Free Response - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 2:89-cv-00570-PCD Document 97 Filed 08/17/2005 Paget of 4
rijltl Fg gi.-;) »··.;. `
li F 1;: lj T
I UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ,
2 DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ZUU5 AUG i ·i p 2: 2 8 1
l
s U.S. Dl£`i`i—3{;]"` . . i
· Pi E W 1i·i/*.‘i/{i€.`;i··l,bg{TR T
4 WILLIAM ROE, et ai., on behalf of ) · i
)
5 themselves and all others similarly ) CASE NO: H89-570 (PCD)
) N a
6 situated, ) =
) it
7 i>i.A1NT1Fi=, ) l
I ) l 3
8 VS. ) l
) AUGUST 12TH, 2005 M .
9 MICHAEL HOGAN, ET AL, ) I |
) , i
10 DEFENDANT ) ll l
l
11 ‘—“ ""—“`““ )
12 QBJEQIQN TQ DEF§NDAN]j'§ MEMQRANQQM Ig QPQQITIQN IQ THE i
13 i
14 The plaintiff, James Kelly objects to the defendants Memorandum in Opposition to hi
15 Motion for Order of Compiiance. The defendants have opposed the plaintiffs Motio i
16 i
for Order of Compliance stating that; l E
17 1. They have not violated the terms of the Agreement of Settlement. E
l
18 2. That the plaintiff who is a class member by virtue of his status has failed to avai I
19 himself of the review process provided for in the Agreement of Settlement. I
20 3. The motion was not Hled by counsel designated by the Court.
. 21 I. IHE DEEENDANIE HAVE VIQMIEQ TH; TERMS QF THE AQBEEMENT QF
22 I
l
za A. The Treatment Decisions Concerning The Plaintiff Have Been Made On The Basis i
Of Connecticut Valley Hospitai Policy That Governs The Restrictive Setting He Has
24 Been Place In
l
25 l
l Q

l l
ll l

Case 2:89-cv-00570-PCD Document 97 Filed 08/17/2005 Page 2 of 4
l
1 The plaintiff has amended his Motion for Order of Compiiance in order to correct
2 errors and better assert his claims against the defendant’s. The plaintiff asserts that ail i
3 treatment decisions are based on Hospitai Policy which was created by the Defendant's. i
E The defendant's have been in violation of the Agreement of Settlement since January of
6 2001, when the unit that the plaintiff is confined on was opened.
», Individual evaluations and assessments do not reveai any symptoms that are Q
B refractory in nature; the plaintiff doesn’t suffer from a mental disability that is out of th i
9 ordinary which indicates that he should be treated differently than other clients within
10 the class of individuals who are committed to the Psychiatric Security Review Board. i
11 tx. MR. KELLY DID FQLLQW TQE Avvggvgtgrg PQXQQQBE Desvrrg me ii
12 DEFE§QANT'§ A§§§RIIQ!§§ m THQ §_QN]jgA_RY.
13 The defendant's assert that the plaintiff has a disagreement with his treatment team o
M the unit where he resides and that he should have followed the procedure outlined i Z
15 the Agreement of Settlement which entaiis requesting a review of his case through th ;
ij Chief of Professional Services.
18 The Plaintiff is alleging that the defendant's are in violation of the Agreement o i {
19 Settlement and in accordance with Paragraph 29 of the Agreement the plaintiff sen t
20 notice to the defendant Thomas Kirk in a letter dated June 4"", 2005. The defendan N
21 failed to respond within the ten day time period and consequentiy the plaintiff liled hi
22 Motion for Order of Compliance.
23
24 i _
25 l
l
l
l
l i
l
WT

Case 2:89-cv-00570-PCD Document 97 Filed 08/17/2005 Page 3 of 4

1 III.
2 APPLIED @3 A QQMPLAQNAQE QRQER N
3 4
The defendant’s in their last claim in opposition assert that the Federal Rules of Civil l
4 N
5 Procedure require that the legal interests of a class be at all times represented by N
6 qualified, experienced counsel designated by the court. .
7 The class is indeed represented by counsel, the Connecticut Civil Liberties Union N
a Foundation. In accordance with the Agreement of Settlement, Paragraph 29, i
9 “plaintiffs may initiate proceedings in this court as part of this case. By virtue of his N
ll
10 status, the plaintiff, James Kelly is a plaintiff in this case. N
11
For ali of the foregoing reasons and based on the plaintiffs amended pleading filed N
12 N
with this Court, the defenclant's opposition should be denied. N
13 · r
The piainti N
14 1
15 N
l u
16 M . James Kell l
17 Connecticut Valley Hospita N
Dutcher Hal N 5
18 Middletown, Connecticut 0645 r
l
20
21
zz N
23
24
zs N
'—J _-N


Case 2:89-cv-00570-PCD Document 97 Filed 08/17/2005 Page 4 of 4 l
l
1 _cEn;;|=1gAT1gu
2 ·
3 I James Kelly hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Amended Motion for Order of
4 Compliance, Leave of Court to Amend and the plaintiffs Objection to the defendants
5 opposition was mailed postage pre paid to Thomas Ring, Assistant Attorney General,
6 Office of The Attorney General, 55 Elm St., Hartford, Connecticut 06144 on this 12?“ day I
7 ly
of August, 2005.
8 lll l
9 - .
10 James Kell l
11 Connecticut alley Hospita j
Dutcher Hal l ·
12 Whiting Forensic Divisio l
351 Silver Stree
13 Middletown, Connecticut 0645 ,
14 l
15 l
16 6
17 4 E
18
li
19 I
20
21
22
l
23 y
24 y
25 ‘ » y I
1 i
l
l z
""`""”“'m“m