Four years ago, a woman with severe mental illness poured a pot of boiling water over Michael Sorenson as he sat in his wheelchair at a Bloomington group home, leaving him with burns covering 35 percent of his body.
This week the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that the group home operator cannot claim legal immunity under a 1967 state law and shield itself from more than $1 million in potential civil damages.
In a far-reaching decision, a three-judge appeals panel held that Sorenson, 63, can sue his former group home operator, Options Residential Inc. of Burnsville, for damages from injuries he suffered when a roommate with a history of aggression burned him so badly with the scalding water that he was hospitalized for two months and then had to move into a nursing home.
Attorneys say the decision will make it harder for group homes and other facilities that house or treat people with disabilities to insulate themselves from often-costly lawsuits in cases of neglect or abuse. The 1967 statute, known as the Minnesota Commitment and Treatment Act (CTA), established procedural safeguards and rights for people being committed by the courts as mentally ill; however, a provision of the law also gave facilities protections against civil or criminal liability when they made a "good faith" effort to provide care to committed individuals.
The decision has broad implications for the estimated 14,000 Minnesotans who live in four-bed group homes across the state. In many of these homes, people with physical and developmental disabilities live in close quarters with people with severe mental illnesses, which can create a chaotic and sometimes violent atmosphere, a 2015 Star Tribune investigation found. At times, residents lash out at each other and staff, turning these homes into battlegrounds.
"This means the least among us will have the right to a legal remedy if they are harmed in a group home," said Donald McNeil, a Bloomington attorney who represents Sorenson. "And no provider should be allowed to hide behind an immunity defense to avoid accountability."
Options Residential did not return multiple calls seeking comment.
In the past, facilities sometimes would claim broad immunity from legal action when maltreatment involved a person who was civilly committed under the 50-year-old state commitment law. Now, however, that could prove more difficult. The appeals panel concluded that immunity under the law is limited to claims arising from a person's civil commitment, and does not extend to harm done to individuals like Sorenson who are not committed as mentally ill.