News (Media Awareness Project) - US MD: Methadone Clinic Wins |
Title: | US MD: Methadone Clinic Wins |
Published On: | 2006-08-09 |
Source: | Baltimore Sun (MD) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-13 06:05:42 |
METHADONE CLINIC WINS
County Law Restricting Medical Facility Sites Faulted
A federal jury ruled yesterday that Baltimore County officials
discriminated against the patients of a Pikesville methadone clinic
when they enacted a law prohibiting state-licensed medical facilities
from locating within 750 feet of homes.
After hearing testimony over three weeks, the U.S. District Court jury
deliberated for less than five hours yesterday before finding in favor
of A Helping Hand methadone clinic. The clinic, which also prevailed
in a judge's ruling that the county law violated the Americans with
Disabilities Act, will remain open.
The findings do not immediately repeal the four-year-old law, but they
could prompt changes in the law to avoid similar challenges from other
methadone clinics that might seek to open in the county, said Steven
J. Barber, a lawyer for A Helping Hand.
"It's a great day for the people in Maryland who have serious need for
treatment," said Barber, adding that his Washington law firm, Steptoe
and Johnson, represented the clinic on a pro bono basis. "And the
message to the county should be clear: [The law] should not survive."
County attorneys said they would probably appeal the judge's ruling,
but it was unclear yesterday whether the county would also appeal the
jury's verdict.
The private, for-profit clinic in the Ralston neighborhood filed the
federal lawsuit against the county in 2002, claiming that the law
discriminated against the clinic's patients and violated the Americans
with Disabilities Act. The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland
joined the suit against the county. And three of the clinic's
patients, identified in the court proceedings as John Doe One and Two
and Jane Doe One, were also listed as plaintiffs in the suit.
The jurors found that the county had not interfered with the
individual rights of the clinic's clients and awarded no damages. The
county might have to pay the legal expenses of the clinic, though the
judge didn't rule on the amount yesterday. The jury found that the
clinic's right to due process was violated.
District Judge Catherine C. Blake, who presided over the trial, had
ruled Monday that the county law had a "disparate impact" of being
discriminatory, meaning whether it was intentional or not, the law had
the effect of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Donald I. Mohler, a county spokesman, said that County Executive James
T. Smith Jr., a former Circuit Court judge, would carefully review the
case and its "implications for the county taxpayers."
Mohler said the county was disappointed by the verdict. He called the
dispute an "important case for families in Baltimore County."
Lawyers for the county had argued that officials were employing zoning
law to keep certain types of businesses out of neighborhoods, much the
way the county prohibits factories and other companies from being
located too close to homes.
They pointed out that methadone clinics are permitted in areas zoned
for manufacturing, and that the 2002 law doesn't single out drug
treatment facilities, but applies to all state-licensed medical
facilities, including kidney dialysis offices. The law mentions
adverse effects on the community from such facilities, such as
increased traffic and parking problems.
Lawyers for the clinic argued that the county based its law on
stereotypes of drug addicts and had violated protections for disabled
people by bending to fears held by residents about drug treatment facilities.
Richard Griffiths, an attorney for the ACLU of Maryland, said
yesterday's verdict "serves to bolster the rights of people under the
ADA, especially those with disabilities that might be disfavored by
certain groups, such as government entities."
He said he didn't know of any jurisdictions in Maryland with zoning
laws similar to Baltimore County's but said that the case could serve
as precedent to any government seeking to single out those in drug
treatment.
Blake struck down county laws in 2000 and in 2002, ruling that they
violated the ADA because they were stricter about methadone clinics
than other similar medical practices. However, a 2002 appeals court
ruling held that a jury should have decided whether the law violated
the ADA, according to county attorneys.
A Helping Hand is the only for-profit methadone treatment clinic in
Baltimore County. A public-private hybrid program is in an industrial
park in Timonium. Another private, for-profit methadone clinic that
had sought to open in Pikesville settled with the county out of court
last year.
County Law Restricting Medical Facility Sites Faulted
A federal jury ruled yesterday that Baltimore County officials
discriminated against the patients of a Pikesville methadone clinic
when they enacted a law prohibiting state-licensed medical facilities
from locating within 750 feet of homes.
After hearing testimony over three weeks, the U.S. District Court jury
deliberated for less than five hours yesterday before finding in favor
of A Helping Hand methadone clinic. The clinic, which also prevailed
in a judge's ruling that the county law violated the Americans with
Disabilities Act, will remain open.
The findings do not immediately repeal the four-year-old law, but they
could prompt changes in the law to avoid similar challenges from other
methadone clinics that might seek to open in the county, said Steven
J. Barber, a lawyer for A Helping Hand.
"It's a great day for the people in Maryland who have serious need for
treatment," said Barber, adding that his Washington law firm, Steptoe
and Johnson, represented the clinic on a pro bono basis. "And the
message to the county should be clear: [The law] should not survive."
County attorneys said they would probably appeal the judge's ruling,
but it was unclear yesterday whether the county would also appeal the
jury's verdict.
The private, for-profit clinic in the Ralston neighborhood filed the
federal lawsuit against the county in 2002, claiming that the law
discriminated against the clinic's patients and violated the Americans
with Disabilities Act. The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland
joined the suit against the county. And three of the clinic's
patients, identified in the court proceedings as John Doe One and Two
and Jane Doe One, were also listed as plaintiffs in the suit.
The jurors found that the county had not interfered with the
individual rights of the clinic's clients and awarded no damages. The
county might have to pay the legal expenses of the clinic, though the
judge didn't rule on the amount yesterday. The jury found that the
clinic's right to due process was violated.
District Judge Catherine C. Blake, who presided over the trial, had
ruled Monday that the county law had a "disparate impact" of being
discriminatory, meaning whether it was intentional or not, the law had
the effect of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Donald I. Mohler, a county spokesman, said that County Executive James
T. Smith Jr., a former Circuit Court judge, would carefully review the
case and its "implications for the county taxpayers."
Mohler said the county was disappointed by the verdict. He called the
dispute an "important case for families in Baltimore County."
Lawyers for the county had argued that officials were employing zoning
law to keep certain types of businesses out of neighborhoods, much the
way the county prohibits factories and other companies from being
located too close to homes.
They pointed out that methadone clinics are permitted in areas zoned
for manufacturing, and that the 2002 law doesn't single out drug
treatment facilities, but applies to all state-licensed medical
facilities, including kidney dialysis offices. The law mentions
adverse effects on the community from such facilities, such as
increased traffic and parking problems.
Lawyers for the clinic argued that the county based its law on
stereotypes of drug addicts and had violated protections for disabled
people by bending to fears held by residents about drug treatment facilities.
Richard Griffiths, an attorney for the ACLU of Maryland, said
yesterday's verdict "serves to bolster the rights of people under the
ADA, especially those with disabilities that might be disfavored by
certain groups, such as government entities."
He said he didn't know of any jurisdictions in Maryland with zoning
laws similar to Baltimore County's but said that the case could serve
as precedent to any government seeking to single out those in drug
treatment.
Blake struck down county laws in 2000 and in 2002, ruling that they
violated the ADA because they were stricter about methadone clinics
than other similar medical practices. However, a 2002 appeals court
ruling held that a jury should have decided whether the law violated
the ADA, according to county attorneys.
A Helping Hand is the only for-profit methadone treatment clinic in
Baltimore County. A public-private hybrid program is in an industrial
park in Timonium. Another private, for-profit methadone clinic that
had sought to open in Pikesville settled with the county out of court
last year.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...