499 F. App'x 57
2d Cir.2012Background
- In 2002, the Oglesbys obtain pre-adoptive custody of four children, later adopting IG and NR and removing two older siblings after inappropriate conduct by them.
- In 2003, IG and NR are formally adopted; IG’s kindergarten behavior is monitored, including installing a video camera; no major incidents early on.
- In second grade (Nov. 2005), IG inserts a trophy and caulking gun into her vagina; she is hospitalized for four weeks and authorities are notified.
- After IG’s hospitalization, Mrs. Oglesby inspects IG’s and NR’s vaginas; school nurses and staff become involved; a log tracks IG’s bathroom visits.
- From January 2006 onward, concerns about IG’s masturbation lead to procedures restricting bathroom access and increased nurse oversight; teachers’ observations do not corroborate the concerns.
- In 2006–2007, plaintiffs repeatedly inform school officials; CPS is contacted (April 24, 2006) regarding alleged abuse; CPS later closes the case as unfounded; plaintiffs do not lose custody.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Amendment retaliation claim | CPS call was retaliatory and based on false information after complaints. | Call was prudent, based on reasonable suspicion; reporters are immune when acting in good faith and advised by counsel. | CPS call not retaliatory; reporting deemed reasonable and protected. |
| Substantive due process right to intimate association | State action deprived custody in a way that shocks due process? | No actual loss of custody occurred; significant due process concerns require loss of custody. | No substantive due process claim; no loss of custody means no claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kia P. v. McIntyre, 235 F.3d 749 (2d Cir. 2000) (mandatory reporters have immunity for good-faith reports)
- Cox v. Warwick Valley Cent. Sch. Dist., 654 F.3d 267 (2d Cir. 2011) (deference to reporting for mandated reporters; liability for failure to report)
- Curley v. Village of Suffern, 268 F.3d 65 (2d Cir. 2001) (elements of a First Amendment retaliation claim)
- Tenenbaum v. Williams, 193 F.3d 581 (2d Cir. 1999) (substantive due process standard for intimate association)
- Anthony v. City of New York, 339 F.3d 129 (2d Cir. 2003) (standing inquiry for temporary separations and due process considerations)