Good news for grandparents: court ruling coming soon

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Lilly's Mother Comments On Blog

Here for the first time...Lilly's' MOTHER speaks out.

"I am writing for one of the first times ever. I am Lilly's mother or "terminated mother" as the AG calls me. This day in court brought a smile to our family's face for the first time in many, many long months. Yes I am appealing my rights. I was lied to in court and promised my child, Lilly, would go to my parents, who had raised her from birth. Lilly is their world as much as she is mine. We love her. Pam thank you so much for following this. IT NEEDS TO BE SOLVED. THEY ARE TEARING APART FAMILIES." (Lilly's Mom)

STATUS: Standing has been granted by the court to Lilly's maternal grandparents and also to the deceased father's grandparents (Lilly's great-grandparents) who stepped in to regain family placement after the maternal grandparents lost the child because of a bunch of lies in a home study. (The home study called them thieves who lived in a home without heating.) The child was removed from the grandparents because of this study.

DSHS tells young mothers when they are asked. "Yes, you terminate your rights and your mom can adopt her! You can have the chance to get an education and you know your child will be better with the parents who raised you. This way everyone is happy...and you will be able to even see your child grow and develop." ETC.

DSHS and the Attorney General have no intention of giving the child back to the mother even though they used false pretenses to get her into the system and lined up for adoption. There are a lot of problems in this case. But, we need to go back to the first problem and get it corrected. Since the state lied to the mother to get the child...the mother should have the child returned to her!

Federal Appeals Court Finds CPS Tactic Unconstitutional

City: Sacramento, CA

As families gather for the holidays, a recent ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals offers hope to hundreds of thousands of parents haunted by the nightmare of unproven child abuse allegations.

For years, attorneys with Pacific Justice Institute have warned parents that, once CPS decides to investigate them for child abuse - sometimes based on anonymous tips from neighbors or vindictive ex-spouses - their names can end up on California's Child Abuse Central Index (CACI). Parents are listed on the CACI even when CPS eventually deems the charges "inconclusive" and closes its files. The CACI listing shows up on background checks for years to come and prevents parents from obtaining jobs or state licenses.

In Humphries v. County of Los Angeles, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sharply criticized the ease with which people are listed on the CACI and the obstacles which prevent their names from being removed. The court was also troubled by a study indicating that as many as half of the more than 800,000 individuals listed on the CACI "may have a legitimate basis for expungement." Calling the list "the reverse of the presumption of innocence in our criminal justice system," the court ordered the state to enact greater procedural safeguards.

PJI President Brad Dacus commented, "It is gratifying that the Ninth Circuit has acknowledged what we have been saying for years-that treating parents as criminals when they are never convicted of a crime is unjust. We call on the legislature to finally fix this broken system in a way that honors basic constitutional rights."

Karen Milam, who directs PJI's Southern California office, stated, "Every year, PJI is inundated with hundreds of calls from desperate parents who do not understand how they could be labeled as child abusers based solely on unproven suspicions. This ruling is an important step toward keeping CPS honest."

______________________________________________________________________________________
The Pacific Justice Institute is a non-profit 501(c)(3) legal defense organization specializing in the defense of religious freedom, parental rights, and other civil liberties.
P.O. Box 276600 Sacramento, CA 95827-6600
Phone: (916) 857-6900 Fax: (916) 857-6902 Internet: www.pacificjustice.org

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0556467p.pdf

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 24, 2007

ORANGE COUNTY JURY FINDS CPS WORKERS AND AGENCY

LIABLE TO MOTHER FOR $ 4.9 MILLION IN COMPENSATORY

DAMAGES PLUS PUNITIVE DAMAGES TO BE DETERMINED.

RE: FOGARTY-HARDWICK v. COUNTY OF ORANGE, ET AL.

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE

Case No. 01CC02379 (Trial before Hon. Ronald L. Bauer, Dept. CX103)

On March 23, 2007, the Orange County Social Services Agency and two of

its Social Workers, Marcie Vreeken and Helen Dwojak were found liable

forviolating the parental rights of Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick, as

guaranteed under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United

States Constitution. The jury found 10-2 in favor of the Plaintiff and

awarded $4.9 million in economic and non-economic damages. The

punitive damages phase of the trial will begin on Tuesday, March 27,

2007.

The verdict follows the filing of a civil suit for civil rights violations by

Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick, a mother of two minor children, against the

Orange County Department of Social Services and three of its social

workers. The Plaintiff Deanna Fogarty-Harwick sued defendants County of

Orange, Orange County Social Services Agency, Marcie Vreeken, Elaine

Wilkins, and Helen Dwojak.

The Jury found against the Plaintiff and for Defendant Elaine Wilkins, by a

10-2 jury vote. This case was brought by Plaintiff against Defendants to

recover damages arising from Defendants alleged violations of Ms.

Fogarty’s constitutional rights to raise and associate with her children, free

from governmental interference. Ms. Fogarty-Hardwick alleged that social

workers Marcie Vreeken, Elaine Wilkins, and Helen Dwojak caused Ms.

Fogarty-Hardwick’s children to be removed from her custody without

cause, and continued to detain them without cause, violating Ms. Fogarty-

Harwick’s Constitutional right to familial association. Ms. Fogarty-

Hardwick alleged that these defendants, while working as social workers

for Orange County Social Services, intentionally fabricated evidence to

obtain a court order to detain Ms. Fogarty-Hardwick’s two young

daughters on February 17, 2000. Ms. Fogarty-Hardwick also alleged that

Orange County Social Services, Marcie Vreeken, Elaine Wilkins, and Helen

Dwojak maliciously failed to provide the court with exculpatory

information, and filed false reports in furtherance of the effort to keep Ms.

Fogarty-Hardwick separated from her children.

The second civil rights claim alleged that the policies, practices, or

procedures employed by Orange County Social Services and the County of

Orange in the removal of Plaintiff’s children from her care also violated

Ms. Fogarty-Harwick’s constitutional rights, under the Fourth and

Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and to raise

and associate with her children free from governmental interference. The

unlawful policies, practices or procedures pertained to the detention of

children without a finding of imminent danger or serious physical injury; i

nterviewing children without a parent present; continuing detention after

learning there was no basis to do so; using trickery and fabricated

evidence; and failing to adequately train employees regarding the

Constitutional rights of parents.

Lead trial attorney Shawn A. McMillan states “My client Deanna Fogarty-

Hardwick, is satisfied by the Jury’s recognition of the harm that the

defendants caused her. But, obviously, no amount of money can ever undo

the damage inflicted upon Ms. Fogarty-Hardwick or her children. We

expect the Jury’s 4.9 million dollar verdict will cause the County of Orange

and its Department of Social Services to implement procedures to prevent

future abuses by County social workers and protect other families.”

San Diego Lawyer Shawn A. McMillan, of the Law Offices of Shawn A.

McMillan, was trial counsel in the case. Attorney Sondra S. Sutherland was

cocounsel.

For additional information, contact:

Shawn A. McMillan, Esq.

THE LAW OFFICES OF SHAWN A. McMILLAN, A.P.C.

4955 Via Lapiz

San Diego, California 92122

Telephone: (858) 646-0069

Facsimile: (206) 600-4582

Website: www.mcmillan-law.com

E-Mail: attyshawn@netscape.net

PRESS RELEASE DISTRIBUTED BY

WWW.FEARNOTLAW.COM

# # #

California Judge Issues Injunction Against Orange County CPS Workers

Following Orange County Jury's finding CPS workers and agency liable to mother for $4.9 million in compensatory damages plus punitive damages trial judge enters permanent injunction against the California's Orange County to prevent CPS from including in charging allegations any statement that a child is abused, neglected or abandoned without reasonable and articulable evidence to support the claim.

San Diego, CA (PRWEB) May 21, 2007 --

RE:   FOGARTY-HARDWICK v. COUNTY OF ORANGE, ET AL.
   SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE
   Case No. 01CC02379 (Trial before Hon. Ronald L. Bauer, Dept. CX103)

On May 14, 2007, Orange County Superior Court Judge, Ronald Bauer (Dept.
CX-103) issued an injunction against the Orange County Social Services Agency requiring the agency to obtain "reasonable and articulable evidence" prior to initiating dependency proceedings alleging abuse, neglect or abandonment of a child.

The injunction follows on the heels of an earlier and unprecedented jury verdict of $4.9 million against Orange County and two of its social workers Marcia Vreeken and Helen Dwojak for violating the parental rights of Deanna Fogarty, as guaranteed under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

This case was brought by Deanna Fogarty against the County of Orange, Marcia Vreeken, Elaine Wilkins, and their supervisor Helen Dwojak to recover damages arising from Defendants alleged violations of Ms. Fogarty's constitutional rights to raise and associate with her children, free from governmental interference.

On March 23, 2007, an Orange County Jury found against Orange County, social worker Marcia Vreeken, and social worker supervisor Helen Dwojak and awarded monetary damages of $4.9 million. A third social worker, Elaine Wilkins was found not liable.

In addition to seeking damages, Ms. Fogarty also sought to enjoin the Orange County Social Services Agency from continuing its allegedly unlawful practice of making allegations of wrong doing against parents in dependency proceedings without supporting evidence.

Lead trial attorney Shawn A. McMillan states: "Ms. Fogarty is very pleased with Judge Bauer's decision to issue the injunction. This is a very important issue to my client, and the court's decision today clearly demonstrates that sufficient evidence was presented to convince the court that the customs, policies and practices of the agency were unlawful. This injunction is expected to have incalculable and far reaching effects for a great many families presently experiencing the vagaries of the Social Service system in Orange County, and perhaps throughout the state. The injunction will force a change that is long overdue."

An electronic copy of the permanent injunction are available at:
Orange County CPS Injunction

San Diego Lawyer Shawn A. McMillan, of the Law Offices of Shawn A. McMillan, was trial counsel in the case.

For additional information, contact:
Shawn A. McMillan, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF SHAWN A. McMILLAN, A.P.C.
4955 Via Lapiz
San Diego, California 92122
Telephone: (858) 646-0069
Facsimile: (206) 600-4582
Website: www.mcmillan-law.com
E-Mail: attyshawn @ netscape.net

PRESS MATERIAL HOSTED BY WWW.FEARNOTLAW.COM">WWW.FEARNOTLAW.COM