Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Small v. Montana
, No. 97-35007 (9th Cir. filed Sept. 30, 1997). ; Clearinghouse Number: 52220
Description
Montana Agrees to Base Decisions About State Mental Health Facility Admissions and Discharges Only on Patients’ Need for Treatment and Support
Abstract
The parties settled this challenge to Montana’s failure to
administer treatment for mentally ill patients in integrated,
noninstitutional settings. Plaintiffs—patients receiving
treatment for mental disorders—alleged that, by isolating,
segregating, and institutionalizing them and denying them the
opportunity to achieve independent living, Montana violated the
Americans with Disabilities Act’s requirement that the state
provide services in the most integrated setting appropriate, 42
U.S.C. § 12132, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiffs sought
to block the financing and reconstruction of the Montana State
Hospital for individuals with mental disorders, require the
Department of Public Health and Human Services to develop a
comprehensive system of community treatment services for
individuals with mental disorders, and demand the release of
plaintiffs from segregated state institutional settings to
integrated community settings appropriate to their needs. Under the
settlement agreement, Montana agreed to operate its mental health
facilities as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible and to
make decisions about patient admissions and discharges based only
on the patient’s need for treatment and support. Montana
agreed not to base such decisions on whether a particular placement
would increase or decrease revenue to the state. Montana also
agreed not to require that a managed care organization with which
the state had a contract purchase a predetermined volume of
services from the state mental health facilities. Counsel notes
that all named plaintiffs were released from the state hospital
before the case was settled and that Montana was not barred from
beginning construction of the new hospital.
Additional Information
Files
- Complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief
- Defendants' brief in support of motion to deny class certification
- Defendants' motion for partial judgment on the pleadings
- Defendants' brief in support of motion for partial judgment on the pleadings
- Memorandum of law in support of plaintiffs' motion to certify class and in opposition to defendants' motion for an order denying class certification
- Memorandum of law opposing defendants' motion for partial judgment on the pleadings
- Defendants' reply brief in support of motion for partial judgment on the pleadings
- Reply memorandum opposing class action certification
- Plaintiffs' reply memorandum of law in support of plaintiffs' motion to certify class
- Plaintiffs prediscovery disclosure statement pursuant to local rule 200.5(a)
- Defendants' prediscovery disclosure statement
- Plaintiffs' preliminary pretrial statement pursuant to local rule 235-1(c)
- Defendants' preliminary pretrial statement
- Order
- Stipulation and order for dismissal of appeal
