Court Opinion

ID: 9409086
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-14 21:00:57.132232+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:48.768912
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1645      Doc: 34        Filed: 07/13/2023    Pg: 1 of 6

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                  FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-1645

        NICHOEL HILL, Individually, and as mother and next friend of her minor child,
        child doe; WILLIAM HILL, Individually, and as father and next friend of his minor
        child, child doe,

                            Plaintiffs - Appellants,

                     v.

        DETECTIVE JASON HUNT, #5112; BALTIMORE COUNTY, MARYLAND;
        BALTIMORE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; STATE OF MARYLAND;
        CHASITY TECOLA RANDALL; KATHRYN A. CAWTHON; PARKVILLE
        NAZARENE CHRISTIAN DAYCARE, INC.; BRIANNA CARULLO,

                            Defendants - Appellees,

                     and

        BALTIMORE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES; BALTIMORE
        COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER; MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF
        HUMAN SERVICES; MARYLAND CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES;
        MICHELLE CHUDOW,

                            Defendants.

                                              No. 22-1701

        NICHOEL HILL, Individually, and as mother and next friend of her minor child,
        child doe; WILLIAM HILL, Individually, and as father and next friend of his minor
        child, child doe

                            Plaintiffs - Appellants,
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1645      Doc: 34        Filed: 07/13/2023    Pg: 2 of 6

                     v.

        DETECTIVE JASON HUNT, #5112; BALTIMORE COUNTY, MARYLAND;
        BALTIMORE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; STATE OF MARYLAND;
        CHASITY TECOLA RANDALL; KATHRYN A. CAWTHON; PARKVILLE
        NAZARENE CHRISTIAN DAYCARE, INC.; BRIANNA CARULLO,

                            Defendants - Appellees,

                     and

        BALTIMORE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES; BALTIMORE
        COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER; MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF
        HUMAN SERVICES; MARYLAND CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES;
        MICHELLE CHUDOW,

                            Defendants.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        Catherine C. Blake, Senior District Judge. (1:20−cv−03746−CCB)

        Submitted: February 9, 2023                                     Decided: July 13, 2023

        Before DIAZ, Chief Judge, WYNN, Circuit Judge, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: David C.M. Ledyard, LEDYARD LAW LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for
        Appellants. Brian E. Frosh, Attorney General, Elise Kurlander, Assistant Attorney
        General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore,
        Maryland, for Appellees States of Maryland, Chasity Randall, and Kathryn A. Cawthon.
        Bradley J. Neitzel, Assistant County Attorney, BALTIMORE COUNTY OFFICE OF
        LAW, Towson, Maryland, for Appellees Baltimore County, Baltimore County Police
        Department, and Detective Jason Hunt. Stephen S. McCloskey, Matthew J. McCloskey,
        SEMMES, BOWEN & SEMMES, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee Parkville Nazarene

                                                   2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1645        Doc: 34       Filed: 07/13/2023    Pg: 3 of 6

        Christian Daycare.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    3
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1645       Doc: 34          Filed: 07/13/2023      Pg: 4 of 6

        PER CURIAM:
               Nichoel and William Hill, individually and as next friend of their minor child, filed

        this suit against various individual, county, and state defendants, alleging violations of their

        federal constitutional, state constitutional, and state law rights in relation to the 2018 arrest

        of Nichoel Hill (Ms. Hill). The Hills appeal the district court’s order granting motions to

        dismiss filed by the Baltimore County Police Department (BCPD), BCPD Detective Jason

        Hunt, Baltimore County, Maryland, the State of Maryland, Baltimore County Department

        of Social Services (DSS) Investigator Chasity Randall, DSS supervisor Kathryn Cawthon,

        Parkville Nazarene Christian Daycare, Inc. (Parkville Daycare), and former Parkville

        Daycare employee Brianna Carullo. The Hills also appeal the district court’s order denying

        their motion to file a second amended complaint, denying their motion to reconsider, and

        denying their request to remand their state law claims to the Baltimore County Circuit

        Court. We affirm.

               We review de novo the district court’s order granting the defendants’ motions to

        dismiss, Harvey v. Cable News Network, Inc., 48 F.4th 257, 268 (4th Cir. 2022),

        “accept[ing] as true all well-pleaded facts in [the] complaint and constru[ing] them in the

        light most favorable to the plaintiff,” Lucero v. Early, 873 F.3d 466, 469 (4th Cir. 2017)

        (citation omitted). We employ this same standard when, as here, the district court denies

        a motion to file a second amended complaint on the grounds that such amendments would

        be futile. U.S. ex rel. Ahumada v. NISH, 756 F.3d 268, 274 (4th Cir. 2014).

               Reconsideration, on the other hand, “is an ‘extraordinary remedy,’ to be used

        ‘sparingly,’ available on only three grounds: 1) an intervening change in controlling law;

                                                       4
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1645      Doc: 34          Filed: 07/13/2023     Pg: 5 of 6

        2) previously unavailable evidence; or 3) to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest

        injustice.” JTH Tax, Inc. v. Aime, 984 F.3d 284, 290 (4th Cir. 2021) (citation omitted).

        We review the district court’s denial of the Hills’ motion for reconsideration for abuse of

        discretion. U.S. ex rel. Carter v. Halliburton Co., 866 F.3d 199, 206 (4th Cir. 2017).

               We also review for abuse of discretion the district court’s exercise of supplemental

        jurisdiction. PEM Entities LLC v. Franklin County, 57 F.4th 178, 181 (4th Cir. 2023). “A

        district court abuses its discretion when it acts in an arbitrary manner, when it fails to

        consider judicially-recognized factors limiting its discretion, or when it relies on erroneous

        factual or legal premises.” Wall v. Rasnick, 42 F.4th 214, 220 (4th Cir. 2022) (citation

        omitted).

               Upon review of the parties’ briefs and the record, we find no reversible error in the

        district court’s: (1) determination that probable cause existed to arrest Ms. Hill, (2)

        dismissal of the Hills’ negligence and gross negligence claims, (3) determination that the

        Hills’ proposed amendments would have been futile, (4) determination that the court did

        not commit a “clear error of law” or a “manifest injustice” when it considered a document

        attached to the defendants’ motion to dismiss, JTH Tax, 984 F.3d at 290, and (5) exercise

        of supplemental jurisdiction over the Hills’ related state law claims under 28 U.S.C.

        § 1367(a).

               Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders granting the defendants’ motions

        to dismiss, denying the Hills’ motion to file a second amended complaint, denying the

        Hills’ motion for reconsideration, and denying the Hills’ request to remand their previously

        dismissed state law claims. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

                                                      5
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1645      Doc: 34        Filed: 07/13/2023     Pg: 6 of 6

        contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would

        not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                     AFFIRMED

                                                    6