Shawn Slaven v. Dan Engstrom
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5720
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- Slavens sue Hennepin County under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for procedural due process violations in a child-protection case involving C.S., A.S., and J.S.
- C.S. suffered a head injury; medical findings prompted state authorities to initiate a child-protection investigation.
- C.S. was placed on an emergency 72-hour hold; EPC hearing was scheduled for August 25, 2009, with other hearings following.
- Hennepin County personnel filed a petition; the EPC hearing resulted in a placement order and ongoing supervision decisions.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Hennepin County, holding no § 1983 liability for enforcing/state-law practices.
- On appeal, the Eighth Circuit affirmed, ruling the County lacked a standalone policy causing the alleged due-process violations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hennepin County can be liable under § 1983 for enforcing state law with respect to the EPC/hearing process. | Slavens claim county policy or custom caused due-process violations by applying Minnesota law. | County lacked a policy; constitutional issues arise from state court applications of law, not county policy. | No county policy alleged; no § 1983 liability. |
| Whether the EPC hearing denied meaningful opportunity to be heard due to alleged evidentiary limitations. | County denied rebuttal and cross-examination, violating due process during EPC hearing. | State procedures and the hearing comported with due process; no municipal policy implicated. | No due-process violation attributable to county policy. |
| Whether the 62-day delay between EPC hearing and trial violated due process by depriving a meaningful opportunity to be heard. | Delay was arbitrary and shocks the conscience, implying lack of due process. | Timetabling is a judicial function; no county policy or fault in scheduling. | Delay did not establish § 1983 liability. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lind v. Midland Funding, L.L.C., 688 F.3d 402 (8th Cir. 2012) (due process requires notice and right to be heard)
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (fundamental parental rights with government interest)
- Whisman Through Whisman v. Rinehart, 119 F.3d 1303 (8th Cir. 1997) (parental rights balanced against child protection interests)
- Dornheim v. Sholes, 430 F.3d 919 (8th Cir. 2005) (state interest in child protection limits on parental liberty)
- Board of County Commissioners of Bryan County, Oklahoma v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397 (1997) (municipal liability requires an official policy or custom)