Meador v. Cabinet for Human Resources, s. 88-5613

Decision Date18 October 1988
Docket NumberNos. 88-5613,88-5614,s. 88-5613
Citation860 F.2d 1079
PartiesUnpublished Disposition NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit. David Lynn MEADOR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CABINET FOR HUMAN RESOURCES; Marvin Hood; Sandy Allnutt; Marian McKinney, Defendants-Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

Before KEITH, NATHANIEL R. JONES and MILBURN, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

Plaintiff Meador moves to proceed in forma pauperis and moves to amend his complaint on appeal from the district court's judgment dismissing this civil rights case. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. The appeal has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon consideration, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

Meador is a resident of Bowling Green, Kentucky. The defendants are the Kentucky Cabinet of Human Resources, two Cabinet supervisors, and one Cabinet social worker. Meador alleges that the defendants negligently placed his children in a foster home where the children were sexually abused.

The district court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss. The court held that Meador had no standing to sue for the deprivation of the civil rights of his children. Tyree v. Smith, 289 F.Supp. 174, 175 (D.C.Tenn.1968). The court also held that Meador's allegations of negligence were inadequate to state a claim. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b).

We agree with the conclusion of the district court on the standing issue. Meador has no right to sue on his own behalf for the deprivation of the civil rights of his children.

Accordingly, the motion for in forma pauperis status is granted. The motion to amend the complaint is denied. The judgment of the district court is affirmed under Rule 9(b)(5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit, because the issues are not substantial and do not require oral argument.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Hill ex rel. S.H. v. Blount Cnty. Sch., : 3:14-CV-96-PLR-HBG
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee
    • 19 Febrero 2015
    ...has no right to sue in his own behalf for the deprivation of the civil rights of his or her children. Meador v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 860 F.2d 1079 (6th Cir. 1988). Because S.H. is no longer a minor nor under any legal disability under Tennessee law, her parents have lost all rights ......
  • Harris v. Clevel
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee
    • 1 Marzo 2018
    ...above, a plaintiff has no right to sue in her own behalf for the deprivation of the civil rights of a child. Meador v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 860 F.2d 1079 (6th Cir. 1988). Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that every unrepresented party personally sign each ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT