C.F. v. Buckner

• Docket Number: 2:22-cv-529-CWB
• Decision Date: 31 August 2023
• Parties: C.F., Plaintiff, v. NANCY BUCKNER, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama

1

C.F., Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY BUCKNER, et al., Defendants.

No. 2:22-cv-529-CWB

United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division

August 31, 2023

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

CHAD W. BRYAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

I. Introduction

C.F.^[1](“Plaintiff”) brought this action to assert claims against Nancy Buckner and Kim Mashego (collectively, “Defendants”), both individually and in their respective capacities as Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Human Resources and Director of the Shelby County Department of Human Resources. (Docs. 1 and 18). Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. §1983, as well as monetary damages on state law claims for negligence and wantonness. (See Doc. 18). All claims stem from allegations that Defendants failed to afford Plaintiff a hearing in connection with a finding of child abuse/neglect.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties have consented to the exercise of civil jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge. (Docs. 13 and 14). Now ripe for determination is a Motion for Dismiss (Doc. 20) filed by Defendants. Upon review and consideration of the parties' arguments (Id.; see also Doc. 24), and for the reasons set forth below, the court finds that dismissal is due to be granted in part and denied in part.

2

II. Factual Background^[2]

Defendant Buckner is the Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Human Resources. (Doc. 18 at ¶ 7). In that capacity, she is responsible for establishing, implementing, and overseeing policies and procedures/rules and regulations for the Alabama Department of Human Resources and for ensuring its compliance with State and Federal legal requirements. (Id. at ¶ 9). Defendant Mashego is the Director of the Shelby County Department of Human Resources (Id. at ¶ 8). In that capacity, she is responsible for establishing, implementing, and overseeing policies and procedures/rules and regulations for the Shelby County Department of Human Resources and for ensuring that the Shelby County Department of Human Resources complies with applicable State and Federal legal requirements. (Id. at ¶ 10).

Plaintiff received a letter dated December 2021 from the Shelby County Department of Human Resources informing her that the Alabama Department of Human Resources had completed its initial assessment on a report of suspected child abuse/neglect and had reached a conclusion of “indicated,” i.e., that there was more credible evidence than not that child abuse or neglect had been committed. (Doc. 18-1 at p. 1). The letter more specifically explained as follows:

The department was able to find sufficient evidence to support the allegation of Neglect (Inadequate Supervision) against you, [C.F.], regarding the minor [K.F.] (2-6-21) You, [C.F.], allowed [N.F.] to have unsupervised contact including overnight[] visits with [K.F.] which violated the ISP dated 11-29-21 which acted as the court ordered visitation agreement. Due to the lack of supervision [K.F.] suffered a Non-Accidental Head Trauma resulting in [N.F.'s] arrest. Therefore, the final disposition of this investigation will be INDICATED

You have the right to an administrative record review. This means that the county's written report will be reviewed by an independent panel of DHR employees who are not involved in the case. The panel members will review the written report and make a final decision about whether the written report supports the finding. The panel has the authority to overturn the county's decision if the documentation does not support the findings

3

If you want the decision reviewed by the panel, you must submit your written request to me at the Shelby County Department of Human Resources (address is above) within ten (10) working days from the date of receipt of the letter. You may include any written information that, in your opinion, proves the findings are not true.

If we do not receive a written request within the 10 working days, we will consider that you have given up your opportunity for a review. At that time, the preliminary decision will become a final decision, and it will be entered into the Department's Central Registry for Child Abuse/Neglect. This information is for the Department's records only and does NOT refer to any Criminal Charges. Our records are confidential and may only be released according to State law.

(Id.). Plaintiff alleges that in response to the letter she requested a hearing but that the request was denied. (Doc. 18 at p. 6).

In a subsequent letter dated January 24, 2022, Plaintiff was informed that the “indicated” finding indeed would be added to the statewide Central Registry:

We have completed our administrative record review.... It has been determined that the County Department does have enough credible evidence to support a dispositional finding of ‘indicated', i.e. true. This report will be entered into the Department's Central Registry on Child Abuse and Neglect as an ‘indicated' incident.

(Doc. 18-1 at p. 2). Plaintiff alleges that such listing on the Central Registry adversely affects her rights and that she has been stigmatized, slandered, and defamed as a result of the listing. (Doc. 18 at p. 7). Plaintiff further alleges that she faces a real, immediate, and concrete threat of future injury in that the listing will likely be released to third parties. (Id. at p. 8).

In her First Cause of Action, which is styled as a “Claim for Relief Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983,” Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have established a custom, practice, or policy that has resulted in the systematic denial of hearings and/or other constitutionally adequate process by which “indicated” listings on the Central Registry can be challenged. (Id. at ¶¶ 14-15). As a remedy, Plaintiff seeks both declaratory and injunctive relief against Defendants in their official capacities:

4

(a) Issue declaratory and injunctive relief directing that Defendants Buckner and Mashego in their official capacities expunge, purge and remove from the statewide Central Registry all reports, names, information and data of any type relating to Plaintiff and, further, issue declaratory injunctive relief directing that Defendants cannot list Plaintiff's names and information on the Central Registry until such time as all due process rights and remedies available to deny, dispute and controvert the report, allegations and the disposition have been exhausted; and

(b) Issue declaratory and injunctive relief directing Defendants in their official capacities to provide to Plaintiff a hearing for the purpose of denying, disputing and controverting the report, allegations and “indicated disposition.”

(Doc. 18 at pp. 12-13). In her Second Cause of Action, styled as a “State Law Claim for Negligence/Wantonness,” Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages from Defendants in their individual capacities as a result of being listed on the Central Registry. (Id. at ¶ 26).^[3]

III. Statutory and Regulatory Framework

Barring exceptions not applicable here, the Alabama Department of Human Resources investigates most reports of suspected child abuse and neglect. See Ala. Code § 26-14-6.1. Through its statutory authority, the Alabama Department of Human Resources has established regulations and procedures for investigating and disposing of child abuse reports and for reviewing, recording, and disclosing the outcomes of investigations. See Ala. Code § 26-14-12; see also Ala. Admin. Code r. 660-5-34-.01 et seq. “Once a report of suspected child abuse/neglect has been received, it must be investigated, and the investigation is known by DHR as the child abuse/neglect child abuse neglect (CA/N) assessment.” Ala. Admin. Code r. 660-5-34-.04(4).

An investigation by the Alabama Department of Human Resources must include: the nature, extent, and cause of the child abuse or neglect; the identity of the person responsible; the names and conditions of other children in the home; an evaluation of the parents or person

5

responsible for the care of the child; the home environment and the relationship of the child or children to the parents or other persons responsible for their care; and all other data deemed pertinent. See Ala. Code § 26-14-7; see also Ala. Admin. Code r. 660-5-34-.05. After completion of the investigation, the investigating social worker “must arrive at a disposition as to whether the child has experienced abuse/neglect and whether the person identified as responsible for the abuse/neglect was actually responsible for the abuse/neglect.” Ala. Admin. Code r. 660-5-34-.07. The social worker then must assign one of the following dispositions:

(1) Indicated - This disposition is used when a preponderance of the credible evidence (e.g., eyewitness account, medical report, professional evaluation) and the professional judgment of the worker (based on facts gathered during the course of the CA/N assessment) indicate that abuse/neglect has occurred. Credible evidence means that the available facts, when viewed in light of surrounding circumstances, would cause a reasonable person to believe that a child was abused or neglected. ...

(2) Unable to Complete ....

(3) Not Indicated - This disposition is used when a preponderance of the credible evidence and professional judgment does not substantiate that abuse/neglect has occurred. It is also used when credible evidence and professional judgment does not substantiate that the person allegedly responsible for the abuse/neglect was responsible for the abuse/neglect.

Ala. Admin. Code r. 660-5-34-.07; see also Ala. Code § 26-14-8(a). After a disposition is made, the county office submits a complete written report of the investigation and disposition to the Central Registry. See Ala. Code §...