Patterson v. Armstrong County

Decision Date22 May 2001
Docket NumberCIV. A. No. 99-221.
Citation141 F.Supp.2d 512
PartiesKelly J. PATTERSON, individually, and as parent and natural guardian of Abby Ferguson, Douglas A. Patterson, and Kelly's Kids Child Care, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. ARMSTRONG COUNTY CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES, Armstrong County, Jo Ellen Bowman, South Buffalo Township and Scott Yockey, Officer, Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania

Alexander H. Lindsay, Jr., Lindsay, Jackson & Martin, Butler, for Kelly J. Patterson, Individually and as parents and natural guardian of Abby Ferguson, Douglas A. Patterson, Kelly's Kids Child Care, Inc., plaintiffs.

Scott G. Dunlop, Paul D. Krepps, Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, Mark R. Hamilton, Carmen A. Martucci, Zimmer Kunz, Pittsburgh, for Armstrong County Children and Youth Services, Armstrong County, Jo Ellen Bowman, South Buffalo Township, Scott Yockey, Officer, defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

LEE, District Judge.

Before the Court are: (i) South Buffalo Township ("Township") and Officer Scott Yockey's Motion for Summary Judgment(DocumentNo. 35); and (ii)Motion for Summary Judgment(DocumentNo. 38) filed on behalf of Armstrong County("County"), Armstrong County Children and Youth Services("CYS"), and Jo Ellen Bowman.After careful consideration of these motions, the memoranda of law in support and in opposition thereto, the supporting materials offered by the parties, and the entire record in this case, the Court will grant summary judgment in favor of all defendants on plaintiffs' substantive due process claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and their pendent state claims, but will deny the motions with regard to plaintiffs' section 1983 procedural due process claims.

Background

The historical facts underlying this lawsuit are not in dispute, for the most part, although the competing inferences the parties spin from those facts are wildly divergent.Putting aside the contradictory spins and inferences, for now, the mostly undisputed material facts material are as follows.During the first week of November 1998, plaintiffKelly J. Patterson and her daughter, Abby Ferguson, approaching 15 years of age, were having an ongoing disagreement about, among other things, whether Abby could go and live with her father, Jeffrey Ferguson.Mrs. Patterson had primary custody, and pursuant to family court order, Mr. Ferguson had alternating weekends, and substantial shared custody in the summertime.

On the morning of November 6, 1998, a Friday, the escalating week-long squabble culminated in a physical altercation in the driveway of their home.After the altercation, Mrs. Patterson drove Abby to Freeport Area High School.Two of Abby's friends noticed that she was very upset, crying, and had some minor scrapes and bruises on her wrists, arms, knees and a small bump on her head.Abby told them she was upset because her mother and she had a fight.

Her friends persuaded Abby to tell the guidance counselor what had happened.Doug Stanko, the counselor, spoke with Abby who told him about the fight.Mr. Stanko asked Abby to write out a statement explaining what had happened.Abby handwrote the seven-page statement, the highlights of which are as follows.

Abby described a series of escalating arguments she had with her mother over a variety of things, but mostly about her wanting to go and live with her father.Mrs. Patterson thought she was manipulating her parents.On one occasion, "she said she would punch me in the face and drag me to the car" if Abby wouldn't ride to school with her voluntarily.Abby Ferguson deposition, Deposition Exhibit 1, at 4.The arguments continued for about a week.On Friday, November 6, 1998, Abby told her mothershe was going to go to her father's residence after school, and tempers flared.

The argument escalated, mother and daughter shouting at each other, including Abby Ferguson screaming, "Screw you."Mrs. Patterson insisted Abby would not ride the bus to school, and she was going to drive her instead.Arguing throughout the morning, eventually they headed toward the car.

By that time I'd gotten to the car & was on the steppey thing, & she came up behind me & pulled me out by my hair & faced my head down.She told me never to swear at her again.I told her to stop & let go of me & she said not `til I said I wouldn't.We got on the ground & she clawed me & we fought until I got on top & I said, "You don't hit me."She got on top again, & she got my hooded sweatshirt over my face & was pulling it.I told her I couldn't breathe, & she said good.I got out of her grip, and I got at last on all fours.She clawed at my bracelets & my arm, & pulled my left arm back behind my back, and when I told her she was hurting me, she said she'd break my fingers if she had to!She put my forehead into the gravel, & I was stuck, there was nothing I could do.She had called my step-dad out, & he was standing there, just watching.I got on all four's again, & she got me down, pulled my arm back, sat on top of me, & all I could do was say that I wouldn't swear.She sat there for a few sec., then let me up.We got into the car, and after stopping at Freeport, she took me to school.I called my dad, and he said he'd come get me.Then on my way to H.R., my friends Jenny & Deanna saw I had been crying and when I told them what happened, they took me to the guidance office.

Abby Ferguson deposition, Deposition Exhibit 1, 6-7.

Mr. Stanko reported the incident to his immediate supervisor, Assistant Principal Max Krugle.After seeing Abby and reading her statement, he requested Abby be examined by the school nurse.Abby told Mr. Krugle that she did not want to go home that night, and that she was afraid of her mother.Nurse Mary Barbara Lagiovane examined Abby, and noted the minor scratches, scrapes and bruises on her knees, hands, wrists and an abrasion on her head.Abby told Nurse Lagiovane that she was afraid to go home.Nurse Lagiovane, and Messrs. Krugle and Stanko met with the principal, Mr. Robert Schleiden, to determine the next step.Principal Schleiden spoke with Abby and confirmed the facts in her written statement.Abby indicated to the principal she was adamant about not going home to her mother.The four school officials unanimously decided that this incident had to be reported to CYS.1

Kelly Patterson, who owns and runs Kelly's Kids Childcare, Inc., a childcare center, concedes it was appropriate for the school officials to notify CYS pursuant to the mandatory reporting provisions of the Child Protective Services Law ("CPSL"), 23 Pa.C.S. §§ 6301 — 6384.DefendantJo Ellen Bowman was the caseworker assigned by CYS to investigate the matter.She went to Freeport Area High School, read Abby's statement, interviewed her and confirmed what she had written.Ms. Bowman reviewed the nurse's report and observed the visible injuries to Abby.Abby expressed some concern about her safety and had asked Ms. Bowman not to notify her mother that CYS was involved.Bowman deposition, at 20, 28-29.Abby told Ms. Bowman "that her mother would be very angry knowing that we were involved," and "she felt that the situation that had happened that morning was going to escalate and did not feel that the situation between herself and her mother had been rectified from the altercation that they had in the morning."Bowman deposition, 28-29.

Ms. Bowman had attempted to contact Mrs. Patterson by telephone at her day-care center, but was told she was not available.Ms. Bowman then contacted several police stations in boroughs which arguably had jurisdiction over some or all of the events, including South Buffalo Township Police Department, which had jurisdiction at the Patterson-Ferguson residence.Officer Yockey was the police officer from Township who went to the school to investigate.

Kelly Patterson arrived at Freeport High School around 2:45 p.m. Patterson deposition at 72.At this point, she had no idea what had gone on at school that day and she saw Principal Schleiden on the sidewalk and approached him.He told her he needed to speak with her, they went inside the school where there were several police officers, and the principal told Mrs. Patterson that Abby was in protective custody.Patterson deposition at 76.

According to Ms. Bowman, she tried to speak with Mrs. Patterson, who was making a phone call to her lawyer, and Mrs. Patterson could not say how long it would take for her lawyer to get to school.It was late afternoon, the high school was in a football playoff game, and everyone in the school, including the school officials, wanted to go to the game.Ms. Bowman asked Mrs. Patterson if she wanted to go to the police station to wait for her attorney, and Mrs. Patterson said no. Bowman deposition, at 16-17.

Ms. Bowman then discussed the matter with Officer Yockey and the school officials, and everyone agreed Abby Ferguson should not return home that night because they were not able to ensure her safety if she did.Bowman deposition, at 12-13, 21.Officer Yockey initiated a call to District Attorney Scott Andreassi, the district attorney for Armstrong County, who agreed Abby should be taken into protective custody, and advised Officer Yockey and Ms. Bowman to initiate that.He also advised Officer Yockey to file criminal charges against Mrs. Patterson based upon what the circumstances described to him, and Officer Yockey later filed criminal charges for simple assault, harassment, and disorderly conduct.

According to both Ms. Bowman and Officer Yockey, Yockey assumed custody of Abby Ferguson under Pennsylvania's Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6301-6365, which was the normal procedure CYS and officers of the Township followed on weekends and after hours.Bowman deposition at 30-31.Immediately after assuming custody, perhaps simultaneously, Officer Yockey turned custody over to CYS/ Ms. Bowman.In the meantime, Mrs. Patterson's attorney arrived,...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
18 cases
  • B.S v. Somerset County, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:08-30
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania
    • 16 Marzo 2011
    ...conscience may be considered a violation of a parent's substantive due process rights. Patterson v. Armstrong County Children and Youth Services, et. al, 141 F. Supp.2d 512, 520-522 (W.D. Pa. 2001); citing Miller at 376; also citing Croft at 1125-26; also citing Doman v. City of Philadelphi......
  • Shuman v. Penn Manor School Dist.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • 7 Septiembre 2005
    ...given context and case are supplied and defined by federal law, not by state law or regulations." Patterson v. Armstrong County Children & Youth Servs., 141 F.Supp.2d 512, 537 (W.D.Pa.2001) (citing Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 194, 104 S.Ct. 3012, 82 L.Ed.2d 139 ...
  • Whitenight v. Elbel, 2:16-CV-00646-CRE
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania
    • 5 Diciembre 2017
    ...except under limited circumstances that are defined by statute.7 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8545;Patterson v. Armstrong County Children and Youth Services, 141 F. Supp. 2d 512, 543-44 (W.D. Pa. 2001). A cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress is predicated upon a finding of......
  • Jowett v. Churchill
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • 31 Agosto 2021
    ... ... law, not by state law or regulations.'” (quoting ... Patterson v. Armstrong Cnty. Children & Youth ... Servs. , 141 F.Supp.2d 512, 537 (W.D. Pa. 2001)) ... ...
  • Get Started for Free