Request Legal Help Now - Free


$3 Million Settlement Reached in METO Class Action

This is a settlement for the lawsuit.

St. Paul, MN: A $3 million settlement has been reached in a federal class action lawsuit brought by three families against the State of Minnesota and other defendants for restraining and secluding residents with developmental disabilities, prior to September, 2008, at Minnesota Extended Treatment Options (METO), a state operated facility.

In the settlement, the State and Plaintiff families agree to work together over the next 60 days to develop appropriate policies and procedures for use at METO and the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS). The parties also agree to form a committee to include stakeholders within the developmental disabilities community to study, review and modernize the DHS rule (Rule 40), which governs and protects people with developmental disabilities, to reflect current best practices, including the use of positive and social behavioral supports, and the development of placement plans consistent with the principle of the "most integrated setting" and "person centered planning, and development of an "Olmstead Plan" consistent with the 1999 U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 582 (1999).

If approved by the Federal Court, this settlement will establish lasting, positive change for the families who have been through this difficult, emotional situation. The State and the families have jointly agreed to develop effective policies and practices for the treatment and care of people with developmental disabilities, including those who are sent to state operated facilities.

The lawsuit, originally filed in July 2009, contended METO staff routinely restrained residents in a prone face down position and placed them in metal handcuffs and leg hobbles, placed residents in seclusion and isolation rooms for extended time periods, and deprived them of visits from family members, among other claims.

The lawsuit sought damages for violations of the federal civil and constitutional rights of residents with developmental disabilities, and asked the Court to enter an injunction against the State to prohibit its restraint and seclusion practices, and to declare them unconstitutional.

Legal Help

If you have a similar problem and would like to be contacted by a lawyer at no cost or obligation, please fill in our form.
Published on Sep-15-10


Please read our comment guidelines before posting.

Note: Your name will be published with your comment.

Your email will only be used if a response is needed.

Are you the defendant or a subject matter expert on this topic with an opposing viewpoint? We'd love to hear your comments here as well, or if you'd like to contact us for an interview please submit your details here.

Request Legal Help Now! - Free