No. 20-381

Hamilton County Job and Family Services, et al. v. Joseph Siefert, et ux.

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-09-24
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: 42-usc-1983 child-services circuit-conflict civil-rights due-process medical-care qualified-immunity state-action state-actor
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2020-12-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Sixth Circuit err in its qualified-immunity analysis?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED A. Did the Sixth Circuit err when it failed to conduct an individualized analysis of Petitioners’ actions before blanketly rejecting their asserted defense of qualified immunity? B. Did the Sixth Circuit err when it determined that, through a footnote, it was clearly established that a children’s services caseworker has an affirmative duty to protect parental due process rights when a child is hospitalized and no child custody proceedings have been initiated? C. Whether this Court should resolve the circuit conflict on the important federal question of whether a private, non-profit hospital and private healthcare providers, are state actors subject to claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when they simply provide medical care and cooperate with a county Job and Family Services Department for the appropriate treatment of a suicidal minor.

Docket Entries

2020-12-07
Petition DENIED.
2020-11-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.
2020-10-23
Brief of respondents Joseph Siefert, et al. in opposition filed.
2020-09-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 26, 2020)

Attorneys

Hamilton County Job and Family Services, et al.
Jon David BrittinghamDinsmore & Shohl LLP, Petitioner
Joseph Siefert, et al.
Ted Laurence WillsTed L. Wills, Attomey at Law, Respondent