Synopses of cases recently decided in Connecticut's
state and federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court regarding Abuse
and Neglect, Adoption, Civil Liberties, Discrimination, Education,
Family Law, Guardianship, Juvenile Justice, Legal Representation,
Medicaid, and Mental Health.
-
In
re Francisco R. (December 9, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Neglect//Predictive
Neglect :...
This case is an appeal from the trial court's adjudication of
neglect as to Francisco R., an adjudication based on the doctrine
of predictive neglect. Respondent father claimed that the trial
court's adjudication of neglect was clearly erroneous because
there was no evidence that the child had been harmed, abused,
neglected, or uncared for prior to or on the date of the neglect
petition.
-
In
re Justice V. (December 8, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Neglect//Evidence:
Terminating
parental rights on the ground of abandonment:...
The crux of the appeal was whether the trial court's failure
to issue specific following the neglect adjudication precluded
the trial court from granting termination of parental rights
on the ground of abandonment. Respondent mother also claimed
that the trial court's factual findings that TPR was warranted
were clearly erroneous.
-
In
re Tayler F. (October 28, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Neglect//Evidence:
Admissibility of children’s statements, preservation, testimony
regarding credibility:..In
this split decision, the respondent mother appealed the trial
court’s adjudication of neglect alleging the court improperly
admitted (1) testimony regarding whether the children should
testify in court; (2) hearsay evidence of statements by the
children, their father, and others; and (3) evidence of the
children’s credibility. The appellate court affirmed the judgment
of the trial court, agreeing that some evidence produced at
trial was inadmissible hearsay, but finding the admission of
such evidence harmless error in light of the overwhelming evidence
of child neglect.
-
P.
v. Newington Bd. of Educ., 546 F.3d 111 (2nd Cir. 2008)
Second
Circuit Court of Appeals
Education: The
Second Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the long standing
issue and adopted a standard for determining what constitutes
the least restrictive environment (LRE) under the statutory
obligations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA). The Court affirmed the granting of summary judgment
to the defendants Newington Board of Education holding that
the school complied with providing Plaintiff P. educational
services as mandated by the IDEA.
-
In
re Sarah S. (September 30, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Termination
of Parental Rights/Failure to Rehabilitate/Guardianship/Due
Process: In
this termination of parental rights appeal, the appellate court
affirmed the trial court’s termination decision, holding that
(1) the court properly denied the parent’s motion to transfer
guardianship to the paternal aunt; (2) there was ample evidence
to support a finding that the parents failed to rehabilitate;
and (3) the parents had not adequately briefed their claim that
the denial of a jury trial on the termination petition deprived
them of due process of law.
-
In
re Karl J. (September 2, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect/Guardianship/Motion to revoke: ...
This
case is an appeal from the judgment of the trial court awarding
custody and guardianship of Karl J. to the child's paternal
aunt and uncle. At issue was whether the court abused its discretion
in determining that it was in the best interests of the child
to remain in the care and custody of his paternal aunt and uncle.
Finding no abuse of discretion, the appellate court affirmed
the judgment of the trial court.
-
In
re Earl B (September 2008)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Juvenile Justice: ...In
this juvenile justice case, the Connecticut Supreme Court addressed
the question of whether a juvenile adjudicated as delinquent
and committed to the custody of the Department of Children and
Families pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-140(j) is entitled
to a hearing pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-15 to challenge
his continued placement at Connecticut Juvenile Training School
("CJTS"). The Supreme Court, in reversing the judgment of the
trial court, held that the department's decision to continue
placement at CJTS was reviewable in a treatment plan hearing
under § 17a-15.
-
In
re Devaun J. (August 26, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Termination
of Parental Rights/ Failure to Rehabilitate/ Open Adoption:
... In this termination of parental rights case, the appellate
court denied the mother's claim that the trial court improperly:
(1) failed to consider her statutory choice of a voluntary termination
of her parental rights and an open adoption; (2) concluded that
she failed to rehabilitate and that there was no ongoing parent-child
relationship; and (3) considered certain witnesses as expert
witnesses. The court also rejected the mother's claim that the
judgment of termination should be reversed because the postjudgment
report required by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-112(o) was filed late.
-
In
re Forrest B. (August 19, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..
In
this case, the mother's appeal from a trial court's order of
temporary custody was dismissed on mootness grounds.
-
In
re Trevon G. (August 19, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..
In
this termination of parental rights case, the appellate court
denied the mother's claim that the trial court improperly concluded
that she failed to rehabilitate, that the department has failed
to make reasonable efforts to reunify her with her children
and that termination served the best interests of her children.
-
In
re Stephen M. (August 12, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..
In
this termination of parental rights appeal, the appellate court
reversed the trial court's dismissal of the state's termination
petition, holding that the trial court improperly re-considered
and rejected the underlying finding of neglect made in a previous
proceeding.
-
In
re Emerald C. (July 1, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..
In
this split decision, the appellate court affirmed the trial
court’s determination that the father’s inconsistent compliance
with court-ordered and DCF mandated expectations supported a
finding that he had failed to rehabilitate.
-
M.K.
ex rel. Mrs. K. v. Sergi. (May 12, 2008)
United States District Court, D. Conn.
Education: In
a case raising important disability discrimination issues, the
United States District Court in Connecticut granted summary
judgment in favor of the Commissioner of the State Department
of Education, the Department of Children and Families, the town
of Putnam Board of Education, and other individuals sued in
their official capacity.
-
In
re Coby C. (April 29, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..
Respondent
mother appealed termination of parental rights decision contending
that the trial court’s finding that she failed to rehabilitate
and that termination was in the best interests of her child
was clearly erroneous."
-
Connecticut
v. Spellings. (April 28, 2008)
United States District Court, D. Conn.
Education: In
a significant decision, the United States District Court dismissed
the last remaining challenge brought by the state of Connecticut
to the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).
-
In
re Jorden R. (April 15, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..
In
this unusual case, the Appellate Court reversed a termination
of parental rights decision on the grounds that the trial court's
determination that the mother was unable or unwilling to benefit
from reunification services was clearly erroneous."
-
In
re Anthony A. (March, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..
In
this interesting neglect appeal, the respondent mother argued
that despite her significant psychiatric problems, her newborn
son should not have been adjudicated neglected because at the
time the neglect petition was filed the baby was living with
the maternal grandparents."
-
In
re Davonta V. (February 12, 2008)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..The
fundamental question raised in this interesting appeal of a
termination of parental rights is whether it is ever in the
child's best interest to terminate his parental rights when
an adoptive family has not been secured and the child maintains
a good relationship with his extended biological family."
-
In
re Shanaira C. (February 12, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..How
much intervention should be allowed by an intervenor at a revocation
hearing? The answer, according to the Appellate Court in Shanaira
C., is not as much as the intervenor would have liked. The court
upheld the trials court's revocation of commitment, despite
a thoughtful and well-reasoned dissenting argument."
-
In
re Joseph L. (January 28, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..The
parents in this termination of parental rights appeal had a
long and significant history with DCF due to ongoing substance
abuse, domestic violence and ongoing child abuse and neglect
issues. The two children involved in this case were the mother's
ninth and ten children and the father's fourth and fifth. None
of the respondents' other children lived in the parents' care."
-
In
re T.K. (January 28, 2008)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..In
this controversial case, the parents appealed the trial court's
decision that their child was neglected pursuant to a theory
of "predictive neglect." The parents' contended that absent
a history of problematic parenting or a demonstrated unwillingness
on the part of the parents to accept necessary services, the
doctrine of predictive neglect is inapplicable. The Appellate
court rejected the parents' argument and affirmed the decision
of the trial court.
-
In
re Leah S (December 18, 2007)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...The
Supreme Court, reversing the judgment of the Appellate Court,
held that the Department of Children and Families could not
be held in contempt for violating the court-ordered Specific
Steps which mandated that the Department "ensure the [child's]
wellbeing" and "provide appropriate services." The Court determined,
ironically, that the Specific Steps were too vague to support
a finding of contempt.
-
In
re llyssa G. (December 18, 2007)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ..The
threshold for opening a default judgment in a termination of
parental rights case is a steep one which requires the satisfaction
of a two part test. Not only does the movant need to show that
(1) a good defense existed at the time the judgment was rendered,
but also (2) that the movant was prevented from making that
defense because of "mistake, accident, or other reasonable cause."
Unfortunately for the petitioning father in Ilyssa G., he was
unable meet either prong of the two-part test, and the appellate
court thus affirmed the termination of his parental rights in
this short case."
-
In
re Selena O (December 4, 2007)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...In
this unusual case, the appellate court reversed the trial court's
denial of the state's TPR petition. The appellate court held
that the trial court's decision that the state failed to make
its "failure to rehabilitate" case was clearly erroneous. The
appellate court remanded for further proceedings."
-
In
re William D (November 13, 2007)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Juvenile Justice: ...In
this juvenile justice case, the Connecticut Supreme Court addressed
the question of whether a trial court may extend a delinquency
commitment when the "child" at issue has reached the age of
16, given that the definition of "child" in Conn. Gen. Stat.
46b-120 is defined as a 'person under sixteen' or a person over
16 who has a violated a court order issued subsequent to a delinquency
finding. In
this case neither definition applied to William D. The Supreme
Court held that for purposes of extending a person's commitment
pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-141, it only matters what
age the person was at the time of the original commitment.
-
Bd.
of Educ. v.
Tom F. (October 10, 2007)
U.S. Supreme Court
Education: the Supreme Court affirmed, without opinion,
a Second Circuit court of appeals decision upholding the proposition
that parents need not "try out" a school district's placement
for an identified child if the placement is not appropriate
for the child.
-
In
re Anna Lee M (October 2, 2007)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...In
this termination of parental rights appeal, the mother claimed
that the trial court erroneously relied on several pieces of
inadmissible evidence to support its finding that she "failed
to rehabilitate."
-
In
re Ryan R. (July 24, 2007)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...In
this “failure to rehabilitate” TPR appeal, the court affirmed
the termination of the mother’s parental rights and concluded
that DCF had made reasonable efforts to reunify her with her
child.
-
In
re Francisco R. (May 8, 2007)
Connecticut Superior Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...Termination
of parental rights. Francisco was born February 3, 1995.
He may had been born with positive drug toxicology as his mother
abused drugs during pregnancy.
-
Winkelman
v. Parma City School Dist.
(May 21, 2007)
U.S. Supreme Court
Education: In a surprising reversal of a 6th Circuit
decision, the United States' Supreme Court held that parents
may bring a pro se court action regarding any procedural or
substantive claim arising under the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA.) The Court rejected the view of some circuit
courts that, under the statute, parents are merely "guardians"
of their children's right to an appropriate education, rather
than "real parties in interest".
-
M.K.
ex rel. Mrs. K v. Sergi. (Mar. 30, 2007)
United States District
Court, D. Conn.
Education: In a procedurally complicated case the parents
of a psychiatrically disabled teenager, and the prevailing party
in a due process hearing, sued, among other defendants, the
former Commissioner of the State Department of Education (SDOE)
for violations of IDEA.
-
.
(Mar. 30, 2007)
United States District
Court, D. Conn.
Education: This special education decision serves as
a warning to school districts regarding the consequences of
failing to include parents in the IEP process. In this case,
the parents sought reimbursement for private school placement
on the ground that the school district denied their daughter
an appropriate education and denied the parents the right to
participate meaningfully in the IEP process.
-
E.K.
v. Stamford Bd. Of Educ. (June 15, 2006)
United States District Court, D. Conn.
Education: In March 2005, a secondary school Planning
and Placement Team ("PPT") exited the plaintiff (E.K.), a student
in Stamford, Connecticut, from special education upon agreeing
he met the goals of his Individualized Education Plan ("IEP").
The plaintiff remained in regular education and neither his
parents nor he ever raised concerns regarding his need for special
education.
-
In
re Brianna C.
(December 26, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...The
Appellate Court affirmed an adjudication of neglect in the interesting
case of Brianna C., where the main reason for removal and foster
care placement was the father's paranoid schizophrenia resulting
in psychotic episodes.
-
In
re Christina M. (November 7, 2006)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...In
this highly anticipated opinion, the Connecticut Supreme Court
held that parents have standing to assert claims that their
child was denied the right to effective counsel, but stopped
short of addressing the key issues raised in the appeal - namely
whether the conflict between a child's express wishes and her
attorney's position at trial merits constitutional review.
-
In
re Christian P. (October 24, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...tackles
the issue of whether parental rights may be terminated on a
ground that is not pleaded in the petition for termination.
The answer, not surprisingly, is no - and the object lesson
is that the state child welfare agency must plead the specific
grounds for termination in order for a court to consider those
grounds seeking termination of parental rights.
-
In
re Nasia B. (October 10, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...the
Appellate Court reversed the trial court's decision dismissing
the state's termination of parental rights petition for failure
to establish a prima facie case. The Court also reversed the
trial court's sua sponte decision to revoke DCF's custody of
the minor child and place the child at home under protective
supervision.
-
In
re Davonta V. (October 10, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...the
Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's decision to terminate
a mother's parental rights on the grounds that the mother failed
to achieve a reasonable degree of rehabilitation and termination
of parental rights was in the child's best interest.
-
In
re Rachel J. (October 3, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...In
a sad case that involved significant physical trauma and sexual
exploitation, the Appellate Court affirmed the termination of
a mother's parental rights in In re Rachel J.
-
In
re Nelmarie O. (September 19, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: ...the
Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's decision to terminate
a mother's parental rights on the grounds that the mother failed
to provide her children with a safe home environment free of
violence and therefore she denied them the "care, guidance or
control necessary for [the children's] well-being."
-
(September 30, 2006)
U.S. District Court
Civil Rights, Education: In an interesting federal special
education decision, the United States District Court, District
of Connecticut, awarded plaintiff over $93,000 in attorney's
fees for a successful administrative hearing decision garnered
through a Due Process procedure.
-
Conn.
Office of Prot. and Advocacy for Persons with Disabilities v.
Hartford Bd. Of Educ.
(September 15, 2006)
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals
Education: The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed
the District Court's judgment which entered a permanent injunction
against the Hartford Board of Education in the case of Protection
& Advocacy v. Hartford Bd. of Educ. This is the case where
the state office of Protection and Advocacy for Persons with
Disabilities (P&A) brought suit against the Hartford Board of
Educ. ("HBOE") requesting access to the HBOE's controversial
Hartford Transitional Learning Academy ("HTLA") to (1) observe
programs and speak with students and (2) give P&A a directory
of HTLA students and contact information for their parents/guardians
to investigate allegations of abuse and neglect at the school.
-
In
re Reginald H. (August 25, 2006)
Superior Court of Connecticut
Abuse and Neglect: This
is a decision on two so-called "Romance motions" filed in a
termination of parental rights case by petitioner, the Commissioner
of the Department of Children and Families ("DCF"), seeking
disclosure of certain of the mother's confidential medical and
substance abuse treatment information.
-
In
re Shaun B. (August 22, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: In
a relatively straight forward termination of parental rights
case, the appellate court affirmed the termination of a mother's
parental rights where the trial court found the failure to rehabilitate
constituted the most significant barrier to reunification.
-
(June 26, 2006)
U.S. Supreme Court
Education: The omnipresent and always controversial issue
of attorneys' fees in special education found a path all the
way to the Supreme Court this past term. In Arlington Central
School Dist. v. Murphy, the plaintiffs sought fees for services
rendered by an educational consultant used during legal proceedings
held pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act ("IDEA"). Despite their status as the "prevailing party"
in the lengthy litigation, the Supreme Court overturned the
Second Circuit Court of Appeals by holding that 20 U.S.C. §
1415(i)(3)(B) does not authorizing prevailing parents to recover
expert fees.
-
In
re Anthony E. (July 11, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Family Law/Guardianship: This
case was an appeal from the judgment of the trial court modifying
a prior custody order and granting shared physical custody of
two minor children to the respondent mother. The issues on appeal
here were (1) did the trial court improperly find a material
change in the mother's circumstances and (2) did the trial court
abuse its discretion when it modified the original order of
custody without making a finding that doing so was in the children's
best interests.
-
In
re Leah S. (June 13, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: In
an important decision that reverberates as an ongoing warning
to the state's child welfare agency, the Appellate Court upheld
a motion for contempt against the state Department of Children
and Families ("Department") for noncompliance the court orders
regarding the care of a child in the Department's care. The
essential element in the case was whether the Department's noncompliance
of court orders was willful, or merely negligent.
-
(May 18, 2006)
U.S. Supreme Court
Education, Legal Representation: The issue presented
on this appeal is whether the United States Supreme Court's
controversial holding regarding attorney's fees in Buckhannon
Bd. & Care Home, Inc. v. W. Va. Dept. of Health & Human Serv.,1
applies to a "prevailing defendant"? If so, was the Appellant
here a "prevailing defendant"? The Second Circuit Court of Appeals
held that a "prevailing party" under the federal fee-shifting
statute is one who has achieved a judicially sanctioned change
in the legal relationship among the parties, such as a judgment
on the merits or a court-ordered consent decree, applies to
"prevailing defendant" cases and further held that plaintiff
here was not a prevailing defendant under this standard.
-
Christopher
R. v. Comm'r. of Mental Retardation (April 4, 2006)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Mental Health : The
Connecticut Supreme Court weighed in on the issue of what criteria
are necessary for determining eligibility for services with
the state Department of Mental Retardation ("DMR").
-
In
re Stacey G. (March 21, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: In
a short and straightforward case, the Appellate Court reversed
a trial court's denial of a father's motion to transfer guardianship
on evidentiary grounds, and because the trial court would not
grant a continuance to hear evidence from a forensic psychologist.
-
In
re Ashley. (February 1, 2006)
Connecticut Superior Court
Abuse and Neglect: trial
court denied the State's motion to compel a battered women's
shelter to disclose the mother's health records.
-
In
re Claudia F. (January 24, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: The
question of mootness once again confronted the Appellate Court
in Claudia F. and the court answered in a resounding
fashion by determining that a respondent mother's voluntary
termination of her parental rights rendered an appeal of a neglect
adjudication moot.
-
Bruno
v. Greenwich Bd. Of Educ. (January 6, 2006)
United States District Court, D. Conn.
Education: Does
the failure to provide a copy of the notice of procedural safeguards
to an "adult" special education student constitute a per se
violation of the special education act, requiring an award of
compensatory educational services?
-
In
re Patricia C. (January 3, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: Maintain
Commitment and Affirm a Permanency Plan
-
In
re Shaiesha O. (January 3, 2006)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: Overturned
Termination of Parental Rights
-
In
re Nicholas R. (November 15, 2005)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: In
a short but interesting case, the appellate court affirmed an
order of temporary custody ("OTC") obtained by the Department
of Children and Families ("Department") in September 2004. The
facts of the case are relatively straight forward - but the
language used by the appellate court regarding the nature of
consent, and the evidentiary consequences that result from forced
or coerced circumstances in child protection matters may resonate
in future cases.
-
(November 14, 2005)
U.S. Supreme Court
Special Education: In a decision that may have far reaching
implications for disabled students eligible for special education
services, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the burden
of proof in an administrative "due process" hearing challenging
the student's education plan is placed on the party seeking
relief, whether that party is the disabled child or the local
school district.
-
Scewczyk
v. Department of Social Services (September 20, 2005)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Medicaid: In an extremely important decision, the Connecticut
Supreme Court tackled the difficult issue of what exactly constitutes
an "emergency medical condition" under federal Medicaid law
and state social services policy.
-
In
re Christina M. (August 2, 2005)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: Termination of Parental Rights:
This
case involves the termination of parental rights where neither
the children nor the parents want a separation, and where no
guardian ad litem was appointed despite the children's wishes
conflicting with their attorney's representation of their best
interest.
-
Carrubba
v. Moskowitz
(July 26, 2005)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Family Law, Legal Representation:
In a very important decision, the Connecticut Supreme Court
extended absolute, quasi-judicial immunity from subsequent
law suits against attorneys appointed by the courts to represent
children.
-
In
re Heather L. (June 21, 2005)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: Termination of Parental Rights
-
In
re Brendan C. (June 14, 2005)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: In this case, the parents of Brendan
C., an eight year old...
-
Szemerakis
v. Comm, Social Services (June 7, 2005)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Medicaid: In a narrow but disappointing decision, the
Connecticut Supreme Court...
-
A.R.
v. New York City Dept. of Educ. (May 10, 2005)
Federal District Court
Education: Do "winners" in administrative hearings governing
...
- In
re Krystal J. (April 05, 2005)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Abuse and Neglect: In a short yet convincing decision,
the appellate court upheld the denial of...
