cnsl heard and discussion had. Janice Frisch with State of Montana presents Exh E (chart (list) of persons in service and waiting for service. Exhibit E admitted on stipulation and Frisch will not be sworn and will not testify as to this exhibit. Court and counsel heard as to starting point in determining those included in suit. The date of filing Complaint found fair by Court. Larose agrees, Lund disagrees w/ Class Cert. Closing stmts hrd. Court asks cnsl to meet and draw up description of class based on todays hearing. This to be done this afternoon and filed by 5pm. Cnsl to use dates of filing of complaint through trial. 3:30 ajrn. (gar) [Entry date 06/12/02]
STIPULATED Submittion of Class Definition (copy to CCL, MKB) (gar) [Entry date 06/12/02]
TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for Day 3 of hearing held 6/11/02 held in Helena, MT on motions hearing. Laurie Crutcher
RPR (baf) [Entry date 06/17/02]
RECEIVED - letter from Mt. Advocacy regarding a breakdown of document classifications of the appendices and/or exhibits submitted in connection with various motions for summary judgment. (baf)
STATUS REPORT (baf) [Entry date 07/02/02]
TRANSCRIPT filed of hearing held June 5 and 10, Lisa Lesofski, RPR (baf) [Entry date 07/24/02]
MOTION by plaintiff to continue trial (copy to sched clk w/propo) (baf) [Entry date 07/30/02]
Joint STATUS REPORT - (baf) [Entry date 08/02/02]
OBJECTIONS by State of Montana to trial date proposed by plfs in [294-1] (cpy to J. Smith) (baf)
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell, present schedule cannot be maintained, parties are in agreement as a schedule which the court now finds acceptable, granting motion to continue trial [294-1] ; trial set for 9:30 5/26/03 at Helena ; Disclosure of Pltf's Experts due 10/14/02; Disclosure of Dfts' Experts due 12/13/02; Discovery Deadline is 1/14/03; Atty conference to prepare Final Pretrial order is week of 4/21/03; pretrial order ddl set for 5/14/03 ; final pretrial conference set for 10:00 5/22/03 at Helena (cc: PED, CCL, Sched Clk, USM, Lund/Carter, Kradolfer/Orr, Seifert, Deola, Burnim, Gran/Gilholl, Larose/Freed (gar)
ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC by Judge Charles C. Lovell, date set in

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 43 of 58

8/27/02 -8/28/02 299 9/3/02 300 9/6/02 301 9/6/02 302 9/6/02 303
9/9/02 304 9/9/02 305
9/9/02 306 9/9/02 306 9/9/02 307 9/16/02 308 9/18/02 309 9/18/02 310

8/7/02 order are vacated and the following date are submitted and shall govern: Disclosure of Pltfs' Experts: 10/31/02, Discloure of Dfts Experts: 11/30/02, Discovery Deadline: 1/31/03, ; Motions Deadline set for 5/16/02, Atty Conf to Prepare Final Pretrial Order: Week of 4/7/03, ;
pretrial order and trial brief deadline set for 4/30/03 Final Pretrial Conference set for 5/22/03 at 10:00 am and Trial set for 5/27/03 at 9:30.l Both Final Pretrial Conference and Trial will be held in Courtroom 2 of US Dist. Courthouse, 901 Front St., Helena. cc: CCL, Sched Clk, Crtrm Dep, USM, PED, Lund/Carter, Kradolfer/Orr, Seifert, Deola, Burnim, Gran/Gilhool, Larose/Freed (gar)
PROPOSED Stipulation and order for confidentiality of records. (cpy to MKB) (baf) [Entry date 08/30/02]
MOTION for written order of Class Certification. (baf) [Entry date 08/30/02]
STATUS REPORT by defendant (baf) [Entry date 09/09/02]
MOTION by plaintiff, defendant, plaintiff to compel cooperation of institution staff in examination of plaintiffs. (cpy to MKB) (baf) [Entry date 09/09/02]
RESPONSE by defendant to motion to compel cooperation of institution staff in examination of plaintiffs. [301-1] (baf) [Entry date 09/09/02]
Clerk's ORDER that defts' time to respond to the emergency motion is shortened to 9/9/02, and should be on file w/clk of court by that date. (cc: faxed to all counsel, PED) (baf) [Entry date 09/09/02]
REPLY by plaintiff to response to motion to compel cooperation of institution staff in examination of plaintiffs. [301-1] file delivered to: MKB (baf)
ORDER by Judge Charles C. Lovell recusing himself from all further proceedings herein and no further issues will be decided. Ordered clks to transmit this order (cc: all counsel, dwm, ped) (baf)
SUPPLEMENTAL response to Motion to Compel by defendant and (baf) [Entry date 09/10/02]
MOTION by defendant for protective order (baf) [Entry date 09/10/02]
NOTICE by State of Montana of additional authority (baf) [Entry date 09/10/02]
NOTICE by defendant of additional authority: Fredrick L. (baf)
NOTICE by plaintiff to Chief Judge of Pending Motions and Status Report (baf) [Entry date 10/02/02]
NOTICE by plaintiff of Supplemental Controlling Authority

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 44 of 58

9/18/02 311 9/18/02 -9/20/02 312
9/23/02 313
9/24/02 -9/25/02 -9/25/02 -10/2/02 --
10/2/02 314
10/2/02 315 10/3/02 316 10/4/02 --
10/7/02 -10/11/02 317 10/11/02 -10/11/02 --

(cpy to law clk R. Hyslop and to DWM) (baf) [Entry date 10/02/02]
Withdrawal of Portion of Motion to Compel and RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion for protective order [306-1] (cpy to lawclk Blgs and to DWM) (baf) [Entry date 10/02/02]
REMARK ********** vol # 15 begins with doc # 310 ********* (rmw) [Entry date 11/26/02]
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy Case reassigned to Judge Donald W. Molloy as to State of Montana, Carl Keener, Ron Balas, Sylvia Hammer, Jennifer Pryor, Dan Anderson, Joe Matthews, Robert Anderson, Peter Blouke, Mont Develop Center, Eastmont Human Svc, Gail Gray, Jeff Sturm, Ed Amberg (cc: Lund, Orr/Kradolfer;Seifert;Cater;Deola; Burnim;Gran/Gilhool;Freed/ Larose;CCL,PED) (baf) [Entry date 10/02/02]
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy Status hearing set for 11:00 11/20/02 @ USDC Helena, Crtrm I. (cc: Lund, Kradolfer/Orr;Seifert;Cater;Deola;Burnim; Gran/Gilhool; Freed/Larose; PED, USM) (baf) [Entry date 10/02/02]
9 RED FILES DELIVERED to Clerk Blgs. for delivery to law clerk BH re outstnding mtns. (baf)
RECEIVED in Billings from Helena 9 red files (tmd)
DELIVERED 9 red files to Ryan for review (tmd)
File delivered to Billings to lawclerk Ryan Hyslop - 14 volumes plus transcript of hrg 6/5/02 through 6/11/02 hrg mailed. Remainder of file remains in Helena til further notice. (baf)
RESPONSE by State of Montana to motion to compel cooperation of institution staff in examination of plaintiffs. [301-1] (files with cpy of this motion to Blgs) (baf)
STATUS REPORT by State of Montana for October, 2002 (baf)
RESPONSE by plaintiff to Deft's Rule 34 Objection (0 + 1 to Blgs for file) (baf) [Entry date 10/10/02]
RECEIVED file in Billings from Helena consisting of 14 clerk's volumes, 4 brown expandos and 3 loose copies of plaintiff's 2nd amended complaint (tmd) [Entry date 10/07/02]
FILE DELIVERED to Ryan Hyslop for review (tmd)
MOTION by plaintiffs to vacate discovery schedule with Proposed Order (gar)
PROPOSED Order vac disc sched received (gar)
RED MOTION FILE DELIVERED to Judge Molloy for Mot to Vacate

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 45 of 58

10/30/02 318 11/1/02 319 11/4/02 -11/14/02 320 11/18/02 -11/18/02 321
11/19/02 -11/22/02 322
11/22/02 --

Disc Sched with proposed order. Note: Orig motion to Clerk, Billings, for file. (gar)
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy granting motion to vacate discovery schedule [317-1], discovery deadlines set forth in Order of 8/9/02 are vacated. Parties shall attend status conference on 11/20/02 at 11:00 at Helena. cc: PED, Lund, Kradolfer, Seifert, Cater, Deola, Gilhool, Burnem, Larose. (gar) [Entry date 11/04/02]
JOINT STATUS REPORT, parties are preparing for mediation they have set with Billings atty Ron Lodders as mediator scheduled for 11/14-15/02. (gar) [Entry date 11/04/02]
REMARK Orig Order #318, Status Report #319 to Clerk, Billings, for file and copy of Status Report to Judge Molloy and Law Clerk, Billings. (gar)
NOTICE of supplemental authority by plaintiff (Orig and cpy mailed to Blgs for file and law clk) (baf)
RECEIVED in Billings from Helena 2 boxes of documents consisting of 2 expandos, transcripts and miscellaneous loose documents and delivered to Ryan (tmd)
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy granting motion for written order of Class Certification. [299-1], denying motion to dismiss medicaid claims [241-1], denying motion to dismiss Section 504 claims [239-1], denying motion to dismiss claims for relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act [237-1], granting motion to certify class action [226-1] and defining the class members as "All those individuals with developmental disabilities who are presently, have been or will be residents of the Montana Developmental Center or Eastmont Human Services Center at any time during the period beginning August 23, 1996 and ending on the date of final adjudication of this matter. (cc: all counsel) (caa)
FILE DELIVERED to RH for review (caa)
SCHEDULING ORDER Judge Donald W. Molloy purs to status conf held 11/20/02: the previous dates of FPT 5/22/03 and bench trial of 5/26/03 in Helena MT - are vacated and reset: non-jury trial reset to 9/13/04 @ 9 AM-Helena MT ; final pretrial conference reset for 8:00 9/13/04 in Helena MT; motion brief ddl reset for 5/21/04 and Motion filing: by 5/21/04; Discovery due: by 4/23/04; and deadline to submit proposed FPT Order is 8/30/04 & to give notice to Court reporter re Use of Real Time & Notice of Intent to use CD ROM & to submit porposed Findings of Fact & Conclusionso of Law is 8-23-04 & deft disclose damages experts by 2/27/04 and pltf disclose damages experts & simul dissclosure of liability experts is 1/30/04 (cc: all counsel) (rmw) [Entry date 11/26/02]
REMARK cpy of # 322 to Clerks office - Helena - pointing out old & new dates (rmw) [Entry date 11/26/02]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 46 of 58

11/27/02 323
12/2/02 -12/12/02 324 12/16/02 325 12/16/02 326 12/16/02 -12/16/02 --
12/18/02 328 12/19/02 -12/23/02 329 1/3/03 --
1/6/03 330
1/6/03 --

ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy denying as moot dft's motion for protective order [306-1], denying pltfs' motion to compel that has not been withdrawn regarding cooperation of institution staff in examination of plaintiffs [301-1]. Dfts shall cooperate in the assessments to be conducted of pltfs by pltfs' experts under the Rules of Civil Proc, or by agreement; Pltfs' cnsl and Pltfs' experts shall not interview DPHHS employees ex parte without the consent from defense counsel. (cc: all counsel) (snyb) [Entry date 12/02/02]
FILE DELIVERED to JDS (RH) for review (snyb)
NOTICE by State of Montana of additional authority: Martin v. Taft (mailed to Blgs for file) (baf) [Entry date 12/13/02]
MOTION by State of Montana to stay pending appeal.( orig and red file to Blgs for file) (baf) [Entry date 12/17/02] [Edit date 12/17/02]
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by State of Montana in support of motion to stay pending appeal. [325-1] (0+1 to Blgs for file) (baf) [Entry date 12/17/02]
RECEIVED re [327-1] fee in amount of $ $105 ( Receipt # 314822) (baf) [Entry date 12/17/02]
***************REMARK********************* ********** ************DOCUMENT #327 WAS REMOVED FROM THIS FILE****** IT IS THE NOTICE OF APPEAL AND HAS BEEN LODGED AND PLACED WITH FILE UNTIL A RULING FROM JUDGE MOLLOY (snyb) [Entry date 02/14/03]
TRANSCRIPT filed of status confnc on 11/20/02, Daina Hodges, RPR (baf) [Entry date 12/19/02] [Edit date 01/09/03]
REMARK - #329 mailed to Blgs for file (baf)
MOTION to extend time til 1/24/03 to file brief in response to Motion for Stay and to prepare Plfs' Motion to Certify Appeal as Frivolous. (Orig to Blgs for file - Red file to DWM for action) (baf) [Edit date 01/09/03]
REMARK - Sent to Missoula for DWM's review a Memo from LC Hyslop along with Proposesd Order Granting Pla's Motion for Extention of Time pursuant to instructions by LC Hyslop. (ell)
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy granting motion to extend time til 1/24/03 to file brief in response to Motion for Stay and to prepare Plfs' Motion to Certify Appeal as Frivolous. [330-1] (cc: all counsel) (baw) [Entry date 01/07/03] [Edit date 01/09/03]
FILE DELIVERED to JDS (RH) for Review (ell) [Entry date 01/09/03]

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 47 of 58

1/7/03 -1/16/03 -1/16/03 -1/16/03 331 1/17/03 332 1/17/03 333 1/17/03 333 1/21/03 -1/22/03 -1/22/03 334 1/22/03 -1/31/03 335
2/5/03 336
2/5/03 337
2/7/03 -2/7/03 338

REMARK orig. doc. 331 to BLG for placement in file (baw)
EXCERPT OF RECORD sent to incarcerated pro se appelant per Circuit Court rule (gar) [Entry date 01/17/03]
EXCERPT OF RECORD sent to incarcerated pro se appelant per Circuit Court rule (gar) [Entry date 01/17/03]
DESIGNATION OF THE RECORD FOR TRANSMITTAL ON APPEAL by defendant State of Montana (Orig & copy to Clerk, Billings) (gar) [Entry date 01/17/03] [Edit date 01/27/03]
MOTION by plaintiffs for certificate of Dfts' Appeal as Frivolous and Invalid (gar) [Entry date 01/21/03] [Edit date 01/27/03]
RESPONSE by plaintiffs to motion to stay pending appeal. [325-1] (gar) [Entry date 01/21/03] [Edit date 01/27/03]
BRIEF by plaintiffs in support of motion for certificate of Dfts' Appeal as Frivolous and Invalid (gar) [Entry date 01/21/03] [Edit date 01/27/03]
RED MOTION FILE as to Motion for Cert #333 DELIVERED to Clerk, Billings, for Law Clerk, RH, consisting of 2 copies each of Motion #333 and Resp/Memsup #334 and Origs. (gar)
RECEIVED red motion file in Billings from Helena re #333 and delivered to Ryan (tmd)
Amended Representation STATEMENT by State of Montana (baf) [Edit date 01/27/03]
REMARK #334 mailed to Blgs for file (baf) [Edit date 01/27/03]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to extend time to prepare, serve and file reply brief in support of Motion to Stay (faxed to Judge Molloy with proposed order, orig to Clerk, Billings, for file) (gar)
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy granting motion to extend time to prepare, serve and file reply brief in support of Motion to Stay [335-1]. Defts have til 2/7/03. (cc: all lfer (faxed); Larose/Freed; Gran/Gilhool/ Burnim; Deola; Cater; Seifert; Lund) counsel) (baf) [Entry date 02/07/03]
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy, Motion for Ext of Time #335 is granted. Dfts shall filr reply brf no later than 2/7/03. cc: Kradolfer, Lund, Seifert, Cater, Burnim, Gran, Larose (gar) [Entry date 02/07/03]
REMARK #336 mailed to Blgs for file (baf)
REPLY by defendant State of Montana to response to motion to stay pending appeal. [325-1] (orig & copy to Clerk,

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 48 of 58

2/20/03 339 3/24/03 340
3/26/03 341
3/27/03 -4/16/03 342 4/16/03 -4/28/03 343 5/1/03 344
5/5/03 345 5/5/03 -5/5/03 346 5/6/03 347 5/7/03 -5/7/03 348

Billings, for file and Law Clerk) (gar)
REPLY by plaintiffs to response to motion for certificate of Dfts' Appeal as Frivolous and Invalid [332-1] (copy to Judge Molloy, Orig & copy to Clerk, Billings, for file) (gar)
RULE 11(f) STIPULATION to designate that most items lodged in dist court record should be retained by dist court subject to call by court of appeals. (Copy and Proposed Order to Judge Molloy, Orig to Clerk, Billings, for file) (gar) [Entry date 03/27/03]
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy that Docket entries # 2-14,16-217,219-222,224-236,239-251,253-270,272-292, 294-309,311-320,322-326 and all documts filed subsequent to the Notc of appeal filed as docket # 327 shall be retained in the district court subject to call by the court of appeals. The following to be transmitted to the court of appeals: items 1,15,218,223,237,238,252,271,293,310,321. (cc: Lund, Orr/Kradolfer, Seifert, Cater, Deola, Burnim, Gran, Gilhool, Freed/Larose) (baf) [Entry date 03/27/03]
REMARK - Doct # 341 mailed to Blgs for file. (baf)
MOTION by plaintiff for preliminary injunction (baf) [Entry date 04/18/03]
LODGED PROPOSED Order submitted by plaintiff Travis D. (tmd) [Entry date 04/22/03]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana for scheduling conference (Orig to Billings for file, Red Motion file to Judge Molloy w/ Proposed Order) (gar)
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy setting hearing on motion for preliminary injunction [342-1] 3:00 5/13/03 ; Preliminary Injunction set for May 13, 2003 at 3:00 at Helena (cc: USM, Crt Sec, Gilhool, Larose, Burnim, Deola, Cater, Kradolfer, Seifert, Lund) (gar) [Entry date 05/05/03]
MOTION by defendants for extension of time to respond to Application for Prel Inj (faxed to Judge Molloy) (gar)
REMARK Order #344 and Motion #345 sent to Clerk, Billings, for file. (gar)
RESPONSE (obj) by plaintiff to motion for extension of time to respond to Application for Prel Inj [345-1] (baf) [Entry date 05/06/03]
REPLY by defendant to response to motion for extension of time to respond to Application for Prel Inj [345-1] Orig to Clk Blg for file and cpy for LC- RH in Blg (baf) [Edit date 05/06/03]
REMARK Orig of Order filed 5/1/03 sent to Clerk, Billings, to be attached to faxed copy. (gar)
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy granting motion for

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 49 of 58

5/8/03 -5/8/03 349
5/12/03 350 5/12/03 351 5/13/03 -5/15/03 352
5/15/03 353 5/16/03 354 5/20/03 355 5/20/03 356
5/23/03 357

extension of time to respond to Application for Prel Inj [345-1], vacating hearing re motion for preliminary injunction [342-1] A new hearing will be set by separate order ; Motion hearing set for 5/13/03 is vacated (cc: USM, Crt Sec, All cnsl of record) (gar) [Entry date 05/08/03] [Edit date 05/08/03]
REMARK #347 to Clerk, Billings, for file (gar)
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy granting motion for extension of time to respond to Application for Prel Inj [345-1] Dfts shall respond to motion no later than 5/23/03.
No further extensions will be granted. (Order faxed by Clk, Missoula, to cnsl of record) Orig order forwarded to Clerk, Billings, for file. (gar) [Entry date 05/09/03]
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by defendants Notice of Deposition of Diane Edwards, MD; Dfts' reply to Pltf obj to Mot for Extension of Time and Motion for Ext of time to Linda M. Deola, Atty. (Orig to Clk, Billings, Copy to Judge Molloy) (gar)
NOTICE by defendant St of Mont of Schedule Conflicts as to Dfts' expert in June (fax to Judge Molloy) (gar) [Entry date 05/13/03]
REMARK #351 to Clerk, Billings, copy faxed & mailed to Judge Molloy (gar)
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy setting hearing on motion for preliminary injunction [342-1] 9:00 6/16/03 at Russell Smith Courthouse, Missoula; Preliminary Inj reset to 9:00 6/16/03 at Missoula (cc: Clerk-Missoula, Law Clerk-TH, Billings, Deola, Seifert, Kradolfer, Lund, Burnim, Cater, Gran) (forwarded to Clerk, Billings, for file) (gar) [Entry date 05/16/03]
NOTICE by plaintiffs of Supplemental Authority (Orig & copy to Clerk, Billings, for file and Law Clerk and copy to Judge Molloy) (gar) [Entry date 05/16/03]
NOTICE by defendant State of Montana, Agency Legal Services Bureau of Change of Address. Copy to Atty Maint Clk, Orig to Clerk, Billings, for file. (gar)
NOTICE by plaintiffs of Scheduling Considerations (Faxed to Judge Molloy, Orig & copy to Clerk, Billings for file and Law Clerk) (gar) [Entry date 05/21/03]
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy, Pltfs having file Notice of Sched Considerations, ; Preliminary Inj set for June 16 is reset for 9:00 on 7/16/03 at Courthouse, Missoula (cc: Law Clerk-RH, Clk-Msla, Kradolfer, Lund, Gilhool, Burnim, Larose, Deola, Seifer) Note: faxed to all cnsl w/ available fax numbers) (Orig to Clerk, Billings, for file) (gar) [Entry date 05/21/03]
RESPONSE by defendant State of Montana to motion for preliminary injunction [342-1] (This document in expand

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 50 of 58

5/27/03 358 5/27/03 358 5/28/03 -5/28/03 359 6/6/03 360 6/20/03 361 6/20/03 362 6/20/03 363 6/20/03 364 6/20/03 -6/24/03 -7/1/03 365 7/1/03 -7/1/03 --
7/8/03 --
7/9/03 366

folder) Copy to Judge Molloy, Orig to Billings for file. (gar) [Entry date 05/28/03]
MOTION by plaintiffs to compel Dfts to allow observations of Pltfs by Pltfs' Expert (gar) [Entry date 05/28/03]
BRIEF by plaintiffs in support of motion to compel Dfts to allow observations of Pltfs by Pltfs' Expert [358-1] (gar) [Entry date 05/28/03]
REMARK Orig #358 + copy to Clerk, Billings, for file and Law Clerk. Copy of #358 in red motion folder with proposed order to Judge Molloy (gar)
NOTICE by State of Montana that defts have agreed to plf's expert to observe. (orig and cpy to Blgs for file and LC) (baf)
RESPONSE by plaintiff to deft's response to application for prelim. inj. [342-1] (orig to Blgs for file w/cpy for lawclk) (baf) [Entry date 06/09/03]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana for protective order (gar) [Entry date 06/24/03]
BRIEF by defendant State of Montana in support of motion for protective order [361-1] (gar) [Entry date 06/24/03]
MOTION by defendant State of Montana for sanctions (gar) [Entry date 06/24/03]
BRIEF by defendant State of Montana in support of motion for sanctions [363-1] (gar) [Entry date 06/24/03]
REMARK - Volume 2 begins with Document #362 (caa) [Entry date 06/26/03]
REMARK Motions and Briefs #s 361-364 along with red motion folders sent to Clerk, Billings, for file and Law Clerk (gar)
NOTICE by defendant State of Montana of taking deposition of Questa Teppo on 7/7/03 at 9:30am (gar)
REMARK #365 and copy to Clerk, Billings (gar)
RECEIVED origianl executed affid of Dr. Irene Campbell-Taylor to be substituted for unsigned copy that Dfts had included as Exh C in support of their Motion for Sancations. (Original to Clerk, Billings. Copy delivered to Judge Molloy by Clerk, Missoula) (gar) [Entry date 07/02/03]
PROPOSED Second SupplementalStipulation for protection of confidential information w/propo attached. ( Orig and cpy to Blgs for file and LC) (baf) [Entry date 07/09/03] [Edit date 07/09/03]
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy finding the motion for scheduling conference [343-1] moot., finding the motion to

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 51 of 58

7/9/03 -7/10/03 -7/10/03 367
7/11/03 -7/11/03 368 7/11/03 369 7/14/03 -7/15/03 -7/16/03 370
7/16/03 371 7/17/03 372
7/17/03 373

compel Dfts to allow observations of Pltfs by Pltfs' Expert [358-1] moot, having been withdrawn. (cc: all counsel) (cad) [Entry date 07/10/03]
FILE DELIVERED to clerk's ofc in GF for delivery to Magistrate Ostby who will take it to Missoula for a hrg. Mailed 3 volumes by Fed. Express. (caa) [Entry date 07/10/03]
REMARK mailed orig. order to Clerk Helena, & copy to Clerk Blgs. (cad)
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy Case referred to Judge Carolyn S. Ostby for the limited purpose of considering Pltfs' request for a preliminary injunctin. Judge Ostby will issue findings and recommendations. cc: Judge Ostby, Orr, Kradolfer, Deola, Larose, Seifert, Gilhool, Carter, Burnim, Lund (Orig order to Clerk, Billings, for file) (gar) [Entry date 07/11/03]
RECEIVED Red File from Billings, delivered to CAD (lll)
RESPONSE by plaintiffs to motion for protective order [361-1] (gar) [Entry date 07/15/03]
RESPONSE by plaintiffs to motion for sanctions [363-1] (gar) [Entry date 07/15/03]
RED FILE DELIVERED to Clerk Gt. Falls Containing 7/08/03 Proposed Supplemental Stip. for Protection of Confidential Info. Orig. + copy. For purpose of keeping entire file in one place. Faxed to Mag. Judge CSO on 07/14/03. (cad)
REMARK #s 368 & 369 faxed to Law Clerk and Judge Ostby. Orig of same forwarded to Clerk, Missoula, for insertion into Court file. (gar)
MINUTES: ; In-court hearing held 7/16/03 on motion for preliminary injunction; chambers with counsel: Judge Molloy to sign order today denying motion to stay; each side will have 2 witnesses;Court will allow filing of depo of Questa Teppo; 9am-witnesses sworn for plf: Dr. Diane Rose Edwards; Debra Ann Beckman; witnesses sworn for deft: Irene Campbell Taylor; Dr. Jean Justad; exhibits 28-36,38-103,530,535,536,537,541-548,550,551 admitted before Judge Carolyn S. Ostby C/R: Julie Lake (baw) [Entry date 07/21/03]
DEPOSITION of Questa Teppo taken on the following date(s): 7/8/03 at 9:30am for plaintiff (baw) [Entry date 07/21/03]
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy denying motion to stay pending appeal. [325-1], granting motion for certificate of Dfts' Appeal as Frivolous and Invalid in part and denied in part; defts' appeal of the Court's order rejecting their 11th amendment defense is deemed frivolous [332-1] (cc: all counsel) (baw) [Entry date 07/21/03]
ORDER by Judge Donald W. Molloy Case referred to Judge

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 52 of 58

7/21/03 -7/21/03 374 7/22/03 -7/24/03 --
7/24/03 375 7/24/03 376 7/25/03 377 7/25/03 378 7/25/03 379 7/25/03 380 7/25/03 381 7/25/03 -7/25/03 --
7/29/03 -8/1/03 -8/13/03 382

Carolyn S. Ostby for all pretrial proceedings; Judge Ostby will enter findings and recommendations (cc: all counsel) (baw) [Entry date 07/21/03]
(4 boxes) FILE DELIVERED to Helena per Law Clerk RH for storage (baw)
NOTICE by plaintiffs of Supplemental Authority relevant to the parties' pending cross motions for summary judgment. (2 copies to Judge Ostby) (gar) [Entry date 07/22/03]
RECEIVED Court file at Helena from Clerk, Missoula, consisting of 17 Vols, expando folder and transcripts (gar)
RECEIVED exhibit 548, during the 7/16/03 hrg cnsl were allowed to submit exh 548 after the hrg, but it was admitted during the hrg. (exhibit kept on left side of file) (baf)
ORDER (nunc pro tunc) by Judge Donald W. Molloy Case reassigned to Judge Carolyn S. Ostby (cc: all counsel-9, Judge Ostby) (gar) [Entry date 07/25/03]
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to Judge Carolyn S. Ostby mailed to attorney(s): attorney for plaintiff, attorney for defendant (gar) [Entry date 07/25/03]
REPLY by defendant State of Montana to response to motion for sanctions [363-1] (gar)
REPLY by defendant State of Montana to response to motion for protective order [361-1] (gar)
NOTICE by defendant State of Montana of Additional Authority: Pennsylvania P&A v. Dept of Public Welfare (gar)
FIFTY MOTION by defendant State of Montana to dismiss Claims re: Services In ICF/MRs (gar)
BRIEF by defendant State of Montana in support of motion to dismiss Claims re: Services In ICF/MRs [380-1] (gar)
REMARK Folder #18 begins here............................. (gar)
REMARK Request copies of Dfts pleadings of 7/25/03 and advised them we would need 2 copies of filings. Clerk advised that copies would be delivered. (gar) [Entry date 07/29/03]
RED MOTION FILE AS TO #380 (5TH MOTION TO DISMISS) DELIVERED to Chambers of Judge Shanstrom for Law Clerk RH with copies of Reply Briefs 377 & 378 (gar)
NOTICE OF CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE (placed in envelope on left side of file) (gar) [Entry date 08/04/03]
NOTICE of consent to proceed before a Magistrate - signed by K. Kradolfer for dfts (Put on left side of file) (baf)

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 53 of 58

8/18/03 382 8/18/03 383
8/18/03 384 8/19/03 -8/19/03 385 8/20/03 -8/20/03 -8/22/03 386 8/22/03 -8/22/03 --
8/22/03 387
8/26/03 -8/27/03 388 8/28/03 389
9/2/03 390
9/18/03 391

RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to dismiss Claims re: Services In ICF/MRs [380-1] (cpy to Judge Ostby and LCRH-Blgs) (baf) [Entry date 08/19/03]
NOTICE by plaintiff cnsl Andre Larose for designation as local counsel if Jennifer Mathis admitted PHV. (cpy to MJCSO-GF; LCRH-Blgs) (baf) [Entry date 08/19/03]
MOTION by plaintiff for attorney Jennifer Mathis to appear pro hac vice (cpy MJ CSO-GF; LC RH-Blgs) (baf) [Entry date 08/19/03]
REMARK - EXHIBIT 536 & 537 FROM 7/16/03 HRG ARE KEPT IN VAULT IN HELENA. (oversized x-rays) (baf)
AFFIDAVIT of Jennifer Mathis re [384-1] (baf)
RECEIVED in Billings from Helena copies of doc. #382, 383, 384 & 385 in red file (tmd)
RED FILE DELIVERED w/docs. frm Helena to Ryan (tmd)
ORDER by Judge Jack D. Shanstrom upon written consent of parties, this case transferred to Judge Carolyn S. Ostby for final disposition (cc: all counsel) (snyb)
REMARK- orig order (doc #386) mailed to Helena as file is there. Copy of Order mailed to Judge Ostby (snyb) [Edit date 08/22/03]
REMARK per instructions from Judge Ostby, 18 volumes of file plus everything else associated with the file is being transported to Great Falls (Court Reporter T. Brilz transporting all) (baf)
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby granting motion for attorney Jennifer Mathis to appear pro hac vice [384-1] (cc:
all counsel Cpy of Order to Helena for rcpt of atty adm) (rew) [Entry date 08/26/03] [Edit date 08/26/03]
REMARK Receipt #34555 written for PHV Jennifer Mathis (baf)
ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant State of Montana by Paul D. Johnson, Orig & copy to Clerk, Gr. Falls (gar)
MOTION by defendant State of Montana to extend time to file reply brief in support of Dfts' 5th Motion to Dismiss Claims Re: Svc in ICF/Mrs. (Orig & copy to Clk, Gr Falls, with proposed and copy to Law Clerk-Blgs) (gar)
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby granting motion to extend time to file reply brief in support of Dfts' 5th Motion to Dismiss Claims Re: Svc in ICF/Mrs. [389-1] rply brf due 9/19/03, regarding [380-1] (cc: all counsel) (ljm)
SUPPLEMENTAL STIPULATION and ORDER FOR CONFIDENTIALITY OF RECORDS -That the parties are to respect the privacy of

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 54 of 58

9/18/03 392 9/19/03 393 9/22/03 394 9/30/03 396 9/30/03 397 10/1/03 395 10/1/03 398
10/28/03 399 11/5/03 -11/13/03 --

non-parties pursuant to this Stipulation-SEE STIPULATION by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby : (cc: all counsel) (rew)
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL STIPULATION and ORDER FOR PROTECTION OF CONFIDENTAL INFORMATION by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby : In Discovery of Medicaid expenditures of non party pltfs (cc: all counsel) (rew)
REPLY by defendant State of Montana to response to motion to dismiss Claims re: Services In ICF/MRs [380-1] file delivered to: CSO (Original and copy sent to Great Falls Clerk's Office - copy to LC RH in Blgs.) (ell) [Entry date 09/22/03]
AMENDED REPLY by defendant State of Montana to response to motion to dismiss Claims re: Services In ICF/MRs [380-1] file delivered to: CSO (Mailed Original and copy to Clerk's Office in GF - Copy to LC RH in Blgs.) (ell) [Edit date 09/22/03]
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby Defts' Motion to Dismiss Equal Protection and Due Process Claims is DENIED [235-1],Parties' Motions for S/J are both DENIED. [230-1],
[243-1] (cc: all counsel) (ljm) [Entry date 10/03/03]
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby denying Pltfs' motion for preliminary injunction [342-1], denying Defts' motion for protective order [361-1], denying Defts' motion for sanctions [363-1] (cc: all counsel) (ljm) [Entry date 10/03/03]
TRANSCRIPT filed of 7/16/03 oral argument proceedings (ljm) [Entry date 10/03/03]
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby ; status hearing set for 1:30 10/30/03 in GF, re: Disc issues, proposed add'l disc, add'l legal issues, propriety of proceeding as class action, identification of claims/defenses that can be abandoned in light of factual or legal developments since 2nd amd cmplt was filed, and all other matters parties believe may streamline trial prep. (cc: all counsel) (ljm) [Entry date 10/03/03]
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby that the Status Conf set for 10/30/03 is VACATED; lead trial cnsl for ea party shall appear via telephone conf on Dec 10, 2003 at 1:30 p.m. for purpose of status conf; status hearing set for 1:30 12/10/03 (cc: all counsel) (seal)
REMARK per RH - mail 2 brown folders of exhibits to Helena - per RH - therse were from msla hrg earlier this year and Helena deps will deliver exhibits to counsels. (rmw)
REMARK - per instructions of clk Blgs,Hlna clk mailed exhibits 28 - 96 & 530 from hrg this summer to Andre Larose. Mailed exh 357 to Kimberly Kradolfer per same instrns. (baf)

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 55 of 58

12/10/03 400 12/19/03 401
1/22/04 402 2/5/04 403 2/5/04 404 2/5/04 405 2/5/04 406
2/6/04 407 2/11/04 408

ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby lead cnsl for ea party shall appear via telephone conf w/cnsl for defts shall coordinate, initiate and pay for the conf call status hearing set for 11:00 12/18/03 (cc: all counsel) (rew)
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby (1) that the parties shall attend a mediation conf in Billings, MT on Jan 21, 04. The Crt has appointed Mr. Ronald R. Lodders as mediator at the conf. Parties to contact Mr. lodders to arrange place, time and method of compensating him for his work. (2) The mediation will be a ONE-DAY MEDIATION SESSION only taking place on Jan 21, 04. (3) Mr. Lodders will not conduct any mediation activity in this case after Jan 21, 04, the Court will not consider any further requests to appoiint mediator (4) This medication shall not be construed as a cont of any dates set forth in Sch Order entered by Judge Molloy on Nov 22, 2002 w/except of pltf's disclose of damage and liab expers shall be ext to Feb 19, 2004. Deadline for defs damage expert shall be extended to Mar 26, 04 (5) No ext of the Jan 21, 04 trial preperations (6) All parties are to negotiate in good faith- CPS ALSO FAXED TO ALL CNSL AND MR. LODDERS AS WELL AS MAILED (cc: all counsel) (rew)
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby status hearing set for 4:00 2/5/04 in Great Falls, MT (cc: all counsel) (rew)
JOINT MOTION by defendant, plaintiff, defendant to dismiss w/ prejudice certain named plaintiffs and named defendants (ljm) [Entry date 02/06/04]
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby granting motion to dismiss w/ prejudice certain named plaintiffs and named defendants [403-1] party Brenda S., party Freeman B., party Andrea I., party Travis C. dismissing party Eastmont Human Svc, party Dan Anderson, party Sylvia Hammer, party Ed Amberg, party Ron Balas (cc: all counsel) (ljm) [Entry date 02/06/04]
MOTION for order to approve class action settlement agreement and for fairness hearing (ljm) [Entry date 02/06/04]
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby granting motion for order to approve class action settlement agreement and for fairness hearing [405-1], Court preliminarily approves Class Action Stlmt Agreement attached as Exh 1 to the Joint Motion, Pltf Class re-certified as contained in this Order, ; fairness hearing set for 10:00 5/13/04 in Hlna. Court directs C/C to issue the Ntc in the form annexed to this Order, and to serve it on cnsl of record for svc on Pltf Class as provided in this Order (cc: all counsel) (ljm) [Entry date 02/06/04]
NOTICE of Proposed Class Action Settlement and Fairness Hearing. Hearing set for 5/13/04 at 10:00 in Helena. (CC: All counsel) (ljm)
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby denying motion to dismiss Claims re: Services In ICF/MRs [380-1] as moot, w/oo

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 56 of 58

2/12/04 409 4/2/04 410 4/2/04 411 4/12/04 -4/13/04 412 4/13/04 412 4/15/04 --
4/16/04 -4/19/04 413
5/11/04 414
5/12/04 415
5/12/04 417
5/12/04 418 5/13/04 419

prejudice. If stlmt is not finally approved and matter goes forward, Defts may reassert the motion. (cc: all counsel) (ljm) [Entry date 02/12/04]
TRANSCRIPT filed of Settlement Conf 2/5/04 (ljm) [Entry date 02/13/04]
OBJECTIONS by Alta LeDoux w/ copy of letter from Doris Whithorn to [407-1] (ljm) [Entry date 04/12/04]
OBJECTIONS by Sherry Paton to [407-1] (ljm) [Entry date 04/12/04]
REMARK copy of 410 and 411 to JDS L/C R.H. (ljm)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by plaintiffs of Ntc of prop stlmt (gar) [Entry date 04/15/04]
MOTION by plaintiff to seal attachment A as confidential (gar) [Entry date 04/15/04]
RED MOTION FILE as to Cert of Svc & Motion to seal attachment #412 DELIVERED to Clerk, Gr. Falls, for Judge Ostby along with orig pleading & proposed order. (gar)
FILE DELIVERED to CSO for review of #412 and prop order (ljm)
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby granting motion to seal attachment A of doc # 412 as confidential [412-1] (cc: all counsel) (ljm) [Entry date 04/20/04]
Supplemental Cert of Svc Upon Class Members andMOTION by plaintiff for order to keep attachment confidential (Orig & 2 cps to Clerk, Great Falls) (gar)
MEMORANDUM by defendant in support of Final Approval of Class Action Settlement (faxed to LC RH-Blgs; and Judge Ostby-GF) (baf)
MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff in support of Final Approval of Class Action Settlement (baf) [Entry date 05/13/04]
Objection by Allen L. (baf) [Entry date 05/13/04]
MINUTES FAIRNESS HEARING before Judge Carolyn S. Ostby. Andre Larose pr for plf; Paul Johnson and Carey Lund pr for Dft. In chambers hrg 10:05. In open crt @ 10:31. Crt asks cnsl re the adequacy of the notice of svc of hearing. Both sides say it was timely and proper. Court states the purpose of the hearing and requirements of the court. Only issue here is the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of the settlement agmt. Andre Larose (for plf) hrd. Crt questions regarding objections. Ms. Larose hrd re objections of Ms. Ladeiu, Ms. Patton and Ms. Lynes. Paul Johnson hrd for deft, touching on arms-length agreemt and the three objections. Exh A offered and admitted w/o obj. Crt asks if objecting pties wish to be hrd. Patricia C.

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 57 of 58

5/14/04 -5/17/04 420 5/27/04 421
5/28/04 -5/28/04 422 6/1/04 -6/14/04 423 6/21/04 424

Lynes is sworn and hrd. She doesn't object to the provisions in the settlmt agmt, but has individual concerns regarding her son. No other obj to be hrd. Crt finds that based on its knowledge of the file, the memorandums received, the oral argumts hrd and objections, that the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate. Crt finds that obj of Ms. Ladieu pertain to an individual being moved;
the obj of Ms. Patton, based on Exh A, is not part of this case. Crt thanks Ms. Lynes for her input but finds that her testimony supports the settlm agmt, but there are issues with her son. Crt finds the settlmt reasonable and adequate. Deft objected to 2 objections filed outside the notice. Crt will consider. Daphne Crosby is S/T for dft. Plf obj to testimony, asking the purpose of same and if it can be supptd by an offer of proof. Obj overruled. Deft pr offer of proof that the Lynes family requested a discharge of their son and the staff agreed to allow that. Johnson, Larose and Ms. Lynes question Crosby. Witns S/T for plf: Lorraine Jacobs. Plf moves admission of plf exh 1. Deft obj. Admitted. Nothing further either cnsl. Crt concludes that settlmt is fair and reasonable. A written order will follow. C/R: Debbie Eickhoff (baf) [Entry date 05/14/04]
REMARK - minutes and exhibits mailed to GF frm Hlna for file (baf)
ORDER by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby granting motion for order to keep attachment A confidential [414-1]; Attach A to Supplt Cert IN SEALED ENV MARKED CONFIDENTIAL (cps mailed to counsel) (rew) [Entry date 05/18/04]
MEMORANDUM and ORDER: by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby, Court approves settlement proposed by parties. Any pending motions are denies as moot. Pursuant to agreement of parties, Clerk of Court shall enter judgment of dismissal with prejudice. cc: All Cnsl, J/O Book (seal) [Entry date 06/01/04]
FILE DELIVERED to Helena per RH in JDS's chambers request. Delivery Confirm. #0103 8555 7493 0860 3892 (hmm)
FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT by Clerk pursuant to order by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby dismissing case with prejudice (cc: all counsel and j/O Book Vol 34 page 2020) (seal) [Entry date 06/01/04]
RECEIVED Vol 18 only at Helena from Clerk Missoula (gar)
MOTION to adopt and incorporate terms of Class Action Settlement Agreement as Order of Court (red file to Judge Ostby) (baf) [Entry date 06/15/04]
ORDER Amending Judgment by Judge Carolyn S. Ostby granting motion to adopt and incorporate terms of Class Action Settlement Agreement as Order of Court [423-1] and the Clerk shall amend Judgment to add the following terms: (1) the Court adopts & incorporates the terms of the settlement agmt into its May 27, 2004 Order approving settlement; and (2)

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005

U.S. District Court Web PACER(v2.4) Docket Report

Page 58 of 58

6/21/04 -7/1/04 --

the Court retains jurisdiction over this case for the limited purpose of enforcing the terms of the settlement agmt & (cc: all counsel) (J/O Book Vol 34, Pg 2020) (rmw) [Edit date 06/24/04]
REMARK mail # 424 to Helena MT. (rmw)
10 Boxes containing 18 volumes of file, 11 brown expandos and 18 three-ring binders DELIVERED to C/C Helena by Court Reporter Tina Brilz; Misc filing placed in box to be placed in last file that was mailed to C/C Helena by C/C Blgs (rew)

Case Flags: TERMED CONMAG

END OF DOCKET: 6:96cv63

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

PACER Login: Description: Billable Pages:

10/27/2005 12:44:58

hs0328

Client Code:

docket report Search Criteria:

65

Cost:

6:96cv00063 5.20

http://pacer.mtd.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/pacer740.pl

10/27/2005