Vanessa Haldeman v. Ruth Golden

MEMORANDUM

State social workers Karen Duty and Donald Cupp appeal from the district court’s partial denial of qualified immunity from child-plaintiffs Vanessa and Benjamin Haldeman’s 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and state law claims. We have jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals taken from a district court’s denial of summary judgment based on a claim of qualified immunity. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 530 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). We review a district court’s denial of qualified immunity de novo on appeal. Elder v. Holloway, 510 U.S. 510, 516 , 114 S.Ct. 1019 , 127 L.Ed.2d 344 (1994). We reverse the district court’s denial of qualified immunity.

The facts of this case are known to the parties. We do not repeat them.

The claims contained in counts 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 10 of the Haldeman children’s second amended complaint as alleged against Duty and Cupp are properly before the court on appeal. We do not decide any other issues as to any other parties.

I

Counts 1 and 2 of the Haldeman children’s second amended complaint contain their § 1983 claims and conspiracy claims against Duty and Cupp. Qualified immunity protects § 1983 defendants from civil liability unless…