Opinion ID: 172351
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Safe-And-Secure-Environment Claim

Text: The Starkeys' complaint alleged: During the period from September 12, 2005 to December, 2005, Ms. Park, Ms. Kintzing and/or Ann Baldwin repeatedly endeavored to force the children in foster care or their mother's care, despite the obvious physical and emotional dangers of such placement. Id. at 14 ¶ 15. They may have been attempting to state a claim that Defendants violated the children's substantive-due-process rights to placement in a reasonably safe and secure environment while in the custody of BCDSS. See Yvonne L. v. N.M. Dep't of Human Servs., 959 F.2d 883, 892-93 (10th Cir.1992) (recognizing constitutional right to reasonably safe conditions in foster care). And they appear to be referring to such a claim when they assert in their opening brief on appeal that the children have been subjected to horrific living conditions, and [A.B.] has been subjected to emotional and sexual abuse in foster care. Aplt. Br. at 6. That brief, however, cites no evidence in the record that would support such a claim. The only cite in support is a portion of A.B.'s affidavit, but the district court struck the relevant language from the affidavit, and we have affirmed the court's ruling. Accordingly, the Starkeys' claim lacks evidentiary support, and we must affirm the judgment in favor of the individual Defendants in their personal capacities. See Gross v. Burggraf Constr. Co., 53 F.3d 1531, 1546 (10th Cir.1995) (refusing to consider unsubstantiated allegations on appeal). Although the Starkeys' reply brief cites additional evidence in support of their safe-environment claim, we decline to consider that evidence. This court does not ordinarily review issues raised for the first time in a reply brief. Stump v. Gates, 211 F.3d 527, 533 (10th Cir.2000). This rule protects us from publishing an erroneous opinion because we did not have the benefit of the appellee's response. Id. The same rationale applies when the only evidence supporting a claim is not cited until the reply brief. See Hrobowski v. Worthington Steel Co., 358 F.3d 473, 478 (7th Cir.2004) (reply brief's citations to the record [came] too late); Forsyth v. Barr, 19 F.3d 1527, 1537 (5th Cir.1994) (designating specific portions of record (to support opposition to summary judgment) for first time in reply brief [came] far too late).