Trueblood, et al v. Washington State Department of Health and Human Services et al

Filing 263

ORDER granting plaintiffs' 244 Motion for TRO by Judge Marsha J. Pechman.(RS)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10

CASSIE CORDELL TRUEBLOOD, et
al.,

11
Plaintiffs,
12

CASE NO. C14-1178-MJP
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
ORDER

v.
13
14

WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT
OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES,
et al.,

15
Defendants.
16
17
18
19

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining
Order. (Dkt. No. 244.) Having considered the Parties’ briefing, the opinions of the Court
Monitor’s experts, the observations made by the Court during its May 10, 2016 visit to the Maple

20
Lane facility, and the related record, the Court GRANTS the Motion with some modification.
21
/
22
/
23
24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER- 1

1
2

Discussion
Plaintiffs move the Court for an order enjoining Defendants from allowing class members

3 to access the staircases at the Maple Lane alternative restoration facility—which includes
4 enjoining Defendants from housing class members on the second floor of the facility—until such
5 time as the staircases and their railings no longer pose an unreasonable risk to class members’
6 safety. (Dkt. No. 244.) Defendants oppose the Motion, arguing that the staircases are not unsafe
7 and that Plaintiffs cannot satisfy the elements required for issuance of a temporary restraining
8 order. (Dkt. No. 248.)
9

“A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on

10 the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the
11 balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.” Winter v.
12 Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). The standard “is substantially identical for
13 the injunction and the TRO.” Stuhlbarg Intern. Sales Co., Inc. v. John D. Brush & Co., Inc., 240
14 F.3d 832, 839 n.7 (9th Cir. 2001).
15

At issue here is access to and use of the second floor of the Maple Lane alternative

16 restoration facility, which includes patient bedrooms. Plaintiffs argue that use of the second
17 floor presents an unreasonable risk of serious injury to class members who might attempt to
18 injure themselves or others by jumping or failing over the uncovered railings on the staircases or
19 by hanging themselves from the staircases’ railings. (Dkt. No. 244.) Plaintiffs argue that the
20 risks posed by the open staircases mirror the risks posed by the open staircase at the Yakima
21 alternative restoration facility, which has already been found to present an unreasonable risk to
22 class members. (Id.)
23
24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER- 2

1

Defendants argue that the Maple Lane facility is a physically safe facility overall, and

2 that any remaining risks posed by the physical facility have been mitigated through screening
3 and monitoring procedures. (Dkt. No. 248.) Specifically, Defendants argue that patients sent to
4 Maple Lane are pre-screened for suicidal ideation or behaviors, that all staff have been trained on
5 suicide prevention techniques, and that the staircases are monitored by video camera and from
6 the central command station in the center of the facility. (Id.) Defendants argue that remediation
7 efforts are ongoing, and that the DSHS has already planned additional construction to enclose the
8 staircases. (Id.)
9

The Court finds that the open staircases at the Maple Lane facility present a serious and

10 unacceptable risk of irreparable harm to both class members and facility staff. As described by
11 the experts, open staircases allow for jumping or falling, and allow for items to be thrown down
12 onto others. The exposed metal bars of the railing allow for hanging. While the Court
13 appreciates the facility’s commitment to monitoring class members and training staff, monitoring
14 (even by well-trained staff) cannot prevent suicide from jumping or hanging in many instances
15 because of the speed with which people intent on harming themselves might accomplish those
16 actions.
17

The Court agrees with Defendants that their remediation efforts—i.e., the construction of

18 plexiglas and metallic enclosures and barriers around the staircases—are sufficient to remove the
19 unreasonable risk of harm to class members. Accordingly, the Court finds that allowing access
20 to the second floor of Wing A, where construction has been completed, does not present an
21 unreasonable risk of irreparable harm. However, Defendants have allowed access to the second
22 floor of all four of the facility’s wings, and have housed at least two class members on the
23 second floor of Wing D, where the remediation efforts have not been completed. The Court
24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER- 3

1 cannot allow class members to be housed on or have access to the second floor of Wings B, C,
2 and D when the staircases to those wings continue to present a real and immediate risk of serious
3 harm to class members. Therefore, as laid out below, the Court issues a modified temporary
4 restraining order preventing access to the second floor of Wings B, C, and D until such time as
5 the staircases in those wings are enclosed in the same manner as the staircase in Wing A.
6

As with the temporary restraining order issued regarding the Yakima alternative

7 restoration facility, the Court derives its authority to issue this order from its Order Modifying
8 Permanent Injunction and the representations made by Defendants in support of their request for
9 additional time to achieve compliance. (Dkt. No. 186.) The Court granted Defendants an
10 additional five months to come into compliance—instead of holding Defendants in contempt—
11 based on the understanding that DSHS had two additional facilities in which it could safely
12 provide competency restoration services to class members. Defendants represented to the Court
13 that the alternative restoration facilities and the care provided there would be similar and
14 comparable to that of the state hospitals, and that the “Department’s alternative sites for
15 restoration will be set up as therapeutic environments.” (Dkt. No. 183 at 2.) Instead, class
16 members are being placed in a facility that presents several serious risks of harm not present at
17 the state hospitals.
18

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED with

19 some modification. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
20

(1)

No class member may be housed on, or allowed access to, the second floor of

21 Wings B, C, and D of the Maple Lane alternative restoration facility unless and until the
22 jumping, falling, and hanging risks posed by the staircases have been remediated. Because the
23
24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER- 4

1 Court is satisfied with the remediation efforts completed on the staircase and railing in Wing A,
2 this temporary restraining order does not prohibit the use of the second floor of Wing A.
3

(2)

Defendants must seal off the staircases on Wings B, C, and D so that they may not

4 be used or accessed, and may only unseal the staircases once remediation efforts have been
5 completed and the staircases are enclosed in the same manner as Wing A.
6

(3)

7

This temporary restraining order will remain in effect until June 20, 2016, or until proof

The bond requirement is waived.

8 of compliance has been submitted to the Court and the Court Monitor and is found acceptable by
9 the Court, whichever is earlier. Plaintiffs may apply for an extension of the order, if appropriate.
10

SO ORDERED.

11
12

The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.

13
14

Dated this 6th day of June, 2016.

15

A

16
17

Marsha J. Pechman
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER- 5