Whether persons who are not government officials and not performing governmental duties can claim qualified immunity from suit in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983

QUESTIONS PRESENTED , 1. Whether persons who are not government officials and not performing governmental duties can claim qualified immunity from suit in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 2. Whether it is harmless error to submit to the jury the legal issue whether a de. fendant is entitled to qualified immunity. 3. Whether it is harmless error to submit to the jury for determination the legal standard whether the defendants’ conduct, in light of U.S. Supreme Court precedent and historical understanding of the Constitution, meets the “shocks the conscience” standard for constitutional violations. ; 4. Whether, if the defendants’ conduct did violate the Constitution, a governmental official in defendants’ position could nevertheless reasonably believed their con— 7 duct was lawful. 5. Whether petitioners were entitled to a directed verdict when respondents acted jointly to involuntarily confine Petitioner Nancy Golin, an autistic, mentally retarded woman, at an undisclosed location for 11 months, without due process, or indeed, any process of law at all, or does the defendants’ professed desire to keep Nancy Golin “safe” absolve them from liability? i THE PARTIES Plaintiff Nancy Golin was a 31-year old developmentally disabled adult at the time this claim arose. She suffered from mental retardation, epilepsy, and autism. She was almost mute and had the mental capacity of a 2or 3-year old. Plaintiffs Jeffrey Golin and Elsie Golin are Nancy’s parents. Defendant San Andreas Regional Center (“SARC”) is a not-for-profit corporation, which, like all regional centers, provides services to persons with developmental disabilities under contract with the State Department of Developmental Services. Defendant Santi Rogers was Executive Director of SARC. Defendant Miriam “Mimi” Kinderlehrer was the Director of Consumer Affairs for San Andreas Regional Center. She reported to Santi Rogers. _ : Defendant Tucker Liske was the District Manager for San Andreas Regional Center. He supervised approximately a dozen service coordinators. _ Defendant Jamie Buckmaster was the Social Services Program Manager of Santa Clara County Adult Protection Services (APS), a county agency that is mandated by the Welfare and Inst. Code to receive and investigate reports of dependent adult abuse, neglect and exploitation. See Calif. Welfare & Institutions Code §§ 15751, 15766 : Defendant Stanford Hospital and Clinics is a private hospital in Palo Alto, California. ii | Defendant Edna Mantillas d/b/a Embee Manor was the administrator of Em, bee Manor, a 6-bed residential care facility where Nancy was sent. The City of Palo Alto and Detective Lori Kratzer were originally named as defendants, but were dismissed on their motions for summary judgment. DIRECTLY