|
In October 2006, one of our residents filed a complaint in federal court alleging, among other things, that Channing House was behind a “premeditated campaign” to evict her from her apartment, and has been instrumental in discriminating against her based on her disabilities, and that we have not provided reasonable accommodations for her.
On January 29, 2009 the federal judge ruled in Channing House's favor on the final two claims in this case. This dismissed all eight claims in the case. The court therefore determined that the CCRC is not obligated to accommodate the resident by allowing private aides to provide all of the 24-hour care she required in independent living. In the order, the judge determined that Herriot's request would not be a "reasonable accommodation" and would constitute a fundamental change to Channing House's continuing care program. The judge further noted that Herriot could not have a reasonable expectation to remain in her independent unit because her continuing care contract explicitly states that at some point Herriot might be required to move to a higher level of care. It is unknown whether the case will be appealed.
|
