Home      Login

Abstract: 

In Charles v. Orange County, N.Y.S., 925 F.3d 73 (2d Cir. 2019), the court determined that discharge planning was an essential part of in-custody care. Further, a claim for damages caused by the lack of such planning can be a claim for deprivation of in-custody care and plaintiffs on remand will have the chance to prove that the mental health care that they complain of is of the sort that required discharge planning. This is a breakthrough decision and as such it is written with care, the corners are protected, the language somewhat conditional. This article examines the case itself and then what appears to be the most plausible take away principle.

Keywords: Charles v. Orange County, N.Y.S.; Discharge Planning for Mentally Disordered Inmates

Affiliations:  1: Executive Editor.