Newport Academy Lawsuit: Citations, Zoning, and Insurance Denials

The Newport Academy lawsuit picture is not one case but several running in parallel: a former Connecticut staff member’s criminal plea, years of substantiated state citations at now-closed California facilities, a federal Fair Housing suit and overturned settlement in Fairfield, Connecticut, a Virginia Supreme Court zoning ruling, and a class action against an insurer that routinely covered — or refused to cover — stays at Newport programs. All of it has unfolded as the parent company, Newport Healthcare, shut nine residential facilities in late 2025 and pulled back from several markets.

Criminal Case Against a Former Connecticut Staff Member

In February 2021, Brandon Fortier, a former staff member at Newport Academy’s residential facility in Bethlehem, Connecticut, was arraigned on charges of second-degree sexual assault, risk of injury to a minor, and providing alcohol to minors. Investigators alleged that Fortier had groomed a patient by supplying alcohol and nicotine in exchange for sexual acts, and that he engaged in similar conduct with other male patients at the facility.¹

In September 2023, Fortier pleaded guilty to reduced charges: illegal delivery of alcohol to a minor, reckless endangerment, and illegal delivery of electronic nicotine devices to individuals under 21. The sexual assault charge was dropped as part of the plea agreement.¹

California State Citations and Substantiated Complaints

Two Pleasanton, California facilities — one on Happy Valley Road and the Arena facility on Johnston Road — built up a long citation record with the California Department of Social Services before both closed. Since 2021, the Happy Valley location received seven Type A citations, the state’s most serious category indicating immediate threats to health and safety, plus eight Type B citations. The Arena facility received four Type A and 16 Type B citations over the same period.²

State investigators substantiated complaints at both facilities that included staff members sexually abusing minor patients, staff providing controlled substances and pornography to minor clients at Happy Valley, and, at the Arena location, a lack of overnight supervision that let patients leave the premises undetected, unauthorized medication administration, and excessive restrictions on family visits. Staff at both sites were also found to have used profanity and yelled at clients.²

In December 2023, the department placed both facilities on a two-year noncompliance agreement requiring increased inspections and corrective training. A March 2024 inspection found no deficiencies, but later complaints were substantiated, including a staff member providing pornography to a minor and failures in mandatory training on youth sexual development. On November 20, 2025, state officials notified Newport that the cases for both facilities were being forwarded for legal review due to continued noncompliance, a step that could have led to license revocation. The Arena facility closed in late 2025, and the Happy Valley location shut on April 24, 2026, laying off 30 employees; another 16 lost their jobs the same day when a separate adult facility in Sunol also closed.²

Fair Housing Lawsuit and Overturned Settlement in Fairfield, Connecticut

Newport’s longest-running civil fight is in Fairfield, Connecticut. In 2019, the company bought two properties in the Greenfield Hill section — 3236 Congress Street and 2495 Redding Road — for a combined $5.45 million to convert into group homes for young adults with mental health conditions. The properties sit in a zone that allows only single-family detached homes on two-acre lots.³

After the town attorney denied certificates of occupancy in November 2020 on the grounds that the proposed facilities were mental healthcare centers rather than group homes, Newport sued the Town of Fairfield in U.S. District Court in January 2021. The federal complaint alleged the town had discriminated against people with disabilities in violation of the Fair Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and Connecticut’s fair housing law.⁴ A federal magistrate judge mediated the case, and in January 2022 the Fairfield Board of Selectmen ratified a settlement under which the town agreed to issue certificates of occupancy for both properties and pay Newport $1.5 million.⁵

Neighbors organizing as “Neighbors for Neighborhood Preservation” challenged the deal in state court. In March 2024, Superior Court Judge Dale Radcliffe overturned it, ruling that the settlement improperly bypassed the town’s mandatory zoning process and gave Newport Academy “a privileged status not available to any other Fairfield property owner.” He described the arrangement as having the potential for “mischief and favoritism” and ordered the Zoning Board of Appeals to hold a public hearing on the project.⁶ Newport Academy and the Town of Fairfield have both appealed to the state appellate court.⁷

Virginia Zoning Challenges

Newport Academy faced similar neighborhood resistance in Fairfax County, Virginia, where it sought to run a residential treatment center at 1318 Kurtz Road in the Salona Village area of McLean. The company classified the use as a “Group Residential Facility,” permitted by right, rather than a “Congregate Living Facility” or “Medical Care Facility,” which would require a special exception. Neighbors disagreed and sued.

After the Fairfax County Circuit Court dismissed the neighbors’ petition on standing grounds, the Supreme Court of Virginia reversed in May 2022. The court found that neighbors who owned property immediately adjacent to the facility had alleged sufficient particularized harms, including diminished property values and increased traffic, to establish standing, and sent the case back for a merits determination.⁸ The McLean facility was among the nine residential locations Newport closed in its October 2025 restructuring.⁹ Separately, in Great Falls, Virginia, property owners on Plantation Drive sent a formal letter to the Fairfax County Zoning Administrator in November 2020 requesting denial of another proposed Newport facility, citing violations of ordinances on transient occupants and group home capacity limits.¹⁰

Insurance Denial Class Action Affecting Newport Families

Newport Academy is not a defendant in Beach et al. v. United Behavioral Health, but the case matters to families whose stays at Newport programs were paid — or not paid — by UBH. Filed in November 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Case No. 3:21-cv-08612), the class action alleges that UBH used restrictive internal clinical guidelines and a “Bundling Policy” to systematically deny coverage for residential mental health treatment, including stays at facilities like Newport Academy.¹¹

The plaintiffs claim UBH’s 2018 and 2019 guidelines were more restrictive than generally accepted standards of care, and that its bundling practice denied coverage for entire daily facility rates even when individual services within those stays were medically necessary. In May 2025, Chief Judge Richard Seeborg denied UBH’s motion to dismiss, allowing the case to proceed past the pleading stage.¹²

The cost issue recurs in Newport families’ accounts. In one documented case, the Benz-Bushling family received a coverage denial five days after their son’s admission to Newport Academy, appealed three times, and lost each time. To cover roughly $25,000 in out-of-pocket costs, the family took out a high-interest loan and sold personal property before eventually resolving the dispute through a confidential settlement with the father’s employer.¹³

Survivor and Parent Allegations

In 2021, the nonprofit Breaking Code Silence, which advocates for survivors of the “troubled teen industry,” published a report compiling roughly 15 testimonials from former patients, parents, and ex-staff about conditions at Newport Academy facilities. Accounts described staff failing to perform mandatory overnight physical checks on patients, leaving residents to monitor each other for self-harm and suicide attempts. Former patients said they felt trapped, were denied the ability to leave common areas during panic attacks, and had personal belongings confiscated as punishment for complaints. Some reported developing eating disorders while at the facility due to peer influence and a lack of staff intervention. One parent alleged that Newport “falsified information” by housing their child alongside patients recovering from addiction after promising separate treatment; other accounts accused the facility of keeping patients enrolled longer than clinically necessary to maximize insurance billing. Strict limits on phone calls and visits, with communication withheld as a control measure, also came up repeatedly.¹⁰

A 2024 Yale Herald investigation noted that the Breaking Code Silence report contained over 25 testimonies from survivors, parents, and former staff, including three specific to the Bethlehem, Connecticut location where Brandon Fortier had worked.¹

Where the Company Stands Now

In October 2025, Newport Healthcare announced a sweeping restructuring. The company confirmed it was closing nine residential facilities — five in Northern California, three in Southern California, and one in Virginia — along with its administrative office in Irvine, California. CEO Brian Setzer said the moves were meant to “balance our operating footprint in line with demand across the country” and “secure more in-network contracts.” The company acknowledged operating in a market defined by “significant underinvestment and scrutiny from payers and other stakeholders, such as federal agencies.”¹⁴

In the Tri-Valley area of Northern California, closures included the Arena and Happy Valley facilities in Pleasanton, a location on Lawrence Drive called Willow Hill (which had closed earlier in 2025), an Oasis center on Johnston Road, and a Danville location. Twenty-eight staff members were laid off in that round. The company said it would focus growth on Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Utah while continuing remaining residential and outpatient programs under what it called a new care delivery model focused on efficiency.¹⁵

Newport Healthcare is majority-owned by Toronto-based private equity firm Onex Partners, which acquired roughly 60% of the company in July 2021 in a deal valued at $1.3 billion. By its 2024 annual report, Onex had disclosed that its investment in Newport Healthcare had “decreased in value.”¹⁶¹⁴

1
Yale Herald. Teenage Life Inside Newport Academy
2
Pleasanton Weekly. Newport Academy Received Numerous State Citations Before Closing Pleasanton Clinics
3
CT Post. Newport Academy Fairfield Mental Health Treatment
4
Relman Colfax. Monroe RE LLC v. Town of Fairfield, First Amended Complaint
5
Relman Colfax. Newport Settlement
6
Patch. Judge Overturns Deal to Allow Teen Treatment Facilities in Fairfield
7
Law Street Media. Examining Lawsuits Faced by the Troubled Teen Industry
8
FindLaw. Anders Larsen Trust v. Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County
9
Recovery.com. Newport Academy Virginia
10
Breaking Code Silence. Newport Academy
11
ClassAction.org. Beach et al. v. United Behavioral Health, Complaint
12
BenefitsLink. Beach v. United Behavioral Health, Order on Motion to Dismiss
13
Newport Healthcare. Insurance Denies Treatment
14
Behavioral Health Business. Newport Healthcare Closes Locations, Lays Off Staff
15
Pleasanton Weekly. Newport Academy Shutters Tri-Valley Locations
16
Behavioral Health Business. Onex Partners Finalizes 60% Purchase of Newport in Reported $1.3B Deal