Case Law Nicholson v. Williams

Nicholson v. Williams

Document Cited Authorities (123) Cited in (80) Related

Lansner & Kubitschek, New York, By David Lansner, Esq., Carolyn Kubitschek, Esq., Joanne Sirotkin, Esq., Sanctuary for Families, Center For Battered Women's Legal Services, New York, By Jill Zuccardy, Esq., for Plaintiffs Subclass A.

Legal Aid Juvenile Rights Division, By Monica Drinane, Esq., Leslie Abbey, Esq., Barrie Goldstein, Esq., Kay G. McNally, Esq., Judith Waksberg, Esq., Henry Weintraub, Esq., Lawyers for Children, New York, By Karen Freedman, Esq., Karen Walker Bryce, Esq., Betsy Kramer, Esq., for Plaintiffs Subclass B.

Martha Olson, Esq., Citizens' Committee for Children, Riverdale, for Next Friend of Children in Subclass B.

New York City Law Department, Office of the Corporation Counsel, Brooklyn, By Michael D. Hess, Esq., Jonathan Pines, Esq., Martha Calhoun, Esq., Carolyn Wolpert, Esq, Daniel A. Shacknai, Esq., Administration for Children's Services Deputy General Counsel, New York, for Defendant City of New York and Administration for Children's Services.

NYS Attorney General, New York, By William H. Bristow III, Esq., Robert

Kraft, Esq., for Defendant State of New York and Governor George E. Pataki.

Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky & Popeo, P.C., Washington, D.C., By Greg E. Haber, Esq., Fernando R. Laguarda, Esq., Noam B. Fischman, Esq., for Amici National Network to End Domestic Violence and National Network to End Domestic Violence Fund.

Law Offices of Joanne C. Fray, Lexington, MA, By Joanne C. Fray, Esq., Helene Sullas Huggins, Esq., for Amicus National Coalition for Child Protection Reform.

Missouri Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Jefferson City, MO, By Nina Balsam, Esq., for Amicus Missouri Coalition Against Domestic Violence Against Women.

Davis Polk & Wardwell, New York, By Frank S. Moseley, Esq., Zachary S. McGee, Esq., Joan Loughane, Esq., Kelli J. Stenstrom, Esq., Of Counsel, New York County Lawyer's Association, New York, By Craig A. Landy, Esq., Norman L. Reimer, Esq., for Amicus New York County Lawyers' Association.

Ohio Domestic Violence Network, Columbus, OH, By Alexandria M. Ruden, Esq., for Amicus Ohio Domestic Violence Network.

Supplemental Memorandum, Findings of Fact and Law, and Order

Table of Contents

  I. Introduction ............................................................. 163
 II. Procedural History ....................................................... 164
III. Facts .................................................................... 165
     A. Current Institutional Framework ....................................... 165
        1.  Reports to the State Central Register .............................. 166
        2.  Child Protective Proceedings ....................................... 167
     B. Plaintiff Families .................................................... 168
        1.  Nicholson .......................................................... 168
            a. Background ...................................................... 168
            b. Domestic Violence Against Ms. Nicholson ......................... 169
            c. Removal ......................................................... 169
            d. Court Proceedings ............................................... 170
            e. Subsequent Case History ......................................... 172
        2.  Rodriguez .......................................................... 173
            a. Background ...................................................... 173
            b. Domestic Violence Against Ms. Rodriguez ......................... 173
            c. Intervention by ACS and Removal ................................. 173
            d. Court Proceedings and Further Removal ........................... 175
            e. Subsequent Case History ......................................... 176
        3.  Udoh ............................................................... 176
            a. Background ...................................................... 176
            b. Domestic Abuse Against Ms. Udoh ................................. 177
            c. Abuse Triggering Removal ........................................ 178
            d. Removal ......................................................... 178
            e. Court Proceedings ............................................... 179
            f. Subsequent Case History ......................................... 180
        4.  Tillett ............................................................ 180
            a. Background ...................................................... 180
            b. Domestic Violence Against Ms. Tillett ........................... 180
            c. Removal ......................................................... 180
            d. Court Proceedings ............................................... 181
        5.  Garcia ............................................................. 182
            a. Background ...................................................... 182
            b. Domestic Violence Against Ms. Garcia ............................ 182
            c. Intervention by ACS ............................................. 183
            d. Removal ......................................................... 184
            e. Court Proceedings ............................................... 185
            f. Subsequent History .............................................. 185
        6.  Norris ............................................................. 185
            a. Background ...................................................... 185
            b. Domestic Violence Against Ms. Norris ............................ 185
            c. Removal ......................................................... 186
            d. Court Proceedings ............................................... 186
            e. Subsequent History .............................................. 187
        7.  Rhodes ............................................................. 187
            a. Background ...................................................... 187
            b. Intervention by ACS ............................................. 188
            c. Removal ......................................................... 188
            d. Court Proceedings ............................................... 188
            e. Subsequent History .............................................. 188
        8.  Berisha ............................................................ 188
            a. Background ...................................................... 188
            b. Removal ......................................................... 189
            c. Court Proceedings ............................................... 189
            d. Subsequent History .............................................. 190
        9.  Jane Doe ........................................................... 190
            a. Background ...................................................... 190
            b. Investigation by ACS ............................................ 190
            c. Domestic Violence Against Jane Doe .............................. 190
            d. Removal ......................................................... 191
            e. Court Proceedings ............................................... 191
            f. Subsequent History .............................................. 191
        10. Xiomara C .......................................................... 192
            a. Background ...................................................... 192
            b. Domestic Violence Against Mrs. C ................................ 192
            c. Removal ......................................................... 192
            d. Court Proceedings Against Ms. C ................................. 192
        11. Other Cases ........................................................ 192
     C. Modern Perspectives on Domestic Violence and Child Welfare ............. 193
        1.  Historical Background .............................................. 193
            a. Domestic Violence ............................................... 193
            b. Child Welfare ................................................... 194
        2.  Views of Experts ................................................... 197
            a. Effects of Domestic Violence on Children ........................ 197
            b. Effects of Removals on Children ................................. 198
        3.  Best Practices ..................................................... 200
            a. Mothers Should Not Be Accused of Neglect For Being Victims
                of Domestic Violence ........................................... 200
            b. Batterers Should Be Held Accountable ............................ 201
            c. Children Should Be Protected by Offering Battered Mothers
                Appropriate Services and Protection ............................ 202
            d. Separation of Battered
...
5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York – 2006
U.S. v. Stein
"...the criminal process simply by acting through DOJ policy rather than by statute or formal regulation. See, e.g., Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F.Supp.2d 153, 243 (E.D.N.Y.2002) ("In considering the constitutionality of the policy or practice of a state agency rather than the specific acts of i..."
Document | California Court of Appeals – 2010
People v. JONES
"...356 F.Supp.2d 1353; Lavallee v. Justices in Hampden Sup. Ct., supra, 442 Mass. 228, 812 N.E.2d 895; Nicholson v. Williams (E.D.N.Y.2002) 203 F.Supp.2d 153, 239–241, vacated and remanded sub nom. Nicholson v. Scoppetta (2d. Cir. Nov. 29, 2004) 2004 WL 2699925, 2004 U.S.App.LEXIS 24601 White ..."
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit – 2003
Nicholson v. Scoppetta
"...on March 18, 2002, the District Court issued a lengthy opinion explaining the basis for the injunction. See Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F.Supp.2d 153 (E.D.N.Y.2002). This appeal followed. We denied the defendants' motion for a stay of the injunction pending The District Court's Findings of F..."
Document | Oklahoma Supreme Court – 2020
Duke v. Duke
"...Clare Huntington, The Empirical Turn in Family Law , 118 Colum. L. Rev. 227, n. 139, 252 (2018) (citing Nicholson v. Williams , 203 F.Supp.2d 153, 197-198 (E.D.N.Y. 2002), and noting opinions by five experts relating to potential adverse effects for children in a home where intimate partner..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York – 2017
Cook v. City of N.Y., 15 CV 6559 (ILG) (CLP)
"...entity, has been held liable in the past for the constitutional violations of its employees under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Nicholson v. Williams , 203 F.Supp.2d 153 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (holding that ACS's conduct substantially infringed on the fundamental liberty interests of mothers and children with..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
5 books and journal articles
Document | Representing Parents in Child Welfare Cases: Advice and Guidance for Family Defenders (ABA)
Chapter 1 General Overview of Child Protection Laws in the United States
"..."fundamental right" to "remain together without the coercive interference of the awesome power of the state"); Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F. Supp. 2d 153, 235 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (liberty "interest in not being forcibly separated by the state is shared by parents and children"). Other courts th..."
Document | Vol. 17 Núm. 2, June 2008 – 2008
Do no harm: an analysis of the legal and social consequences of child visitation determinations for incarcerated perpetrators of extreme acts of violence against women.
"...to the violent acts committed by batterers is often misapplied in cases of intimate partner violence. See Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F. Supp. 2d 153, 207-11 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (identifying New York City's Administration for Children's Services' tendency to remove children from the abused mothe..."
Document | Núm. 38-2, December 2009 – 2009
Judicial Oversight over the Interstate Placement of Foster Children: The Missing Element in Current Efforts to Reform the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children
"...is restricted access to family members). 45 Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1928). 46 See, e.g. , Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F. Supp. 2d 153, 257 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (issuing a preliminary injunction that prevented the city from removing children from battered mothers who were fit..."
Document | Studies in Law, Politics and Society (vol. 33) – 2004
A DELICATE TASK: BALANCING THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN AND MOTHERS IN PARENTAL TERMINATION PROCEEDINGS
"...damage to constitutionalrights is accomplished in the many months preceding the opportunity for f‌inaljudicial disposition” (Nicholson v. Williams, 2002, p. 215). The mutual interestsof a mother and child who should be reunited can be compromised by the state’sincompetence and its control o..."
Document | Núm. 20-1, September 2006
Howard Davidson, Children's Rights and American Law: a Response to What's Wrong With Children's Rights
"...27048, at *13 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 6, 2003); Alvarez-Garcia v. I.N.S., 234 F. Supp. 2d 283, 289 (S.D.N.Y. 2002); Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F. Supp. 2d 153, 234 (E.D.N.Y. 2002); United States v. Martinelli, 62 M.J. 52, 72 n.37 (C.A.A.F. 2005). 21 In re Julie Anne, 780 N.E.2d 635 (Ohio C.P. Ct. 20..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 books and journal articles
Document | Representing Parents in Child Welfare Cases: Advice and Guidance for Family Defenders (ABA)
Chapter 1 General Overview of Child Protection Laws in the United States
"..."fundamental right" to "remain together without the coercive interference of the awesome power of the state"); Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F. Supp. 2d 153, 235 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (liberty "interest in not being forcibly separated by the state is shared by parents and children"). Other courts th..."
Document | Vol. 17 Núm. 2, June 2008 – 2008
Do no harm: an analysis of the legal and social consequences of child visitation determinations for incarcerated perpetrators of extreme acts of violence against women.
"...to the violent acts committed by batterers is often misapplied in cases of intimate partner violence. See Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F. Supp. 2d 153, 207-11 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (identifying New York City's Administration for Children's Services' tendency to remove children from the abused mothe..."
Document | Núm. 38-2, December 2009 – 2009
Judicial Oversight over the Interstate Placement of Foster Children: The Missing Element in Current Efforts to Reform the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children
"...is restricted access to family members). 45 Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1928). 46 See, e.g. , Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F. Supp. 2d 153, 257 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (issuing a preliminary injunction that prevented the city from removing children from battered mothers who were fit..."
Document | Studies in Law, Politics and Society (vol. 33) – 2004
A DELICATE TASK: BALANCING THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN AND MOTHERS IN PARENTAL TERMINATION PROCEEDINGS
"...damage to constitutionalrights is accomplished in the many months preceding the opportunity for f‌inaljudicial disposition” (Nicholson v. Williams, 2002, p. 215). The mutual interestsof a mother and child who should be reunited can be compromised by the state’sincompetence and its control o..."
Document | Núm. 20-1, September 2006
Howard Davidson, Children's Rights and American Law: a Response to What's Wrong With Children's Rights
"...27048, at *13 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 6, 2003); Alvarez-Garcia v. I.N.S., 234 F. Supp. 2d 283, 289 (S.D.N.Y. 2002); Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F. Supp. 2d 153, 234 (E.D.N.Y. 2002); United States v. Martinelli, 62 M.J. 52, 72 n.37 (C.A.A.F. 2005). 21 In re Julie Anne, 780 N.E.2d 635 (Ohio C.P. Ct. 20..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York – 2006
U.S. v. Stein
"...the criminal process simply by acting through DOJ policy rather than by statute or formal regulation. See, e.g., Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F.Supp.2d 153, 243 (E.D.N.Y.2002) ("In considering the constitutionality of the policy or practice of a state agency rather than the specific acts of i..."
Document | California Court of Appeals – 2010
People v. JONES
"...356 F.Supp.2d 1353; Lavallee v. Justices in Hampden Sup. Ct., supra, 442 Mass. 228, 812 N.E.2d 895; Nicholson v. Williams (E.D.N.Y.2002) 203 F.Supp.2d 153, 239–241, vacated and remanded sub nom. Nicholson v. Scoppetta (2d. Cir. Nov. 29, 2004) 2004 WL 2699925, 2004 U.S.App.LEXIS 24601 White ..."
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit – 2003
Nicholson v. Scoppetta
"...on March 18, 2002, the District Court issued a lengthy opinion explaining the basis for the injunction. See Nicholson v. Williams, 203 F.Supp.2d 153 (E.D.N.Y.2002). This appeal followed. We denied the defendants' motion for a stay of the injunction pending The District Court's Findings of F..."
Document | Oklahoma Supreme Court – 2020
Duke v. Duke
"...Clare Huntington, The Empirical Turn in Family Law , 118 Colum. L. Rev. 227, n. 139, 252 (2018) (citing Nicholson v. Williams , 203 F.Supp.2d 153, 197-198 (E.D.N.Y. 2002), and noting opinions by five experts relating to potential adverse effects for children in a home where intimate partner..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York – 2017
Cook v. City of N.Y., 15 CV 6559 (ILG) (CLP)
"...entity, has been held liable in the past for the constitutional violations of its employees under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Nicholson v. Williams , 203 F.Supp.2d 153 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (holding that ACS's conduct substantially infringed on the fundamental liberty interests of mothers and children with..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex