Gabriella Collette, for herself and on behalf of Channin Collette, an incapacitated person v. Utah State Developmental Center; Utah State Department of Health and Human Services; State of Utah; and Jarod Squire

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Utah grants the state defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss claims arising from the alleged sexual assault of an incapacitated resident at the Utah State Developmental Center. The court concludes that the Center is not a suable legal entity, that Utah and the Utah Department of Health and Human Services are immune from the § 1983, Fair Housing Act, premises-liability, and related claims, and that the complaint insufficiently pleads Title IX and ADA claims. The court grants leave to amend the Title IX and ADA claims within fourteen days.

Holdings

1. The Utah State Developmental Center is a program and facility within the Department of Health and Human Services and is not a separate legal entity capable of being sued in its own name.
2. The State of Utah and the Utah Department of Health and Human Services are not persons subject to suit under § 1983 because the State is not a statutory person and DHHS is an arm of the State protected by Eleventh Amendment immunity.
3. The State Defendants are immune from the Fair Housing Act and premises-liability claims because the FHA did not abrogate Utah's Eleventh Amendment immunity, Utah did not waive that immunity under the circumstances, and the Utah Governmental Immunity Act retains immunity for injuries arising out of assault or battery.
4. The Title IX claim was inadequately pleaded because the complaint did not identify an appropriate official with actual knowledge of the alleged harassment or plead facts showing the State Defendants' response was deliberately indifferent, although amendment was permitted.
5. The ADA claim was inadequately pleaded because the complaint did not allege that the State Defendants discriminated against Channin by reason of her disability, although amendment was permitted.
6. The State Defendants retain immunity from vicarious liability for the negligence, gross-negligence, and sexual-battery claims asserted against Squire.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Utah State Developmental Center is a legal entity capable of being sued in its own name.
2. Whether the State of Utah and the Utah Department of Health and Human Services are persons subject to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
3. Whether Eleventh Amendment and Utah governmental immunity barred the Fair Housing Act and premises-liability claims against the State Defendants.
4. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged institutional Title IX liability based on actual knowledge and deliberate indifference.
5. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged that the alleged ADA discrimination occurred by reason of Channin's disability.
6. Whether the State Defendants could be held vicariously liable for the tort claims asserted against Squire.

Disposition

other