Case: Clark v. California

3:96-cv-01486 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: April 22, 1996

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On April 22, 1996, two prisoners with developmental disabilities, incarcerated within facilities run by the California Department of Corrections (CDC), filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Rehabilitation Act (RA), against the State of California, its Governor, CDC and prison officials. The plaintiffs, represented by the Prison Law Office, the Disability Rights an…

On April 22, 1996, two prisoners with developmental disabilities, incarcerated within facilities run by the California Department of Corrections (CDC), filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Rehabilitation Act (RA), against the State of California, its Governor, CDC and prison officials. The plaintiffs, represented by the Prison Law Office, the Disability Rights and Education Defense Fund, and private counsel, asked the court for declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief, alleging that the defendants violated their rights under the Equal Protection Clause, Americans with Disabilities Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that the defendants discriminated against them because of their disabilities, that their living conditions constituted cruel and unusual punishment, and that the defendants had deprived them of due process. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants’ practice of confining prisoners with developmental disabilities in state prisons without offering sufficient protection from the general prison population was cruel and unusual punishment. Additionally, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants failed to provide accommodations required to allow the plaintiffs the same benefits and program participation opportunities afforded to non-developmentally disabled prisoners.

On October 1, 1996, Judge Fern M. Smith denied the defendants' motions to dismiss the Rehabilitation Act, ADA, equal protection and Eighth Amendment claims and granted, in part, the defendants' motion to dismiss the due process claims, allowing the plaintiffs to amend their complaint with respect to the due process claim. The defendants appealed. Clark v. State, 1996 WL 628221 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 1, 1996).

On February 26, 1997, Judge Smith certified a class consisting of all present and future individuals with developmental disabilities under the control of the CDC. In January 1998, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding additional plaintiffs. Extensive discovery followed.

On May 11, 1998, Judge Smith granted in part and denied in part the State defendants' motion for summary judgment. Judge Smith granted summary judgment on and dismissed the equal protection claims, and denied motions with respect to exhaustion of administrative and state remedies as well as for standing. Judge Smith also denied the defendants' motion to decertify the class. Clark v. State of Calif., 1998 WL 242688 (N.D. Cal. May 11, 1998).

Prior to the scheduled trial date, the parties engaged in negotiations under the supervision of Judge Eugene Lynch. The negotiations resulted in an interim agreement and stipulation that was filed on July 20, 1998. The interim agreement provided for, among other things, improved education, vocational programs, medical care, housing, and staff assistance for inmates with developmental disabilities. This plan was subject to negotiations between the parties and evaluation by court appointed experts.

On August 18, 1998, Judge Smith appointed Peter Leone, Ph.D., and Melissa G. Warren, Ph.D. to be the court's experts to evaluate the defendants' compliance with the agreement, and filed a settlement agreement, implementing the interim agreement subject to monitoring by the plaintiffs' counsel and evaluation by the court's experts.

On October 9, 1998, Judge Smith entered judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in the amount of $2.8 million for attorneys' fees for all work performed before the execution of the interim agreement and stipulation.

Between December 1999 and February 2002, other district court Judges Charles R. Breyer and Phyllis J. Hamilton approved various amendments to the settlement agreement. In March 2002, the CDC issued a comprehensive remedial plan which was adopted by the court. The remedial plan included detailed policies and procedures to assure identification, appropriate classification, housing, protection and nondiscrimination of prisoners/parolees with developmental disabilities.

On December 3, 2001, the parties signed a settlement agreement granting relief to the plaintiff class. The defendants admitted "that they [had] violated the federal rights of plaintiffs in a manner sufficient to warrant the relief contained herein." Implementation and modifications to the 2002 remedial plan continued through 2007.

In July 2009 the defendants filed a motion to terminate the settlement agreement, pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act and Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 60(b). The defendants declared that they were no longer violating the federal rights of prisoners with developmental disabilities, and that continued relief was no longer necessary because of these violations. On August 13, 2009, the plaintiffs filed a motion to enforce judgment. There was no dispute as to the utility of the settlement agreement and the Clark Remedial Plan. What was in dispute, however, was whether the order requiring compliance with the plan, including monitoring by the plaintiffs' counsel and the court's experts, was necessary. Investigating this issue, one of the court's experts conducted a review of the treatment of developmentally disabled prisoners and found that developmentally disabled inmates did not receive the protections and supports as described in the Clark Remedial Plan.

On September 16, 2010, the District Court denied in part and granted in part the defendants' motion for relief. The court also granted in part and denied in part the plaintiffs' motion for further relief. The court found termination of the entire settlement agreement unwarranted because ongoing violations of federal constitutional and statutory rights supported the continuation of relief. However, not all of the provisions of the settlement agreement were sufficiently narrowly drawn to meet the standards of the Prison Litigation Report Act (PLRA), so these provisions were terminated. In addition to upholding the majority of the settlement agreement, the court issued further remedial orders including staff training, better identification of class members by the defendants, and self-monitoring by the Defendants on their progress. Clark v. California, 739 F. Supp. 2d 1168 (N.D. Cal. 2010). On December 29, 2010, the court granted the plaintiffs' attorneys an additional $2.3 million in fees.

On December 16, 2015, the court agreed to a revision of the Remedial Plan. The revision eliminated the need for a post-rules violation consultation between the Chief Disciplinary Officer and the Developmental Disability Program clinician. Instead, the parties agreed to adopt the rules violation process developed in the case Coleman v. Brown. This process called for standardized mental health assessments.

As of January 2020, the settlement agreement was still in place and monitoring was ongoing.

Summary Authors

David Priddy (7/17/2011)

Jessica Kincaid (7/15/2014)

Hope Brinn (11/3/2018)

Emma Himes (11/27/2019)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5874830/parties/clark-v-state-of-california/


Judge(s)

Breyer, Charles R. (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Chavez, Mark A. (California)

Godbold, Penny (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Alexander, Elizabeth R. (District of Columbia)

Garske, Sharon Anne (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

3:96-cv-01486

Docket [PACER]

Clark v. State of California

May 14, 2018

May 14, 2018

Docket
26

3:96-cv-01486

Order Denying in Part, Granting in Part, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss

Clark v. Wilson

Oct. 1, 1996

Oct. 1, 1996

Order/Opinion

1996 WL 628221

67-1

3:96-cv-01486

Second Amended Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Under S1983 for Violations of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments

Clark v. State of California

Jan. 15, 1998

Jan. 15, 1998

Complaint
141

3:96-cv-01486

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment

Clark v. Wilson

May 11, 1998

May 11, 1998

Order/Opinion

1998 WL 242688

181

3:96-cv-01486

Interim Agreement and Stipulation; Order Appointing Experts and Prescribing Duties

Clark v. State of California

July 20, 1998

July 20, 1998

Settlement Agreement
194

3:96-cv-01486

Settlement Agreement and Order

Clark v. State of California

Dec. 3, 2001

Dec. 3, 2001

Settlement Agreement

3:96-cv-01486

Remedial Plan

Clark v. Wilson

March 1, 2002

March 1, 2002

Settlement Agreement
493-4

3:96-cv-01486

On the Status of Inmates with Developmental Disabilities In the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Feb. 15, 2010

Feb. 15, 2010

Monitor/Expert/Receiver Report

2010 WL 4268116

489-1

3:96-cv-01486

July 2010 Report of Division of Adult Institution's Leone Report Review Team

July 23, 2010

July 23, 2010

Monitor/Expert/Receiver Report

2010 WL 4268115

493

3:96-cv-01486

Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Surreply

Aug. 13, 2010

Aug. 13, 2010

Pleading / Motion / Brief

2010 WL 4229736

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5874830/clark-v-state-of-california/

Last updated Oct. 10, 2025, 10:29 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT Summons(es) issued; Fee status pd entered on 4/22/96 in the amount of $ 120.00 ( Receipt No. 121127) [3:96-cv-01486] (ls, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 04/23/1996)

April 22, 1996

April 22, 1996

2

ORDER RE COURT PROCEDURE and SCHEDULE (ADR Pilot) by Judge Fern M. Smith : Proof of service to be filed by 6/6/96 ; counsels' case management statement to be filed by 8/20/96 ; initial case management conference will be held 8:30 8/30/96 . (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (ls, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 04/23/1996)

April 22, 1996

April 22, 1996

3

NOTICE by Plaintiff of related case(s) C80-0012 MHP, C90-3094 TEH; C94-2307 CW. [3:96-cv-01486] (ls, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/09/1996)

May 8, 1996

May 8, 1996

4

RETURN OF SERVICE unexecuted - attempted as to defendant State of California, defendant CA Dept of Corr, defendant Pete Wilson, defendant Joseph Sandoval, defendant James Gomez, defendant Kyle S. McKinsey, defendant Nadim Khoury, defendant John S. Zil [3:96-cv-01486] (ls, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/09/1996)

May 8, 1996

May 8, 1996

SUMMONS issued as to State of California, CA Dept of Corr, Pete Wilson, Joseph Sandoval, James Gomez, Kyle S. McKinsey, Nadim Khoury, John S. Zil [3:96-cv-01486] (ls, COURT STAFF)

May 8, 1996

May 8, 1996

10

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken DENYING related case notice as to actions 4:94-cv-2307 CW and 3:96-cv-1486 FMS. (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/24/1996)

May 30, 1996

May 30, 1996

9

ORDER by Judge Marilyn H. Patel DENYING related case notice as to actions 3:80-cv-12 MHP and 3:96-cv-1486 FMS. (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/24/1996)

May 30, 1996

May 30, 1996

RECEIVED Stipulation and Proposed Order ( plaintiffs Derrick Clark, Ambrose Woods ) to extend date for filing proofs of service or waivers [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

June 5, 1996

June 5, 1996

5

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith : extending date to file proofs of service or waivers of proofs of service to 7/8/96 (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/11/1996)

June 11, 1996

June 11, 1996

6

WAIVER OF SERVICE by defendants served on 7/3/96 in response to the Request for Waiver sent on 5/29/96 [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/03/1996)

July 3, 1996

July 3, 1996

7

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION WITH MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES before Judge Fern M. Smith by defendants Pete Wilson, Joseph Sandoval, James Gomez, Kyle S. McKinsey, Nadim Khoury to dismiss with Notice set for 8/16/96 at 10:00 am [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/12/1996)

July 12, 1996

July 12, 1996

8

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith: setting hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss [7-1] 10:00 9/20/96; plaintiff's opposition must be filed and served no later than 28 days before the hearing date; defendants' reply due 14 days before the hearing date; Continuing Case Management Conference to 8:30 9/20/96; (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/24/1996)

July 23, 1996

July 23, 1996

11

MEMORANDUM by Plaintiffs Derrick Clark, Ambrose Woods in support of ex parte application for leave to file opposition to motion to dismiss in excess of twenty-five pages [11-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) Modified on 08/05/1996 (Entered: 08/05/1996)

Aug. 2, 1996

Aug. 2, 1996

12

DECLARATION by Caroline N. Mitchell on behalf of Plaintiffs Derrick Clark, Ambrose Woods in support re ex parte application for leave to file opposition to motion to dismiss in excess of twenty-five pages [11-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/05/1996)

Aug. 2, 1996

Aug. 2, 1996

RECEIVED Proposed Order (Plaintiffs Derrick Clark, Ambrose Woods) re: ex parte application for leave to file opposition to motion to dismiss in excess of twenty-five pages [11-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Aug. 2, 1996

Aug. 2, 1996

13

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith GRANTING plaintiffs' ex parte application for leave to file opposition to motion to dismiss in excess of twenty-five pages [11-1], not to exceed thirty pages of text. (Date Entered: 8/7/96) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/07/1996)

Aug. 6, 1996

Aug. 6, 1996

14

OPPOSITION by Plaintiffs Derrick Clark, Ambrose Woods to motion to dismiss [7-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/27/1996)

Aug. 23, 1996

Aug. 23, 1996

RECEIVED Stipulation re disclosure of documents to co-counsel [3:96-cv-01486] (mcl, COURT STAFF)

Aug. 23, 1996

Aug. 23, 1996

RECEIVED Stipulated Protective Order [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Aug. 23, 1996

Aug. 23, 1996

15

STIPULATION re Disclosure of Documents to Co-Counsel. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/27/1996)

Aug. 27, 1996

Aug. 27, 1996

16

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith: for protective order (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 08/27/1996)

Aug. 27, 1996

Aug. 27, 1996

17

REPLY BRIEF by defendants Pete Wilson, James Gomez, Joseph Sandoval, Nadim Khoury, Kyle S. McKinsey in support re motion to dismiss [7-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/06/1996)

Sept. 6, 1996

Sept. 6, 1996

18

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT and PROPOSED ORDER filed. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/11/1996)

Sept. 10, 1996

Sept. 10, 1996

19

ORDER by Chief Judge Thelton E. Henderson advising that case 3:90-cv-3094 TEH is not related to 3:96-cv-1486 FMS. (Date Entered: 9/12/96) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/12/1996)

Sept. 12, 1996

Sept. 12, 1996

20

STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION submitted by Plaintiffs [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/17/1996)

Sept. 17, 1996

Sept. 17, 1996

21

STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION submitted by Plaintiffs [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/20/1996)

Sept. 20, 1996

Sept. 20, 1996

22

MINUTES: (C/R none) Defendants' motion to dismiss [7-1] - matter taken off calendar. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/23/1996)

Sept. 20, 1996

Sept. 20, 1996

23

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith CONTINUING hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss [7-1] 10:00 9/27/96 (Date Entered: 9/23/96) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/23/1996)

Sept. 20, 1996

Sept. 20, 1996

24

STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION submitted by Plaintiffs [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/24/1996)

Sept. 24, 1996

Sept. 24, 1996

25

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith: CONTINUING hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss [7-1] 10:00 10/4/96; Case Management Conference continued to 8:30 10/4/96 (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/26/1996)

Sept. 26, 1996

Sept. 26, 1996

26

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith DENYING in part defendants' motion to dismiss [7-1] plaintiffs' RA and ADA claims, and equal protection and Eight Amendment claims; GRANTING in part defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' due process claim. Plaintiffs' are GRANTED leave to amend their complaint within thirty (30) days as to their due process claim (Date Entered: 10/2/96) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/02/1996)

Oct. 1, 1996

Oct. 1, 1996

27

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith VACATING hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss currently scheduled for 10/4/96 at 10:00 am; Case Management Conference set for 8:30 10/4/96 (Date Entered: 10/2/96) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/02/1996)

Oct. 2, 1996

Oct. 2, 1996

30

MINUTES: (C/R none) INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE HELD. Parties to go forward with class certify motion. Discovery to be limited to issues in class certify motion. Parties to work out guidelines for taking depos of potential class members. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/15/1996)

Oct. 4, 1996

Oct. 4, 1996

RECEIVED Proposed Order (defendants) of Certification of Interlocutory Appeal [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Oct. 4, 1996

Oct. 4, 1996

28

NOTICE OF APPEAL by defendants from Dist. Court decision order [26-2] Fee status paid [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/08/1996)

Oct. 7, 1996

Oct. 7, 1996

Copy of notice of appeal and docket sheet to all counsel [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Oct. 7, 1996

Oct. 7, 1996

Docket fee notification form and case information sheet to USCA [28-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Oct. 7, 1996

Oct. 7, 1996

CERTIFICATE of Record mailed to USCA, counsel notified. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Oct. 7, 1996

Oct. 7, 1996

29

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith certification of interlocutory appeal (Date Entered: 10/9/96) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/09/1996)

Oct. 8, 1996

Oct. 8, 1996

31

COPY of USCA Order: 96-80385 that the petition for permission to appeal under U.S.C. 1292(b) is DENIED. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/28/1996)

Oct. 24, 1996

Oct. 24, 1996

NOTIFICATION by US Circuit Court of Appellate Docket Number 96-16952 [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Oct. 28, 1996

Oct. 28, 1996

32

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT [1-1] by Plaintiffs; adding Larry Dixon Jr., Milton Silva, Jack Von Gunten, Mark Mitchell Morino [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/01/1996)

Oct. 31, 1996

Oct. 31, 1996

33

ANSWER by defendant to first amended complaint [32-1]; jury demand [3:96-cv-01486] (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/18/1996)

Nov. 18, 1996

Nov. 18, 1996

RECEIVED Proposed Stipulated Extension Order ( Plaintiff) [3:96-cv-01486] (ml, COURT STAFF)

Nov. 18, 1996

Nov. 18, 1996

34

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith : extending time to file class certification motion (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/20/1996)

Nov. 20, 1996

Nov. 20, 1996

35

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION WITH MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES before Judge Fern M. Smith by Plaintiffs to certify class action with Notice set for 2/21/97 at 10:00 am [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/10/1997)

Jan. 10, 1997

Jan. 10, 1997

36

DECLARATION by Mark A. Chavez on behalf of Plaintiffs in support re motion to certify class action [35-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/10/1997)

Jan. 10, 1997

Jan. 10, 1997

37

DECLARATION by Shawn Hanson on behalf of Plaintiffs in support re motion to certify class action [35-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/10/1997)

Jan. 10, 1997

Jan. 10, 1997

38

DECLARATION by Donald Specter on behalf of Plaintiffs in support re motion to certify class action [35-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/10/1997)

Jan. 10, 1997

Jan. 10, 1997

39

DECLARATION by Adam E. Sak on behalf of Plaintiffs in support re motion to certify class action [35-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/13/1997)

Jan. 10, 1997

Jan. 10, 1997

RECEIVED Proposed Order (Plaintiffs) re: motion to certify class action [35-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Jan. 10, 1997

Jan. 10, 1997

40

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith Case Management Conference set for 8:30 2/21/97 (Date Entered: 1/29/97) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/29/1997)

Jan. 29, 1997

Jan. 29, 1997

41

OPPOSITION by defendants to motion to certify class action [35-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/03/1997)

Jan. 31, 1997

Jan. 31, 1997

42

DECLARATION by William Jenkins on behalf of defendants in support re opposition [41-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/03/1997)

Jan. 31, 1997

Jan. 31, 1997

43

REPLY by Plaintiffs to opposition to motion to certify class action [35-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/10/1997)

Feb. 7, 1997

Feb. 7, 1997

44

DECLARATION by Caroline N. Mitchell on behalf of Plaintiffs in support re motion reply [43-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/10/1997)

Feb. 7, 1997

Feb. 7, 1997

45

LETTER dated 2/5/97 from Caroline N. Mitchell to Judge Fern M. Smith re discovery dispute. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/12/1997)

Feb. 12, 1997

Feb. 12, 1997

46

MINUTES: (C/R none) Telephone Status Conference held; parties to reach stipulation re Protective Order. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/12/1997)

Feb. 12, 1997

Feb. 12, 1997

47

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT and PROPOSED ORDER filed. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/14/1997)

Feb. 13, 1997

Feb. 13, 1997

RECEIVED Stipulation and Proposed Order Re In Camera Inspection of Confidential Inmate Information Subject to the Official Information Privilege [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Feb. 20, 1997

Feb. 20, 1997

49

MINUTES: (E/R Helen Almacen - Tape 2870) Case Managment Conference held; plaintiffs' motion to certify class action [35-1] is SUBMITTED. Case Management Conference continued to 11:00 6/13/97; Pretrial conference set for 2:30 3/30/98; Trial will be held 8:30 5/4/98 [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/27/1997)

Feb. 21, 1997

Feb. 21, 1997

48

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith Re: In Camera Inspection of Confidential Inmate Information Subject to the Official Information Privilege (please see order for more details). (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/25/1997)

Feb. 24, 1997

Feb. 24, 1997

50

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith GRANTING plaintiffs' motion to certify class action [35-1]. The class shall consist of all present and future individuals with developmental disabilities who are under the control of the California Department of Corrections. The term "developmentally disabled" is applied and used as defined in California Welfare & Institutions Code section 4512(a). (Date Entered: 2/27/97) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/27/1997)

Feb. 26, 1997

Feb. 26, 1997

51

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT and PROPOSED ORDER filed. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 05/30/1997)

May 30, 1997

May 30, 1997

52

MINUTES: (E/R Helen Almacen - Tape 2944) Case Management Conference held and continued to 8:30 11/7/97 for further Status; Discovery cutoff set for 12/31/97; Pretrial conference set for 2:30 4/13/98; Trial will be held 8:30 5/4/98. State has a continuing obligation to produce documents. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/16/1997)

June 13, 1997

June 13, 1997

53

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith: Pretrial Summary Judgment motions will be filed by 1/13/98; oppositions due 2/3/98; replies due 2/17/98; Discovery cutoff 2/20/98; Motions hearing date 10:00 3/6/98; Pre-trial conference will be held 2:30 4/13/98; Trial set for 8:30 5/4/98 . Est.trial days: 25. (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/17/1997)

June 16, 1997

June 16, 1997

54

REQUEST by defendant for in camera review [3:96-cv-01486] (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/17/1997)

July 16, 1997

July 16, 1997

RECEIVED documents for in camera review submitted by defendant [3:96-cv-01486] (ml, COURT STAFF)

July 16, 1997

July 16, 1997

55

ORDER "FILED UNDER SEAL" (Date Entered: 7/29/97) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (scu, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/29/1997)

July 25, 1997

July 25, 1997

56

CERTIFIED COPY of USCA Order: 96-16952 AFFIRMING the decision of the District Court [28-1]. [3:96-cv-01486] (scu, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/23/1997)

Sept. 22, 1997

Sept. 22, 1997

57

CLERK's letter spreading the mandate to counsel. re appeal [28-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (scu, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/23/1997)

Sept. 22, 1997

Sept. 22, 1997

58

COPY of USCA Order: the appellees' motion to transfer appellate fee application to the district court is GRANTED. [3:96-cv-01486] (mcl, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/21/1997)

Oct. 17, 1997

Oct. 17, 1997

59

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith: Status Conference scheduled for 11/7/97 is VACATED. (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/03/1997)

Oct. 29, 1997

Oct. 29, 1997

60

LETTER dated 12/15/97 from William Jenkins to Judge Fern M. Smith re discovery dispute. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 12/17/1997)

Dec. 16, 1997

Dec. 16, 1997

61

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith: Telephone Status conference set for 8:30 12/19/97 re discovery dispute. (Date Entered: 12/17/97) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 12/17/1997)

Dec. 16, 1997

Dec. 16, 1997

62

MINUTES: (C/R none) (Hearing Date: 12/19/97) Telephone Status Conference held. Court extended the discovery cutoff until 1/30/98 and the motion for summary judgment for 30 days. Defendant directed to fax list to the Court. Court will either arrange a phone conference or issue a written ruling regarding the parties discovery dispute. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 12/24/1997)

Dec. 19, 1997

Dec. 19, 1997

63

LETTER dated 12/22/97 from Caroline N. Mitchell to Judge Fern M. Smith re discovery dispute. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 12/24/1997)

Dec. 23, 1997

Dec. 23, 1997

64

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith Re: Discovery (please see order for specific details). (Date Entered: 12/24/97) (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 12/24/1997)

Dec. 23, 1997

Dec. 23, 1997

65

LETTER dated 12/22/97 from William Jenkins to Judge Fern M. Smith in response to plaintiffs' correspondence date 12/22/97 regarding the outstanding discovery dispute. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 12/30/1997)

Dec. 29, 1997

Dec. 29, 1997

RECEIVED Stipulation and Proposed Order (Plaintiffs and Defendants) to extend time for plaintiffs to bring discovery dispute/motion to compel for limited issues [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Jan. 7, 1998

Jan. 7, 1998

66

STIPULATION and ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith: Plaintiffs may raise any discovery dispute with the Court relating to defendants receipt and use of federal funding until and including 2/10/98; and plaintiffs may raise any discovery dispute witht he Court relating to the HDSP Documents until and including 2/10/98. (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/15/1998)

Jan. 12, 1998

Jan. 12, 1998

67

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION WITH MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES before Judge Fern M. Smith by Plaintiffs for leave to file a second amended complaint and certifying a subclass with Notice set for 2/20/98 at 10:00 am [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/16/1998)

Jan. 15, 1998

Jan. 15, 1998

68

DECLARATION by Adam E. Sak on behalf of Plaintiffs in support re motion for leave to file a second amended complaint [67-1] and motion certifying a subclass [67-2] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/16/1998)

Jan. 15, 1998

Jan. 15, 1998

RECEIVED Proposed Order (Plaintiffs) re: motion for leave to file a second amended complaint [67-1] and motion certifying a subclass [67-2] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Jan. 15, 1998

Jan. 15, 1998

69

ERRATA by Plaintiffs to motion for leave to file a second amended complaint [67-1] and motion certifying a subclass [67-2] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/21/1998)

Jan. 16, 1998

Jan. 16, 1998

70

PROOF OF SERVICE by Plaintiffs of errata [69-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/21/1998)

Jan. 16, 1998

Jan. 16, 1998

71

RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon William Jenkins (personally served Pam Montoya, Receptionist) on 11/15/97 of motion for leave to file a second amended complaint and certifying a subclass with supporting documents thereof. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/27/1998)

Jan. 23, 1998

Jan. 23, 1998

72

LETTER dated 1/27/98 from Caroline N. Mitchell to Judge Fern M. Smith seeking the Court's assistance in resolving a discovery dispute. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/29/1998)

Jan. 28, 1998

Jan. 28, 1998

73

MINUTES: (C/R Judy Thompsen) (Hearing Date: 1/28/98) Telephone Status Conference held. Briefing schedule set for motion on assessment procedure: plaintiffs' brief due 2/3/98; defendants' opposition due 2/6/98; reply due 2/10/98. Parties are to agree to a proposed order re stopping interviews until ruling on motion. [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/29/1998)

Jan. 28, 1998

Jan. 28, 1998

75

ORDER by Judge Fern M. Smith SUSPENDING defendants' overview of adaptive functioning of absent class members. (cc: all counsel) [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/02/1998)

Jan. 29, 1998

Jan. 29, 1998

74

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT; Date of proceedings: 1/28/98 (C/R: Judith Thomsen) minutes [73-2] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/30/1998)

Jan. 30, 1998

Jan. 30, 1998

76

NOTICE OF CROSS-MOTION AND CROSS-MOTION before Judge Fern M. Smith by State defendants seeking a stay, or, in the alternative continuance of the Trial and Pretrial dates with Notice set for 2/20/98 at 10:00 am [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/02/1998)

Jan. 30, 1998

Jan. 30, 1998

77

DECLARATION by Steven Cambra, Jr. on behalf of State defendants in support re cross-motion seeking a stay [76-1] and cross-motion continuance of the Trial and Pretrial dates [76-2] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/02/1998)

Jan. 30, 1998

Jan. 30, 1998

78

DECLARATION by Williams Jenkins on behalf of State defendants in opposition to motion for leave to file a second amended complaint [67-1], in support re cross-motion seeking a stay [76-1] and cross-motion continuance of the Trial and Pretrial dates [76-2] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) Modified on 02/02/1998 (Entered: 02/02/1998)

Jan. 30, 1998

Jan. 30, 1998

79

OPPOSITION by State defendants to motion for leave to file a second amended complaint [67-1], motion certifying a subclass [67-2] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/02/1998)

Jan. 30, 1998

Jan. 30, 1998

RECEIVED Proposed Order (State defendants) re: cross-motion seeking a stay [76-1] and cross-motion continuance of the Trial and Pretrial dates [76-2] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Jan. 30, 1998

Jan. 30, 1998

80

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION before Judge Fern M. Smith by Plaintiffs for protective order terminating defendants' overview of adaptive functioning of absent class members [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/04/1998)

Feb. 3, 1998

Feb. 3, 1998

81

DECLARATION by Adam E. Sak on behalf of Plaintiffs in support re motion for protective order terminating defendants' overview of adaptive functioning of absent class members [80-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/04/1998)

Feb. 3, 1998

Feb. 3, 1998

RECEIVED Proposed Order (Plaintiffs) re: motion for protective order terminating defendants' overview of adaptive functioning of absent class members [80-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF)

Feb. 3, 1998

Feb. 3, 1998

82

OPPOSITION by State defendants to motion for protective order terminating defendants' overview of adaptive functioning of absent class members [80-1] [3:96-cv-01486] (lcc, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 02/09/1998)

Feb. 6, 1998

Feb. 6, 1998

Case Details

State / Territory:

California

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Disability Rights

Special Collection(s):

California's Prisoners' Rights Bar article

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Post-PLRA enforceable consent decrees

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 22, 1996

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Developmentally disabled individuals incarcerated by the California Department of Corrections

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund (DREDF)

Prison Law Office

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

State of California, State

California Department of Corrections, State

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.

Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701

Constitutional Clause(s):

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Equal Protection

Other Dockets:

Northern District of California 3:96-cv-01486

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Monetary Relief

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Relief Granted:

Attorneys fees

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Content of Injunction:

Develop anti-discrimination policy

Monitoring

Provide antidiscrimination training

Reporting

Amount Defendant Pays: 5,100,000

Issues

General/Misc.:

Classification / placement

Counseling

Education

Rehabilitation

Sanitation / living conditions

Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)

Totality of conditions

Disability and Disability Rights:

Intellectual/developmental disability, unspecified

Mental impairment

Special education

Discrimination Basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)

Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:

Administrative segregation

Assault/abuse by staff (facilities)

Sexual abuse by residents/inmates

Medical/Mental Health Care:

Intellectual/Developmental Disability

Intellectual disability/mental illness dual diagnosis

Medical care, general