No. 19-649

N. E. L., et al. v. Monica Gildner, et al.

Lower Court: Tenth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-11-19
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: 4th-amendment child-custody civil-rights decisional-law due-process fourth-amendment jurisdiction post-removal-hearing post-seizure-hearing qualified-immunity uccjea
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure
Latest Conference: 2020-01-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Were Colorado's UCCJEA requirements detailed enough to defeat qualified immunity in a Fourth Amendment claim arising from the denial of a post-seizure hearing or, in the alternative, was the right to a post-removal hearing identified in decisional law with obvious clarity?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Were Colorado’s UCCJEA requirements detailed enough to defeat qualified immunity in a Fourth Amendment claim arising from the denial of a postseizure hearing or, in the alternative, was the right to a post-removal hearing identified in decisional law with obvious clarity? Did the Colorado district court have specific jurisdiction over Kansas agents who had direct and significant contact with Colorado agents in obtaining immediate legal custody of children while the children were located in Colorado?

Docket Entries

2020-01-21
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/17/2020.
2019-11-19
Waiver of right of respondents Monica Gildner, et al. to respond filed.
2019-11-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 19, 2019)

Attorneys

Monica Gildner, et al.
Toby CrouseOffice of Attorney General Derek Schmidt, Respondent
Toby CrouseOffice of Attorney General Derek Schmidt, Respondent
NEL, et al.
Rebecca R. MessallMessall Law Firm, LLC, Petitioner
Rebecca R. MessallMessall Law Firm, LLC, Petitioner