Case: U.S. v. Maryland

1:05-cv-01772 | U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland

Filed Date: June 30, 2005

Closed Date: 2010

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 30, 2002, the United States Department of Justice ("DOJ") notified State of Maryland officials of its intent to investigate conditions of confinement at the Cheltenham Youth Facility ("Cheltenham") in Cheltenham, Maryland and the Charles H. Hickey, Jr. School ("Hickey") in Baltimore, Maryland, pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act ("CRIPA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1997, and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141 ("Section 14141"). Be…

On August 30, 2002, the United States Department of Justice ("DOJ") notified State of Maryland officials of its intent to investigate conditions of confinement at the Cheltenham Youth Facility ("Cheltenham") in Cheltenham, Maryland and the Charles H. Hickey, Jr. School ("Hickey") in Baltimore, Maryland, pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act ("CRIPA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1997, and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141 ("Section 14141"). Between April 28 and June 12, 2003, the DOJ toured Cheltenham and Hickey with consultants in the fields of juvenile justice, medical care, mental health care, education and sanitation. At the time of the tours and until April 1, 2004, Hickey was operated by a for-profit corporation. On April 9, 2004, the United States issued a findings letter pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997(a)(1), which concluded that certain conditions at Cheltenham and Hickey violated the constitutional and federal statutory rights of juveniles confined there.

The findings led to negotiations between state and federal authorities. The parties reached a settlement agreement made public in late June 2005, filing of the settlement and an associated complaint (to invoke the jurisdiction of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland). The settlement describes a number of areas the state obligated itself to improve upon at Cheltenham and Hickey: protection of residents from violence and sexual abuse (via adequate reporting procedures, health care improvements, a use of force policy, staff training, behavior management program implementation, staffing improvements, security system installation (including individual door locks), appropriate and limited use of restraints and seclusion, access to toilets, due process for disciplinary matters, improved intake and classification, and screening of job applicants to ensure employment of persons fit to work with youth), suicide prevention, mental health and medical care, special education, and fire safety.

In the months just following the settlement, the DOJ similarly toured the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center ("BCJJC") as part of an investigation, invited by the state, of conditions of confinement at BCJJC. An August 7, 2006, DOJ findings letter also described rights violations, leading to a modification of the original settlement. The May 2007, modification added the BCJJC, so that the state's obligations to improve its juvenile justice housing would extend to all three facilities. The same categories of improvements were set out in the second agreement, with some minor variations between the improvements needed at Cheltenham and Hickey compared with the improvements required at BCJJC. Again, the Department of Justice filed an amended complaint to invoke the court's jurisdiction over the settlement. These complaints relied upon allegations of violation of Section 14141 and the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, of non-compliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482, and of non-compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. § 794.

The settlements provide processes for compliance reporting and quality assurance, as well as for monitoring of and access to the facilities by the Department of Justice, to enable enforcement proceedings, if necessary. On July 19, 2005, the court (Judge Frederick Motz) placed the case on the court’s inactive docket, with a scheduled dismissal in three years from that date or upon the State’s substantial compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement. On June 24, 2008, the parties submitted a Second Amended Settlement Agreement, releasing Cheltenham and Hickey from monitoring and terminating the Agreement with respect to those facilities. On June 26, 2008, the court (Judge Motz) signed a Second Modified Order of Conditional Dismissal, which stated that the interests of the remaining parties would be best served by extending the duration of certain provisions of the Settlement Agreement. In this Order, Judge Motz placed the case on the court’s inactive docket, to be dismissed on June 29, 2009 or earlier if the state reached substantial compliance with the terms of the Second Amended Settlement Agreement.

On June 25, 2009, the parties submitted a Third Amended Settlement Agreement in which the parties agreed that BCJJC improved conditions relating to suicide prevention and special education services sufficiently but still needed monitoring in the area of protection of BCJJC youth from harm by other youth. On June 30, 2009, the court (Judge Motz) approved the Third Amended Settlement and again placed the case on the court’s inactive docket, to be dismissed on June 29, 2011, or earlier if the state reaches substantial compliance with the terms of the Third Amended Settlement Agreement.

On August 19, 2010, the parties determined that the state had fulfilled all of its obligations and Judge Motz ordered that the case be finally dismissed with prejudice.

Summary Authors

Mike Fagan (5/20/2008)

Frances Hollander (2/21/2016)

People


Judge(s)
Attorney for Plaintiff

Acosta, R. Alexander (District of Columbia)

Brown Cutlar, Shanetta Y. (District of Columbia)

Delaney, Joshua (District of Columbia)

DeSheilds Minnis, Tarra (Maryland)

Attorney for Defendant

Fontaine, Robert R. (Maryland)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:05-cv-01772

Docket (PACER)

Aug. 17, 2010

Aug. 17, 2010

Docket

Investigation of the Cheltenham Youth Facility in Cheltenham, Maryland, and the Charles H. Hickey, Jr., School in Baltimore, Maryland

DOJ CRIPA Investigation of the Cheltenham Youth Facility in Cheltenham, Maryland, and the Charles H. Hickey, Jr., School in Baltimore, Maryland

No Court

April 9, 2004

April 9, 2004

Findings Letter/Report

1:05-cv-01772

Settlement Agreement

June 29, 2005

June 29, 2005

Settlement Agreement
1

1:05-cv-01772

Complaint

June 30, 2005

June 30, 2005

Complaint
3

1:05-cv-01772

Order of Conditional Dismissal

USA v. State of Maryland

July 19, 2005

July 19, 2005

Order/Opinion

Investigation of the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center in Baltimore, Maryland

DOJ CRIPA Investigation of the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center in Baltimore, Maryland

No Court

Aug. 7, 2006

Aug. 7, 2006

Findings Letter/Report

1:05-cv-01772

Amended Settlement Agreement Between the United States of America and the State of Maryland Regarding Conditions at Three Juvenile Justice Facilities

May 18, 2007

May 18, 2007

Settlement Agreement

1:05-cv-01772

First Amended Complaint

May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

Complaint
13-1

1:05-cv-01772

Second Amended Settlement Agreement

United States v. State of Maryland

June 23, 2008

June 23, 2008

Settlement Agreement
15

1:05-cv-01772

Second Modified Order of Conditional Dismissal

USA v. State of Maryland

June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated March 13, 2024, 3:03 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT against Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr, The Maryland Department of Juvenile Services, Kenneth Montague, Reginald Garnett, Tom Bowers, The State of Maryland , filed by United States Of America. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(ljs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/30/2005)

June 30, 2005

June 30, 2005

2

Joint MOTION for Conditional Dismissal by Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr, The Maryland Department of Juvenile Services, Kenneth Montague, Reginald Garnett, Tom Bowers, United States Of America, The State of Maryland. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Text of Proposed Order)(ljs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/30/2005)

June 30, 2005

June 30, 2005

3

ORDER OF CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL granting 2 Joint Motion of Condidtional Dismissal. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 7/19/05. (slf, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/19/2005)

July 19, 2005

July 19, 2005

4

NOTICE of Appearance by Allen F Loucks on behalf of United States Of America (Loucks, Allen) (Entered: 05/22/2007)

May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

5

Consent MOTION to Reopen Case by United States Of America. Responses due by 6/8/2007 (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Loucks, Allen) (Entered: 05/22/2007)

May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

6

Consent MOTION to Amend/Correct 1 Complaint, by United States Of America. Responses due by 6/8/2007 (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order # 2 Redline First Amended Complaint# 3 First Amended Complaint)(Loucks, Allen) (Entered: 05/22/2007)

May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

8

ORDER granting 5 Motion of USA to Reopen Case. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 5/23/07. (slf, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/23/2007)

May 23, 2007

May 23, 2007

9

ORDER granting 6 Motion of plaintiff to Amend/Correct Complaint. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 5/23/07. (slf, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/23/2007)

May 23, 2007

May 23, 2007

10

AMENDED COMPLAINT against The State of Maryland, Martin O'Malley, The Maryland Department of Juvenile Services, Donald Devore, Reginald Garnett, Leander Parker, Rodney Pegram, filed by United States Of America. (Attachments: # 1 hi light copy of amended complaint)(slf, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/23/2007)

May 23, 2007

May 23, 2007

11

ORDER granting 7 Motion of plaintiff to Amend/Correct Order of Conditional Dismissal. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 5/24/07. (slf, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 05/24/2007)

May 24, 2007

May 24, 2007

12

Consent MOTION to Reopen Case by United States Of America Responses due by 7/11/2008 (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Loucks, Allen) (Entered: 06/24/2008)

June 24, 2008

June 24, 2008

13

Joint MOTION to Amend/Correct by United States Of America Responses due by 7/11/2008 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − Second Amended Settlement Agreement, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Loucks, Allen) (Entered: 06/24/2008)

June 24, 2008

June 24, 2008

14

ORDER granting 12 Motion of plaintiff to Reopen Case for the purpose of enabling the parties to file a Joint Motion to Amend this Court's May 24, 2007 Order. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 6/26/08. (slf, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/26/2008)

June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

15

SECOND MODIFIED ORDER OF CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL granting 13 Motion of plaintiff to Amend/Correct. Ordered that this case shall be placed on the Court's inactive docket; this case shall be dismissed on June 29, 2009 or earlier if the State reaches substantial compliance with the terms of the Second Amended Settlement Agreement; this Court will retain jurisdiction over the case until either June 29, 2009 or such earlier time as the State achieves substantial compliance with the terms of the Second Amended Settlement Agreement; and the superintendents of Hickey and CYF shall immediately be dismissed as parties. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 6/26/08. (slf, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/26/2008)

June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

16

NOTICE of Appearance by Karl Aram Pothier on behalf of all defendants (Pothier, Karl) (Entered: 07/01/2008)

July 1, 2008

July 1, 2008

17

NOTICE by The Maryland Department of Juvenile Services, Reginald Garnett, Martin O'Malley, Donald Devore, Leander Parker, Rodney Pegram, The State of Maryland of the Withdrawal of Appearance, pursuant to Local Rule 101.2., of Robert T. Fontaine and Margaret Ann Nolan (Pothier, Karl) (Entered: 07/01/2008)

July 1, 2008

July 1, 2008

18

Joint MOTION to Alter/Amend Judgment by United States Of America Responses due by 7/13/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Third Amended Settlement Agreement, # 2 Text of Proposed Order Third Modified Order of Conditional Dismissal)(Delaney, Joshua) (Entered: 06/25/2009)

June 25, 2009

June 25, 2009

19

THIRD MODIFIED ORDER OF CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL PLACING case on this court's inactive docket; DISMISSING on 6/29/11 or earlier if the State achieves substantial compliance with the terms of the Third Amended Settlement Agreement, and RETAINING jurisdiction until either 6/29/11 or earlier time as the State achieves substantial compliance with the terms of the Third Amended Settlement Agreement (terminating 18 Motion to Alter/Amend Judgment). Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 6/30/09. (dass, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/01/2009)

June 30, 2009

June 30, 2009

20

Joint MOTION to Dismiss by United States Of America Responses due by 9/3/2010 (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order of Final Dismissal)(Delaney, Joshua) (Entered: 08/17/2010)

Aug. 17, 2010

Aug. 17, 2010

Case Details

State / Territory: Maryland

Case Type(s):

Juvenile Institution

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: June 30, 2005

Closing Date: 2010

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Attorney General, on behalf of the United States, seeking to enjoin the State of Maryland from depriving youth confined in the Cheltenham Youth Facility in Cheltenham, Maryland.

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

State of Maryland, State

Maryland Department of Juvenile Services, State

Cheltenham Youth Facility, State

Charles H. Hickey, Jr. School, State

Baltimore Juvenile Justice Center, State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 1997 et seq.

Indv. w/ Disab. Educ. Act (IDEA), Educ. of All Handcpd. Children Act , 20 U.S.C. § 1400

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

Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act, 34 U.S.C. § 12601 (previously 42 U.S.C. § 14141)

Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Order Duration: 2005 - 2010

Content of Injunction:

Remedial education

Hire

Other requirements regarding hiring, promotion, retention

Implement complaint/dispute resolution process

Reporting

Monitoring

Training

Issues

General:

Aggressive behavior

Classification / placement

Conditions of confinement

Disciplinary procedures

Education

Failure to supervise

Fire safety

Incident/accident reporting & investigations

Informed consent/involuntary medication

Juveniles

Rehabilitation

Restraints : physical

Sanitation / living conditions

Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)

Suicide prevention

Policing:

Excessive force

Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:

Confinement/isolation

Sexual abuse by residents/inmates

Sex w/ staff; sexual harassment by staff

Assault/abuse by staff (facilities)

Assault/abuse by non-staff (facilities)

Disability and Disability Rights:

Special education

Medical/Mental Health:

Dental care

Medical care, general

Medication, administration of

Mental health care, general

Self-injurious behaviors

Suicide prevention

Type of Facility:

Government-run