Department of Children and Families, Division of Child protection and Permanency v. E.D.-o., 434 N.J. Super. 154

On May 6, 2009, appellant Eleanor parked about 150 feet from a Dollar Tree, left her 19‑month‑old sleeping child belted in a car seat with the engine running, doors locked, and windows open about one inch, and entered the store for 5–10 minutes.
A mall security guard observed the unattended child, called police; Eleanor was arrested on child endangerment charges and later released.
The Division of Child Protection and Permanency investigated, substantiated the incident, placed Eleanor on the child abuse registry, and implemented a family safety plan.
The Division later filed and then consentually dismissed a Title Nine custody action after concluding no further intervention was needed.
Eleanor sought an administrative evidentiary hearing and appealed the Director’s final agency decision; the appellate issue was limited to whether the undisputed facts established abuse or neglect under N.J.S.A. 9:6‑8.21(c)(4)(b).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether leaving a 19‑month‑old unattended in a running, locked car 150 feet from a store satisfies the statute's “minimum degree of care” standard	Division: this conduct is grossly negligent/reckless and places the child in imminent danger	Eleanor: brief errand, child was sleeping, vehicle had engine running and slight ventilation, neighborhood was upscale — conduct at most negligent	Held: conduct was grossly negligent/reckless and met N.J.S.A. 9:6‑8.21(c)(4)(b); abuse/neglect finding affirmed
Whether an evidentiary hearing was required	Division: facts undisputed; summary disposition appropriate under agency rules	Eleanor: sought hearing to contest findings	Held: no hearing required where material facts undisputed and Director properly used summary procedure
Whether context (child unharmed, short time, available adults at home, shopping for party) negates gross negligence	Eleanor: absence of extenuating circumstances and short duration reduce culpability	Division: public vehicle + out of sight + engine running increases risk; no extenuating facts here	Held: context did not mitigate; brief duration and lack of exigent reason did not preclude gross negligence finding
Whether neighborhood safety affects standard	Eleanor: upscale mall reduces risk	Division: risk not materially reduced by locale	Held: location does not materially diminish the peril inherent in leaving a toddler unattended in a vehicle

G.S. v. Dep’t of Human Servs., 157 N.J. 161 (defining "minimum degree of care" as grossly or wantonly negligent; focus on whether an ordinary reasonable person would recognize peril)
T.B. v. N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs., 207 N.J. 294 (cautionary‑act language; not every failure is statutory abuse — mere negligence insufficient)
N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. A.R., 419 N.J. Super. 538 (gross negligence where infant placed on bed next to radiator and door closed)
N.J. Dep’t of Youth & Family Servs. v. J.L., 410 N.J. Super. 159 (facts showing mere negligence where children left nearby and had safety measures; not statutory abuse)
N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. S.N.W., 428 N.J. Super. 247 (discussing fact‑sensitive nature of minimum care inquiries)
E.S. v. Div. of Med. Assistance Health Servs., 412 N.J. Super. 340 (agency summary procedure precedent referenced)