Over the past few months, several developments have occurred in the ongoing Ball v. Kasich litigation that are likely of interest to county boards of DD. While each development has its own complex legal explanation, we have prepared a brief summary below to ensure that members are kept up to date on the general progress of the lawsuit. Members with questions about any of the items presented below should feel free to email "firstname.lastname@example.org" for more information.
Guardians Make Claims Against Plaintiffs, Defendants on ICFs
Class definition narrows significantly
In response to this restricted class definition, plaintiffs filed a motion in October requesting the court reconsider its decision. They argued that the definition was too narrow and allows the State to define scope of options counseling. Because the court had yet to consider the plaintiffs' request for reconsideration, however, the court used its more narrow class definition to severely limit the plaintiffs' discovery requests in late November. Essentially, this means that the plaintiffs can only request documents, interviews, and other information from the much smaller pool of individuals who meet the court's new definition.
On December 7, the court rejected the plaintiffs' argument that the class definition is too narrow. At this time, the narrower class definition continues to substantially limit the scope of the plaintiffs' lawsuit.
Settlement Talks Continue, Trial Scheduled
In the event that settlement talks do not produce a resolution, however, the court has set a date for the trial to begin: February 24, 2020.
OACB will continue to participate in these proceedings and ensure that the interests and voices of county boards of developmental disabilities and the people they serve are well-represented. During the interim, members with questions about the case should feel free to email email@example.com with questions or requests for more information.
Send this page to a friend