Procedural History How did this case get to this particular court? Typically, you will be reading case law from the appeals court.
Youngberg involved the rights of involuntarily committed mentally disabled individuals. Supreme Court recognized that the liberty interest of the 14th Amendment's due process clause requires the state to provide "minimally adequate or reasonable training to ensure safety and freedom from undue restraint" for involuntarily committed mentally disabled individuals.
In meeting this duty, however, state officials' decisions are "entitled to a presumption of correctness" and officials will not be held liable unless these decisions substantially depart from accepted professional judgment.
The court decided that the same 14th Amendment liberty interest, "the right to be free from infliction of unnecessary harm… and the fundamental right to physical safety," applied to foster children, but that liability was predicated on a showing of deliberate indifference.
Supreme Court subsequently issued strong statements limiting state liability in the foster care context. In DeShaney, the state took custody of the plaintiff because of allegations of abuse by his father, but then returned him to his father's custody, where he suffered further abuse.
The Court held the state's actions did not violate the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, rejecting the argument that the state had an on-going duty to protect the plaintiff after having once assumed his custody.
Distinguishing Estelle and Youngberg, the Court stated that the state "does not become the permanent guarantor of an individual's safety by having once offered him shelter.
This ruling clearly establishes that states cannot be held liable for harm to foster children caused by third parties. In a footnote, the DeShaney Court noted that if the plaintiff had remained in state custody, his rights might equal those of the prisoners and institutionalized persons in Estelle and Youngberg.
The Court recognized that lower courts had applied Estelle and Youngberg to such cases. After DeShaney, a number of federal circuits have relied on this footnote to claim violation of a right to be free from unnecessary harm for foster children in state custody.
Dep't of Human Serv. However, DeShaney imposes important limitations to this right, including withholding liability for third party harm. The right is also limited to children involuntarily placed into state custody.
See Taylor, F. Supreme Court required in DeShaney. Since there is no precedent in this jurisdiction to support an extension of due process rights to children in Milton R.
The DeShaney opinion also emphasized that the state duty of protection only extends to an individual the state holds "against his will. Subsequent cases have interpreted DeShaney to limit the state's liability under the 14th Amendment to children involuntarily placed into foster care.
Anne Arundel County Dep't of Soc. Despite DeShaney's strong language to the contrary, some courts have extended some protection to voluntarily placed children.
Because there is no such extension in this jurisdiction, this court must follow the U. Supreme Court and the circuits that have correctly interpreted DeShaney to limit state liability as to foster children voluntarily placed into state custody and grant summary judgment as to Plaintiff Milton R.
The use of the deliberate indifference standard in the foster care context pre-dates the creation of the professional judgment standard, as well as its application to foster care.
City Dep't of Soc. Furthermore, the professional judgment standard is inapposite for foster care as it emerged in the context of habilitation of mentally disabled people and is rooted in medical malpractice cases. See Youngberg, U.
An important element of the standard is the requirement of notice. Doe emphasized that "[deliberate] indifference cannot exist absent some knowledge triggering an affirmative duty to act. Along this line, other courts have explained deliberate indifference as "at minimum that defendants were plainly placed on notice of danger and chose to ignore the danger," White, F.
The professional judgment standard was first articulated in Youngberg. Supreme Court stated that a violation of the professional judgment standard would be "such a substantial departure from accepted professional judgment, practice, or standards as to demonstrate that the person responsible actually did not base the decision on such a judgment.
The court is not to determine which of several professionally acceptable choices should be made. The standard has a notice requirement similar to deliberate indifference: The professional judgment standard is inappropriate for the foster care context because it has roots in the standard for medical malpractice claims.
The case turned on the question of whether an institutionalized mentally disabled person had the right to habilitation: The court decided the plaintiff did have the right to "minimally adequate or reasonable training to ensure safety and freedom from undue restraint.A brief must “[s]tate each point under a separate heading or subheading summarizing the point, and support each point by argument and, if possible, by citation of authority.”Cal.
Rules of Court, rule (a)(1)(B).
Guide to Appellate Briefs. The brief is a party’s opportunity to argue why the trial court’s decision is legally incorrect or correct. The appellant’s (appealing party’s) brief contains a statement of the issues on appeal, the procedural history of the case, a statement of the underlying facts, the appellant's legal argument, and a conclusion stating the relief sought.
North Carolina Appellate Advocacy Training Chapel Hill, NC Wednesday, October 17, to Friday, October 19, WRITING THE LEGAL ARGUMENT: A FEW WRITING SAMPLES. The appellate brief template. is a fully formatted Microsoft Word document..
It saves you time and money by eliminating the burdensome formatting normally required when writing an appellate brief. It has all or the formatting that’s normally required in an appellate brief. superior court of new jersey appellate division docket no. at3 i/m/o the provision of basic generation service for the period beginning june 1, BRIEF WRITING By: Dallas Sacher INTRODUCTION Much to my amazement, I have spent nearly thirty years in the practice cannot be self expression or glory.
Rather, the purpose of the appellate brief is to provide a concise, precise and clear exposition of the relevant facts and For example, if it is undisputed that the defendant shot the.