Quevedo Ex Rel. Bevan v. New Mexico Children, Youth & Families Department
10 N.M. 707
| N.M. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Plaintiffs (former residents of Tierra Blanca Ranch High Country Youth Program — TBR) sued CYFD and others alleging physical and emotional abuse, deprivation, shackling, and forced exercise while at TBR. Plaintiffs allege CYFD knew of abuses and failed to license/regulate TBR despite beginning a licensing effort in 2005 and later stopping it.
- CYFD moved for summary judgment asserting governmental immunity under the New Mexico Tort Claims Act (TCA), specifically that the TCA’s "building waiver" (§ 41-4-6(A)) does not permit Plaintiffs’ suit.
- The district court granted summary judgment for CYFD (and other state defendants); Plaintiffs appealed only the CYFD ruling on the building waiver.
- Relevant statutory and regulatory framework: the Children’s Code and CYFD shelter-care and foster-home licensing/regulations impose placement, inspection, staffing, safety, and conduct requirements for facilities where CYFD may place children.
- Central factual dispute: whether and under what circumstances CYFD placed, referred, funded, or otherwise exercised control over children sent to TBR (and whether any financial nexus or referrals existed). CYFD made an ambiguous oral comment at the hearing that it had placed children at TBR, but did not file written responses denying Plaintiffs’ allegations.
- The Court of Appeals concluded that material factual disputes about CYFD’s involvement with TBR preclude summary judgment and reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the TCA "building waiver" permits suit against CYFD for alleged harms at a private residential program | The building waiver applies because CYFD had duties (statutory/regulatory) to operate/ensure safe placements and therefore waived immunity for negligent operation/maintenance of TBR when CYFD placed/referred children there | CYFD argued the statutes do not allow or require CYFD to license TBR and that immunity is not waived for Plaintiffs’ claims | The court held waiver may apply if CYFD had a relationship/duty regarding TBR placements; factual disputes about CYFD’s involvement prevent summary judgment (reversed/remanded) |
| Whether CYFD owed a duty of ordinary care to children placed or referred to TBR | CYFD’s placement/placement-authority, regulations, and licensing schemes created duties to protect children in placements | CYFD disputed that it had duties to license/operate TBR or that those duties extend to private property absent specific control | The court held statutes/regulations can create duties bringing CYFD within the building waiver; the existence/scope of such duties is a fact question |
| Whether summary judgment was appropriate given the record | Plaintiffs argued unresolved factual issues (placement, financial ties, control) required denial of summary judgment | CYFD relied on immunity and absence of a duty/authority to license TBR | The court held summary judgment was improper because reasonable inferences must be drawn for the nonmovant and material facts are disputed |
| Whether Plaintiffs preserved/argued claims against DWS on appeal | Plaintiffs named DWS below but offered no appellate argument or statutory basis against DWS | DWS asserted summary judgment in its favor; Plaintiffs did not contest on appeal | The court deemed appeal of DWS’s judgment abandoned (no appellate discussion) |
Key Cases Cited
- Cobos v. Doña Ana Cty. Hous. Auth., 970 P.2d 1143 (N.M. 1998) (building-waiver analysis hinges on duties/control exercised by public employees, not title to property)
- Encinias v. Whitener Law Firm, P.A., 310 P.3d 611 (N.M. 2013) (building waiver not limited to physical defects; extends to unsafe conditions arising from negligent government operation/maintenance)
- Upton v. Clovis Mun. Sch. Dist., 141 P.3d 1259 (N.M. 2006) (building waiver includes safety policies necessary to protect building users)
- Young v. Van Duyne, 92 P.3d 1269 (N.M. Ct. App. 2004) (permitting claim that CYFD-operated foster home could fall within building waiver; remand to develop regulatory/operational proof)
- M.D.R. v. State ex rel. Human Servs. Dep’t, 836 P.2d 106 (N.M. Ct. App. 1992) (special concurrence recognizing foster placement creates a unique state involvement that may give rise to duties)
- Espinoza v. Town of Taos, 905 P.2d 718 (N.M. 1995) (summary judgment inappropriate where resolution of factual disputes is required to decide legal questions)