vers. nov gy euri rasun reup 1 MOV 8.2011 4:41PM S2AFERNAH LAKIND: NO5321 16 . SZAPERMAN, LAKIND, BLUMSIEIN & BLADER, ¥.c, Be Quakerbridge Executive Center : = 201 Grovers Mill Road, Spite 200 Lawrenceville, New Jarsey 08648 | ® By: Tracey C. Hinson, esquire : i = Telephone; (603) 275-0200 Faxt (609) 275-4511 | Attorneys for Plaintiffs _ | i S.B.x. (formerly R.5.) an! SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY : infant by his Guardian Ad! LaW DIVISION - ESSE¥ COUNTY ion, | pace Ro Saxe" Gil Ope || Plaintiff, ‘SEVIL ACTION THE STATE OF “NEW JERSEY | DIVISION OF YOUTH AND PANELY | SERVICES (“DYPS"), STATE OF] KEW JERSEY DRPARTNENT OF CHIGEREN, AND. FRMLLIRS, CRED | COMEEATN aND URE spscnD MANGER WORKER DIANE SUITH, in | her official and personal} capacity, CASEWORKER H. CLMO, | in his/her official and} % H personal capacity, CASEWORKER | ‘. CURTIS CARTER, in his official | . * and personal capacity, | ty CASEMORKER = LISA MARIE) a FINNEGAN, in her official and personel capacity, chSEvonen! ‘ i M. BRENA, in his/her official | end porsonal capacity, SUPERVISOR B. BLAKELY, in! his/her official and personal capacity, SUPERVISOR JOE! ai GORMAN, in his official ana! personel capacity, SUPERVISOR! cr CUBE K. TORRES-MEJIAS, in his/her | — official and! pazsonal! 7-520 mz: 1 i —— "a : H, HARVEST OF HOPE, | te=--y ot JOHN/JANE DOES 1-100, | : yo JOHN/JaNe DOSS SUPERVISORS 1- | wl 100, JOKR/JANE DORS MANAGERS | ; 1-200, JORN/JANE ——DOBS| CASEYORKERS 1-100, ABC COMPANY | 1-100, XYZ CORPORATION 1-190) | and | JORN/JBNE DOES 2] {Fictitious Names), 1 1 i Defendants. — ! onesDDD SSD SSE ovFs Nov 9 2011 13:02 P.06 HOV, 8.201] 4:42PM STAFERMAY LAKIND WO53, P27 Plainviff, $.B.K., @ minor by his Guardian ad ihten, BQ , nesiding in the City of Lambertville, countyl pf Hunterdon, , and State of New Jersey, by vay of Complaint says: NASURE_OFTHE_AcETON : 1. ‘This is an action to zenedy Federal and State civil rights. viclaticns and tertious conduct committed by the! state ef tow, Jersey and its employees against minor Plaintizt vid was placed by” the Division of Youth and Family Services ("DYPS") off the Division: of children and Families ("DCF") in foster homes whjixe Defendants failed to adequately monitor minor Plaiatits’} safety and Well-being, or provide hie basic neods and treatment |while tn their, care resulting in minor Plaintif£’s abuse, anes and neglect! by the foster parents that Defendants approved fox faim. 2. | Defendants failed to ensure that minor Plaintisf nad nist needs met during his time in foster caxe. 3. pefendants failed to ensure that minox Plaintiff received! adequate cave while in state custody, and failed tq appropriately! nonicox and approve CMI OME. CHIEN ©. SBS, onc ol a as A foster home for minor Plaintiff, s.B.K.,| resulting in significant injury. 4, The Defendants’ failures vere before, during, and after the placement of S.B.K. PARSIES 5, S.B.K. as @ young boy, 0.0.8. 5-3499, who was. MP 8 SM ce tie acorten pezents of eratSESE LLL Cree aves Nov 9 201k NOV. € 2011 4:42PM SZAFERMAN ( ACIND S.B.K, 7. That determination was mada in: in the § 13:02 P07 WoSHL %. 28 fatter of the Adoption of « Chi2e by CUMS 220 AM MINN 20 ecsoece | Mexcer County, Case No: FA~11-015-04-E, 8 [D¥FS) was and 4s an entity charged with the| individuals under their custedy and control. 9. Diane Smith, M, Olmo, Gexmaine Curtis-cart Pinnegan, M. Baena, B. Blakely, Joe Gorman and i. Tor DYFS casevorkers, supervisors and managers who were i care of S.B.K. duriag relevant periods. 10. Harvest of Hope recruited and trained po parents on behalf of DYFS during relevant periods. 11. Defendants John/Jane Does 1-100, ABC Comps Corporation 1-100} and John/gane Does A-2 (Fictitioy uals and/or governmental ox private entities indi for the damages to minor Plaintif. 12. Defendants John/Jane Does Supervisors, he positions within DYFS and/or PCS with responsibility, the casevork_ staff responsible fox the safety and sued in their official ainor Wainwiff, They are capacities. 13. Defondants John/gane Doar Managers 1-100, positions within DYFS and/or DCS with yesponsibilil ‘care of those x, Liga Marie Gs-Mejias are wolved in the | ential foster : ny 1-100, XYZ 5 Names), axe’: iho are Liable! Id ‘surexvisdry ds to supervise! well-being of” and personal)’ faid managexial * Ses to ensure adeguate training and supervision of, and/or commication song DYFS and DCS supervisory and casework staff respo) safety and woll-heing of minor Plaintiff. They ard snes sible for the! sued in their!EEE EE _ << yes, Wow 9 2014 1asaz Puts MUL OYE) S¥gE gene cntMGN GaniMe me sues ae official and personal capacities } : 14. Dettendant Jon/3ane Does Cosevorkers, held cascvorkér, investigator, and/or inspector positions within ops and/or Dos With responssbilities for the safety and well béing of minor‘ Plaintiff, They are sued in theix official and personpl capacities. ; BAGKGROOND : 15. the Division of Youth and Family Sezvices|is the agoncy within the Department of Children and Families established by the © state of New Jersey to investigate reports of suspectled child abuse“, and neglect; provide hecessary services to children pd fenilios to, protect children who ere the subject of such repofts, including placing children into out-of-home custedyy provide proper cara to! abused and neglected children in state custody: enshre the safety: and well-being of such childzan in state custody protect such! children {n state custody from further maltzeatmoy iia #jand secure permanent placements ‘for such children in state custody, : rest 16. If @ child is removed from his home and placed in DYFS!, { custody, nis.cage is assigned to.a.district office) caseyorker. A, regional DYES Fostex Home Unit is responsible fod matching the. om the child to an appropriate placement. The district office county vhere the child vas removed or in the county here the child! 4s placed | ansumes caso planning nd cash management responsibilities over the child snd the plaflenent. these ce responsibilities “inclede making gace-to-Z lothe: xegular! eosEEE eEeee—_e_ee_ owes Noy 9 2011 13:02 pus { | NOY. 8.2011 4:42PH — SZAFERWANE LAKIND NO.5311 7.30 contacts with the foster child and ensuring that jthe child and fester family are recsiving Aecestexy services. 47. DYES was zesponaible for approving or cexti ffing/Ticensing | foster homes during the relevent times at issue through its. pistrict, Office Foster Hone Units, Regional foster Bhme Ontts, end, ive Bureaw of Licensing pacts aLLEseD te. S.n.k. came under the caxe, custody end c}atro! of oYEs! gnortiy after his birth at St. Piizabeth’s Hospieal da May 3, 1999 is. pves vas contacted by the hospital and whpn they becaine involved, §.5-£, was taken under DYES care, custody end oontseh- S.a.k. wee eventually discharged fron the hospitel and placed in | the hone of GME off ena ner male friend HF oa. ao. pYFS conducted either no background check.@t SUL, oF ar! jmsufficient background check of mz iy and ‘a _ as. well a9 of theiz home envixonment- 21, S.B.K. was ronoved from the home of om vy following’ 5s bdecan pyre! Peceived alleging abuse and hegiect pf the chitdrod! cn AMS me PRE Setting BRE pres” substantiated the claim of abuse and negiect pyes placed S-B-K. in temporary foster hoses with CAD 22. 5 ana SMM c esore no vas placed inthe bone Jof ms Rprik 16, 2002. Be romained ia the home of G| M until he was placed in the hone of mis adopted paxcocs 5A apd | rsetvow, ovrs Noy 9 2011 6.20b1 4:47PM SZAFEMMAY LAKIND Ne PME on cctopes 11, 2002. 23: DYFS conducted either no background cheek pt all, 13:02 P10 0.53218 31 oan insufsseient background check of _ S, Sy sland clggay 2, as well ag of their home environment. 24, S.B.K. endured physical abuse and neglect an} wag sexually assaulted viile 4p che hones of CI *mV'G ml Cm S: - MBs, ang GMM 5, and while under the care}o: € pes. Th sexual assault included, but is act limited to, fmal and oral | penetration. 25. DYFS acted wrongfully by failing to or iin investigating the Zoster parents and theix paramours,| £: not properly investigating the hone environment, plating §.8.X, in the None inttially, failing to locate family menbers who sere willing to care for S.B.X. and/or failed to protect, S.B.K. after peing notified or being made aware of the negle}it; ebuse and jot properly ‘ailing te or aesavltive kchavior as well as addicional failyres in cheix responsibilities. SQHCLUSION: . 2g. defendants failed to grotect minor Plajstiff cue to’, acts spd omissions at all levels of DYFS and/or DCS: Minor Pieintiff As a result, yan euffexed grievous harm gnd | permanont | physical, emotional, developmental, paychological and/or psychiatric injuries 2], Managerial Defendants failed to ensure thac DYFS wad, DOS! _vyes Nov NOY 87011 4:42PM STAFERMAN LAKIND Ni 53) 32 staff was adequately trained and supervised to track rs understand information relevant to the screening and approval £ the cM: A SSS, 2s CM, thoter homes an ® manner that was consistent with the exercise be xeesonable Professional judgment, and in deliberate jndlfference such as to. shock the conscience, to the risk of harm to Minor plaintifs, Supervisory Defendants failed to adequately supervisp DYFS and Hos © stafé responsible for screening and approvang the — ai A CU. SS. oc OR, foster nomps An a manner that was consistent with the exercise of rexsonabl¢ profeasiogal |, judgment, and in, deliberate indifference such aa|to shock the.! conscience, to the risk-of ham to minor Plainj Bofendants tailed to screen ané approve the Gl @ MS, SMM S250 CAN), foster hones in| wes Consistent with the exercise of xeasonsble| professional! jiidgnent, and in deliberate indifference such as|to shock the conscience, to the xisk of harm to minor Plaintiff. 28. Managerial Dagendants failed to ensure that |DYFS scazf vas £ Cuseyark: / manner that adequately trained and supervised to screen 4 monitor the! of gl ce > os. os homes in a manner that was consistent with thi fi, foster exercise of reasonable profesedonal judgmenz, and indeliberaté indifference’: such as to ghook, the conscience, to the risk of |narm to minor, Plaintift. Supervisory Defendants failed to adequately supervise! DYFS staff xesponsible for screening end monitoring or che fmEES <—— ier oves Nov ¥ cunt | szuz rose WOH. 8.2017 442M SZAFERMAN LAKIND No.5321 P33 A CMs, 5S, 2s CM a, joster homes in @ manner that was conbistent with the exercise [of reasonable’ professional Judgnent, 2nd in deliberate indiftereyce such as to shock the conscience, to the risk of harm to mifox Plaintite. Casework Defendants failed to adequately screen add monitor the! Jy vy CM © SM Sorc SB, costar’: homes in a manner that Was consistent with the exercise of! rearonable professional judgment, and in deliberatp indifference { such as to shock the conscience, to the risk of jham to miner... Plaintits. | 28. Managerial Defendants lied to ensure that|DYPS staff wes. adequately trained and supervised to conduct required regular,’ face-to-face visits with minor Plaintifé in a manner that was: consistent with the exercise of reasonable| professional judgment, and in deliberate indifference such as|, to shock ‘the.’ conscience, to the risk of harm to minor, Plaintige. "supexvisory’ Pefendants failed to adequately supervise DYES-sta¥i responsible) fox conducting required, regular face-terface visits with minor), , Plaintiz? in @ manner that was consistent with tie exercise, of reasonable professional judgnent, and in deliberate indifference, ‘uch as to shock the conscience to the risk of jharm to minor’! Plaintiff. Casework Defendants failed to conduct rdquired regulax, face-to-face visits with minor Plaintiff in a minner that was! consistent with the exercise of reasonable profeasional judgment,.ee ovFs Oy A eer susve ROY WLU GcazPM SEAFERMAR LAK and in deliberate indifference such as to shock the chnecience, to the riak of nam to minor Plaintif#. 30. Managerial Defendants failed to ensure that WYFS staff vas adequately trained and supervised te track, understand, and protect the medical and mental health of minor Plaintiff inh manner that was consistent with the exercise of reasonable | professional Judgment, and in deliberate indifference such as fto shock the ' conscience, to the risk of harm to minor Plaintiff} supeseisory : Defendants failed to adequately supervise DYPS staff responsible for tracking, understandifig, and protecting the medidal and mental ° health of minor Plaintiff in a mannex that was consistent wich the exercise of reasonable professional judgment, and fn deliberate indifference such as to shock the conscience, to thd rik of ham to minor Plaintiff. Casework Defendants failed to adojuately track, understand, and protect the medical and mental he; of minor Plaintiff in a manner that was consistent with thf Fezsonable professional judgment, and in deliberat: ndiffozesice such as to shock’the conscience, to the risk of haim to minor Pla iff. FIRSS CAUSE OF ReWTON : 42. U.S.C. § B 4989 Substantive Due Process: special] Relationship Gguingt Diane Smitn, M. Olas, Curtis Carter, ira Mie Fionogan, M. Racna, B. Blakely, Joe Gormin, f. Taxel Managerial Doan, poe Supervisory Docs, and’ the Case ‘their pexeonal capacities) Sl. Bach of ‘the foregoing paragraphs is inco¥porated as 14! fully set forth beredn. ' enavies ney ys gure HOV. B20" 4:43PM STAFERMAN LAKIND 32: At all vimes when Defendants Diane Smith, ¥| Carter, Lisa Marie Finnegan, 4. Bsera, B. Blakely, Jj H. Torres-Mejias had minor Plaintiff in their foster] Defendants had a special reletdorship with minor PL imposed upon Defendants an affirmative duty to care minor Plaintifé from hax under the Fourteenth Au: United States Constituticn. EE wo 5321 P35 Olmo, Corbis | ¢ Gorman, and care custody, © intAft which rt and protect |, indent to the! 33. pefendants breached that duty. Defendants actions and! omissions were 2 substantial departuze from end exercise of, reasonable professional judgment, practice, and 4 amounted to deliberate indifference to minor Plaint! jtandards, and Let's welfare. © 34, Defendants acted with deliberate indigggrence to and with callous Gissegard of repented indications lof abuse and neglect and signs thst minor Plaintiff was not receiving adequate! care, nourishment, and services while in foster cay) 35. Defendants failed to ensure the safety an minor Plaintif£ while he wes in foster care and in the State, thus proximately causing hin bubstential : well-being of |! he, custody, of tnd unnecessary physical, emotional, developmental, psychological, and/or poychietric hom. 36, The actions and dnactions that resulted inelude but are not limited to: the failure to in this ham provide mtnoris Plaintits with a'safe and appropriate foster care filacenent; and’) the fat1ace co adequately screen, approve, 14cen! i a i s. ood OE Has se fe and monizor jwitable foster::Now. O_O Ce ovrs HOY 3 eure tau 82001 4:43 SZAFERMAM LAK UMD parents 37, In addition, the Managerial Does failed WO.5321 P36, © assure the adequate training ‘of the Supervisory end Casework Ddgs concerning { the provision of adequate care and services to fostef the adequate screening, approval, liconsure, and foster homes, and failed to ensure that DYES procedures were interpreted and implemented in a cons| The Managerial Does were'aware for years of the inadel nnd ovbex eystenic deficiencies in the State's fost children apd j) jronitoring of policies. and stent manner. ate tredning x care system; that contributed to the karm suffered by minor [Plaintife but | foiled to take reasonable steps to remedy these def feilure to adequately train the Supervisory and cas so obvious, and go obviously likely to result in a Ciencies. the - work Does was constitutional violation, that it amounted to deliberate indiffetencé to minor! | Plaintiff's welfare. ‘The failure to provide, adequel the Supervisory and Casework Does directly result: suffered by minor Plaintifé. fe Exaining toi!” dim the harm" 38. In addition, the Supervisory Does faited|to adequately; supervies the’ Caseverk Doos with respect to the! provision oft adoquete care and services to foster children and the adequate, screening, approval, licensure, and monitoring of fo ad to ensure that DYFS policies and procedures w ver homes, and®: xe intezpreced’ and implemented in a consistent manner. The Superrdoory Does were!” avare for years of the inadequate supervision and other systemic deficiencies in the State's foster care system that|contriputed to” eonsa ovFs Nov 9 2011 a:us car NOW, 8.2011 4:49PM SZAFERMAN LAKIND 51 3 the her suffered by minor Plaintifz but ta ed to take reasonable stops to remedy these defictencies. ‘The Supervisory Does ! vere deliberately indifferent to minor Plaintifs'} welfaze by |: failing to take action that vas obviously necessary ko prevent ox stop the deprivation of minor Plaintiff's constitutional zights. The failure to adequate aupervision to the Cagework Poes directly | resulted in the harm suffered by minor Plaintiff. 39. By virtue OZ the foregoing, Defendants dtprived minor Plaintif? of varioue rights protected by the Due proqbss Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, including but not limited fto: the right to personal security and reasonably safe living cohditions; the { right to protection from hamy the cight not to be haxmed physically, emotionally, developmentally ox othexvide 40. Defendants arbitrarily and capriciously diprived miior Plaintiff of his’ due process rights. in the abgence of any countervailing state interest. Ee, 42. Minor Plaintifé’s substantive due procesd rights wére |! clearly established constitutional : amma °° and) GMM =H, foster honte Red the ability to provide for minor! Plaintife's basig nutritional, developmental, educational, and health needs, and to provice CAD My Clmmmy S/ SMe ve a: with information on nutrition on the child’ health needs, | WAC. 10:122C 1.20 (a), 101122B-4.1(b)z a FEgHE te have pefendents ensure thet minor Plaintiff xecedved rppropriace and outspyrs Nov ¥ gute HOV. 8. JUN] @49HM | SCATERMAN LARIRD mdse on ae necessary heaith care while in che custody of CIN Vay Cima s, SMM s, aod GMM 4 and that manor Plaintige x and dental examinations at least annually, N.J. bcoived medica? 10:3220-2.5; right to have Degendants ensuce thet CA 7A cms. amy 8, and GMM 8, vere properly trained to faifii2 th as f ster parents, NisLB.G. 20:1220-2.77 a right to visit the foster hore to assess compliance with sle life eafety standards, te interview each househ participating in pxe-service training, and to veri about each household ember, NLB.C. 20:1225-5.37 Defendants obtain medical references for each membe: vw Es, SMM s, and cig # nousehotas} new household member, N,dB.C. 10:122C-2.3(a), 10:2220-2,5(b)z cs. s, and GMM) #, in folfilting &: respect to minor Plaintifé's case goals, Nud.A. a right a ight to"have Defendants conduct annua) inspection homes, which shal) anclude interviews With all zost othex howachold members, P0:122¢-2.9{b); a sight to have Defendants promptly anvestigats any Confplaints or reports questionin 7: statutes and/or régulevions, NDB.C. 10:422¢-2.12( een to have Defendants suppor’ NeJ.B,.C. 10:1226-2.8{b), t | and GMM u's compliance ©: sks abLigations’.. Kavo Defendants. ping space andi: Ad, menber nots: y anformation § 4 wight to nave: of the Ci and for each! FO); MaDe) _ = Mit roles with. ab: 122B~4.3 th) +! of the foster, lz children and: Jana thoroughly ® , =e th applicable". bs and a rightea vF: byes Nov 9 2011 13:04 P.uz HOY 8.2011 4:44PM SZAFERMAW LARING r mk ad or Plasmtife from doster care wich the CA VM :. SM s, and GM 8 spon a determination that minox Plaintité was net sate ee eee, foster homes, N.J-B.G. 10:122E-2.1; Md.B.c. 10:122H2.5. to have Defendants ensure the removal of 36. Winor Plaintiff was vested, by vixtud of various : statutery and xegulatory obligations imposed vpon |Defendants to adequately sexeen end approve the CE Vii (i ia 8, SMM S. and CQ} 2, foster homes as appropiate adoptive homes for the mir Plaintiff aid to ensure mingk Plaintiff's « placement safoty and valfaxe, with certain state-cfeated liberty interoste protected by che federal, Dua Process Clabse, including the right co have Defendants select minor Plaintifd!s fortes none based on an informed, objective Judgment, after a £412 and careful assessment of each factor which could have dffected minox Plaintiff's abijity to bonefit physically, feqialty, and emetionally from the adoptive placement, NiJ.B.C, 1Ps3210-4.4; the wight to have Defendants.perfozm a detailed. preado Pe 2 oe ee ee including ensuring that Cf Vom — s, S, and G: M had the capacity to meet minor Pleidkiz£’s physical: P ? ive home study: and onotions} needs end bad disclosed any histozy off child abase ox neglect ox any criminal record, ox any psychological probiens; NGS, 9°3-54.27 NLBC. 10s 123C-3.2(b); MAIC, Losizi0-4. 27ures Novy vue NOY, 8 2011 4:44PM SZAPERMAN LAKIN Wasa ae placing minor Plaintife in the ogy iy cay MDAC. 10:1210-5.77-NJ.B.C, 1L02121R-5.6@ (2), (a) | ;| the xiant to have Defendants ensure that such home study snenaped at least hres in-person contacts vith Ci 5 MIE s, Is, ons GIMMMM at toast one in-person. contact with all mekbers of the household, at least one visit to the "EE ¢ S, end GI! homes, a review of the cM i SMM &. ond CA 1s job references, « review of ti s, a: jeir pexsonal references, the procurement of various specific chtegories of Snformation, and completion of background checks xegar| records and/or records of prior child abuse or negli 20:221A-S.6(9)-(5)2 the right to have Defendants Jing criminal et, WB, efrain from . Es, and GI 8, foster hones without a properly comptes hone study, NGA. 10;2218-5,6(m)+ and the right to have Defen| post placement services to minor Plaintifé and +o (cf / os CHES, SMEs, ona - B, foster hemes, 3 ants provide Luding face + certece comuniestion, te assist wish tesuey cetolude to minor Plaintisé 9 placement, to assess the need for counse: the adoptive family to madicel, therapeutic, fing. to refer educat:onal, uelf-help, ox other services es needed, to assist fhe tanily to function autonomously, and to assess the family's [readiness and : suitability for final adoption, NuLA.C. attempting to fully protect minor Plainti#s. 57. Minor Plaintiff was vested, by virtue of va: esa, and: e yious statutory | and xegylatory obligations imposed upon Defendants |to report any omsta {Re prrs Nov 9 2011 19:04 P04 Ur GEV A°MazM SURFER LRALD C suspacted abuse of minor Plaintiff in order to ensure nis exgoing safety and welfare, with certain eteté-ereated Libekty interest provected by the federal Dus Process Clause, ineludingftne signe to + have Defendants report any suspicion that minor Plaint}fé vas being subjected to acts of child abuse, "JSR. $ 9:6-8/10; Ma 10:121a-3.5; tho right to have Defendants Anvedtigate such suspected child abuse, IUGR, 30:40-22; and the sight to have Defendants somediately ceport alt instances af sofpacted hie abuse and neglect to the county prosecutor im the cojnty in which minor, Plaintiff resided, N.SS.A, 926-8.962., and/or to have defendant(s) gully investigate and protect the minx Haintir€ from any child abuse. { 50. Defendants! actions and inactiens vere k inconsistent, with the exercise of reasonable professional judgment and amount vo deliberate inditference to the procedural dae qrocess rights « of minor Plaintige. pefendancs ected with deaaverach fndsfterence and callous disregard to repeated indications and silims that mistor ~ i 1 as thé"victin of abuse and negleét and wadinot receiving Plaintsz adequate cere, noucishment, and services whale in tdovor care, end kas undex-ceveloped, As a xesult, minor Plaintitt wes deprived of . the procedural due proves rights confexsed upon hife by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United Staves Constitution. 59. pefendants ezbicrarily and caprictously keprived sninoz Plaintigz of nis de process zighcs in the absence of ‘ony: onus,SEES Ce DvFS Nov 9 2011 tyzus revo HOV, 82011 4:449M — SZAFERMAN LAKTAD q 531 46 | | i countervailing state interest. 60. Minor Pleantiti's procedural due” process | rights and state law entitlements were clearly established at the time of the alleged acts and ontasions, and a xeasonabte Andipidvel vould | have known that the alleged acts and omissions vdpid violace these clearly established rights. I EOUREE CAUEE OF Act ION Now Jersey Constitution substantive Due Process: Relationship (Againat all Defendants) ‘Special 61. Each of the foregoing paragraphs is incorpoduted as if t fully set forth herein. 62. dt ait times when Defendants had minor Plaintife in their foster care custody, Pefendants bad a special rolatiionabip vice minor Plaint4££, which imposed upon Defendants an eftizmative duty ; te care for and protect minor Plaintif¢ from hayin’ unde: the Fourteenth Amendment to the Usited states Conststuts inl . 63, Defendants breached that duty.. pefendants'| dictions and omissions were a substantial depazcure from the | exercise of rensoneble professional judgment, pracuice, and sifndards, and amounted to dvldberate indifference to minor Plaintiff's velface. 64, Defendants acted with deliberate indi sfefence to and» callous disragerd of repeated indications and sigde that minbr Pleintifé was the victim of abuse até neglect and was |not receiving adequate care, and services while in foster care. j i iee bvrs Woy 9 2011 12:05 Pe UB QUFE S4geSAreRMIAN LastAD wea on a ninor Plaintstt valde He was an foster care and in tile custody of the State, thos proximately causing his substantial anfi unnecessary physical, emotional, developmental, psychologi#ial, and/or psychiatric harn. ' SS. The actions and inactions that resulted jin this hoz Smelude but are not imited to: the failure to ensuke that minor : Plaintaft received busic necessities while in [foster care, inejuding the failure to ensure that minor elainkits recoived © adequate medical care, treatment, anc..services wafie in foster care; the failure to adequately ionitor minor Plaintiff's saery and vell-baing while the epild was in foster cares the fatiore ‘tO provide minor Plaintiffs with a safe and aeproprsabe foster care! placement; and the failure to adequately screen, approve, License. ane monitor ci li Cm sim fb eae: suitable foster pazents. : 67. Ip addition, the Managerial Qoos failed [to: assure the . - adequate training of the Casework Does.concerning the provision of: adequate caze and services to foster children anf! the adequate: + and sczeening, approval, Licensure, and monitoring of foptex h failed to ensure that. DYPS policies and procedures wire texpreted and implemented jp a consistent manner. ‘The Manageriib1 noes were ox should have been, aware fox yoars of the inedeguate training and ovher systemic defictens(es in the Stste's Zoster dere system chat entsatNoy. EL TE ayes Nov 9 wut Vs:u r | BTU) @:Q4yRSZAFEHIOAN LARIND fos a8 | contributed to the harm suffered by minor Plaintit# but fatled to take reasonable steps to remedy these deftciencies| the failuie to adequately train the Casework Doss was so bry ws, and fo ebviovely lixety to result in a constitutional violation, that it amounted to deliberate indifference to minor Plaintize's welfare, 68. In addition, tho Supervisory Does failed yo adequately supervise the Caseork Does with respect to the [provision of adequate care and servicos to foster childcen and|the adequate sexeening, approvaj, licensure, and monitoring of foster homes, and failed to ensure ‘that DYES policies and pfocedures welle interpreted and implemented ine consistent manner. The Supervisory Docs were ox should have been, aware for years of tho inadequate supervision and other systemic deficiencies in the state's fostdr cadre system thet contributed to the harm suffered by minor Plaintses but failed to take reasonable steps to remedy these deficiencies. Te Supervisory Does were deliberately indifferent to.minoy Plaintiff's welfare by failing to take ection that was obviously necensary to pkevent' or stop *the* deprivation of minot Plaintiff's donststutsonal ight i | 68. py virtue of the foregoing, Defendants deprived minor; Flaintigf of various rights protected by the New| Jersey State 1 Constitucion, article 1 $1, including bot not Ljpited yo: the Fight vo personal security and reasonably safe 2ivihy condictone: ihe right to bropection from hezas the rignt aor} eo be named i 1 guLe DyFs Nov 9 2011 Vasu Pouy NOY 8.2012 4:44PM SZAPERMAW LARINO ip saz 243 physically, emotionally, developmentally or otherwise] the rignt to basic life necessities, and the right to adequate yedical cere, treatment, and services consistent with the exercise Sf reasonable 70. Defendants arbirxarily and caprickously déprived minor Flaintigg of his due procass rights tn the absence of any countervailing state interest. V1. Minor Plaintifé’s substantive due procesd rights vere clearly established constitutional rights at fre time of Defendants’ acts and onissions, and x reasonable individual vold have known that rheir acts and omissions would iolate these clearly established: constitutional rights. | EIETH_CAUSE oF acEYOw New Jersey Constitetion Substantive Due Proves: State-reated Danger (against all Defesdants) "| 72. Bach of the foregoing paragraphs is incorplrated as if fully set forth herein. . re 73. ‘The New Jersey Stete Constitution, Article 2 2 1, guarantees minor Plaintiff che substantdve-due procass right to be: free from state-created dangers i 74. Defendants violated this right by taking afPirnative steps to approve the placenent in che Gi “jl _ s, Ss. ae and Gf 8, foster hones ond having those placenont finalized, which placed the child at imminent ond foreseesble [risk of danger and harm. 650ee oves Nov 9 2011 19:05 Puy HOV. 8 2011 4:44PM SZAFESMAN LAKTHD pom had 78. The physical, emotional, developmental, psychological, Pi “and/or psychiatric harm that minor Plaintige sustoroh efter being in the foster care of Cl ily ams, sim b, and ci Wo was foreseeable, and directly, and Proxinatety caused by Defendants’ unconstitutional ucts and omissions. — 75. Defendants acted vith callous and wiliful Bisnegard for minox Plaintiff's safety by approving and/or cdntinuing the Placement by Clg will CH s, SM s and c! H, despite Defendants’ knowledge of repeated indications and signs that minor Plasntifé waa the victim of anuse and negiéch ond ~ pn receiving © adequate care, oz sexvices fxou Ci _ om: and GMM) x white in fost 72. At the time of minor Plaintiff's placement, Pefendants and x care. minor Plaintiff had 8 special xelntionship, givgn that minor Plaintiff was in foster care end in Btate of evstody 90. Defendants’ exercise of their authority to parse and ask the family Court to approve the foster placement of anor Baincite by individuals no exeated a xisk of danger chat fodld not nave: Z Stee 3F dang nave Defendanra bad adequately] sersened and - otherwise oxisted nonitored Ci OP ED i CHM SSMS. onc Cm H as potential foster parents ex identified $n alternative i appropriate foster placement. 79. pefendants erbitrarily and capriciously fdeptived minos” Plainciif of hin due process righte in the dbsence of any eountervailing state interest, and caused minor Pldinti:Saas ores. Nov $2011 13:05 P19 ' WUY, BTN] 428azM 7 SZAP ERMAN LAKIO won ht substantial and.onnecessary physical, omotionsi, ddvelopmental, psychological, and/or psychisteic harm as 4 result. 80. Minor Plaintiff's substantive due Process Eights to’ be ftee of scate-created dangers was cleeriy | established constitutional rights at the time of Defendantd' acts and om: 2sicns, and a reasonable individual vould hve know that their Acts and omissions would violate these clearly| established ! p i constitutional rights. SERDE CAUSE_OF nCTION WGK, 96-1 et seq. Violation of Child Placemyt Bil of Rights Act (Against all Defandants) @1. Bach of the foregoing paragraphs is incorpopated as if fully vet forth hetein. i * t 82. Under the New Jersey child Placement B431 of Rights Act, minor Plainti?é possessed the following rights while yisodd outside © of his biological home: a right to be free fron piysidal; senual or + psychological abuse; 2 right to zeceive adequatt,! sete, and - appropriate food, clothing, and housing; 2 xSghi ito receive " adequete ahd appropriate medical carer a xight to//have regular “ contact wath cese workers assigned to his case; a right to receive '', services of e high quality thac sre designod to|meintain ands: advance his mental and physical well-being; a right|/to receive an educational progxam Which maximized his potential; pnd a right co be free from unwarranted physical restraint and isolation. Nyisia. + S:6B-4(h)—(T), Uh, (m)- (Ph. pasaey OvES Mov 9 20 NOY 8.2011 4:45PM STAPERMAN LAKSAD 83. Defendants had a duty to provide minor Plat: and care to enstira that these statutory rights were 11 tyiup ren fossa kt 52 | | nif services Protected. i 84. Defendants violated minor Plaintiff's statutlory rights by failing to meet their duties to the minor Plaintiff wi{ile the chile ves in out-of-home placement, causing substantial a physical, emotional, developmental, —_psycholog psychiatric harm to minor Plaintifg, as well as pain brsiety, sceial discuption, and other grievous hazm.. SEVENTE_CAUSH_OF AcETON M.D.S.A. 30:40-258 Failure to Visit (Againet ali nfl unnecessary ifeal, and/or ] ind suffering, befendants) 85. Bach of the foregoing paragraphs {s incorborated as if fully Set forth herein. 86, Under Nad.S-R. 30:40-25, Defendants hag a duty “to” regularly visit minor Plaintiff while he wes in ensure that he was receiving adequate services and 87, Dofandants breached this duty. 88. As e direct and proximate cause of Defend fUlfal1 these duties, minor Plaintiff mstained o: unnecessary physical, emotional, psychdlogtoal, and, ham to minor Pl: social disruption, and other grievous haen. EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION Regulations Promulgated Pursuant to articles 9 and Jersey Statotory, oie Failure to adequately Serec! Monitor the vip. QE :, se: Foator Homes as ac Dpprop=iate Poster B eps stex care “to” are. " * fatlure to otantial end fox Psychiatric intAff, as well ss pain and suffeting, anxiety, , s wer 30 of the Hew” ', Approve, and’a ovr: 8 Nov 9 2001 19:95, P12 HOW, 82011 4:4bPM SEAFERMAR LAR IID pe fon (Againot 211 Defendants) 89. Bach of the foregoing paragraphs iv incorporated as if + fadly sat forth herein t 90. Defendants were under various stetutory aid regulatory obligations to minor Plaintiff to adequately sczeen,| approve, and nonitor the CM CMS, SMM s, ana — B, Zoster + homes in order to ensure minor Plaintiffs safecy and felfare. These obligations included but were not limited to: a duty to conduct a + detailed hone study of the Ci SE oly cl s, S, and GI #, foster haites prior to placing minor Phaintifé with - Cm MM cM Ss) SM s) ane a, Nena 20:122¢-2.8(a); a duty to ensure that Cf vill cls, SMM s, ana cM) # were able to care efteochjoy fox minor" Plaintiff as foster parents, WAC. 10:122C-1, stay: 2 duty’ to! ensure that CI MM CH: Sms. | were: providing the necessities of life to their £m NeDabeGe! 22C-1.5(T); a duty to ensure tha: OM vil ims, SMBs, and GMM 8 had income or other meanp df financial . 1 support that madd thom economically independent of #inor Pleintiff:- 2 Zoster care mejntenance payments, NJLB.S, 10:1224-1.5(517 a duty: to ensure that Ci oi. CMS. SM s. ong CRM E ose all of the money xeceived in the name of minor Pleiseare to provide: for that child's care, NyJ.A.C. 10-122C-1.5(0); a chet A, MES, SMES, 2nd to provide for minor Plaintiffs basic developmental, oducationaly duty to, ensure had the abiticy } asbyFs Mov ¥ 2uLT is:un NOV. 8.201) 4:459N — SZAFFRNAN LAKIND Hp. 53mt 54 ! | and health needs, and to provide Gia “iy es, and GWM 4 with information on and child health nebds, B.J-d. 20:0 2.10 (a), 20:22z8~4-1(b); a duty to ensurd that mindz | Plaintiff recelves sppropriate and necessary health pare while in eon the custody of UI CRE s. Is, — i, and“ that minor Plaintiff receives medical and dental efhtiihcvins as | least annually, M.Z.A.C. 10:122D-2.5; a duty that (ol oll | MS ©. MMS. 20d GH wore properly mr to fuLtins | their obligations as foster parents, N.J.A.c. 10:129) Tim duty 1 to visit the foster home to assess compliance with sleeping space fect ng ee and Life sagety standards, co intorviey each hoWGEsGd Bendy, no participating in pre-service training, and to verity information about each hoasehold menbex, NaB.C. 10:1228-5.3; a Huty'to obtain : medicel references for each member of Cl 7 mms, (MMM =. enc GMS household, and fer cach How household member, SLA.G. 19:1250-2.3(a), (b); NLA. 10:1PdC-1. 8th) = °° cuty vo suppor: AIA my s. Samm jC a fulgilling their roles with respect.to minor Flakintiff's case goals, N.J.A.C. 10:1228-4.1(h); a duty .to ‘conduct daspections ‘of | che force hones, viseh shat include Sutsrvtegs ulen ald forer ‘ : apsr220-2.5 161, chiddzen and other howsehold wsenbers, NSA MEA. 10:1220-2-9(b); a duty to promptly aka thoroughly: investagate say complaints or reports. questioning CAE aim A MS <. S sd 's ceeuptiiance vith; applicable statutes and/or regulations, N,J.A.C. 10:1226~2.42{a) enesnt neee by Dyes. Nov $211 13206 rove HOY. #200) 4:45PM SZAFERMAN LAKING $0.59 8 95 and a duty to remove minor plaintif’ from foster ont vith Ci a a ms detexminatlon that minor Plaintift vas not cafe in end Gf ll CHE cs, SMM 5. and cM & noms, gre. 10:1228-2.1; NoSR.c. 10:2228-2.5. . 91. berendant’s breached these statutory ankl regulstéry obligations to minor Plaintiff. 92. As © direct and proximate result of Defendants' failure to fulfill these duties, minor Plaintiff sustained substential and unnecessary physical, emetjonsl, developmental, psychological, and/or paychiatric har, a well as pain and suffering, anxiety, sociel aisruption, and other grievous harm. } NUWIH_CAUSE, OF -ACEION i Regulations Promulgated Pursuant to Articles 9 and|30 of the. Rew " Soraga and Approve Ses Se Cotas telinina ka aaa oo i ie DS ME Soe Brose tones» = AS an Appropriate Foster Zone (against all Defendants) 93. Rach of the foxegeing paragraphs ts incorporated es if fully set forth Hered, i . 94. Defendants vere under various statutory [and regulatory obligations to minor Plaintiff to adequately screen land approve the: SHE VE CMM SSIS, 000 CMMI &, Fosfor hones a9 an appropriate foster hone for the minor Plaintizé and|to cneuro mino# Flaineiz® » postiplaccnent sefety and welfare. ‘Thfse obligation’ incladed, but ‘were not Linited to: 2 duty td select minor onenoves Noy 9 ord 1t:U6 pei yu. Be2UDD 44pet— SCAPERMAN ACE cane Fb Plaintiffs ester: home based on kn informed, objective judgment, after a full and carefu) assessment of each factor vanfen gould have * affectad minor Plaintiffs ability te benefir physica hy. sectentir and emotionally £xam the fester placement, NQA.C. qjosszic-s.a; a: duty to perform a detailed pre-placement: home study bf the 7 Ms, Ms, =: GJ 2. soster hones, including enavcing that CA vA ©) RS 4 aye = cho capacity to meet minor Plaintiffs physics] and © Jotional needs and bad disclosed any Bistory er child ebuse oF negiect oF Ay criminal record, ind/ox paychological review, SulAf.2 9:3-86.27 Nem. — U9s222e-3-Mbjy NAB dge121A-$.77 NeDB.G. 1022218-5.6 (0) (2), (A)? @ uty Fe engure that ° such home study included at Least bree in-person |eontacts with | em cm: Ss. = of ond: at ease one \n-person contact with ali members of the household} at Jeast one; visit to the GI 4 df: Qs po a, foster homes, @ review of the cm i ms SMEs, and: jal references, ° fmm «50 eferencan, & nevsew oF theiz person che procurement of various specific categories of Siffomation, andi gorpietion of background checks, Fegnscine eximiaal feécords aed/ox! pecords of prion child sbuse oF negect, and/ox| psychological: problens, KuLAG- sortzan-s.61@)-(3)7 @ duty not [ko piace minor, pleancaft in GAD vie cS Oy S, and rer -eaxe without @ progerly completed #, foster homes for the parpese of fos! sine i i |ET ET bvFs Rov 9 2011 19:06 Pete home orudy, N.g-A.C_ 10:122A-5.6(m)> and a duty te provide post-placament services to minot Plaintiff and col Cl ll, i _ MMs, end CMM tncuuaing f faco-to-re i communication, to assist with iseves relevant to mindr Plaigtits' s placement, to asses the need for counseling, te refer the foster family to medical, therapeutic, educational, seli-uéip, oz other { services as needed, to assist the family to function |autononously, and te assess the family's xendiness and suitebility for placement, 21C-$.1. To perform these post-placenpnt services, pefendants had a duty to ensure that the placement & appropriste © and that the minor Plaintiff is safe. 95. Defendants breached these statutory add fegulatory ; obligations to misor Plaintiff. 96, As a direct and proximate result of Datendanes’ failure |, fo ful fila these duties, minor Plaintit sustained sibstantial and: unnecessary physical, emotional, developmental, favetoteaseit, * and/or peychiatrié ham to minor Plaintif£, as well, as pain and suffering, anxiety, social disruption, ‘and othor-grievous harm ‘iern_cnosi_or aeproN [ Viclatioa of New Jersey statutory and Regulatory jinties puty co Report and Investigate abuse (against abl Defendants) 57. Each of the foregoing paragraphs is incorlpordted as if fully set forth herein. & 92. Defendants were wndex various statutory gnd regulatory obligations to minor Plaintiff to report and/or [recégnize and’! : enterEE Tc ovFs Now 8 2011 19: NOV 0. 2011 4:45PM SZAFERWAN LAKIN HHO.5301 P58 address any suspected abuse of minor Platotit in ofder te ensure his ongoing safety and welfare. 99, A1L defendants who had any contact vith minor’ Plaincitt wale be wae seuiding vith Cll Ga sam ci s, SMEs, eno GMM x naa cause to betieve that he child das subjected to child abuse or acts of child abuse and hus had a duty! to Ammediately report this information. y.g.s.a} $ 9:6-8,10; NedeBeO, 10:221A-3,5. 4 200. Defendants had a duty to properly Ansfeotigate such sUspected ohild abuse. N.d.S.B. 30;40-12. - E - 10. DYFS also had a duty to immediately repoxt!all snistances df suspected child abuse and neglect to the county the county in which minor Plaintiff resided 102. Defendants breached these asvatutozy apd regulatory: - obligations to minor Plaintife, Es tone 103. As a dixect end proximate cause of Defendafts!*failuré to’: fUL£ill these duties, minox Plaintiff Sustained spibevantial ‘and’? unnecessary physical, emotional, developmental, |psychological, and/or psychiatric harm to minox Plaintifz, as well ap pain ond ouftering, anxiety, social disruption, and ovher gfteveus hare EUGVINNA CAUOR oF acaroN, | [ Mew Jersey Toxt Ciyine Act ~ Negligence (against all Defendants) - 104. Each of the foregoing paragraphs !s incdipozeced as Lf! fully set féxth hexein. 105. Minor Plaintiff has complied with the notifse requirements e204NN ee nuwe won Nov 9 2011 ovrs 4:qDFM SCAT AAA LAKIAU of the Tort Claims Act. MJ.S.A, 991-2 et cog. 106, Defendants oved nunerous, duties 20 the mh DXRS and Managerial Does had a duty to train thei ensuxe that any suspected abuse and neglect of the be properly and fully recognized, reported and 2) legally requixed. DYFS and Supervisory.Does had a dutly the Casework Dees te assure that they properly end full repoxt and investigate any suspected abuse and negla: Plaintiff as legally required. DYPS and Casework Doeg bwwson 4 19:06 p18 Fa or Plaintisé.” employees to nor Plasntigs i vestigated as! Ly recognize, i: Of the nigors had a duty.to to, supervise). properly and fully recognize, report and investi dare suspected | abuse end neglect of the minor Plaintiff legally xeduixed. 107, Defendants had a general duty to ensur| Plaintiff received adequate care and services. | 108. Defendants Also had a duty to screen, approy} monitor tre CA VA CHEE S, SIs, ana ol homes to enauxe that minor Plaintiff remained ease: 209, Defendants had a duty to take reasonable ste} and fully Investigate suspected abuse or neglect an: abusive and/or neglectful heme, plaintiff from an 210. By their acts aod omissions, Defendants viol of duty owed to iinor Plaintiff. Defendants ected with gross |. that minor |, license and R, foster ' emove minor ' ated the care i neghigeace: and/or -reckhessiy,-Defendante acts and dhisaiens-were outside of their scope of employment, and did not invblva the mexe | exercise of professiousl Judgment of discretion. ly sate, ys" CO Property .., 111. by their dcea and omissions, Defendants proudnately caused | one |DYES. Noy 9 gurt save vee HOV, 6.201] 4:45PM SZAFERMAN LAG 148 1 WO. 537k 8 60s | | permanent injuries to the minor Plaintiff, including avbstantial. physical, emotional, developmental, Psychological, and/or: psychiatric harm. Defendants’ acts and omissions Were 2 material element and/or a substantial factor in bringing thé harm abou te: the minor Plaintiff, The harms sustained by the minor Plaintiff.was 4 reasonably fordseeable result of Defendants’ acts|and omissions. 112, vy the foregoing, Defondance axe Lisble for minoz Plaintiff’s inJoxies pursuant to N.g.S.A. 59:1-1 et pag. Defendants’. are jointly and severally liable for the injuries shstained by the minor elaintitt. | NWELETH CAUSE oF ACtToW Negligence - Befondaats cM 71 oe Cs. OO SEES 2 ¥ 113, Minor Plaintiff incorporates all previolis| paragraphs as 42 set rorth herein at length. : 214, defendants A Di AS. om and ofl 5 did negligently physically abuse] and sexually. assault, ox allowed a physical abuse and sexual assault, and/or. failed so report the physica) abuse and sexual assalts, upon minoz! Plaintifé. Said negligence was the proximate caus¢ of the manor. laintifs’s inguites. i WHEREFORE, minox Plaintiff demands judgment against, Defendants as aforeeaid, jointly and severally, in. chesx individual and/or official ‘capacity, fox compensatory anise, punitive: damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit and interest. msesEEE CC byes Hoy 9 mut Tau reve Mov, 8.201 4:46AM SZATERNAN LAKIND poser 6 | ‘THIRTERNTE CAUSE OF ACEION | Recklessness — Defendants “= _ : OME 5 esa a ; —_ 115, Minor Plaintiff incorporates all previous Pm as A set forch herein at length. 116, Defendants cy oll “i ay =~ Ss: and GMM) 2, did recklessly physically abuse jfand sexually aysauit, or allowed a physical abuse and sexual apeeuit, and/or fadled to report, the physical abuse and sexua} assadts upon minor Plaintist. Said recklessnoss was tho proximate cailsp of the minor Plaintiff’s injuries. ke. WHEREFORE, minor Plaintiff demands juddiment against ~ Defendants as aforeseid, jointly and severally, in tWeix individual and/or official capacity, for compensatory damfiges, punitive ' damages, attorney's fees, coste of suit and interedt. - ‘EOURERENTH CAUSE OF acriow : intentionally - Defendants Of vn oe co: i _ x E sand | 147. Minor Plaintif£ incorporates all previous paxagraphs as if set forth herein at length. : 110. Degencents Cl Ml ay ay =m: mms ! and GMM 8, cid intentionally physicaliy abusb and sexvadly assault, or allowed a physicel abuse and sexval fasault, and/or failed to report the physical abuse and sexual assdvits upon minor i incencional act was the proximaye cause of the 1 Plsintiti. 5; minor Plaintiff’s injuries. ean iDvFs Wow 9 2011 V3zue rus HOY. 2011 4:46PM SZAFERMAN LAK HD WO.5321 P82 WHEREFORE, minor Plaintiff demands ageinet pefendants as aforesaid, jointly and seyerally, in thgiz individus) and/or official capacity, for compensatory damages, punicive damages, attorney's feos, costs of suit and interest. EXETERNTE CAUSE oF ACTION | Negligence — Defendants Jobn/Jane Does 1-100 (Wictidions Namou) 19. Minor Plaintifé incorporates 222 previous [paragraphs as if set forth herein at length. 120. Defendants, Joha/dana Does 1-100, dic negligently physically abuso and sexually assault, or allowed @ physical abuse and sexual assault, and/or failed to report the physj{cal sbuse and | cemial asaaults ypon minor Plointiff. Said negligence was the ; proximate cause of the minor Plaintit’s injuries. WieREFORS, minor Plaintiff denands judgyent’ agaist pefendants as aforesaid, Jointly and severally, Sn their individdal and/ox official capacity, fox compensatory damages, punitive damages, attoxney's foes, costs of suit and interes: STATHENSE_CAUSE OF ncsoH Recklassnesi— Joba/iano Dora 1-100 wictiesont Manes) ai. winor PlaintlZh Incozgorates a1 previons jpasagrachs e2 Lf set forch herein at length. I 522, Defendants, Tohn/Johe Doew 1-200, d4d Fecklensily phyeSGelly abuse and sexually assault, of alloyed a [physical abuse ang sexual assau2t, and/or failed to report the physical abuse and sexual assaults upon minor Plaintiff. Said rackl efsness was the; set |I bys Woy 8 2011 13:07 P08 NOY 8.2011 4:45AM SZATERMAN LAKLND fooa % 08 i i | proximate cause of the minor Plaintiff = injuries. WHEREYORS, the inlnor Plai tit demands judgment against ' Defendants ag aforesaid, jointly and severally, ‘in'thdir individual and/or official capacity, fox compensatory damages, punitive damages, avtorney's fees, costs of suit end interest! SEYZRYEENIE CAUSE OF RESTON Yntentional, Act - Jobn/Jane Does 1-100 (Fictitious Nomex) 223. Minox Plaintiff incorporates all previous |paragraphs as Af set forth herein at Length 124. Defendanta, Gobn/Jane Does 1-100, did fintentionalty physically abuse and sexually assault, or allowed a physical abuse and sexval assault, end/or failed to report the mie abuse end sexual assaults upon minor Plaintiff, Said intentioijal act was the! preximate cause of the minor Plaintiff’ s injuries. } WHEREFORE, minor Plaintif€ demands judgment agafnst ‘Defendants as aforesaid, jointly and severally, in their sndivifuat and/or . official capacity, for compensatory damages, “puniitive damages, attorney's fees,, costs of suit and interest. 7 9 RE SRRERNITE CRUSE OY RCETON Feiled To Provide Services ~ DYE | 128. Minor Plaintifx incorporates all previous paragraphs as if set’ forth herein “in Ladgtn. & 126. potendant, Y€2, through ite employed, agents aad servants, failed to adequately supervise the actiohs or inections of its employees, failed to adequately providd and maintainDrFs: Nov 9 2011 13:07 P05, NOW, §. 2011 4:46PH SZAFERMAN LAKING fo-5221 P. be | | | policies and procedures concerning their employees, agents and servants, failed to adequately hire and train persons appropriately foz their positions, failed to prevent the wrongful fonduct of its employees, agents and servants, failed to properly investigate | end/or supervise, and were otherwise tortuous tn hair conduct « and/or have acted dn bad faith. 127. The Defendants aforesaid, through thei course of | conduct and the conduct of their employees, agents “te servents, | proximately caused the minor Plaintiff to experience great har and juries, and other losses and demagas. he WHEREFORE, minor Plaintiff demands judgment, against the j ‘in their Defendants as aforesaid, jointly and severati} individual and/ox official capacity, for compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit and interest WUNRTEEWE CAUSE OF ACTION i 128. Minor Plaintiff incorporates all previous if set forth herein at Length. 1 2s. xe 7a reeult of the conduct described droresaic, the! Defendants toxtuows conduct hao Violated tha mingr Plaintist’s; conmon law rights and bis rights under the Fourteent{i Amendment to! * the United states Constitution and 42 0.5.0. ection 1989007 WHEREFORE, the minor Plaintiff demands judomest ageiast the Defendants es aforesaid, jointly, and soveratiy, in thas: Andividual and/or officiel capacity, for compensiitory. damages,oves Wov 9 2011 13: Gr Oey) Worn” SANTERMAN LAKIN nyo we punitive damages, as woll as other damages, attozney|s fees under 42 U.8.6. Section 1988, costs of ouit-and interest. SMUNTIETE CAUSE OF ACTION I Failuse te Protect — DFS it 130, Minor Plaintiff incorporates ell previous paragraphs 2s if set forth herein at Length. : 131. pefendents, Cl Al a an: am 5. GMM and Jobn Does 1-100 committed physical abusé and sexual; assault upon minor "Plaintiff and/or tailed to stop tile apsaules, while the minor Plaintiff was in the cara, custody afid/or control of OYFS. 132. DYES failed to satisfy its responsibilirids to protect minor Plaintiff. Said failure proximately caused mipof Plaintiff's injuries. WHERRFORE, minor Plaintiff demands judgmipnt against | pefandancs ae aforesaid, jointly and severally, “in theiz | jndividual end/ox officlal capacity, for compensatory dawages, punitive damages, attorney's fires, costs of suit pee interest. NAPRIXCEIRAT_GAUSE_OF_ACTYON wiqifel Diszegard-ALl Defendants 133. Minor Plaintifé incorporates ali previous [paragraphs as Ag pet’ forth Herein’ at’ Idnoth~ 134, The conduct of the Pefendants wes outrageoys, yanton and ( wilifel, in recklese indifference to the rights, sefety, dnd interest of minox Plaintifg, and taken with conscioul disregard of enueovFs Nov $2011 19:08 peur 8.2011 4c45PM —STAFERMAN LAKINO Nov fosml re 1 | i | their duties and obligations. \ 135, Said conduct proximately caused the injeried, to the minér Plaintife. : WHEREFORE, minor Plaintiff demands judgment |;agatnst the begendants as agoresaid, jeintly and severally, in thdir individtial and/or official capacity, for compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit and interest, i MeNtY-sECOND CRUSE OF ACTION. | Megiigent Compliance with the Law ~ DIPS 436. Minor Pléintife incorporates ail previous [paragraphs as Jf set forch herein at length. i ‘with its own 157. vegendant, DYES negligently failed to compl} regulations and/or state laws and requirements conoepning the care ; and welfere of fostex chaldren. 138. said failure proximately caused minoy wpletoriff's Anjuries WHORSORE, minor Plaintiff demands judgment] against the,” tly and) severally, in their Defendants as aforesaid, 3 FEkGisiedhi Ghd7on “orticial capacity, for compensdtory damages, { punitive damages,’ attomey'a fees coste of suit eng intezed:, | RMENIEARUXRD CAUSH OF AERION — f yioarious Liability — DYES 129, Miner Plaintig£ incorporates all previous| paragraphs as 4 set forth herein at length. 140. defendant py#s is vicariously liebie for the acts and/oroy Nov. 8.2011 FS Nov wy Zurn tue revo 4:46PM STAFERMAN LAKINO Osa B87 failures of the foster. parents with whom minor Plaintiff vas leit. Plaintiff's injuries. asi Said lisbility vas the proximate cauge of minor WHEREFORE, minor PlaintSff demands Sedgmens against Defendants ag afezeoaid, jointly and severally, an their individual and/er official capacity. fox compensailoxy damages, punitive damages, attormey's fees, costs of suit and interest. Af sec forth herein at length. qamvzy-NOURTS CAUSE OF ACTION Breech of Contract — DYFS 142, Minor Plaintiff incorporates all previous paragriphs ac 143. Defendant DYFS has committed = bresch in corfiract, either express or implied, as against the pacties contained hezein. injuries sustained by the minor Plaintiff. f a4. Said contrace breach was the proxinsze favse of the La WHDREFORE, minor Plaintifé demands judgripat against pefendants as afozesaid, jointly and sevorailj,. in their { . Gndividual and/or, official-capacity, *for* conpensafory’ damages, punitive damages, attorney's Hees, costs of suit and interest. as set forth herein at length. ae. (WRN FERTH_ CAUSE OF AOTIOS violation of Rights — DYFS & HARES OF HOPE Minor Plaintiff incorporates 411 previous [paragraph as” pefendants DYES and Raxvest of Hope deprived the winor Plaintat£ of his convt4tutiona? right to be free rrof ham and bisbyes Now ¥ gure i stue vous NOY, 8 20EN Ho8gsM | OLATERMAM Lanane fe eons rights under 42 9.$.C. Section 1983. | WHEREFORE, minor Plaintst® domands judgment against the. Defendants as aforesaid, jointly and severally, in their: individual and/or officiel capacity, for compensat ory damages, punitive damagos, ao voll as other damages, attorney|s fees, under 42 U.S.C. Section 1984, costs of suit and interest | , TaNEY-stKYA CAUSE OF ACTION Uohn/Jane Does A-Z (Fictitious Nemes) 147. Minor Plaintiff dncorporates all previous |paragraphs as Ag eet forth herein at length. a4 148, Defendants, Jobn Does A~Z are individuals anq/or.entities, which may be found to be Liable for the injuries sujtained by the } 14S. Sadd 1isbility was the proximate cause of the injuries to minor Plaintif: manor Pledntiff. Me, therefore, proserve our rights to amend these y Pleadings. ‘ WHEREFORE, minor Plaintiff demands judgment |, against the Defendants as aforesaid, Joincly and severallf,i in their: individual snd/or ‘official capacity,’"Zor compensatory, damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit ang Antexest. BEL { PHEREFORE, minor Plaintiff denarids thet Judgment|ibe evaded" in his favor as follows: i : 1. An order awarding compensstory damages in ei anourit tobe determined at trieiy i 61260 . | nores Novy au)y 1sue rw NOY. 8.2011 424 7°. STAFERVAN LAKIAD a | 2- An order awarding punitive damages in an amount, to be determined at trial; 3, An order awarding reasonable attorney's feel 4, An oxdex awarding prejudement interest; and 5. An order dixecting such other and further felief as the Court may deem just and proper, including bus'not limited , to appropriate costs and disbursenents. Tox DEMAND, Minor Plaintixt hereby demands trial by jury as th all issues. | DESIGURTTON OY RIAL COUNSET, - $4, you are hereby dotified thit In accerdance with Rule 4: CRAIG R. HUBERT, ESQUIRA, SAMUEL TOTARO, ESQUIRE afd’ TRACEY Cc. HINSON, ESQUIRE ara designated as trial counsel.