Opinion ID: 2775042
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: Marion’s is owned by Richard Marion and Angela Marion, a married couple. The Center has been licensed since May 23, 2006, for up to 123 children. The Home has been licensed since August 28, 2002, for up to 12 children, but it has not been in operation for some years. DHHS is a state agency responsible for the enforcement of the Child Care Licensing Act. Nebraska Advance Sheets 984 289 NEBRASKA REPORTS On July 21, 2008, DHHS placed the Center on probation for 1 year and imposed a civil penalty for various violations relating to the responsibilities of the director and licensing process, child-staff ratio, and infant care and supervision. On April 10, 2009, DHHS extended the Center’s probation another year (until July 21, 2010) because a busdriver had left two children in a van in subzero temperatures for approximately 10 minutes. Despite a citation for child abuse/neglect, the Center allowed the driver to transport children the following day. On or about May 26, 2010, childcare inspection specialist Susanne Schnitzer conducted an onsite investigation of allegations of improper discipline at the childcare center of Marion’s on West Dodge Road in Omaha (Dodge Center), which has since closed. Schnitzer found that one of the Dodge Center’s staff members, Carla Marion, had inappropriately disciplined children by “thumping, kicking and purposely tripping along [with] throwing an object at a child and twisting the cheek of . . . another child.” Carla Marion, Richard Marion’s sister, resigned before the investigation concluded. On March 14, 2011, the Center was placed on probation for another year based on various violations, including misbehavior by a member of the Center’s staff and the director’s failure to supervise and correct the behavior, despite several complaints from parents. During the investigation of the complaints, the Center was found to have violated a regulation requiring it to obtain additional background information from the appropriate law enforcement agency regarding one of its staff members. On April 11, 2011, DHHS received a request to conduct a check for Cristina Carrizales on the Nebraska Central Registry of Child Abuse and Neglect and the Nebraska Adult Protective Services Central Registry, which is required for any prospective employee prior to beginning work at a licensed childcare. Although Carrizales did not have a criminal history, the Center’s timecard records showed that Carrizales had begun working 2 weeks prior to the registry checks being completed. Nebraska Advance Sheets MARION’S v. NEBRASKA DEPT. OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVS. 985 Cite as 289 Neb. 982 On May 24, 2011, DHHS issued a “Notice of Revocation” to the Center. The notice was issued following DHHS’ investigation into a complaint concerning events that took place on March 29, only 2 weeks after the Center had been placed on probation on March 14. The Center had employed two incarcerated felons who were on work release, Shannon Tays and Greta Johnson. Both women failed to completely and accurately disclose their criminal histories. Despite being incarcerated, both Tays’ and Johnson’s “Felony/Misdemeanor Statements” provided incomplete information, and one indicated that she had no prior law enforcement contacts. Marion’s did not request additional information from any law enforcement agency to verify those statements. Marion’s had been aware that Tays and Johnson were incarcerated on theft by deception charges. On various occasions, it had provided the women rides from a correctional facility to the Center. Tays had five previous convictions for felony for­ gery and one for possession of methamphetamine. On June 3, 2011, DHHS issued to the Home a “Notice of Revocation and Denial” of the Home’s application to amend its license. DHHS issued the notice because the Home did not conduct background checks for three staff members listed on the application to ensure that the criminal history disclosures were accurate. On the application, Marion’s listed as prospective employees both Carla Marion and Shonae Doremus. Doremus disclosed various misdemeanor tickets and convictions for possession of marijuana, flight to avoid arrest, and several theft offenses. She did not disclose contacts with law enforcement for operating a vehicle under suspension, furnishing tobacco to a minor, and failure to appear. Marion’s submitted an administrative appeal of both notices, and the cases were combined for purposes of conducting a DHHS administrative appeal hearing. The hearing was commenced on December 5, 2011; continued on February 27, 2012; and concluded on May 15. On October 3, 2012, DHHS issued an order upholding the denial and revocation of the license for the Home for the following reasons: hiring without investigating three new Nebraska Advance Sheets 986 289 NEBRASKA REPORTS employees who had not fully disclosed their criminal histories, past violations regarding previously investigated and substantiated allegations of inappropriate discipline by one of the staff members, and history of noncompliance by Marion’s at other licensed locations. DHHS did not revoke the license of Marion’s to operate the Center. But in lieu of revocation of the license, DHHS imposed an alternative penalty in the form of additional probation and a civil sanction of $615. This action resulted from the hiring of Tays and Johnson by Marion’s without conducting a background check. Tays and Johnson are felons. DHHS found that hiring two felons with convictions of crimes of moral turpitude and possession of methamphetamine was against DHHS regulations and therefore violated the Center’s probation. Marion’s appealed DHHS’ order to the Lancaster County District Court, which reviewed the case de novo. On August 26, 2013, the district court affirmed DHHS’ decision. It found that the Center had violated the terms of its probation by failing to request additional information about employees that were hired as staff. The court concluded that the regulations impose a duty to request additional information from law enforcement agencies and that Marion’s neglected its responsibility by relying solely on employee self-reporting. The court rejected the claim of Marion’s that it lacked knowledge about the employees’ dishonesty in reporting their criminal histories. The court found that Marion’s had demonstrated it was either unable or unwilling to comply with DHHS regulations at its childcare centers and therefore upheld DHHS’ sanctions. Marion’s appealed. ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR Marion’s assigns two errors: (1) The district court’s ruling upholding DHHS’ findings regarding the Center’s license did not conform to law, was not supported by competent evidence, and was arbitrary, capricious, and not reasonable, and (2) the district court’s ruling upholding DHHS’ findings regarding the Home’s license did not conform to law, was not supported by competent evidence, and was arbitrary, capricious, and not reasonable. Nebraska Advance Sheets MARION’S v. NEBRASKA DEPT. OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVS. 987 Cite as 289 Neb. 982