Estate of Place v. Anderson

398 F.Supp.3d 816

The ESTATE OF Angel PLACE, Represented by Shane Place and Misty Blackwell, Personal Representatives, Plaintiff,

v.Joyce ANDERSON, Joni Bedell, and Crystal Stewart, Defendants.

Civil Action No. 1:16-cv-02286-JLK

United States District Court, D. Colorado.

Signed June 26, 2019

John Keith Killian, Joseph Henry Azbell, Killian Davis Richter & Mayle, P.C., Grand Junction, CO, for Plaintiff.

Andrew Bradford Clauss, Courtney Elizabeth Bartkus, Christopher William Brophy, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP, Denver, CO, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 66)

John L. Kane, SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

INTRODUCTION

This civil action involves the death of Angel Place ("Angel") on September 17, 2014, when she was 11 months old and a foster child under the care of foster parents Randy Bond and Sydney White. Angel died after having been shaken and kicked violently by Sydney White. Plaintiff seeks damages against three social workers employed by the Mesa County Department of Human Services.

The operative complaint is the Second Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 73).

JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction is provided by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 & 1343(a)(3).

PARTIES

The plaintiff is the Estate of Angel Place, represented by Shane Place and Misty Blackwell, personal representatives. Shane Place is Angel Place's paternal grandfather. He was appointed personal representative of the Estate on October 22, 2016, in the state court probate proceeding captioned In the Matter of the Estate of Angel Place , Case No. 16PR30293, in the District Court for Mesa County, Colorado. Ms. Blackwell was appointed co-personal representative of the Estate on September 26, 2018.

The defendants are Joyce Anderson, Joni Bedell, and Crystal Stewart. They are sued in their individual capacities and in their official capacities as employees of the Mesa County Department of Human Services.

Plaintiff's claims against defendant Jacque Berry were dismissed by stipulation. See Stipulated motion to dismiss (ECF No. 80) and Order dated March 28, 2019 (ECF No. 81).

CLAIMS

Plaintiff asserts three claims for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Plaintiff's first and second claims allege that Defendants violated Angel's right to Substantive Due Process guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. As discussed below, claim one is premised on the "special relationship doctrine," and claim two is premised on the "state-created danger theory."

The third claim alleges violations of the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 (AACWA), 42 U.S.C. § 670 et seq.¹

The fourth claim for violation of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, 42 U.S.C. § 5106a et seq., was dismissed by stipulation. See Stipulated motion to dismiss (ECF No. 80) and Order dated March 28, 2019 (ECF No. 81).

DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 66)

On January 9, 2019, Defendants moved pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 for dismissal of all claims, arguing (1) the doctrine of qualified immunity shields them from liability in their individual capacities; (2) the first and second claims fail on the ground that Plaintiff's evidence is not sufficient to show a substantive Due Process violation under either the special relationship or state-created danger theory; and (3) the third claim fails because the subject provisions of the AACWA do not provide rights enforceable under § 1983, or if they do, the available relief is limited to injunctive relief.

Defendants' motion is supported by documents, deposition testimony, and other evidence identified as Defendants' Exhibits A-1 through A-22 (ECF Nos. 66-1 through 66-47).

Plaintiff opposed the motion in a response filed February 15, 2019 (ECF No. 74). Plaintiff supported its response with exhibits marked as Plaintiff's Exhibits 1 through 32 (ECF Nos. 74-1 through 74-32).

Defendants replied on March 15, 2019, and provided additional documents marked as Defendants' Exhibits A-23 through A-28-1 (ECF Nos. 78 and 78-1 though 78-7).

Plaintiff was granted leave to file a sur-reply, which was filed on May 1, 2019 (ECF No. 86).

FACTS

Defendants' motion includes a statement of undisputed facts, but that statement is set forth in narrative form and not in numbered paragraphs. (Defs.' mot. at pp. 3-12). Plaintiff's opposition brief does not admit or deny Defendants' statement of undisputed facts. Instead, Plaintiff provides its own statement of facts in narrative form. (Pl.'s resp. at pp. 2 - 22). Both parties include argument with their version of the facts.

Below is my own effort to describe the factual background without the parties' argumentative statements. I drew the following statement of facts from exhibits and the parties' descriptions of the background facts.

The underlying material facts appear to be generally undisputed. There are, however, disputes about inferences to be drawn from the facts. Those disputes are identified in the discussion below.

Angel enters foster care

Angel Place (Angel) was born on October 6, 2013 to parents Tierra Bond Place (age 16) and Theodore Place (age 19). In late November 2013, the Mesa County Department of Human Services (MCDHS) received a report of safety concerns about Angel. An MCDHS case manager, Jacque Berry, investigated that report. She determined that the biological parents were physically and verbally abusive toward each other, using marijuana, neglecting Angel, and the home was unsafe for Angel. (Pl.'s Ex. 1, Request to File Petition in Dependency and Neglect). The MCDHS obtained custody and removed Angel from her biological parents' home on December 6, 2013, pursuant to an emergency court order in a state court action captioned In the Interest of Angel Lanee Place, a minor child, and concerning Tierra Sue Place and Theodore Elvin Place , Case No. 13 JV 410, District Court for Mesa County, Colorado (the Juvenile Court Action). (Pl.'s Ex. 2, Emergency Custody and Pickup Order).

Angel is placed with foster mother Misty Blackwell

The MCDHS initially placed Angel with foster parent Misty Blackwell. An organization known as Ariel Services had certified Ms. Blackwell to be a foster parent, and Ariel Services referred Ms. Blackwell to the MCDHS. Cassandra Strang, an Ariel Services caseworker, monitored Angel's placement with Ms. Blackwell and reported to the MCDHS. (Defs.' Ex. A-3, M. Blackwell Dep. at 19:6-18; Defs.' Ex. A-4, Strang Dep.)²

Ms. Blackwell was a good foster mother who provided a safe home for Angel. (Defs.' Ex. A-5, Stewart Dep. at 66:1-9). By all accounts, Angel was healthy, comfortable, and well-adjusted under her care.³

The MCDHS considers kinship placement

Ms. Blackwell was not related to Angel. According to Colorado and federal law, the MCDHS was required to engage in a diligent search for a kinship foster home. See 42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(19) ; C.R.S. § 19-3-403 ; C.R.S. § 19-3-508(5)(b)(I) ; C.R.S. § 19-3-605(1) ; C.R.S. § 19-1-115(1) & (3)(a). The MCDHS manual for the Family and Children Services Division includes the following statement: "The State Department of Human Services Mandates that children be placed with kin when kin are determined to be safe and appropriate, and that a diligent search process to locate kin begin within 3 days of placement and continue until a permanent placement plan is reached." (Pl.'s Ex. 10, MCDHS Kinship Care Policy and Procedure).

The MCDHS began that search in early December 2013. By the end of that month, a young couple, Mr. Randy Bond (Randy) and Ms. Sydney White (Sydney), were identified as potential kinship foster parents. (Def.'s Ex. A-6-1, Kinship Diligent Search Referral Form).⁴ Randy is a first cousin of Angel's biological mother, Tierra Bond Place.

Randy and Sydney had lived together as common law husband and wife for approximately four years. Randy was then 21 years old, and Sydney was almost 20 years old. They were the parents of two children – a son (Kaleb) who was then just over 2 years old, and daughter (Harper) who was under the age of 1. Randy and Sydney expressed their desire to provide Angel with a loving home. (Defs.' Ex. A-6-5, Home Study at MC-2017).⁵

During the relevant time period, Defendant Joni Bedell was a supervisor employed by the MCDHS.

An MCDHS caseworker, Ethan Storeng, initiated the process to certify Randy and Sydney as foster parents by sending an email to Bedell, requesting a Safe Home Study of Randy and Sydney. (Defs.' Ex. A-6-2, Jan. 30, 2014 email from Storeng to Bedell).

A Safe Home Study is an industry standard used by state and county agencies to assess and approve potential foster parents. It is a detailed report that includes information such as criminal background checks; reference checks; medical reports regarding the applicants; interviews with the applicants and members of their household; and other documents. (Def.'s Ex. A-6-4, part 1 at MD 44110).

Defendant Bedell assigned the task of conducting the Safe Home Study of the Bond/White household to defendant Joyce Anderson, an MCDHS Placement Resource Manager.

Connie Mercer, another placement resource manager, also was involved in the process of certifying the Bond/White household to become a foster home. Ms. Mercer was responsible for matters such as ensuring that the applicants' home met certain standards; the applicants were prepared to provide a safe environment for the foster child; and required paperwork was completed. (Pl.'s Ex. 16, Mercer Dep. 64:12-65:21; Defs.' Ex. A-9, Bedell Dep. at 34:21-36:7; 37:23-25).⁶

The Certification Process and Home Study Report

To become certified as foster parents, Randy and Sydney attended a series of training classes and completed application forms. (Defs.' Ex. A-6-3, MCDHS training records; Defs.' Ex. A-6-4, part 2, Application to Care for Children).

To prepare the Home Study, Ms. Anderson assembled and reviewed various records, including criminal background checks of Randy and Sydney, social histories, documentation of their interactions with DHS, and other data. (Defs....