Costa v. Ramaiah
| Docket Number | 21-cv-5165 |
| Decision Date | 29 August 2023 |
| Parties | KENNETH DALLA COSTA and DEBORAH DALLA COSTA, individually and as the parents and next friends of AA, BB, and CC, Plaintiffs, v. VEENA RAMAIAH, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
Kenneth and Deborah Dalla Costa lost custody of their children twice, due to abuse allegations. The first time, the state of Indiana brought medical child abuse allegations against the parents, leading to a four-day loss of custody. But an Indiana judge sided with the parents and found no probable cause for the removal, and the family was reunited.
A few days later, the same child welfare workers in Indiana allegedly coaxed the parents to take one of the children for a medical evaluation at Comer Hospital of the University of Chicago Medical Center. The parents agreed. But as the complaint tells it, the whole thing was a setup. The parents didn't know that the visit was a continuation of the child abuse investigation. Less than two weeks later, the parents lost custody yet again.
The parents responded by filing suit on behalf of themselves and their children (minors AA, BB, and CC). They sued the two Indiana child welfare officers, Samantha Ilic and Melissa Lara (“the State Defendants”). And they sued Comer Hospital and two of its employees, Dr. Veena Ramaiah and Lindsay Forrey (“the Hospital Defendants”). The twelve-count complaint includes claims under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments and a smattering of claims under Illinois law.
The State Defendants and the Hospital Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint. For the reasons stated below, the motion to dismiss by the State Defendants is denied. The motion to dismiss by the Hospital Defendants is granted.
Before diving into the allegations of the complaint, the Court offers a reminder about the applicable standard. At the motion to dismiss stage, the Court must accept as true the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint. See Lett v City of Chicago, 946 F.3d 398, 399 (7th Cir. 2020). The Court “offer[s] no opinion on the ultimate merits because further development of the record may cast the facts in a light different from the complaint.” Savory v Cannon, 947 F.3d 409, 412 (7th Cir. 2020). That's always the rule, but given the sensitivities of the case, it is worth remembering.
The case involves the removal of children from the home of Kenneth and Deborah Dalla Costa. They have three children. During the time in question, AA was 11 years old, BB was 9 years old, and CC was 7 years old. See Am. Cplt., at ¶¶ 20-22 (Dckt. No. 26).
On September 16, 2019, the Indiana Department of Child Services (“DCS”) received an anonymous call on a hotline about medical child abuse. Id. at ¶¶ 12, 30. The caller alleged that the Dalla Costas (who were residents of Indiana) were seeking unnecessary medical treatment for their children. Id.
Specifically, the anonymous caller said that he or she suspected Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (also known as Factitious Disorder Imposed on Another). Id. Deborah Dalla Costa allegedly “was exaggerating or fabricating AA's medical symptoms” to get certain surgeries and procedures done on the child. Id. The caller claimed that Deborah Dalla Costa “was shopping for doctors around the country for surgeries / procedures local doctors refused to perform.” Id.
The identity of that caller remains a mystery. By that point, AA had received treatment at Comer Hospital at the University of Chicago Medical Center several times, including in 2012, 2015, 2016, 2018, and earlier in 2019. Id. at ¶¶ 43, 58. The complaint suggests that the treating physician, Dr. Uzelac, may have placed the anonymous call. Id. at ¶ 30. In fact, AA's medical charts say that Dr. Uzelac “made the report for medical child abuse.” Id. But Dr. Uzelac later testified that she was not the caller. Id.
By all appearances, the Dalla Costas were all-too-familiar with issues about the treatment of children. At the time, Ken Dalla Costa was the Associate Director of Foster Care Clinical Services at UCAN, a subcontractor of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. Id. at ¶ 19. Deborah Dalla Costa is a licensed psychotherapist and a stay-at-home mom. Id.
The Indiana Department of Child Services opened an investigation of the Dalla Costas based on the anonymous call. Two case workers, Defendants Samantha Ilic and Melissa Lara, took the lead. Id. at ¶¶ 27-28. And they took swift action. Ilic and Lara (again, “the State Defendants”) formalized the allegations of abuse by filing a petition in the Juvenile Division of Lake County, Indiana. Id. at ¶ 31.
The abuse allegations led to a temporary loss of custody. On September 19, 2019, while the case remained pending, the state of Indiana removed AA, BB, and CC from the care of their parents. Id.
The parents did not consent to the loss of custody. Id. No court order authorized the removal of the children. Id. No exigent circumstances justified the removal, either. Id.
Even so, the State removed the children “[b]ased on the recommendation” of Defendant Forrey of the University of Chicago Medical Center. Id. Forrey is a social worker, not a physician. Id. at ¶ 54. She is a member of the Child Advocacy and Protective Services team at Comer Hospital. Id. at ¶¶ 23-25, 31. Forrey had recommended “very limited parental contact while evaluations are being completed for cases like this ....” Id. at ¶ 31.
Forrey recommended removal of the children even though she had not spoken with the parents or the children. Id. at ¶ 32. Forrey had not reviewed the medical records, either. Id. Forrey based her recommendation on a review of Facebook posts, which raised issues similar to another case that involved medical child abuse. Id.
A state court judge presided over a hearing on September 23, 2019, meaning a few days after the removal of the children. Id. Ilic and Lara testified about the multiple diagnoses that the children had received, such as OCD, anxiety, and ADHD. Id. at ¶ 35. They also recommended that the children be placed in foster care until they could be evaluated at Comer Hospital, and until the parents could receive a psychological assessment. Id. at ¶ 36. They claimed that the parents were reporting “undocumented rare diseases,” and were going around the country in search of surgeries and procedures. Id.
Ilic and Lara also testified about why they had removed the children. The state seized the children “due to their tender age, concerns for their immediate safety and well-being due to multiple doctors prescribing medications for the children and suspicions of factitious disorder imposed on other.” Id. at ¶ 34.
The petition in state court didn't get very far. At the hearing on September 23, 2019, the Indiana judge entered a directed verdict on the petition in favor of the Dalla Costas based on “a lack of evidence/probable cause.” Id. at ¶ 37.
That same day, the Dalla Costa children were returned to the custody of their parents. Id. at ¶ 31. So the parents lost custody of their children for four days, from September 19 to 23, 2019. Id.
By the sound of things, the State Defendants didn't take “no” for an answer. The same state workers “immediately went back to work on removing the children again.” Id. at ¶ 3. According to the complaint, the State Defendants orchestrated a “set up” to remove the children a second time. Id. at ¶¶ 4, 20, 22.
Basically, the State Defendants cooked up a plan to have one of the children receive medical care at Comer Hospital. But the goal wasn't medical care. The true purpose was to continue a child abuse investigation, sub silentio. Id. at ¶¶ 44-45. They wanted a medical doctor's “diagnosis” to give them cover and “get them past the probable cause hearing.” Id. at ¶ 3.
But first, the State Defendants needed to get the child from Indiana to Chicago. And that's when the State Defendants allegedly threatened more abuse charges.
A week after the Indiana court dismissed the case, the State Defendants told the Dalla Costas that they needed to take their older daughter (AA) to Comer Hospital in Chicago for a medical evaluation - or else. Id. at ¶¶ 4, 38. If they didn't comply, the state would refile the abuse charges, and “take AA, BB, and CC from the adult Plaintiffs.” Id. at ¶ 38.
The parents acquiesced to the demand. On September 30, 2019, Ken Dalla Costa took AA to Comer Hospital at the University of Chicago Medical Center to avoid having the children removed for a second time. Id. According to the complaint, he agreed to do so under duress. Id. at ¶ 39.
But again, things didn't end there. The Dalla Costas allege that the hospital visit wasn't a run-of-the-mill medical evaluation. Instead, the would-be medical evaluation was a child abuse investigation, in disguise. Id. at ¶ 48. Defendants “disguise[d] the detention of AA and further investigation of Medical Child Abuse as an evaluation of AA's medicines and diagnoses.” Id. at ¶ 45.
Before the examination, no one told the parents that the child was there for a child abuse investigation. Id. at ¶ 47. But AA's medical charts from the day reveal the real reason for the visit. The notations confirm that “AA was admitted to Comer for evaluation of medical child abuse.” Id. at ¶ 48.
As the Dalla Costas tell it, Id. at ¶ 50.
On October 3, 2019, Dr. Ramaiah offered her diagnosis. She concluded that Deborah Dalla Costa ...
To continue reading
Request your trial