After conducting an investigation into the conditions at state-run Tennessee State Homes for Veterans (TSHVs), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed this lawsuit against the State of Tennessee in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee on January 16, 2009. TSHVs served as care facilities for veterans in need of intermediate or long-term rehabilitation, medical, or nursing care. During the underlying investigation, which began in February 2007 and occurred with the full cooperation of the State, the DOJ conducted tours of TSHVs and consulted with experts in the fields of geriatric care and nursing home administration. Plaintiff found that a number of conditions in the facilities violated residents' federal rights. Accordingly, Plaintiff made a number of factual allegations about the inadequacy of the care provided at TSHVs, including that the State engaged in a pattern or practice of failing to provide adequate nutrition, psychiatric care, end-of-life care and pain management, and that the State did not maintain a safe environment in the TSHVs. Plaintiff brought claims under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Social Security Act. Acting under the Civil Rights for Institutionalized Persons Act (42 U.S. § 1997), plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief.

After the DOJ made a report of its findings to the State, the parties agreed to settle pursuant to a Memorandum of Agreement. Accordingly, after negotiations, the parties jointly filed a Stipulated Settlement Agreement on the same day plaintiff filed its Complaint. The parties indicated that since the DOJ made a report of its findings to the State, the State had already made significant efforts to improve the areas of concern.

The terms of the Settlement Agreement provided that defendants would conduct assessments and create and implement protocols to ensure the following: 1) proper nutrition and hydration of TSVH residents; 2) safe feeding plans for those at risk of aspiration; 3) the provision of adequate and appropriate psychiatric and psychotropic care; 4) the provision of adequate end-of-life care and pain management; and 5) adequate fall prevention measures. The Settlement Agreement was to remain in effect for eighteen months, or until the State had achieved and maintained compliance for at least six months.

Simultaneously, the parties moved for conditional dismissal. Judge Daniel Breen granted their motion to dismiss, with the Court reserving jurisdiction only for enforcement of the Agreement.

The case closed in 2010 upon termination of the 18-month-long Agreement.

Lauren Latterell Powell - 01/09/2018


compress summary