Crawford v. Buncombe County Department of Social Services

Filing 7

ORDER denying as moot 3 Motion for Hearing, 4 Motion for Joinder, 5 Motion for Permanent Injunction, 5 Motion for indefinite restraining order, and 6 Motion for ex parte Hearing, granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and action is hereby DISMISSED . Signed by Judge Lacy Thornburg on 12/12/05. (Freeman, Phyllis)

Crawford v. Buncombe County Department of Social Services

Doc. 7

Case 1:05-cv-00355-LHT

Document 7

Filed 12/12/2005

Page 1 of 4

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL NO. 1:05CV355

CHARLAYNE CRAWFORD, as ) Mother and Next Friend of ) Victoria Crawford (a minor child), ) ) Petitioner, ) ) Vs. ) ) BUNCOMBE COUNTY ) DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL ) SERVICES, ) ) Respondent. ) )

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner's application to proceed without the prepayment of fees. The affidavit in support of the application is incomplete. While the Petitioner indicated that she had worked within the past year, she did not provide the information required by the application. Nonetheless, because the action has no merit, the Court will grant the application but dismiss the action without service of process.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:05-cv-00355-LHT

Document 7

Filed 12/12/2005

Page 2 of 4

2 The Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus to bring a juvenile currently in the custody of the Buncombe County Department of Social Services into federal court. She also asks that this Court conduct a review of pending state court neglect proceedings involving that child. There are many reasons why this Court may not interfere in the pending state court matters. First of all, habeas relief is not available until all state proceedings have been exhausted. District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983); Gamble v. Calbone, 375 F.3d 1021, 1026 (10th Cir. 2004); Berry v. S.C. Dep't of Social Servs., 121 F.3d 697 (table), 1997 WL 499950 (4th Cir. 1997). "[F]ederal habeas has never been available to challenge parental rights of child custody" even where a child has been placed in foster custody by court order, as is the case here. Lehman v. Lycoming County Children's Servs. Agency, 458 U.S. 502, 510-11 (1982). Second, the Petitioner in essence seeks to enjoin the state court proceedings. This Court will not interfere with pending state court proceedings under these circumstances. Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 45, 53-54 (1969); Mandel v. Town of Orleans, 326 F.3d 267, 273 (1st Cir. 2003); Suggs v. Brannon, 804 F.2d 274, 278-79 (4th Cir. 1986).

Case 1:05-cv-00355-LHT

Document 7

Filed 12/12/2005

Page 3 of 4

3 IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Petitioner's application to proceed without the prepayment of fees is hereby GRANTED and this action is hereby DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petitioner's motions for an injunction, emergency injunction, indefinite restraining order, ex parte hearing, and to add additional Plaintiffs are hereby DENIED as moot.

Case 1:05-cv-00355-LHT

Document 7

Filed 12/12/2005

Page 4 of 4

4

Signed: December 12, 2005