United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999-08-26
42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: civil; family sues social worker and police officer over child-abuse investigation; interlocutory appeal by the two individual defendants from denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity; result: claimant-won; claim:
Uncertainty
None recorded
Misfit
The opinion decides only the qualified-immunity defense; the underlying Fourth Amendment violation is decided implicitly and merged with "clearly established". Recording a separate deprivation block duplicates the defense block and its [triable] basis is my inference, not the court's statement.
Basis is hybrid: non-consent is "conceded for purposes of appeal" (assumed), the legal ruling is [law], and the claim itself remains for trial ([triable]); one basis tag per block cannot say all three.
Much of the reasoning is analogical (like Good, unlike Darryl H., White, Baker, Wildauer, Franz); the dispositive `held` sentence is a case comparison ("This case is like Good, not Darryl H."), and the notation has no way to record which precedent's fact pattern was matched or distinguished.
Whose right? Plaintiffs are parents and children; the court locates the strip-search injury mainly in the mother's dignity/authority. `party` names the defendant and `count` the conduct; there is no slot for the rights-holder.
Opinion footnotes its citations, so a rule sentence may track precedent with the source only in a footnote; whether a line deserves `[quoted]` cannot be told from the line, and none is tagged here (the lines chosen are the court's own formulations).
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 20
Elements 7–12 of 20
| Case | Common-law absolute immunity (judicial, prosecutorial, legislative, witness functions) | Eleventh Amendment state sovereign immunity bar (official-capacity damages / retrospective relief) | Preiser / Heck v. Humphrey favorable-termination and habeas-exclusivity bar | Borrowed state personal-injury statute of limitations (42 U.S.C. § 1988; Wilson v. Garcia; Owens v. Okure) | Issue preclusion / collateral estoppel from prior state criminal or civil judgment (Allen v. McCurry) | Judicial standing prerequisite, separate from damages remedy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 13–18 of 20
| Case | Statutory bar on injunctive relief against a judicial officer acting in a judicial capacity (1996 amendment) | Municipal policy or custom as moving force (Monell v. Department of Social Services) | District of Columbia exclusive Act of Congress inclusion clause (1979 amendment) | Rejected extra element: separate proof of "abuse of governmental power" (Collins v. City of Harker Heights) | Federal action / Fifth Amendment claim (outside § 1983 state-law scope) | Collateral-order appellate jurisdiction over interlocutory qualified-immunity denials (Mitchell v. Forsyth; Johnson v. Jones) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | · not addressed | ○ not reached · basis not recordedNot counted: applied/merits | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 19–20 of 20
| Case | Appellate preservation / forfeiture of issue not raised in district court | Section 1983 malicious prosecution claim (Fourth Amendment / procedural due process) |
|---|---|---|
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | ○ not reached · basis not recordedNot counted: applied/procedural | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — not reached (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Personal involvement / causal connection ("subjects, or causes to be subjected") | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / meritsOfficer Schwall's responsibility for the strip search (he "backed off") is not separately analysed. | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — not reached (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Action taken "under color of" state, territorial, or D.C. law | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — not reached (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Damages remedy (legacy CASE id; not a prerequisite for prospective relief) | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — satisfied · triable (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Deprivation of Fourth Amendment rights (unreasonable search, warrantless entry, false arrest, excessive force) | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: triable; count: coerced entry into the home; subject: count=coerced entry into the home Merits and immunity are merged: on plaintiffs' version (non-consent conceded for the appeal) the entry violated the Fourth Amendment; consent remains disputed for trial. | warrantless-home-entry/child-abuse-investigation-on-weak-anonymous-tip | The caller said that she was once awakened by a child screaming “No Daddy, no” at 1:30 A.M. at the Calabretta home.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [784:899] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The children were standing at the door with their mother, and the social worker noted on her report that they “were easily seen and they did not appear to be abused/neglected.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [1735:1911] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.Appellants concede that for purposes of appeal, the entry must be treated as made without consent.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [3278:3376] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.By contrast, in the case at bar, the report did not describe any evidence of physical abuse, and the social worker and police officer did not perceive any danger of injury to the children or loss of evidence if they secured a warrant.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [14159:14393] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.White v. Pierce County establishes that a special exigency excuses a warrantless entry where the government officers have probable cause to believe that the child has been abused and that the child would be injured or could not be taken into custody if it were first necessary to obtain a court order.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [23173:23474] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.This was not a case where the officials coercing entry into the home recognized some special exigency creating imminent risk to the child.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [23034:23172] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591. |
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — satisfied · triable (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Deprivation of Fourth Amendment rights (unreasonable search, warrantless entry, false arrest, excessive force) | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: triable; count: strip search of the three-year-old; subject: count=strip search of the three-year-old Court blends Fourth Amendment privacy with a familial-privacy (parent-child relationship) interest without naming a separate Fourteenth Amendment right. | strip-search/child-examined-for-bruises-without-reasonable-suspicion | There were no bruises or marks on the three year old’s bottom.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [6014:6076] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The social worker had noted on her first visit that “Minors were easily seen and did not appear to be abused/neglected.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [29636:29756] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The reasonable expectation of privacy of individuals in their homes includes the interests of both parents and children in not having government officials coerce entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment and humiliate the parents in front of the children.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [34695:34951] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.A social worker is not entitled to sacrifice a family’s privacy and dignity to her own personal views on how parents ought to discipline their children.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [30726:30878] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591. |
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — not reached (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Suable "person" (natural person in individual capacity, official in official capacity for prospective relief, or municipality; excludes States) | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — not reached (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Municipal policy or custom as moving force (Monell v. Department of Social Services) | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — not · law (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: law; party: social worker Floyd and Officer Schwall; count: coerced entry into the home; subject: party=social worker Floyd and Officer Schwall; count=coerced entry into the home Precedent about police (White v. Pierce County) clearly establishes the rule for social workers too; no child-welfare or administrative-search exception to the warrant requirement absent exigency; state regulations did not authorize forced entry. | clearly-established/warrantless-home-entry-child-welfare-check-no-exigency | On November 10, fourteen days after the call and ten days after the first visit, the social worker returned to the Calabretta house with a policeman.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [2083:2232] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.Mrs. Calabretta did not open the door, and said she was uncomfortable letting them in without her husband at home.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [2847:2961] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The police officer had the opinion that in any check on the welfare of children “there is an exigent circumstance” so no search warrant is needed.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [2962:3108] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The social worker and her department delayed entry into the home for fourteen days after the report, because they perceived no immediate danger of serious harm to the children.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [9191:9367] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The only reason the social worker and police officer did not seek a search warrant was that their subjective opinion was that they did not need one.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [14591:14739] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.Anderson requires more particularized analysis, to determine whether, in these particular circumstances, notably the absence of emergency, a reasonable official would understand that they could not enter the home without consent or a search warrant.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [10962:11211] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The principle that government officials cannot coerce entry into people’s houses without a search warrant or applicability of an established exception to the requirement of a search warrant is so well established that any reasonable officer would know it.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [11696:11951] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.In our circuit, a reasonable official would have known that the law barred this entry.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [11212:11298] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.We conclude that on appellants’ first issue, whether they were protected by qualified immunity regarding their coerced entry into the Calabrettas’ home, the district court was right. They were not.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [25634:25831] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591. |
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — not · law (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: law; party: social worker Floyd; count: strip search of the three-year-old; subject: party=social worker Floyd; count=strip search of the three-year-old No in-circuit case on point; out-of-circuit authority (3d and 10th Cir.) plus the taint of the unlawful entry defeat immunity. The injured interest is framed chiefly as the mother's dignity and authority in her home, not the toddler's bodily privacy. | clearly-established/strip-search-of-child-during-unlawful-home-entry | While the mother was still with the policeman in the other room, the social worker told the twelve year old to pull down the three year old girl’s pants.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [4548:4701] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The three year old was screaming and fighting to get loose, the mother looked at the social worker to see whether she would relent, but she did not, and the mother pulled down the three year old’s pants in obedience to the social worker’s order.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [5768:6013] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The twelve year old had already explained away the screaming and told the social worker that the children were not abusively disciplined.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [29757:29894] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.By the time the social worker forced the mother to pull down the child’s pants, the investigation had contracted to the social worker’s personal opinion that any discipline of a child with an object must be against the law, and her puzzling mention of the family’s religiosity.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [35407:35684] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.The strip search cannot be separated from the context in which it took place, the coerced entry into the home.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [33829:33939] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.An unlawful entry or search of a home does not end when the government officials walk across the threshold.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [33940:34047] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.This case is like Good, not Darryl H.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [33791:33828] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591. |
| Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 — not reached (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Appellate preservation / forfeiture of issue not raised in district court | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / procedural count: separate interview of the twelve-year-old; subject: count=separate interview of the twelve-year-old Qualified immunity for the interview was not argued in the district court, so the court declined to consider it. | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
Court interpretations recorded from this case
interpretation
White v. Pierce County establishes that a special exigency excuses a warrantless entry where the government officers have probable cause to believe that the child has been abused and that the child would be injured or could not be taken into custody if it were first necessary to obtain a court order.
Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed)
White v. Pierce County establishes that a special exigency excuses a warrantless entry where the government officers have probable cause to believe that the child has been abused and that the child would be injured or could not be taken into custody if it were first necessary to obtain a court order.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [23173:23474] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.Evaluated under Graham v. Connor objective reasonableness from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene.
interpretation
The reasonable expectation of privacy of individuals in their homes includes the interests of both parents and children in not having government officials coerce entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment and humiliate the parents in front of the children.
Calabretta v. Floyd — 189 F.3d 808 (1999) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999 (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed)
The reasonable expectation of privacy of individuals in their homes includes the interests of both parents and children in not having government officials coerce entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment and humiliate the parents in front of the children.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_189.jsonl#/f3d/189/0808-01; Unicode character offsets [34695:34951] (end exclusive); SHA-256 edec3b518ed061bd5b1694c2c9bca444a659a0f2506551d6bce3f3f43f0a5591.Evaluated under Graham v. Connor objective reasonableness from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene.