Child removal claim is the child’s, not the parents’

“Plaintiff may not maintain an action on behalf for her child for this removal because ‘Fourth Amendment rights are personal rights which … may not be vicariously asserted.’ Alderman v. United States, 394 U.S. 165, 174 (1969); Southerland v. City of New York, 680 F.3d 127, 143 (2d Cir. 2011) (‘A Fourth Amendment child-seizure claim belongs only to the child, not to the parent’); …” Reeves v. New York, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42690 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2022).* See Grae-El v. City of Seattle, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43007 (W.D.Wash. Mar. 10, 2022)* (same).

Plaintiff’s version of the facts of her being taken down and injured during a disorderly conduct arrest overcame qualified immunity, so there was no jurisdiction for this appeal. Windsor-Hart v. Genesee Twp., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 6260 (6th Cir. Mar. 9, 2022).* Compare King v. City of Columbus, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 6305 (6th Cir. Mar. 10, 2022) (factual dispute intertwined, so this is referred to the merits panel).

This entry was posted in Qualified immunity, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.