Relevant Case Law 

Duchesne v. Sugarman, 566 F.2d 817 (2d Cir. 1977). Foundational family-integrity case. The Second Circuit said the government cannot just hold children and force the parent to sue; the burden to initiate judicial review is on the state.

 

Croft v. Westmoreland Cnty. Children & Youth Servs., 103 F.3d 1123 (3d Cir. 1997). Strong Third Circuit case on coerced family separation. It is one of the classic “you cannot force a parent out of the home absent objectively reasonable suspicion of abuse” cases.

 

Hurlman v. Rice, 927 F.2d 74 (2d Cir. 1991). Second Circuit recognized that officials may remove a child without consent or prior court order only in true emergency circumstances.

 

Doe v. Hennepin County, 858 F.2d 1325 (8th Cir. 1988). The children were removed for sixteen days and returned after the abuse allegations proved unfounded. Useful for family-integrity and due-process framing, even though the outcome is not a clean across-the-board plaintiff win.

 

Calabretta v. Floyd, 189 F.3d 808 (9th Cir. 1999). Major Ninth Circuit case holding that child-abuse investigations do not create a special Fourth Amendment exception for warrantless home entry and child strip searches.

 

Wallis v. Spencer, 202 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 2000). One of the most important Ninth Circuit cases in this area. Officials may remove a child without prior judicial authorization only if they have reasonable cause to believe the child is in imminent danger of serious bodily injury and the intrusion is reasonably necessary to avert that injury.

 

Mabe v. San Bernardino County, 237 F.3d 1101 (9th Cir. 2001). Reinforces that warrantless removal turns on imminent danger, not vague agency discomfort. Good Ninth Circuit authority against casual “better safe than sorry” removals.

 

Roe v. Texas Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 299 F.3d 395 (5th Cir. 2002). Fifth Circuit denied qualified immunity after a CPS worker visually searched a child’s body cavities without a court order. Excellent search/exam case.

 

Wooley v. City of Baton Rouge, 211 F.3d 913 / reported at 206 F.3d 574 page source on Justia (5th Cir. 2000). Useful Fifth Circuit family-integrity case recognizing the child’s concomitant liberty interest in remaining with the parent.

 

Brokaw v. Mercer County, 235 F.3d 1000 (7th Cir. 2000). Strong Seventh Circuit case reversing dismissal where the child alleged removal without warrant, probable cause, or exigent circumstances, plus familial-relations and procedural due-process violations.

 

Brokaw v. Weaver, 305 F.3d 660 (7th Cir. 2002). Follow-on Brokaw litigation. Useful for the proposition that the earlier Brokaw claims were real, substantial constitutional claims tied to unlawful seizure and interference with family relations.

 

Rogers v. County of San Joaquin, 487 F.3d 1288 (9th Cir. 2007). Another Ninth Circuit removal case. The court treated the warrantless removal issue seriously and rejected the idea that thin facts automatically justify bypassing judicial process.

Tenenbaum v. Williams, 193 F.3d 581 (2d Cir. 1999). Very important Second Circuit case on emergency removals and examinations. It is especially useful for the principle that once the claimed emergency has abated, the state cannot keep acting as if process does not matter.

 

Southerland v. City of New York, 680 F.3d 127 / amended opinion at No. 07-4449 (2d Cir. 2012). Important Second Circuit authority on unconstitutional home entry and child removal claims. Also useful for the circuit’s “reasonable basis” abuse-investigation language.

 

Hernandez v. Foster, 657 F.3d 463 / No. 10-1364 (7th Cir. 2011). One of the best cases on coerced safety plans. The Seventh Circuit held that threatening parents into signing a safety plan without lawful basis can violate familial rights and defeat summary judgment.

 

Malik v. Arapahoe County Dep’t of Social Servs., 191 F.3d 1306 (10th Cir. 1999). Strong Tenth Circuit case on investigative misconduct and immunity boundaries in child-removal litigation. Good for the proposition that social workers do not get a free constitutional pass just because they say “child welfare.”

 

Demaree v. Pederson, 887 F.3d 870 / No. 14-16207 (9th Cir. 2018). Excellent Ninth Circuit authority: clearly established law barred removing children without a warrant or court order absent cogent, fact-focused reason to believe they faced imminent physical injury or sexual abuse.

 

Keates v. Koile, 883 F.3d 1228 / No. 16-16568 (9th Cir. 2018). Ninth Circuit reversed dismissal of a familial-association claim, holding the complaint plausibly alleged no reasonable cause to separate mother and child.

 

Garcia v. County of San Diego, No. 19-55022 (9th Cir. 2020) repeats the Ninth Circuit rule that children can be taken from the home without a warrant only to protect them from imminent physical injury or molestation before a warrant can be obtained.

Kia P. v. McIntyre, 235 F.3d 749 (2d Cir. 2000) is often cited in the Second Circuit for the “reasonable basis” framework in child-abuse investigations, even though it is not the cleanest plaintiff win.

Berryman v. Niceta, No. 23-1263 (10th Cir. 2025) is newer and more complicated, but it is worth reading because it involves alleged false statements that led to removal and discusses the limits of constitutional tort liability in that posture. 

 

Hardwick v. County of Orange, 844 F.3d 1112 / No. 15-55563 (9th Cir. 2017). Excellent fabricated-evidence case. The Ninth Circuit held social workers were not entitled to immunity where plaintiff alleged they used perjured testimony and fabricated evidence to secure removal.

 

Mann v. County of San Diego, 907 F.3d 1154 / No. 16-56657 (9th Cir. 2018). Strong case involving removal followed by invasive medical exams without parental consent or a court order. Excellent for search/exam issues and child bodily privacy.

 

Capp v. County of San Diego, 940 F.3d 1046 / No. 18-55119 (9th Cir. 2019). Not a classic removal-holding case, but very useful because the Ninth Circuit held a social worker was not entitled to qualified immunity for threatening custody consequences in retaliation for speech.

 

Sampson v. County of Los Angeles, 974 F.3d 1012 / No. 18-55450 (9th Cir. 2020). Another retaliation / child-welfare crossover case. Useful where CPS actors allegedly weaponized custody or placement decisions after the caregiver complained. The opinion also notes the child was later returned to Sampson’s care.

 

Rieman v. Vazquez, No. 22-56054 (9th Cir. 2024). Very good recent Ninth Circuit case. Social workers were denied immunity for failing to provide notice of the detention hearing and for giving incomplete or false information to the juvenile court to satisfy notice requirements.

 

Scanlon. County of Los Angeles, No. 21-55999 (9th Cir. 2024). Important recent judicial-deception case. The Ninth Circuit reversed summary judgment where the warrant application for removal allegedly contained material misrepresentations and omissions.

 

Morrell v. Mock, 270 F.3d 1090 (7th Cir. 2001). Mixed result, but still worth keeping. The Seventh Circuit expressly held the mother stated a constitutional due-process claim because, absent exigent circumstances, the state cannot separate parent and child without pre-deprivation notice and some opportunity to object. 

 

 

Warrantless removal / exigency: Duchesne, Croft, Hurlman, Wallis, Mabe, Rogers, Demaree, Garcia.

Fabrication / perjury / judicial deception: Hardwick, Rieman, Scanlon, Brokaw.

Coerced safety plans / coercive threats: Hernandez, Capp, Sampson.

Unlawful searches / medical exams / child interviews: Calabretta, Roe, Mann, Tenenbaum.

Family integrity / notice and hearing: Duchesne, Doe v. Hennepin, Southerland, Morrell, Wooley, Keates.