University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Dunakin v. Quiqley ID-WA-0003
Docket / Court 2:14-cv-00567 ( W.D. Wash. )
State/Territory Washington
Case Type(s) Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Intellectual Disability (Facility)
Nursing Home Conditions
Public Benefits / Government Services
Special Collection Post-WalMart decisions on class certification
Attorney Organization NDRN/Protection & Advocacy Organizations
Case Summary
After budget cuts, an intermediate care facility serving individuals with intellectual disabilities operated by Washington State was ordered to cut costs by up to $1.8 million. To comply with the October 2010 order, management moved 27 residents from the intermediate care facility to its nursing ... read more >
After budget cuts, an intermediate care facility serving individuals with intellectual disabilities operated by Washington State was ordered to cut costs by up to $1.8 million. To comply with the October 2010 order, management moved 27 residents from the intermediate care facility to its nursing facility and simultaneously reduced programs and staffing at both sites. After bringing problems to the attention of state agencies, investigations by Disability Rights Washington (DRW)—the state National Disability Rights Network organization—found materially significant loss of services, findings which were confirmed by the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS). In fact, CMS found over 40,000 violations of the NHRA pertaining to these 27 individuals alone.

CMS found that Washington State failed to comply with Nursing Home Reform Act (NHRA), that residents were housed in inappropriate settings, the transfer violated federal law, and as a result the state had received federal funds in error. CMS then announced an expansion of the investigation to other state-operated, Medicaid-certified nursing facilities. Pertinent state departments issued a corrective action plan in response to CMS’s findings.

DRW claimed the correction plan was inadequate in a complaint it filed on April 16, 2014 on behalf of a class of plaintiffs of people with intellectual disabilities. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, the plaintiffs sued the Secretary of the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services and the Director of the Washington State Health Care Authority in their official capacities under the Medicaid Act and the Nursing Home Reform Act (NHRA). The plaintiffs, represented by both DRW and a private firm, sought injunctive and declaratory relief to require defendants to establish an adequate system to provide Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) screenings, assessments, specialized services, and, when appropriate, community-based integrated placement for class members who reside in privately-operated Medicaid-certified Nursing Facilities.

Defendants filed an answer on May 8, 2014. The plaintiff moved for class certification on October 17, 2014 and filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of the proper standard for PASRR screenings and evaluations. On November 10, 2014 defendants responded to plaintiffs’ motions and moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims and for partial summary judgment. The motions were resolved by the court on April 10, 2015 with Judge James L. Robart ruling mostly in favor of the plaintiffs. 99 F.Supp.3d 1297. The Judge granted part of defendant’s motion to dismiss, but gave plaintiffs leave to amend the complaint and file a valid claim.

The Court certified a class (April 10, 2015) comprised of all individuals who: (A) are or will be residents of Medicaid-certified, privately-operated nursing facilities in the State of Washington; and (B) who are Medicaid recipients with an intellectual disability or related condition(s) such that they are eligible to be screened and assessed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1396r(e)(7) and 42 C.F.R. § 483.122 et seq.

The defendants appealed the class certification on April 24, 2015 to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Docket #:15-80076. The defendants claimed that the plaintiff’s only allegation was that he should have been a part of this class, so therefore was not qualified to represent it. On August 10, 2015, Judges Michael Daly Hawkins and Andrew D. Hurwitz of the Ninth Circuit denied permission to appeal.

After negotiations, in August of 2016, the plaintiffs filed an unopposed motion for approval of a settlement agreement, class certification, and a settlement approval hearing and process. The settlement agreement required copies to be sent to every member of the class. Class members would also be notified of the date and time of the final settlement hearing. Any objecting class member had an opportunity to speak at the final hearing.

After giving time for notice to be provided to all class members, the final settlement hearing took place on January 9, 2017. The court approved the final settlement agreement on January 10, 2017. 2017 WL 123011. The settlement provided for a comprehensive reform of defendant’s PASRR screenings required under the NHRA, establishing procedures for timeliness of evaluations, Post-PASRR meetings, provision of specialized services to increase class members’ independence and/or discharge planning for class members who are medically able and willing to live in an alternative placement in the community. It also established metrics for monitoring implementation of new PASRR system, with reporting to class counsel on a quarterly basis. The court retained jurisdiction over the case and the settlement agreement. Lodestar attorneys’ fees of over $600,000 were scheduled to be paid by defendants.

The settlement is still ongoing and under court supervision through September 30, 2020. The settlement agreements provides for a joint court order to terminate the case if the defendants show that they have completed all requirements before the September 2020 date.

EXTERNAL RESOURCES WEBSITE: https://www.disabilityrightswa.org/cases/dunakin-v-lashway/

Malcolm Clayton - 02/09/2019
Maddie McFee - 11/03/2019


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Benefit Source
Medicaid
Content of Injunction
Monitoring
Reporting
Defendant-type
Hospital/Health Department
Disability
Mental impairment
Discrimination-basis
Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)
General
Commitment procedure
Pattern or Practice
Placement in mental health facilities
Reassessment and care planning
Medical/Mental Health
Intellectual/Developmental Disability
Mental Disability
Intellectual/developmental disability, unspecified
Plaintiff Type
Non-profit NON-religious organization
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Medicaid, 42 U.S.C §1396 (Title XIX of the Social Security Act)
Nursing Care Reform Act of 1987/ Omnibus Reconciliation Act
Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701
Defendant(s) Director
Secretary
Plaintiff Description All individuals who: (A) are or will be residents of Medicaid-certified, privately-operated nursing facilities in the State of Washington; and (B) who are Medicaid recipients with an intellectual disability or related condition(s) such that they are eligible to be screened and assessed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1396r(e)(7) and 42 C.F.R. § 483.122 et seq.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations NDRN/Protection & Advocacy Organizations
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Filed Pro Se No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Attorneys fees
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Conditional Dismissal
Order Duration 2017 - 2020
Filing Year 2014
Case Ongoing Yes
Docket(s)
2:14-cv-00567 (W.D. Wash.)
ID-WA-0003-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 02/18/2017
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint [ECF# 1]
ID-WA-0003-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 04/16/2014
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order on Motions to Dismiss and Class Certification [ECF# 43] (99 F.Supp.3d 1297) (W.D. Wash.)
ID-WA-0003-0002.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Date: 04/10/2015
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Amended Complaint [ECF# 52]
ID-WA-0003-0003.pdf | Detail
Date: 05/08/2015
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Denying Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration [ECF# 58] (2015 WL 4076789) (W.D. Wash.)
ID-WA-0003-0004.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Date: 07/01/2015
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Final Settlement Agreement [ECF# 71-1]
ID-WA-0003-0007.pdf | Detail
Date: 08/15/2016
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Motion for Final Approval of Settlement [ECF# 81]
ID-WA-0003-0005.pdf | Detail
Date: 12/28/2016
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Final Approval of Settlement [ECF# 85] (2017 WL 2899793) (W.D. Wash.)
ID-WA-0003-0006.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Date: 01/09/2017
show all people docs
Judges Robart, James L. (W.D. Wash.) show/hide docs
ID-WA-0003-0002 | ID-WA-0003-0004 | ID-WA-0003-0006 | ID-WA-0003-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Eaton, Sarah (Washington) show/hide docs
ID-WA-0003-0005 | ID-WA-0003-9000
Hamburger, Eleanor (Washington) show/hide docs
ID-WA-0003-0001 | ID-WA-0003-0003 | ID-WA-0003-0005 | ID-WA-0003-0007 | ID-WA-0003-9000
Kas, Susan Linn (Washington) show/hide docs
ID-WA-0003-0001 | ID-WA-0003-0003 | ID-WA-0003-0005 | ID-WA-0003-0007 | ID-WA-0003-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Coats, Sarah (Washington) show/hide docs
ID-WA-0003-9000
King, Matthew S (Washington) show/hide docs
ID-WA-0003-0007 | ID-WA-0003-9000
McCarthy, Angela D. Coats (Washington) show/hide docs
ID-WA-0003-0007
Teed, Michelle (Washington) show/hide docs
ID-WA-0003-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -