Davis v. Washington State Department of Social and Health Services et al

Filing 290

ORDER DENYING 283 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OR TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Salvador Mendoza, Jr. (AY, Case Administrator)

1
FILED IN THE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT May 01, 2018
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON SEAN F. M AVOY, CLERK

3

C

4
BARBARA DAVIS, as Personal
5 Representative of the Estate of G.B.,
deceased,
6
Plaintiff,
7
v.
8
WASHINGTON STATE
9 DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND
HEALTH SERVICES; JENNIFER
10 STRUS, individually and in her official
capacity acting under the color of state
11 law; HEIDI KAAS, individually and in
her official capacity acting under the
12 color of state law; MELISSA
KEHMEIER, individually and in her
13 official capacity acting under the color
of state law; JAMES DESMOND,
14 individually and in his official capacity
acting under the color of state law;
15 CASSIE ANDERSON, individually and
in her official capacity acting under the
16 color of state law; BRINA
CARRIGAN, individually and in her
17 official capacity acting under the color
of state law; MAGGIE STEWART,
18 individually and in her official capacity
acting under the color of state law;
19 LORI BLAKE, individually and in her
official capacity acting under the color
20 of state law; SHANNON SULLIVAN,
individually and in her official capacity

ORDER - 1

No. 2:17-CV-00062-SMJ

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION OR TO
ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT

1 acting under the color of state law;
SUSAN STEINER, individually and in
2 her official capacity acting under the
color of state law; CAMERON
3 NORTON, individually and in his
official capacity acting under the color
4 of state law; SARAH OASE,
individually and in her official capacity
5 acting under the color of state law;
RANA PULLOM, individually and in
6 her official capacity acting under the
color of state law; DONALD
7 WILLIAMS, individually and in his
official capacity under the color of state
8 law; CHRIS MEJIA, individually and in
his official capacity acting under the
9 color of state law; RIVERSIDE
SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 416, a
10 Municipal corporation duly organized
and existing under the laws of
11 Washington State; JUANITA
MURRAY, individually and in her
12 official capacity acting under the color
of state law; ROBERTA KRAMER,
13 individually and in her official capacity
acting under the color of state law;
14 SARAH RAMSDEN, individually and
in her official capacity acting under the
15 color of state law; CAROLINE
RAYMOND, individually and in her
16 official capacity acting under the color
of state law; CHERI MCQUESTEN,
17 individually and in her official capacity
acting under the color of state law;
18 SARAH RAMSEY, individually and in
her official capacity acting under the
19 color of state law; TAMI BOONE,
individually and in her official capacity
20 acting under the color of state law;
MELISSA REED, individually and in

ORDER - 2

1 her official capacity acting under the
color of state law; ANN STOPAR,
2 individually and in her official capacity
acting under the color of state law;
3 KRISTINA GRIFFITH, individually
and in her official capacity acting under
4 the color of state law; WENDY
SUPANCHICK, individually and in her
5 official capacity acting under the color
of state law; SHERRY DORNQUAST,
6 individually and in her official capacity
acting under the color of state law;
7 GARY VANDERHOLM, individually
and in his official capacity acting under
8 the color of state law; ROGER PRATT,
individually and in his official capacity
9 acting under the color of state law;
CHRIS NIEUWENHUIS, individually
10 and in his official capacity acting under
the color of state law and JOHN DOES
11 1-50, individually and in their official
capacities acting under the color of state
12 law,
Defendants.

13
14

Before the Court, without oral argument, is Plaintiff Barbara Davis’s FRCP
15
59(e) Motion to Alter or Amend March 26, 2018 Judgment Dismissing 42 U.S.C.
16
§ 1983 Claims against Sarah Oase, ECF No. 283. Davis argues that the Court should
17
reconsider its order granting summary judgment on the § 1983 claims against
18
Defendant Oase because attorneys for the DSHS Defendants made incorrect
19
representations about DSHS’s home study policy in 2014 and regarding Oase’s
20
compliance with DSHS policy. ECF No. 283 at 45. But assuming this is true, it does

ORDER - 3

1 not affect the Court’s rational for finding that Oase is entitled to qualified immunity
2 on Davis’s § 1983 claims:
3
4
5
6

On the record before the Court, Oase had no obvious reason to believe
Kaas was falsifying records concerning her health and safety visits, or
to suspect that there was a problem with the Khaleel home. Moreover,
she was no longer Kaas’s supervisor during the time in which it
appears DSHS discovered Kaas was falsifying records. The record
does not support that a reasonable official would have inferred a
substantial risk of serious harm existed. Accordingly, Oase is entitled
to qualified immunity on Plaintiff’s § 1983 claims.

7
ECF No. 281 at 23. Even if a home study should have been completed prior to G.B’s
8
placement with Khaleel pursuant to DSHS policy, the record does not support
9
deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious harm on the part of Oase.
10
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
11
1.

Plaintiff’s FRCP 59(e) Motion to Alter or Amend March 26, 2018

12
Judgment Dismissing Claims against Sarah Oase, ECF No. 283, is
13
DENIED.
14
IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk’s Office is directed to enter this Order and
15
provide copies to all counsel.
16
DATED this 1st day of May 2018.
17
18

__________________________
SALVADOR MENDOZA, JR.
United States District Judge

19
20

ORDER - 4