Department of Children and Families Case
A decision rendered in a case involving the Department of Children and Families (DCF) demonstrates the extent to which courts defer to the agency’s conclusions when reviewing a matter on appeal. In this particular case, the plaintiffs were the maternal aunt and uncle of two children, ages fourteen and sixteen. After receiving reports that the children were being physically and emotionally neglected, the Department conducted an investigation, ultimately substantiating the allegations as to both children. When the plaintiffs learned they were going to be placed on the Central Registry, they requested an administrative hearing.
The hearing officer found that DCF had received several prior reports for this family, ranging from allegations of physical abuse to emotional neglect. The hearing officer also found that on one occasion, the plaintiffs forced their nephew to sleep on dirty laundry, and on other occasions, locked him out of their home. At one point, the aunt and uncle stated the nephew was a financial obligation and they did not want him to return to their care. Shortly thereafter, the plaintiffs agreed to transfer guardianship of the child to the paternal uncle.
The hearing officer upheld the allegations of physical neglect as to the nephew based on his finding that the child had been wrongfully denied access to his home. The hearing officer also upheld the substantiation of emotional abuse as to the nephew because of an incident in which the plaintiffs took the child’s backpack and school books from him, and because of several inappropriate statements the plaintiffs made about the child to third parties.
In explaining its limited role on appeal, the court stated that it may not retry the case or substitute its own judgment for that of the administrative agency with respect to the weight of the evidence or questions of fact. Rather, its duty is simply to determine, in view of all the evidence, whether the agency, in issuing its order, acted unreasonably, arbitrarily, illegally or in abuse of its discretion.
The fact that a hearing officer discounted contrary evidence in the record does not affect the validity of the DCF decision. In reviewing the case on appeal, the Court must defer to the agency’s assessment of the credibility of the witnesses and to the agency’s right to believe or disbelieve the evidence presented by any witness, either in whole or in part.
In light of that standard, the court ultimately held that the testimony and documents produced at the hearing convinced the officer to uphold DCF’s determination. As the Court expounded, “The ‘book bag incident,’ the ‘sleeping on dirty clothes event,’ the plaintiffs’ insults of [the child] given at the hospital and probation office, and the barring from the house for both [children] were in the record.” Therefore, there was no basis to overturn the hearing officer’s decision.
Should you have any questions regarding DCF cases, or family matters generally, please do not hesitate to contact managing partner, Attorney Joseph C. Maya to schedule a free initial consultation. He can be reached in the firm’s Westport office at (203) 221-3100 or by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.