Molnar v. Care House
| Decision Date | 05 September 2008 |
| Docket Number | No. 06-CV-15202-DT.,06-CV-15202-DT. |
| Citation | 574 F.Supp.2d 772 |
| Parties | Gerald MOLNAR, Plaintiff, v. CARE HOUSE (Child Abuse and Neglect Council of Oakland County), Amy Allen, Janice Pokely, City of Troy, and Renee Molnar, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan |
Ashish S. Joshi, Lorandos Association, Demosthenes Lorandos, Ann Arbor, MI, for Plaintiff.
Heidi D. Hudson, Mark J. Zausmer, Zausmer, Kaufman, Farmington Hills, MI, Christopher J. Forsyth, Troy City Law Department, Troy, MI, for Defendants.
Renee Molnar, Waterford, MI, pro se.
This Section 1983 action is presently before the Court on the motion to dismiss and/or summary judgment filed by Defendants Janice Pokely1 and the City of Troy, and the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants Care House and Amy Allen. Both of these motions have been fully briefed by the parties. Having reviewed and considered the parties' briefs2 and supporting evidence, the Court is now prepared to rule on this matter. This Opinion and Order sets forth the Court's ruling.3
Plaintiff Gerald Molnar filed for divorce from his then wife, Renee Molnar, on February 8, 1998. The Molnars had four children together, three boys and one girl. According to the Amended Complaint in this action, soon after Plaintiff filed for divorce, Renee began accusing him of abusing their children. According to Plaintiff, these accusations began sometime in August of 1998 after Mr. Molnar expressed to Renee his concern about her brother, Brian Koch, a convicted sex offender, having access to their children. Renee allegedly responded to Mr. Molnar's concern by warning him, "You better watch out or you just might find yourself in the same boat one day." Plaintiff claims that after that date through May 1999, Renee made several allegations to the authorities that Plaintiff had sexually and physically abused their children. The authorities, however, found these allegations to be unsubstantiated.
Plaintiff thereafter filed a federal suit against Renee and various state actors claiming violations of his Constitutional rights. Plaintiffs claims in that case, Molnar v. Lopez, E.D. Mich. No. 00-75050, stemmed from actions taken by Renee in January 1999 who at that time entered the Molnars' oldest son, Alexander, into counseling with Oakland County Community Mental Health Authority ("OCCMHA") and allegedly "concealed the course of treatment" from Plaintiff. Mr. Molnar's theory in that case was that his ex-wife's actions violated the terms of their divorce decree and also that the various counselors and employees of the OCCMHA and the Oakland County Family Independency Agency (the "FIA") had conspired with his ex-wife to violate his Constitutional "right to parent" by damaging his relationship with his children. The Court (Roberts, J.), however, found that Mr. Molnar had provided no evidentiary support for his conclusory allegations and, therefore, found that he failed to make out a cognizable federal constitutional claim. Accordingly, on March 4, 2002, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs federal claims, declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over his state law claims, and entered judgment in favor of the defendants.4
On October 8, 2003, Renee Molnar went to the Troy Police station and reported that her ex-husband had touched their daughter Elizabeth (a/k/a "Libby") in a sexual manner. Renee's complaint was referred to Detective Janice Pokely. Renee then met with Detective Pokely and reported that her then nine-year-old daughter told her that her father had put his hand down her pants and "touched her vulva." Detective Pokely then asked Renee to write out a witness statement and return it the next day, which Renee did.
Detective Pokely thereafter advised Renee that Elizabeth would need to be interviewed at Care House.
Care House is a private non-profit agency engaged "solely [in] the advocacy, prevention, intervention and treatment of child abuse and neglect." [Care House Brief, p. 11.] Care House performs forensic interviews with children under the age of 13 for all of the 46 police jurisdictions in Oakland County and the Department of Health and Human Services. Care House is used by the authorities so that interviews can be conducted in a less intimidating environment. Care House does not take private referrals and only accepts referrals and cases from law enforcement officials and Child Protective Services.5 A portion of Care House's funding comes from Oakland County and other state agencies, and there are a number of community leaders and state officials who have seats on Care House's Advisory Committee.6
On October 16, 2003, Care House employee, Amy Allen, conducted an interview with Elizabeth. No other person was in the room with Elizabeth and Ms. Allen. However Detective Pokely, a crisis counselor, an Oakland County Assistant Prosecutor, and Care House Coordinator Jennifer Hay were able to observe the interview through a two-way mirror. Elizabeth's mother, Renee, however, in no way participated in, or viewed, the interview. The interview was neither video-taped nor audio-recorded, and the only record of the interview is from the observers.
During the interview, Elizabeth stated several times that Plaintiff had placed his hands down her pants and "touched her vulva." Elizabeth's statements were consistent and Detective Pokely and the other observers determined that Elizabeth was a credible witness.
After the interview was conducted by Amy Allen, both she and Care House concluded their involvement in the case. The authorities' only contact with these Defendants after the interview was a telephone call by the police to confirm that a prior case involving Plaintiff and his children had been closed as not substantiated. The only other contact these Defendants had with Elizabeth after the interview was Amy Allen's incidental contact with her while at subsequent court hearings.
On the same day as Elizabeth's Care House interview, Detective Pokely interviewed Plaintiff Molnar at his residence and delivered to him a motion for an emergency motion to determine visitation rights. At the time of this interview, Plaintiff was living with his friend, Mary Urban. When Detective Pokely explained the allegations to Plaintiff, he denied them and, in Detective Pokely's opinion, appeared "frustrated." Plaintiff also told Detective Pokely in this interview about his ex-wife's previous allegations of abuse and that all of these were found to be unsubstantiated.
Plaintiff claims that he explained to Detective Pokely during the interview that he moved in with Ms. Urban on the suggestion of his attorney, and that Ms. Urban was present at all times he was with his children. Ms. Urban confirmed Plaintiffs statement in an Affidavit she provided on May 19, 2007. Plaintiff also claims that he informed Detective Pokely that Renee's brother, Brian Koch, was a convicted pedophile and that he had objected several times to Brian having access to his children. He also claims that he informed Detective Pokely of the "threat" Renee had allegedly made when he had confronted her about her brother.
After the interview, Detective Pokely reviewed incident reports from other police departments that identified Plaintiff as a suspect in two other incidents involving acts that were sexual in nature.
An emergency hearing was conducted in the family division of the Oakland County. Circuit Court concerning Plaintiffs visitation rights. After hearing testimony, on October 24, 2003, Referee Michael Hand suspended Plaintiffs visitation rights.
Detective Pokely thereafter reviewed all the information she had gathered, reduced it to a narrative report, and submitted the report to the Oakland County Prosecutor on November 24, 2003. In her narrative report, Detective Pokely included her knowledge of past unsubstantiated accusations made against Plaintiff. She also noted that Plaintiff was then living with Ms. Urban; however, she did not mention anything about Ms. Urban having indicated that she had seen no inappropriate behavior on the Plaintiffs part while the children were with him, or the claim by Plaintiff that Renee's brother was a convicted pedophile.
On December 4, 2003, the Oakland County Prosecutor authorized a complaint and warrant charging Mr. Molnar with Criminal Sexual Conduct ("CSC"). Detective Pokely swore out the warrant in front of Magistrate Donald Chisolm and the Magistrate thereafter issued a warrant for Plaintiffs arrest. After Plaintiff was informed by his attorney that a warrant had been issued, he voluntarily turned himself in to the Troy Police Department on December 5, 2003.
On December 23, 2003, a three-hour preliminary examination was conducted. Elizabeth, Renee, Detective Pokely and Amy Allen all testified at this hearing, and Plaintiffs lawyer was able to cross-examine all witnesses. After the preliminary examination, Judge Drury determined that there was probable cause to charge Plaintiff with CSC and bound him over for a criminal trial.
During the pendency of the criminal proceedings, proceedings concerning Mr. Molnar and his children continued in the family court. A petition to terminate Mr. Molnar's parental rights was filed with the Oakland County Circuit Court by the Oakland County Prosecutor's Office and the Family Independence Agency in December 2003. On December 23, 2004, Judge Daniel O'Brien held a bench trial on the petition. After hearing Elizabeth Molnar's testimony, Judge O'Brien concluded that the "alleged victim ... [was] credible and the Respondent ... [was] not." [1/5/05 Opinion and Order; Defendants'...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kolley v. Adult Protective Serv.
...was provided as the basis for the state court's determinations means that collateral estoppel does not apply. In Molnar v. Care House, 574 F.Supp.2d 772 (E.D.Mich.2008), the plaintiff-father brought a § 1983 action against various defendants related to their investigation of his daughter's ......
-
Brent v. Wayne Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs.
...F. App'x at 600 (providing court-ordered services to teenagers is not a power traditionally reserved exclusively to the state); Molnar, 574 F. Supp. 2d at 784 (provision of court-ordered counseling services is not public function). Similarly unavailing and unsupported is Brent's argument th......
-
Kedrowski v. Richards
...exception. The case Aldrich and the Fund cite to support their position regarding the entanglement exception, Molnar v. Care House, 574 F. Supp. 2d 772 (E.D. Mich. 2008), aff'd 359 Fed. App'x 623 (6th Cir. 2009), seems not to analyze the joint action test under Dennis. Id. at 783-86. Regard......
-
Jamison v. Child Protective Servs.
...2012), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, and remanded sub nom. Brent v. Wenk, 555 F. App'x 519 (6th Cir. 2014); Molnar v. Care House, 574 F. Supp. 2d 772, 782-85 (E.D. Mich. 2008). The Court finds the reasoning in these cases persuasive and applicable to Samaritas. Accordingly, for the foregoin......