leftmfy

ADULT HOMES

Cortigiano v. Oceanview Manor Home for Adults, CV-04-4077 (E.D.N.Y.) (filed 2004)
MFY and Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw & Pittman LLP brought suit on behalf of residents of the Oceanview Manor adult home, seeking to end the home's denial of use of and control over the residents' meager monthly personal allowances, which are state entitlements not legally subject to the home's control, and to redress the ongoing invasion of privacy and verbal abuse in the distribution of the residents' funds. On April 4, 2005, the court granted class certification, noting that there were more than 150 residents of Oceanview, many of whom would not pursue their rights individually for lack of resources and fear of reprisal.

Bowen v. Rubin d/b/a Leben Home For Adults, CV-01-0070 (E.D.N.Y.)
MFY Legal Services, Inc., Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP, and Disability Advocates, Inc., filed a lawsuit on behalf of 17 mentally disabled men who were subjected to unnecessary prostate surgeries while residents of the Leben Home for Adults. All of the defendants were charged in some way with care of the disabled men when they resided at the Leben Home and used their special relationship with them to accomplish their money-making scheme. On August 4, 2004, the 17 plaintiffs won a settlement of $7.4 million ($432,653 each). The Leben Home for Adults, its former operator, two urologists involved in the surgery, and Parkway Hospital agreed to the settlement. Defendants connected to Americare, a home-health agency, declined to settle and the case is continuing against them. Most of the money from the settlement is being used to set up pooled supplemental needs trust accounts for the plaintiffs, and a social worker is assisting them to access proper services and improve their living arrangements.

Significant decisions:

213 F. Supp. 2d 220 (E.D.N.Y. 2001)
Court held that federal rules of civil procedure warrant appointment of "next friends" to pursue complex affirmative litigation on behalf of psychiatrically-disabled plaintiffs where clinical evidence supports the application and the court maintains continued supervision of the litigation.

Order, May 17, 2002
Court denied motion to dismiss plaintiff's federal claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and civil rights conspiracy claims under 29 U.S.C. ßß 1986 and 1985.

Henry v. Isaac, 214 A.D.2d 188 (2d Dep't 1995)
MFY and Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP brought suit on behalf of residents of the New Whitman Home for Adults. The court held that residents of an adult home have a private right of action for violations of Social Services Law and implementing regulations governing adult homes to seek redress for wrongs personally suffered as a result of poor conditions and lack of services in the home. (In Carrier v. Salvation Army d/b/a Booth House Residence for Adults, 88 N.Y.2d 298 (1996), the New York Court of Appeals denied a private right of action to seek the remedy of a temporary receiver, distinguishing Henry because it not address enforcement remedies, and stating that the Henry Court's conclusion was undercut by the then-recent amendment providing a private right of action for breach of the warranty of habitability. MFY has successfully lobbied for the introduction of a bill, now pending in the New York State Senate (S4878-A) and Assembly (A2971-B) that would overturn Carrier and create a private right of action.)

Alvarez v. Klein, Index No. 20403/02 (Sup. Ct. Kings Cty. June 10, 2002)
MFY brought a proceeding pursuant to Article 78 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules on behalf of residents of the Seaport Manor adult home who sought, inter alia, for the New York State Department of Health ("DOH") to appoint a receiver to operate the home, which had a long history of egregious conditions, to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the residents. In response, the New York State Attorney General counter moved for the appointment of a receiver, which was granted. Subsequently, the New York State Attorney General filed a separate lawsuit exercising his unique statutory authority and seeking, inter alia, restitution and damages for residents who had suffered through years of horrendous conditions. See State of New York and Antonia Novello v. Seaport Manor, et al, Index No. 52275/02 (Sup. Ct. Kings Cty.) [Dismissed, Decision Opinion and Order June 11, 2003].

Viruet v. Rubin d/b/a Leben Home for Adults, 181 Misc. 2d 535 (Sup. Ct. Qns. Cty. 1999) Held that causes of action sounding in breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, conversion and fraud for adult home's withholding of retroactive Social Security benefits were actionable because they alleged a breach by defendants of the parties' admission agreements that provided, inter alia, that resident funds would be protected.

Tzerman v. Castelucci d/b/a Seabay Manor Home for Adults, Index No. 9614/96 (Sup. Ct. Kings Cty.)
MFY represented adult home residents of Seabay Manor Home for Adults in a class action lawsuit challenging the improper withholding of the residents' personal needs allowances by the operator of the facility. By stipulation of settlement, all withheld allowances were returned to residents, along with punitive damages.

Daniels v. Christofoletti d/b/a Queens Lighthouse Home for Adults, 143 Misc.2d 857 (Civ. Ct. Qns. Cty. 1989)
MFY brought suit on behalf of a blind adult home resident who had been diagnosed with AIDS during a temporary hospitalization. The adult home refused to let him return, alleging that he was a danger to himself and others. The court held that an adult home operator cannot use self-help to evict a resident of an adult home but must bring a special proceeding and obtain a court order. Similarly, Schwartz v. Amsel as director of Garden of Eden Adult Home, Index No. L&T 036632/00 (Civ. Ct. Kings Cty. December 7, 2000) reiterated these longstanding legal process protections for adult home residents. See also Doyle v. Brooklyn Manor Home for Adults and Diane Walker, Index No. 2117/03 (Civ. Ct., Kings County, May 16, 2003) (holding that adult home must bring a special proceeding to evict a resident who was hospitalized after physically assaulting a staff member, and must readmit the resident until an eviction order is issued).