Lane et al v. Kitzhaber et al

Filing 416

JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL signed on 8/12/2022 by United States Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta. (pjg)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
PAULA LANE; ANDRES PANIAGUA;
ELIZABETH HARRAH; ANGELA
KEHLER; GRETCHEN CASON; LORI
ROBERTSON; SPARKLE GREEN; and
ZAVIER KINVILLE, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated,
and UNITED CEREBRAL PALSY
ASSOCIATION OF
OREGON AND SOUTHWEST
WASHINGTON, INC.,
v.

Plaintiffs,

KATE BROWN, in her official capacity as
the Governor of the State of Oregon; ERINN
KELLEY-SIEL, Director of the Oregon
Department of Human Services; MARY
LEE FAY, Administrator of the Office of
Developmental Disability Services; and
STEPHANIE PARRISH TAYLOR,
Administrator of the Office of Vocational
Rehabilitation Services, all in their official
capacities,
Defendants.
__________________________________
Page 1 – JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

Case No. 3:12-cv-00138-AC
JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
v.
THE STATE OF OREGON,
Defendant.
__________________________________
ACOSTA, Magistrate Judge:
Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit against the State Defendants on January 25, 2012, on behalf of
themselves and all persons having intellectual or developmental disabilities who were working in,
or had been referred to work in, sheltered workshops. The court granted plaintiffs’ motion to
certify the class on August 6, 2012. The United States filed its intervenor complaint on May 24,
2013. After more than three years of vigorous litigation, the parties began settlement discussions
on July 10, 2015, which discussions continued through August 25, 2015. Through the parties’
and their attorneys’ genuine commitment, extraordinary effort, and consistent professionalism,
they reached an agreement for settling the case and, on September 15, 2015, they jointly moved
for preliminary approval of their agreement. The court granted their motion on September 17,
2015. The parties then jointly moved for final approval of their proposed settlement on November
13, 2015, and, after a fairness hearing, the court granted final approval of the settlement on
December 7, 2015.
The 37-page settlement agreement required the State Defendants to undertake multiple
obligations, which were to be performed over a seven-year period beginning in 2015 and ending
in 2022. To support and assess compliance with the settlement agreement obligations, the parties
agreed to employ an Independent Reviewer who would meet with the parties, attorneys, and
Page 2 – JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

stakeholders at regular intervals during the performance period, who would annually provide the
court with detailed written progress reports of the progress of implementing the settlement
agreement’s provisions, and who would submit a final report on compliance at the conclusion of
the performance period. 1
On July 6, 2022, the Independent Reviewer filed the “Final Report to the Court” regarding
compliance with the settlement agreement. The 72-page report, accompanied by five appendices
comprising 136 pages, contained the Independent Reviewer’s assessment of the State Defendants’
compliance with each obligation under the settlement agreement. Summarizing those findings at
the end of the report, the Independent Reviewer stated:
It is the determination of the Independent Reviewer that substantial progress has
been made in providing access to CIE[ 2 ] for Oregonians with IDD, including
sheltered workshop and transition class members. It is the Independent
Reviewer’s recommendation that the State has satisfied the metrics and
substantially complied with and implemented the other provisions of the Settlement
Agreement. It is the Independent Reviewer’s determination that certain actions
should be implemented by the state to sustain this progress and ensure that the
efforts to date are durable. 3
On July 21, 2022, the court convened a hearing on settlement agreement compliance and
final dismissal of case.

Plaintiffs’ and State Defendants’ attorneys each presented remarks

acknowledging and commending the significant permanent positive changes achieved as a result
1

During the performance period, two persons served as Independent Reviewer under the
settlement agreement. From 2015 to 2020, Cathy Ficker Terrill, M.S., served as Independent
Reviewer, and from 2020 to 2022, Nicole Jorwic, J.D., served as Independent Reviewer. The
court wishes to acknowledge and express its great appreciation for the superior and conscientious
work Ms. Terrill and Ms. Jorwic each performed in their role of Independent Reviewer, and in
working with the parties and their respective attorneys to realize the settlement agreement’s goals.
2

Competitive Integrated Employment.

3

The Independent Reviewer also offered recommendations for continuing the implementation of
the settlement agreement’s provisions.
Page 3 – JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

of the parties’ agreement. Plaintiffs also presented two witnesses at the hearing, both of whom
spoke highly of those changes and applauded the transformative improvements made in the lives
of the class members. At the hearing’s conclusion, this court observed:
What makes this particular case unique is the tremendous professionalism that the
lawyers and their client representatives brought to this problem to obtain a
resolution not just to end litigation, but to solve a problem, and not just to solve a
problem retroactively, but to put in place safeguards to make sure the problems they
saw are solved going forward.
Accordingly;
1. Based on the Independent Reviewer’s Final Report of July 6, 2022, and the appendices
thereto; the comments and statements of counsel at the hearing; the witness testimony at the
hearing; and the court’s assessment of the record; the court finds that State Defendants are in
substantial compliance with the parties’ Settlement Agreement and that a durable remedy is in
place, and that the parties’ performance under settlement agreement, as per its express terms, is
now ended.
2. Judgment is hereby ENTERED, and this case is DISMISSED, with prejudice. 4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 12th day of August, 2022.
_____________________________
Hon. John V. Acosta
United States Magistrate Judge

4

On August 9, 2022, the parties informed the court that they had resolved all outstanding issues
regarding attorney fees and costs.
Page 4 – JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL