TPM Mourns the Passing of Our Friend and Colleague Bruce A. Bell, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE

For forty years, Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP had the benefit of the environmental engineering expertise, the wise counsel, and the warm sense of humor of our friend and colleague Bruce Bell, who passed away on June 7, 2023, in Boston, Massachusetts, following an illness. 

Bruce stood shoulder-to-shoulder with us through dozens of legal battles over four decades to vindicate our clients’ interests in protecting the environment. TPM partner Carolyn Smith Pravlik said, “Bruce was the gold standard as an expert. He was able to explain complex technical issues so that a judge could understand them and was absolutely unflappable on cross-examination.” We will miss Bruce and send our deepest condolences to his family and friends. 

TPM Files FOIA Action for the Maryland Transit Opportunities Coalition to Obtain Access to Unreleased Documents Regarding I-495 and I-270 Toll Lanes

Nearly one year ago, the Maryland Transit Opportunities Coalition (MTOC) sought procurement and planning documents from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) related to a major planned toll lane project for I-495 & I-270 in Maryland and the American Legion Bridge between Maryland and Virginia. FHWA has failed to produce the requested documents for almost a year despite a 20-day time limit. On April 3, 2023, Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP (TPM) sued for the release of the documents (Maryland Transit Opportunities Coalition v. Federal Highway Administration (D.D.C. Civ. No. 23-894 (RDM)). Click here for the Complaint. On April 3, 2023, MTOC described the importance of these documents as follows:

“The toll lane scheme was plagued with secrecy from the beginning,” MTOC chair Ben Ross said. “Whatever happens next on the American Legion Bridge, full disclosure of the backroom deals that brought us to this point is essential to protect the public interest.”

A critical piece of the lawsuit is the mysterious “Capital Beltway Accord” between Maryland and Virginia. Former governors Larry Hogan and Ralph Northam held an elaborate signing ceremony in November 2019, but the text of the deal was never made public. It emerged later that the two states were still working out the details, and no final agreement had been signed.

In April 2022, Maryland officials admitted that there was a “draft agreement, drafted term sheet and two bi-state cooperation letters” but refused to release them. MTOC then submitted its FOIA request for these and other toll lane documents to FHWA. Eleven months later, the Federal agency has yet to respond. Under FOIA, a response is supposed to be issued within 20 days and documents released promptly after.

“Secret deals are no way to conduct the people’s business,” Ross said. “For the sake of accountability, let's put all the facts in front of the public before any more decisions are made.”

On April 3, 2023, Montgomery Community Media covered the case (“Transit Coalition Sues Federal Highway Administration for Road Widening Documents,” available here). On April 13, 2023, Maryland Matters covered the case as well (“Transit group asks federal judge to compel release of toll lane proposal documents,” available here).

Shortly after the complaint was filed, on April 14, 2023, the Maryland Transit Opportunities Coalition received a partial response to the FOIA request producing some of the documents and withholding others. The Maryland Transit Opportunities Coalition is reviewing the FOIA response to determine its adequacy. 

If you have any questions about the case, please call Daniel Franz at 202-204-8473.

District of Columbia Now Requiring Medicaid Recipients to Renew Their Coverage

Starting on April 1, 2023, and continuing through June 2024, all DC Medicaid recipients will be required to renew their coverage. In March 2020, DC Medicaid renewals were suspended as part of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency. As a result, for the past three years, DC Medicaid recipients have not been required to renew their coverage but they will all have to do so now.   

As the renewal period opens, DC Medicaid recipients should update their contact information, especially their mailing address, through the District Direct portal (www.districtdirect.dc.gov/ua). 

DC’s Medicaid agency will review your family’s information and will mail you a notice regarding your Medicaid eligibility at the address they have on record for you. If the District finds that you are still eligible, you will not have to take any action. If the District needs more information to decide if you are still eligible for Medicaid, the notice will provide instructions to fill out renewal forms. The renewal period will continue until June 2024, so do not be alarmed if you do not receive your notice immediately.

For more information about the renewal process, click here. If you need assistance filling out and submitting your DC Medicaid renewal forms, you can contact the District’s helpline at 202-727-5355. If you need further help regarding your Medicaid coverage, for example, if you lose your coverage without having received any prior written notice, please contact our law firm at 202-682-0578 and we may be able to assist you.

DC Medicaid Beneficiaries Win Reversal in Federal Appeals Court Which Allows Them to Press their Claims That the District of Columbia Fails to Provide Due Process

Maldonado v. District of Columbia is a class action filed in 2010 by Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP (TPM) and the National Health Law Program on behalf of District of Columbia Medicaid beneficiaries and applicants which seeks to establish their constitutional right to receive procedural due process, in the form of individualized written notice, when their claims for prescription drug coverage are denied at the pharmacy. 

In March 2022, the district court dismissed the case as moot. This was the third time the district court had dismissed the case.

Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed the lower court’s decision, as it had done twice before. 

In a unanimous opinion by Senior Judge David S. Tatel, the Court of Appeals held that the District of Columbia failed to meet its “heavy burden of demonstrating mootness” when it relied solely on a 2020 policy which it claimed was “largely successful” in requiring pharmacies to provide Plaintiffs with individualized written notice. Because the lower court had been presented with “evidence that pharmacies are in fact failing to provide notice,” the Court of Appeals concluded that “the case is no more moot than Brown v. Board of Education would have been if, in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 1954 decision, the Topeka Board of Education had issued a memorandum directing its schools to desegregate and record evidence demonstrated that Black children were still attending segregated schools.” The Court of Appeals further instructed the district court “to proceed expeditiously with discovery and allow plaintiffs to make their case.” 

“Today’s decision is emphatic that the high standard for mootness cannot be met by simply having a policy on paper,” said TPM partner Michael L. Huang, who argued the appeal. “After thirteen years without progress, Plaintiffs look forward to finally having their case resolved on the merits.”

Jane Perkins, Litigation Director for the National Health Law Program, commented that: “The problems in the District of Columbia are by no means unique. Medicaid beneficiaries, nationwide, are leaving their pharmacies each day without the necessary prescriptions, empty-handed with no explanation of why they have been told no. The D.C. Plaintiffs now have the opportunity to engage in discovery from the Medicaid agency and to shed light on this issue as they prove their case in court.”

Follow the links to download the Court of Appeals’ opinion and order.

Message Regarding COVID-19 Public Health Emergency

At Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP, we are working hard to continue serving our clients during the on-going COVID-19 pandemic. We are operating on our regular office schedule, but many of our lawyers are working from home. Our office is not open for clients to visit without an appointment. 

If you are calling our Medicaid Hotline (202-682-0578), please leave a message with your name, the issue you are having, and your telephone number. One of our paralegals will contact you as soon as possible and within one business day. DC Medicaid beneficiaries whose coverage would have otherwise expired as of March 2020 or later will have their Medicaid benefits automatically extended during the COVID-19 federal public health emergency and they do not need to take any action to extend the benefits. 

The District of Columbia has compiled information regarding the specific effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on Medicaid beneficiaries, which can be found here.

We wish everyone good health as we work together to combat this public health emergency and we will continue to help in any way we can. To contact us or schedule an appointment, simply give us a call at 202-682-2100 or send us a message here. 

Notice to Plaintiff Class in DL v. District of Columbia

On December 21, 2022, Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a request for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses in DL v. District of Columbia, a class action related to special education services for preschool-aged children in the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia (the defendant) agreed to pay those fees and expenses and the matter has been submitted to the Court for its approval. Class members may file objections with the Court to the fee request on or before February 6, 2023. For additional detail, click here for a copy of the notice related to this motion. Click here for additional information regarding this case. 

TPM Fights for Public Access to Budget Documents in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In 2020, Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP (TPM) brought a D.C. Freedom of Information Act (“D.C. FOIA”) case against the District of Columbia. TPM asked the D.C. Superior Court to order the District to turn over budget materials that reflect determinations by D.C. agencies about how much money they need to do their work. D.C. law requires that information be made public and posted on a District website. As discussed here, on July 23, 2021, the Superior Court rejected the Mayor’s arguments that she was entitled to withhold the documents and ordered them to be placed online.

That order was stayed pending the Mayor’s appeal to the D.C. Court of Appeals. In that appeal (District of Columbia v. Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP (No. 21-CV-543)), the Mayor seeks to have the D.C. FOIA provision at issue declared invalid, contending that the budget transparency imposed by statute would violate the District Charter. Oral argument was held before the Court of Appeals on September 28, 2022 (recording here). The case is pending decision.

On October 14, 2022, the Washington City Paper reported on this matter in an article titled, “Bowser Fights Budget Transparency. No One Is Surprised.” Click here for that article.

TPM Receives Outstanding Achievement Award from Washington Lawyers' Committee

On June 1, 2022, the Washington Lawyers’ Committee recognized TPM’s work on Charles H., et al. v. District of Columbia by awarding the firm an Outstanding Achievement Award for Commitment to Civil Rights and Justice:

“Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, DC Public Schools has provided inaccessible, inadequate, and inconsistently delivered work packets in lieu of classes to 40 students with special education needs who are incarcerated at the DC Jail. As a result, these students received virtually no instruction and no mental health counseling or other services in violation of federal education law. In response, Terris Pravlik & Millian LLP, School Justice Project, and the Committee filed suit and in June 2021, a federal judge entered a preliminary injunction ordering the District to provide these students with special education and related services in conformity with their Individual Education Plans within 15 days. In February 2022, a federal court found the District in contempt of the preliminary injunction. We continue to advocate on behalf of the students at the DC Jail to ensure they are provided the education they deserve.”

More information about the award can be found here.

Notice to Plaintiff Class in DL v. District of Columbia

On June 7, 2022, Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a request for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses in DL v. District of Columbia, a class action related to special education services for preschool-aged children in the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia (the defendant) agreed to pay those fees and expenses and the matter has been submitted to the Court for its approval. Class members may file objections with the Court to the fee request on or before July 29, 2022. For additional detail, click here for a copy of the notice related to this motion. Click here for additional information regarding this case.

DC Held in Contempt for Failing to Comply with Court Order to Provide Special Education to DC Jail Students

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, students with disabilities at the DC Jail complex have not received the education and related services to which they are entitled under federal law.

On June 16, 2021, the Court found that, inter alia, students were experiencing irreparable harm from the denial of their education and that Plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their claim. Therefore, the Court provisionally certified the class and ordered the District of Columbia within 15 days to provide the students with “the full hours of special education and related services mandated by their Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) through direct, teacher-or-counselor-led group classes and/or one-on-one sessions, delivered via live videoconference calls and/or in-person interactions.”

However, the District has failed to comply with this order.

On February 16, 2022, Judge Nichols found the District of Columbia in contempt for its failure to comply with the preliminary injunction. Judge Nichols ordered the District to submit individualized plans to ensure that each student will receive the education hours lost since the original preliminary injunction order and to extend eligibility for students past their 22nd birthday for the amount of time necessary for them to receive the education they should have received had the District complied immediately with the preliminary injunction. In addition, he ordered a “remote-learning system fully operational” in the DC Jail by March 15.

In his Contempt Order, Judge Nichols noted that, “every student currently enrolled in the Program remains at an inexcusable educational deficit for this school year—a failure all the more baffling given that the Court entered its Preliminary Injunction months before the school year began.” Judge Nichols further stated “[i]t is beyond doubt (indeed, it is essentially conceded) that Defendants have failed, and are continuing to fail, to comply with the Preliminary Injunction. They have had ample time to do so, yet remain out of compliance.” See the Order here.

The Washington Post, writing about the Court’s order (see here), explained that “while some services have [improved since the beginning of the pandemic], the contempt order revealed deep and persistent failures to operate the high school program. . . .”

Carolyn Smith Pravlik of Terris, Pravlik, and Millian, LLP, who argued the motion, says: “The Judge’s Order sends a clear message to the District that it cannot continue with business as usual but must immediately take effective steps to meet the Court’s injunction and thereby meet the educational needs of the high school students at the DC Jail.”

TPM Announces Stephanie Madison as Newest Partner

Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP is pleased to announce that Stephanie Madison has become its newest partner, effective January 1, 2022. Stephanie has demonstrated passion and skill on behalf of our clients since she joined the firm in 2015. Over the last few years, Stephanie has focused on civil rights class actions related to access to Medicaid benefits and special education services. TPM partner Todd Gluckman notes that “We and our clients are extraordinarily lucky to have her here.”

Stephanie received her law degree from Georgetown University Law Center in 2014. Following law school, and before she came to TPM, Stephanie worked at the American Civil Liberties Union as a Litigation Fellow for the National Prison Project. She was part of the litigation team representing clients in class actions challenging conditions in prisons, jails, and immigration detention facilities for constitutional and statutory violations.

Notice to Plaintiff Class in DL v. District of Columbia

On January 4, 2022, plaintiffs’ counsel filed a request for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses in DL v. District of Columbia, a class action related to special education services for preschool-aged children in the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia (the defendant) agreed to pay those fees and expenses and the matter has been submitted to the Court for its approval. Class members may file objections with the Court to the fee request on or before February 19, 2022. For additional detail, click here for a copy of the notice related to this motion. Click here for additional information regarding this case.

Court Requires District of Columbia to Comply with its Legal Obligation to Post Budget Materials Online

Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP (TPM) brought a DC Freedom of Information Act (“DC FOIA”) case against the District of Columbia asking the Superior Court to order the District to turn over budget materials that are required by law to be posted on a District website. The legislative history for the law explains that it was passed to “expand public access to key budget documents so that residents can participate more fully in the budget dialogue, and [to] promote accountability by making the financial operations of the District government more transparent.” TPM sought the materials to help it to monitor the District’s compliance with the injunction in DL v. District of Columbia, which addresses the delivery of special education and related services to preschool-aged children. More information about the DL case is here.

The Mayor asked the Court to dismiss the case, arguing that the documents were exempt from disclosure under DC FOIA or, in the alternative, asking the Court to invalidate the statutory provision at issue rather than order the Mayor to comply with it. The DC Council filed an amicus curiae brief supporting TPM and calling for the documents’ release. On July 23, 2021, the Superior Court rejected the Mayor’s arguments and ordered the District of Columbia to publish online all documents that the statute requires to be public.

The case is Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP v. District of Columbia, No. 2020 CA 003087 B, in DC Superior Court. The complaint is here and the Court’s order is here.

Notice to Plaintiff Class in DL v. District of Columbia

On July 6, 2021, plaintiffs’ counsel filed a request for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses in DL v. District of Columbia, a class action related to special education services for preschool-aged children in the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia (the defendant) agreed to pay those fees and expenses and the matter has been submitted to the Court for its approval. Class members may file objections with the Court to the fee request on or before August 23, 2021. For additional detail, click here for a copy of the notice related to this motion. Click here for additional information regarding this case.

Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Ordering DC to End IDEA Violations at the DC Jail Within 15 Days

On June 16, 2021, Judge Carl J. Nichols of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia entered a preliminary injunction in Charles H. v. District of Columbia, ordering the District of Columbia within 15 days to provide special education to the more than 40 students who are incarcerated at the DC Jail complex. The District must comply by July 1, 2021.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, students at the DC Jail complex only received occasional work packets in lieu of classes taught by qualified teachers either in-person or virtually. In April 2021, two students represented by TPM and co-counsel at the Washington Lawyers’ Committee and School Justice Project, filed a lawsuit on behalf of themselves and a class of all other students at the Inspiring Youth Program challenging the District’s failure to provide them with education and other services that they are entitled to receive under federal law and asking the court to issue a preliminary injunction to ensure that students have access to their education.

Judge Nichols found that “Plaintiffs are likely to demonstrate that Defendants did not implement student IEPs to the greatest extent possible throughout the pandemic” because the District failed to properly plan and implement a sufficient remote educational program at the Inspiring Youth Program, and the limited education they did provide did not offer students educational benefit and because the students would suffer irreparable harm, an injunction was warranted.

The court order requires that the District provide all students at IYP “with the full hours of special education and related services mandated by their IEP through direct, teacher-or-counselor-led group classes and/or one-on-one sessions, delivered via live videoconference calls and/or in-person interactions” within 15 days. See the Order here and Opinion here.

Zenia Sanchez Fuentes of Terris Pravlik & Millan LLP, says: “We are thrilled for our brave clients who had the courage and commitment to bring this case to federal court to pursue their education. The Court has told the District of Columbia loudly and clearly that its failure to teach these students during the pandemic must cease within 15 days. We look forward to continuing to vindicate our clients’ federal rights.” 

The Washington Post, writing about the Court’s order (see here), explained: “The judge issued the injunction before the full lawsuit has made its way through court, a sign the [students] made a strong case that they haven’t received an adequate education and need an immediate solution...” The DCist, the digital publication of WAMU 88.5 American University Radio, also wrote about the Court’s order (see here).

The U.S. Department of Justice Submits Statement of Interest in DC Jail case

On April 9, 2021, TPM, along with co-counsel at the Washington Lawyers’ Committee and School Justice Project, filed a class action on behalf of students with disabilities at the DC Jail complex challenging the District of Columbia’s failure to provide special education services and a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. On April 12, we filed a motion for a preliminary injunction which shows that the District’s failure to provide any direct instruction throughout the pandemic, and only providing students with work packets, is not FAPE and the Court should order effective injunctive relief. 

On May 26, 2021, the United States Department of Justice filed a Statement of Interest in the case, explaining that the United States “has an interest in ensuring the appropriate and consistent interpretation of the [Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)] and its implementing regulations . . . . [and] also has an interest in ensuring that the IDEA protections continue to apply during emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic.”

The United States explained that students with disabilities in adult correctional facilities are entitled to special education and related services under the IDEA and the responsibility of state and local education agencies to provide special education and related services exists during the COVID-19 pandemic despite challenges. The United States further explained that special education and related services must be designed to meet a student’s unique needs and cited cases in which courts have found packet-based instruction to be insufficient under the IDEA, particularly when it is the sole method of instruction.

The United States emphasized the federal resources available to state and local education agencies which can be used to overcome the challenges posed by remote learning in correctional settings. The Statement noted that the Department of Education has explained that educational agencies have “considerable flexibility” in how they use federal IDEA funds during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Lastly, the United States stated that compensatory education may be required when a school district denies students special education and related services, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Statement of Interest is available here.

TPM, joined by the School Justice Project and the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, Challenges DC’s Failure to Provide Needed Special Education Services at the DC Jail

On April 9, 2021, TPM filed a class action complaint on behalf of students at the DC jail who are being denied special education services during the pandemic.  Over a year ago, on March 13, 2020, DC Public Schools (DCPS) stopped in-person classes for all students due to the pandemic.  Although DCPS resumed virtual education for most students in the community, for the approximately 40 students enrolled in DCPS at the DC Jail complex, all of whom have disabilities and special education needs, DCPS has never resumed classes.  Instead, students have only received inaccessible, inadequate, and inconsistently delivered work packets in place of classes taught by qualified teachers either in-person or virtually.  Although each student has a comprehensive plan tailored to the student’s educational needs called an Individualized Education Program (IEP), which details, among other things, the instruction and related services each student needs to ensure that the student can make progress, DCPS has completely failed to implement these IEPs.  For the past year, students have had virtually no instruction and have not received mental health counseling or other services.

According to Stephanie A. Madison, Attorney at Terris Pravlik & Millan LLP, “Students with disabilities are extremely susceptible to being left behind if not given a proper education. Marginalization is exacerbated for young people that are involved the criminal justice system.  Asking them to fend for themselves regarding their education has the potential to derail their futures.”  A copy of the complaint is here. 

DCist, the digital publication of WAMU 88.5 American University Radio, writing about this suit (see here), explained: “When the pandemic pushed learning online, students in D.C. schools were supplied digital devices and WiFi hotspots so they could participate in virtual classes during the pandemic. But students in the D.C. Jail have mostly received paper packets of work or given limited access to tablets uploaded with digital versions of the packets, the suit says.”

The plaintiffs have moved the Court for a preliminary injunction to bring about a prompt remedy for the students at the DC Jail. 

TPM Salutes Marjorie Rifkin – the 2021 Recipient of the American Bar Association’s Paul G. Hearne Award for Disability Rights

We send our hearty congratulations to our colleague Marjorie Rifkin who received the American Bar Association’s 2021 Paul G. Hearne Award for Disability Rights at a virtual ceremony on February 19, 2021.  A link to the announcement of Marjorie’s award is here.

Marjorie joined our firm in 2020 to continue her work as co-counsel with TPM, AARP Foundation Litigation, and Disability Rights DC at University Legal Services, in the Brown v. District of Columbia class action brought by nursing facility residents seeking to transition to the community with DC Medicaid long-term care under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  More information about Brown v. District of Columbia is available here.

TPM’s case to require the District of Columbia to comply with its legal obligation to post budget materials online moves forward

Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP (TPM) brought a FOIA case against the District of Columbia asking the Superior Court to order the District to turn over budget materials that are required by DC law to be posted on a District website.  TPM sought the materials to help it to monitor the District’s compliance with the injunction in DL v. District of Columbia, which addresses the delivery of special education and related services to preschool-aged children.  More information about the DL case is here. 

The Mayor moved to dismiss the case.  The DC Council filed an amicus curiae brief supporting TPM.  On February 12, 2021, the Court denied the District’s motion to dismiss.  The case is Terris, Pravlik & Millian, LLP v. District of Columbia, No. 2020 CA 003087 B, in DC Superior Court.  The complaint is here and the Court’s order is here.

Notice to Plaintiff Class in DL v. District of Columbia

On December 23, 2020, plaintiffs’ counsel filed a request for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses in DL v. District of Columbia, a class action related to special education services for preschool-aged children in the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia (the defendant) agreed to pay those fees and expenses and the matter has been submitted to the Court for its approval. Class members may file objections with the Court to the fee request on or before March 26, 2021. For additional detail, click here for a copy of the notice related to this motion. Click here for additional information regarding this case.