Chayo v. Kaladjian

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• interpreting van Emrik to permit unauthorized x-rays that were ordered by a pediatric resident for purposes of diagnosis, not investigation, where child had visible bruise on head
• dismissing, on summary judgment, claims against police officers who assisted in removal of children; officers were “protected from suit by qualified immunity based on their reasonable reliance on the Caseworkers' assessments”
• “The terms ‘initiate’ and ‘at the behest of ... could only comprise the state officials’ actions if the Court gave these terms an unusually broad construction.”
• “[T]he mere fact that no evidence of abuse was discovered at the home was not a basis for concluding there was no imminent danger.”
• “[M]edically necessary x-rays may be taken without judicial approval or parental consent.”
• “The instant case [Chayo ] is distinguishable ... [from van Emrik ] because the x-ray examinations [of the Chayo child] were ordered not by the caseworkers but by Doctor Ibrahm Ahmed, a pediatric resident at St. Vincent’s Hospital, and for medical rather than investigative purposes.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).