Did the court of appeals in its de novo review of summary judgment abuse its appellate jurisdiction and deny petitioners due process by refusing to address their unrebutted expert proof that respondents acted with deliberate indifference which 'shocked the conscience' when they changed and then failed to monitor the child's foster care placement, conduct which caused her death?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Did the court of appeals in its de novo review of summary judgment abuse its appellate jurisdiction and deny petitioners due process by refusing to address their unrebutted expert proof that respondents acted with deliberate indifference which “shocked the conscience” when they changed and then failed to monitor the child’s foster care placement, conduct which caused her death? 2. Should this Court resolve the conflict among the Circuits about whether in non-emergency situations a substantive due process violation may be found for deliberate indifference as opposed to the more culpable intent-to -harm standard of conduct?