article: On May 24, 1998, a group of individuals confined to Florida's four Developmental State Institutions for Persons with Developmental Disabilities ("DSIs") filed suit against the state of Florida and relevant state officials alleging that defendants failed to take appropriate measures to habilitate the plaintiffs, and that the plaintiffs suffered grave harm as a result. They asserted claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. ("ADA") and its regulations; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; 29 U .S.C. § 794; the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq . and its regulations; and 42 U .S.C. § 1983, alleging Due Process and Equal Protection violations. Represented by Florida's Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities, the plaintiffs asked the U.S District Court for the Southern District of Florida for declaratory and injunctive relief. In May 1998, defendants filed a motion to dismiss based, among other things, on lack of standing and failure to state a claim under the ADA. Defendants also argued that plaintiffs were barred from bringing suit against the State because the State was immune from suit by private citizens under the Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In July 1998, the United States Department of Justice filed a motion to intervene in the case and included a memorandum in opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss. The DOJ also filed for leave to address as amicus curiae the proper construction of the ADA as it related to this case. In its memo on the motion to dismiss, the DOJ argued that the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act were valid examples of Congress's power to abrogate, or abolish, the states' immunity from suit by private citizens. It also argued that both the ADA and the integration mandate established by the Supreme Court in L.C. v. Olmstead in 1998 provided a cause of action under which plaintiffs could challenge unnecessary institutionalization of mentally ill persons. On October 15, 1998, Judge Ferguson granted the DOJ's motion to intervene in the motion to dismiss and denied its motion to participate as amicus curiae. On March 31, 1999, Judge Ferguson denied defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. Meanwhile, the plaintiffs moved for class certification. On March 10, 1999, the Court (Judge Wilkie D. Ferguson) entered an order certifying a class. Defendants appealed the order to the Eleventh Circuit and on February 3, 2000, the Eleventh Circuit issued an opinion reversing and vacating the class certification order and remanding the matter back to the Court for further action with instructions to certify the class as instructed. On February 11, 2000, the Court (Judge Ferguson) issued a Revised Order certifying a class. After lengthy mediation and negotiations, the parties reached a Settlement Agreement on May 11, 2004, which was filed with the Court on May 21, 2004. On June 16, 2004, the parties submitted an amended Agreement, according to which defendants agreed to utilize both the Supported Living Home and Community-Based Services Waiver and the Developmental Disabilities Home and Community-Based Services Waiver to serve clients residing in the DSIs. Defendants also agreed to close one DSI no later than June 30, 2005 and another no later than July 1, 2010. On August 11, 2005, the Court (Judge Jose E. Martinez) approved the Amended Settlement Agreement. On July 2, 2007, Judge Martinez granted the parties' Joint Motion to Dismiss Case After Substantial Compliance with Amended Settlement Agreement and closed the case.
summary: This case was brought in 1998 by the class of individuals confined to Florida's four state institutions for people with developmental disabilities, alleging failure to habilitate. The parties reached an agreement involving provision of community based services and closure of at least two residential facilities in 2003. On July 2, 2007, the case was dismissed on joing motion in which the parties agreed that the state had substantially complied with the Settlement Agreement.