The Arizona Supreme Court on Dec. 17 opened the door for civil-rights lawsuits on behalf of children in state-provided foster care if case managers deliberately ignored known or obvious dangers.

The unanimous ruling came in the case of a boy who was sexually assaulted after Child Protective Services case managers placed him in a foster-home shelter in late 1996.

The state had argued that it and its employees had legal immunity from the claims filed on behalf of Michael L., a boy who was 12 years old when he was placed in the shelter and assaulted by two other minors.

The boy’s guardian sued the state, two caseworkers and a supervisor.

A trial judge dismissed the lawsuit, saying that both the state and its employees had varying levels of legal immunity.

Case Managers Missed Visits, According To Court Papers

The Court of Appeals overturned that ruling and concluded that a federal civil rights law entitles children to safety while in foster care.

Court papers said case managers were late in filing an initial case plan for the boy, failed to assess his needs, did not visit the shelter promptly after his placement and made only two of 16 required weekly supervisory visits before the alleged abuse was disclosed in March 1997.

In its ruling that erased parts of rulings by two lower courts, the Supreme Court said the trial judge now must decide whether the lawsuit can proceed under given the “deliberate indifference” standard set in the latest ruling.

Liability under a civil-rights suit is justified “if a state worker, with time to consider the placement for a foster child, acts with such deliberate indifference as to ignore information indicating that the placement will result in danger to the child or refuses to obtain information that, if considered would reveal a danger to the child,” Vice Chief Justice Ruth V. McGregor wrote.

FYI

The case is Weatherford vs. State of Arizona, CV-02-0369-PR. —