# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 7- 27 02

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

H al W

. St an le y an d Mi ch el le St an le y , In di vi du al ly an d as Pare nt s an d Leg al G ua rd ia ns

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll ees

v.

Kath eri ne Fin ne ga n

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

Garl an d C ou nt y , et al

.

ll ll ll ll l Defe nd an t s

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s - Ho t Sp rin gs

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Apri l 1 0, 2 01 8
Fi le d: Aug us t 1 0, 2 01 8

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re SM ITH, Chi ef J ud ge , W OLLMAN and LOKEN, Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

LOKEN, Ci rcu it Ju dg e.

On Ja nu ary 12

, 20 15

, ch il d ab us e in ve st ig at or s rem ov ed se ve n m in or ch il dr en

fro m th e pr iv at e ho m e of th ei r p a r e n t s , H a l an d Mi ch el le St an le y , in Hot Sp rin gs , Ark an sa s. Afte r ex te ns iv e st at e ad m in is tra ti ve an d jud ic ia l ch il d ab us e pr oc eed in gs ,th e St an le y s f il ed th is § 19 83 act io n, in di vi du al ly an d on be ha lf of si x of th ei r

c h i l d r e n, ag ai ns t th e Ark an sa s Dep art m en t of Hum an Serv ic es (DHS); Garl an d

Co un ty; an d nu m ero us em pl oyees of th e St at e an d Garl an d Co un ty in th ei r in di vi du al

an d of fic ia l cap aci ti es

. The fo rty-sev en pa ge Co m pl ai nt as se rte d a va rie ty of cl ai m s

ag ai ns t nu m ero us de fen da nt s, in cl ud in g m ul ti pl e cl ai m s ag ai ns t Kath eri ne Fi nn eg an ,

a ci vi li an in ve st ig at or fo r th e Cri m es Aga in st Ch il dr en Div is io n of th e Ark an sa s St at e

Po li ce, in he r i n di vi du al an d of fic ia l cap aci ti es

. Thre e in di vi du al de fen da nt s,

in cl ud in g Fi nn eg an , m ov ed to di sm is s pl ai nt iff s’ in di vi du al cap aci ty cl ai m s ba se d on

qu al ifi ed im m

un it y

. The di st ric t co ur t gr an te d th es e de fen da nt s qu al ifi ed im m un it y 1

o n al l cl ai m s ex cep t on e, th e cl ai m th at Fi nn eg an rem ov ed th e St an le y s’ m in or
ch il dr en fro m th ei r ho m e wit ho ut an ad eq ua te ba si s. Fi nn eg an ap pe al s. An

i nt erl oc ut or y or de r de nyin g a m ot io n to di sm is s ba se d on qu al ifi ed im m u n i t y i s

im m ed ia te ly ap pe al ab le

. Ash cro ft v. Iq ba l, 55 6 U.S. 66 2, 67 3 (2 00 9)

. Rev ie win g th e
de ni al of qu a l i fie d im m

un it y de no vo , we affi rm

. Brad fo rd v. Huc ka be e, 39 4 F.3 d

10 12 , 10 15 (8t h C ir. 2 00 5) (st an da rd of r ev ie w).

I. Ba ck gr ou nd.

Our rev ie w of th e de ni al of a Ru le 12 (b )(6 ) m ot io n t o d i s m is s ba se d on

qu al ifi ed im m

un it y is li m it ed to th e fact s al le ge d in th e St an le y s’ le ng th y Co m pl ai nt

, whi ch we acce pt as tru e an d vi ew m os t f a v or ab ly to th e pl ai nt iff

s. Hag er v. Ark

. Dep ’t of Hea lt h, 7 35 F.3d 10 09 , 10 13 (8t h C ir. 2 01 3)

.

The Co m pl ai nt al le ge s th at Hal an d Mi ch el le are pa ren ts who ch os e to rai se an d

ho m e-e d u c a t e th ei r ch il dr en acco rd in g to Ch ris ti an be li efs an d wit h li m it ed acce ss

ou ts id e of th e ho m e. In 20 14

, so n Jo na th an , th en si xt een , de ve lo pe d a de si re to at te nd

pu bl ic sc ho ol an d “ no t co nt rib ut e a n d b e a pa rt of hi s fam il y su ch as it was .” His

The Hon or ab le P.K. Hol m es , III, Ch ie f Ju dg e of th e Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct 1

Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s.

-2

-pa ren ts di sa pp ro ve d. Jo na th an reb el le d, co nv in ci n g a n a du lt fri en d to rep or t to th e

DHS Div is io n of Ch il dr en an d Fam il y Serv ic es th at th e St an l e y c h i l d r en were no t

a d e q u a te ly cl ot he d an d on e was be in g ab us ed

. In Decem be r 20 14

, a D H S

in ve st ig at or vi si te d t he Sta nl ey ho m e an d “ un su bs ta nt ia te d” th e rep or t.

Und et erre d, Jo na th an th en accu sed his pa re nts of “ po is on in g, bu rn in g, st rik in g,

a n d br ui si ng th e ch il dr en ,” ne gl ect in g th e ch il dr en ’s ed uc at io n, an d pr ov i d i n g

in ad eq ua te fo od an d he al th c a r e

. He al le ge d to ad ul t fri en ds th at Hal cau se d th e
ch il dr en to be co m e il l by fo rci ng th em to dr in k a so lu ti on cal le d “ Mi racl e Mi ne ral

So lu ti on ” (MM S), a pr od uc t Hal us ed in hi s gr een ho us e, an d th reat en ed to pi pe MM S

th ro ug h t he ho us e v en ts . J on at ha n pr ov id ed wha t he sa id was a sa m pl e o f MM S to

an ad ul t fri en d who tu rn ed it ov er to th e Garl an d Co un ty Sh eri ff’s Dep a r t ment

. Serg ean t Mi ke W rig ht in te rv ie wed Ch ris to ph er St an le y , an ad ul t ch il d, on Ja nu ary 9,

20 15 , wh o sa id hi s on ly k no wled ge th at Hal ha d pu m pe d MM S va po rs th ro ug h th e
ho m e’s sc ho ol ro om cam e fro m Jo na th an

. Serg ean t W rig ht c o n s u l te d Dr. Teres a Esq ui ve l of th e Ark an sa s Ch il dr en ’s Hos pi ta l who co nd uc te d an in te rn et se arch an d

rep or te d th at MM S w a s d a n g e ro us

. Bas ed on th is in fo rm at io n, Serg ean t W rig ht

ob ta in ed a warra nt to se arch th e St an le y ho m e fo r MM S an d o t h e r da ng ero us
ch em ic al su bs ta nc es

. W rig ht ’s warra nt affi da vi t st at ed th at “ th e Ar k a n sa s St at e

Po li ce Cri m es Aga in st Ch il dr en Div is io n

. . . in te nd s to rem ov e th e ch il dr en fro m th e
ho m e to ha ve th em

ex am in ed by a m ed ic al do ct or .”

At ap pr ox im at el y 4: 30 p.m

. on J an ua ry 12

, so m e th irt y go ve rn m en t ag en ts

in cl ud in g Fi nn eg an co nd uc te d a fiv e-h ou r warra nt se arch of th e St an le y ho m e. Sev en

m in or ch il dr en in cl ud in g Jo na th a n w e r e pr es en t. The ir pa ren ts were or de red to

rem ai n o n t he fro nt po rch du rin g th e se arch an d wer e n ot all owe d t o s pe ak wit h t he

ch il dr en

. Each ch il d was in te rv ie wed by Fi nn eg an

. Jo na th an re pe at ed hi s accu sa ti on s

of ab us e an d ne gl ect an d m ad e nu m ero us ad di ti on al accu sa ti on s. Fo ur te en -y ear- ol d

V.S. st at ed th at Jo na th an an d hi s ad ul t fri en ds “ co nv in ced he r ho w ba d th in gs were.”

-3

-Dur in g th e in ve st ig at io n, each ch il d was ex am in ed in an am bu la nc e by a do ct or

w h o f o u nd each ch il d he al th y an d sh owi ng no sym pt om of ex po su re to a to xi c

su bs ta nc e. At th e co nc lu si on of th e in ve st ig at io n, th e DHS Div is io n of Ch il dr en an d

Fam il y Serv ic es rep res en ta ti ve s co nc lu de d th e ch il dr en were ha pp y , he al th y , an d in

no da ng er an d de cl in ed to ta ke th em in to DHS cu st od y

. Howev er, th e S h e rif f’s

D ep ar tm en t an d its Cr im es A ga in st Ch il dr en Div is io n in ve st ig at or , Fi nne ga n, cr ed ite d

Jo na th an ’s accu sa ti on s. Serg ean t W rig ht rem ov ed th e ch il dr en “ at th e in si st en ce of

In v. Fi nn eg an ,” le av in g DHS no ch oi ce bu t to acce pt cu st od y

. The ch il dr en were se nt

to tw o d iff

eren t ci ti es , two ho ur s away fro m ho m e, an d en ro ll ed in pu bl ic sc ho ol

. Co nt es te d pr oc eed in gs en su ed an d co nt in ue d fo r twen ty-on e m on th s. Fi nn eg an m ad e

fin di ng s o f ab us e an d n eg le ct th at were o ve rtu rn ed on ap pe al

.

The Co m pl ai nt ’s Fi rs t Cl ai m fo r Rel ie f in cl ud es a § 19 83 cl ai m se ek in g to ho ld

Fi nn eg an li ab le fo r co m

pe ns at or y an d pu ni ti ve da m ag es fo r “ re m ovi ng, de ta ini ng, an d

co nt in ui ng to de ta in [s ix m in or ch il dr en ] fro m th e care , cu st od y , an d co nt ro l of th ei r

pa r e n t s

. . . wi th ou t pr op er or jus t cau se an d/ or au th or it y ” in vi ol at io n of pl ai nt iff s’

Fi rs t, Fo ur th

, an d Fo ur te en th Am en dm en t Ri gh ts

. In br ie fin g th e br oa de r m ot io n to

di sm is s to th e di st ric t co ur t, th e pa rti es di d no t se pa rat el y ad dr es s whe th er Fi nn eg an
is en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y on th is cl ai m

. The di st ric t co ur t de ni ed Fi nn eg an ’s

m ot io n t o d is m is s t he cla im on th e b as is of q ua li fie d i m m un it y :

[I ]t was cl earl y es ta bl is he d at th e ti m e of th e se iz ur e th at at le as t a

reas on ab le su sp ic io n of ch i ld ab us e was req ui red be fo re rem ov in g ch il dr en fro m th e ho m e.

. . . Bec au se th e al le ga ti on s in di cat e th at Fi n n eg an or de red th e St an le y ch il dr en rem ov ed de sp it e ev id en ce an d
DHS reco m

m en da tio ns to the co ntrary

, Fi nn eg an ha s no t es ta bl is he d th at sh e h ad a reas on ab le su sp ic io n o f ch il d a bu se

. 2

On th e m eri ts

, to de feat a qu al ifi ed im m un it y de fen se , pl ai nt iff ha s th e bu rd en 2

of pr ov in g th at de fen da nt ’s co nd uc t vi ol at ed a cl earl y es ta bl is he d co ns ti tu ti onal rig ht

. See Hes s v. Abl es , 71 4 F.3 d 10 48

, 10 51 (8 th C i r

. 2 01 3)

. Bu t at th e Ru le 12 (b )(6 )

st ag e, th e is su e is whe th er pl ai nt iff “ pl ead s fact ua l co nt e n t th at al lo ws th e co ur t to

-4

-II . Dis cus si on

.

“ Qua li fie d im m

un it y pr ot ect s pu bl ic of

fic ia ls fro m § 19 83 da m ag e act io ns if

th ei r co nd uc t do es no t vi ol at e cl earl y es ta bl is he d st at ut or y or co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s of

whi ch a reas on ab le pe rs on wou ld ha ve kn own .” Brad fo rd

, 39 4 F.3d at 10 15

, ci ti ng

Harl ow v. Fi tz ge ral d, 45 7 U.S. 80 0, 81 8 (19 82 ). To de te rm in e whe th er a de fen da nt

is en ti tl ed to di sm is sa l on th e ba si s of qu al ifi ed im m un it y , we co ns id er “ (1 ) whe th er

th e of fic ia l’s co nd uc t vi ol at ed a co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht ; an d (2 ) whe th er th e viola te d righ t

was cl earl y es ta bl is he d.” Man ni ng v. Co tt on , 86 2 F.3 d 66 3, 66 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ). A

co m pl ai nt m us t “ st at e a cl ai m to rel ie f th at is pl au si bl e o n i ts face .” Bel l At l. Co rp

. v. Two m bl y , 55 0 U.S. 5 44 , 57 0 (20 07 ). To prev ai l at thi s st ag e of th e p ro ceed in gs , Fi nn eg an m

us t be en ti tl ed to qu a l i f

ie d im m un it y “ on th e face of th e co m pl ai nt .”

Brad fo rd , 39 4 F .3d at 1 01 5.

As th e di st ric t co ur t reco gn iz ed

, it is cl earl y es ta bl is he d th at th e re mov al of

ch il dr en fro m th ei r pa ren ts ’ cu st od y vi ol at es a co ns ti tu ti o n a l rig ht if th e rem ov al

oc cu rs wit ho ut reas on ab le su sp ic io n of ch il d ab us e. See Heart la nd Ac a d

. C mt y

. Ch ur ch v. W ad dl e, 42 7 F.3 d 52 5, 53 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ); Abd ou ch v. Bu rg er, 42 6 F.3 d

98 2, 98 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ). “ Pare nt s ha ve a li be rty in t e res t in th e care , cu st od y , an d

m an ag em en t of th ei r ch il dr en ,” bu t th is in te res t is “ li m it ed by th e st at e’s co m pe ll in g

i n t e r e s t i n pr ot ect in g a ch il d

. . . .” Swip ie s v. Kof ka

, 34 8 F.3 d 70 1, 70 3 (8 th Ci r.

20 03 ). To ba la nc e th es e co m pe ti ng in te res ts , we hav e ad op te d t he rul e th at , “ whe n

a st at e of fic ia l pu rs ui ng a ch il d ab us e in ve st ig at i o n t a k e s a n act io n whi ch wou ld

ot he rwis e un co ns ti tu ti on al ly di sr up t fam il ia l in te gr it y , he o r sh e is en ti tl ed to

qu al ifi ed im m

un it y , if su ch act io n is pr op erl y fo un de d up on a reas on ab le su sp ic io n

of ch il d ab us e.” Id

., ci ti ng Man zan o v. S.D. Dep ’t of So c. Serv s., 60 F.3 d 50 5, 51 0-

dr aw th e reas on ab le in fere nc e th at th e de fen da nt is li ab le fo r th e m is co nd uc t al le ge d.” Iq ba l, 55 6 U.S. at 67 8. Thu s, th e di st ric t co ur t’s st at em en t th at F i n n e g a n “ ha s no t

es ta bl is he d” th e d efen se , th ou gh im pr eci se , was n ot erro r.

-5

-11 (8 th Ci r. 19 95 ). Thu s, th e i s s u e i s whe th er th e al le ga ti on s in th e St an le y s’

Co m pl ai nt

, ta ke n as tru e an d vi ewed in th e i r fav or , st at e a pl au si bl e cl ai m th at

Fi nn eg an la ck ed reas on ab le su sp ic io n of ch il d ab us e whe n s h e pa rti ci pa te d in

rem ov in g t he Sta nl ey s’ m in or ch il dr en fro m th e h om e an d c us to dy of th ei r pa ren ts

.

Fi nn eg an fir st arg ue s th at th e St an le y s’ cla im is no t pl au si bl e be cau se , u nd er

th e Ark an sa s Ch il d Mal tre at m en t Act, on ly a la w en fo rcem en t of

fic er, a juv en il e co ur t jud ge , or a de si gn at ed DHS em pl oyee ha s au th or it y to ta ke a ch il d in to pr ot ec t i ve

cu st od y

. At th e Ru le 12 (b )(6 ) st ag e, th is arg um en t is wit ho ut m eri t. The Co m pl ai nt

al le ge s th at Fi nn eg an , act in g un de r co lo r of st at e la w, en te red th e ho m e to ex ecu te a

se arch warra nt , s ep arat ed th e St an le y s fro m th ei r ch il dr en , q ue st io ne d th e ch il d ren ,

an d had th em ta ke n to th e am bu la nc e fo r a do ct or ’s ex am in at io n. At the en d of thi s

pr oc es s, “ al l se ve n (7 ) of th e St an le y ch il dr en were rem ov ed by Sg t. Mi ke W rig ht at

th e in si st en ce of In v. Fi nn eg an .” The se fact s pl au si bl y al le ge th at Fi nn eg an m ay be

li ab le if t he ch il dr en were re m ov ed wit ho ut reas on ab le su sp ic io n o f ch il d a bu se

.

Fi nn eg an ne xt arg ue s th at a ch il d m al tre at m en t inv es ti ga to r ca nn ot be li ab le fo r

“ m ak ing re co m

m en da ti on s ba se d on in ve st ig at iv e fin di ng s,” ci ti ng Man zan o, 60 F.3 d

at 51 0- 11

. Thi s co nt en ti on , to o, is wit ho ut m eri t. In Man zan o, a m ot he r in fo rm ed a

c o un ty sh eri ff’s in ve st ig at or he r ch il d ha d m ad e st at em en ts th at th e ch il d’s f a t h e r

se xu al ly ab us ed he r

. The in ve st ig at or ad vi se d th e m ot he r to ge t a te m po rary

pr ot ect io n or de r to ke ep th e fat he r away fro m th e ch il d. 60 F.3 d at 50 7. In rev ers in g

th e de ni al of su m

m ary jud gm en t ba se d on qu al ifi ed im m un it y , we ex pl ai ne d: “ we do

no t th in k th at [ t h e i n ve st ig at or ] ha d to ha ve a reas on ab le su sp ic io n of ch il d ab us e
be fo re ad vi si ng [th e m ot he r] of he r op ti on to fil e a pe ti ti on fo r a te m po rary pr ot ect io n

or de r.” Id

. at 51 2. Thi s de ci si on do es no t co m e cl os e to su pp or ti ng th e as se rti on th at

an in ve st ig at or can no t b e li ab le for ca us in g a ch il d’s fo rci bl e rem ov al

.

The is su e in th is cas e is pr op e r l y f r a m ed by cas es es ta bl is hi ng th e Fo ur th

Am en dm en t st an da rd th at ap pl i e s t o p o li ce of fic ers an d in ve st ig at or s in m ak in g

-6

-arre st s and ot he r se iz ur es

. The st an da rd is well es ta bl is he d in th is ci rcu it

. Cau se or

su sp i c i o n w a r r a n ti ng a se iz ur e m us t ex is t at th e m om en t of th e se iz ur e. Ri ps on v.

All es , 2 1 F.3 d 80 5, 80 8 (8 th Ci r. 19 94 ). “ An of fic er co n t e mp l at in g an arre st is no t

free t o d i sr eg ard pl ai nl y ex cu lp at or y ev id en ce, ev en if su bs ta nt ia l in cu lp at or y

ev id en ce (s ta nd in g by i ts el f) su gg es ts th at pr ob ab le cau se ex is ts .” Kue hl v. Bu rti s,

17 3 F.3 d 64 6, 65 0 (8 th Ci r. 19 99 ); se e Ro ss v. Ci ty o f Ja ck s o n, No. 17 -1 39 0, 20 18

W L 35 81 46 8, a t *4 (8 th Ci r. Ju ly 26

, 20 18 ); W om ack v. Ci ty of Bel le fo nt ai ne Neig hb or s, 1 93 F.3d 10 28 , 10 31 (8t h C ir. 1 99 9)

.

Here, Fi nn eg an , Serg ean t W rig ht

, an d th e o th er in ve st ig at or s wen t to th e

St an le y s’ ho m e ba se d on bi zarr e accu sa ti on s by te en ag er Jo na th an th at

, if tru e, ga ve

reas on to be li ev e Jo na th an ’s m in or si bl in gs were in da ng er of co nt in ui ng ch il d ab us e.

B u t a m on th earl ie r, an ot he r in ve st ig at or ha d “ un su bs ta nt ia te d” Jo na th an ’s earl ie r

al le ga ti on s, an d pr op er res ea rch wou ld ha ve sh own , as an em ai l fro m a DHS

su pe rv is or at ta ch ed to th e Co m pl ai nt rep or te d th e d ay aft er th e warra nt se arch , t ha t

“ MM S is le ga l an d pr o mo t e d a s a cu re fo r th e si m pl e co ld to acn e to th e flu an d to

ot he r m or e se rio us di se as es .” Thu s, al th ou gh th e in ve st ig at or s wen t to th e ho m e wit h

th e i n t en t to rem ov e th e ch il dr en , th is was a ch il d ab us e si tu at io n th at cri ed ou t fo r

in ve st ig at io n an d co nf

irmatio n. Afte r fiv e ho ur s, th e fiv e y ou ng es t ch il dr en ha d be en

in te rv ie wed ; th ey de ni ed ab us e in th e ho m e an d sa id th ey lo ve d th ei r pa ren ts ; a do ct or

ha d m ed ic al ly ex am in ed each ch il d an d co nc lu de d th ey were he al th y an d sh owe d no
si gn s of ab us e or sym

pt om s of po is on in g; an d th e DHS in ve st ig at or s ha d co nc lu de d

th at th e ho m e was sa fe an d th e ch il dr en were ha pp y , he al th y , in no da ng er, an d sh ou ld

n ot be ta ke n in to cu st od y

. Yet, Serg ean t W rig ht

, at th e “ in si st en ce” of Fi nn e g a n ,

or de red th e ch il dr e n rem ov ed

, co m pe ll in g DHS to ta ke cu st od y an d be gi nn in g a

twen ty-on e m on th ord eal for th e fam il y

.

As th e di st ric t co ur t co nc lu de d, it was cl earl y es ta bl is he d at th e ti m e Fi nn eg an

act ed th at reas on a b l e s u sp ic io n was req ui red to rem ov e th e St an le y ch il dr en fro m

th ei r ho m e an d th ei r pa ren ts ’ cu s to dy. Lik e pr ob ab le cau se to arre st

, reas on ab le

-7

-su sp ic io n to se iz e ch il dr en m us t ex is t at th e m om en t of th e se iz ur e, an d an of fic ia l is

no t free to di sr eg ard p l a i n l y ex cu lp at or y ev id en ce whe n it un de rm in es su bs ta nt ia l

in cu lp at or y ev id en ce th at reas on ab le su sp ic io n ex is ts

. The Co m pl ai nt rai se s a fai r

in fere nc e th at Fi nn eg an was aware of th e su bs ta nt ia l ex cu lp at or y ev id en ce de ve lo pe d

du rin g th e fiv e-h ou r in ve st ig at io n be fo re Fi nn eg an an d Serg ean t W rig ht m ad e th e
de ci si on to rem ov e. The Co m pl ai nt al so rai se s th e in fere nc e t h a t th e de ci si on to

rem ov e was m ot iv at ed by di sa gr eem en t with th e St an le y s’ de ci si on to ho m e-s ch oo l

th ei r ch il dr en in an is ol at ed en vi ro nm en t. Tho ug h pe rh ap s un li ke ly, th is th eo ry is no t

im pl au si bl e. “ [A] well -p le ad ed co m pl a i n t m ay pr oc eed ev en if it st rik es a sa vv y jud ge th at act ua l pr oo f of th os e fact s is im pr ob ab le

, an d th at a reco ve ry is ve ry rem ot e

an d un li ke ly.” Twom

bl y , 55 0 U.S. at 55 6. The fact ua ll y su p p o rte d cl ai m ag ai ns t

Fi nn eg an at is su e on ap pe al li e s w e l l wit hi n th at li be ral pl ead in g st an da rd an d

th eref or e su rv iv es a Ru le 12 (b )(6 ) m ot io n to di sm is s ba se d o n q ua li fie d i m m un it y

.

Fi nn eg an arg ue s th at ou r de ci si on in Myers v. Mo rri s, 81 0 F.2 d 14 37 (8 th Ci r.

19 87 ), is co nt rary, co nt ro ll in g aut ho rit y

. W e di sa gr ee. Myers is di st in gu is ha bl e on

m ul ti pl e gr ou nd s -- th e gr an t o f qu al ifi ed im m un it y was m ad e on a su m m ary jud gm en t reco rd ; at le as t twel ve ch i l d ren -- m an y un rel at ed to on e an ot he r -- m ad e

al le ga ti on s of se xu al ab us e ag ai ns t pa ren ts an d ot he r ad ul ts th at th erap is ts

, gu ard ia ns ,
pr os ecu to rs , an d in ve st ig at or s fo un d cred ib le ; an d th e go ve rn in g le ga l st an da rd fo r

rem ov al -- rea so na bl e su sp ic io n o f ch il d a bu se -- was no t cl earl y es ta bl is he d at tha t

ti me. Id

. at 14 41 -4 3, 14 54

, 14 60

, 14 62 -6 3. Here, whe th er th ere was reas on ab le

su sp ic io n of ch i l d a bu se warra nt in g rem ov al m us t be de te rm in ed by an al y zi ng th e

to ta li ty of th e ci rcu m st an ces at t he ti m e o f th e rem ov al . Kueh l, 1 73 F.3d at 6 50

.

W e affi rm th at pa rt of th e di st ric t cou rt’s Ord er da te d Ju ne 20

, 20 17

, de nyin g

th e m ot io n to di sm is s th e cl ai m th at Fi nn eg an rem ov ed pl ai nt if fs ’ m in or ch il dr en fro m

th e i r h o me wit ho ut an ad eq ua te ba si s, an d th e Ord er da te d Ju ly 5, 20 17

, de nyin g

Fi nn eg an ’s m ot io n fo r rec on si de rat io n.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-8

-