A.A. ex rel. Lewis v. Kristy Shutts
2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 34
| Ky. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Watson Adkins and three siblings were placed with their aunt and uncle in foster care; Watson (nearly 3) died of blunt-force abdominal injuries inflicted by the uncle.
- Dr. Kristy Shutts examined Watson at several clinic visits in 2011; prior social-services allegations of abuse against the aunt and uncle had been investigated and found unsubstantiated.
- On September 23, 2011, the aunt brought Watson for a small healed head cut; the aunt/uncle gave inconsistent explanations (fall in bathtub; ER treatment with a glue-like substance), and Dr. Shutts could not confirm the ER visit.
- Watson died about a week later; the uncle was criminally convicted of murder and child abuse. The Adkins Estate sued Dr. Shutts for failing to report suspected child abuse under KRS 620.030.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to Dr. Shutts based on statutory immunity (KRS 620.050(1)) and a finding there was no reasonable cause to suspect abuse; the estate appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope of KRS 620.050 immunity | KRS 620.050 immunity applies only to those who "act" by reporting; non-reporters are not immune | Immunity covers both reporters and non-reporters so long as omission was in good faith | Reversed: Immunity statute applies only to those who act by making a report; non-reporters are not entitled to KRS 620.050 immunity |
| Breach of duty ("reasonable cause to believe") | Whether Dr. Shutts had reasonable cause to suspect abuse is a jury question; summary judgment improper | No reasonable cause as a matter of law given benign exam and prior unsubstantiated CPS finding | Reversed and remanded: viewing evidence favorably to plaintiff, reasonable minds could differ; jury could find breach — summary judgment improper |
Key Cases Cited
- Norton Hosps., Inc. v. Peyton, 381 S.W.3d 286 (Ky. 2012) (interprets interplay of KRS 620.030 reporting duty and KRS 620.050 immunity)
- Shelton v. Kentucky Easter Seals Soc’y, Inc., 413 S.W.3d 901 (Ky. 2013) (breach-of-duty questions often fact issues; summary judgment allowed only when only one reasonable conclusion exists)
- Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Serv. Ctr., Inc., 807 S.W.2d 476 (Ky. 1991) (summary judgment standard; view facts in light most favorable to nonmovant)
- Goodwin v. Al J. Schneider Co., 501 S.W.3d 894 (Ky. 2016) (reiterates limits on summary judgment for breach questions and open-and-obvious doctrine)
- Commonwealth v. Allen, 980 S.W.2d 278 (Ky. 1998) (mandatory duty to report suspected child abuse under KRS 620.030)
- Hazlett v. Evans, 943 F. Supp. 785 (E.D. Ky. 1996) (discusses whether ‘‘reasonable cause’’ is a jury question; treated as persuasive but not controlling)