Box 5
Contains 18 Results:
A Legal Response to Legislative Failure: ARC v North Dakota , UND Honor's Thesis by Karissa Haugeberg: May 2000
In the ARC Case, Van Sickle found that North Dakota 's system for the care of the developmentally disabled violated the constitutional rights of its residents by being overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed.
Synopsis: Association for Retarded Citizens v. Olson, by John Kapsner and Lynn Boughey: undated
In the ARC Case, Van Sickle found that North Dakota 's system for the care of the developmentally disabled violated the constitutional rights of its residents by being overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed.
Correspondence: 1981-1995
In the ARC Case, Van Sickle found that North Dakota 's system for the care of the developmentally disabled violated the constitutional rights of its residents by being overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed.
Correspondence with Dr. Robert Eelkema, Court Monitor: 1982
In the ARC Case, Van Sickle found that North Dakota 's system for the care of the developmentally disabled violated the constitutional rights of its residents by being overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed.
Correspondence with Dr. Robert Eelkema, Court Monitor: 1983
In the ARC Case, Van Sickle found that North Dakota 's system for the care of the developmentally disabled violated the constitutional rights of its residents by being overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed.
Correspondence with Dr. Robert Eelkema, Court Monitor: 1984
In the ARC Case, Van Sickle found that North Dakota 's system for the care of the developmentally disabled violated the constitutional rights of its residents by being overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed.
Correspondence with Dr. Robert Eelkema, Court Monitor: 1985
In the ARC Case, Van Sickle found that North Dakota 's system for the care of the developmentally disabled violated the constitutional rights of its residents by being overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed.
Correspondence with Dr. Robert Eelkema, Court Monitor: 1986
In the ARC Case, Van Sickle found that North Dakota 's system for the care of the developmentally disabled violated the constitutional rights of its residents by being overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed.