Free Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

I , t R O I
· UNBTED STATES DISTRICT COURT F IL III; U
I ISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT I
I ROBERT KALMAN, Plaintiff : .I?.@___._, I I I
v. ” ; can Action 14P,,}‘%;i§3§t§i,?sii?,ii’i“` I
I (DJS) (TPS) I
I ROBERT BERGER, et al., 2
I Defendants, November 9, 2003
I ··~··~···-····—-·-—-——·-—·-— I
I A STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS I
I Pursuant to Rule 9(c) 1 of this court’s Local Rules of Civil Procedure,
_ the plaintiff Robert Kalman, submits the following list of undisputed facts
that entitle him to summary judgement on his ADA, claim of the denial to -
the plaintiff access to services, opportunities, programs and activities I
enjoyed by others in the least restrictive setting.
1. On- January 10, 2003 defendants Robert Berger, John Ryan, Janet I
Williams, Silvia Cancela and Susan Blair, held a hearing pursuant to the
provisions of Connecticut General Statutes, Section l7a—583. On
F ebruary 21, 2003 defendants Robert Berger, John Ryan, Janet Williams, I
Silvia Cancela and Susan Blair, issued a memorandum of decision I
finding that plaintiff "Robert Kalman is so violent that he requires
confinement within a maximum-security setting"
1 I
I


""""""`* to R R YG EG R R, ;! L; O ;; I E ;;


‘“ T to ·· -- Ei RRR QQ QQ S QQ ` S Q.Q,Q_Q1

. I
I
I ” Case 3:03-cv-00671-D® Document 30-2 FiIed11/€»%OO3 Page2of4
I 2. The defendant Robert Berger, John Ryan, Janet Williams, Silvia Cancela I
I I
_ and Susan Blair stated in the Memorandum of decision that "Further the
I Board orders that the confinement of Robert Kalman be under maximum-
I security conditions? Pursuant to Connecticut General Statues, Section
I 17a—599, defendant Robert Berger, John Ryan, Janet Williams, Silvia I
Cancela and Susan Blair ordered the plaintiff confined to the Whiting I
Forensic Institute. The plaintiff is presently confined under the most I
restrictive setting at the Institute under conditions of maximum-security. I
.3. The plaintiff is deprived of appropriate treatment services consistent with I
his individual clinical status, by having been wrongfully classified by I
defendants as "so violent" and by having been ordered conhned in a I
maximum-security facility in a restrictive classification setting that I
deprives plaintiff of increasing levels of freedom and responsibility equal I
to civilly committed patients, and other patients committed to the
jurisdiction of the defendants.
4. Plaintiff is deprived of increasing levels of freedom not allowing him
I
unsupervised on-campus passes, employment opportunities afforded to I
I
I
2 I


) ` Case 3:03-cv-00671-D® Document 30-2 Filed 11/{252003 Page 3 of 4
i civilly cormnitted patients, and other patients committed to the V
jurisdiction of the defendants.
l l
5. Plaintiff is denied the opportunity to exercise personal autonomy and F
l
responsibility for as much of his daily activities as clinically appropriate,
{ in that he is restricted to levels of freedom that only allow him to go only 4
in the Institute courtyard regardless of his individual clinical status. N
5
6. Plaintiff is not allowed to go on off campus rehabilitative _ or leisure I
activities afforded to civilly committed patients and other patient’s {
committed to the jurisdiction of the defendants. i
2
7. Plaintiff is not allowed consideration for temporary leaves, and is not
eligible to be considered for transition into the community. l
l
8. Plaintiffs confinement at the Institute under the most restrictive setting
severely diminishes his everyday life activities, including family
relations, social contacts, economic independents, and of ethnic cultural
enrichment.
3 l _



N i Case 3:03-cv-00671-DQS) Document 30-2 Filed 11/@-22*2003 Page 4 of 4
October 29, 2003
N Respectfully submitted,
N
Robert Kalman N
N Whiting Forensic Institute N
' _ P. O. Box 70 O’Brien Drive
N Middletown, CT 06457-0070 N
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certiiy that a copy of the forgcing Statement of Undisputed
Facts, was mailed in accordance with Rule 5 (b) of the Federal Rules of E
Civil Procedure on this 9th, day of November 2003 to: N
Richard J. Lynch
Assistant Attorney General
55 Elm Street, P. O. Box i20 l
Hartford, CT 06141 ~— 0120 N
. ` N
Robert Kalman, Pro se,
E
‘ 4 E
5
i