Facts: Petitioner Kathleen Hardee’s home child care license was revoked by the respondent Department of Social and Health Services after Hardee’s son sexually assaulted a child in Hardee’s home and a subsequent investigation by the Department of Social and Health Services revealed that Hardee’s son had had unsupervised access to children under Hardee’s care in violation of a safety plan imposed in response to his previous convictions for harassment, intimidation, and assault. After administrative review affirmed the revocation, Hardee appealed the Department of Social and Health Services’ decision first to the Superior Court for King County and then to the Washington Court of Appeals, both of which also affirmed the revocation. Hardee appealed to the Supreme Court of Washington.
Questions: Does due process require that decisions by the Department of Social and Health Services to revoke home child care licenses be supported by clear and convincing evidence rather than by a preponderance of the evidence?
Conclusion: Justice James M. Johnson’s opinion for the Court affirmed the Washington Court of Appeals, concluding that Washington Revised Code §43.215.300(2), which requires that decisions to revoke home child care licenses be supported by a preponderance of the evidence, does not deny those deprived of home child care licenses due process given the relatively minimal time, expense, and education required to obtain such a license and the continued ability of those deprived of home child care licenses to work in the field as child care staff members, the low risk of erroneous deprivation and the relatively low value of additional procedural safeguards, and the state’s compelling interest in protecting the safety of children receiving in home child care without being held to a burden of proof that may result in the endangerment of children.
Docket No. 83728-7 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 62436-9)
Petitioner: Kathleen Hardee
(Counsel: Philip Albert Talmadge, Sidney Charlotte Tribe, and Carol Farr)
Respondent: Department of Social and Health Services
(Counsel: Patricia Lee Allen and Jay Douglas Geck)
Briefs:
- ACLU Et Al Amici
- Amicus - Supplemental Seiu Local 925
- Amicus Nw Justice Project
- Amicus WA State Veterinary Medical Assn
- Amicus of Care Et Al
- Amicus of Njp
- Answer
- Answer to Amici
- Appellant Brief
- Dept of Early Learning Brief in Respondent to Amici ACLU Et Al
- Petition for Review
- Reply
- Respondent Brief
- Second Statement of Additional Auth
- Statement of Additional Auth
- Supplemental Brief of Del
- Supplemental Brief of Petitioner
Argument: Thursday, October 28, 2010 1:30pm
[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]
Audio: Court of Appeals Division I
Audio: Washington Supreme Court
Decided: Thursday, July 7th, 2011
Prevailing Party: Department of Social and Health Services (Respondent)
Vote: 8-1
Citation: Pending
Court: Madsen1 Court (2010-2011)
Madsen
(Concurs)
Johnson
Alexander
Sanders
(Dissent)
Chambers
Owens
Fairhurst
Johnson
(Majority)
Stephens
Note: We post only slip opinion(s) as published at the time of the decision. Please consult Washington Reports printed volumes for the opinion(s) in their final form. Each opinion should appear next to the Justice who authored it.