Leslie Mercado v. Department of Children and Families.
24-P-0128
| Mass. App. Ct. | Feb 26, 2025Background
- Leslie Mercado sued the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF), seeking damages and other relief for alleged negligence, civil rights violations, and failure to provide her with her records during and after her time in foster care.
- Her complaint included disturbing allegations of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse while in DCF custody, supported by a personal narrative.
- The complaint was dismissed by the Superior Court for failure to state a claim, prompting Mercado’s appeal.
- DCF moved to dismiss based on untimeliness, lack of proper presentment for tort claims, lack of a cognizable statutory claim for civil rights, and failure to show a clear duty or right to specific records.
- The Appeals Court reviewed the sufficiency of the complaint de novo, considering both facts and attached exhibits, but affirmed the lower court’s dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negligence (Tort Claims) | DCF was negligent in failing to protect Mercado and prevent ongoing abuse while in their custody. | Claims should be dismissed for failure to properly present a claim and for being time-barred. | Dismissed for lack of presentment and untimeliness under the statute of limitations. |
| Sexual Abuse-Related Tort Claims | DCF negligently supervised persons who abused Mercado as a minor. | Any such claims are time-barred under the relevant statute of limitations. | Dismissed as untimely because alleged acts occurred before 2014 and injury was discovered by 2008. |
| Civil Rights Violations | DCF violated Mercado’s civil rights during her time in custody. | DCF is not a "person" under the relevant civil rights statutes and thus not subject to suit. | Dismissed; DCF not liable as a "person" under MCRA or §1983. |
| Withholding of Records | DCF unlawfully denied Mercado access to her foster and pre-adoption records. | No clear-cut duty was alleged; DCF followed applicable procedures. | Dismissed; no plausible allegation of failure to fulfill a nondiscretionary duty. |
Key Cases Cited
- Curtis v. Herb Chambers I-95, Inc., 458 Mass. 674 (standard for reviewing motion to dismiss and sufficiency of complaint)
- Iannacchino v. Ford Motor Co., 451 Mass. 623 (pleading standard under Massachusetts law; facts must plausibly suggest entitlement to relief)
- Gallant v. Worcester, 383 Mass. 707 (complaints are not dismissed if any viable theory is supported)
- Weaver v. Commonwealth, 387 Mass. 43 (strict compliance with presentment requirement under the Tort Claims Act)
- Hansen v. Commonwealth, 344 Mass. 214 ("person" in statute does not include the Commonwealth or political subdivisions)