Bouslog v. Care Options Management Plans and Supportive Services, LLC

Background

Nickole Bouslog alleged that she has cerebral palsy, severe paralysis, and a need for an electric wheelchair, a computerized communication device, and 24-hour care. She had lived independently in the community for more than 20 years with staffing provided through the Regional Center of the East Bay. The Regional Center contracted with Care Options Management Plans and Supportive Services, LLC, doing business as Compass, to provide that care.

Bouslog alleged that her caretaker provided substandard and abusive care. According to the complaint, the caretaker did not provide enough food or water, did not bathe her regularly, left filth in her home, and left her unattended for extended periods. Bouslog also alleged that employees of Compass and the Regional Center did not meet with her outside the caretaker’s presence or make unannounced visits, so the problems went unnoticed until her parents took her to the hospital before scheduled surgery.

The complaint asserted claims under Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act as analyzed by the court, California law, and negligence against the caretaker, the caretaker’s employer, the Regional Center, and the California Department of Developmental Services.

State-law claims and administrative exhaustion

The court explained that California’s Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act provides a process for resolving disputes about services, including informal meetings, mediation, and a fair administrative hearing. A party may seek judicial review after the administrative decision.

The court concluded that Bouslog had not used that process before filing in federal court. It agreed with the Regional Center that the Lanterman Act required her to exhaust the available administrative remedies for claims concerning services provided under that law. The court therefore dismissed all of Bouslog’s state claims.

Federal disability claims

The court granted Developmental Services’ motion to dismiss Bouslog’s claims under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. It stated that these claims required allegations that Bouslog was denied or excluded from services because of her disability. The court accepted that Bouslog had a disability, qualified for the services, and alleged that the services were poorly provided. But it found that the alleged denial was not based on her status as a person with a disability. Instead, the court reasoned, her disability was the reason she received services, while the provider allegedly failed to carry them out correctly.

The court also granted the Regional Center’s motion to dismiss Bouslog’s Title III Americans with Disabilities Act claim. It found that the alleged poor service was not discrimination based on disability. The court granted the Regional Center’s motion to dismiss the Section 504 claim for the same reason.

Disposition

The court did not reach Developmental Services’ arguments about injunctive relief because the action was otherwise being dismissed. It dismissed the entire action, ordered that no further attempts to replead would be allowed because amendment would be futile, and directed the Clerk to close the file.