Hall v. Bush
| Decision Date | 21 July 2021 |
| Docket Number | 1:20-cv-731 |
| Parties | HEIDI HALL and JOSEPH HALL, Plaintiffs, v. THOMACA BUSH, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan |
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Heidi Hall and Joseph Hall filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and other federal statutes against numerous Defendants in connection with a Michigan Child Protective Services investigation in the fall of 2018 that resulted in the removal and detention of their children, M.H and J.H., from Illinois to Michigan for 61 days. In their first amended complaint- the current operative pleading-the Halls sue a number of Defendants who generally fall into two groups: (1) the State Defendants, who include Thomaca Bush Marisa Anderson, Tonya Martinez, Elizabeth Montemayor, Herman McCall, and Rita Ermatinger;[1] and (2) the County Defendants including Ingham County, Stacy Strouse, Sidra Alvi-Waller Peter Brown, Richard Garcia, and Carol Siemon.[2] The Halls assert the following federal claims: (1) violation of substantive due process; (2) violation of procedural due process; (3) unlawful search and seizure; (4) First Amendment retaliation; (5) violation of their Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection; (6) failure to train; (7) failure to supervise; and (8) conspiracy under 42 U.S.C. § 1985. Invoking this Court's diversity jurisdiction, the Halls also assert a state-law claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED).[3]
Presently before me are the State Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and the County Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (ECF Nos. 37 and 50.) Also before me is the Halls' Motion for Leave to Amend. (ECF No. 65.) The motions are fully briefed and ready for decision. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), I recommend that Defendants' motions be GRANTED. The Halls' motion for leave to amend is DENIED.
The Halls are husband and wife and reside in Illinois. They have two children together, M.H. and J.H.
Thomaca Bush is a Child Protective Services (CPS) Investigator with Ingham County. Marisa Anderson is a CPS supervisor who supervised Defendant Bush. Rita Ermatinger and Tonya Martinez are CPS supervisors in Ingham County. Elizabeth Montemayor is the Ingham County CPS program manager. Herman McCall is the Executive Director of the Michigan Children's Service Agency. Jane Doe Nos. 2 and 3 are CPS employees for Ingham County and Jane Doe No. 4 is a CPS supervisor. (ECF No. 46 at PageID.1775-77.)
Carol Siemon is the Ingham County Prosecutor. Stacy Strouse is the Deputy Juvenile Register/Scheduling Clerk for the Ingham County Circuit Court. Sidra Alvi-Waller is a Deputy Juvenile Register for the Ingham County Circuit Court. Peter Brown is an Ingham County Circuit Court Referee. Richard Garcia is the Chief Probate Judge for the Ingham County Circuit Court. (Id.)
In August and September 2018, the Halls and their children visited Michigan on a camping trip with a 25-foot trailer. As of late September, the Halls were staying at a campground in Ingham County. (ECF No. 46 at PageID.1782.) On September 24, CPS received a complaint of potential child abuse and neglect by the Halls, prompting a visit from CPS. (Id. at PageID.1784.) Defendant Bush visited the Halls at their campsite at Heartland Woods RV Resort on September 26. During that visit, Bush spoke with Joseph Hall, who indicated that he had an Illinois medical marijuana card and that the Halls had been subjected to prior CPS removals in Illinois. Joseph also indicated that the family had been living in a camping trailer for over a year as a lifestyle choice and that the children were being home schooled. (Id. at PageID.1786; ECF No. 38-2 at PageID.1617.)
On September 27, 2018, Bush spoke with St. Claire County CPS worker Jason Salamango, who informed her that the St. Claire County office of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) had previously begun an investigation into the family. (Id. at PageID.1619.) In addition, Bush spoke with an Ingham County deputy sheriff who had been dispatched to the family's campsite to perform a well-being check earlier that week. (Id.) That same day, Defendant Bush interviewed Heidi Hall at the Ingham County Fair Grounds. During the interview, Heidi Hall was irate and confrontational and told Bush that she was infringing on her constitutional rights. (Id. at PageID.1618; ECF No. 46 at PageID.1786-87.)
As a result of her investigation, on September 28, Defendant Bush filed a Petition in the Family Court Division of the Ingham County Circuit Court requesting that the Court take jurisdiction over M.H. and J.H., issue an order of removal, and place them in MDHHS's care and custody. The Petition further requested that the Halls be provided parenting time with the children. (ECF No. 38-2.) Defendant Strouse scheduled a hearing for less than a half-hour later. (ECF No. 46 at PageID.1791.) Bush attempted to inform the Halls of the hearing, but Heidi Hall “hung up” on her. (Id. at PageID.1791-92.) Defendant Brown held the hearing and entered an Order After Preliminary Hearing finding probable cause and authorizing the Petition. (ECF No. 38-3.) The order found:
It is contrary to the welfare of the children . . . to remain in the home with their parents, Heidi Hall and Joseph Hall Sr. due to physical neglect and lack of cooperation by the parents regarding ensuring the children's safety and wellbeing. The parents have previous CPS history in Illinois regarding physical neglect. The mother, Heidi Hall, has reported mental health issues. Family is living in a 25 foot trailer with garbage all over inside and outside of the trailer. The family is vomiting “all over the place.” The children are dirty and smell like urine. The children have not bathed in over 25 days and . . . may have had lice.
(Id. at PageID.1622.) The order set a pretrial hearing for October 18, 2021, and a trial for November 26, 2018. (Id. at PageID.1625.) It also appointed separate counsel for both Heidi and Joseph and appointed a guardian ad litem for the minors. (Id. at PageID.1625.)
When Defendant Bush attempted to locate the children, she discovered that the Halls had left the state and returned to Illinois. Defendant Anderson called Heidi Hall, who informed her that the family was at a K.O.A. campground in Illinois en route to their destination. (ECF No. 46 at PageID.1794-95.) At approximately 8:30 p.m. on September 28, Bush sought and obtained from Defendant Garcia Orders to Take Children into Protective Custody, directing CPS/law enforcement to apprehend the children and return them to the Michigan DHHS for care and supervision. (ECF No. 38-4; ECF No. 46 at PageID.1797-98.) The apprehension orders noted that the Halls had absconded with the children. (ECF No. 38-4 at PageID.1627, 1632.) On September 29, at approximately 6:00 a.m., a deputy sheriff from Champaign County, Illinois, seized the children from a motel room where the family was staying. The children were then returned to Michigan and placed in foster care. (ECF No. 46 at PageID.1799.)
On October 1, 2018, Ingham County Judge Janelle Lawless issued an Order After Preliminary Hearing. (Id. at PageID.1801.) On October 2, 2018, Defendant Alvi-Waller updated the “registry of action” and entered a Record of Preliminary Hearing to reflect an order for the “care and custody” of the minors after their removal. (Id.) On October 18, 2018, Judge Lawless held a pretrial hearing. Following the hearing, she entered an Order After Pretrial Hearing that continued the placement with MDHHS until the scheduled trial on December 3, 2018. (ECF No. 53-4.)
The children were returned to the Halls on November 29, 2018-61 days after they were removed-after the court granted a motion to dismiss that Heidi Hall's appointed counsel filed. (ECF No. 46 at PageID.1809-10.) The order of dismissal stated that “[b]ased upon the agreement of all parties . . . jurisdiction is not necessary in this matter.” (ECF No. 63-2 at PageID.2150.)
On August 5, 2020, the Halls filed a 512-page, 2, 133-paragraph, six-count complaint. The State Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on November 23, 2020. The County Defendants elected to file an answer on October 13, 2020. On November 2, 2020, the Halls filed a motion to strike certain paragraphs of the County Defendants' answer or to deem them admitted. On December 30, 2020, I entered an order concluding that the Halls raised valid arguments as to some of the County Defendants' responses, but I found that their voluminous complaint violated Rule 8(a)(2)'s “short and plain statement” requirement. Accordingly, I directed the Clerk to strike the complaint and granted the Halls an opportunity to file an amended complaint in accordance with Rule 8(a), containing no more than 50 pages. I also held the State Defendants' motion to dismiss in abeyance pending the Halls' filing of a first amended complaint. I directed the State Defendants to indicate- once the Halls filed their amended pleading-whether the grounds for their motion to dismiss remained valid and whether they would seek to supplement their motion. (ECF No. 45.)
The Halls filed their amended complaint on January 22, 2021 which condensed their pleading into the allowed 50-page limit but also added new claims and Defendants. The State Defendants advised that the amendment did not alter their original motion to dismiss, but they requested an opportunity to supplement the motion. The State Defendants filed their supplement on February 8, 2021. (ECF No. 47.) This time around, the County Defendants elected to file a motion to dismiss in lieu of an answer, which...
To continue reading
Request your trial