Rogers v. County of San Joaquin

Good Law
487 F.3d 1288·2007 WL 1531829
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 29, 200705-16071California4,512 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reinhardt, J.

The Rogers family brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , alleging that the conduct of social worker Charlotta Royal in removing the Rogers children from their home without a warrant violated their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Both parties filed motions for summary judgment, although the Rogers- es’ was as to liability only. The district court granted Royal’s motion on the basis of qualified immunity. Because we hold that it was clearly established that war-rantless removal of children is permissible only in cases of exigency, and that it would have been apparent to a reasonable social worker that no exigency existed in this case, we reverse both the grant of summary judgment to Royal and the denial of partial summary judgment to the Rogers-es.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On August 20, 2001, San Joaquin County Child Protective Services received a report of child neglect in the Rogers home. The caller stated that three-year-old Shelby Rogers (“Shelby”) and five-year-old Thomas Rogers, Jr. (“Tommy”) were not toilet-trained, were locked in their rooms at night and in a room at then’ parents’ business during the day, were not receiving medical or dental care,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.