US Third Circuit Judicial Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 
covering Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey and the Virgin Islands
​ 

Measurable Goals

3rd Circuit: 

Frederick L. vs. Pennslyvania Department of Public Welfare (2005)

Val's Take

Frederick L. (3rd Cir. 2005) is cited by the US Department of Justice in Court Documents BUT it is not included under Olmstead Enforcement Cases for the 3rd Circuit on the ada.gov website.

My point is not so much that the website needs to be updated ---- It's more that the ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS need to be updated with CLEAR REGULATIONS.

We are only at this point in the discussion because of the BRILLIANT work of DOJ and other Individuals, Families, Advocates and Attorneys.

BUT we don't have WIDESPREAD OLMSTEAD COMPLIANCE among the States after more than 20 years after the original US Supreme Court Decision ---- and its hard to see how we're ever going to get it if we don't STREAMLINE this ENFORCEMENT PROCESS, PROVIDE CLEAR REGULATIONS, and GREATER TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND  ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT.

​
Court Summaries of the Opinion:

Rejecting Pennsylvania's fundamental alteration defense


Summary of this case from United States v. Mississippi
Interpreting Olmstead “to mean that a comprehensive working plan is a necessary component of a successful ‘fundamental alteration’ defense” and holding that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania could “not avail itself of the ‘fundamental alteration’ defense to relieve its obligation to deinstitutionalize eligible patients without establishing a plan that adequately demonstrate[d] a reasonably specific and measurable commitment to deinstitutionalization for which [the Commonwealth could] be held accountable.”

Summary of this case from Hampe v. Hamos
Applying Olmstead in action by mental health patients regarding their institutionalization

Summary of this case from Hawaii Coalition for Health v. State
Frederick L. v. Department of Public Welfare, 422 F.3d 151 (3d Cir. 2005)
(See 156-159 on Measurable Goals)

According to Casetext --- Frederick L. (2005) has not been overruled or negatively treated on appeal.
​